A plea regarding bases, towers, and bunkers

Huma · 2011-08-05, 02:19 AM

Please please Sony for the love all that is holy please clear the areas around tactical structures. Bases shouldn't have rocks or trees within 50 meters of them let alone completely blocking wall turrets. Any commander worth anything would clear cover from around a tactical position especially if it limits LOS.
A tactical structure is intended to dominate the surrounding area and thusly should be hard to approach undetected.

Bags · 2011-08-05, 02:22 AM

How the hell are we supposed to assault a base with no cover? Fun gameplay > realism every damn time.

Can we PLEASE put some thoughts into our ideas before posting them?

exLupo · 2011-08-05, 02:24 AM

Ground transports!

Senyu · 2011-08-05, 03:08 AM

Fine as is

Aractain · 2011-08-05, 04:20 AM

Add lots more rocks, trees and other cover. Maybe some roads and kill zones too. Maybe not trees overhanging walls... but cover yes.

Also Bags' avatar makes me feel uppity.

Huma · 2011-08-05, 06:22 AM

You forget that there are going to be a much larger number of troops on the field. The defenders are going to be hard pressed keeping attackers at bay as it is. Not to mention the built in counters to walls with armor, air, snipers, cloakers, and old fashioned suppressive fire. Besides these structures are going to be extremely important in that they will make it easier to keep adjacent hexes from being captured as easily. Purposely retarding their intended purpose by slapping trees in front of turrets is a horrible idea. Besides it's not like there isn't going to be a huge armor/air brawl that'll clear up everything before everyone switches to grunt to mop up.

Erendil · 2011-08-05, 08:17 AM

Originally Posted by Bags

How the hell are we supposed to assault a base with no cover? Fun gameplay > realism every damn time.

Can we PLEASE put some thoughts into our ideas before posting them?

Two words: Ground transport.

And he never asked for no cover at all. Just that the immediate area around bases be cleared of natural obstacles like trees and boulders. And I agree with the OP. At least to some extent re: trees. In PS1 there are a few bases that have trees growing just a few feet away from a wall turret. Take Kaang for example, There's a grove of trees in the NW corner that makes the NW wall turret all but worthless. Talk about stupid base planning....

RE: other cover, I'm okay with boulders being strewn about, and I'm hoping/expecting there will be trenches, bunkers, pill boxes, etc present in the areas around bases that infantry can use to find cover.

In short, nerf da treez!

Jennyboo · 2011-08-05, 08:51 AM

Agreed fine as is, ground troops get cover also it slows the flow of ground vehicles.

FriendlyFire · 2011-08-05, 09:12 AM

I am fine with less trees, in favor of better lay outs for attack/defense. Some bases should favor tactics more than others.

Sovereign · 2011-08-05, 10:12 AM

Because we already know that bases will have the exact same layout as before...

Ergo we can expect improvements in base defenses to come in some form or another. Personally I hope they have more depth to bases would like other frameworks of cover with various means besides just crates.

Lastly cover like trees should be destroyable and be considered light cover.

Hamma · 2011-08-05, 10:14 AM

Originally Posted by Bags

How the hell are we supposed to assault a base with no cover? Fun gameplay > realism every damn time.

Can we PLEASE put some thoughts into our ideas before posting them?

Every idea is valid even if you don't agree with them.

But I am going to agree it is fine as is - clearing it out wouldn't be much fun.

opticalshadow · 2011-08-05, 10:55 AM

keep it the way it is. aside from jsut regualr troop cover, as an dedicated infil for 8 years now i cant tell you how useful these peices of cover can be for breaking into bases. without them anyone with DV can pretty much spot me with no chance at all for doing anything.

here i can perch on top, or behind, i can even lead thoughtless soldiers around a rock or tree to kill the wounded infil, just for a hidden explosive to end their life.

maybe move a turret thats blocked by trees a bit, but dont get rid of the trees.

Heaven · 2011-08-05, 11:25 AM

I totally disagree, things like trees and rocks give the game a tactical side to assault the bases and towers, we would be sitting ducks if there was no cover for troops, but it would be a snipers heaven ha, cover in PS2 is a must and everyone knows it.

**Malorn** · 2011-08-05, 11:46 AM

As many others have said, cover is important and gives some natural tactics to base assault that will differ per-base. I really don't want every base assault to be repetitive.

I know some folks have a hardon for ground transports but stripping cover is not the way. If anything that cover will serve you better, protecting your transport from the engineers that would otherwise ruin it.

Gameplay has to come first.

CutterJohn · 2011-08-05, 12:02 PM

Cover is fine, but I do see his point. Some turrets had way too much obstruction.