Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Going off of the community roundtable here's a suggestion.
 


 

Quote

We do want FOBs to be easier to place. The range between them might be lowered, for example, or removing the ticket loss if a FOB is destroyed. We would also like to see FOBs used as backup positions more often, not as just one key location and forget the rest. Using them as rear spawning locations should be viable.


Especially the part where someone in the discussion pointed out that 2 people can disable a FOB, hide and then the enemy team can't make a new FOB, without the enemies destroying the old one, so if they don't have a defence on the FOB it cuts them off from using, basically, an 800x800 area of the map to place a new FOB. Yadda yadda yadda.

Here's a couple ideas I had while listening to this part of the discussion.
1 - Increase the size of the HAB model. This will do two things. First it'll be possible to make the HAB more protective against incoming fire for those that are spawning in. By enlarging the footprint of the HAB it'll be more likely that people will place it in open spaces, which lowers the possibility of two enemy players hiding it out in a nearby building etc, though not dramatically.
Also if you make it triangular instead of rectangular you could plant the HAB, when deploying it, inside a hill for example, as long as two of the three entrances aren't blocked by the terrain.
2 - FOB/HAB/Build distances. Right now there's a 400m zone around each FOB which is assigned to that FOB and no other FOB can be placed there. You can build a HAB or anything else within 150m, from the FOB in all directions.
Coming back to the first, if enemies(2+) lock down a HAB then that's 400m in all directions where you can't set up a new HAB - possibly for the rest of the game, I mean there is a chance.
Instead, what could be done is to have a distance for FOBs, a distance for HABs and a distance for building.
e.g.
FOBs: (atleast) 100m from any other FOB, 150m from any HAB
HABs: 300m from any other HAB
Building zone: 100m from a HAB in any direction, 100m from the FOB in any direction(except HAB, 150m limit)
supplies for both building zones would be in a single pool 

So it'd look something like this(not exact distances its quickly cobbled together and there might be a few pixels error)
CsXtad9.jpg

Blue - FOB
Green - HAB
White - build zone, wh. line - HAB belongs to FOB(100m)
Purple - HAB build distance limit from FOBs(150m)
Yellow - HAB minimum build distance from another HAB(300m)

This has two effects. The first, simpler one, is that if you put FOBs too close to each other then their HABs become directional(bottom FOB line: One HAB in Village, second HAB in a fallback position).
The second effect has to do with disabling the HAB.
When the HAB is online then there can be no other HAB within 300m.
- - - - -
(In the current version, there can be no FOB within 400m of another FOB, so if a HAB gets disabled, that's 400m)
- - - - - 
If the HAB gets disabled, it also disables the 300m limit.
The HAB ceases to be a HAB it falls apart, it becomes dilapidated, deserted. This is option A and C.
A = 2+ enemies get within proximity of the HAB, the HAB gets disabled, both visually and functionally + it loses the 300m limit, because it's not longer a HAB.
C = The HAB gets destroyed by a mortar for example. Same as above  ^                                      ^                                         ^

mock-up of a triangle HAB with a larger footprint in comparison with current HAB(no rl reference, I might've gone a little too wild with it)
AcXPqfp.jpg

The B option would be when there are 2+ enemies, but there is also atleast 1 friendly on the HAB(within 100m)
In this case the HAB becomes disabled, but that's it. It stays visually the same and the 300m limit is still in place.

This way a HAB defence can go one of three ways.
The defenders kill all the enemy within the area = the HAB becomes spawnable again.
The defenders fail(all die or the HAB gets otherwise disabled; explosives)-
they come in from a rally point and clear the HAB = now they have to build the HAB back up for it to become spawnable
they completely fail and the attackers leave the disabled HAB and FOB standing = they can now build another HAB within a 150m of the disabled FOB on a preexisting FOB 100m+ away OR they can take down a HAB from a preexisting FOB 100m+ away from the disabled one and rebuild it 150m+ from it, etc etc

One thing to keep in mind is that disabling a HAB and keeping the enemy FOB up would not deprive the enemy of a large area, for FOB building like now, but it would deprive a slightly smaller area + the angle at which the HAB will be built in relation to the FOB and so the angles of HAB + FOB + FLAG.

In other words, disabling the HAB and leaving the FOB would still retain the tactical advantage(quote from roundtable: "aboooze"), but it's not an absolute distance/speed impediment from new HAB-to-capzone, only if you want to attack from the same angle as the disabled HAB let you do, ie going to the disabled HAB from the new HAB and then going to the flag from there.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"In this realistic environment..."

 

Honestly this whole FOB/HAB business seems like it's really getting overly complicated and completely unrealistic.

 

Realism would be more transport trucks at main, transport helos with the fast ropes and logistics trucks that you loaded up with the actual weapons and ammunition you were going to use. This is much easier for the average person to comprehend as opposed to the geometric equation it's evolving into.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is a good Idee to make the habs biger. but it should still be easy to take them down to stop FOB vs FOB battles. I also want it to be harder to spawn on your HAB if enemy's are to closse so people would not just built them on the cap wath just makes it very hard to take it over when the enemy can just keep spawning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Zylfrax791 said:

"In this realistic environment..."

 

Honestly this whole FOB/HAB business seems like it's really getting overly complicated and completely unrealistic.

 

Realism would be more transport trucks at main, transport helos with the fast ropes and logistics trucks that you loaded up with the actual weapons and ammunition you were going to use. This is much easier for the average person to comprehend as opposed to the geometric equation it's evolving into.


Sure. It's just something that popped into my head when I heard concerns about the loopholes, when the devs explained how it's probably going to work, which I think are loopholes.
Technically if you look at the suggestion it doesn't get rid of the importance of vehicles and doesn't make HABs/FOBs into fortresses.
All it really does is give you a choice, logistics vs transport from main.
If you wanted to set up two backup FOBs for every HAB you make then you could, but it'd take some effort. Or you could just rely on vehicles all the way, which are unreliable. Either way you will have to maintain supply lines, whether you're making a single FOB defensible or you are making backup FOBs or you are running people into the fight from main.
I think the "deny FOB and withhold 400m from enemy" is going to be an issue. Some people seem to be hard pressed to find an adequate spot for a FOB even without having inactive FOBs in their way already.
And the "geometric equation" is as simple as can be tbh, (FOB+FOB) x 3 = HAB + HAB = (HAB + HAB) / 2 = FOB + HAB

But taking a step back, maybe this or something similar could be in place for the smaller maps only. Maybe split the gamemodes between AAS and AAS Large. Just a thought.

Edited by Peerun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I have to agree with @Zylfrax791 on this one as he pretty much nailed it:

19 hours ago, Zylfrax791 said:

Realism would be more transport trucks at main, transport helos with the fast ropes and logistics trucks that you loaded up with the actual weapons and ammunition you were going to use. This is much easier for the average person to comprehend as opposed to the geometric equation it's evolving into.

What about FOBs/HAB having an 'up time' timer instead of limited spawns or other changes in values that will screw with my brain? Completely unrelated from the spawn timer for individual players.

 

The recent changes to the spawn mechanic favor multiple (unfortified and hidden) FOB/HABs set up across the map for AAS/PAAS/INVASION (the 3 most popular modes)...so (values can be changed):

 

Let's make the FOBs stay up for 15 minutes.

When timer reaches 0 = FOB disappears with no ticket penalty.

In order to keep FOB up = 50 construction are consumed by the FOB which add 5 more minutes to the timer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CptDirty said:

Yeah, I have to agree with @Zylfrax791 on this one as he pretty much nailed it:

What about FOBs/HAB having an 'up time' timer instead of limited spawns or other changes in values that will screw with my brain? Completely unrelated from the spawn timer for individual players.

 

21 hours ago, Zylfrax791 said:

"In this realistic environment..."

 

Honestly this whole FOB/HAB business seems like it's really getting overly complicated and completely unrealistic.

 

Realism would be more transport trucks at main, transport helos with the fast ropes and logistics trucks that you loaded up with the actual weapons and ammunition you were going to use


Ok, at this point I'm pretty sure that you guys are replying to a different thread and your posts end up here via a wormhole matrix glitch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Peerun nah man it's the math you require us to do that glitches my brain. 

 

Think of the construction points consumed by the FOB, for increased up time, as a maintenance resources :) 

 

 

Edited by CptDirty
edit: damn you gotta admit that's good haha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point, I'd prefer purely a supply based spawn system for HABs. No radios, just attached supply crates. Build as many as you want, and as close as you want, but you need a full logi to drop one, and have to supply them to keep them viable. Make them bigger for conventional forces, so they can't hide them inside of a building, but they can hold more resources. Smaller for insurgents, and less resources, but easier to hide and supply with smaller vics. 

 

Cut off their supplies/reinforcements,  spawns run out and they go down. Outnumber them within proximity, or get two people inside the HAB, and spawns stop. Destroy the HAB with explosives or shoveling it down, and it's gone. It'd be much more logical than arbitrary manipulation with distances, hiding radios and all that nonsense. I'm tired of searching for a magic icon (the radio) that serves no purpose. 

 

Tie deployables to crates, and build them anywhere. 

 

I'd support testing a time based system as well, X points gives you Y amount of time instead of tickets.

 

Anything to stop the meatgrinder and focus on creating FOB fishbowls on caps. If this sort of system was in place, you'd place your HAB(s) in an area where it can hopefully be safely resupplied, which would be some distance off of the CAP and enemy lines. You could then drop a crate(s) at the cap and set up a ring of defenses around it. Once you start to lose ground, you'd collapse your in the cap defenses back and push in from outside, instead of sitting trapped inside, with nowhere to spawn outside, since all of your rallys are overrun, and you can only have the one HAB because of distance restrictions. Every cap battle turns into the Alamo now, not a more multifaceted battle for territory like it should be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imho, no amount of "tweaking" or "fine tuning" will ever fix the giant magic pillbox that magically farts out fresh players whereupon they typically all run single file towards the flag like ants.

 

I mean even new players understand quite quickly how to find these player harvesting devices, so now just imagine how the clans are wargaming the predictive placement of HAB's based on databases from their own servers.

 

Think about it for a second. At the start of the game it's very realistic. You form up your platoon and all get into vehicles and proceed to the objectives. Then the arcade rally points, fobs and Habs go down and the fantasy science fiction starts and the predictable contrived  gameplay starts. Then at some point both sides lose all of their Habs and Rally's and start back over at the base in realism mode sometimes.

 

I'm not knocking the arcade style of it because it's fun but what I am saying it would make a lot more sense if things were consistent across the board. Make it either realistic AAS where Medics and transport really matters or just get rid of all the nanny restrictions and make it full Arcade because the hybrid simply doesn't work for so many reasons.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×