[Feedback] Tunnels

NewSith · 2013-02-02, 04:51 PM

...have one huge design flaw:

Shield is BAD. It makes defenders camp instead of trying to push through. Without shields it would be either you have it or you do not. With shield, it's just a game of who outcamps who.

I'm even okay with painfield, really, but the impenetrable shield must go. Put orange one on it instead.

thegreekboy · 2013-02-02, 05:10 PM

Agreed. The tunnel idea is really good, but they need to do something about the campability of the exits

NewSith · 2013-02-02, 05:14 PM

Originally Posted by thegreekboy

Agreed. The tunnel idea is really good, but they need to do something about the campability of the exits

They just got the idea wrong - the devs apparently think that shields prevent camping... But the truth is - shields encourage it. Especially the one way through type.

In this particular design removing the shield will stretch the capmable area. And that will actually disencourage camping.

ShadetheDruid · 2013-02-02, 05:18 PM

Or having no shields would just allow the attackers to spam grenades down the hole..

NewSith · 2013-02-02, 05:24 PM

Originally Posted by ShadetheDruid

Or having no shields would just allow the attackers to spam grenades down the hole..

Instead you can put AI mines and C4 onto the shield, that defenders cannot destroy.

You are wrong in thinking that grenade spam is worse then having a shield, I assure you. Grenade spam FORCES people to get either BACK or TOPSIDE, instead of just sitting there and trying to camp whatever pops into your LoS.

ringring · 2013-02-02, 05:31 PM

Very disappointed by shields.

Also, how are we supposed to know where each on goes? Do we have to learn by doing? What's wrong with a little sign saying 'East Gen', 'West Gen' or 'Main building'? I would have thought that would be basic.

From the beginning of this game there is one thing it consistently does is to make it difficult for you to orientate.

Babyfark McGeez · 2013-02-02, 06:06 PM

Haven't experienced tunnels as attacker, but i agree, shields are not so good.

But after checking a tech plant i found two things that allready annoy me more now:

1) Confusing Jump-pad / Sonic the hedgehog transportation system without any indication of where you are actually going to

2) One-Way only. Seriously, wtf. Now if i save an objective i rather kill myself and take the tunnel to the next instead of having to expose myself to the tdm that is the base courtyard. And that's lame. Make me be able to get back into the tunnels.

I thought the tunnels were supposed to offer some kind of defensive network rather than a troop dispenser to the objectives. I mean i kinda get where they are going with these "sonic dispenser tunnels", i just think an actual "real" tunnel network for the defenders would be more useful.

So how about this:

A real tunnel network without accelerated transportation methods, that has no shield on the exit but one in the middle of the tunnels (or better: DOORS). That way a new infantry-only part would be created in the base that, due to the shields halfway from spawn (maybe even with additional equipment terminals - basically increasing the spawn-room under the base) and due to the nature of tunnels would still be of great benefit for the defenders. It also would feel more natural then being propelled around at 200 kp/h.

Tatwi · 2013-02-02, 06:26 PM

/facepalm for over engineering the solution. Million dollar space pen or five cent pencil? I would have been happy with plain old tunnels, as Barfy described.