How often have You experimented with engineers, and their other constructions?
Then how about we remove engineers from the game, and make rally points buildable by any class, using shovels?
Basically, everyone with a shovel gets access to building 1 rally point.
It is rather unrealistic to be in the center of action all the time - normally, the intensity should fluctuate, but for the sake of satisfying simplistic players who want to be in the thick of it - sure…
I mean, the one who blows them up gets some exp, so, sharing is caring, eh?
To be fair, the point of fortifications is to be the one that absorbs the bullets/explosives intended for players, letting them live for longer, or to otherwise delay the enemy.
The fact that the fortification has been blown up means that it is doing it’s job - delaying the attackers, possibly even making them waste ammunition.
Depends on map, and the sniper squad status.
The only place I tend to agree with You here, though it’s more a map problem.
and that is why you fluctuate through battlefield. you go in front center, left, right or retreat to cap depending where enemy is, or is paying attention. and depending on support your teammates give you.
well you know that explosives can be lobed? so it can take out both fortifications and players behind them. or that planes can bomb/rocket shit out of cap and destroy all fortifications that you used 5-10 minutes to build? i am not against fortifications, but i am against having players going from battle to build forts on second cap. players can build fortifications on current cap. i think that 9 other players would appreciate sandbags and ammo boxes more in current battle, rather than one they will have in 5 or 10 minutes where the engineer could build them then. and what will happen on second cap? will the engineer go to fortify the third cap?
snipers are usually most useless players ingame for defenders and for attackers.
Well, it is still tense. Tense gameplay, knowing that enemy is near you.
It’s a bit calmer as you go to the point, usually… (unless it’s a rally point sometimes).
Yes, but how accurate these throws are? Last I heard, explosives had a smaller radius than grenades, meaning one can… overshoot overthrow the grenade, eliminating only half the squad, or just the squad but not fortification.
And what about the more controversial 2-layer sandbag wall creation…
Not to mention, the defenders can try to throw it back, or if attacker is taking his time aiming the throw right, only to be met with a bolt-action rifle bullet in his chest.
They don’t really take that long… but if one is taking that long, it is likelly that he also built an AAA gun, so a pilot has something to worry about as well, here.
Well, building useful fortifications means that engineer has to be in the open area often - which is basically asking to get shot.
So, obviously engineers tend to go to a (currently) safer place, where they can perfect it.
There’s also another nuance - what if cap is already almost capped, and saving it is simply impossible? Still try to counter-attack the enemy?
Another thing, from attacker’s perspective - are You sure this roflstom from defenders is fun for your enemies?
Personally, it depends if I have extra building points and squadmates that I have and the type of map - Moscow monastery comes to mind.
Generally, I’d try to man my fortifications that I’ve made, as all the building slots for things have been expended.
Though, sometimes it happens that the capture point ends up in a different place than I built fortifications in…
Oh well, at least it becomes an okay-ish place for a rally point.
Ever tried Berlin or Stalingrad maps?
There were places where it seemed like sniper paradise/hell for me.
Though, it may have been some custom battles.
I agree that any changes should be tested / balanced before implementation, who argues otherwise?
You can fix grind and MM, but if gameplay will be centered around repetitive CoD style rush point with automatic rifle, and other classes and squads will be considered useless and not expanded to provide gameplay variety then people may stop playing - I know I will, there are much better games providing fast paced “middle of the action” experience.
this is not some tactical shooter like arma or HLL. it is always tense unless attackers start to camp.
explosive packs are currently meta cause they can deal damage to both vehicles and infantry and destroy fortifications. and if you have them on almost all soldiers you will be pretty accurate with their throws. and you always cook the grenade so people cant throw them back at you (or vehicle run away).
well people want to build extensive fortifications with trenches… so go figure how much time it would take.
i always have engineer squad+engineers in other squads. you can build fortifications in open by crawling and using built sandbags as cover. that is what i usually do when there is cap in open and defenders need cover.
and yes, you always counter attack enemy. get as many kills as you can to waste enemy tickets. if there is intact rally after they captured cap, spawn behind them and be a nuisance.
and you see that is the problem. there are no public test servers to provide feedback. and if devs use limited development time, most changes stay ingame for a long time even if they are bad (they just need to be not gamebreakingly bad). if someone wants to make mod and test it, then it is good. but if they implement it in official game it could be very bad.
after grind and MM are fixed, then there is merit talking about game balance. i talked about equipment based MM where you would be matched against other players with bolties if you have bolties equipped (for low lvl equipment MM) or if you have stg44 equipped, you would be matched against people with late game automatic rifles. now there is problem cause you have asymmetric warfare where if you are new to campaign you get matched against high leveled players with automatic rifles. you cant enjoy all your squads cause you always have to chase meta.
most game problems stem from 3 things:
so all of the development time should be focused on fixing those 3 things and loads of existing bugs. no new campaigns and no new mechanisms that might affect game balance.
I think that fixing grind and MM has less to do with effort required to implement those changes, and more with conscious design decision to prioritize queue times over balanced matches. Warthunder has a really healthy playerbase and yet they won’t compress BRs because they say it would be bad for queue time.
I like equipment based MM idea - as example I have maxed outed Moscow yet still use many bolt actions and refuse to abuse mkbs and other semi and automatic weapons, because I can scratch that itch on Normandy. I wouldn’t want to be constantly put against 10 lvl 38 players who run full meta squads saturated with avs fedorvos etc.
nah… it is rather hard thing to do cause it requires complete overhaul of some game mechanics. game is becoming more PVE with every campaign added. also it deters newbies when they get on bot heavy side and get roflstomped by full human team. you cant implement MM cause in current campaign progression there just arent enough players for reasonably fast match to be created. and that is why we need unified grind so we can have unified playerbase for actual MM to be implemented.
The game is designed as more of a tactics type game than YOU seem to realize. Most players got into it for larger scale combat, with tactics. NOT to play it like CoD. If that’s how you wish to play, that’s up to you. However, don’t say that is how everyone else should be focused on playing.
The game is DESIGNED around having 3 key elements.
If you want a game that doesn’t involve using those tactics, this isn’t it.
have you even played the game? this is not tactical shooter. nor it is cod. ffs cs:go is more tactical than this. this is pure zerg rush fps. you overwhelm players on cap with more bodies and cap it. maybe in start of development it wanted to be more tactical, but it isnt. if you want tactical gameplay go play cs:go, rainbow six siege, HLL, arma 3 etc.
Oh really? Ever flown a plane in the game? Must say, it is indeed more calm than on the ground, usually.
Have the option to blow up several fortifications, several times you mean? Many opportunities to use a weapon or feature does not mean that it will be used accuratelly.
Hence my own quote:
Besides, the fact that the attacker is wasting time and explosives to blow up fortifications rather than run and gun is already an indication that fortifications are working - the enemy has wasted time and resources doing side stuff, rather than capturing a point.
Really depends on the map - urbanized terrain does not really let folks go into shovelling competition.
From my personal experience, I used shovels to protect my rally points and provide a semi-safer passage to the capture point (or, at least a building). That was quarry custom battle. We were the attacking force, though, it was lone warriors mode as well.
Lying on the ground, hastily trying to build sandbags tends to be… less accurate than building them slightly further away from the heat of hostilities. The former tends to leave open spaces, not to mention about flanking.
Always? Really?
I consider my squads, especially upgraded ones, to have a greater purpose than to be mere cannon fodder to be wasted at the enemy.
For example, it would be absurd to spawn in with a mortarman squad, or even the same engineer squad (though, here, there might be nuances regarding building obstructions such as barbed wire) or radio operator squad (especially if the squad gets eliminated before even getting the opportunity to call in at least 1 strike).
I suppose I could see logic if the main squads that You are using are riflemen, assaulters, machinegunners, flamethrowers and (with a bit of stretch) AT gunners.
For any other trooper - do You also throw them in the meatgrinder?