but wait...you didn't mention TRAP! some of my QoL changes would be: add a vehicle pain field over the exit tubes in amp station short cuts. so zergs can't simply park 2 vehicles on them to cause anyone using the tube to die... 360 harasser seat! (combined with a price increase, harassers are way too cheap) show who destroyed your vehicle (if possible) there are so many times when i've left a sundy in a nice spot far away from battle and suddenly someone has nuked it but it seems like there are no enemies around, i'd like to know if its sabotage. higher walls on esamir (bases like aura material lab that has tanks on a nearby hill spamming HE inside...) FLASH AND VALK TURBO AS DEFAULT. faster tankmine activation once thrown, faster detonation once triggered. currently you can throw a tankmine behind a vehicle and they seem to have aaaages to simply drive over it and away before it becomes active, and even then they can drive a harasser over it and take no damage when it triggers...
"remove Biolabs and add battleflow!" Let me translate that for you: "Make it so that any base falls quickly and defending is useless". "Battle flow" does not mean that every scrap of land should be constantly changing ownership, that's just trading in a non-moving battleflow for one where no one is willing to defend because why would you? The maps need to flow and you can only do that by screwing over anyone who tries to defend so that the bases get captured! You know what real battle flow is? When the objective to capture the base changes over time. You can spend 6 hours at the same base, but have a constantly changing objective and progress to capturing it. You can do this by making the capture of a base much more layered. Start the defenders with high-powered defenses, then let the attackers slowly destroy, capture, shut down or depower these defenses to enter deeper into the base. The defenders in the meantime will try to reactivate their defenses constantly and eventually push the attackers out by destroying their Sunderers, Sunderers that can now benefit from captured defenses and be harder to break. Just think about it: First you have to break through an anti-vehicle defensive line by hunting down some generators to shut down AV turrets and some shield generators to gain more and more access to the base's outer defenses. Then you go steal some cores in a CTF type gameplay to shut down some shields and gain access to more ways into the base and avoid chokepoints. Then to protect your deployment zone's you have to find and shut down/destroy a variety of antennae that are scattered throughout the base that allow the defenders to droppod in or even have access to teleporters. Then to shut down some powerful unhackable anti-infantry turrets at important infantry positions you bring in a vehicle to a special vehicle pad which will disrupt the turrets as long as the vehicle remains stationary and alive on the area (uses it's internal powersource to short-cirquit stuff and such). Then finally you capture the points, but the fight is far from over. An attrition gameplay element can enhance this part of the game where the defenders can lengthen the timer by killing the attackers, and the attackers can shorten the timer by killing the defenders (with a nice modification to how much time is given for a kill depending on how outnumbered you are to fight Zergs). The way you capture could also vary from base to base. In some bases you have the age-old point. In others you can pick up the point and walk around with it within a certain area of the base, while the defenders can only reset the timer by having the point nearby the pointroom which can be achieved by destroying the carried point (which will make it spawn in the pointroom again) or carrying it back to the pointroom. If brought back to the Spawnbunker it auto-respawns on the point to prevent cheesy defenses inside the spawnbunker. Or you have a more classic CTF mode, where the attackers need to capture a flag (for lore purposes: A computer core with codes to capture the base), and then bring the flag back to the Sunderer. Enough captures starts the base capture timer, more captures accelerates the capture, destruction of the Sunderer with the flags resets the timer, capture the flag on different deployed Sunderers to preserve some captures in case of Sunderer destruction. Or you could turn it around: The attackers need to buy a flag at the Sunderer, and bring it to the pointroom to start up the point. The the flag needs to be protected from destruction. The defenders can only reset the timer by buying their own flags and bringing it to the point. The list of options is massive, especially in PS2 which lends itself for some unique versions of classic gametypes. And this gives an actual battleflow without forcing the defenders into a losing battle for the sake of area's changing hands. Make capturing area tough, and you'll actually have enough fights in different area's as the fights on bases closer to the warpgate will happen for longer periods of time.
Imagine if you could have skipped this condescending passive-aggressive BS and just explained what you feel is good battle flow. Though in the spirit of forumside I shall translate your entire post without reading it to say, "I love coffee", agree to that, and have a cup right now.
Ok soo, you are telling me that Biolabs are NEEDED to STOP attacking force from steamrolling...even when they clearly have an overwhelming force?! Problem with Biolabs is easy to see.. unless there are some confusion as to how world works : biolabs are too easy to defend..realistically you need noticeably LESS players going to defend than to take them + if we are talking about zergs (in this case referring to players who just come to fights for the fighting sake and dont go for objectives) then there is this phrase you'll hear any platoon leader say : "get fu*ked!" TL;DR : biolabs are too easy to defend which creates a pointless farm where people dont push naturally
The condescending tone is because this "idea" has been put forth multiple times without any thought for the consequences. No, I'm telling you that having bases in favor of the defender, and some extremely in favor of the defender, is not necessarily a bad thing. People get hung up about "battle flow" without realizing the crapshow the game would be if bases flipped on a dime and you got to see all the bases... Very shortly and without any real contest. And as I outlined, without whining may I add, is that battleflow needs to be gotten in a different manner. Something like a Biolab could eventually have the attackers wear down the dome shield or create additional holes to pass through etc. I'm not asking for Biolabs to remain the same, and I'm not asking for Biolabs specifically to stop overwhelming forces. I'm asking for an improved battleflow that changes over time based on the exploits of the attackers and defenders. Yeah! People like them and tend to gather at them! Oh wait you had a different point? You know, if this game sported any tactics they aren't that easy to defend. No one sticks around for a battle that isn't coming. So just pulling back, then assaulting the enemy through various entrances in force almost guarantees a victory. You've probably seen it multiple times already: The attackers get beaten back, the defenders spill out of the Biolab and just then there's this window of opportunity where the attackers can beat the defenders and take hold of the entrances and get a strong foothold which takes a hell of a lot of force to break again. But again, even the most tactical commanders of PS2 throughout it's years put together would still fail at such tasks as any tactics beyond "more people to X" is rarely ever needed which destroyed the game's possibilities. A more layered defense/offense would solve a lot of this, including Biolabs. But ofcourse rather than read any of that you call it whining. Hypocrite. Well good that there are some bases too easy to defend. There's plenty of bases that are very hard to defend, so it evens out doesn't it? But you know what's interesting? For all your whining, you don't come with any solutions, you are just attacking me with the sole purpose of attacking me rather than prove something or improve the game.
