deployable watchtower

[Antonious_Bloc]

MOD SPAM :O

OT: I just don't see them as a realistic thing for an army to do when a flag can be captured at a any second...

We allow troops to build concrete bunkers at points that can be captured at any second, so why not towers?

[Scot]

^^^ wut he said. And (empty then filled)sandbags are a lot easier to carry around than big bits of wood or metal

[Colt556]

Here's an easy solution then, only allow watch-towers to be built next to bunkers, not fire-bases. Since bunkers are OBVIOUSLY the more permenant of the two bases, stands to reason they'd have more permenant support structures aswell, I.E. watchtowers.

[Scot]

God more starbucks, i swear there are more starbucks than any other shop

[Colt556]

lmao, Starbucks on Kashan, not even the deserts are safe anymore.

[Psyko]

Those are all really good ways of killing it. The only problem I see, what happens when there's no armor on the map? You all say armor would kill it easy, but not EVERY map has armor. NO asset is usefull is all situations, why would a watch-tower be any differant? Sandbags could be blown to hell by armor, as would the bunker itself. That's why you place sandbags and bunkers where it's hard for armor to get to them. If armor is lurking around you might not place a watch-tower, same as you wouldn't place the anti-air gun if there's no air around.

A watch-tower has it's uses, and would make for a very good adition to buildable assets, but it's not going to be usefull at all times, which is what the nay-sayers are using as their primary arguement. Which is kinda sad, since by that logic we might aswell remove all assets.

Agreed, as in the Kashan 16 map where there are no armour units and infantry have a focus on holding flags.

^^^ wut he said. And (empty then filled)sandbags are a lot easier to carry around than big bits of wood or metal

Especially in a desert

Also it stands to reason, if this were to be taken to this level, it would be a logial course of action to consider full sized walls for placement for protection from infantry sneak attacks. and with that said there are three things to consider... The amount of statics allowed on a map, the bugs that would follow such a change/improvement and that includes the third... the interferance of such objects with the likes of object/player-spawns, splash damage of such object exploding in visinity of other destructables and if that enoying command post build spam would interfere with the objects in close proximity. but to my understanding, these considerations will no longer be considerations in the coming releases.

[Tirak]

Here's an easy solution then, only allow watch-towers to be built next to bunkers, not fire-bases. Since bunkers are OBVIOUSLY the more permenant of the two bases, stands to reason they'd have more permenant support structures aswell, I.E. watchtowers.

Agreed, a watchtower in the middle of nowhere might be hard to set up, but by a flag after a Bunker's been deployed, that would be a good time, I support including Watch Towers with this change