Poll: EMP Grenades

[Nielsen]

Beta 3 has been a lot of fun thus far and in some part due to the EMP grenades which helped diffuse some massive tankspam and possible rushes when timed correctly.

We would like to hear your opinions on the EMP Grenades!

Post comments and ideas below: what do you think and are changes required?

[Kriemhild Gretchen]

Honestly, I'd have waited a while before making a topic about EMP grenades, giving more time for people to use and develop opinions of them.

Now, with that said, I'd like to see more use of them. They seem to be highly useful in immobilizing and annihilating vehicle rushes if used correctly. It's hilarious to stop an enemy Mammoth/Flame Tank in front of the Obelisk or AGT, for example. I need to work on integrating them into my own strategy.

[Nielsen]

You can change your answer on the poll for that reason.

Personally I'd like to see more functionality with the EMP. Disabling a building or defenses and mines for a limited time would be great as well as unstealthing SBH. (pretty much a given, but it's not in the game)

[Truxa]

You can change your answer on the poll for that reason.

Personally I'd like to see more functionality with the EMP. Disabling a building or defenses and mines for a limited time would be great as well as unstealthing SBH. (pretty much a given, but it's not in the game)

Ohhh hell, I also wanted to post these reasons you giving.

Temporarily decloading an SBH, as if he was shooting once.

Proxy mines rely on electronically detecting an enemy in close proximity. Why not throw an EMP grenade near those mines and disabling them entirely. The mines would still be present, but the proxy detector would be disabled indefinately, untill a hotty/engineer comes along to repair them. Or is that too OP? As they still count toward the minelimit.

Disabling the AGT/obelisk would be too OP I think, but if you'd want to implement that, why not disabling the other structures as well?

EMP on powerplant --> 10 second loss of power

EMP on refinery --> 15 second loss of automatic credit tick + disabling the harvester (or atleast the dump)

EMP on Bar/Hon/WF/Strip --> 30 second loss of char/veh purchase (when rushing, this adds a whole new tactic)

Imo, as it stands, the costs of the EMP grenade for "just vehicle stoppage power" is a bit too high. Adding other functionality would make it a better weapon of choice with increased price.

[N3tRunn3r]

What about the possibility to disable various structures/guard towers?

IMO the Silo/Tech Building needs more functionality too, adding more weapons as maybe an EMP "Bomb" for structures whenever 2 or more silos have been captured. This EMP Bomb disables a structure for like 45 seconds and automatically reenables afterwards again. One issue tho, it needs to be planted interior.

1 captured silo gives 2 additional weapons as we know it, and 2+ captures silos additional more various ones etc.

EDIT_001:

Oh Truxa kinda mentioned this too lol.

One more idea about those regular EMP nades. Those should disable the HUD/EVA and distract sights of effected players for like 30 seconds. Also an EMP nade should have the possibility to uncloak stealthed units and kinda break the weapon functionalities of vehicles. Yet you are still able to shoot, this should be kinda broken in radnom times until this status effect disappears.

[omega79]

I like em, but they should not influence buildings ... except for turrets maybe

i think they should dissable any movement of the vehicle, even the guns

decloak sbhs would be an option but SBHs are very easy to see and you can spot them (Q) even if they are cloaked in BETA3

I have no problems following SBH through the base (Been already called a cheater) in this build

[Truxa]

I like em, but they should not influence buildings ... except for turrets maybe

i think they should dissable any movement of the vehicle, even the guns

this too yeah. I find it OP for an EMP grenade to disable Obelisk and AGT, I'd rather see the Nod turrets going offline and the GDI guard towers. Same for the SAM sites, but thats less of an issue for aircraft anyway.

[Rockfire]

Idk, I kinda like the idea of them disabling the towers for a few seconds (5-10). It would give fields a more interesting dynamic rather than a slugfest it currently is. That said it'd need to be balanced. Maybe a placeable area EMP? or a precision emp air strike? (solo target) Both would require time to place down and as long as its priced similar to airstrikes or something. I don't see it being abused that much.

[SFJake]

EMP should never stop mines. They are already too weak and the game already depends too much on them (and we still need improvement on that front, you're in the team that doesn't mine properly you lose, and its not even close to fun). Making EMP stop mines is ludicrous.

Disabling a building is INSANE power for a single infantry. Plain old no.

Removing stealth is the only good idea in this topic. And no, don't lower the price. Its a huge tool as it is.

And don't do any hud disabling crap. Lets stick to fun elements.

[Truxa]

EMP stands for Electro Magnetic Pulse. It's effect is disabling electronic devices by shortcircuitting them. Since the HUD could be seen as an electronic assistance, I think it should be affected. It will make it more usefull against infantry in general rather than a single SBH. Besides, it is supposed to be fun or making it easier for the user's team, not the affected. A disabled HUD might remove your HP/armor indicators and minimap, but also the targetting reticle. The only way to accurately fire is by scoping or using ironsights.

I agree though, buildings can be "protected" by their thick layer of concrete and lead alloys to protect against the EMP's radiation.

[Rockfire]

In there current iteration I agree, but why not have a special item similar to the nuke?

[Truxa]

In there current iteration I agree, but why not have a special item similar to the nuke?

Why would you use EMP when you can use a nuke?

[Rockfire]

because emp is instant.

[A-Rodge]

The EMP grenade is a little over-priced for what you are getting.

When used correctly, though, it can be a lot of fun! Especially when you see players use it as a smoke screen to cover up nukes/ions.

I am with Truxa on building disabling though. Even if it is for like 5-10 seconds, that is a lot of time in the fast paced combat. Also gives infantry a whole new dynamic in contributing to stalemate maps like Field, Goldrush, and Under.

Maybe with building disabling, you could increase the price to 500 or 700.

[H.D. Lovecraft]

EMP stands for Electro Magnetic Pulse. It's effect is disabling electronic devices by shortcircuitting them. Since the HUD could be seen as an electronic assistance, I think it should be affected. It will make it more usefull against infantry in general rather than a single SBH. Besides, it is supposed to be fun or making it easier for the user's team, not the affected. A disabled HUD might remove your HP/armor indicators and minimap, but also the targetting reticle. The only way to accurately fire is by scoping or using ironsights.

I agree though, buildings can be "protected" by their thick layer of concrete and lead alloys to protect against the EMP's radiation.

That doesn't sound fun at all though. I think gameplay outweighs realism on this one. Disabling vehicles and stealth adds an interesting gameplay option, whereas losing the HUD would just annoy people more than anything.

[R315r4z0r]

I think it should disable SBH cloaks. It should also disable HUD functionality, especially the minimap.

It should not disable buildings or mines though.

I also think that the effects of an EMP grenade should not stack with another EMP grenade. If one grenade is used on a group of vehicles, any other EMP grenades used should not extend the time those vehicles remain disabled. So, basically, if a vehicle is already disabled, throwing another EMP grenade at it would be just a waste of the grenade.

Also, there should be a lockout duration for disabled vehicles that makes them immune to another EMP grenade for a small amount of time after they recover. (You can probably use this to cover my last point as well).

And, finally, you should not be able to EMP friendly, neutral or empty vehicles. (to prevent that immunity buff thing from being exploited).

[QUAKERxnc]

A good option should be that Laserchaingun and Gunner get one by default.

And it should reduced the Rate of Fire by 10% if a enemy vehicles was hit.

[RoundShades]

Like cloak disable. To be fair, it would also have to disable the mines, the natural enemy of sbh and a GDI counterpart. I mean, it would only disable 1 door at a time, and you could layer mines at doors and terminals and raise the suggested mine limit to comphensate for that.

It works wonderfully already, a standstill is a lot more a death sentence to any vehicle popping out at a base defense as well as for any light armor vehicles and for APCs.

[R315r4z0r]

Mines are mechanical. Plus it would only introduce problems if emps could disable mines. At the moment, the way to disable mines is by using one of the lesser combatant classes (engineer units). So having a grenade that anyone could use would make infantry rushing way too over powered, since players would then be allowed to take more heavy-hitting infantry into the base and still be effective.

It would also make SBHs like twice as lethal than they already are, since mines would no longer be an obstacle for them to overcome. At the moment, there is a tactic of taking a group of SBHs and taking turns taking damage from one mine at a time in order to break into a building. But with EMP grenades, that job becomes easier since now, they don't even need to take damage.

Would be a very poor gameplay decision to make EMPs disable mines.

[boxes]

There is no need to add more to the EMP nade. It works perfectly fine.

[Truxa]

But with EMP grenades, that job becomes easier since now, they don't even need to take damage.

But in order to throw the grenade, the SBH decloaks and is easily spotted. It still requires 3-4 SBHs for a C4 infiltration to than end.

[RoundShades]

Mines are mechanical. Plus it would only introduce problems if emps could disable mines. At the moment, the way to disable mines is by using one of the lesser combatant classes (engineer units). So having a grenade that anyone could use would make infantry rushing way too over powered, since players would then be allowed to take more heavy-hitting infantry into the base and still be effective.

It would also make SBHs like twice as lethal than they already are, since mines would no longer be an obstacle for them to overcome. At the moment, there is a tactic of taking a group of SBHs and taking turns taking damage from one mine at a time in order to break into a building. But with EMP grenades, that job becomes easier since now, they don't even need to take damage.

Would be a very poor gameplay decision to make EMPs disable mines.

Just a thought. I was thinking, AT Mines and EMP nades both could use being in the Item slot. As well as that item slot possibly consuming the "grenade and mine" slot. That would adequately nerf planting beacons, it holds the place of c4, and would nerf emp grenades because it holds the place of c4 as well.

Then again, emp nades are useful for planting c4 on a vehicle, which is where we come at difficulties. How about emp nades as well as mines take the slot of items, but c4 retains it's slot. Because right now, tank mines don't "refill" and emp nades could also not if desired, but they take the secondary slot that is supposed to refill? Idk, their "slot placement" confuse me.

[Truxa]

Weapon slots:

1-Sidearm

2-Primary

3-Timed C4

4-Remote C4

5-Proxy mines

6-Ion/Nuke/Airstrike

Hotwire/Techy getting grenades removes the proxy mines while retaining the timed C4 while other classes lose their timed C4 for getting grenades.

Why not simply put EMP nades/AT-mines at slot 7 (if there is one) but removes the ability to hold Proxy mines/grenades for Hotwire/Techy and Timed C4/grenades for the other classes with the addition of not being able to hold a nuke/ion.

The result would be that normal classes dont hold more than 4 weapons (sidearm, primary, EMP/AT and airstrike) and the hotwire/tech dont hold more than 5 weapons (sidearm, repairtool, timed C4, EMP/AT and airstrike)

NOTE: the discussion was about nukes combined with EMP effectiveness on mines, hence airstrikes would still be possible

[lone0001]

Out of all the ideas in this thread I like the one about EMPs disabling the Radar portion of the HUD for a short time and perhaps disabling small base defenses like guard towers, turrets, or sam sites (but NOT AGT or Obby) for a short time as well.

Another idea that I haven't seen mentioned yet would be to delay an Ion/Nuke beacon, throw it at a beacon and have it delay the timer for about 7 seconds (give or take but less than 10) perhaps? This could be a thing as people already complain a bit that there is "not enough time" to disarm beacons. Having an extra 5 or so seconds to disarm before it gets to "initiated" could be interesting.

[Kriemhild Gretchen]

Out of all the ideas in this thread I like the one about EMPs disabling the Radar portion of the HUD for a short time and perhaps disabling small base defenses like guard towers, turrets, or sam sites (but NOT AGT or Obby) for a short time as well.

Another idea that I haven't seen mentioned yet would be to delay an Ion/Nuke beacon, throw it at a beacon and have it delay the timer for about 7 seconds (give or take but less than 10) perhaps? This could be a thing as people already complain a bit that there is "not enough time" to disarm beacons. Having an extra 5 or so seconds to disarm before it gets to "initiated" could be interesting.

I'm very opposed to beacons being delayed by EMP grenades. As it stands, beacons often help to break stalemates. I like the time as it stands, as if deployed during a siege, it forces the opposing team to divert resources from repairing buildings. Defending would be way too easy if beacons could just be mitigated like that.

[RoundShades]

Why not simply put EMP nades/AT-mines at slot 7 (if there is one) but removes the ability to hold Proxy mines/grenades for Hotwire/Techy and Timed C4/grenades for the other classes with the addition of not being able to hold a nuke/ion...

...hence airstrikes would still be possible

Idk, that is a LOT of work just for airstrikes. It makes more sense for emp nades and mines to replace airstrikes and beacons, all 4 take the same slot, even the same "items" tab in the Purchase Terminal for clarity.

That would be minimal work, just do exactly what you did for the beacons and airstrikes, for the emp nades and mines.

[Handepsilon]

EMP Grenades that disables HUD? It seems like Renegade X will receive their own Flashbang

[Henk]

I like them a lot, but I think you should keep your timed C4 when you buy one. And they're a little expensive when the Power Plant is down, maybe it would be better if the price wouldnt double, but had a multiplier of 1.5x instead.

And as you may have noticed, if you refill, you don't get your timed C4, you have to click on it, but I suppose that will get fixed?

[R315r4z0r]

I don't like the idea that Hotwires and Technicians have different weapons replaced than other infantry.

What they should do, however, is break down all weapons into classes and apply "weapon class slots" to all characters. Then, allow the player to choose what weapons to replace, as long as the weapon is the same class of weapon.

So, you'd have Primary Weapons, Secondary Weapons, Primary Explosives, Secondary Explosives and Items.

-Primaries being all of the main weapons carried by all classes ranging from assault rifles to rocket launchers to repair guns.

-Secondaries are all sidearm weapons such as pistols and SMGs.

-Primary explosives are explosive devices such as timed and proximity C4 as well as grenades and other mines.

-Secondary explosives are what I'd consider remote C4. I don't think anything (at least anything currently in game) should be able to replace this.

-Items are things like beacons and airstrikes.

Then, give each character specific weapon slots and allow the player to customize it how they see fit. Granted, 90% of the characters would have the same slots (1 Primary, 1 Secondary, 1 Primary Explosive and an Item slot. However, some classes would be different. Engineers, Hotwires and Technicians would have a second primary explosive slot as well as a secondary explosive slot.

All that being said, I think some balance would need to be adjusted to make this viable, as it would insure that players constantly gravitate towards Hotwire/Techs. Perhaps remove a weapon slot from them? What if they couldn't use secondary weapons because of all their explosives? (just a random idea)

Edit: another idea running from what I'm saying here: Perhaps introduce a new form of currency that's used to customize loadouts? You unlock a token to change one item, so you are then allowed to purchase a replacement.

[epicelite]

Would be neat if they disabled mines maybe?

[Kriemhild Gretchen]

Would be neat if they disabled mines maybe?

Protip: Read the entire thread before you reply. This was covered. It would make SBHs stupidly powerful if they could just spend $300 to make mines irrelevant.

[Truxa]

Would be neat if they disabled mines maybe?

Protip: Read the entire thread before you reply. This was covered. It would make SBHs stupidly powerful if they could just spend $300 to make mines irrelevant.

He should have read the comments yeah.

SBH + Nuke + EMP grenades, or just a 4man-SBH tagteam, 1 having EMP nade to throw at a patch of mines behind the ref door (e.g. walls) other 3 SBHs walk in and put them timed C4's. then they scatter around to place 4 nukes in different sites. (1 nuke a building) could be too powerful as ref will essentially be attacked twice

[Action Hank]

In my opinion is EMP too defensive and not much offence.

I am much more interested in the smokescreen effect created by the EMP.

What if you can buy a Smokestrike, like the normal airstrike, except of bombs, you get a smoke screen. This can be used for offence and defence. Games like red orchestra rely on smoke. Its very hard too push without smoke, but with a well placed smoke you can turn a battle in your favour. Example, sneak an apc into the base or something.

Might be too OP, what if defence structures cant target anything in smoke.

Anyway this might be an interesting way to break stalemates and create more back n forth flow in battles.

[Darkraptor]

In my opinion an EMP-Grenades thats defuse mines is a no go. Thats just to powerfull.

But an EMP thats expose SBH is a good adition and a major step to end the debate thats SBH are to powerfull.

Against infantry it would be nice if the emp explosion would cause a fuzzy screen to enemy players. Yes, thats like a flashbang but it would give the EMP Grenades more offensive use.

For example: before you enter an enemy building, you throw one EMP-Grenate inside.

And the EMP would still be a usefull option when the enemy airfield/WF is destroyed.

Edited November 3, 2014 by Guest

[Darkraptor]

The EMP grenade is a little over-priced for what you are getting.

When used correctly, though, it can be a lot of fun! Especially when you see players use it as a smoke screen to cover up nukes/ions.

I am with Truxa on building disabling though. Even if it is for like 5-10 seconds, that is a lot of time in the fast paced combat. Also gives infantry a whole new dynamic in contributing to stalemate maps like Field, Goldrush, and Under.

Maybe with building disabling, you could increase the price to 500 or 700.

I'am also thinking that emp-Grenade is a little to expensiv. 250 credits would be fine.

Disable a building is in my opinion to powerfull.

[noxidevad]

The EMP grenade is a little over-priced for what you are getting.

When used correctly, though, it can be a lot of fun! Especially when you see players use it as a smoke screen to cover up nukes/ions.

I am with Truxa on building disabling though. Even if it is for like 5-10 seconds, that is a lot of time in the fast paced combat. Also gives infantry a whole new dynamic in contributing to stalemate maps like Field, Goldrush, and Under.

Maybe with building disabling, you could increase the price to 500 or 700.

I'am also thinking that emp-Grenade is a little to expensiv. 250 credits would be fine.

Disable a building is in my opinion to powerfull.

We can easily put the EMP's up a little in price that isn't an issue

[A-Rodge]

Maybe if the emp is used on a Master Control Terminal it disables building. That would make infiltrating as GDI a lot more practical.

[Action Hank]

Finally voted No I dont like them.

For me they dont add anything to the gameplay, infact imo, they only hurt gameplay. Succesful rushes are hard enough to pull off. EMP makes them even harder or in some cases impossible. They only promote stalemates.

Linking back to my previous post I would like to see smokescreens. This will add more tactics than emp.

[vlatkozelka]

I hate it ... in fact i hate all of these attempts in Renx that just make the game easier , like airstrikes , AT mines , and now EMP . It's like forget team work , forget defending properly ... get an emp and stop the rush .

Anyways , its a public poll but ... if EMP were to stay , can u plz remove the smoke screen ? I see no reason why it should have any smoke in the first place , its an EMP .. if ur trying to make it look realistic ,well then emp isnt even visible, but id say just leave the blue electrical discharge effect (kinda like the one when the pic or rail hits a tank ).Besides , its now killing more FPS than tanks atm lol

[Darkraptor]

I hate it ... in fact i hate all of these attempts in Renx that just make the game easier , like airstrikes , AT mines , and now EMP . It's like forget team work , forget defending properly ... get an emp and stop the rush .

Anyways , its a public poll but ... if EMP were to stay , can u plz remove the smoke screen ? I see no reason why it should have any smoke in the first place , its an EMP .. if ur trying to make it look realistic ,well then emp isnt even visible, but id say just leave the blue electrical discharge effect (kinda like the one when the pic or rail hits a tank ).Besides , its now killing more FPS than tanks atm lol

Well, i like this new attempts. But in one thing we are sharing the same oppinion: The smoke screen doesn`t fit to the emp. It is no smoke grenade. So it needs definitley a new effect.

If some one like this smoke screen, add smokes grenades as alternativ side arm.

Perhaps it would be a compromise when you reduce the area of effect of the emp-explosion.

But when you do this, you also need to reduce the price of the EMP-Grenate.

[yosh56]

Gave it some time before formulating an opinion on it,and in the end I had to go with I just don't like them. Granted, I may like them if they weren't just a buyable item that could be thrown by anyone with money, but that's just me. The smokescreen effect is cool, but it looks like it belongs on its own item. As for the EMP itself, it seems like far too much power in one player's hand. You can literally bring an entire rush to a halt in one click of the mouse.

Airstrikes are support, as you have a warning, you can get out of the way, and (now) their damage is significant, but not overwhelming. EMPs have a tendency to be 'by the time you see this, it's too late', and for what they do it just seems like too much power in one player's hand. I already voiced my opinion that defence was being made entirely too easy the moment EMP nades and AT-mines were introduced, and in action that's starting to prove quite true.

[RoundShades]

Maybe an EMP Nade should be an area debuff in case of above.

Maybe, the smoke effect as well as some ion effect shows a round area, and the following happens inside of it:

-Grenade costs 400 and is found in the items next to airstrikes and beacons.

-the effect is about the diameter of 2 artys end on end, and lasts about 10 seconds

-remote c4 cannot receive detonation trigger until effect is over

-proxy c4 cannot be triggered

-timed c4 cannot be detonated until the effect is over, but any c4 including this can be thrown and work after the effect

-repair guns cannot fire

-stealth effects are disabled

-radar and player hud is disabled

-anything that can lock on, vehicle and infantry, can not lock on

-this is a maybe, but maybe a list of advanced weaponry no longer functions like ramjet, volt, pic, railgun.

-vehicles touching the effect move at half speed

Now, imagine this, this would break front door camping in Field (the vehicles can be suffocated back off the front door via repair denial), and allow teams to flip the field more often. As well as be used for infiltration but not with a beacon, and be used for tunnel fights. It also costs as much as a SBH itself, so it is a good dump of credits.

[Darkraptor]

ok, it seems the main problem, thats a few players have with the emp grenade is that it can stop a whole tank rush.

So what about an item that has the same effect like the emp, but only can stop a single vehicle instead of a bulk.

The only thing thats bother me with the emp-grenade is, that the emp is completely useless agains infantry.

When you destroy the enemy airfield or Wf, the emp isnt anymore an option.

Thats why i made the proposal with the fuzzy screen to enemy players.

[Action Hank]

Even if it disabled one tank, it still kills rushes.

Entrances of bases are pretty cramped.

People will bump into each other if the leader freezes.

Because of the physics, tanks tend to stick together if you hit them., making it very hard to drive around the frozen leader.

Even if you take your distance, you usally get bumped from behind and get pushed towards the frozen leader.

One might argue, well everyone should take care how they drive, sure its true. However its not viable on a pub server. Besides, sometimes people hit some wierd hitbox a rock (eventhough you didnt visually hit the rock) and get completly stuck. Small things like this can kill a rush completly. Think what an emp can do. Its very hard to anticipate sudden changes with 6+ vehicles.

Even if there are absolutly no collison issues, it still kills rushes, because driving around a tank gives the defending team a lot more time to kill a rush and because everyone cant rush in easily and attack a building together.

[Bananas]

I also voted that I don't like them. I haven't seen them add anything worthwhile to the game in beta 3.

I see what they were intended to do, but a more balanced option already exists. This option is blocking with vehicles. You can already stop rushes by physically blocking with a vehicle. It's more balanced since you can just be blown up.

For example, I can stop an apc rush with a humvee for around the same price as an emp. It's also more risky and takes more skill than an emp. Will this humvee stop a mass flame rush? No. I'll be blown up in about four seconds. If I want to physically stop the movement of the rush, I would have to invest more. An apc, medium, or mammoth will block for a longer period of time.

I think the emp was a good idea that was worth trying, but it just doesn't work in its current state. I don't see it ever really working because of some maps. If a flame tank gets stuck in the walls entrance, the entire rush is going to run into each other.

I thought about ideas that might rework the emp, but none are great. Having the vehicle be temporarily "phased out" to where it can't take damage and/or can't block other vehicles would be interesting yet balanced.

Another would be change the item to a super weapon and increase the price. Then make it like stasis field from starcraft. Make the vehicles in an area unable to attack, unable to move, and unable to be damaged for a time. This would be an interesting yet balanced option.

[Darkraptor]

Another option for the EMP would be, that the emp doesnt stop a vehicle, but reduce the movement speed of the vehicle.

It could also reduce the fire rate.

[epicelite]

What if its just changed to a EMP mine?

[RoundShades]

What if its just changed to a EMP mine?

I too considered this, but I noticed severe pros and cons:

1) As mines, they would always be placed front of base. Since it is easy to plant and leave, any class can place it and rushes would be useless all game.

2) As grenades, they can be tossed in panic. While it requires a presence of a person instead of a mine automatically guarding while people ignore it, it also makes it more powerful for a person to use on any vehicle since it is point and click and hit.

3) C4 requires manual attention, but it is mostly over-useless as it requires you to get so close to the vehicle that you already could plant regular c4, why would you need it if already that close?

Generally, the problem is with the severity and singularity of their use. Reduce effect on vehicle speed, and give a few other bonus debuffs like repair gun disabled and stealth disabled and c4 disabled, then it would be more useful in more situations, but less a promise for a stalemate game.

[Darkraptor]

I would prefer to chance to EMP-grenade into an EMP-strike.

that means:

- same range and deploy time like airstrike

- same effect like EMP-grenade (perhaps a little more area of effect)

- price about 400-500 credits

This would be a cheaper alternative to air strike. And would be interesting for teamplay; first a player lunch the EMP-strike and then another player the air-strike.

And of course snipers are now more important to stop this EMP-strikes.

[epicelite]

What if we just drop the EMP, and just make it a smoke bomb that you can't target things through?