Firebase extra asset and takedown idea

[abbadon101]

Would it not be possible to have it so you need 3 or 4 crates to make the ammo dump hence needing more teamwork to set it up?

[Adetter]

I totally agree,but then u have to build llooonnnngggg time.

[Vege]

If it would be made breachable, then there should also be breachable roof hatch as sometimes you just cannot walk near the door because the firebase is placed too high.

[Sir.Grossi]

I like the idea taken foward for a smaller CQB Map/Scenario,
using FBs or bunkers as tactical positions to be captured.
(like the bunker complex on Koselzk with more than one capture/spawn point inside it)
But I don't think it is appropriate for FBs in particular.

IMO The FB is just the representation of the centre of a controlled area.
You secure the area surrounding the FB and therefore having a 'micro'
battle inside the FB is a bit like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

If the enemy has made it past the front line, or you have put your FB
in the middle of enemy territory then the FB deserves to be overrun
The 'Mechanic' for doing that (ie stabbing the radio/placing incendry)
becomes pretty irrelevant.

IDK, quite like the way it is ATM

[Tonnie]

Dont let this idea die... I love the idea of having to storm and hold a firebase for a certain amount of time and then you can destroy it.

[Redamare]

I dont know .... i totaly agree though that the firebase needs to be fixed a littlebit for one there is no need for the camo canopy it actuilay give away the position of the firebase more then it hides it. but perhaps a smaller less visible firebase can work ...

[Ecko]

I have one major problem with the take down requirements. It's legitimizing spawn camping, the whole point of the quick 3 knifes to the radio was too discourage it.

[Pure_beef]

Devs please read this post. The thing with the FB's is that it takes a squad at least 5 mins to build up a FB and defences. Its not a fun job building them and so you would want them to last. However 1 man can come along and destroy the whole thing with his knife?! The barbed wire for example hardly keeps out anything as it can be destroyed by 1 rocket or a few rounds of apc fire.

They need to be tougher, i know the idea of them is to be a spawn point for the whole team, but you have included all these defences and to be honest the majority are useless becase they cant surive a single hit.

[arjan]

Thanks for the support guys.

@ ecko: basicly once you breached the door, and cleared the inside of the bunker, you knife the radio.
enemie wont be able to respawn, and probaly will try and get inside the firebase to defend it.

after some minutes you hear some kind of sound (cracking radio?) and you can knife the radio again to kill the firebase fully.

i dont really see wye people go spawncamping, while going into the firebase is abit ''tacticooler''


As for the firebase model: only a door that can be breached, no windows.
becouse that would mean the enemie could first nade the hell out of the bunker and than just move in, if you make it so only the entrance is open enemie need to use breach maneaovres too.

[daranz]

The whole point of having a radio in the firebase is to make it easy to kill in the first place. Whoever is alive after making it to the FB should be able to take it down. Imagine your specialist getting blown up by a grenade before you breach the firebase door - now you'd have 5 people hanging around the FB, waiting for him to respawn and come back, killing the enemy as soon as he spawns. It wasn't fun when it happened due to FBs being built where they were unreachable, and it wouldn't be fun with a door on the FB either.

As to ammo dumps, the whole point of a the crates is to introduce a logistics element to the game. Running out of ammo in a crate should mean no more ammo. That way, you can deny useful weapons to your enemy by intercepting their incoming supplies.

[Pure_beef]

The whole door thing does present a problem, maybe you take out the door with a few nades?

[arjan]

The whole point of having a radio in the firebase is to make it easy to kill in the first place. Whoever is alive after making it to the FB should be able to take it down. Imagine your specialist getting blown up by a grenade before you breach the firebase door - now you'd have 5 people hanging around the FB, waiting for him to respawn and come back, killing the enemy as soon as he spawns. It wasn't fun when it happened due to FBs being built where they were unreachable, and it wouldn't be fun with a door on the FB either.

Well, like i said its about making killing firebases more teamwork orientated and makein it harder, not just running in and knife a radio and voila firebase gone. now you actualy need teamwork, not a lonely guy that sneaks in and knifes it and runs away. if he would be on his own he would probaly fail on defending, thus requiring a squad to take it out (realism) also its the squad fault if the specialist dies, becouse you should always have a medic.

And im pretty sure it will add alot to gameplay

As to ammo dumps, the whole point of a the crates is to introduce a logistics element to the game. Running out of ammo in a crate should mean no more ammo. That way, you can deny useful weapons to your enemy by intercepting their incoming supplies.

Agree actualy

answer in red
Removed ammo dump idea, since it was a bad idea.

Tonnie, you got xfire?

[arjan]

no more thoughts?

[cyberzomby]

As to ammo dumps, the whole point of a the crates is to introduce a logistics element to the game. Running out of ammo in a crate should mean no more ammo. That way, you can deny useful weapons to your enemy by intercepting their incoming supplies.

My point exactly! Having experienced this past saturday I can say that it is a really cool and realistic aspect. We where on Kozelsk as Chechens in the forward base. We had 3 crates, 3 AT guys around us and armour and APC's kept incoming. After we took down 3 ammo ran out. Medics needed it, Riflemen needed it for incoming infantry, AT guys needed it! So one of our squad-members ran off with the supply truck for an ammo run. He got taken out. Than he took a truck from main and got taken out when he was almost near us.

I tell you! It sucks being out of ammo when you know theres tanks, APC's and infantry about! We finally got a supply crate and we managed to hold out a little bit longer. Than the server crashed xD

EDIT:
Surprised to see you have switched your oppinion on the ammo dump since I came up with the same point when you just made this topic. Just noticed you removed the idea so excuses about this first bit.

The reinforced bunker without windows does not sound fun or gameplay balanced at all. One guy in there with a shotgun or a LMG can easily hold that Firebase for ages. /like I said before in this topic.

You say it adds teamwork to take out a firebase? Have you ever assaulted a flag that had a supporting firebase near it? (in a good spot)

I can tell you it takes a lot of teamwork and usually more than one attack wave to take that sucker out. Sure it also happens that 1 guy runs in and knifes the thing, but thats the defending teams own fault! Everyone always builds it, and moves out. Than dont complain you lose the firebase. Its not like a main-base. Someones gotta defend that thing. You build a base in enemy territory and than leave it on its own. No wonder it goes down

Leaving it like know adds in more teamwork since you can use a squad as FB defense and assaulting the base still takes teamwork and effort.

[TomDackery]

Would it be possible to do both? Keep the current FOB and make this another option, such as more crates to build, longer build time, etc? The FOB we have now is quick and easy to build, then this would be the tougher yet more demanding firebase for both sides...

I dunno, this does seem like more a teamwork oriented FOB, which is good.

[Gore]

There can be done alot to the firebase as it is a bit arcadey to run in, knife, run away. It's hard to defend because it's an open structure. I think the old system should be brought back.

build outside flag? FB

build inside flag? Bunker

[LithiumFox]

agreed. Old system was excellent.. though... i think we should find a better way to do it... personally, I think you should be able to pu an AA gun on the top of it

[Herbiie]

Tbh the only reason one guy can sneak in is because no one ever defends firebases.

I once saw someone on the Chicago Hardcore server make a wonderful Fb on Ramiel. It had a mine field on one side, wire marking a safe LZ on a flat bit of ground, .50s and fox holes and the squad defended it while my squad used it as Patrol base. I like this system, and I think the Dev's time is better spent elsewhere

[K4on]

I liked the old system

build outside flag? FB

build inside flag? Bunker

1. - i think ur idea sounds better than the actual FOB-system.

2. - but wouldn't it be better if it is the decision of the SQL, what kind of FOB he wants
to build? you can handle it like the "build - HMG/AA" button. rightclick for BUNKER, leftclick for FIREBASE.

That sounds good, right ?

[akatabrask]

I've always disliked the idea of one having to knife or flare the firebases in order to take them down.
To me, the idea of a firebase is not that of a fortified physical position as most people here seems to see it.
Rather, to me it is somewhat what the idea of the rally point is but in a scale of a whole team. A point where the team/squads spawn, regroup and rearm and such. Somewhat a secured area to which the "imagined supply lines" go with reinforcements and such, an indicator of frontline almost. Therefor, it should also work somewhat like a rally point.

Allthough, it can also be "upgraded" to act as a stronghold if one wish, by using the deployable asset.

So why then have a physical object that needs to be destroyed? What I would like to see is something that works more in the way of flags so to speak. In other words, you gain controll over the area by outnumbering or killing the enemy and keep it that way for a certain amount of time.

To show an example: MEC has a firebase. 2/3/x US soldiers enters the area. Simulating disruption of supply lines and reinforcements: spawn is disabled.

More US soldiers enters the area and are now in greater numbers than MEC. Firebase is now slowly starting to "decompose" simulating US gradually seizing controll of the area making the area more unstable.

US greatly outnumbers remaining MEC soldiers which consists of maybe 2 soldiers. US now has controll over the area and the firebase disappears after x amount of time.

Also, anyone even considered the amount of time it takes to construct a concrete bunker with doors?