Members - Veterans
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

162 Good

About EneCtin

  • Rank
    2nd Lieutenant

Faction & Soldier

  • Faction
  • Soldier
    All types

Recent Profile Visitors

2,275 profile views
  1. You may have 5k infantry and whatever else in a town, your team is as good as the 20 nutheads getting to play that match. What is the advantage of having a extensive garrison? Nill. So, each AT has the option to join in fortifying a town (casemates, minefields, MG emplacements, antitank batteries, antitank obstacles whatever their name is etc), canceling movement for an hour while fortifications are erected (in a RTS sense, though all those bonus structures might be included later in the FPS game), or pushing ahead. Up to 5 fortifications on a city and 3 otherwise. Loosing a match destroys one fortification. A city cannot be taken while fortifications are still unconquered at the location. Under siege fortifications cannot be erected. You'd need 4 wins in a continuous battle to whittle down 3 forts and finally to take the town (you can loose battles but need a win before the enemy can build again). A large army can fortify faster the town. Fight in a town you've contributed to, and you get a bonus of some sort, to compensate time not spent pushing battles. This way, there is a bit of strategy to this. An enemy must be stronger in several matches in a row to push the front. Do you push onwards or do you fortify what you gained, making the recapture harder? You could also fortify the city against a certain threat, like strong AAA defences - no airplanes allowed, or no Tanks , etc. Attacking team gets to vote which fortification do they fight to take down during the match. They might have airforce nearby, paras or bombers, they might choose to open that avenue...or to negate not having tanks of their own... Possibilities are reasonable if not great.
  2. This may have been suggested before (haven't checked.. nor will I). Anyway, if War is being largely ignored, its because there is has no beef for the usual players. But, this could change if you know you would get 15% bonus to whatever XP you got during matches, if at the moment of start all the command points of the soldier are deployed within 3 towns of an open battle. Even more so, if you choose to fight in the town your troops are in, a 30% bonus in XP (to compensate somewhat the longer waiting). To the big players, this will not mean a thing. To the really uninterested players, same. But it may interest the new players or bring a new dimension to the game. This will not help the warfunds or gold situation, just XP
  3. It is annoying, indeed, expecting to let out a hail of fire and letting out a peep
  4. EneCtin

    Friendly Fire

    You view this only from your viewpoint (Hell, I would get less score if someone steps in front of me or or happens too close to the enemy while I shoot. Hell no) There is a reverse. THEY too won't be able to release a withering barrage for the same reasons. It averages out, at a different level of gameplay
  5. EneCtin

    Friendly Fire

    Combat in a building is a valid location. 2 soldiers go up the stair and each starts pre-shooting, the defender gets the first enemy maybe but the second's bullets are already in flight. Definite advantage using this immunity. No, in a house, this can turn a multiple vs one in multiple one vs one fights, that either side has a chance of surviving. Even a very good chance if you defend with a LMG or a flamethrower Can this be taxing to the server?? Maybe, idk, Is this suited for staged. Probably not. For war matches, though, certainly.
  6. EneCtin

    Friendly Fire

    That sounds like spawn camping, not valid argument....or defending a spawn (which by definition is protected from damage)
  7. EneCtin

    Friendly Fire

    I am very serious, why not. Spray and Prey with a twist. As is now, you have no care when you discharge your wepon, what is between you and enemy or what is beside him or behind him. Damn, nearly forgot!! LMG and rifle bullets penetrate more than one body and do damage to all until the last that may have only partial damage ( a hole is a hole is a hole, no?) Not REALizm but a slight twist
  8. Enable friendly fire, with penalties subtracted from score etc. I'm feeling like this will get a new Umph! to the game.
  9. Reto is, in my opinion, about the only game developer that cannot develop its own code and needs money to hire external aid. Not a recipe for success. As for "major" updates, those were minor at best.
  10. How dare you say true things? Have you no shame ? And yes, option to capture or sabotage at the beginning of that timer, what could be simpler? I believe that is so, captured APCs cannot be used by your team...or even you as respawn point. I mean, from the many APCs I've stolen, maybe one would not be stalked immediately and let me spawn there..
  11. Not only Armor 2.0 has the flaws presented above, but playing tanks is penalized: either by that one map and, sorry, stupid objective, or by excessively overpowered AT rambos, or by the spawn delay, or unavailability in match or limited faction production queue or whatnot, the list goes on and on. As a result, one does not get or does not want to subject himself to torment to play them. What if there would be a Kursk game mode, prolonged ongoing battle, maybe even War related, large numbers of tanks, no objective beyond terminating all enemy tank resistance but with a twist (no HE shells for tanks and only those land AT crates for infantry? Tiers of available equipment would be unlocked with number of kills. For example out of say 500 tanks available, starting with the basic light, medium, and heavy tanks, at 100 kills for the faction, tier 2 tanks are available, at 200, tier 3 and so on. Some rule that , if you are in the battle, within 5 minutes you need to do damage to a tank or be kicked. Started randomly on all maps. Maybe random spawns or just one fixed for the battle duration but chosen at random locations between battles. Suitable variations for the other factions, like Battle of the Bulge etc. What if the battle has meaning in war, being fought with state sponsored armor (not with player fielded attack teams) and is fought for control of a zone of several villages on the war map, so there be interest to participate and win? The battle would run for hours, players come, play and go as they choose, first team to blow 500 tanks wins. Skrew the respawn delays in this mode. The game is arcade, let it be arcade. There will be plenty of opportunity for infantry to do damage to tanks or harass the tanks, or coordinate with the team for a deeper experience. But this Kursk game mode is about tank on tank Maybe the battle be divided on rounds, the first team to have superiority at the enemy spawn for 5 minutes, wins the rounds and the next round starts at the respective spawns. Oh, no position markers. We'll call radio the chat window. You see a target, you write it in chat, for those interested
  12. EneCtin

    Recon suggestion

    Somehow, recons are not getting anything from ... reconnoitering. Like spotting and tracking incoming enemies, which is half their job. Instead, recons are just long range plink-ers.
  13. EneCtin


    Well...I do, but I find this rather OP. Flame is an indiscriminating foe. Plus, where is the explosion when the soldier's tank gets punctured ?? A hit to torso would pretty much guarantee a BOOOM...ok, ok, let's be fair on third of the hits to torso gets a boom. Maybe he does not die from bullets but he does get it.
  14. EneCtin

    Flamethrower capture

    The enemy might have the flamethrower as their secondary weapon. They drop the pistol, not the thrower. It can be captured
  15. EneCtin


    Friendly fire, definitely yes