[Suggestion] To make construction meaningful, we must look at RTS games

what the heck is that even supposed to mean?

but infantry even with flakarmor being oneshoted by weapons not realy meant to be used against them like AP cannons, halberds and daltons which their plattforms already severly overpower infantry is ok? and please don´t give me another answer of "realism" and/or "authentisity"

if you decide to use an AP cannon to fight better against vehicles it should be less effective against infantry .. as in not oneshot them on a direct hit but 2 shots to kill them, and 3 shots when Flakarmor is used ...
hesh and heat already have splash and can damage multiple infantry clumped up and deal damage despite infantry being behind walls or within bunkers ...

LA using C4 or rockletrifle is not poking .. it´s literaly touching your rear ... for C4 to be successfully used against a tank you require 2 bricks and enough time to drop both bricks and detonate them ... primarly most succesful against players with lacking awareness ..

rockletrifles with default ammo merely plink a bit of damage like explosive crossbows ... you have to magdump them at close to butt touching range to get the most damage out the quickest which is even more true with typhoon rocklets ...
if you die to rockletrifles you have been either severly outnumbered (which is just very unlikely outside of a specialty outfit) or severly lacked awareness ... any tankpilot has much greater initiative than infantry that would use a rockletrifle ...

lock on launchers already warn you, stealth severly limits lock on capability and even then you can use a smoke screen ...
more than enough options against them ... i stopped counting how many times i was not able to use my swarmlauncher against tanks despite being in clear lock range ...

lancers are loud, very visible, take significant time to fully charge otherwise merely deal plinking damage like AMRs, single fire rockletrifles and explosive crossbows .... lets not even mention UB nadelaunchers being limited in ammo, difficult to aim with and dealing insignificant damage against armor ...

AV grenades even after their change to deal C4 like damage still deal only enough if you run a grenade bandolier ...

... i seriously have to wonder why ... ... ...

even with red alert 2s archaic controls can easily be killed by a machinegun/sniper IFV, flaktrack, teslatank and V3 launcher?
yea ...

no, they have become worse, can´t even revive AV Maxes anymore and their surviveabilty was already scrap ..

you can easily take any vehicle with machineguns and still be more effective at killing infantry than infantry killing you in a any vehicle that isn´t 100% AA ...

also please do not use dark blue on black background, thx

Maybe RTS-ifying the game isn't the solution. But, construction does blow right now, so it is a good time to brainstorm solutions.
My motivation for suggesting RTS (in the spirit of Starcraft or C&C) actually stems from the pain that I face as a unit in transit. I am an MBT main, so I spend some of my game time just driving around trying to reach the frontlines. While in transit, I often run into friendly Player-Made-Bases (PMBs) that flat-out block a road.

Here's the first bad design feature I want us to address: PMBs can be abused by griefers to completely block roads. Make no mistake, this "blocking" is different from a roadblock-proper (which is fair game IMO). By roadblock, I mean, say one faction places a gate on a road to prevent opposing factions from transiting (but obviously the faction that controls the roadblock allows transit for its own units). The current griefers or incompetent minecraft players will put a Command center and choke the roads towards the Ascent on Amerish (for example). So, they will halt all transit of friendly units. Friendly units cannot TK this guy or their base quickly because of the recent friendly-fire nerfs. Simply put, one would have to wait for the enemy Zerg to advance and delete this eyesore for us.

The second bad design feature I see is the interaction between the Lattice system, Construction, and the crappy maps. With the exception of Indar and possibly Esamir, all other maps are $hit. Why are they $hit? Because they overwhelmingly consist of either, narrow roads inside steeply sloped canyons (Hossin), evident ctrl-c + ctrl-v of Mount Everest all over the place (Amerish), or the Archipelagos from which if you fall off from, you'll spend 4 minutes driving underwater trying to get out if you are a tank or get preyed on if you're a Sunderer/ANT (Oshur). Why do these qualities make the maps $hit? Because the Lattice system then comes in clutch (for Wrel) and funnels us players through the most inescapable chokepoints of these maps for A2G griefers to then farm the BR-1's. Construction right now serves the sole purpose of sealing these chokepoints to further trap us players inside a localized zone. The Lattice system makes it so that the fights are centralized, the construction system makes it so that it is harder to break out of the same central fights. And the crappy map design just makes players log-out. I swear, we ought to rebrand Amerish as The Ascent, Hossin as Nason's Defiance, and Oshur as donut with a bite under the current game.

Now, the centrality of the fights will also manifest in Indar and Esamir, but, because those maps are, you know..., actually good, coping is easier in them. Indar and Esamir have chokepoints, but, for every chokepoint there is a nearby open field over which players can flank and "reset engagements."

I didn't mean to excuse bad game design because I was able to hustle (my apologies if It came across that way). I agree fully with your second paragraph. Here is a small list of things I will flag as bad design (outside of the current construction issues):

• Inability to pull MBTs/Liberators from most bases on Esamir, Hossin, Amerish, and specially Oshur.
• Asymmetry in A2G and G2A.
• The current nanite pool (750) is too small. There was a time in which we had effectively 3x the amount back when the game had the Mechanical/Infantry/Aerospace resource system (2013-2015 time).

In this game roadkills are determined by whether the roadkiller's vehicle runs the person over in the person's client. If the roadkiller runs over the person in the roadkiller's client, no kill is scored. This is a necessary evil under the clientside paradigm. If we reverse this, then the infantry on their client would see a vehicle miss them entirely and then they would suddenly die to the vehicle.

I disagree.
For this "balance", or "trade-off" point to hold then something would need to happen to nanite cost. If you want to take 2-3 APs to die, then I want MBTs to cost 100 nanites at most. The vehicle gameplay would be terrible if we normalize infantry taking 2-3 APs to die. Essentially, the prospect of pulling MBTs is now "I'll pay nanites to become a bigger target and poke infantry instead of kills"

With regards to the tankers who lack situational awareness, I 100% agree. They have it coming from anyone (not just the LAs).

The reason for my animosity towards LA's with c4 + rocklet is because too often the game puts me on Amerish and Hossin, where the LAs just Drifter-jet off the bases with high elevation and rather easily lurk above you. Even if you are on the move, they can track you long enough for the time that you as a tanker run into a vehicle and start a vehicle fight. Say you win the vehicle fight, then this LA out of nowhere just sweeps you. Even if you want to be situationally aware to the point that you are on-edge looking everywhere, well, you can't look up as a tanker unless you hop out or switch to the gunner seat whilst having a secondary gun with enough elevation. Both of options are a huge compromise in the heat of battle.

This height advantage is realized outside of Amerish and Hossin by bailing out of ESFs (often pulled for free from a player-base). Proximity can be attained by transporting themselves via Flash/Javelin. Just by casually being around a tank, LAs can leap to it (a-la Terror Drone from Red Alert 2 style). In my experience, LAs are the most effective infantry-based AV in the game.
This is becoming a rabbit-hole, I'll save it for later.

Only amateurs use Stealth, granted, I say this as Nimitz/Auto-Repair maximalist (full-disclosure here). Only ...., "unusual" tankers use Smoke Screen, and when they do, they don't use it to defeat lock-ons (like the A2G griefers use Flares). The only good use of Smoke Screen that I have seen is in tank vs. tank combat, where the Smoke Screen user is banking on their enemy not having thermals (which is a very valid assumption). If the Smoke Screener gets the first shot and the enemy tank is unable to spot the Smoke Screener, then it is very difficult for the ambushed tank to even hit the Smoker Screener. The Smoke Screener will need Thermals or spot the enemy tank to be able to see them through smoke.

Anyhow, your qualification of lock-ons, AMRs (I hate being hit-scanned), and the Lancer (I hate being hit-scanned and it hurting more) do not consider terrain. These weapons are typically fired from behind cover like hills, terrain bumps, and basically any other obstacle that allows infantry to quickly peek and then fire and forget. The exposure time for them is literally an instant. This is why tankers don't complain about the MANA AV turret even though it is one Python AP worth of damage per shot, because the MANA user is exposed for a lot longer than an instant. Fine, lock-ons do require exposure time longer than an instant but the HAs can still "ADADA" and crouch. This technique is soo effective, that I get rage tells, or, "hackusations" when I get kills on these dodgy HAs.

Don't even get me started on AV grenades. All griefer HAs run grenade bandolier! Hell, even the engineers with ASP will use them after they bail of a burning Sundered/Lightning/Harasser to destroy your MBT. Dude, I'm going to have to upload MBT gameplay footage for people to understand my frustration.

MAXes will F-off after one hit from AP out of fear of dying. This was true before their revivability nerf because proximity to friendly medics is not a reasonable assumption. At any rate, MAXes, when cocky, will persist and expose themselves unduly (far longer than HAs and AMR Engineers will) to the point where I have enough time to 2-shot them. Sometimes, my gunner (with Halberd) and I (with AP) will full-salvo a MAX and not have to worry about it.

I am aware that Tanya had its counters, my favorite was to send a veteran Apocalypse Tank or a Boris. Wait, V3 Launcher? You must have manually aimed that, otherwise, no way. Sometimes, I gave up and Iron wasted an Iron Curtain just to one-tap her.

I disagree.

In the past, you would be 100% correct, back when splash radii on the then-called "HE" (nowadays called "HESH") was 2X what we have now. Also, in the past we didn't have AMRs, Rocklets, AV grenades, MANA AV turet, or Explosive Crossbows. Infantry have acquired new AV tools over the years, whereas simultaneously AI main tank guns have been nerfed.

In my experience, the main mode of Infantry-based AV (not to be confused with the most effective, that being c4 LAs) is not the MAX, rather, the preponderance of Lock-On HAs and AMR Engineers. This hurts Prowler and Magrider mains the most because they cannot y cope as easil with being damaged as the Vanguard can. Nimitz is actually a blessing for NC, because the petty damage from these AI-based AV weapons (most annoying being AMRs) often gets washed away by Nimitiz. Prowlers and Magriders don't have it, so they must somehow cope with the AMR poking with constant repairs to their MBTs.

Vehicles killing infantry more often than the reverse is perfectly fine due to the nanite cost. Get rid of nanites, and I will concede your point, but also leave Planetside 2 for a different game.

I switched to red, hope that helps. Sorry about that.

You damn well know nobody is suggesting that.

And the fact that those games have any customers at all, in fact have millions, and are so ******, just proves people do want something else; a slow strategy, a MMORTS; something else to engage the strategic mind, not just a mad clicking, pass the crack pipe, multiplayer Starcraft game.

For godsakes I just want is a pause button on ANNO1800, is that too much to ask? Is that too much to ask?

How about a slow mode for Steel Division multiplayer, or a Starcraft 2 match, is that too much to ask? Is that too much to ask?

How about a big giant strategic map for Steel Division multiplayer or Starcraft 2 match that lasts hours or days and that has hundreds or thousands of players, is that too much too ask? Is that too much to ask?

Where is your imagination and vision, game developers?

"We've tried large strategy games that last days or even months, it doesn't work cause players have to go to sleep, this reason and that reason." Yes I know players are exploiters, griefers, min-maxers, game the game, hackers, and try hards that ruin the experience of other players which is why we need to control the actions of players like tyrant; and the solution is simple, the solution is staring at you right in the face. You're looking at it right now. Put me in charge.

If you played on console I can't speak to that experience, but on PC there were... a lot of Rush maps with multiple heavy weapons and air support. Certainly many of the popular ones did. I can only think of a handful that didn't.
Frontlines plays like a roughly balanced seesaw fight between two bases in Planetside would where there is ebb and flow and momentum. Obviously the teams are even which does affect things, yes.

I'd hardly call two groups throwing grenades (that they could then resupply from ammo boxes) around corners or down stairwells at each other while the first person to push from either side gets annihilated by a bipoded LMG with thermals through the inevitable vape cloud "noob friendly".

And more often than not the only benefit the so-called "flanking routes" offered was alternative flavors of this same scenario. Honestly I'd take a single hallway in Planetside that can be brute forced over three in Battlefield that cannot.

Hours or days? People balk at even spending 3 hours on a match. I admire your insanity.
Also, look into Foxhole.

I balk at their lack of imagination.