Defenders often have the short stick. They're pushed back mist often due to larger numbers of the opposition and lack the push for getting mobile spawns as they have a permanent one in the base. That gives them a disadvantage, as the attackers can predict much more easily where the defenders can come from. In addition, the attackers can have multiple spawn points and thus outflank defenders more easily, further augmenting their advantage. My proposition is to place droppod terminals in the spawn room. You will see the map and a set area around the base where you can drop at will, with a certain margin of error. A point owned by the attackers will generate a denial area where droppods can't land. The area will generally not go outside the base, and might not even cover the whole base. What will this do? The attackers will be pushed more towards defending control points, instead of camping spawn points. The defenders will have a larger amount of options to leave the spawn room and further tactics can be used. Options: -give LA higher degree of mobility in the droppod/larger drop area. - Restrict the terminal to LA only as high mobility is their slice of pie. - terminal can be used for different contentsin the pods, like certain buffs (temporary radar, flashes, highlighting players as if in medic shield bubble, etc.)
That wouldn’t be effective. If we are talking about such a large overpop the defenders can’t even pull vehicles then the places would be captured easily by the zerg. Or they would wait near it and just camp almost the same as spawn. Something that would work would to put more teleporters around each base giving more options and spreading the zerg thin instead of them all waiting outside 1 spawn room
Just give spawn rooms more than the basic one or two exit points that they have now. You'd spread the attackers out more thinly trying to cover all routes for possible counterattack. It is a given that attackers need superiority in numbers and multiple spawn points as defenders can reinforce with redeploy easily enough. I have seen many attacks rolled back to their spawn points which are then destroyed. I have also seen bases overrun before the defence stiffens up. Spawn camping by a zerg happens but it is not the only outcome in my experience, not even the most common one.
Considering that the attackers are guaranteed to have vehicle superiority and only need a single tank at the vehicle spawn to prevent new one's from spawning compounded by the fact that almost every single vehicle spawn in PS2 is out in the open and easily shut down, defenders don't have access to vehicles most of the time anyway. This idea would be perfect. The attackers never needed a Zerg to spawncamp, and with a solid less predictable way out of the spawnroom you can remove the ability to fire from inside the spawnroom and remove both spawncamping and spawnwarriors with one change. We already know how effective this is with AMP stations. Even though the exits aren't random, the amount of exits and the way they are spread out across the base make AMP station spawns the least camped spawns in PS2. With the ability to drop-pod in places you want and move your drop-pod in-flight you have the best way to get started fighting enemies without the enemies having the option to truly spawncamp you even if they did hang around the center of your drop-pod area's. And when they do hang around the drop-pod area's, it means there's less people camping the spawn as well, allowing for easier breakouts and once again an improvement to the game. Also if you hadn't noticed, using a drop-pod terminal is basically a teleporter but with the option to guide yourself in an area around the teleporter before you land, making it harder to camp than your teleporter idea. Wouldn't adding this be easier? We already have drop-pods and spawnmethods for using them. You would need a new UI to access them and put a bunch of them over each base, but after that it would be far easier to maintain than having to reconfigure every single base over and over again until there's enough exits that it can't be spawncamped. It is not a given that attackers need superiority in numbers as they have force multipliers like vehicles. Ofcourse you have seen many attacks rolled back to their spawnpoints which are then destroyed, you've also seen bases captured without that happening. You've also seen the spawnpoints be destroyed only for them to be replaced again. But that's not the issue (if that's even an issue). The issue is how easy it is to spawncamp, and how you could prevent it with a nice drop-pod terminal.
A very good suggestion indeed, would spice up the in-base action. But my concerns are nonetheless: What are the guarantees that the 'spawnees' are not instagibbed on landing, akin to feeding sheep to lions? Would this change be fair or balanced to the attackers, who can only spawn from deployed, fragile places? Perhaps only add it on select bases, or during severe population imbalances.
Perhaps tie this with the commonly suggested spawn waves that clump spawns together so: A immediate group up of 3 guys hitting down at once means less chance their immediately out numbered A delay in spawns to use this method means that attackers would have a spawn time advantage and free capture time Tie it to population, larger pop longer between drop waves but longer consecutive point progress by a attacker shorter time between waves and defender capping spawns the next wave immediately but attacker cap resets the next wave timer. This promotes close fights.
