It is as i feared... no deploy zones. - Page 4

Stardouser · 2013-07-16, 12:20 AM

Originally Posted by Baneblade

Why is increasing the spawn time on Sunderers not on the table?

Increasing spawn timers for both attackers and defenders, at both fixed and Sunderers, should be on the table. Obviously there are ways to do this such as a multiple SCU approach (taking down 1 or 2 SCU increases spawn timer, all 3 shuts it off).

Or, deploying 1 sunderer in a certain radius is a 30 second respawn, 5 makes the respawn as short as it is now.

Jax Blake · 2013-07-16, 01:46 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

The purpose of the NDZs is to ensure timing between defender spawns and attacker spawns and prevent checkmate moves to capture a base by putting a spawn point directly on top of it or between the defender spawn and the capture point. Distance to travel from a spawn is a force multiplier and NDZs standardize it and give a clear defender advantage (which is why it doesn't affect defenders).

If we give the ability to disable the NDZ then we have three issues.
1) More places for a defender to defend, which makes it harder for them, especially if outnumbered.
2) If the NDZ is dropped, the fight is basically over since the attackers can now magnify their force even more. And if they managed to take out the generator then they probably already have more than the defender.
3) The ability for defenders to recover the situation is severely reduced, as now they not only have to secure the point and remove the AMS, but they must also retake the generator.

It's effectively more win for a winning side and a pure defender disadvantage to do that. By not having them removable we ensure consistency of spawn distance and give defenders better chances against a numerical superior opponent and better chances at recovering.

The fact that defenders can place AMS inside the NDZ means there's more objectives: For the attacker, the objective is kill the defensive AMS. For the defender the objective is to place them. Once those are gone the playing field from a spawn distance standpoint is even. Attackers have flexibility in spawn placement while defenders have the ability to fortify with closer spawns.

Generally speaking all of the NDZs should be roughly the distance from the defender spawn to the objective(s). They are custom to every outpost due to every outpost being different, so we may have some outposts that need tweaking if isn't quite right.

One of the major problems that I have with NDZ is that you have completely removed an attack strategy from the game. What is the purpose of the GSD sunderer now? The harasser I can understand as it gets you inside and allows you to farm infantry but the sunderer is useless.

If you rush to a base in order to hack out a sunderer what do you do then? You pull the sunderer outside the safety of walls and place it where? If that sunderer you have moved away from the vehicle spawn point dies how do you pull another one? Odds are your forces guarding the vehicle spawn are dead which often times includes the capture point, or you hold the vehicle spawn but can't keep a sunderer alive because you're forced to move it so far away from where the bulk of your forces are trying to hold the capture point and it's out in the open.

How do you attack an amp station without superior numbers? At times the game already feels like a zerg fest and you've made it so that you HAVE to have superior numbers in order to take a facility. Previously you could have a Sunderer up inside of a tech plant or amp station and still fail on your attack if you didn't protect them. Now you take the inside of an amp station and because your sunderer can no longer be placed inside your reinforcements are forced to run from greater distances than the defenders from their spawn room. It will always be a greater distance because there is no place you can safely put a sunderer near the capture point that will allow your reinforcements to get there in time. You can only rely on spawn beacons / medics / squad deployments for so long. Just this weekend I was in a platoon that tried to assault an amp station only to fail because the numbers grew to the point that it was impossible to defend without a sunderer on the inside. Is the only strategy to bring more people than them?

The way things are it feels like the goal is not to attack and defend your place on the capture point but to attack and camp the defenders into the spawn point so that the defenders can't get out. If these biodomes comes in it forces attackers to bring in even more numbers since you can no longer use combined arms, air will not be able to suppress and these massive walls on esamir means that armor can't suppress either (for the record I love the esamir changes.)

I also have to ask about why base timers are being changed again? The zergs already move strong and shorter timers do nothing but encourage more of that gameplay, the more people you have together the quicker you can get through all the bases and all that wonderful capture xp that zergs seem to enjoy. I shudder to think about what the TR Connery outfits are going to do with 7min timers on major bases and I think an even shorter one on biolabs.

Wargrim · 2013-07-16, 01:27 PM

Not having the no deploy zone stop the placement of defensive sundies is a good change / fix. At least now the system should work to the benefit of the defenders. But i still believe that it is too artificial, and not a good system. The new, promising looking defensible base designs for Esamir seem to be a much more natural and fitting approach.

SternLX · 2013-07-17, 01:58 AM

Originally Posted by Jax Blake

One of the major problems that I have with NDZ is that you have completely removed an attack strategy from the game. What is the purpose of the GSD sunderer now? The harasser I can understand as it gets you inside and allows you to farm infantry but the sunderer is useless.
.. snipped

The GSD sundy tactic is still a valid one. We kept doing it to NC on Connery a couple nights ago at an Amp station. Drop off nearly a whole squad in there with half of them MAXs with the rest being a mix of Engy's and medics and you clean it out right quick. Mean while Sundy driver was making a trip to get more people.

I've taken to Tank mining just behind the shield in amp stations because I have seen a lot more use of GSD as of late.

Livefire · 2013-07-17, 04:04 PM

I think the no deploy zones need to be removed immediately, this is a fundamental interruption in game play strategy that was designed by the players for the players. Players want a sand box battle field that we can figure out what works and what does not, we do not like restrictions on what we can and can not do with are vehicles and weapons. Design a base and then give us are space to figure out how to make it work. Do not make random restrictions that make no sense like this vehicle "magically can not deploy here". We do not want are battles and strategy's guided by game Devs.

Shooter · 2013-07-18, 09:57 PM

Unfortunately bases have not been designed for NDZ's (and removing them for defenders and other fixes suggested here are changes to suit a bad idea and will only cause further problems).

Tired of having to park the sundie in the open when attacking, only to have it blown up by a lib, or whatever, as soon as I have run half-way to the objective.

If NDZ's suit MLG play keep them for the Battle Islands.
They aren't a solution to indefensible bases.

Mordelicius has nailed it in his post I HOPE THE DEVS HAVE READ AND RE-READ IT at least a couple of times!

Also agree with Greenthy and many other posters here about how NDZ's are just wrong wrong wrong!

So you want to adapt the game to suit MLG... fine... save the changes for the Battle Islands.

Zidaya · 2013-07-20, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by Malorn

The purpose of the NDZs is to ensure timing between defender spawns and attacker spawns and prevent checkmate moves to capture a base by putting a spawn point directly on top of it or between the defender spawn and the capture point. Distance to travel from a spawn is a force multiplier and NDZs standardize it and give a clear defender advantage (which is why it doesn't affect defenders).

If we give the ability to disable the NDZ then we have three issues.
1) More places for a defender to defend, which makes it harder for them, especially if outnumbered.
2) If the NDZ is dropped, the fight is basically over since the attackers can now magnify their force even more. And if they managed to take out the generator then they probably already have more than the defender.
3) The ability for defenders to recover the situation is severely reduced, as now they not only have to secure the point and remove the AMS, but they must also retake the generator.

It's effectively more win for a winning side and a pure defender disadvantage to do that. By not having them removable we ensure consistency of spawn distance and give defenders better chances against a numerical superior opponent and better chances at recovering.

The fact that defenders can place AMS inside the NDZ means there's more objectives: For the attacker, the objective is kill the defensive AMS. For the defender the objective is to place them. Once those are gone the playing field from a spawn distance standpoint is even. Attackers have flexibility in spawn placement while defenders have the ability to fortify with closer spawns.

Generally speaking all of the NDZs should be roughly the distance from the defender spawn to the objective(s). They are custom to every outpost due to every outpost being different, so we may have some outposts that need tweaking if isn't quite right.

I like the idea behind NDZ but I think the main issue lays with the lack of cover for sundys.

Perhaps a key spot for the return of the cloak bubble.

Baneblade · 2013-07-20, 11:37 PM

Originally Posted by Shooter

Tired of having to park the sundie in the open when attacking, only to have it blown up by a lib, or whatever, as soon as I have run half-way to the objective.

Then why don't you stay and defend it?

SerethiX · 2013-07-21, 03:25 AM

I think the problem is, you often don't have enough warriors to defend the control points AND the sunderer, that gets as much attention as the control points

SerethiX - www.serethi.de

Baneblade · 2013-07-21, 09:29 AM

Sunderers only really need one or two dedicated defenders for most scenarios. Rarely is there a concentrated assault on a Sunderer. Two people can easily dispatch most of the threats to a Sunderer and keep it repaired under fire. Now if two isn't sufficient, you are going to lose it anyway. I tend to guard my Sunderers solo and I do kill a lot of would be Sunderer killers. It might blow up eventually, but for each person you killed trying to kill it, that is one less Sunderer to worry about replacing.

NewSith · 2013-07-21, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by Baneblade

Sunderers only really need one or two dedicated defenders for most scenarios. Rarely is there a concentrated assault on a Sunderer. Two people can easily dispatch most of the threats to a Sunderer and keep it repaired under fire. Now if two isn't sufficient, you are going to lose it anyway. I tend to guard my Sunderers solo and I do kill a lot of would be Sunderer killers. It might blow up eventually, but for each person you killed trying to kill it, that is one less Sunderer to worry about replacing.

I kinda miss the cloak bubble and the ability to place more than 2 mines around it. In PS2 you're basically bound to your AMS and that's not exactly action-packed.

Also I think I finally realised that Mineguard is OP in a way that AT mines shouldn't be able to kill a mineguardless Sunderer. Otherwise mineguard is a musthave cert for an AMS which is stupid.

Baneblade · 2013-07-21, 07:44 PM

Well, in the big fights, you will see plenty of action.

Mordelicius · 2013-07-24, 12:47 AM

War Report #16

Axeltoss and Jax on Sunderer placement. Check 41m 10s in.

Freelancers Union vs Consortium and Heavy Metal Marines - War Report Episode 16 - YouTube

Jax quote: "Why are they deploying their Sundies on such an open area??"

And another on 38m 30s.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPLCWm392xc#t=38m30s

And another on 44m 50s. They eventually parked one so far away for the sake of cover....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPLCWm392xc#t=44m50s

Watch the these clips of Sunderers blowing one after the other. They explode so fast, how are even NDZs a necessity?

SerethiX · 2013-07-29, 04:37 PM

Originally Posted by Mordelicius

Watch the these clips of Sunderers blowing one after the other. They explode so fast, how are even NDZs a necessity?

We need them, cause if you are out numbered and the enemy got a spawn sunderer next to a control point, you almost have no chance.

Have you read any of the posts in this thread?

I think, ndz's could be improved, so they match the attacker/defender rating.

Let's say we have 12/6, then the ndz is 2 times bigger than normal. And the sunderer needs to park in a greater distance.

On 6/12 the sunderer can park closer to the points.

When you park your sunderer while having 1/30 and then the ratio changes to 12/12 and you parked inside the ndz, the spawn time at the sunderer is set to a higher level, like spawn beacons. In this case you might be able to spawn again, but you'll always try to get the sunderer out of the ndz.

If we have 48+/48+ i would like to see a ndz that covers the whole base and the surrounding area, so it is a fight of strategy and not who can park a sunderer better than the other.

My five cents

SerethiX - www.serethi.de

Baneblade · 2013-07-30, 06:06 PM

Frankly, if NDZ is getting your Sunderers killed, you need better placement, defense, planning, or all three.