Jump to content
Stom

Separate FOBs and Fortifications

Recommended Posts

I was playing earlier today and one of my squad-mates complained about a FOB being built in the objective area because it was too obvious to the enemy, and that got me thinking about people being afraid of making their FOBs too obvious so they don't bother with any fortifications, which is a shame.

 

To remedy this and bring fortifications back into the forefront of gameplay why not separate the fortification function from FOBs.

 

To do this the SL places a materials stockpile (visually a pile of empty hesco/sand-bags) in the same way they do a Rally-point or FOB.

 

The stockpile has an amount of resources and a buildable area around it, the same as the current FOB, but can only create fortifications, so the FOB is still required to place Ammo boxes and spawn players.

 

 

Thanks for humouring me, and sorry if this has been discussed elsewhere, I did a search and couldn't find anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

heres a topic i created awhile ago.

FOB zone split into 2 zones, being able to build whereever within the fob zone but the capping radius is smaller allowing to fortify it without some dickhead enemy laying on the very edge in a bush capping. If people were to build the fortifications around the fob instead on it would allow for better defense and such 

 

http://forums.joinsquad.com/topic/4269-new-fob-mechanics-ideas/#entry75097

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FOB zone split into 2 zones, being able to build whereever within the fob zone but the capping radius is smaller allowing to fortify it without some dickhead enemy laying on the very edge in a bush capping. If people were to build the fortifications around the fob instead on it would allow for better defense and such 

That could work, but with how I'm seeing the placement of FOBs they'd still be nowhere the objective. So the FOB building zone would have to be massive to include objectives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO FOBs such be build off the objective but close by maybe 100-200 meters and use rally's for closer spawn use the fob as over watch or a place to defend if getting pushed back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fobs shouldn't be build on objectives. It's that simple.

I agree, but my point is that objectives should be fortified.

 

So to do both FOBs should not have the ability to fortify, instead fortification is something entirely separate from FOBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno, have the feeling that would make it turn to Minecraft even more than it does at the moment - which sometimes removes the teamplay as some people tend to take more focus into building blindlessy rather than really helping the team.

"Because it's fun". Yeah, go play Minecraft. (no offence to you, that's just what I think when some SLs decide to do that).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fortification must be part of gameplay and the range of options that a team has , I believe that should be linked strictly the fobs and a great need for supplies and ''dig`` to foster teamwork and logistics .

So depending on the map and of the strategy teams can choose : A stealthy fob that is difficult to detect and neutralize and do not order as many supplies but does not provide as many means to defend a position.
And fob with fortifications that will cost a lot more supplies and labor, will be very easily detected too, but will provide many means to defend positions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

heres a topic i created awhile ago.

FOB zone split into 2 zones, being able to build whereever within the fob zone but the capping radius is smaller allowing to fortify it without some dickhead enemy laying on the very edge in a bush capping. If people were to build the fortifications around the fob instead on it would allow for better defense and such 

 

http://forums.joinsquad.com/topic/4269-new-fob-mechanics-ideas/#entry75097

 

This is already the case.  The FOB capture radius is much smaller than the actual build radius.  Additionally, Enemies only get the status bar only if they are inside the capture radius, not the construction radius.  Construction Radius is like 350 meters, and the capture radius is 100 meters.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is already the case.  The FOB capture radius is much smaller than the actual build radius.  Additionally, Enemies only get the status bar only if they are inside the capture radius, not the construction radius.  Construction Radius is like 350 meters, and the capture radius is 100 meters.  

That's great to know. 

 

In terms of UI, the defending team's yellow-bar FOB status is the build radius, whilst the attacking team's yellow-bar FOB status is the take down radius?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fobs shouldn't be build on objectives. It's that simple.

Why? If the FOB build radius is larger than the cap, you can keep them out easier. This is only alpha and it's not PR. I don't see why having a squad in a fortification on the flag is a bad thing.

 

I don't know if you're saying that they shouldn't be allowed to build as in can't place one there, but it should be up to the SL to decide not the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is already the case.  The FOB capture radius is much smaller than the actual build radius.  Additionally, Enemies only get the status bar only if they are inside the capture radius, not the construction radius.  Construction Radius is like 350 meters, and the capture radius is 100 meters.  

 

 

<3 YAY!

Will there be any way to tell for the FOB owners to tell when they are outside of the cap zone but still inside of the FOB zone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's great to know. 

 

In terms of UI, the defending team's yellow-bar FOB status is the build radius, whilst the attacking team's yellow-bar FOB status is the take down radius?

 

Yes.  If you see the resource counts, you are within range of a friendly FOB's build radius.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why? If the FOB build radius is larger than the cap, you can keep them out easier. This is only alpha and it's not PR. I don't see why having a squad in a fortification on the flag is a bad thing.

There's plenty of separate threads discussing why this is a bad idea. Namely, you should never put all your eggs in one basket. If there is a FOB on a flag, it's too easy to lose both at once. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's plenty of separate threads discussing why this is a bad idea. Namely, you should never put all your eggs in one basket. If there is a FOB on a flag, it's too easy to lose both at once. 

How are they relevant since the game doesn't even have FOB that can be defended properly. No guns, you can shovel concrete and you think that this is the best time to judge the merits of a FOB...

 

A tank is irrelevant too if it doesn't have guns and can be shoveled away. May as well say pass judgement on all future tanks because a tank in alpha hasn't been implemented properly and doesn't have all its doo dads.

 

Don't dictate where and how FOBs should be made. Leave it up to the SL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they should be separate, tieing FOBs to fortifications changes the process of evaluating a fortifications strategic importance from based on where it is and it's field of fire to it's an obvious main spawn point and we have to kill it.

 

Maybe FOB could have limited building capacity, like sandbags and piles of debris as if it was an improvised position or something, but if you really wanted to build fortifications, you'd need a supply crate sort of deployable and bring in supplies to enable the building. This would prevent SL's from dropping crates where ever, like they do with fobs now, as they'd need the coordination of other squads to build them. Until vehicles are in game, you could require maybe 2 SL's to be in the build zone to be able to build? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May as well say pass judgement on all future tanks because a tank in alpha hasn't been implemented properly and doesn't have all its doo dads.

Then there is no point in having any discussion. But, here we are: having a discussion. I agree that everything will most likely change. We can only talk about what we have in front of us at this very moment.

 

How are they relevant since the game doesn't even have FOB that can be defended properly. No guns, you can shovel concrete and you think that this is the best time to judge the merits of a FOB...

I didn't state that FOBs were irrelevant. I said that they shouldn't be placed on flags. I didn't want to write an essay about why this is the case, so I provided you with an incredibly curt response to what is an incredibly complex problem. FOBs are an integral part of a team's respawn infrastructure. You can't place them within 400 meters of each other and they are easily overrun if subject to concentrated enemy attack. Therefore, why place them in an area that will, by design, be subject to concentrated enemy attack? I understand what you are saying: you place a FOB on a flag thus reinforcing the capture zone with emplacements and fortifications. Trust me. I get it. I'm just disagreeing with you. Feel free to do what you please, but if you're on my team I will advise you to avoid the tactic.

 

 

 

Don't dictate where and how FOBs should be made. Leave it up to the SL.

I will. Because, for the majority of my play, I am leading a Squad ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 You can't place them within 400 meters of each other and they are easily overrun if subject to concentrated enemy attack. Therefore, why place them in an area that will, by design, be subject to concentrated enemy attack? 

spot on

 

Try and argue with that lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will. Because, for the majority of my play, I am leading a Squad ;)

You know what I meant. Don't limit the game. Your squad is up to you.

 

" You can't place them within 400 meters of each other and they are easily overrun if subject to concentrated enemy attack. Therefore, why place them in an area that will, by design, be subject to concentrated enemy attack? "

 

What's harder to capture. A flag with nothing on it or a flag with a machine gun looking at it and a squad on it already. You're speaking from an alpha, possibly PR, context and depending on how FOBs are implemented and whether or not Hescos and other installations will be shovelable, it's too early to be saying just don't and I'll say nay if I'm on your team. You can't be dogmatic about what isn't even created yet.

 

"Then there is no point in having any discussion. But, here we are: having a discussion. I agree that everything will most likely change. We can only talk about what we have in front of us at this very moment."

 

This isn't time sensitive to what we have now. I really don't get why you think that. We can only talk about what we have now...really. This is a suggestion thread; not a thread about tactics in the current build. lol. Can't be talked about...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what I meant. Don't limit the game. Your squad is up to you.

 

" You can't place them within 400 meters of each other and they are easily overrun if subject to concentrated enemy attack. Therefore, why place them in an area that will, by design, be subject to concentrated enemy attack? "

 

What's harder to capture. A flag with nothing on it or a flag with a machine gun looking at it and a squad on it already. You're speaking from an alpha, possibly PR, context and depending on how FOBs are implemented and whether or not Hescos and other installations will be shovelable, it's too early to be saying just don't and I'll say nay if I'm on your team. You can't be dogmatic about what isn't even created yet.

 

"Then there is no point in having any discussion. But, here we are: having a discussion. I agree that everything will most likely change. We can only talk about what we have in front of us at this very moment."

 

This isn't time sensitive to what we have now. I really don't get why you think that. We can only talk about what we have now...really. This is a suggestion thread; not a thread about tactics in the current build.

Just because the fob isn't directly on the flag, doesn't mean you cant be on the point lol. In the long run, id rather have a fob that stays up and can continually attack the contested flag, rather than one that might be convenient for the first 3 minutes of enemies attacking.

 

use rally points close to the flag and use the fob as your insurance plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because the fob isn't directly on the flag, doesn't mean you cant be on the point lol. In the long run, id rather have a fob that stays up and can continually attack the contested flag, rather than one that might be convenient for the first 3 minutes of enemies attacking.

 

use rally points close to the flag and use the fob as your insurance plan.

Yes, FOB placement is contextual to the flag. You guys are confusing this with tactics. Those will be sorted out later. You can do your thing. I might want to place my FOB right there on the flag and have a rally backup.

 

If a build radius is bigger than the cap radius a fortification is a viable option.

 

Leave these things up to the SL, but don't say you can't talk about certain things.

 

"Just because the fob isn't directly on the flag, doesn't mean you cant be on the point lol"

Just, why. A huh huh huh, durr. Meaningless drivel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't dictate where and how FOBs should be made. Leave it up to the SL.

The reason I want the separation is to give more options to SL.

 

If the functions are separated it doesn't mean you can no longer build fortifications on FOBs, it just means you'll need to drop a stockpile next to your FOB and build from there.

 

I don't want this to happen to devalue FOBs, I think things like ammo boxes and in future weapon emplacements should be restricted to FOBs, so if you do want to make a super fortress you'll still need a FOB in your fort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason I want the separation is to give more options to SL.

 

If the functions are separated it doesn't mean you can no longer build fortifications on FOBs, it just means you'll need to drop a stockpile next to your FOB and build from there.

 

I don't want this to happen to devalue FOBs, I think things like ammo boxes and in future weapon emplacements should be restricted to FOBs, so if you do want to make a super fortress you'll still need a FOB in your fort.

True, this is all up in the air, but I think this is very similar to Tarantyco's suggestion mentioned at the beginning of this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the ongoing discussion, Anders :)

 

 

You know what I meant. Don't limit the game. Your squad is up to you

I won't apologise for being facetious, that's just who I am. If we are ever in-game together, as Squad Leaders, I have no doubt we'll reach an agreement. But I'd play hardball - I don't often acquiesce ;)

 

What's harder to capture. A flag with nothing on it or a flag with a machine gun looking at it and a squad on it already. You're speaking from an alpha, possibly PR, context and depending on how FOBs are implemented and whether or not Hescos and other installations will be shovelable, it's too early to be saying just don't and I'll say nay if I'm on your team. You can't be dogmatic about what isn't even created yet.

You're dead right. But it's more than that. I'm approaching this from years of practical experience in Project Reality, practical experience as a soldier and realism gamer, and as a rational exposition of preexisting game mechanics and tactics that aren't likely to change substantially. By that, I mean, the method of establishing, supplying, and fortifying FOBs may very well change, indeed, I guarantee it will, but the basic mechanics and tactical considerations that apply to FOB placement will not. There will always be good FOB placement, and there will always be bad FOB placement. And that we can argue about until the cows come home -- as, it looks, we are doing hahaha.

 

Yes, FOB placement is contextual to the flag. You guys are confusing this with tactics. 

I don't think we're confusing anything. FOB placement is absolutely tactical. And absolutely contextual. Including, but not limited to, the flag position, but the terrain, likely and suspected enemy approaches, likely and suspected enemy intent, friendly intent, and any multitude of other factors. We're providing you with feedback that we've experienced thus far -- in both Project Reality and Squad. Putting a FOB smack-bang in the middle of a capture is, in our experience, a poor choice.

 

Just because the fob isn't directly on the flag, doesn't mean you cant be on the point lol. In the long run, id rather have a fob that stays up and can continually attack the contested flag, rather than one that might be convenient for the first 3 minutes of enemies attacking.

 

use rally points close to the flag and use the fob as your insurance plan.

This, Anders, is the crux of it. The FOB provides a forward spawn for the entire team. The Rally provides a forward spawn for your boys. If your centralised FOB gets overrun, the team has to traverse at least 400 meters of terrain (often undulating and potentially contested) before they can reengage or provide support to your element. If you then lose your rally point, there's absolutely no recourse for you.

 

An ideal FOB, for mine, is set back from the cap zone. Slightly. In a position that can provide support to both the offensive and defensive caps.

 

And, let me just make this clear, it is entirely contextual. There may indeed be a time and a place for a flagzone FOB. What I'm trying to argue is that, as a general rule, it is not wise to do this.

 

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

×