An update to nuke/ion overuse

[sgfrisbee2016]

For nukes and ions give each map a certain number of beacons (5 to 10).

This will keep teams from chaining beacons together for the entire map like on map Snow.

Also give the Commander the option to buy more beacons with CP.

Also maybe give Commander or team the option to ban beacon use like with mines.

[Mystic~]

My concern with limiting max beacons as you've suggested is that sometimes, particularly on maps like Walls, Islands and Lakeside, Nod in particular will try a number of times to multi-nuke a base to achieve victory, and it is perhaps a separate discussion to discern whether or not 4 or more beacon's from Nod at the same time is an unfair advantage or overkill. Even GDI will often place 3-4 beacon's in a single rush. But in any case, even limiting either side to just 10 per map would prevent an ordinary and legitimate strategy due to risk of eventually running out.

Currently we have it setup so it's no longer possible to place a beacon in one's own base, but I think we have got this the wrong way round. If we were to only allow beacons to be placed in the enemy base it would no longer be possible to spam or misuse them period. The only people I currently foresee this sort of change irritating is people on PUG games who want to mad plant beacon's on the field or in their own base just to get a really impressive explosion or rush of power.

I don't really think beacons should be allowed to be placed on the field as a fake and if anything something like this could be some sort of max cp special ability to target the field area only with an ion cannon or nuclear strike, perhaps similar to a cruise missile or what was done in the original C&C strategy game. The idea of free field striking is just something extra to throw out there and it would have the positive benefit in my opinion of preventing or breaking a long stale-mate campy base siege on choke point maps like Field, X-Mountain and so on.

Placing fake beacon's just outside of the base zone I feel is a bit of an underhand tactic anyway, it can also still turn into mad spam and it is equally annoying to listen to all the noise and EVA chatter, to place a fake somewhere like an enemy base tunnel I don't think is bad as it can cause what I would call allowable misdirection and confusion so they don't get an instant disarm, maybe limit the max number of beacons that can be placed on a building? Is it really fair to allowably have 6-7+ beacons placed by an enemy all on one building, take the Islands map and trying to finish off the GDI barracks without an Airstrip, sometimes there's no reasonable chance of even disarming that many beacons.  

Edited October 31, 2019 by Mystic~

[Marinealver]

Just raise the cost of beacons.

That will reduce the spam (especially if the refinery or powerplant gets knocked out).

[Handepsilon]

Power plant does not affect item price

[Mystic~]

Just raise the cost of beacons.

This would also prevent more people from using beacons's period, even legitimately; and especially on games where refinery's have already been taken out, this seems like a major potential source of frustration and under these conditions a team rarely spams beacons without a refinery and not every beacon makes it to a deployed state due to the carriers being taken out before they can get into a position.

[Tytonium]

I think the problem here is not beacon spam, it is unbalanced chokepointy map designed along with shoving way too many players into a certain selection of small maps. The only time beacon spam tends to be a problem is on Snow, Oasis, and Field. It's almost like 64 players weren't meant to be shoved into a map meant for smaller player counts.

Just vote for bigger maps when you have a bigger player count and the problem disappears.

[Mystic~]

17 hours ago, Tytonium said:

I think the problem here is not beacon spam, it is unbalanced chokepointy map designed along with shoving way too many players into a certain selection of small maps. The only time beacon spam tends to be a problem is on Snow, Oasis, and Field. It's almost like 64 players weren't meant to be shoved into a map meant for smaller player counts.

Just vote for bigger maps when you have a bigger player count and the problem disappears.

People will vote for Field and Under no matter what you say. Beacon spam is sometimes a really irritating problem, particularly on a map like Islands or Snow and also when taking into account a large map like X Mountain or and having to check ever building the moment it announces "Nuclear strike beacon deployed". As far as choke points go, having a free firing nuclear strike or ion cannon strike that could be to target a camping army would be superb, just like the original game. For example, if you're just going to camp our base entrance without attacking anything then we'll super weapon you, and likewise, perhaps if all a team does is defend then maybe their army could be eliminated the same way, it would just need a fair system for how it's used, cost or cp limited and some sort of time delay that doesn't make it either instant or slow and useless, maybe the word "ion cannon incoming" without flaring the targeted spot and let people guess and scatter accordingly. It would have to be made useless against buildings though.

[isupreme]

cool down period?

[crazfulla]

On 11/3/2019 at 11:09 AM, isupreme said:

cool down period?

This (same as airstrikes).

Or remove the bit where the beacon can't be disarmed (the last 10 seconds or so).

Edited November 7, 2019 by crazfulla