IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
So lets talk about fortifications Discussion of the Week #1, How interactions dont play out as well as they used to.
(USA)Bruce
post 5 May 2017, 18:10
Post #1


The Forums American Hotshot Flyboy
Group Icon

Group: Tester
Posts: 2513
Joined: 22 November 2012
From: The foundation of modern freedom and Liberty;United States of America.
Member No.: 9500



Sooo with the latest internal beta Fortifications now cost from 100 to...0?

Thats great now aint it?

Well sorta, Now that they are for free the way we use and look at things have changed.



Usually I went with this layout, and I forgot to mention in that image that;

Tank traps do not give garrison bonuse

Now with the changes the Tank trap barricade doesnt have a reason other then to fuck around with pathfinding and honestly thats not a valid reason to exist.
Thats like saying we should allow something in the game because the particles add more lag into the game.

It now doesnt have much of a place to stand on its own.

Now comes to the issue connected to this; The medic outpost upgrade as you dont have a reason to build tank traps and heal exposed/outside Infantry then why would you build this?
Well that comes to two reasons and maybe three
1-Your pushing/Defending so you Need the healing for making the most for your troops and upgrade it to the medic outpost.
2-You need it to keep the longevity of your heavy snipers as they trade shots agaisnt buggys firing on the move.(It isnt alot of damage but without this they'll die eventually)
3-You didnt go for prepared defences upgrade (Which right now is really meta and you see it very often)


My ideas to fix both issues;
1-Allow Infantry in tank traps to be stealthed when not firing which would allow you to provide an ambush on any sneaky beaky fellas that didnt expect to encounter you.
(Im looking at you stealth commanche raids)
2-Allowing the medic outpost to call in a pegasus chopper.This would Allow the player to recyle the investment if the outpost is overrun and allow ECA reinforce their heavy sniper postions by quickly replenishing the funds for it.

Then theres another issue I want to bring up and its not as big of an issue but still ODD

Theres currently an open top upgrade for fortifications that allow pineers and grenediers to garrison them, making them immune to toxin weapons and snipers and the such.

With the latest changes Grenediers have been shifted from being "Just a panzerfaust but good cause you can use them vs paladins" to an anti building unit/Anti infantry
Given the secondary weapon it has and the fact that its main weapon switched to Auora bomb which does damage agaisnt buildings and infantry more.

Now it used to make sense for this fortification to house one guy thats biggest weakness was to getting sniped with ease.Now hes got a shield of sorts to protect himself.
Why would you want AU bomb damage on the front line? Are you pushing with theese fortifications with grenediers somehow?
Its not as big of an issue but if possible, the grendier to have a more fitting damage type perhaps? Im not an ECA Player

So I'd like to hear from you, the playerbase about this issue and what you think would be the right way to go.
Tester and devs can comment to (Otherwise the main two ECA's Skitt/Mizo would be blocked out )

This post has been edited by (USA)Bruce: 18 May 2017, 0:38


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Knjaz.
post 5 May 2017, 20:53
Post #2



Group Icon

Group: Tester
Posts: 1812
Joined: 29 May 2012
Member No.: 9155



1) Tank Traps are... not dedicated garrisons? They were given ability to be garrisoned just as a rule of cool and secondary utility, their main purpose wasn't affected at all with the fortification cost decrease? Never meant to compete with forts in that role?

QUOTE
Now with the changes the Tank trap barricade doesnt have a reason other then to fuck around with pathfinding and honestly thats not a valid reason to exist.

That's their exact reason for existence. They're roadblocks, not fortification equivalents.

2) Sure, ECA players including me will love 100% refund for whatever infantry/snipers/grenadiers/etc were killed around medicforts on top of greatly increased survivability combined with uber cheap price of medicfort itself, but that's imba**** and you know it. Also makes medics useless for anything but offensive operations.

This post has been edited by Knjaz.: 5 May 2017, 20:56
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mizo
post 5 May 2017, 21:10
Post #3


AI Coding Expert
Group Icon

Group: Dev. Team
Posts: 1599
Joined: 9 May 2014
From: Poland
Member No.: 10450



Tank traps are not garrisons but rather just, a wall with the added benefit of you fitting your men inside. I still find them hard to use, not because they are useless but because my dozers are often too busy building other key stuff to keep me alive rather than slowing down enemies. I might build the habit of tanktrap spam soon enough when I get back into PvP again.

Fortifications are pretty useless past tier 1 due to anti garrison units, unless you pick prepared defenses. Medics outpost is important to keep your heavy infantry alive, they do make a huge difference.

Grenadiers are still good, even in the defensive part. Sure their damage output got reduced, but now they deal damage to all sorts of targets, even their counters which is great.

Wish tanj traps were slightly wider but I digress.


--------------------


Not a Rusty Spoon........The_Hunter uses a goddamn wooden spoon on his AI Scripters....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shiro
post 5 May 2017, 22:06
Post #4


Gamer Girl
Group Icon

Group: Legend
Posts: 3717
Joined: 19 June 2009
From: Disboard
Member No.: 182
ROTR PR Assistant and Friendly Freelancer



I find it more amazing how Tank Traps went from "not free and even require one of the GP unlocks" to "can hold infantry and is for free". But yeah, "roadblock" is their entire reason for existance.

I'm also with Mizo in that they could be slightly wider (maybe fit 4 infantry then instead).


--------------------
Joy~
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
{Lads}RikerZZZ
post 6 May 2017, 0:49
Post #5


Certified Shitposter
Group Icon

Group: Donator
Posts: 2263
Joined: 30 December 2013
From: Straya'
Member No.: 10248
pls join my games im lonely =c



If i could describe tank traps in one word it would be tedious.

Not bad, not good, and if i was to evaluate their performance both as a road block and as a pseudo bunker i would say that they failed miserably at both aspects. But thats not the standout feeling you have when using them. If you can be bothered using them, they are just tedious.

Why is this?

Well for starters if we look at their main job as a road block they dont really do a good job at blocking the road.
ignoring the basic fact that it is CONSIDERABLY easier to put mines in a chokepoint or zone, and the fact that the mines actually do damage to kill the units that go over them, and the mines are stealthed, the road block function itself is exceptionally hard to set up and use effectively.
Whilst melee units are indeed a thing that exist, they arent a primary focus of the game, so the ability to "wall them off" in the traditional sense is not a valuable asset. Most anti-base defence units (with the vague exception of the terrorist) are designed to either clear the garrison through ranged means or simply out range base defence all together. Unless the ECA player builds the tank traps way ahead of their defence line (which leaves the dozer exposed, more on that later) there isn't really much point to getting them to begin with.

This is ultimately why the garrison ability was added. You can say
QUOTE
theyre designed as road locks blah blah blah
but nobody ever used them like that in a proper game scenario. Hell, I would be hard pressed to say you even used them vs the ai for their intended role for the reasons above (thats an even larger impossibility now with mizos ai being as ruthless as it is too).
People used the tank traps as either an aesthetic visual prop (putting them around your base, around status bonus's, around garrisons etc) where they looked cool for a screenshot, but didnt really do much. More often than not, because these were all build around the base defence creating a 'wall', the idea to make them fortifications was a thematic tie in to this and it at the very least gave the tank trap some identity beyond being aesthetic.

That said, because of the issues bruce posted about the question still remains. Why should i bother creating a series of tank traps that not only don't do much, but also keep me from using that exact same attack route that i just blocked? Why should i spend the time investment of getting a dozer to go over there, build it where it would be exposed to every type of enemy fire, just so i can get something that is harder to use and more ineffective than a mine field. You could argue that you would "send an army" or "build more base defence" around the dozer to protect it, but that ultimately defeats the purpose of the "walling off" aspect.

So simply put as a tl;dr, the tank trap doesnt wall well, walling is not useful when mines exist, and they are tedious as shit to use because of the time and effort investment needed to get very little results back.


Now, i don't agree with bruce that we should give the inf inside the trap stealth. Lord knows we need another stealth detection gimmick when fighting eca defence lines.
But i do have an idea on what we could do to make its purpose relevant.

For starters make the thing bigger. Way bigger. Like, 2-3 times as wide bigger. Having the tank traps be of an actual useful size would be a good way to reduce their tedious nature. Instead of needing 3 tank traps to wall off a choke, i now need one. A single dozer + less time invested = a more streamlined and easier to use building.

Now that would be enough as an experiment of usefulness, but that doesn't fix the whole garrison thing. Before you say "it doesn't need fixing" (i can see you typing already KJ), it does.
Even making them larger and easier to use does NOT fix the fundamental flaw in their design in that it is still easier to poop out some mines and be done with it. Not to mention that your units still cant drive over your own tank traps.

If i were trying to design a working useful tank trap I would make them have a very large footprint and make them stealthed, and make them work like psudo termite drones, trapping enemy infantry and tanks in their barbed wire and concrete walls so they can be easily shot at by your troops (a different mechanic to the area denial aspect of the mines). seeing that units could walk through the tank traps, this would also mean your units could pass through them unharmed, thus removing the negative repercussions to the wall building for the ECA. Now this would be very powerful, no denying, but if it was locked in the prepared defences GP, or the ammo bunkers as an alternative, I think they would be well worth the investment. (note, this idea does somewhat rely on the tank traps being larger as previously established).

If that was not an option and i was just going to be boring i would make them really emphasise the infantry garrison ability by giving them full garrison bonus's and even increase protection from enemy troops.

Beyond those two ideas I can not see any other way of making these things work with mines existing as an alternative.

Now as for the pegasus call in, I've had that idea since 1.85 and I've wanted it for YEARS at this point, so yes, I would love to see that too.
What kj says as "imba" isnt really if the cooldown is massive and/or the function is locked behind a gp.

EDIT: as a quick final edit, can we PLEASE for the love of god make microwave tanks clear fortifications properly? I don't care what it takes, just do it, that shit it painful to deal with at the moment and really fucks things up so please fix it

This post has been edited by {Lads}RikerZZZ: 6 May 2017, 0:55


--------------------

Many thanks to IvanMRM for my avatar and Star for drawing my epic signature. You guys rock!
Also, check out our ROTR - Fan group on Facebook.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mizo
post 6 May 2017, 1:16
Post #6


AI Coding Expert
Group Icon

Group: Dev. Team
Posts: 1599
Joined: 9 May 2014
From: Poland
Member No.: 10450



QUOTE
If i were trying to design a working useful tank trap I would make them have a very large footprint and make them stealthed, and make them work like psudo termite drones, trapping enemy infantry and tanks in their barbed wire and concrete walls so they can be easily shot at by your troops (a different mechanic to the area denial aspect of the mines). seeing that units could walk through the tank traps, this would also mean your units could pass through them unharmed, thus removing the negative repercussions to the wall building for the ECA. Now this would be very powerful, no denying, but if it was locked in the prepared defences GP, or the ammo bunkers as an alternative, I think they would be well worth the investment. (note, this idea does somewhat rely on the tank traps being larger as previously established).

Spammable stealthed Road block is a bad idea.....am looking at you Russian Observation Outpost -.- . They could be wider but nothing else.


--------------------


Not a Rusty Spoon........The_Hunter uses a goddamn wooden spoon on his AI Scripters....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zeke
post 6 May 2017, 1:53
Post #7


The X General
Group Icon

Group: Project Leader
Posts: 2012
Joined: 7 June 2009
From: Philippines
Member No.: 73
Uniqueness is Overrated



Well I haven't played ROTR in a long time, so I'm probably not qualified to post here, but I don't really see the problem with tank traps being "useless".

You don't have to use everything, if ya'll think forts are now way better than tank traps in every conceivable way, then just use those instead.

The only time I used tank traps was when they could still be repaired (not sure if this was changed, like I said haven't played for a while), to me they were more like shields for your defences than road blocks, since the AI would waste their shots on them instead of your actual defences, kinda like permanent smoke grenades.

If it were up to me, I would optimize them for that role instead, either making them an upgrade that adds a second health bar to defences using firebase logic, or make give them an ability like the anvil tank that make defences around them untargetable until they're destroyed.

I'd also make it so that they leave a husk when they die, similar to how oil derricks now function in ROTR, with an upgrade that lets players spend money to rebuild it in the same place, negating the need to send your dozer out every time to rebuild them (I'd probably add this system to demo traps as well).

writes that down as possible update to his addon

This post has been edited by Zeke: 6 May 2017, 1:53


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
LeBrute
post 6 May 2017, 3:06
Post #8


Connoisseur of Fine Details.
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 48
Joined: 9 January 2017
From: Made in the U.S. of A.
Member No.: 14173
Neither pro nor noob: Mid-tier skill level.



The thing that I always liked about ECA Tank Trap Barricades is how they are indeed not technically garrisons. I will explain...

Because of how a Tank Trap Barricade is not a garrison in the technical sense, it makes garrison-clearing units not as effective. At least, not in the usual manner. For units such as Buratinos that have rather significant AOE, it doesn't really matter. But, against China Dragon Tanks, it is pretty handy; rather than instantly clearing out all of the infantry, the Dragon Tank's flamethrower is stymied by the Barricade's wall, forcing a player to individually micro down the infantry units that are behind it in order to kill 'em dead. Although the infantry units are still pretty easy to kill, it at least buys time for the ECA player to be able to react and fall back to another Barricade without losing as many units, if any.

I know that what I've described is such a minuscule aspect, but I've always appreciated it and utilized it against opponents of the China variety.

----------------------------------

On the lines of the whole pathfinding/roadblock thing, the Barricades, in my opinion, are really helpful; one just has to know how to use them properly and to their advantage. Now, I'm certainly not claiming to be an expert, nor am I calling anyone ignorant, but I've been able to use roadblock-fu pretty effectively in past PvP games quite a few times. If your ECA army is comprised of mostly vehicles and tanks, then yeah; creating choke-point hell is not the best idea. But, if your army composition is more focused on infantry and aircraft, then roadblock-fu can become pretty deadly.

Moreover, it's pretty effective to have Pioneers bombarding the enemy's ground force from afar when they are trapped behind... well... traps. And, being that they are infantry, the Pioneers are able to maneuver through the roadblocks no problem.

Also, if the Barricades are arranged in the right way, small groups of units that decide to mosey beyond the front line will get stuck on each other when attempting to turn around for the retreat, which creates the perfect window for Tiger hit-and-run.

Honestly, though, Tank Traps are best used in conjunction with mines; they can be used to direct armies into minefields, or simply buy more time for Minelayers to be able to do their thing a bit further behind the front line. They can be effective in this way because of how they are seen as worthless; opposing players will also see empty Tank Traps as a waste of time, thus, taking the bait and ignoring them, marching straight into a pool of mines.

In my experience, roadblock-fu works best when only applied to one or two fronts, being sure to keep at least one path clear of pathfinding hazards (in order to avoid the scenario of being locked inside of your own base). Against aggressive players that try to muscle their way through the roadblock, having that one roadblock-free path is perfect for catching the opposing army out of position and executing ground-based counter attacks. Against more careful players that just look for another way in, well, you have the advantage of knowing where they're not, which also makes it easier to catch the army out of position.

----------------------------------

All this being said, I completely agree with the notion that the Barricade should be longer.

I also agree with the idea that Medic Outposts should be able to call in medivacs.

----------------------------------

I think that's all I had to say tongue.gif

Thank you.


--------------------
Humvee kiting is for sissies; use a real strategy.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rey
post 6 May 2017, 8:46
Post #9



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 320
Joined: 28 February 2014
Member No.: 10315



same as Zeke i always used traps as shield for defenses. now with being repairable again traps are back in line for me. never really used them for garrisoning.
considering every proposition, i liked the passable variant with kinda termite drone logic so Road Blocks become real Blocks, though i can't imaging how to make it if not only constant subdual damage use. basically even current barricades could go well quite in theme with purpose as a shield, just make them wider(with passable effect for friendly units) and make sure that nothing apart from artillery could fire through them - so enemy just has to spend time to destroy barricades or search for another route.

idea of med-evac for med-forts sounds interesting, and with proper long recharge seems to be not so OP. besides most players tend not to use medics much for recovery, so i don't think that would really harm their usefulness.

rebuildable demo-traps from Zeke, hmm, i'd play with that.!) some pro players probably would make grate use of it, but for such low skills like me i think it will just finally raise a desire to use demo-traps at all = at present if i want to make "gla minefield" i send 2-3 demo-trucks - faster, less micro, more chance for unit to not die unlike worker.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RedDeadSmeg
post 6 May 2017, 8:55
Post #10



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 56
Joined: 26 September 2016
From: England
Member No.: 13220



Personally I very rarely use Tank Traps in skirmish games and I love playing as the ECA, I just find it irrelevant considering the other options you have and mines/demo traps are much better against the enemy. However, as others suggested if it was longer and perhaps upgrade-able (e.g. damage bonus/more health) then I would use it more often. I like the idea of the medic fortification being able to call in a medivac, that would really help out if a medic is too far away to help out.

On a side note, I'm surprised fortifications don't have a sniper nest upgrade for the Heavy Sniper considering there is now an open-topped upgrade for the Pioneers and Grenadiers.

This post has been edited by RedDeadSmeg: 6 May 2017, 8:58
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ZunZero97
post 6 May 2017, 9:49
Post #11


A Legendary Fox
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 589
Joined: 14 February 2015
From: Santiago Chile
Member No.: 10865



i think tank traps are decoration.


--------------------

A player who takes it seriously.
QUOTE
´´The suspense...is killing you hehehee`` Dr. Thrax quote

If someone asks me: ''Would you like be a tester?''. My answer obviosly will be ''Yes''.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hanfield
post 6 May 2017, 10:38
Post #12



Group Icon

Group: Tester
Posts: 476
Joined: 24 February 2015
From: Latvia
Member No.: 10884



i think tank traps are traps for tanks


--------------------
"don't live, hanfield"
"i swear to god, if this was a room full of you people i'd be taking off my gloves and slapping hanfield every 5 minutes"

- bruce 2016
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Skitt
post 6 May 2017, 12:00
Post #13



Group Icon

Group: Moderator
Posts: 1469
Joined: 8 January 2015
From: Newcastle, England
Member No.: 10811
Aut vincere aut mori, Cave quid dicis, quando, et cui, De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum.



QUOTE ((USA)Bruce @ 5 May 2017, 18:10) *
My ideas to fix both issues;
1-Allow Infantry in tank traps to be stealthed when not firing which would allow you to provide an ambush on any sneaky beaky fellas that didnt expect to encounter you.
(Im looking at you stealth commanche raids)
2-Allowing the medic outpost to call in a pegasus chopper.This would Allow the player to recyle the investment if the outpost is overrun and allow ECA reinforce their heavy sniper postions by quickly replenishing the funds for it.

First idea i dont like at all
second one i love


QUOTE ({Lads}RikerZZZ @ 6 May 2017, 0:49) *
If i could describe tank traps in one word it would be tedious.

Not bad, not good, and if i was to evaluate their performance both as a road block and as a pseudo bunker i would say that they failed miserably at both aspects. But thats not the standout feeling you have when using them. If you can be bothered using them, they are just tedious.

For starters make the thing bigger. Way bigger.

agree with this pritty much ^^
Needing a few to close off a small area when they can just be taken out with little effort is rather lack luster, considering how much micro/effort you have to put into setting it up for something thats only realy worth while for a limited stage of the game, when you have other things to do at the same time.
increasing there size and durability would be a good way to go as well as removing the splash vulnerability of garrisoned units or just lowering the chance of all 3 units getting killed at the same time by a single unit due to a small splash...

iv been useing the traps a lot lately (mainly due to gun turrets being crap) quite like them, but the points i said above are realy off putting.

QUOTE (ZunZero97 @ 6 May 2017, 9:49) *
i think tank traps are decoration.

just give up


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
__CrUsHeR
post 6 May 2017, 13:11
Post #14



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2609
Joined: 18 April 2012
From: Southern Brazil.
Member No.: 9084
"No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise."



Maybe the tank traps might be a bit more bigger, but I do not think it needs much more than this, after all its function is simply block a path.

The tank traps will never be so useful because it's a passive defense by nature, I do not see much of a problem here, it's completely optional.


--------------------

You already imagined how would be SAP in the ROTR's universe? Check out this fan-fiction: South American Pact Introduction
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
{Lads}RikerZZZ
post 6 May 2017, 14:24
Post #15


Certified Shitposter
Group Icon

Group: Donator
Posts: 2263
Joined: 30 December 2013
From: Straya'
Member No.: 10248
pls join my games im lonely =c



Holy crap zeke, that idea shits all over mine, thats brilliant.


--------------------

Many thanks to IvanMRM for my avatar and Star for drawing my epic signature. You guys rock!
Also, check out our ROTR - Fan group on Facebook.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Knjaz.
post 6 May 2017, 16:47
Post #16



Group Icon

Group: Tester
Posts: 1812
Joined: 29 May 2012
Member No.: 9155



QUOTE ({Lads}RikerZZZ @ 6 May 2017, 2:49) *
What kj says as "imba" isnt really if the cooldown is massive and/or the function is locked behind a gp.


yes, imba. Because cheap as hell, and any meaningful price increase would still leave em cheap as hell compared to medics, given their survivability. Only way around is a global cooldown, preferably with a gp requirement on top of it - or different "hard to use" gimmick like very short AoE of a refund ability.

Disabling tanks from moving while letting them shoot/slowing them down is impossible technically, in this engine.

Garrisons are handled by other defenses, barricade's existence is being roadblock and a wall, with garrisonability being throwed in for the "rule of cool". You can ofc. brainstorm to repurpose it's very existence (at the very least you're much more coherent in this), something that would 1) fit the faction 2) won't conflict with existing content.

QUOTE (Zeke @ 6 May 2017, 3:53) *
I'd also make it so that they leave a husk when they die, similar to how oil derricks now function in ROTR, with an upgrade that lets players spend money to rebuild it in the same place, negating the need to send your dozer out every time to rebuild them (I'd probably add this system to demo traps as well).


Would husk be destructable by opposing force, how much effort it'd take in your vision? When rebuilding, would it use the current oil derrick mechanic and have a scaffolding that'd have full fortification hp, or is it possible to set up low "transition" hp or some other mechanic that'd prevent opposing player from rebuilding them like mad upon their destruction, in face of an incoming army?

This post has been edited by Knjaz.: 6 May 2017, 17:04
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
X1Destroy
post 7 May 2017, 5:37
Post #17


Guardsman
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2020
Joined: 22 October 2012
From: Terra
Member No.: 9379
Armageddon is here..............



Make them garrisonable by heavy snipers. It will save them from undeploying automatically everytime a dozer pass by them.



--------------------
We Die Standing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Skitt
post 7 May 2017, 9:16
Post #18



Group Icon

Group: Moderator
Posts: 1469
Joined: 8 January 2015
From: Newcastle, England
Member No.: 10811
Aut vincere aut mori, Cave quid dicis, quando, et cui, De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum.



^^ that ones new to me, never seen them do that.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zeke
post 7 May 2017, 11:01
Post #19


The X General
Group Icon

Group: Project Leader
Posts: 2012
Joined: 7 June 2009
From: Philippines
Member No.: 73
Uniqueness is Overrated



QUOTE (Knjaz. @ 6 May 2017, 23:47) *
Would husk be destructable by opposing force, how much effort it'd take in your vision? When rebuilding, would it use the current oil derrick mechanic and have a scaffolding that'd have full fortification hp, or is it possible to set up low "transition" hp or some other mechanic that'd prevent opposing player from rebuilding them like mad upon their destruction, in face of an incoming army?


Husk would be indestructible, there wouldn't be much point in it otherwise. They can be manually removed by the player though, in case they want to build something else.

I'd say the fact that you need to pay to rebuild them, and that they can't be repaired is enough of a reason not to spam rebuild them.

Plus, I forgot to mention, the tank traps wouldn't be garrisonable anymore, they'll be purely defense support


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Knjaz.
post 7 May 2017, 15:10
Post #20



Group Icon

Group: Tester
Posts: 1812
Joined: 29 May 2012
Member No.: 9155



Would it be possible to place buildings on top of enemy husk?
If not, i see an easy exploit with supply dock denial. Even if you lose the expansion, you could surround it with barricades randomly, which even when killed will prevent supply center construction. Stuff like that.

This post has been edited by Knjaz.: 7 May 2017, 15:11
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zeke
post 7 May 2017, 15:40
Post #21


The X General
Group Icon

Group: Project Leader
Posts: 2012
Joined: 7 June 2009
From: Philippines
Member No.: 73
Uniqueness is Overrated



QUOTE (Knjaz. @ 7 May 2017, 22:10) *
Would it be possible to place buildings on top of enemy husk?
If not, i see an easy exploit with supply dock denial. Even if you lose the expansion, you could surround it with barricades randomly, which even when killed will prevent supply center construction. Stuff like that.


hmm, well it is possible to build over some nature props and some civvie building husks. Seems further research and field testing is required.

Though I guess another solution is to make the husk unkillable only for a short time after it spawns, or give the husk a lifetime so that it kills itself after not being upgraded for a time


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rey
post 7 May 2017, 16:45
Post #22



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 320
Joined: 28 February 2014
Member No.: 10315



with all said i'd say current traps should lose garrison abilities, become wider, and high resistances, so enemy have to really spend time to destroy it, so fulfilling its original role to block enemy from fast march. at the same time i'd give it real small healing rate(like for BBear) and not so fast build time(to prevent easy expansion block).

open-topped fortifications should allow garrisoning snipers. as for other forts, i was always surprised why ammo-fort is not garrisonable and why engi-/med-fort is there if anyways you needs Pandurs nearby to repair buildings?! so with adding med-evac to med-fort i'd make it not garrisonable and evac itself with long cooldown.

This post has been edited by rey: 7 May 2017, 16:54
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The_Hunter
post 7 May 2017, 22:11
Post #23



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 5604
Joined: 31 May 2009
From: The Netherlands
Member No.: 1
Projects: SWR Productions
Bitch slapping SAGE since 2003



i haven't read all the comments but i'm just going to throw it out that that infantry positioned within/behind tank traps DO benefit from garrison bonuses.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Scud
post 8 May 2017, 4:57
Post #24



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 176
Joined: 16 June 2015
From: Argentina - Buenos Aires - GADA 601 Base
Member No.: 11600



QUOTE (Hanfield @ 6 May 2017, 6:38) *
i think tank traps are traps for tanks


Damn, I thought traps were made by gay people to bother straight people.


--------------------
In a world falling apart... ECA stands united
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Zion
post 8 May 2017, 14:02
Post #25



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 662
Joined: 2 April 2015
Member No.: 10992



and quote of the day goes to
QUOTE (Hanfield @ 6 May 2017, 5:38) *
i think tank traps are traps for tanks


I think zeke brought up a cool idea..

remember those merc gunners from gla that can build their one fox holes????

well how about add ONE barricade construction to all or most of eca defenses.. so that once you build a guard tower.. for fiddy euros more you can place a barricade in a radius of the guard tower.. now u got an easier way to use this structure.. and would actually worth learning the hotkey for.

a line of defenses becomes a barricaded strong line with inf support.. I think this also will help with eca's early weakness..

lets face it.. no one sends their doser infront of their just built defense structure to build a tank barricade.. its just too risky..(or what mizo said.. its not time efficient) // add them to the defense structures as an construction option.. and let it build on its own.

as far as balancing goes.. not sure if it should be locked away or cost more.

This post has been edited by Zion: 8 May 2017, 14:07
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 17 August 2017 - 4:40