Aparently I'm at best a highly functioning retard. What I mean was, do you guys think turrets should be removed from district? I find the first 10 min is fun and then it turns into turret spam and nade spam.
I think grenades will be fine if you don't have turrets. The only reason they are so effective is everyone gets grouped up because turrets start this war of attrition and people aren't able to move up.
Then make the tops of buildings accesible. It would be really cool to see some kind of makeshift ladders connecting the different rooftops. It would also make the map FAR less static as it is now; you'd have to have an entirely new strategy ready to win the map.
is it possible to limit the amount of walls buildable from 10 to 3, just for that map? it would be very good.
Yes, on district I wished so many times for a wall to be poloped doen, in order to take cover right on the front lines, with medics in the back, behind a fully buildt one, and riflemen and grenadiers behind a half build one... That is my dream
Solokiller is adding more ways to go on the map so that turrets aren't as much of a problem. If that's not good enough, we could designate certain areas where turrets can be built and prevent them from being built anywhere else. During alpha testing, you could build walls on Escort, and you spent most of the time having to blast through walls to get any where instead of having fun.
Actualy is it possible to not let the turrents be upgraded? The level ones arent so bad but the level threes are a pain. Id rather face two level ones than one level three. Maybe compensate engies by letting them build two from the start?
On escort walls would be a nightmare... but on district they could be quite an asset, as both teams need to attack, and compleatly sealing off an area is useless..
Unless you have a noob on the map. That would be an issue as then only the enemy can destroy a wall. What happens if some idiot on your team walls off one of the building you can spawn in?
#topic: remove turrets! #offtopic this would be bad. but since when noobs know how to build walls XD?
The suggestions given here are impossible without coding, except partially limiting the places where you can build. Currently, only one area has a no-turrets zone which is the new building and alley to prevent spamming, camping, etc.
Turrets should be not allowed to build in "open areas". So no longer you can place a turret that controls 1 km of the map. Turrets in alleys/small areas would be fine (you can always destroy it by throwing grenades).
Thats what cuases attrition. In open maps there fine, you can go around them. Your statement is ironic. In small alleys it turns into a grenade/turret spam fest in district. Did you not read any of the previous posts?
What m00tant means is they shouldn't be able to be built in the long open areas in disctrict where you can't even see them and they can hit you, but in the alleys where they can be avoided completly or naded they are alright. It seems like a not bad idea, allows you to cover your flank somewhat but doesn't create a standoff in the main part of the map.
In order to avoid Be and Nf teams from building inside buildings a protocol was established that says that you can't damage Imperial(BE)/Friendly(NF) buildings.
It isn't ironic at all. I meant that you should be able to put turrets behind corners/in buildings to protect from a rush (like you all get killed and enemy wins map after 15 seconds). About nade fest: you just can't repair a turret that is being naded. (if enemy is not an idiot) And BTW we're talking about turrets atm.
the current problem with district isn't turre(n)ts or nades, it's the fact that 90% of all people are cowards and refuse to even try to push forward Though, it WOULD be neat with a sewersystem or whatnot or the ability to go through the houses instead of the streets, ie: blow holes in certain walls and such, tho that'd be hard work for the mapmaker....