Just a thought I had recently: why not have the engineer skill allow for a turret that isn't normally available? How about a couple different skills that each unlock a different turret? For instance, perhaps a skill would allow an engi to turn regular old turret (either type) into some sort of funky mortar launching turret? Higher damage, longer range, but the inherent inaccuracy/ slowness of a mortar shell. And I mean damage like a grenadier's mortar, not an arty shell. If not that, I think we could easily have some different turrets, each with special traits... maybe once a turret has been upgraded to level 2, a commander can choose one of a couple different variants, depending on what he wants? For instance: missile turret could be upgraded into, say, a salvo launching turret, a rapid-fire, non-tracking turret, or a slow-firing turret that fires a ridiculously fast missile. Just some ideas to make things a bit more varied and interesting... thoughts?
Mortar turrets have already been ruled out by Krenzo, as they require a lot more coding than one might expect. As for the rest of the post, I don't think it's a very good idea. In the past I've argued against a number of ideas that involve upgrades or whatever to various buildings, and I do not see how this suggestion is any different. My problem arises from the fact that they take gameplay emphasis off of the player and place it on the singular commander. The current turrets are simple and effective, I fail to see what this would add to gameplay.
*BUMP* I think that the current turrets are in need of an improvement, and searching through the forums, i found this suggestion. I'd like to make an edit to the original idea though. Because of the ridiculous range on ML turrets, coupled with their ridiculously slow speed over that distance, they are even less effective for their range. For example, at the limit of the range of a lvl 3 turret farm, you can draw fire from the turret, back behind a rock, and have a friend move in on the turret farm to do damage, before dodging out of the way as well. The turrets will only lock on to that first tank, and then while they take 5-10 seconds to refire, the next tank can get a shot off. Any turret farm is disabled within 30 seconds with this type of attack, with no damage to the attacking tanks. This makes tanks like artillery tanks, who's job it is to clear structures such as turrets, less needed. My idea is as follows: Lvl 1 turrets fire 1 missile at current rate and range. Lvl 2 turrets fire 2 missiles, as they have 2 pods on them now. They have same range, except the 2 rockets would be fired either simultaneously or alternating firing on pods, but each pod would launch at the same rate as a lvl 1 turret. A level 3 turret has 2 rather large missile pods, which would allow at least 2 shots per pod as opposed to the one shot per pod from the lvl 2 launcher. the two ways you could do this are to first them from each pod alternatively with each pod firing at half the rate of the regular pod firing rate. the second way would be to have the missile launcher simply launch a salvo of missiles, with an 6-10 second reload time, so it is similar to a tanks upgraded salvo missiles. so, the numbers would boil down to this: *times are examples, dunno the actual time between rockets* ML 1 - 1 rocket per 5 seconds ML 2 - 1 rocket per 2.5 seconds OR 2 rockets every 5 seconds ML 3 - 1 rocket per 1.25 seconds OR 4 rockets every 5 seconds. MG turrets already seem to act similarly, but that may just be me seeing it wrong. Pros: -Makes the turret more of something you have to deal with rather than a nuisance only dangerous when near the server max. -Gives a reason for the increasing size of the turrets look as far as rocket capacity goes. -Greatly increases the need for artillery tanks against a well defended base. -Makes a defensive strategy realistic and possible. Currently it is hard to lose once your team gets an early offensive edge. Cons: -We may see more turret farms -We may have to do something about them. -Wait, maybe that isn't a con? Anyhow, can we get some input on this? I know it's an old topic, but I think it's worth one final revisit.
currently, ML turrets, even upgraded, become obsolete when HE is researched, perhaps this is a good suggestion.
I agree MG turrets do their job with ruthless efficiency, and slow down any team considerably when they don't have tanks.
I'd still like big guns which you can man and aim like a vehicle. And I'd like them map placeable too, so you can put them in bunkers for engies to build.
If you are going to upgrade MLs, I suggest adding an 'enhanced' ML turret which takes up more room (about the size of the armory) and requires a radar lock and LOS to operate, so you can't use them to siege a base unless you really are dominating, and they can't be used at small outposts. Basically it fires arcing, fast missiles, which would be very good against slow moving tanks at a distance. Fast vehicles would probably be able to outperform the turning speed, which wouln't be that great, because the high speed would offset the need for it. I'm thinking probably 1.5 to 2.0 times the range of the current turret, the same damage, a fire rate of about 3 every 2 seconds, and the ability to hit a target at maximum range within 1.5 seconds from the launch. The missiles should arc slightly, coming to just above the cliff height in canyon, and the LOS should be calculated from the top of the launcher, so it should be able to shoot over low buildings (BE barracks, armory, perhaps refs, and walls). Basically it would be a long range high damage weapon, which would have an effective dead zone at close range because of the turning speed and launch angle, it's size and radar dependency would mean you need to build it in your base, and perhaps put a cap of 2 or 3 on the structure. The whole network would be disabled if the local radar was destroyed, so arty could take it out fairly easily with a spotter, or a fast light tank rush would probably break through. It's just a way to land hits on tanks which sit outside the range of your regular MLs and snipe you, but it wouldn't work on arty for obvious reasons.
A turret that can be hit at lvl 3 outside of it's attack range is a poorly placed turret, or you are on dust storm >_>
I disagree with this statement, on four points. First, the commander can't do anything on his own; he needs soldiers to move to the appropriate points so he can place buildings, and engineers to build them. Second, engineers can place their own turrets, naturally. Third, even with a smart commander putting up good defenses, it's still up to the team to attack, and defenses manned by good defenders will always beat unmanned ones. New / improved buildings can support a team and force them to use new strategies, but it can't make them obsolete unless we give the comm self-operating tanks or robo-engineers or something like that. Fourth, all suggestions for buildings that I've seen would still have to be used effectively by the team to be effective. Team members have to use turrets and other buildings for them to be fully effective, supporting, defending, and being supported by them, and using the support they provide to push and attack. New and better buildings don't reduce the role of soldiers; just the opposite. They expand it and give them more things to do, both by giving them new buildings to work with and by giving them new options when they attack. I strongly think that, in the long run, new buildings, advanced turrets, and so on are good things. By letting comms follow different strategies, they make each game different, and give soldiers new situations and strategies to use, encounter, or fight against in the long run. Right now, many games end up getting repetitive -- comms build the same buildings and turret setups, and people end up attacking them in the same way. New buildings and infrastructure is a way of adding variety to this, if it's done right... I think every game should be different based on the strategies the comms pursue. (HOWEVER, I should add: I don't like the idea of mortar turrets, because it would threaten the role of grenadiers. But I think that more and improved turrets and other support buildings could be a good thing, overall.)
Aqui, that post was made nearly a year ago (last march). I've revived a reallly reallly old thread, cause the title was there and it had the right idea in the main post. Dunno if falcon is active or still holds that opinion.
You still can't get turrets which shoot at long range, because well placed ones don't get the coverage.
My only complaint in the matter is that no matter how big the turret gets, the amount of rockets and the rate of fire is always the same. Same model with 3 levels of range improvements and then 3 levels of fire rate improvements that allow for the larger turrets, or just larger turrets taht get both improved range and rate of fire at the same time.
Though the idea of getting to shoot at a second target at level two is good. So long as if there is no second target, it doesn't get a second shot at the same target. This could help take out multiple turrets as well.... interesting.
Instead of just improving the ML turret, why not use an existing structure to improve the effectiveness of the ML turret. From what I understand of turret use is that many commanders use them primarily to defend their main base, the bridge in slaughtered, and use them to support forward bases. Depending on the significance of the forward base few or many turrets will be used. Turrets guarding Res points are only significant in helping to redirect enemy movements or buy time untill reinforcements can fend off the attack on the res point. Turrets do not actually hold off enemy in this situation when the enemy wants to take that territory. They can be destroyed too quickly. So instead why not have the turrets get bonuses from being within proximity of a Radar. Basically instead of the turret using its own radar it uses the Main Radar for tracking and guidence. Improving range and tracking ability. I don't know about firing rate as well placed lvl'3s can be very effective. So the Radar would have a proximity and any turrets, talking ML's as most believe MG's are ok, would get a range bonus. Those not in the proximity would act as is. Making the importance of a Radar even more significant. A Scout sabotage would take away that enhancement returning them to their current state. This would improve base defense without doing a mass revamp of the ML turret, lessening the ability to snipe with a super long range ML that some engineer placed early in the game. I think this would add more balance than making a perm change to the ML turret itself. Turrets are not supposed to win the game, teamwork is. But it would help a team bounce back if suddenly under heavy siege.
I once sudgested the engineer gets a small turret with halve the sensing distance and the smg2 accuracy and dmg, damageable from bullets, but could be placed on any surface(including cielings and the surface of vehicals ) but when recyled the dead body dosent stay as to avoid wall climb.
