|
Originally Posted by Gohan_VA
Thats the problem. One person with it could hold off 2 squads.
|
With an excellent defensive position, with mounted defenses or crew-served weapons, one squad should be able to hold off a platoon, at least. However, since whatever tactical genius designed the bases made it more like swiss cheese, NONE of that is possible.
This brings up the point of defenses. Everyone screams how base defense should be given more incentives and XP. As it stands now, you have to practically let your opposition get down to one minute, then roll in and kill everyone and rehack. Don't give me that bullshit about "Well if you sit in a turret and kill a hundred enemy, you get more XP than hacking a base with a good battle." That's a load of horse dung.
I have seen maybe a handful of solid-awesome base defenses in this game, since exclusive beta. They've all been within the last month. Each time, we defended a direct-to-warpgate base that prevented the enemy from getting a foothold on the continent, so the fighting was localized to one spot. We had a shield module and a pain module installed, AA and AV weapons on the walls, combat engineers running crazy between the two gates, all turrets manned, a handful of MAX locked down at the back door, and tanks sitting stationary in the archway, behind the shield. Almost all of the friendlies were sitting at one base waiting for the attackers. In short, everyone and their brother was waiting and it was a matter of numbers.
If I'd been in charge of the Terran Republic Army when my engineers were building bases, I'd have executed every last one of them. What dipshit puts a back door in the wall and then slaps a hackable door as the only defense? And furthermore, what tactical Einstein puts two giant archways down, with only a few tank-barriers in the middle? Until the shield module, virtually any enemy could waltz right in. Not too many people want to defend because all you do is a) give the enemy XP as they mow you down and b) more points toward the hack-XP. It's a losing battle, and only an S&M addict would enjoy seeing how long he could hold out.
My suggestions for a cure? The first step in making base defenses better, is making bases themselves better.
-- Internal defenses would be a good start. Perhaps automated turrets inside, guarding base chokepoints. An alarm system, not just a stupid whoopie light and a text message.
-- Put electronically-raised barriers in the archways. Their normal position could be down, but when an enemy is detected within the SOI (via the Interlink lattice link) they'd pop up. Such a raised barrier isn't large enough to completely seal the archway, allowing for incoming and outgoing fire (except when the shield module is installed). Such a barrier is also NOT hackable, but instead goes down if the base loses power, goes neutral, or is hacked. This could be tweaked, though, and it's acceptable to have a hack panel if your offense blows nuts.
-- More variety for turrets, perhaps dumbfire missile racks (these would need to be refilled, to prevent "spammage"). This gives bases a fighting chance when faced with a convoy of Vanguards dumping a thousand rounds into you point-blank, and all you have is the Phalanx BB Gun.
-- The back door. I read somewhere that the developers were going to put a double-hack system on the back door, where you had to hack it from within before you could open the back door. They were planning on putting a blast shield over the "back porch". With a double-hack system, you'd be forced to hack from the inside (raising the blast shield) and THEN your forces could go hack the back door.
This also gives Galaxies a newly-rediscovered role. If a base is fully defended and locked up tight, you'd almost have to air-drop people inside to get the base down. Base attacks would be more difficult, base defenders would actually have a fighting chance, and base defense XP would go up as you carve a hunk out of defenders before they mount a serious, major effort to overwhelm you.
Linear Mode
