[another proposal for the proxi mines]

I've always been frustrated with having mines tied to advanced engineer class. Once you lose the barracks, your play style shifts slightly towards more defensive because the enemy now has the upper hand. Except instead of having just your offense capability reduced, your defensive capability has been reduced too.

Seems out of place to shift the game towards a particular play style but handicap that play style at the same time.

[Credits as Basic Infantry]

Can someone enlighten me - how do things work now vs. how does pointsfix work?

[Alternative Ideas]

I'm sure this will be considered anathema to some - but how about changing the penalty for losing your War Factory / Airstrip? I think game flow, the end game in particular, could benefit if it functioned more similar to the Barracks. Lose your vehicle plant and all advanced vehicles are disabled - except for the Buggy / Humvee and APC. Prices would stay the same as that is already affected by loss of Power Plant. If this proves too unbalanced maybe someway to cut vehicle HP in half as well?

Trudging across some of the larger maps on foot is quite a chore, which would be alleviated by the Buggy / Humvee. Having the APC always available lets an engineer (or whatever) rush be a viable tactic for a team on the verge of losing.

[Love the game, but its 2014. Why no VOIP?]

I would love to see VoIP. When you're in the middle of an assault or scrambling to put together a base defense, standing still for 10 seconds to type is a death sentence.

However, I've played on a few pug servers in which people were communicating well enough with chat to form actual strategies. So it does happen. What would be nice is if the quick bind messages were in a separate chat window, or a different color. It's easy for messages to get bumped off screen and disappear instantly when multiple players spam "Defend the power plant!", or for the message to simply be hard to read amongst a handful of spam because of the same color text.

[So how are Nod players handling Mammoth rushes?]

Changing it with the silo is a good idea, though I can see the point of non capture by the dominating team. I wonder if there is a way of balancing capture vs non capture. Maybe capture doubles/triples the cost of airstrike, but adds a significant cash incentive for holding. Not so much as to negate the airstrike increase, but enough to make it worth getting so you could afford more vehicles or support.

Whatever comes up, I think it is going to be difficult to balance it without making it so high that it is unpurchasable. I feel like it should be something that the losing team should have more access to, as opposed to a further dominating feature for the winning team.

Tieing the ability to the Silo (or some new tech building) is a neat idea, but I don't know if I agree with a penalty for the team controlling said tech building. The game is very straightforward now in that you are rewarded for doing the best you can at all times - part of the arcade simplicity I think. Adding a penalty to the tech buildings mixes in an extra layer of strategy currently not present in the game; this isn't a bad thing by any means, but I think it's outside of what the game is aiming for. Plus it feels wrong to punish the whole team should one individual decide to capture the building.

I like the idea of giving the "losing" team some extra tools to fight back with though. How about if air strikes are only available once the WF is destroyed? Although I guess that could lead to the other team purposefully not targeting the WF, and getting angry at a team mate who does.

How about if it is available once only one building is remaining? This way all buildings are still viable targets, and it wouldn't necessarily be exclusive to one team during the match.