Suggestion: EMP Grenades and C4s

[KrypTheBear]

'Sup everyone, 

I had a little suggestion in mind concerning the EMP grenades. Is there any reason as to why they are only able to disarm Proximity C4s and decloak units? Giving EMP grenades the ability to disarm Remote and Timed C4s would allow the usage of Gunners and LCGs in a more defensive manner (e.g. aid disarming Timed C4s on allied MCTs), as well as would help combat mass Remote C4 strategies in chokepoints (e.g. the tunnels in Under, and basically every single building can be effectively protected with Remotes).

I'd like to hear a couple of opinions/other suggestions on that.

[Ryz]

The idea sounds interesting, but I think this won't work. Why:

In order to remove C4 now you have to 'stand' at the MCT and if you are killed, you cant disarm the C4
An EMP would continue to disarm once you die (the way the EMP works now)
You can easily 'stack EMP's' with multiple people to speed up the process
You don't have to choose what kind of units you have between hotwire and defence class. Imagine 10 LCG's (with EMP's) camping the HON

 

[KrypTheBear]

10 minutes ago, Ryz said:

The idea sounds interesting, but I think this won't work. Why:

In order to remove C4 now you have to 'stand' at the MCT and if you are killed, you cant disarm the C4
An EMP would continue to disarm once you die (the way the EMP works now)
You can easily 'stack EMP's' with multiple people to speed up the process

This isn't actually a necessarily bad thing, as this is simply a tactic which is made possible through this implementation. It brings certainly some risk with it, as while you are concenctrated at removing the timed C4s of an infiltration team, a tank force might be already inside your base. This idea doesn't move any unit with EMPs straight to defense, it just allows them to operate more efficiently in that regard and adds a good deterrent against remote C4s in chokepoints. As far as I recall, one EMP wouldn't be enough to remove a Timed C4 (due to its health, proxies have a lot less health than a timed, hence why they are much faster disarmed than timeds), so the EMP would only act as aid (or if used en masse, as an active measure against Timed C4s).

18 minutes ago, Ryz said:

You don't have to choose what kind of units you have between hotwire and defence class. Imagine 10 LCG's (with EMP's) camping the HON

Then you have 10 less LCGs on the field. Every unit moved to defense is one less unit on offense. Plus they still cannot repair things, which is required to keep buildings alive that are being attacked by, for instance, tanks, as well as potential super weapon beacons.

[boxes]

30 minutes ago, Ryz said:

The idea sounds interesting, but I think this won't work. Why:

In order to remove C4 now you have to 'stand' at the MCT and if you are killed, you cant disarm the C4
An EMP would continue to disarm once you die (the way the EMP works now)
You can easily 'stack EMP's' with multiple people to speed up the process
You don't have to choose what kind of units you have between hotwire and defence class. Imagine 10 LCG's (with EMP's) camping the HON

 

you can repair your c4s if they're being emp'd the same way when an engineer is disarming. this forces you to be more attentive during an infiltration process instead of simply running away from anything that's not a technician 

you can say the same thing with 10 techs camping the hon, except that scenario is a lot more annoying because they can also repair the building

 

[Henk]

20 minutes ago, CampinJeff said:

you can repair your c4s if they're being emp'd the same way when an engineer is disarming.

I'm not always infiltrating with an engineer/tech/hotwire.

[boxes]

16 minutes ago, Henk said:

I'm not always infiltrating with an engineer/tech/hotwire.

forgot to mention that emps should only affect remote c4s and not timed because 1, it nerfs solo hottie infiltration, and 2 because remotes can be used the same way as proxy mines. 

[KrypTheBear]

7 minutes ago, CampinJeff said:

forgot to mention that emps should only affect remote c4s and not timed because 1, it nerfs solo hottie infiltration, and 2 because remotes can be used the same way as proxy mines. 

If you get noticed you are fucked one way or another. If you have a successful infiltration noone notices that C4 until it's too late. Of course, if you give a unit additional defensive power then any sort of infiltration might get weaker. And as I said before, an EMP is unable to completely disarm a Timed C4. So you still rely on the aid of others (or a painfully slow rep tool).
Additionally to that I'm just going to quote yourself:

47 minutes ago, CampinJeff said:

you can repair your c4s if they're being emp'd the same way when an engineer is disarming. this forces you to be more attentive during an infiltration process instead of simply running away from anything that's not a technician 

 

[boxes]

there's a huge difference between being noticed by an LCG compared to a tech, think you should know why

As henk said there are other infiltrators, if you're inside a building with sydney you have no way of repairing your timedc4 from emps unless you have a rep tool. just having emps affect remotes nerfs engie based infiltration while leaving other forms alone. example if there's a huge mcfarland rush or something and there's 15 timed on the mct, emps would disarm all of them

[Agent]

EMPs disarming remote/timed C4 sounds pretty awful.

[Axesor]

Nah, I dont think that anything about an EMP needs to change. You do?  It's pretty good as it is. Also any unit is able to carry repair tool, so..

EMP spam dealing with any c4 rush is pretty op.

Edited November 2, 2016 by Axesor

[Ryz]

Just scrolled through this topic and while I'dd like to keep things sharp, I don't think I am sharp enough to react to this topic right now. Keep the comments going, nothing wrong with a little contrastic opinion. 

Edited November 3, 2016 by Ryz

[Madkill40]

Ideas in this thread don't appear complicated enough so here's one complicated idea:

EMP Grenades could freeze the clock on Timed C4s instead of disarming them, stalling a timed c4 for 10 seconds is just enough leeway for a repairing unit to save a building from complete destruction whilst still giving a chance for that building to take permanent damage.

Remote C4s should explode with a 50% damage reduction when EMPd. See it as the EMP triggering the remote detonation sequence making them a danger to everyone nearby.

Now if you use an EMP Grenade near an MCT with both remotes and timed charges you'll cause remote damage to the building but the timed c4 will be delayed by 10 seconds, this at least gives a good defensive counter-balance.

 

 

[ex_member]

...

Edited September 22, 2018 by ex_member

[KrypTheBear]

14 hours ago, Agent said:

EMPs disarming remote/timed C4 sounds pretty awful.

How so? I mean, recently I see more and more remotes in choke points, especially if you are a LCG and it's like "Oh shit, there's a rem-" *dead* and you can't really do anything against that other than praying to Mother Mary having some mercy. 

17 hours ago, CampinJeff said:

there's a huge difference between being noticed by an LCG compared to a tech, think you should know why

As henk said there are other infiltrators, if you're inside a building with sydney you have no way of repairing your timedc4 from emps unless you have a rep tool. just having emps affect remotes nerfs engie based infiltration while leaving other forms alone. example if there's a huge mcfarland rush or something and there's 15 timed on the mct, emps would disarm all of them

Welp, I agree now. Timeds should be maybe affected like Madkill suggested, that idea sounds very neat and isn't exactly "overpowered". It would be aiding the team and make Gunners/LCGs/PICs more defense viable, as well as turning them into priority targets. Although, Idk how much coding effort that would be.

Still, remotes are FUBAR. It would really aid to game balance if those could be either triggered remotely by tossing EMPs at them, or disarming them entirely with EMP.

[Axesor]

3 hours ago, KrypTheBear said:

Still, remotes are FUBAR. It would really aid to game stalemate if those could be either triggered remotely by tossing EMPs at them, or disarming them entirely with EMP.

Buy repair tool. Solved. Everybody is able to buy rep tool and defend. Patroling LCG with rep tool is already strong as fuck.

[KrypTheBear]

23 minutes ago, Axesor said:

Buy repair tool. Solved. Everybody is able to buy rep tool and defend. Patroling LCG with rep tool is already strong as fuck.

Play a round on Under and then tell me how remote C4s in choke points don't contribute to stalemates. It would do the exact opposite, it would permit LCGs/PICs to make a quick advance through the tunnels straight to the buildings, forcing GDI to stay on their toes (same vice versa)

And how are LCGs with rep tools strong, if you mean that they suddenly just repair eachother then you must have overseen the technician right behind them. One charge of rep tool isn't enough to heal an LCG back to an acceptable percentage of effective hit points (Edit: at least not in a quick fashion.)

Edited November 3, 2016 by KrypTheBear

[Axesor]

Not knowing how to deal with placed remote c4 is just sad, if it isnt sticked right on your face. +Flak armor. +Rep tool. Speaking of defending, anti-infiltration, they would be super op. There is no doubt about that.

Maybe let the EMP affect remotes somehow, not disarming, but defenitely do not make it affect timed c4 in any way. This is just no go.

26 minutes ago, KrypTheBear said:

And how are LCGs with rep tools strong, if you mean that they suddenly just repair eachother then you must have overseen the technician right behind them. One charge of rep tool isn't enough to heal an LCG back to an acceptable percentage of effective hit points.

So what? O_o This is thread abou an EMP isnt it? lol

[vandal33]

Or make the EMP temporally blocks remote detonation on C4s.

[Agent]

20 hours ago, KrypTheBear said:

How so? I mean, recently I see more and more remotes in choke points, especially if you are a LCG and it's like "Oh shit, there's a rem-" *dead* and you can't really do anything against that other than praying to Mother Mary having some mercy. 

There's a lot that you could do. You could just not run into remote C4, kill the person who placed them, bring a repair tool, or simply ignore them since they're probably fake. If you're an LCG (or another flak character), you can tank a few remotes with ease and still take down a building.

If we wanted to discourage using remotes in choke points, it'd probably be better to reduce the personal limit from 4 to 2.

Also worth noting, it'd be pretty easy to limit the disarms to remote/timed c4 attached to the landscape (or otherwise not attached to a building/pawn), though that'd be pretty wonky and inconsistent behavior.

[boxes]

The problem is that if there's remotes in a choke point, the person who placed them is likely standing safely behind cover in third person waiting for you to walk in their trap. You usually have to walk through the remote C4s to reach engineer. Repair tool range and repair rate makes disarming remote C4s absolutely pointless as it takes ages just to remove 1 C4 and the range is within the remote blast radius. It also exposes you as you're probably in the open disarming a remote with your repair tool in your hand, not your primary weapon. 

If there's an actual game-breaking feature on EMPs disarming remote C4s, I'm down to hear it. The reason I support it is because it discourages an annoying tactic (mentioned above) and nerfs adv.engie infiltration which at its current state is by far the most efficient way to kill buildings, particularly during multi-pronged attacks. 

But if not possible, limiting remotes to 2 would probably work wonders as well. Would also be nice if remotes would bounce off friendly pawns. Flaming vehicles is pretty stupid, and flaming infantry is even more so. 

[KrypTheBear]

7 hours ago, Agent said:

There's a lot that you could do. You could just not run into remote C4

Okay. First of all, a couple of maps have disgusting choke points, forcing you to take a certain route if you wish to infiltrate the enemy base as infanterist without being gunned down by base defenses. My favorite example is Unders tunnels, but the same applies to Arctic Stronghold with the side entrance, the one with the concrete wall with barbwire on top, as well as Crash Sites doors to the UFO, Forts Tunnel entrances (usually the main entrance aka. big fat tank chokepoint is blocked by tanks), Fields tunnels, Islands tunnels (Okay, that one has no base defenses, but the primary exit is, as in Fort, filled with vehicles. One could manage to sneak past that, as I do sometimes.), Mesa base entrance to tiberium cave, I could get you more examples if you like. 

7 hours ago, Agent said:

kill the person who placed them

As Jeff said, usually they hide behind cover in third person, making it remotely(haha) impossible to kill them. 

7 hours ago, Agent said:

bring a repair tool

The pathetically low range and slow removal time, as well as staying wide open for attacks is... I dunno. It's plain dumb in my opinion. You could just toss your EMP while defending yourself from others, and once the C4 is disarmed you can continue, as with Proxies. Best case is, they have hidden those remotes in a hard-to-see place.

7 hours ago, Agent said:

or simply ignore them since they're probably fake.

-explodes-

7 hours ago, Agent said:

If you're an LCG (or another flak character), you can tank a few remotes with ease and still take down a building.

You can tank two to three remotes. Although three is already debatable. Non-Vets die most likely from three. Four will just rip you apart, and even as Elite you'll just die from burn damage. EDIT: And even if you survive, your healthpoints will be so low, even that engie hiding behind the rock can just gun you down.

7 hours ago, Agent said:

If we wanted to discourage using remotes in choke points, it'd probably be better to reduce the personal limit from 4 to 2.

I'm cool with that. Although I don't really see a lot of hassle adding "Remotes" to "Things affected by EMP". 

7 hours ago, Agent said:

Also worth noting, it'd be pretty easy to limit the disarms to remote/timed c4 attached to the landscape (or otherwise not attached to a building/pawn), though that'd be pretty wonky and inconsistent behavior.

Why won't we give it a shot? If a timed is not attached to a building/pawn, then it can be removed by EMP. Any remotes can be affected by EMP. That would be my suggestion.

And this:

5 hours ago, CampinJeff said:

Would also be nice if remotes would bounce off friendly pawns. Flaming vehicles is pretty stupid, and flaming infantry is even more so. 

 

Edited November 4, 2016 by KrypTheBear

[j0g32]

EMPs should disarm (or stop/deactivate) remote/times C4s.

I dont think its a game breaker.

The EMP explosion gives away the incoming rush anyway, and without presuming/checking that mines/c4 have been placed around the corner, you would rather save it for entering a building...