commmanders job needs to be more fun. he needs to have some more clout other than restricting vehicles. Bunkers: there needs to be bunkers. an armory with a turret that looks like a low profile bunker where soldiers can shoot from inside. i already use the armories as bunkers, but they need windows to shoot from. Mines: commander placed mines like that found in company of heroes would add to the comms role, making it more important and fun. Slit trenches: slit trenches like those in company of heroes would also be hardcore! Superweapon building: maybe a superweapon building that has a large charge timer where all players can see; like C&C generals. Airport: an airport building can be made as of this version. its only function as of this version would be to allow the comm to set up an airborne spawn point/supply drop for some resources. Tech building: maybe an advance tech building that open up a new research tree? Shield/Stealth Generator: maybe shield or stealth generator buildings that can be researched from the advance tech building. Power Stations: to build faster and power advanced buildings? Antlion Farm: maybe even an antlion farm! where you can use scripted antlion armies to attack enemies! think of more building ideas. feel free to comment and improve these ideas for balance. more buildings adds to the depth of the game.
Yeah, sure, I'll ask the dev team to get right on making the commander 'more fun'. Been suggested many times, ask the dev team if they plan to do anything along those lines, but really they're a mapping decision. Grenadiers have mines, if you want the commander to make them magically appear, then what's the point in grenadiers if the comm can blow up tanks by clicking in front of them? The engine doesn't support them. Superweapons are terrible. That is the function of the APC. That is the function of the high-tier researches, they take a long time and require more money, another building to take up base space is not going to add to gameplay. The former would make artillery useless and prolong a losing game, while the latter would be pointless given the size of most empires maps. Power systems add unneccesary complexty to the game and don't add to the gameplay. I don't know where to start with this, so I'm simply going to shout NO as loud as possible. More buildings increases complexity and the already unpleasant learning curve, add buildings as required, not on whims.
i am not the best idea person in the world, but these buildings are just my ideas used to incite more ideas. but as the game is, the commander role is unappreciated. go to any server and see that no one wants to be voted commander. even experienced commanders like myself and the BSID/JPL boys do not like to be commander more than 2 games in a row. its not too much fun because his only real job is to research (if he wants to win) for the bunkers, i see them to be unnecessary if the armories recieve windows. i already use them as bunkers. the mines must be built by an engineer, like a wall. slit trenches impossible; ok then. superweapons: debatable. for the air port, airborne spawn/resupply idea: if that is what the APC is made for, then why bother with pilotable dropships in 3.0? tech buildings: so you can destroy it and cause the entire team to lose their advanced equipment? this adds more strategy to the game as a different approach to rout the opposing team. just a positive thought i derived from looking at it a second time. shield gens: any team with arty wins. protection is needed, even if miniscule, against arty. any losing team would not be able to build or maintain them due to power/resources. power systems? only feasible if any other advanced building ideas are accepted. they can also be another approach to destroy the opposition instead of the "I-GAT-BIGGUR-WEPANS-DAN-J00!" approach antlion farms: i was trying to pick out a random idea to show that any idea is welcome in this thread. as for buildings increasing complexity: yes it does, FOR THE COMMANDER! Noobs shouldn't play commander, only experienced players who understand the research tree should. do you think a noob footsoldier's game play will be more difficult with more buildings? please dont shoot down my ideas with a closed mind. all you did was say NO to everything without thinking of any possible was to improve it.
My idea to improve them was to not have them, many things are not neccesary in a game, and the best course of action is to not include them. The bunkers are worth considering, but as I said they're a mapping decision for the most part, strong defensive emplacements are a primary function of the emp_eng_map_brush entity, and as such, it should be the decision of the level designer as to where they should be placed, they can even be setup to include a spawn, health, and ammo dispensers. The mines are unneccesary if an engineer has to construct them, a grenadier can do it faster and without monopolising the commander's time. Superweapons are bad, every time they're brought up they are opposed, if you want a superweapon, get the mapper to include it. The point of having dropships in 3.0 is because you need transport on a 16x map, and because you can bring water into play as a negotiable obstacle. Aircraft are being included to add further gameplay elements to the mod, as far as I know, you won't be able to spawn in a dropship unless you carry an APC around. Adding a second building upon which your success is dependent is silly, that's what the CV is for. This is compounded by the fact that most games do not last long enough to merit 'advanced tech'. The team with artillery does not win, the team with control of the map wins, if you can take that back by building tanks and destroying the enemy tanks and arty, you win. I have seen it done many times. Again, power generators add unneccesary complexity for the same reason as the advanced tech building, where are you going to find room for all these buildings anyway? Antlion farms are a silly idea, I don't see why you'd welcome something which has obviously had no thought put into it with regards to balance, feasability, consistency with the storyline, or entertainment value. I think that putting more buildings for engineers to sit at base looking at and holding attack until they're built, more buildings to worry about defending rather than actually fighting at the front line, more buildings to find room for in the already restricted build space on some of the maps, is a very silly and unproductive addition to the game. The commander has enough to do already, if you don't have enough to do as a commander, you aren't doing it properly, you should be micromanaging your team, organising tactics and strategy, and keeping them appraised of the state of play. The commander is neccesary for having an RTS system, it is appealing to people who like RTS games, if you don't like RTS games, don't play commander.
I think im going to try something new here and debate whether or not they would be practical/useful instead of whether or not they should be in the game or whether they're just stupid and unneeded. I remember when stickies were considered, and people dissed them as not fitting in or getting used a whole lot. How about now that Krenzo has added them? They work just fine. No qualms here really. Those better be some seriously powerful mines if they have to be built by an engineer. Late-game anti-heavy tank defense anyone? Yea, sorry but the Source engine does not allow terrain deformation, except for purely visible effects. The collision meshes and brush faces and whatnot are bakes right into the map .bsp, and they can not be changed on the fly. Superweapons would be very difficult to balance. You think people want the commander to rush from nukes and heavy tanks now? What if those nukes were game-enders? There would have to be some way to keep a team for rushing straight to them and winning the game. APCs are fast but not that fast. Dropships won't be able to spawn players, but they will be able to transport troops and vehicles very quickly. APC airdropped behind enemy lines anyone? It would probably make it a lot harder to well-maintain a base under attack, or even find a place to fit it all together, which is pretty hard as it is on some maps. If it was small and had decent HP, then maybe. But it should serve some other purpose aswell instead of just being dead meat. All the buildings in Empires serve a constant purpose; the radar watches enemy units and researches; the barracks, well the barracks I dont really need to explain what purpose it serves; the armory restocks tanks and troops and heals them, as well as letting them change class; VF makes tanks critical to victory; and turrets blow shit up or make it swiss cheese, 'nuff said. I have mixed feelings about these. If they were like the shields in Supreme Commander where units could walk through it and whatnot no problem, then maybe. What if it only projects a shield above itself, but does not on the sides. Hard to explain... Like this: Code: ___ [COLOR=lime]Shield->[/COLOR] / \ | [COLOR=lime]Shield gen->[/COLOR] # That way it works to stop arty shelling the base from afar, but doesn't hinder tanks and infantry and the normal stuff that attacks a base. I see this as a blessing and a curse for a losing team. On one hand they can cripple the enemy by taking out their power gens and buy some time. On the other hand the enemy can do the same thing, but much easier since they're winning, which would then cripple the losing team even further. Plus its just one moe thing you need to build, keep repaired, and find room to place. Random indeed. As for the idea itself, I see absolutely no benefit to gameplay. This is the only idea i'll use Chris's blunt style and say: Please just no. It will make them have to learn what those buildings do and why they are there, or how he can use them. But at least there may be one benefit: It will make for more cover for infantry inside bases and make for more targets your opponent has to destroy. Then again it makes for more Res the comm has to spend on buildings...
sorry that you're recieving such a hostile reception, but truth be told all these ideas. ALL of them (except the antlion one) have come up before, have been discussed before, and several of them have been shot down or the answers we came up with given to you. this is not half life 2 world. this is the empires world. and there are no antlions in the empires world. THAT SAID, i think if we DID have some crazy guy that could make us an antlion substitute, then at least for 5 minutes it would be quite fun.
hmm. for the slit trenches, i have an idea: if the terrain can be altered for visual purposes, then the slit trench building can be made. the way it would work is to get the player "stuck" in the map. kinda like the 'bury' admin command in beetlesmod. just an idea again the commander placed mines (if there are to be any) should be built by an engineer; this prevents the commander from using it as a direct weapon. to those who think the commander placed mines would 'phase out' the grenadier, remember that both the commander AND engineers can build walls, and that has not 'phased out' the engineers or their walls.
The commander has over 10 thousand other stuff than just researching, and the reason for players not wanting to command 2 or more times in a row is because simply they want to play as infantry instead. I don't think you'd like to command 5 times in a row either, it'd get tiresome. None of these ideas pick my interest except possibly bunkers. We alredy have walls, shield generators aren't needed. Before posting an idea, think about what they would do to improve the gameplay
Instead of having the commander place a mine, have him click and drag to create a minefield, which can then be built in one single go and repaired? Shouldn't be cheap to build, but they would be better hidden then grenadier mines. At the same time the requirement to have an engineer handy, the use of resources and ofcourse the fact you can only build them in controlled territory will make sure grenadiers still remain usefull.
The minefield idea is growing on me every time someone suggests it again. Here's my $0.2 worth of improvement suggestions. The commander-placed minefields should be researcheable technologies, somewhere deep down the tree to prevent ruining the early-game balance. The cost of research should be high, but not prohibitive so that in mid-game the Comm will have to decide to (for example) either get the heavies for attacking or minefields for defence. The cost of the field would be dependant on its size, getting progressively more expensive the bigger it gets. This would prevent creating ginantic fields even on maps like Money. Two distinct minefield types: Anti-Infantry and Anti-Vehicle, where vehicles do not set off Anti-Infantry mines and vice versa. This will give the Comm a flexibility to deploy one or the other (two types should not be allowed to overlap) without being able to completely cut off approaching enemy, the job that the Grenadiers should fill. Commander would place the fields by dragging an outline and letting go of the mouse button. Only square and rectangular shapes will be allowed (no wrapping around geometry or structures). Not sure if Engineers or Grenadiers should have to finish "building" the minefields. On one hand, the Engie is the builder of Empires, but on the other - Grenadier is the mine master. In either case, the minefields should only have 1/8th of their effectiveness and be very visible to the enemy when unbuilt. Completed minefields should be invisible to enemy units (maybe a fancy "burrow into the ground" animation?), with the exception of enemy Grenadiers with Defusal skill, for whom the hidden fields would show up on the minimap, as well as on the HUD in some manner when they are within a particular distance from the minefields. Minefields should look and function completely differently from Grenadier's mines: Unbuilt fields should look like tiny round metallic spheres, spread out across squares. Each sphere would cause small amounts of damage that would add up as you walk/drive over more mines. A single mine/sphere would not set off the adjacent mine-spheres. Enemy grenadiers' Defuse skill would only reveal the mines, thus making them only 1/8th effective, and allow each mine to be destroyed separately. Unbuilt or defused mines should be able to be destroyed by infantry weapons (pistols, SMGs, Riffles) or tank shells. This way a greater effort of teamwork would be required to completely clear the minefields. Further research could be then introduced to enhance some aspects of the minefields (damage, detection radius, etc.) What do you guys think?
Maybe the Grenadier could be the one who builds it, like a calculator that only Naders can use on the minefields? And dont make them invisible, the current mines are invisible enough to the unwary.
I still think it's an incredibly bad idea. Functionally, it is exactly the same as putting down half a dozen lines of unbuilt walls, except it requires a different class to get rid of it, and would be even more irritating because you can't see it to go around it. If you're in a position where you have to rely on minefields to survive, you're either playing escort or you're losing badly, and a badly losing team shouldn't just be able to research a tech, drag out a square on the map, and thereby make the game take 10 minutes longer while the enemy defuses all your mines.
I'd have to say no to all, in particular those superweapons, superweapons belong in RTS only games where the units are not real persons playing the game, and where no reinforcements system exists. Trenches can't be done, the only way to defom terrain doesn't deforms collisions, so it would be worthless to try until it is fixed. (engine issue FAIK)
mine field: where's the fun. where's the fun in being killed by something that you can't see. mines are good as they are... I really don't see that adding minefields in this way would make the game more fun or more tactical.
Well, and what exactly? Before Empires I was used to play Natural Selection, similar but far away from beeing the same. While a commander in NaSe had to do the research, building the base it was his job to support the team with medpacks and ammunition as well - Especially the last thing was on the one hand just so freakin' annoying because you had to keep an eye on nearly every guy in your team but then again, you had to do something. Beeing a commander in Empires is just pretty simple - The commander but rather the team is a very important factor. It needs absolutley no skill to put a few buttons in the research menu, after you've planed a research-order you can just follow this concept in most cases. Building walls, turrets and such stuff, well, yes - in the end it does help your team just indirectly. When your team get's attacked there's no way where you can directly help 'em, everything you can to is to plant buildings which must be built. I don't think you need any new buildings, that wouldn't change the role of the commander at all. Instead of 5 for example, you plant just 8 buildings in every outpost - But in the long run, it doesn't contribute anything to make beeing a commander more interesseting. Why not giving the commander some kind of abilities, maybe like those in C&C: Generals? A few abilities which just got a cooldown or even cost ressources to give him a possibility to engange directly. Detect enemies Heal a whole squad Revive a whole squad Filling up the ammunition of a whole squad Givin' em some kinda bonus Unveil areas in the map for a certain time ... I don't like the idea that the commander is just that depentent of his team. When his team is fucked up, right now, there no way he can really compensate that lack off, well, skill. You can give em' tanks, better weapons and everything but what do you when they just don't use them wisely? I guess one of the worse things of the commander's job ist the fact, that you can't do anything when you see that the enemies just keeps overrunning your team. You can only act indirectly by supporting em' with buildings or better weapons, for but at least me, that's a very satisfying feelin'.
Commanders are supposed to organise strategy and direct squads, over the whole field, but I find it helpful to direct tactics to some degree as well. Giving your team wallhacks is a good way to help them, and watching over a squad as it moves around will keep it safe from ambushes. You can also inform them of when the enemy is moving around them because you have a better view than they do. But yes, those things are only any use when your team is intelligent enough to use them, which sadly is very rare.
