• Announcements

    • HEAVY265

      Crs Wants You!   01/18/2019

      CRS is looking for some volunteer live support chat staff.  Are you up for the assignment?  If so,  please send an email with your interest to,  Jobs@corneredrats.com
knucks

MS health determined by Number of PPO's surrounding it

20 posts in this topic

I said it before, UP the charges it takes to take down a MS.

Relocate the flag inside , entrance to the left or right.

Let Engineers build FMS looking bunkers, that way the opposite side actually have to go and investigate to see if it is a legit FMS or not.

Let Trucks build 2 FMS one INF only the other ATG and  AAA specific. It make camping a MS so much harder , cause a Tanker would never know which MS he is at till someone spawns and by then it might be to late cause he just got sapped /shreked/zooked or blown up by an ATG.

And if we want to take it a notch up for each PPO build it takes a half a satchel more , so build 10 PPOs one has just increased the MS threshold by +5 satchels on top of the original amount it takes, ( downside I don't know how that could work cause the one side could always add on while the other side is trying to come back so that idea might not work. Unless there is a max of added satchel we could add to destroy a MS but that kinda sets the fortifications to a minimum too , why build 20 PPOs when all we ever get is a set number.

Only way I can think of is once FMS is set a timer starts and within that timer all the PPOs need to get set to fortify the MS to add a certain number of needed satchels to the destruction of said MS .

So let's say base amount needed for MS without a PPO is 7 , the group sets 10 PPOs we had a positive of 5 more satchels to the destruction of said MS . 

The more PPOS get build the higher the threshold of the MS , also encouraging Team play and the building of PPOs. 

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid Sgthenning would have the games 1st immortal FMS

 

1 hour ago, odin67 said:

I thought a sapper only has 2 HE charges?

He does
Maybe it was an engineer?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Merlin51 said:

I'm afraid Sgthenning would have the games 1st immortal FMS

 

He does
Maybe it was an engineer?

 

 

Not really cause if there is a time limit once the FMS is set then it depends on how many show up to help build , a 1 man crew can only set up so many till time runs out , giving it a variable charges threshold.

Sappers used to be Engineers or vice versa so someone calling one a Sapper is not out of the norm. So he mentioned Engineer but just had Sapper on his mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On Sun Jan 06 2019 at 8:48 PM, dre21 said:

I said it before, UP the charges it takes to take down a MS.

Relocate the flag inside , entrance to the left or right.

Let Engineers build FMS looking bunkers, that way the opposite side actually have to go and investigate to see if it is a legit FMS or not.

Let Trucks build 2 FMS one INF only the other ATG and  AAA specific. It make camping a MS so much harder , cause a Tanker would never know which MS he is at till someone spawns and by then it might be to late cause he just got sapped /shreked/zooked or blown up by an ATG.

And if we want to take it a notch up for each PPO build it takes a half a satchel more , so build 10 PPOs one has just increased the MS threshold by +5 satchels on top of the original amount it takes, ( downside I don't know how that could work cause the one side could always add on while the other side is trying to come back so that idea might not work. Unless there is a max of added satchel we could add to destroy a MS but that kinda sets the fortifications to a minimum too , why build 20 PPOs when all we ever get is a set number.

Only way I can think of is once FMS is set a timer starts and within that timer all the PPOs need to get set to fortify the MS to add a certain number of needed satchels to the destruction of said MS .

So let's say base amount needed for MS without a PPO is 7 , the group sets 10 PPOs we had a positive of 5 more satchels to the destruction of said MS . 

The more PPOS get build the higher the threshold of the MS , also encouraging Team play and the building of PPOs. 

 

THIS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dre21 said:

Let's bump this till CRS takes a look and makes a statement on it.

We are looking at the strength of different PPOs for example the GUn Emplacement takes more to take down then sandbags.

As for making the MS strength adjusted by the number of PPOs around it, I will bring it up in leadership meeting however I do not see that being possible at this time from a simple fact that all coding resources are focused on completion of 1.36 and 64bit. That does not mean the idea doesnt have merit, but prioritization compared to other objectives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BLKHWK8 said:

We are looking at the strength of different PPOs for example the GUn Emplacement takes more to take down then sandbags.

As for making the MS strength adjusted by the number of PPOs around it, I will bring it up in leadership meeting however I do not see that being possible at this time from a simple fact that all coding resources are focused on completion of 1.36 and 64bit. That does not mean the idea doesnt have merit, but prioritization compared to other objectives.

What about giving the engineer the option to build fake FMS , also move the flag into the bunker , and let Truck set 2 FMS one ATG and the other only INF specific,   I think this alone would do a bunch of good .

Increase the duration of the PPOs and let us set them closer together will be good enough the other added satchel charge increase per PPO set in a certain time frame us just an idea I came up with .

But the top half I have just written should be pretty simple to implement I think and it would cut down on camped FMS and it would take a lot longer for the other side to find the actual active FMS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, dre21 said:

What about giving the engineer the option to build fake FMS , also move the flag into the bunker , and let Truck set 2 FMS one ATG and the other only INF specific,   I think this alone would do a bunch of good .

Increase the duration of the PPOs and let us set them closer together will be good enough the other added satchel charge increase per PPO set in a certain time frame us just an idea I came up with .

But the top half I have just written should be pretty simple to implement I think and it would cut down on camped FMS and it would take a lot longer for the other side to find the actual active FMS

We have been working on the PPOs which is how the barbwire and round sandbags came in. We also did change the roof of a fru to match the gun emplacement. MOving the flag has been discussed, @XOOM may have other commentary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, XOOM said:

What's a FRU?

Oh I dunno a forward resupply unit..........Old habits never die..........I guess :P

Edited by bmw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, bmw said:

Old habits never die

eh, i still keep saying MSP

Edited by Merlin51
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Merlin51 said:

eh, i still keep saying MSP

Maybe because they are still called MSPAWN on the map view.

011019.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/6/2019 at 0:32 PM, knucks said:

Battle at Koln where we build a huge FOB around an FMS to hold.

ce8c3dce4c374b37a397fb034ec6e88b.jpg
https://gyazo.com/ce8c3dce4c374b37a397fb034ec6e88b

f1151e2b2b58d356bbda2eb48f26ab8b.jpg
https://gyazo.com/f1151e2b2b58d356bbda2eb48f26ab8b

As you can see very well fortified, well guess what happened?

MS out by a single Sherman and Sapper in 1 run.

Attack neutralized by two players in less than 5 minutes.

What's even the point?

The point is to not setup such linear death traps like this.

 

The barbed wire should be used to force enemy engineers out of bushlines and into the open to be killed and die.  It's  a good strategy to set up an FMS just for this purpose.

 

Sandbags are not for main battle tank protection.  If you want to protect an FMS from those, best to have another tank or ATG in ambush, sapper/RPAT for same, and in the meantime use the engineer to build AT positions around the spawn so you can get in to kill enemy engineers and make it to sandbag cover.

 

Then if the enemy takes down your barbed wire or you aren't manning kill zones, then at least you can spawn in and kill the enemy engineers.

 

Finally, best to have 2 FMS close to each other yet not in line to where one tank can camp both.  Again, all about attriting enemy engineers.  Get those and not only do you protect your FMS for hours from easy enemy takedown, but also protect your FBs and ruin their AI rebuilding.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This^^^^^

Also you should consider there is a fine line between making your FMS hard to find, and hardening it  with lots of PPOs.  The more PPOs that are around the FMS, the easier it is to find from both the air and ground.  In the long run, the ant trail is what kills most FMS's. 

Undefended FMS's deserve to die.  Just like undefended FBs.   The FMS above is also very poorly placed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ratzilla said:

Maybe because they are still called MSPAWN on the map view.

011019.jpg

Ding ding, winner!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Undefended MS are the norm, most people hide their FMS and leave it until it gets camped. Design doesn't promote defending these positions, people rather just leave them and cap points then stay behind, for multiple reasons such as this one. For example you don't see units in Squad not fortify their spawns, they're big and almost impossible to truly hide. (Not that you should hide them, that's not really the point)

Edited by knucks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, knucks said:

Undefended MS are the norm, most people hide their FMS and leave it until it gets camped.

Want to kill lots of LMG's with a rifle
set fms, drop some terrain hazards, then go set up shop near the FMS
lmgs, smgs, engineers, they all come to you.
You know exactly where they need to go to, They have no idea exactly where you feel like going to.

And when they get hung up on barbedwire stuffed in the bushline, its even funnier.

3 hours ago, ratzilla said:

Maybe because they are still called MSPAWN on the map view.

Nah, cause initially you had to find a spot, and type .msp to set it
as an infantryman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.