They're going to have to make it pay out certs very well, otherwise I don't see many people using it.
So what you're suggesting is that "TR simply have to learn that their AV MAXes" (AND ROCKET LAUNCHERS) can only be used at CLOSE range, against LONG range turrets..... and then pretend like it's not a disadvantage at all? While both other faction Maxes and rocket launchers can engage from much further... Your NC AI Max analogy doesn't work, because AI max fights infantry, and infantry engage at close range within buildings where NC AI Max can choose to engage it (instead of open field). It's not like TR AV max can CHOOSE to engage a turret inside a building, or TR with striker can CHOOSE to engage a turret from up close, these things will be deployed outside in the open covering their approaches. It won't be trivial to simply walk up to it (not without getting shot). There are few turrets in the world now, once there are A LOT more, the faction weakest to them is going to become even weaker. Are you seriously not seeing it or just pretending?
Perhaps TR isn't the right Faction for you. Did you pick TR because of their MAXs, or because off their flavor? Because if it's the latter, you're going to have to deal.
An idea. Ant can deploy special bunker minibase with control point. You have to build around a base to defend it and around enemy base to attack. It influence The control point!
I play both. BR 100 TR and BR 98 NC. It's not fair when after some random update that nobody could predict one faction becomes significantly weaker because update exploited a serious weakness in a faction. Or what, you're suggesting almost 3 years ago when I started playing I somehow should have foreseen this?
What is the NCs long range AV? The Phoenix isn't it, it is only 295m in a perfectly straight line. The Raven?
what? constructing turrets instead of making them tactically viable? are you guys kidding? the ANTs should be just like in PS1, giving bases energy to spawn units and repair base turrets, and to power the shields and (non-existent) doors why on earth would you take an ANT to build a turret if you could just as well use an AP lightning, a skyguard, or even an MBT?
Deploying AA/AV out in the open sounds like its going to be great for protecting AMSs and breaking some of the back and forth MBT stalemates around bases like Indar Excavation and Howling Pass
You'd have to hope it is "stage 1", as it is probably easier to do this than lattice 2.0, but it would in the end work with lattice 2.0. I seems like a decent idea, although I do wonder about how they will balance it.
This conversation is kind of ongoing, difficult without reading previous posts (which I'm sure you haven't read all before asking), but I did say this before in this thread "That's a problem. More turrets popping up all over the place will disadvantage TR and benefit VS by a lot. NC stay in the middle." To answer more directly, yes. Phoenix is better against turrets than Striker, although a bit worse than Lancer. With striker you won't even hit the target at 300m (or 295..). With lancer it's literally point and click, it will fly with stupidly fast projectile velocity, won't drop, it's trivial to aim. Phoenix is a bit more difficult, but it will still hit, and using some basic cover you'll be immune to turret return fire (since you can shoot from behind an obstacle). And please don't say you'll hit a turret with decimator or another common pool launcher at 295 meters consistently, that'd be a straight up lie. Edit: Also YES, Ravens are better at those ranges than either Pounders or Fractures.
Don't get me wrong the Pheonix will be useful for taking them down with indirect fire, but I suspect the real unstoppable killers of these turrets will be likely the same as with base turrets now; Lancers from massive (insane) range (because of their range) and Anchored AP Prowlers from very signficant range (because of their very high DPS at that range).
I agree. Only point I was trying to make is TR will have it worse vs turrets than other 2 factions (because or RL and Max). And since turrets will become A LOT more commonplace, TR with be correspondingly worse off. As to prowler, to be honest you can do same thing with any MBT, locked down prowler just does it quicker (albeit more vulnerable while doing it, so there's a tradeoff already built in, plus it's balanced vs other MBT abilities). You can't compare MBT usefulness vs Turrets to a simple rocket launcher though, one is much more common and easier to acquire than other.
Prowlers.......the best turret killing tank in the game....And there are tons of turrets already in the game. Stop manufacturing BS weaknesses. The TR are not weaker against base turrets *eyeroll* Base turrets, with the exception of AA guns, literally have almost zero effect on any base seige. Most are dead long before any infantry arrive on scene. And if they get repaired they usually are dead with in 30 seconds of firing their first shot.
You know you're posting this in discussion about deployable turrets right? As in they will no longer be only on bases. They will now appear at random places wherever someone felt like placing them with their ANT. "Stop manufacturing BS" = argument for someone who has nothing to say.
Evidently because they don't have the funding to do anything on more of a grandios scale. The PS4 version isn't exactly setting the world on fire as was hoped and the PC version is just plodding along. I don't think this is going to help all that much with bringing players back but the leadership tools might help a little to retain what they have in the short term. Anyway, yeah the bottom line is they don't have much bottom line to work with.
So, there is still no real incentive to fight for territory, instead we get new ways to fight meaningless battles. You know the mega farm will just continue? People will just just pad their own K/D, because currently, why should they care? If the base gets taken, so what, who cares, it really doesn't matter. You need to fix this glaring problem with the game, FIRST!
Yea....a deployable turret is still immobile. So are these turret set up by an ANT some how going to be OP over the base turrets that there is upwards of 4-14 of on towers or bases? AMP stations run near 14 or more turrets, well Tech Plants have five. I've yet to really see them slow the TR down like you suggest. So...let me break it down for you. Spear turret goes from being on a base wall....to being ....in a road is this some how make them harder to kill? Even if this new turret is not going to be the same as a spear turret from a base, it will not be much of a change. Basically because uh....it still can't move, oOr aim up high enough to stop the rocket pods,or liberators. I always find it odd when people pick the most off the wall stuff to claim is going to be a huge nerf to one empire. I long range hit immobile targets with decmators all the time. But honestly the tanks in game are MORE then able of dealing with turrets of all kinds currently in game. In fact I would say the TR's is likely one of the better turret killers out there. Good thing I never claimed they were huh? Just said something about killing turrets ;-) Don't get me wrong the prowler has it's flaws but to claim the TR have a much harder hill to clime when dealing with turrets is one of the silliest things I've heard on forumside.
You can't pull Prowlers everywhere. But you can pull MAXes and HeavyAssaults everywhere. And both - TR-Maxes and HA are lacking in the Anti-Vehicle-Department - thats the whole point. Also we are talking about the new towers with a (probably) new kind of turret.
Have turrets ever been more than a minor quickly dealt with annoyance in the game to date? Only thing i can foresee people getting annoyed about if they are being abused to Spawn Camp, or if they being set up as AA nests on some mountain or outside a WG.
