Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tartantyco

  • Rank
    Battalion Staff

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

3,219 profile views
  1. Points-Based Asset Allocation System

    You're not missing anything, but the purpose of the mechanic is simply to specifically stop individual players from wasting assets and hurting their team. In the case of organized/competitive play I assume all participants are playing to the best of their ability, and as such this mechanic could just as well be disabled. It's the requirement that players need to stay in main base with a specific kit to accrue points that is the real limiting factor for the teams. There's a lot of ways to meta in that case, as well, but I don't see meta-gaming like this as a negative unless it actually negatively affects gameplay. As an example, you could cycle five players through accruing points at main, collectively buying assets, then another five players do the same thing, until every player has the active asset penalty imposed on them, but I don't think the logistical practicalities of doing this would be very surmountable, and then you have to find the balance between how many people you can have standing around main not involved in battle vs. the combat value of the assets they're pumping out. One thing I assume would happen in competitive games is that basically the entire team would get crewman/pilot kits at the start, and then collectively buy some "high tier" assets, but I'm not entirely sure how effective that would be considering everyone involved in the joint purchase would not have an active asset accrual reduction. So, it's another cost/benefit analysis: Does getting tanks quick outweigh slower squad asset access and fewer squad assets, or is survivability long enough that infantry squads aren't affected? Either way, if one team can do it, the other team can too. Basically, teams can meta the hell out of the system if they want to, but I don't think anything substantially cheesy is effective enough to be useful for a team that wants to win.
  2. No, it's an intentional addition by the devs. They've added a completely pointless "hex fortification" system where if you have an active HAB in a territory, that territory will show a HAB shield marker in the center if the enemy team holds the adjacent territory. This HAB shield marker denoting that the territory is "fortified" is visible to the enemy team. They don't have to find the HAB or anything, the game just gives them free intel. It is entirely intentional that this marker be visible to the enemy because it's supposed to tell them that they can't cap that territory until they deactivate the HAB. It's just utter nonsense.
  3. Wait, do you even know what I'm talking about? Because right now it sounds like you don't.
  4. As another bonafide combat engineer it doesn't matter that you're a bonafide combat engineer. 100m is easily accurate enough for FOB Hunting. I usually locate enemy FOBs based on enemy movements, disposition, and distribution without even a 300m radius to narrow it down. But that's not the issue. The issue is a) that you're giving the team free intel and b) that you're adding an unnecessary layer of complication with the hex fortification system.
  5. In the v16 test build, if you have a territory that borders and enemy territory with an active HAB in it, a HAB marker shows up in the center of the territory, effectively giving you free intel. It's part of a "hex fortification" system wherein you can't cap a territory if there is an active enemy HAB in it. Bascially, two useless additions to TC have been implemented that serve literally no point to them and severely undermine key aspects of emergent gameplay and teamwork.
  6. Because it's stupid. I don't even understand how this made it into the game.
  7. Building is useless

    The fix is really simple: Remove the ticket value of the FOBs. Teams already pay for FOBs and their related emplacements through, time, manpower, and resources. As I have stated and laid out in detail many times, the FOB should be changed into a Supply Dump(Which it already basically is) that is dropped by logi trucks. The supply dumps, in addition to functioning as a resupply point, have a build radius just like the FOB currently has(BUT the proximity radius would be just as long as the build radius, and the build radius would be shorter). This would allow teams to just drop a supply dump, set up an HMG in a good position, and make use of it without fear of FOB hunters overrunning them and taking out a 10 ticket asset. While just removing the ticket value of the FOB would solve the major issue, it would be best if the supply dump was introduced as the current system means a FOB built just to set up a temporary TOW or HMG could be blocking other good FOB/HAB locations on the map and, to some extent, revealing the positions of spawn FOBs by process of elimination. Build times would also have to be reduced for most emplacements as it just takes too much time to get anything built right now.
  8. Otrevligt bemötande

    Nobody understands your weird swamp-language.
  9. -60 tickets per minute ticketbleed?

    I don't quite understand why people want to try to extend the playtime of a shitty match. If you lose your last flag you should basically just lose instantly regardless. Making it harder to take flags beyond the central one would simply mean that every match from now on is just a constant slog at the central flag until tickets or time runs out, which just makes the game extremely repetitive.
  10. It's basically to avoid FOB spamming, people indiscriminately dropping FOBs everywhere.
  11. Game needs non owned servers

    OP, maybe you're just a shithead.
  12. Naming FOBS Stupid Idea Nr. 568

    Pretty sure FOB naming was planned at one point. No idea what the status is.
  13. Logistics Mechanics

    No, it's the game mechanics. It's always the game mechanics.
  14. Logistics Mechanics

    Because back in the olden days of Squad when FOBs were first introduced, and also acted as spawn points, SLs could literally just place them anywhere at any time. Having a map full of spawns at no cost just made it like CoD with people spawning all over the place with no logistical logic just wasn't very conducive to gameplay, so that was one of the mechanisms put in place to stop that from happening. (Also, the devs doing something does mean that's the right thing to do) First of all, getting two people to stand in one spot next to you and then shovel some stuff is not teamwork. Secondly, you will get a lot more teamwork with my changes. Logi squads and vehicle squads coordinating to set up a Repair FOB network, squads using emplacements to support other squads at range anywhere on the map, squads setting up chokepoints to cut off enemy supplies forcing the enemy to cooperate to eliminate those chokepoints. People need to learn what teamwork is. Too many arguments boil down to "you need more people to do X, therefore it's teamwork", which is just nonsense. Trolls are more of a problem now than they would be with my changes as it's so easy to cripple a team right now with the current restrictions.