Where did 1,000 paragraphs & 20 threads about construction get us? Nothing?

Well my PS2 break didn't last that long. I've returned. Lost Ark sucks.
Tho still, all I want to do is BUILD. I won't build till they add something to help defenders, anything at all.

It appears after 1,000 paragraphs from many ant builders & 20 threads, we don't even get 1 construction buff? Not even 1 for the road map? Not even 1 Ant buff after making a continent that's made for Ant's? Huh?

I'm not going to build, when they've done zero to add anything, after I've already experienced 200 silo's dieing & have another thread of photo's proving all of this. Yet still nothing for the road map? Literal journalist log thread of photo's, showcasing every weakness silo defense has & nothing.

I fully support every aspect of this game, with positivity. The only thing I've ever been salty about, is waiting for these silo buffs man. Thanks if so, for listening yes.

Why should I build after 200 silo's got destroyed, in under 1 min? I mean I could list the simplified version, of how to buff silo items. Without it getting into some drawn out story. Tho I've written so much about silo defense in the past. I don't want to write about it anymore, not even for simplifying update suggestions, for the devs.

At this point, I'll be glad for any buffs to silo defense. Any at all, for the roadmap. All the roadmap ideas seem fun, I just believe the devs ignored construction again, because it's not super easy to figure out how to buff it appropriately. Tho I've already told them how. So what are they waiting for? They really believe silos are not dropping like flies still. They still are, I bet, as I just returned, tho no updates since Oshur on this. Besides cortium harvesting.

I don't even want to list the problems with silo's, so over writing about this. This is just my last ditch effort, to hope for some boost. So I may enjoy building again. Ye my sand castle got stepped on too many times, even with a PS2 break, my building resolve or moral, is still very low. Right now I want to build on the front line road of Indar, & It just seems pointless, without a good or major buff 1st.

I'd say nobody should play ant's till half of these items are tougher.
It's the main thing I want to play, tho still no reason to rehash fortified time.

P.s. At this point, I believe I put more work into writing about construction,or testing it.
Than it would take a dev, even 1/10th of the time to fix these paper defense observations.

The problem is... the Daybreak staff does "NOT" support the constructor game play.
They never did.
And it shows with every content patch, even when they "make a continent for construction..." They really didn't.
The way they been poking minimal efforts for construction while making it so much easier, by leaps and bounds and orders of magnitude too kill player made construction... They more then likely have a second version of Oshur waiting to replace the current one with a version that doesn't support construction and replaces all the dedicated construction base sites.
If they where remotely interested in "ACTUALLY" trying to make construction work, they would have actually adopted even just a small handful of the idea's various different people made. They had plenty. MORE then plenty.

What they are actually doing is akin to attrition. They are intentionally doing lack luster, bare bones, technically able to say "we did something to help construction" mockery, because the goal is actually to irritate people away from construction game play and build up that community wide perception of discontent with construction, so they can eventually use that as an excuse too delete it entirely.

Big organizations play those kind of well thought out mind games that can be dismissed as "paranoid conspiracy theories." They play those kinds of mind games and then play the "tin foil hat card" because it is all about managing perception, to get what they want.

And they don't want construction game play.

To be fair. I see why the devs would want a more infantry themed roadmap for 2022. After Oshur reviews. It's also easier to market a more infantry themed game, maybe.

Still I'm simply asking for any new item that would help a solo ant player, defend better. Be it on the front line roads, or traveling behind enemy lines to solo set a base. Or faster fixes, like adding 3,000 more hp to AV turrets. & some extra regen for regen module. Making skyshield defend against enemy flails / glaives better or delaying the glaive cd. A new item to kill infantry inside base, other than pain spire. Its all ez fixes, like infantry for example; just give ant builders extra mini auto deployable turrets ( 4 total ) that engi already has.. or fighting off tanks, just give us another smaller AV turret that does half the dmg of the main AV turret ( & doesn't need a module to auto), ez fix.

Ending this thread. Tho ye I get the infantry road map or boat vehicles. Maybe I shouldn't blame the devs for that, tho these salty vet infantry players who made uninstall threads. Simply because they were getting run over, on Oshur. heh.

Building solo is entertaining, player or dev, try it. Just a few fixes to help solo ant's anything really. It's like having a turtle shell fort, that's still waiting for a 30% to 40% buff, before wanting to build more. Front line wise.

The hp of the walls & buildings is 100% fine, so some things are fine.

Its not like there havent been more threads about other stuff which has never been changed...

The problem even if the devs listened is that the builders only think of themselves, they dont ask for things that would make for good gameplay for both themselves and the people who come to attack them. Indestructible walls, stronger turrets, automated defenses that can beat multiple enemies at a time... Then they are shocked about why no one wants to interact with them in any way.

If you want construction to work you need:
- good reasons for non-builders to show up and support a base when it is under attack ("I put work in it so they should" does not count)
- bases to be useful when not under attack
- to make bases an enjoyable thing to attack, rather than a "cheese it or leave it" affair.

I did make threads that included things that would support others, ranging from researchable upgrades, unique vehicle options only acquirable from player base vehicle terminals, requiring any base part enhancement to require an upgrade module to be researched and placed in a limited available count of upgrade slots, to Silo Networking, Design prototyping modes before base part deployablity and the ability too donate base parts to a project, some way to actually co-ordinate with others building a base and ability too see their base part deployment suggestions.

The only think that ever happen was the Skywall shield could take 1 shot from an Orbital Strike and the Colossus Tank got the Cortium Reserves for special abilities added too it, but not applied to any other vehicle... So no Player base exclusive Cortium special powers reserves (post research project completion) for any vehicles purchased at a player base.

They have had idea's suggested too work with that would have made player made bases better for everyone, without making them OP and without being builder selfish. They won't accept any idea's.

Not only do they not accept any idea's to make construction actually work, they keep making it tons easier to obliterate a player made base, even with only 1 person. Now all you need is an outfit with 2 outfit OSB's ready and an infiltrator in a stalker cloak with the permissions to tag the silo twice, or a cloaker sundy with a stalker in that has plenty of merit to spam cortium bombs all year long.

The one sided selfishness is in great deal better favor of the attackers by orders of magnitude, not the builders.

VS just barely won by 20 seconds, 2 hour tug of war with TR. Near Sungrey Amerish. TR has that armor pressure & vs is usually medics. Tho they are finally keeping at pace with tr's vehicle fights.

Return to thread theme:
- Ye reason for 2 builders to work together / trade items / need 4 people to build new item.
- Entertainment level of siege players. Maybe give them a item worth a ton of exp, like a bank vault item. That gives me the ant player a buff boost & them the enemies A TON of EXP. or other ways, I'd really really really enjoy this game x2 more; if you made ant players the capture the flag holders & place setters. That'd be a good time. If I got to set the rules for capture the flag, by where I want to build & the flag is in my base & I get a base ant build buff for this region mode. So they have to break my buffed base down to get the flag & the flag only appears after I set 20 items down.
- Mortars, Ramming Vehicles for attackers, Trebuchet
- I'm not asking for stronger walls, I said the walls are fine. HP wise.
- My gripe has just been with my turrets getting shot down too fast when solo,
or some enemy troll who glaive flails my silo items.

Yeah well from the attacker view, I had a collosus today & ye the walls are fine. I didn't shoot his turret down. I don't really shoot enemy bases. I don't see them as paper. They have tough walls. The turrets have some decent hp verse 1 tank. Tho its when 2 tanks shoot that 1 turret or 3 or 4 or 10, when that turret seems like it wants a major upgrade. Just not verse 1 tank its kinda fair? Tho not when that tank is a MBT with a 2nd gunner, then the turret drops too fast as well. So the turret is only semi decent when its 1 tank who has no 2nd gunner. Anything more than that & the turret it too weak. Anymore than that & ALL turrets are too weak.

Then flails, then cort bomb infils, then zergs. However yes I agree that shooting the walls & ninja'ing the enemies silo, should be better enjoyed or more rewarding? Plus defending 1. Quests for defending silo's per 10 mins. A funny reason to attack silo's. I'd vote for that.

Everyone already knows the Silo is the weak point of a player base. Everyone already tries to go strait for that. You keep bringing up walls like it is the major complaint, to such a degree it feels like your making a diversion. The walls mean nothing when a single stalker infiltrator can spam outfit OSB or cortium bombs on the silo itself and win, just by using a maxed out cat implant that increases there jump height, allowing them to use the edges of the wall to jump over it.

Player bases need far more then just an Turret HP or damage resist buff nor some sort of magical capture the flag buff too work. Minimal changes such as those won't be enough nor will it have wide spread of benefits to other players to give other non-builder players reason to utilize player made bases.

Without a research building that can provide player base exclusive special abilities to purchased vehicle and other equipables to visiting same faction members, nor a way for other same faction players to be involved in the base building project in any reasonable co-ordinatable way, as well as have an after part deployment upgrade features.

Construction play will never work without a major concentrated effort to add new features, restore some idea's that didn't make it into the game.

Turrets don't just need some way to increase there HP/damage resist, they also need an ability to fire at longer range and have the ability to have other turret types allow an upgrade feature too target other types of targets. I already mentioned how the research idea and upgrade slots could be used in a post long ago.

Go for minimal changes and you won't go far enough to make construction actually work.
How many times do you have to watch it go that way?
Minimal changes never has enough to make the wider player base want to use nor be part of the player made base.

Says the guy who has advocated for outfits to be removed from the game.

Dude, I have had plenty to say about how construction could improve the gameplay for others. If you actually read and remembered whole posts instead of selectively reading to fulfill your confirmation bias you would know that.

Well it seems easier to get allies to help defend lately. Thus I have time to hunt for enemy flails & have flail vs flail fights. Was Esamir too.

Had many allies defend a silo near Waterson, for 40+ min. Even 1 ant ally revived my base. & helped harvest, so I let him have the OS. Since maybe I don't have to solo as often, than I don't need these buffs as extreme anymore. Thus ending this thread. Also I noticed my mic flickers some peoples voices on & off, for command chat esp, once awhile. Or squad sometimes. With a few other peoples voices, hear them & don't. Holyyeetman & others, so wasn't just Rabids mic. Sometimes I hear them fine, until I start talking, then their voices bug half way, & begin to mute entirely. Maybe I need a new mic or maybe voice chat has some bugs still.

Road map seems more of the mood lately, boats & infantry updates sound good right now. Or underwater fights. Or better pub platoon radius stuff. I'd like some Harasser updates. Ye battle ships. Darker ocean areas.I like the Hermes abilities. Really if they turn this game more into a tank, healer, rogue, type of abilities. Speed more ninja's. Armor abilities for heavy assault. Another regen spell for Medics. A dagger throw. or trip wire. Those mobile jump pads. Many of the season abilities should stay.

Hypocrite much?

As I told you in that thread, removing Outfits is not the good option, they should be improved rather than removed. HOWEVER, if a choice has to be made between keeping current outfits or removing them outright, it would be a net gain in the end to remove the cancerous way they are set up. Without outfits a major reason for players to only pick easy fights through zerging and ghost capping would disappear, as well as incentives to actively let friendly outfit territory be captured so you can recap it for resources later.

As for having idea's for construction. Idea's =/= good idea's. Take silentsue who has idea's for researching things, which just adds time investment for players to get a powerboost. Since we already have nanite-free vehicles available and that carrot does not work the research has to be pretty powerful, likely OP, for players to not only use it but also to actively defend the PMB. Not only does this keep the inherent weaknesses of current PMB's it doubles down on the large time investment. And a proper reward for that time investment even with the current system would need to be OP to be worth it.

And I cant remember what idea's you've posted, maybe they are good! But the premise still stands: most construction players suggest things that benefit them and not the game as a whole.

You never fix anything or make anything better by saying no to everything.
And you know the Devs are going to use time and resource spending as a balance and cost, if they do anything. It happens all the time with every game.

The Devs already have a habit of using only 5% 10% or 15% buffs on most things and sometimes 20% for firearm resist or 40% for C4 resist.

Even if you say it would have to be OP, the devs won't likely use more then a 5% to 15% buff on most things.

Stop making excuses to say no.
Saying no and finding reasons for it is easy. Actually doing something to add value is what is hard.
Stop taking the easy way out.

The only good thing to come out of construction is the ability to create cover. Everything else is either cancerous af, automated bs, or useless.

Game doesn't need more AoE spam. Game doesn't need more automated defenses. Game doesn't need more ways to spam vehicles.

It would be amazing if construction actually contributed to fights, with smaller buildings and prefabs that could be placed in and around bases, with some restrictions.

I am not saying no to everything, I am pointing out the flaws. Adding research would add time investment, something that is currently one of the biggest problems for construction: it does not reward enough for the time invested. But if you were to reward for the amount of time invested it would be almost impossible to attack without 10:1 odds.

The solution is not to add more time investment, but reduce it. And hey, if you can build up an entire base out of combat in a couple of minutes, there is nothing wrong with adding research as one of the add-ons to make them attract more players. But that still means that first you need that lower time investment before you add things that add time investment. And again: how big do those advantages need to be before a significant amount of players actively seeks PMB's out for researched vehicles? Essentially free vehicles already isnt a big enough advantage.

All upgrades to construction should currently focus on:
- reducing the time it takes to build a base out of combat
- changing bases to support the main game, rather than be something seperate
- adding ways to get defenders into the base in time as it comes under attack
- making bases more useful when not attacked or when the fight moves

So you denounce me for making assumptions, then demonstrate my "assumptions". You see that removing outfits from the game would be a net positive because of behaviours you assume are taking place. I can't speak for the team kill faction, but certainly the faction I play with aren't back stabbing each other. We show up to defend a base if it seems like a good base to defend. We don't intentionally avoid fights because that would be boring for the troops. Sure, we'll sometimes go after a base for it's resource, but as soon as we have that in pocket we go find a good shoot em up fight as a thank you to the troops for tolerating 10ish boring minutes.

This is why I'm calling out your hypocrisy. You decided that the outfit system doesn't work for you, you made a bunch of assumptions about it, and because YOU don't like it you don't want anyone to have it. Then you disparage builders for "only thinking of themselves" when not being properly integrated into the rest of the game is among the top complaints of builders.

I already, repeatedly suggested that they add a design prototyping system, that could be setup to have a deploy options, where you would be at a console, selecting parts in a schematic like system that allows you too select threw parts and choose the desired deployment place. It would be much like No Man's Sky floating camera mode, except instead of immediately building the part, you are only assigning the desired location, in a 3D schematic view that can be shared with other players, used to co-ordinate base part placement, then when the desired layout is done, hit the deploy button.

Being able to have an R&D building with a base layout schematic console inside it, to do both research and co-ordinate and donate base parts, that allowed you a NMS style floating ghost camera view and easier access to a construction menu on the fly, that would let you start the build process from that schematic panel inside the R&D building, would go a long way too speed up base deployment.

Does that help explain what I mean, when I keep making the shorter 1 sentence statement of the same suggestion?
Does that help explain how the time it takes to select 1 part and run around is worked around to save time?
Does that explain how you can make the construction process faster threw some form of co-operation that other players can visualize and see, as it happens in schematic view space from the console?
Does the ability for players to donate their base parts and view (place items when permissions toggled on) to the project threw that R&D buildings schematic console help with understanding how other players can be involved in the process? and in a way that doesn't ruin the build and planning process?

I may of used only 1 or 2 sentences with less detail in the past, months and even years ago, but this is still what I meant. So I already mentioned an idea to save on time a long time ago.

Starting to wonder if some of the "Builders being selfish" complaint are being derived as a veiled reference too that 1 multi-boxer player, whose running older hardware that can't get more then 50 Frames Per Second. Everyone knows frames win games in an FPS. If you are worried about that lone multiboxer builder, stop wasting time on that. There are real cheaters that use aimbots and ESP and lots of them. Denying advancement of the construction system cause of 1 lone multiboxer whose hardware doesn't allow them too compete in a fire fight shows a lack of proper prioritizing. That same person was also the one who managed to find the Hypertiming desync problem because they suffered from not being able to deal damage to anyone. Someone made a youtube video of how they unloaded many clips into someones head and it did nothing. That player had to resort to multi boxing, just to be able too do anything.

They arent assumptions if they are readily observable facts.

Also if I recall you yourself have always defended it with "but MY outfit doesnt do that!", which does not mean that suddenly every outfit is some kind of honorable super being, especially with the sheer amount of zergfits that dominate over "good" outfits.

The "teamkill faction" has equalized its TK ratio with the other factions at least 4 years ago. It kept coming up and I looked into it repeatedly only to find that the TK's were more or less equal. But hey, assumptions and all right?

There is, or was, a famous story with a reporter in America. She saw the results of an election and said "it cant be true, because none of my friends voted that way".
Just because you, personally, are in a supposedly good outfit and have ties with other similar outfits does not mean they dont exist.

It does not work for ANYBODY but the people in the outfit. And then not even everyone in the outfits.

It is quite simple: it encourages gameplay counterproductive to the game's goal (people fighting one another), and it encourages players to use the cheapest and fastest tactics to achieve those goals (zerging, ghost capping, griefing players to make them leave).
This was the best visible in the aftermath of the disastrous Escalation update: many people came back for the cooperation and teamplay it promised. Then before the month was over everyone had returned to the old ways of sticking to endurance fights while the core of the outfits had streamlined their business to zerging, redeployside, ghost capping and stabbing allied territory in the back so they could take it. I mean it was a literal night and day difference between the beginning and the end, and we are still very much so in the end as the most efficient methods still exist.
Its not like we didnt have this exact same thing before when construction came out. People tried it out, then players realized that the most efficient way to play was not to encourage fights or support the game, but to go to a corner somewhere and make a murder hole then sit there doing little while they scored points. Funny thing: there were precious few outfits that still tried the honorable way of supporting the game. Those that professed they did would usually just dump a platoon's worth of people on a HIVE and hope it wasnt in a glitched impossible to attack area.

You can say that you are not lured into those tactics and that you still help improve the game's goal and with it the gameplay value, but that does not mean no one else does or that we should look into ways to actively make sure these parts of the game are in line with what the game is about.

Again: your supposedly good outfit is no reason not to improve the outfits/platoon's goals and make them support the rest of the game better, reducing the chance other outfits decide to do the efficient and bad thing to the game.

Which is why I pointed out the R&D piece, which adds time investment on something that is unlikely to attract players until its OP.
Also I forgot to add the most important thing to my minimum requirements for new bases with all the focus being on the builders: make sure that PMB's are fun to attack. Currently PMB's arent very fun to attack and it used to be worse. This has caused the mentality of cheese it or leave it. Where players will use either vehicles from a distance, infiltrators with cortium bombs or drop an overkill of players to destroy it. A PMB needs to encourage its builders to make a fun engagement for both defenders and attackers, rather than a "welcome to my murder hole" base.

The idea for placing blueprints is a good one to help speed up building and cooperate on the base layout. I always promote the idea of at least having a drone with all building blueprints inside with a limited range from the Silo. it gives you any view you could want with mechanics and intuitive controls already in the game (Phoenix missile range limit+aircraft controls+loadout filled with buildings/modules each linked to a limited placement).
Having the ability for others to walk up to a blueprint and pay for it to be placed would help.
I think I already discussed something like this with you in the past.

Geez do you really have to insult me? I pointed out that just dumping research on it will likely not work due to the time investment and the requirements that would be needed to make it attractive are likely too high. I did not mention your blueprints because the point was that builders tend to think about themselves and not far enough ahead. And yes I did use hyperbole when I said all builders only thought about themselves, but the fact that most still only think about themselves and their gameplay without considering that of others still stands.

What the hell are you even talking about. I've never even heard of multiboxing and I have no idea why FPS would be important for the passive construction system. Worse: why would a low FPS player multibox? It would just lower their FPS more, and why would a low FPS multiboxer be worse than a high FPS multiboxer?
Also I consider 50 FPS a decent amount of FPS, I did play some 200+ FPS games sometimes but I never saw much point beyond professional gaming. Its like comparing a regular sports match to professional sports. In professional sports fractions of a second will often be important while in regular sports it can easily be seconds difference even with the same athlete doing the same thing.

But that is completely off topic, I have no idea why you would bring this up other than to try and throw dirt at me by making assumptions.

Apparently I am the one who has to start using single sentences for you to understand because my reasoning is RIGHT THERE and repeated at nauseam.

The game devs aren't going too add time saving features without adding time consuming features. game devs across just about every game for the past 15+ years have developed that kind of way of doing and "balancing" things even when the thing is a bad idea, they still do it. They are going too use time gating no matter how much the idea is disliked.

R&D Building with the schematic console and drone launcher, is also the easiest and most familiar way to give currently available base parts some form of upgradability while retaining its current starting appearance and abilities, to its reform and changes too its appearance and stats. You may reject R&D, but there isn't really many viable alternatives to begin with. Launching the drone at the silo console that is outside is too suicidal. There is no real way to get out of the R&D idea, if the Devs want a way too keep the base parts as is and still allow a way to upgrade them and improve what those parts can do, while giving a flexible wide variety of options to choose from, that can't all be used at the same time. They would end up having an upgrade slot or 2 that would have many upgrade options too choose from as a way too balancing things out and prevent things from becoming OP. Most game developers have already used such methods.

No matter how much we don't like the time consuming element, neither of us will be able too convenes these devs to add things to construction, if it doesn't come with some kind of cost in time and resources, especially if we want a way to speed up time it takes to deploy what currently is available. That is just the common game dev practice. So I choose not too complain till I am blue in the face about what I already know would happen cause of historic president of others.

The multi-boxer and frame per second thing is mostly directed towards the devs themselves, too shame them for having bad priorities and arguments that harm the wider community. A couple of the devs have used that lone player within their in office talks as a reason for why they have held back. So those devs need to be shamed for that view point when there are real cheaters out there using real cheat tools. Holding back on improving construction cause a dev has a chip on their should over 1 player who suffered from unplayable bugs in the past, that lead them to using fringe alternatives of game play, having to use the old hardware collected over time as a work around. It is just shameful bullying activity from those devs and lacks perspective on what should take priority.

50 FPS maybe decent, but the saying frames win games really is true even if you can't notice the visual difference, it does have an effect on how quick and smooth and flowing your controls are. Like it or not, more frames does allow for better ability too fight other players and win, better reaction times on your side, with less lag, that translates into better Kill Death ratios in the favor of the player with higher FPS.

Giving PMB parts upgrade slots, 1 for modules 2 for other parts, won't make them OP either. You already know the devs won't likely give enhancements beyond 15% for most things.

A 15% damage resist, 15% health increase or an upgrade that adds a shield with 15% HP won't make PMB parts OP, even if you can equip the walls, towers, pillbox, bunker both upgrade slots with a 15% resist plus 15% HP at the same time.

Using an upgrade slot in the bunker part too add a door shield and an internal pain field, won't make the bunker OP and will cost you an upgrade slot for damage resist or health HP upgrade chance or shield with HP added equivalent to 15% of the bunker HP.

Having an OSB damage resist upgrade for the silo would not make the silo OP, even if you had both upgrade slots using the standard 15% and the Silo OSB 30% damage resist upgrades. Not will adding 50% 100% storage capacity upgrade, nor will silo networking upgrades, nor will building area expansion upgrades, that allow for overlaps with other PMB building area's.

Using an upgrade slot too add a target type to a turret, enabling the anti-tank turret too also target infantry would not make the turrets OP, nor would having an upgrade that added range too the targeting system by 50%.

In every case, you would have to use the R&D building too research the upgrade, costing that time and cortium we would wish it wouldn't cost, but history game development precedent has show will happen. And you have too choose which upgrades too apply too the PMB parts with limited available slots, so you will never be able too have all the upgrades too make the PMB parts OP, the same kind of historic game development precedent that has already happened in so many other games.

Other wise, we are not ever likely too ever get any improvements to player made construction. More likely too get deleted as a failed experiment instead, as has happened before in other games with other failed features.

We may have gotten lucky enough for the devs to reduce the cortium cost once, when the time consumed was extreme enough too warrant a no strings attached cortium cost reduction. We aren't going to get another speed up without some kind of trade off this time. Game devs all over always use give and take reasoning trade offs, unless the situation is extreme enough to not do that. That one time when it was extreme enough has already been burned off. You can count on the next speed up coming with a trade off of something taking more time and resources. It is the standard precedent set in game development after all.

Okay so 1 enemy TR lightning is shooting my AA turret, from The Ascent. I'm repairing it & I have 2 repair modules for this turret. So even with me repairing the turret + repair modules = its still a tug of war where the builder has to stay there repairing 24/7 1 turret. While some noob peppers your turret for the same damage as a fully upgrade repair tool + 2 repair modules?

So lame. Yes this turret got destroyed, all it took was another skyguard lightning to help for literally 2 seconds, for the turret to drop hp & be destroyed. Now they are peppering the rest of my base & I have to go to the gym anyways, so I just alt+f4'ed. Tho I was I guess, building to help my allies, even if I was gonna leave soon. My items would have helped allies scale the Ascent. & would have told chat free silo here. Instead it just all gets destroyed by 2 lightnings. Meanwhile I have to haul harvested stuff via a 2 mile hill. I didn't have time for round 2 of harvesting.

So yeah, buff the repair modules, 1 noob lightning shouldn't do equal damage to 2 repair modules + 1 guy / builder with a fully upgraded repair tool. The builder has other things to do, then sit & repair the whole time, verse 1 lightning, for equal hp to dps tug of war.

Ye I don't believe 1 lightning should be able to solo silos, who's to say some1 is there to repair anyways & even if so, it either makes you no life the repairs as the enemy snipes the turret, or the turret gets destroyed anyways. Falls fast too. Also if more than 1 lightning is shooting the turret, then? If turrets do not hold their own verse 1 lightning, they def don't hold their own verse 2 to 96 vehicles. I get why they'd want a turret to not be too hard for a lightning to kill I suppose, idk, tho from the defenders view, its not enjoyable having your turret sniped by any noob who pulls a lightning. Even with modules, upgraded repair tool, & repair grenade.

If the person wants to solo turrets, they should get a MBT with a 2nd gunner. Tho solo'ing turrets or equal dmg to repairs, for 1 lightning? May be too bad for the defender.