Can We All Agree Now?

Spawns are harder to camp (big bases) now that they have more exits, requiring the attackers to divide and conquer rather then pitch tents outside one building. Of course they can improve further, but this is a big step forward.

PVP problems require PVP solutions.
Anything else is an exploitable bandaid
that will require more PVP solutions.

Good job, you get a cookie.

You still don't get the point I see so no cookie for you. Try a bit harder next time.

Troll harder, I'm not amused.

By giving the defenders an even bigger spawn zone protection no one will attack ever because the defenders would be invulnerable. Unless you're saying make every point a fortress which again no one will attack because it favours the defenders too greatly. Defending needs more incentive, a **** ton more. But not so much that attacking is not possible with greater numbers. If you make the spawn harder to camp people are just going to wait around the corner.

For as long as there is a spawn point, it can and will be camped.

Won't troll. How about reason?

here's what you said:

Now, I don't know what you do for a living, but lets translate your quote into a real life event. Perhaps that will help you understand why people who engage in self-defeat as a life style cannot be taken seriously.

Tthe real life event:

The boss comes into your office:
"Johnny, I want you to close that deal!"
You:
"Yes sir! I've already created an agenda! Here it is!"

1. Be unaware of the situation in general
2: Be unable to see opportunities
3: Remain statically commited to my fate
4: Get owned
5: Blame you

How much traction do you think that will get in the real world? Less than it does on the forums. So, if you truly want to be taken seriously, the best thing you can do is figure out ways to win, instead of ways to lose.

No need. Don't like cookies. You are certainly clinging desperately to justifying being a campee. Why is that?

What about the game confounds you to the point that you can't exit your spawn?

Fine with me just give me a sign, when you stop ignoring arguments.

Once again, learn rhetoric because you are embarrassing yourself and you don't even know why.
I'll give you a hint: What I do for living is irrelevant to discussion about tactics and defence designs. Next time use arguments that actually are about tactics and respond to examples that were used to disprove your claim.

I'm not interested in motivational gibberish, I'm interested in your response to actual situation that I described. In that situation your base has been captured because you've left your base without substantial defence. Every tactician will tell you it's good to win, but most of all you must always be 2 steps ahead of your enemy and every decision require scenarios in which that tactic may fail. That's how you decide which one will be better.

If you leave that base and take substantial amount of soldiers, then faulty base designs will let small group of soldiers capture that base. Defenders will not be able to hold them off. Base designs work against defenders even if they are using tactic and are experienced and organized. Numbers win in this game no matter what you'll do.

If you want to be taken seriously I would suggest responding to actual arguments instead of hiding behind motivational babbling.

PS. Scenario I described was used today against TR on Miller on Esamir. They had around 20% more population and were close to capping continent. Vanu were useless because they've confronted them openly and lost miserably every time. NC were sending forces but not to the main enemy attack forces, but to every base they've left less defended. They were constantly losing vehicles and were on the move, because our tactic forced them to spread their army. Every time they've spread, NC was making a huge push on weakened position and focused immediately majority of enemy forces on them, while smaller squads were taking other bases. Strategy was to make them tired so we could prevent them from taking that continent. We failed, but against almost 2 to 1 we stood for hours. That's how you use tactics and bad base designs even if you know you are in horrible position.

You sure spent a long time writing. It seems that you're emotionally invested.

You could have saved yourse a lot of time by saying its someone else's fault that the game confounds you.

I've said it before, and I'm sure I'll say it again:

If one is in the position where he is being spawn camped - regardless of the tool being used to do so - one lost the battle minutes before.

And yet no arguments. I was right, there is no point to waste my time here and I suggest everybody else to just leave and let this thread die.

Is it that hard to justify a losing outlook to the game and therefore a need to have it made easier?

Yes, it is.