All battlefields that have stationary Machine Guns placed around the maps, have been implemented as defensive/offensive positions that players can utilize to engage advancing/defending players…
The problem is, these machine guns are very flimsy and can be easily destroyed with a single sniper bullet.
Which means engineers should be allowed to repair a disabled machine gun, to reengage the enemy. (just like we can repair our constructed MG’s and HMG’s).
This would not disrupt balance, because both teams can utilize these guns, and obviously if the sandbags are destroyed (that the stationary MG’s have been implemented), there would be no option to repair the gun.
Or maybe implement an option to repair the entire sandbag/machine gun nest (as a single unit).
Same applies for Machine Guns that are located inside bunkers. Allow these guns to be repaired.
(But don’t make these repairs cheap. It should cost as many engineering points as it does to construct a brand new machine gun/HMG)
9 Likes
I think the perma-death on these MGs is to preserve battle dynamism. Those guns last long enough to put up your own defences if you’re not with only bots or uber noobs. I don’t mind the idea of changing MGs, like being to carry and reposition them on most places you can mount a gun. THEN you’d have some interesting changes in gameplay. However, I’d be against a one-way buff to increase defences.
Not all the guns are positioned in defensive angles. Some of the guns are a positioned in a way, that the attacking team can engage defenders. It’s just a matter of taking the time for attacking players to flank, and utilize these guns.
Yes, true. But any competent player, can easily disable the MG again (if it is repaired). Afterall, the engineers only have a finite number of resources to use. If it cost 10+ points to repair a stationary machine gun, then the engineer would theoretically only be allowed to repair it twice.
3 Likes
This is a good idea. More stationary MGs and weapons would also be great.
1 Like
I think it’d be fun to have a game mode (kind of like domination), where there is a medium/large map, at least 20 vs 20 players, and then have a bunch of strategic objectives that both teams fight to control.
And what would make this mode fun, is that each objective has a strategic value, and whichever team controls that specific position, is granted a team-bonus/perk.
Such as:
-An extra aircraft
-An extra vehicle
-A vehicle ammunition/repair shortcut
-A single premium vehicle (light armor/anti-infantry) spawns for the team to use.
-Heavily fortified machine gun nest
- 2 extra magazines of ammunition for all players (for the team who controls the objective)
- 25% extra stamina or 15% extra sprint speed
Etc. Etc.
More ideas are always welcome (in regards to strategic rewards)
3 Likes
I just see long 8.8cm guns sitting around maps and think “it would be really nice if I could use that against tanks.”
3 Likes
Well it would simply force players to play more conservatively/strategically with their tanks/vehicles, rather than racing around the battlefield (zergrushing with armor)
More AT and AA cannons means that players need to be communicating/spotting more for their teammates who are using vehicles.
I agree with everything except the very end of this.
I disagree. I should cost HALF the amount of a brand new MG nest, as you are only repairing it, not building a brand new one.
2 Likes
I’d personally REALLY like to see AAs added to maps as well.
1 Like
That would be fine with me. It doesn’t really make a difference what the cost is, I’d just like to be able to repair them after they get disabled from a sniper or a couple bullets from a SMG.
My point is simply that it could make a significant difference if there is only like one player that is running around trying to keep them repaired so that his teammates can use them. Then the cost really matters.
If each player took care of one, that might be a different story. However, given the track record of just trying to get teammates to put down rally points and ammo boxes, let alone weapon fortifications. I don’t have too much faith in their abilities to bring an engineer for this cause.
3 Likes