[Suggestion] Remove AMS from Sunderers and give it to Galaxys instead.

In other words:
- Non zerg friendly
- Requires coordination and teamwork to place and defend one
- Your mother cannot ghostcap anymore
--
"Oh, but what about Sunderers? What they will become?"
...a "chubby harasser".
"B-b-but how I will hotdrop my fellow zerglings?"
Use a Galaxy. Or, you know... a Sunderer.
"B-b-but I won't be able to deploy and spawn zerglings anymore with my Tsunderer!"
Deal with it.
"B-b-but Galaxies are expensive!"
Stop being a freeloader and subscribe for extra nanites or deal with it.
"n-n-nOOOO!"
'kay.
--
Have fun.

Does this triviality even need a response?

Early in the game's development Galaxies actually had an AMS. This was terrible, as Galaxies were more Zerg friendly. They had enough resistance and health that only a small part of a Zerg was necessary to keep it alive. It was almost impossible for a small group to defeat the Galaxy. The Galaxy had more weapons and angles to fire from. Weapons on the Galaxy are overall superior to the Sunderer despite officially being the same weapons. The Galaxy was faster and ignored terrain. The Galaxy could just dump itself on a building and deploy without issues, giving a far superior choice of deployment compared to Sunderers.

So they removed it.


We should not add that back into the game. We could let Galaxies become a pocket base that can be the core of PMB's by providing infantry spawns and when fueled with cortium allowing vehicles like Lightnings to be spawned there. That would offer a tactical and mobile option that defeats many of the current PMB's flaws.

Are you really ignoring the whole thread and focusing your whole energy/interest in a pitiful smack talk?

@Demigan, your comment would had (some) sense 7 years ago. Lots have changed/implemented -- including the ability for anyone with two braincells to kill a Galaxy solo. Even with that, a Galaxy is a big *** thing moving around and doing one hell of a noise that anyone with the reflexes of a potato can notice and dispatch accordingly. And even with the ********(es) the game has, AMS'es were never meant to be solo'ed -- which is a good thing. So no, try again.

Have you lost your mind? Sunderers have recieved constant nerfs in EVERY category steadily since before CAI - even the AMS have been heavily nerfed. Galaxies allow for squad spawns so they kinda DO have AMS.

Besides galaxies HAD AMS during beta but it was removed cause it was broken AF...

But then again so are routers but the devs sure seem to think they are ok...

I think it would be fun to give ANTs an option to equip AMS. You can invis OR turbo somewhere cool and unusual, then deploy. Choices are good in game.

Spoilers: It's not beta anymore.

Indeed. But I don't think folks would accept the idea of having "a fatty turbo flash" able to deploy (pretty much anywhere) and spawn zerglings. And before you say, "But Galaxys can fly!", yes, that's true. But a Galaxy has ten times the visual profile compared to an ANT.

I have seen people do this with the colossus. It's unaffected by no deploy zones, which means in some bases you can drive one under the capture point, creating a shielded spawn point for allies.

Yes it was 7 years ago and things have changed. However that doesn't mean the Galaxy would suddenly be worthless. On the contrary, it isn't as easily dismissed as you make it out to be. As you say: No, try again.

So your reply is a literal "No" followed by a simple "You are wrong" and no counterproof? Like you are proving me wrong by simply saying "I'm right and you are wrong"? That's not how discussions work. And no, this time I won't say "No, try again" because you just shot yourself in the foot. Feel free to give yourself a tap in the back for trying, tho.

Your reply was the same:

All you point out is that the Galaxy is still a big target. It's still just as noisy as before and it's still a massive chunk of health and resistances.

You also point out that they "were never meant to be solo'ed". Besides that being false since Sunderers were supposed to be defended by it's users and only in that event be unsoloable, you then do a 180 and say "oh the Galaxy has so many drawbacks anyone can notice it and dispatch it accordingly". So what the hell do you want? Do you want a hard target or do you want something that's easily dispatched?

Besides even if you are "right", which you are not, you still haven't given any good reason to remove it from the Sunderer first.


My reason for not having to explain myself btw is simple: Almost nothing has been added that makes Galaxies any weaker than when they were equipped with AMS's before. At best you can say that No Deploy Zone's have been added near points so you can't park the Galaxy on top of the point building anymore, but that's about it. In all other respects the flaws that made the devs remove the AMS from the Galaxy are still there. Which is all the explanation that should be required.

As mentioned -

During the beta it was galaxies that has AMS and sunderers did not. It simply didn't work. You could easily bring them in and park them anywhere in oddly safe places. The gameplay never got established right.

They removed this and it was a good move.

That said. I think we could go back to one change:
Galaxies should behave as an AMS when landed on an airpad. They should permanently deploy and no longer be flyable to accomplish this.

Petty "remove it from Sundy because I am angry" nonsense aside...
We have a PTS for a reason. Put the Galaxy AMS on it for a month and let people play around and see how broken it is. Right now all I see are a bunch of people reaching back 7 years trying to remember how good/bad something was. Better to test things instead of relying on blanket statements based on memory.

We did not have lattice back then. The lattice system has curbed stomped ghost capping into the ground + Galaxy AMS will speed up response time.

In fact, I see a lot more upsides to having it returned since it will add new vectors to a fight, more air drops and 'flight of the valkyries'-moments (the music track, not vehicle...) which is a heck of a lot cooler and more fun than taking the bus or teleporting around like a magical fairy.

So bring it on, people might accidentally have some fun.

edit: but I don't see the point why you'd remove it from sunderers.

We did test things. It did not work. We are not misremembering this.

Wouldnt it make more sense to add to the actual Valkyrie then?

The Valkyrie is fast, cheap and smaller, but has a much lower resistance to fire. That way the Valkyrie will not replace Sunderers but they will be synergies of each other. Sunderers are still the mainstay for spawns but Valkyries are the tactical side. You dont place a Valkyrie practically on a Sunderer Garage as its just a weaker Sunderer then. You can place it in courtyards, on buildings, walls, wall towers, cliff sides etc to get quick access to paths and attack routes normally inaccessible or harder to reach for your opponents.

As a bonus the Valkyrie is much more designed to be that quick transport, but is not used as such right now. You are more likely to move a Valkyrie or people nearby than the big Galaxy that currently is used mostly as a throwaway transport anyway. Its also easier to pull, costs less making it less of a risk compared to a 450 Galaxy, harder to intercept and easier to use for quick response AMS than a Galaxy.

When?

I'd be down for either as both sound interesting and fun to use.

During the Alpha of the game.

We do have a PTS, but overall there arent enough players to test things properly and the times things are on PTS the fights arent exactly representative. Take the Bastions, lots of people did huge fights with them on the PTS but shortly after they went live the fights were completely different than the ones on the PTS.

Spoilers: it was removed for a REASON during beta but you just couldn't handle a reply based on facts. Sorry you have zero understanding of the game and can't handle it when experienced players school you on facts.