Let Engineers place Refineries independently.

True say.

The commander only really gets to decide research and manage resources, this takes more than it adds. Instead of trying to protect gameplay from a bad commander I think its better to make things more obvious and accessible for commanders.

 

Well yes, you might.

Although flags don't have a health mechanic, I think the idea of the structure locking the point unless you smash it is a good idea, but you could certainly change the placement mechanic to be essentially flag based. Cap the flag spawn a ref, destroy a ref, unlock the flag.

 

this is how i would do it, i even suggested basically this before

 

I made the city flags in king work like that, you can hack it together, but it requires a lot of entities.

 

Distracting the commander keeps the commander from doing anything at all, including placing refineries, and threatens to end the game if the comm vehicle is destroyed. It's not just an economic thing, and flasche does give his opinion that it doesn't even matter because of the abundance of resources. I still want to hear Trickster's answer to the question: How exactly would my suggestion result in less strategy?

I like the idea of making refineries work like flags. It doesn't matter how it's done as long as commanders don't have to place refineries themselves. I'd be fine of commanders could still place refineries anyways if my suggestion was implemented; it couldn't hurt.

 

I agree with flasche that most of the time ( in gamrs bigger then 10 vs 10 ) I'm constantly busy , placing armories on frotlines , placing walls on fronts, refs etc, build turrets in main base maself etc. I agree with flasche yhat if you aint busy all the time you're commanding (below) average... But yeah over to my suggestion,

I suggest that engies can place emergency refs incase commander is slow or not reacting, these refs will be placable by the engie himself, the refs will cost 50 res from res pool ( is unrecyclable , comm can place refs on it though) but it only gives 1/4 res to make this an actual emergency ref.

@THE I really don't fucking get why you want to take so mch work away from the comm, as dizzyone stated , you are making this game to much of a fps instead of fps and rts, I mean fuck me, but if you arent busy running arround your bases building turrets and armories on frontlines your doing it fucking wrong. We should give comm more work, not less

 

He already kinda got to that:

This is why I think it's a bit silly that people are still posting here. For better or worse, Trickster has already made it clear that this isn't going to happen because it kills his pet strategy, distracting the com. The only chance in hell for engy-dropable refs is in preserving that pet strategy.

That's kinda the reason this thread popped up.

 

- Naked assertion
- Begging the question
- Post hoc

 

Because we never see fallacies here!

Although, aaaaaa50, it really is kinda pointless. Trickster has already laid down the law. Given his comments about com distraction, engy-dropable refs will never happen on the current game. It's kinda silly to argue with him.

 

Do you have a point, or were you hoping that someone would mistake your intentional ambiguity for wittiness?

 

There's no damn reason I'm not going to keep arguing my point just because Trickster doesn't agree with me. IMHO I'm right, Trickster is wrong. I'm not here to quaintly submit my opinion and accept judgment from one person. This is a public forum, and I'm posting here to do my damn best to exercise my free speech to everyone who reads my posts. There is no "law" here, unless Trickster start banning people who disagree with him. I'm not just trying to convince Trickster, I'm trying to convince you.

 

Me? I actually kind of agree with Trickster. A team should seriously suffer if the com stays out of com mode. It would completely kill boomtanking.

There's just the problem of actually getting some meaningful things for the com to do, the current list (research, buildings, walls, etc.) doesn't cut it. That's kinda where this thread was going...

 

Yes because having an opinion makes them valid!

No, wrong.

 

this derp has DERPED LONG ENOUGH!

 

Wow, Trickster says this doesn't work and suddenly nobody is allowed to even talk about changing the commander. Nice job being elitist guys, how about you dedicate some time to making commander mode hard enough that nobody will ever want to be commander, other than you, of course.

 

I hate your idea.

No really, I do.

 

That's a great point. It's good to be reminded that this game should be approachable for all skill levels.

However, Trickster said he (and the rest of the dev team, I assume) want more strategy to come from the commander gameplay mechanic, not less. So, the dev team wants commanding to be more complicated if it means deeper strategy.

The community also agrees. This thread and this one have polls asking about how the commander should be played. In one, nearly 75% of those polled said they wanted the commander in com mode more (less boom tanking, less building, etc.). They don't want to see the com driving around, they want him to be busy commanding. The other poll asked about how much work the commander should do. Again, three quarters agreed that the commander should do more work.

So, while it's important to maintain an approachable gameplay position, it's hard to argue when the community wants a busy (i.e. complicated) commander seat.

And as I have mentioned before, if you take those comments about commander strategy as given, this suggestion can't be implemented in the current game. It's not a bad suggestion (quite the opposite), but it conflicts with a more important gameplay philosophy.

 

Man, you sure have a boner for Trickster.

 

All I'm saying is that if you take his comments about distraction as true, this suggestion can't work. This is a great suggestion, but it conflicts with more important things.

So, instead of pointlessly arguing for this suggestion directly, we really need to argue about whether distracting the com should really be an honest strategy. That is what is killing this suggestion.

That is why I made this thread asking for opinions on how com workload. Just because I quote the guy doesn't mean I agree with him, only that I think his comments are important to the discussion at hand. In the other thread, I'm actually trying to get people to disagree with Trickster's comments, but they won't do it. If nobody will disagree with Trickster, then this suggestion is dead.

I want engy-dropable refs just as much as anyone else, but it seems like I'm the only one that really understands what needs to happen to get them.

 

I know what Trickster is talking about with the single tank harassing the comm, he was doing it to me all day on midbridge yesterday, forcing me to build fort knox* here


I spent a good deal of time focussed on protecting my cv, and buidling and rebuilding many many turrets in that base. leaving in particular the SE base largely "un-commed"

but at the end of the day the constant rushes only wasted money because they were hitting my strongest base over and over, leaving the truly weak ones unharassed.

comms already have the tools to protect themselves, but you have to be active, I drop turrets ASAP at any important location. and over time Ive learned how to place them in combination with walls, and my persuasive abuse (mic spam) to fortify locations.

what is really and truly needed for comms is simply more ways to give orders, Im sure the devs know what those are (pings, waypoints, single targets etc) - and engis placing their own refs is hardly one of them. if you are so desperate for a ref node, and your team is even remotely evenly matched with the enemy, you already have the tool you need - F S SPACE.

* that base could be way better, but it evolved over time largely in response to the constant harass