Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Suggestions from our community members for PR:BF2. Read the stickies before posting.
Rudd
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 21225
Joined: 2007-08-15 14:32

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by Rudd »

RHYS4190 wrote:I think the dev's should focous on fixing 0.9 before they attempt any thing else.

Plus having more static defences is pretty pointless. %99 they are just abandoned, iv never seen a 50cal dug out used for very long. So what the point.
they are only abandoned if they are no longer useful, which is fine, there's no rule in war saying "if you dig a foxhole, you better bloody use it" afaik.

I quite like the idea personally, but I've always liked the idea of having to build things next to vehicles to repair them, much more fun than using log trucks, and takes longer

the PROBLEM is that a buildable repair also encourages camping vehicles, they sit next to it and get repaired while in combat, giving them an edge against a wide range of targets. Not really realistic unless the repair point only repairs for X number of repair points and cannot be deployed again for 3-5mins.
Image
killonsight95
Posts: 2123
Joined: 2009-03-22 13:06

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by killonsight95 »

rudd i see the problem but could it be solved by saying it won't repair damage done to the vech in the last 3 mins or it ariving to the repair area/hut/tent/post/temple/whatever else it could be

EDIT: wait temple?????
Image
00SoldierofFortune00
Posts: 2944
Joined: 2006-02-28 01:08

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by 00SoldierofFortune00 »

Elektro wrote:Have you ever played CNC mode?
Not many servers even play that mode, so it really shouldn't be a factor.


As for the suggestion, its just going even more overboard. Not many FOBs are even defended right now. They are basically just taking the place of RPs and being personal spawns for people and if you need 3 or 4 crates to place a TOW or AA, than your FOBs are pretty much screwed.
[R-CON]Rudd wrote:they are only abandoned if they are no longer useful, which is fine, there's no rule in war saying "if you dig a foxhole, you better bloody use it" afaik.
LOL, how many times do you actually see someone stay in an MG at a FOB? 2 minutes max? Unless the FOB is in a known location and you are expecting enemies, almost no one defends them.
"Push the Envelope, Watch It Bend"

Tool ~ Lateralus
rushn
Posts: 2420
Joined: 2010-01-01 02:51

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by rushn »

[R-CON]Rudd wrote:they are only abandoned if they are no longer useful, which is fine, there's no rule in war saying "if you dig a foxhole, you better bloody use it" afaik.

I quite like the idea personally, but I've always liked the idea of having to build things next to vehicles to repair them, much more fun than using log trucks, and takes longer

the PROBLEM is that a buildable repair also encourages camping vehicles, they sit next to it and get repaired while in combat, giving them an edge against a wide range of targets. Not really realistic unless the repair point only repairs for X number of repair points and cannot be deployed again for 3-5mins.
I think the best solution in my opponion would be is to make vehicles locked up when they are repairing which is basicly true in real life
akatabrask
Posts: 560
Joined: 2008-04-10 14:36

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by akatabrask »

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote: As for the suggestion, its just going even more overboard. Not many FOBs are even defended right now. They are basically just taking the place of RPs and being personal spawns for people and if you need 3 or 4 crates to place a TOW or AA, than your FOBs are pretty much screwed.

LOL, how many times do you actually see someone stay in an MG at a FOB? 2 minutes max? Unless the FOB is in a known location and you are expecting enemies, almost no one defends them.
Well, if they aren't under attack why should you defend them. Let there be different types of firebases - some further back to spawn on light defences such as MGs and barbed wire incase the enemy advance that far; some as fortified defences with lots of heavy equipment at the front line; and some offencive ones, also with heavier equipment to lay down fire at the enemy from strategig points.

And you weren't at all screwed before .9 when you needed two crates for all firebases and still didn't have the TOWs.
Elektro
Posts: 1824
Joined: 2009-01-05 14:53

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by Elektro »

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:Not many servers even play that mode, so it really shouldn't be a factor.
Why shouldnt it be a factor if the gamemode exists? Not everyone might play it, but if you can add something to it that might increase the experience I dont understand why we should just ignore such an awesome gamemode?
Pariel
Posts: 1584
Joined: 2008-01-29 23:41

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by Pariel »

[quote=""'[R-CON"]Rudd;1273942']the PROBLEM is that a buildable repair also encourages camping vehicles, they sit next to it and get repaired while in combat, giving them an edge against a wide range of targets. Not really realistic unless the repair point only repairs for X number of repair points and cannot be deployed again for 3-5mins.[/quote]

Perhaps have it only repair vehicles that haven't fired in the past 60 seconds or something? That's the best thing I can think of, no clue if it's actually implementable.

[quote="00SoldierofFortune00""]Not many servers even play that mode, so it really shouldn't be a factor. [/quote]

If the mode exists, it's a factor.
As for the suggestion, its just going even more overboard. Not many FOBs are even defended right now. They are basically just taking the place of RPs and being personal spawns for people and if you need 3 or 4 crates to place a TOW or AA, than your FOBs are pretty much screwed.
I disagree -- the best example is Muttrah. I've played quite a few times where myself or other Huey pilots spam crates around Docks and North City to enable 3-4 firebases, and having enough crates is not a problem for any team that is actually playing together.
LOL, how many times do you actually see someone stay in an MG at a FOB? 2 minutes max? Unless the FOB is in a known location and you are expecting enemies, almost no one defends them.
That's the point of defenses. You can leave them there, and if the enemy starts pushing your FOB, they give you the extra firepower or cover to prevent the enemy from destroying the FOB. They're not there to encourage camping, that's for sure.
Arnoldio
Posts: 4210
Joined: 2008-07-22 15:04

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by Arnoldio »

DevilDog812 wrote:i think that any soldier with a shovel should be able to dig their own crude foxholes without any crates anytime he wants
Nice one, all soldiers should be able to dig one foxhole IMO, but josta small one to fit 1 or 2 in, and not so advanced as the FB ones, but just a hole with dirt wall.
Image


Orgies beat masturbation hands down. - Staker
HAAN4
Posts: 541
Joined: 2009-06-12 11:37

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by HAAN4 »

Draakon wrote:Agreed, let the commander do the most building.
Flak cannons are the best AA in game, so long the have a good gunner, since NOTHIG CAN STOP OUR BULLETS!.

misseles can be lured by flares, and to my AA must work toguether to flak cannons, and misseles to be more efective.
AgentMongoose
Posts: 265
Joined: 2008-09-02 19:03

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by AgentMongoose »

I like the idea except the watch tower having a spawn point.

As for the mg haters once you play in the tourny you
learn to respect those damn things.
HAAN4
Posts: 541
Joined: 2009-06-12 11:37

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by HAAN4 »

[R-CON]Rudd wrote:they are only abandoned if they are no longer useful, which is fine, there's no rule in war saying "if you dig a foxhole, you better bloody use it" afaik.

I quite like the idea personally, but I've always liked the idea of having to build things next to vehicles to repair them, much more fun than using log trucks, and takes longer

the PROBLEM is that a buildable repair also encourages camping vehicles, they sit next to it and get repaired while in combat, giving them an edge against a wide range of targets. Not really realistic unless the repair point only repairs for X number of repair points and cannot be deployed again for 3-5mins.
Vehicles camping are a waste homie!, since a well build fire base alerdy have all it needs, and vehicles need for eficient atack operations.

and, a well placed Heavy AT can kick the *** of those lazy crewmans.

hoever is good to make some prevention, i suport 100%¨this ideia. or anything that will work better
mati140
Posts: 123
Joined: 2009-06-01 14:35

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by mati140 »

AgentMongoose wrote:I like the idea except the watch tower having a spawn point.

As for the mg haters once you play in the tourny you
learn to respect those damn things.

Watch towers are good idea but without spawnpoints.

Also field hospital asset is good idea. But to make it maximaly realistic medics should only be able to stop bleeding, and than player must go to field hospital to be healed. Just imagine.
Image
rushn
Posts: 2420
Joined: 2010-01-01 02:51

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by rushn »

I think maybe hospital should just have a quick acess to medical supplies like patches and epipens
same with ammo tents?
Doc_Frank
Posts: 246
Joined: 2007-03-12 21:13

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by Doc_Frank »

Reflecting on the other part of the topic, I think the engineer's role should be increased. If a SL has the kit, it would be practical if it was functioning as an officer kit. Makes logistic squads more effective.
"The torture never stops."
Sniperdog
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 1177
Joined: 2009-02-27 00:06

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by Sniperdog »

Good idea I like this.
Image

Image

Will Stahl aka "Merlin" in the Squad community
rushn
Posts: 2420
Joined: 2010-01-01 02:51

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by rushn »

I was thinking maybe a Radar that detects vehicles that come close which prepares the AA and AT guys since people usssually mount on them too late
Jafar Ironclad
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 2203
Joined: 2008-11-26 00:45

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by Jafar Ironclad »

Don't need a radar when you have your ears (and good team recon). Furthermore, if I recall correctly, you can't make BF2's scan spotting system detect some threats in scanning range and not others (the system can't be made to show only vehicles and exclude infantry).

Furthermore, radar systems are strategic assets IRL and are deployed as such (AWACS, ground warning radars, etc.); how does one justify building them in the field when a radar system would probably be made a map objective?
rushn
Posts: 2420
Joined: 2010-01-01 02:51

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by rushn »

well it can detect everything then from friendlies to enemies or maybe just have a radar station that a team can cap to get an extra advantage? but make it farther away from main objectives
Image
Drav
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 2144
Joined: 2007-12-14 16:13

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by Drav »

I'm going to go out on a limb here and risk this kind of humiliating horror:
'[R-DEV wrote:Jaymz']Rhino, thats WRONG



Anyway, here we go....

A Radar deployable....No.

Thats not going to happen.
PuffNStuff
Posts: 298
Joined: 2009-06-01 13:57

Re: Deployable Assets Expansion and the Combat Engineer

Post by PuffNStuff »

Well as for the deployable repair station, just have it go through supplies faster. Say, one supply crate would only allow X armor points to be repaired. Have it be stackable so that it can take supplies from multiple crates. Its not like the only thing you need to repair something is a torch. NO. You need spare parts and replacements.

Say a tank parks next to the deployable repair station but only 2 crates are there, it would only heal that one to full health, but blow up after they are done. Needing another supply drop to continue repair operations. After a while of no supplies around, it (the deploable repair station [drs?]) blows up.

Getting more supplies? Find more ways to go through them instead of having them sit there.
Post Reply

Return to “PR:BF2 Suggestions”