Since they're completely gutting construction by nerfing spires and removing autonomous turrets (Sept 23 2022 PTS Update) which will inevitably kill the entire feature, I believe a refund of all Certs and DBC spent on construction parts and ANT upgrades are warranted.
painspires didn´t exist when PMBs were at their most resilient state, they could remove pain and routingspires but bring back invincible or at least super tough walls and structers being buffed by the repairmodule ... the PTS change to turrets no longer being automated by ai modules didn´t make it to live, look at the halloweenpatchnotes ..
The feature was a flustercluck anyway. This is a step in the right direction: less reliance on automation, more focus on making PMB's for your faction. All they need now is adding more things that encourage allies to defend it and enemies to attack it, as well as less murder-hole design and more "make enjoyable fighting area's for both defenders and attackers" design.
Ye they are trying to make infantry fights happen inside the bases when they have been avoided. So you'll have to wait & see how this phase plays out & maybe they'll hopefully make incentive for defenders to stay there defending at the right times, when the base is getting attacked. Meaning " Alarm " module maybe now uses instant action to get allies to summon to a silo when its being attacked by more than 3 enemies. They may buff AI defense. They did make spawn tubes have better hp or invulnerable verse infantry bullets. Getting rid of automation helps Playstation users, yet so far they haven't ridded ai module yet, from what it seems? Maybe if they make a new currency that has to do with attacking silos & another currency for defending silos. Or else people will just attack & not defend still of those 2 themes aren't separate. Or else only for guards.
For that they'd need to design open-air bases with a terrain that is structured in a way that you can build quite well there, but in a place where tanks can't get. The place also needs to be broken up in such a way that murder-holes are impossible to build. THat's a tough order. Could be amazing if it worked, on the other hand.
Not necessarily. For example you could create buildings that are nigh invulnerable to vehicle fire, but offer infantry ways into the base. My own idea would be to give access to semi-random building blueprints that currently make up our normal bases as those buildings offer the space for infantry combat. Also having building pieces designed for control of the outside of the base would be useful for PMB construction as it shifts focus away from murder-holes and into a more general "use the PMB to try and control the outside area". Imagine being able to place simple trench pieces, which would likely need to be an angled slope that vehicles can easily climb and a thin trench that protects you if you crouch on top due to the game not letting you cut holes in the terrain that easily. Alternatively it could be a long series of low shields that can easily be deactivated individually by firepower with a single generator powering the trench on the "inner" side that has high directional protection outwards so players are encouraged to try and get passed the trench and attack it from the inside to destroy it. Such a trench would also mean builders are encouraged to build holes in the base for players to enter the trench (assuming you dont let the trench start inside the base ofcourse). Similarly you could have a lot of buildings with directional protection, designed to be used outside the PMB. For example a minelayer building which pops out highly visible low-yield mines to discourage passage unless you pop the mines first and destroy it by reaching the weaker side of the minelayer. PMB's should be one of the combined-arms bases where you want tanks and infantry to move up together. With an outside phase where the attackers try to dismantle and push through the defender and then an inside phase where infantry tries to push through and create holes for the vehicles to use, all the while the PMB uses its own vehicles along with buildings to defend itself.
preferably yes PMBss should be defended by players ... the general reality of the game though is people at best spawn at your base take whatever they need and go ... the routingspire imho had made this worse ... here is the thing though .. not every PMB player has every friggin PMB asset (thanks to ridiculously high certcosts) and rather just uses the most basic sets for what the purpose of a pmb should be (airbase, Proxyvehiclespawn, areadenial OS, basebuster) ... heck i still don´t have the goddarn skyshield on most of my toons ... also considering how limited the placement of turrets is (only one turret placeable each instead of what i suggest to be 3 or 4 of any together) for solo pmb players a bit automation imho is a necessary evil .. i do not have the interest in scoring free kills, i do not care about kills at all .. i just don´t want the pmb to instantly crumble the moment i decide to get more cortium or actualy go on the offense for a laticebase (the moment a squad of 3 or 4 tanks/vehicles arrives my base is dead anyway), and no of course the base should not be selfsufficient, but it needs stayingresilience in some way ... ...
