Combat Engineering

LordReaver · 2011-02-13, 05:43 AM

I feel it's a safe assumption that CE will make PSN, so without further ado...

Spitfires should go underground when they are not firing. This stop friendly vehicles from running over them and destroying them. It also "cloaks" them without making them lame. You can still see they are there, and can still kill them. (I have to admit, I would miss spitbombs

)

Cerberus Turrets need to be removed entirely. Aircraft have enough to worry about.

Shadow Turrets Remove due to redundancy (see spitfires).

Wall Turrets should be all over the walls, not just corners and gates. They should be easily killable and easily repairable.

One Man Turrets Remove due to redundancy (see bunkers below)

Motion Sensors should hide underground when a vehicle comes near them (even enemy), or just be small enough to drive over without hurting them, again, this stops vehicles from running over and destroying them.

Boomers need to be circular. Triangles are way to easy to spot.

Mines need to be deployed in groups. It doesn't have to be large groups, three at a time would be nice. Maybe add an alternative mode that does singles.

TRAPs need to be easier to kill, but remove the terrible limit on where they can be placed. Except for on bridges, they should not be allowed on bridges.

Bunkers should become a deployable. Give them a lengthy deploy time, lots of armor, and suddenly you can make any spot a viable location to fight from. Variations would be nice.

Sand Bags (or whatever the non specific name is) are also something to be added. Make them a quick setup and perhaps even stackable. If they were somewhat like LEGOs people could make little forts of their own.

Aegis Shield Remove due to redundancy. The AMS/bunkes/sandbags cover this.

Ammo Terminal should be added to allow basic ammunition replenishment. Would have a moderate deploy time, and would go away after a minute or two.

Any improvements and/or additions?

What exactly are the rules on the f-bomb here?

DviddLeff · 2011-02-13, 06:10 AM

Originally Posted by LordReaver

I feel it's a safe assumption that CE will make PSN, so without further ado...

Spitfires should go underground when they are not firing. This stop friendly vehicles from running over them and destroying them. It also "cloaks" them without making them lame. You can still see they are there, and can still kill them. (I have to admit, I would miss spitbombs

)

Good idea.

Cerberus Turrets need to be removed entirely. Aircraft have enough to worry about.

No, infantry need an effective air defense out in the field. Cerberus turrets can only damage/destroy aircraft which are flying low anyway and by the time a Mossie or Reaver is in range they have usually got a cheap kill anyway.

Shadow Turrets Remove due to redundancy (see spitfires).

Agree.

Wall Turrets should be all over the walls, not just corners and gates. They should be easily killable and easily repairable.

Agree.

One Man Turrets Remove due to redundancy (see bunkers below)

Agree.

Motion Sensors should hide underground when a vehicle comes near them (even enemy), or just be small enough to drive over without hurting them, again, this stops vehicles from running over and destroying them.

Agree.

Boomers need to be circular. Triangles are way to easy to spot.

They need to stick to vehicles!

Mines need to be deployed in groups. It doesn't have to be large groups, three at a time would be nice. Maybe add an alternative mode that does singles.

Agree.

TRAPs need to be easier to kill, but remove the terrible limit on where they can be placed. Except for on bridges, they should not be allowed on bridges.

Disgree; if they are easily destroyable putting them on bridges wouldn't matter anyway.

Bunkers should become a deployable. Give them a lengthy deploy time, lots of armor, and suddenly you can make any spot a viable location to fight from. Variations would be nice.

Agree.

Sand Bags (or whatever the non specific name is) are also something to be added. Make them a quick setup and perhaps even stackable. If they were somewhat like LEGOs people could make little forts of their own.

Agree.

Aegis Shield Remove due to redundancy. The AMS/bunkes/sandbags cover this.

Agree.

Ammo Terminal should be added to allow basic ammunition replenishment. Would have a moderate deploy time, and would go away after a minute or two.

I have CR3's being able to deploy these, and they would have a limited supply of equipment like an AMS terminal (no MAX armour).

My comments in yellow.

LordReaver · 2011-02-13, 06:49 AM

Originally Posted by DviddLeff

No, infantry need an effective air defense out in the field. Cerberus turrets can only damage/destroy aircraft which are flying low anyway and by the time a Mossie or Reaver is in range they have usually got a cheap kill anyway.

Disgree; if they are easily destroyable putting them on bridges wouldn't matter anyway.

Infantry need cover from air, more than they need a counter to it.

I didn't mean really easy to kill TRAPs, I just meant a little easier. It takes a long time to kill one of them. If the limit on how many can be placed next to each other was removed, imagine trying to break into a CY with how strong they are now. People would place them like 5 deep. That's a lot of ammo not going towards any kills. I guess if infantry could somehow dismantle them, that would be fine also.

DviddLeff · 2011-02-13, 08:21 AM

Yeah infantry need cover from air; they do not have it currently, so they need the Cerberus Turrets or for the Mossies nose gun COF nerfed.

If Traps could be destroyed with a single Boomer that would be quite cool.

CutterJohn · 2011-02-13, 06:37 AM

Just make friendlies pass through spits. Mowing them over with vehicles is a valid tactic.

Cerberus turrets.. Meh. Aircraft have enough to worry about? So does everything else.

Shadow turrets - Rather a silly concept all over.

Wall turrets - Should lower into the courtyard when not in use. When occupied, the operator can raise it to fire, or lower it to avoid fire. Gun tower turrets should pop up from inside.

Motion sensors are fine. I could support placing them in more positions so that they are harder to run over if well placed. Stop friendly drivers from hurting them, if that happens. I can't remember now.

boomers - I'd like to see them be able to be attached to vehicles. Oh, the lulz that could create. I would like to see boomers moved away from CE, as its a much different beast than the rest of the cert, which is concerned with field fortifications. SA might be appropriate.

Mines hurt small vehicles enough. No need for even more of the damned things. If buggies and such were less susceptible to them, maybe.

Bunkers is a nice idea, but I see that as something that a CE does in combination with a lodestar, being able to place large battlefield fortifications.

Sandbags, sure. Stackable ofc won't happen. Also, should be a shield, instead of sandbags, so it doesn't look as weird when friendlies drive through. It might be nifty to make them very difficult to destroy, but the shield portion has relatively fewer hitpoints, and recharges.

Ammo terminal is pretty redundant with an ams or base around. If it were to exist, it shouldn't go indoors, should have a limited supply, and the construction gizmos shouldn't be able to be purchased from it.

As I went into a bit, I'd like to see players with CE and Lodestars able to deploy advanced/heavy fortifications. Dropping an AMS like bundle. The aforementioned bunker. Heavy field turrets. That sort of thing.

CutterJohn · 2011-02-13, 08:36 AM

Or viable infantry AA. Dedicated, or alternate fires on the AV weapons that make them better vs air. Well, the striker was mostly fine. The lancer could use a flak round, and the phoenix... just needs to be rethought somehow.

DviddLeff · 2011-02-13, 09:29 AM

I would rather have separate AA weapons than have an alternative fire mode for the AV ones.

And the Mossies nose gun needs a nerf whatever happens; its a scout aircraft not mean to be a kill whores dream vehicle.

Tikuto · 2011-02-13, 09:40 AM

Actually, I'd tailor all engineer roles and equipment to make clear difference in battles instead of just putting stuff down.

"What do you mean?"

The Engineer would have their role easy. You place an deployab le item(s) it is works against all vehicles: anti-vehicular. The purpose is to greatly promote field battles away from facilities/urban territories without any vehicles (ground & air), and how many times have we not seen this? -- key information: one field deployable item works against all vehicles effectively.

It means the Engineer has the clear role of something and they do it effeciantly and effectively: anti-vehicular with little time-consuming hassle. Deploying everything for an EMP Blast to jam it all is very aggrivating. So, the Field Turret will have it's uses against anti-infantry or anti-vehicle (ground and air).

Basicly reduce time-consuming effort for more shooty-action fun.

CutterJohn · 2011-02-13, 10:04 AM

Originally Posted by Tikuto

The purpose is to greatly promote field battles away from facilities/urban territories without any vehicles

Why would you want to promote that? This is a combined arms game. CE should help give infantry a chance vs vehicles if they dig in to a defensible position in the field. It should not banish the threat of vehicles entirely.

ArcticPrism · 2011-02-13, 11:21 AM

I still don't see why so many people want Cerberus Turrets(and other AA gone). It requires a group of them to do any sort of damage and even then a mere Wasp can fly through them and survive unless it has low hp or no afterburner. All aircraft have at least 2-3x more range. Other aircraft should not be the only threat to aircraft.

I think in general deployable turrets should be more useful. I haven't found much viable use for Spitfires/Shadow turrets other than making it a pain for cloakers to reach my Lodestars. They aren't very useful around bases. It is fairly discouraging/frustrating spending a lot of time and effort placing them around the base just to see all of the work gone with the press of a button from CR emp. I also think that a limit of only 15 is much too low considering they are extremely weak and have half the range of a Sweeper(lol). They even have damage degradation so if you are a Rexo standing at the edge of its range, it only does 5 armor per bullet and no health!

Field turrets(player manned) are very useless. They have poor range, accuracy and they have way too little shield. You'd be lucky if you could take 20% of a tank's hp before being destroyed by it. They should at least have enough shield to do significant damage to vehicles. If they had greater range they could be placed on hills and stuff.

Players should be able to place more mines or EMP mines should have a separate limit from High Explosive mines. Currently no one uses EMP mines because they are vastly inferior to HE mines.

Aegis shield can be useful for hiding vehicles, but I would also like other types of shields. Maybe ones that can be used as cover for infantry or small vehicles. Players that also have hacking stuff should be able to deploy things that enhance radar instead of only on a charged Aegis.

Hamma · 2011-02-13, 04:17 PM

We need spider clamp turrets.

LordReaver · 2011-02-17, 08:10 AM

Not only are flakfires annoying and not needed when infantry have proper cover, they are also somewhat redundant with the spit. With the current spit, all it would need is more damage vs air, and better tracking. The current spit is unbelievably easy to trick. I can get within spitting distance of one before it will start hitting me. So I assume they will be better next time.

Bunkers in general should cover the need for OMTs, because you are protected, and you can fire whatever you want out of it. However, if they were upgradable with little open seat turrets on them, that'd might be nice.

I should have mentioned the AMS before. It's not really CE, but it kind of overlaps it in my eyes (which is a good thing). I feel that it should basically be a light mobile fort. The only real defense an AMS has right now is not being found. So it could use things like a bubble that soaks up some of the damage from small arms fire, a limited detection ability, or something that would help defenders actually defend it. It shouldn't have any direct defense abilities like a gun or something though. I'm still thinking on this one, but that's where my thoughts are at the moment.

How I'd have the ammo terminal, is it can't do anything other than give out ammo. If you want to switch weapons, you should have to seek out an AMS or other non portable terminal. A user needs to engage the term, and after a few seconds, it will refill what ammo you are in need of (Like John said, it's construction tool can't be purchased from it, to prevent an endless cycle), or you can grab the ammo manually if you want to change it up. It should not be allowed indoors however, and it would expire after 5 or so minutes. Its role is to fill gaps where an AMS can't, and again help encourage going off the beaten path. This is not really an essential thing though.

The Aegis shield is really just a crappy AMS, that is usually used to hide things that shouldn't be hidden. For example Lodestars are commonly put in them and completely defeat the purpose of the Lodey being so massive.

The reason boomers should be circular rather than triangle, is because triangles area really not a common thing to see. Just look around the room you are in, how many triangles do you see (not counting squares

). Circles blend in much better, and would allow for more crafty placement, like on a terminal or a stair. It's only a model change, so it wouldn't change their power. It would only mean you have to pay more attention for booby traps. Which I think is a fair thing. I like the idea of attacking them to vehicles. Would be fun to see someone attack one to an enemy tank, then wait for that tank to drive into a group of their own, and blow the thing. Also, if you can run up and slap a tank, then you deserve to do extra damage to it.

Wall turrets should be easier to kill, because it actually takes a lot of fire power to take one out. The only reason they aren't overpowered is because they are stationary. With more wall turrets, it would make them even harder to combat them. Making them easier to kill helps. In return for being easier to kill, they should be easier to bring back online also. This should help emphasize taking the walls more for both sides. Get on the walls so they can't get the turrets back online, and get on the walls because the turrets aren't hard to get back online. The way it is now, people hardly ever try to get the turrets back online once down, except when the enemy can't take the walls anyways. On a side note, maybe the backside should be weaker than the front, haven't decided if that would actually be meaningful yet.

It doesn't matter what the sandbags look like, just that there is some deployable to block damage.

Traak, the issue you talk about with droppers, maybe isn't a CE problem but a problem with dropping, no? Not that I agree with it being such a problem to begin with. Honestly, how is CE supposed to differentiate between a dropper and someone who just ran up normally?

The shadow turret is redundant in every way except that it cloaks. Now add on top that my idea of spits that go underground when they aren't shooting and you have a semi hard to see automated turret, that isn't completely lame by being 100% invisible without darklight. You have to ask yourself what the reason is for wanting cloaking, and change the source, not add in a new feature to correct the problem. Not going for the source is why so many lame changes/additions happened in the past.

ArcticPrism · 2011-02-17, 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by LordReaver

Not only are flakfires annoying and not needed when infantry have proper cover, they are also somewhat redundant with the spit. With the current spit, all it would need is more damage vs air, and better tracking. The current spit is unbelievably easy to trick. I can get within spitting distance of one before it will start hitting me. So I assume they will be better next time.

Cerberus Turrets aren't redundant. Spitfires have pathetic range. Only the Dragon and knives have less range than them. AI can't lead shots so it helps to have the proximity. Cerberus Turrets in their current form even have short range. Mosquitos and Reavers especially can easily outrange them. Their damage isn't really that high and cannot barely destroy a mere Wasp and that's only if it sits in the field of them or has low hp.

The Aegis shield is really just a crappy AMS, that is usually used to hide things that shouldn't be hidden. For example Lodestars are commonly put in them and completely defeat the purpose of the Lodey being so massive.

Lodestars are massive because they are designed to be able to transport any vehicle. If it didn't have to carry vehicles it would very likely be much smaller and having a cloaking field similar to that of an AMS. Not that a cloaking field will stop anyone from seeing it on the radar, and everyone has reveal enemies these days anyways. Just reveal and OS or go destroy it or hack it.

Wall turrets should be easier to kill, because it actually takes a lot of fire power to take one out. The only reason they aren't overpowered is because they are stationary.

Current wall turrets are garbage and mostly worthless except for the AA variant. It is the only version of the upgrade that is useful. A wall turret will easily lose to any MBT. The chaingun is extremely inaccurate, suffers from heavy damage degradation, has bullet drop and does little more damage than a Mosquito at optimal range. The cannon does decent damage but it has an arc and travels too slow to hit anything that is moving. Orbital strikes are so common that people will just OS them. The turrets are very exposed and impossible to repair once destroyed if there are any vehicles around. Turrets are stationary and can easily be evaded because they are fat which makes it easy to shoot them from where they can't shoot you.

The shadow turret is redundant in every way except that it cloaks. Now add on top that my idea of spits that go underground when they aren't shooting and you have a semi hard to see automated turret, that isn't completely lame by being 100% invisible without darklight.

Shadow Turrets are the only turrets that aren't useless when fighting NC and their uncounterable Phoenix(assuming they haven't been spotted already).

Cyan stuff.

LordReaver · 2011-02-18, 12:37 AM

Originally Posted by ArcticPrism

Cyan stuff.

AI can't lead shots simply because it was lazy coding. All it does is adjust its aim to where you will be based on your speed and direction of travel. That's why all you have to do to trick it is not travel in a straight line. Their damage vs aircraft is easily changed. Why assume that they will be just as shitty as before?

How about making jammer nades explode in proximity to aircraft. That should pretty much take care of infantry vs air troubles. We also don't know how aircraft handle, so making assumptions on how easy it will be to farm is rather pointless really.

The Lodey is much bigger than any ground vehicle. That is so it's easy to take down. When it carries vehicles it basically adds armor and mobility at almost no cost. Then when it gets to where it wants, it turns into a repair/rearm station. That's why it is big.

You clearly didn't read anything I said on wall turrets.

Spitfires can have have an armor plate on their top, so that when they are underground they are hard to kill.

The blowing up bridge thing is an interesting idea. My explosives expert idea would be well fitted for the position of blowing them up. There does need to be some way to counter blowing up bridges though. Who gets to choose what bridge and when? What happens when people take out bridges to grief everybody? How do you effectively repair the bridge?

On the other hand, it does provide benefit. It emphasizes amphibious combat and alternative routes. It would be awesome! I would love to see a group of armor crossing a bridge when a bridge starts coming down.

I would like to know what kind of bridges are going to be in. The old ones are boring and ugly. If some had a hump or were curved, or that would help support infantry crossing the bridge. If they are all the same, I hope they are truss. It would help against air.

Sirisian · 2011-02-18, 12:43 AM

Originally Posted by LordReaver

How about making jammer nades explode in proximity to aircraft.

I remember people wanted them to just turn off the engine on an aircraft. That would be epic. Jump out of a plane onto a galaxy and hit it with a Jammer.