Improvement: Forward Operating Base Take Two

[Baneblade]

Not long ago I proposed that the Sunderer be deployable into a FOB to balance out the Galaxy spawn ability. I see the genius of that particular design decision now and do not believe the Party Bus should get a spawn point.

However, the FOB concept is worth pursuing, but make it a semi permanent facility that takes both the Party Bus and the Galaxy to deploy. The Party Bus gives it repair and rearm for vehicles and the Gal gives it spawn point capability.

The FOB would consist of temporary structures that serve various purposes; spawn building, repair station, armory building, command bunker, defense tower (armed with AV and AA), and a shield generator building.

The FOB can use two modes: Overt (defense shield and empire spawn) or Covert (cloak bubble and outfit/platoon spawn)

OFOBs have an SOI that inhibits enemy drop pods, repairs engineer deployables, and prohibits orbital strikes.

CFOBs have a smaller SOI that disables enemy radar and reveals enemy infiltrators. CFOBs have no defense tower.

Destroying an FOB is straightforward, destroy the command bunker from the outside or the inside.

The idea is to meld engineer deployables with a vehicle based temporary base. Engineer deployables last indefinitely, or until destroyed, while inside an OFOB SOI.

CFOBs are basically intended to be more for specialized use since they are also limited spawns.

[Saifoda]

Interesting idea. I like it. Not so sure about how the specific mechanics you listed would play it out in the actual game, and, surprise surprise, looks like we'll have to wait for beta

But overall I like the general idea. There've been some other threads discussing temporary bunkers and turrets and walls and whatnots placed by engi's (I'm sure you're aware of them).

[Baneblade]

This idea is intended to compliment the existing engineering deployables. The OP's FOB doesn't have walls, this is intended to be something an engineer would set up and set up the defenses for.

The shield would follow the same rules as the PS1 BFR shield... basically any softie can pass through it. Small arms fire (grunt AI weapons) can also penetrate it. So snipers will be the bane of an FOB, unless properly defended.

[Saifoda]

I just have one question: Why does my profile say "Xboxlive Leaderboard #216"?


EDIT: But in all seriousness, I like the idea I just *personally* have some issues with some of the things like the engi setting up mobile repair stations and what not all as part of it; to me honestly it seems like it will end up being a waste of time for that empire. I'm not worried about it being overplayed, I'm worried about it not fulfilling it's role. But again, this is just my opinion, and it's based entirely on tertiary heuristics, so it holds about as much water as a marble.

Second edit: To clarify, I believe it would end up being a waste of time because it would be destroyed relatively easily; alternatively to counter that you could make the structures non destructible but then you run into the issue of the continents being littered with them after a month (there are legit fixes to this as well); you could make the shield stronger, but now you've just given each empire the ability to camp outside of the bases really closely -- that we DO have an example of: the E3 demo where all three empires were spawning vics and air vics within a klick of each other (super messy uncoordinated grind that'd be fun for about 10 minutes before people want to vomit [imo]). Basically those are the issues I see at a cursory glance of this.

[Baneblade]

Any immobile position is far less likely to survive a protracted assault... the Castle Curse. However, acting as a spawn, and somewhat of a vehicle base, but without trying to be inconspicuous like the AMS of yore, the FOB can become something more dynamic and flexible.

If the defense shield is sufficient to defend against a reasonable force, then adding defenders only improves that. FOBs should not be invincible effectively or in actuality. But they should not simply be a CUD click away from oblivion either.

[Saifoda]

Somehow, for some reason, after reading your last response it makes a lot more sense to me and I can more "emotionally" (colloquially, internally, take your pick, etc...) understand what you're going for here.




Here's an interesting thought: We have all these great ideas in the idea vault, I think it might be prudent (if not at least fun for the players ) for PS2 devs to put in a "revolving" or "evolving" beta, where new concepts are constantly being play-tested by the players.

[Cuross]

This is a concept that I was thinking about on a smaller scale with my other thread (which no one likes to reply in T_T), but like I mentioned there, involving vehicles for a forward base would be difficult. In this case you, like me, tried to see if there was a way to combine the sundie and the gal to create a forward base. While a good idea, truly I think so, this could only be achieved if both the sundie and the gal will have those certs available to them and thus take away the concept of a new mechanic since anyone can do it anyway.

ie.: Galaxy is certed for respawn and equipment terminal. Sunderer is certed for resupply and repair. It won't need a further mechanic to make it a forward base, people will just land and park near each other out of necessity and synergy.

BUT! Temporary structures like you are suggesting seems like it would be difficult. What I'm basically seeing here is that you are suggesting that someone (engineers) will be able to build a base in a sort of RTS sort of fashion. This means that there will have to be a certain radius of influence that you can build these structures and that the Sunderer and Galaxy will have to either be close enough to each other or in predetermined positions in order to gain the effect. Too much in my opinion.

This is where my idea of the hex system comes in. Engineers with a mobile outpost cert tree can plant any structure and those structures create hexes around them for another engineer to plant more, expanding the influence further. Cert so that you can build around a parked Sunderer and I'm imagining a sort of field CC tank with a bunch of sandbags (shields), a few autoturrets, and other such deployables and you've got a pretty bunkered in base.

I love the idea of evolving Beta, a sort of testing server from what I understand? That way, even after the game has been released, they can still test all these great ideas before actually putting them in the official servers.

[MedicDude]

No, static spawnpoints should be restricted to capturable facilities and towers only, they resulted in a lot of frustration in PS1 and led to stale gameplay, not to mention ripe OS targets. I do agree with your need for a ground-based spawning solution that does not need to fly into battle, and the sundy would be a perfect solution.

[Fafnir]

Higby actually mentioned that he likes the idea of setting up FOBs. However he described it as something build by mixing up various vehicles and defenses, like deploying Galaxy, parking Sunderer, setting up MANA turrets and placing mines around, without any "build FOB" button. He also mentioned, that Lodestar may be added to that later on. I like this way to set up FOBs, because it gives much more freedom to players, as we decide where to place every single thing and that makes every FOB unique.

[Baneblade]

Originally Posted by MedicDude

No, static spawnpoints should be restricted to capturable facilities and towers only, they resulted in a lot of frustration in PS1 and led to stale gameplay, not to mention ripe OS targets. I do agree with your need for a ground-based spawning solution that does not need to fly into battle, and the sundy would be a perfect solution.

Pretty sure the Galaxy has to be static to be a spawn point. OFOBs can't be OSed.