Max Beacons Request

[Mystic~]

• Please limit simultaneously deployed beacons to maximum of 5 at any one time. Enough for 1 per building or several at one building.
• Please limit the PED to a maximum of 1 deployed beacon that needs to be defended.

In today's Nod versus Nod Black Hand PUG the opposing team managed to plant between 8-10 beacons all on the pedestal and it was mayhem to the point of being nearly impossible to defuse them all in time. Likewise, the upper suggested limit (5) would prevent having 10 beacons all deployed from people in APCs or a nearby tunnel exit, which are all planted external to a building.

These are in my opinion dirty tactics with little or no chance of surviving or disarming them in time. I'd also like something that prevents C4 from preventing a beacon from being disarmed due to blocking or obscuring the beam by placing it on top or over it, also something that prevents cluttering the pedestal area.

It was a somewhat amusing ending to the game, but I'm sure we should fairly have had plenty more fight left in us with just this building gone and not been subject to a near invincible attack.

If you have any other related sensible suggestions, amendments, ideas or opposing feedback please add to the discussion, thanks. 

[roweboat]

I'd say if a team can coordinate a well planned 10 nuke strike, more power to them.

 

Even if an attack like that seems overwhelming, it encourages team play, so it shouldn't be limited.

[Handepsilon]

I suppose the better question is : How did the team get the money to plant 10 beacons into the same spot INSIDE a building with not enough intrusion against them (bonus point if they use decent characters/vehicles as well), and if you only have 5 techs trying to disarm them as opposed to.... well, nearly the entire team.

I mean, don't get me wrong, 10 beacons are quite annoying, but when all of them are planted in what I'd consider one of the most precarious spot in all buildings, I'd have to question your team's defense very strongly

[Mystic~]

The map was Steppe, once the single rear guard tower is destroyed there is no active base defences covering that area and the Hand of Nod was already destroyed by a previous rush. With no techs, no more mines, with no high tier infantry no way of really stopping a full team rush with high tier infantry with a defensive bonus shield - with both a functioning refinery and a silo the money is easy to achieve. Precisely the same thing could happen on a map like Goldrush as similar splitting of large bases and potentially something like Lakeside.

Anyway, the proposition is sound, maybe it needs some refining or editing... but I am against invincible or unstoppable tactics like this.

10 over kill beacons should not required to encourage team play and not required to finish a game by way of a ped beacon - but being given the chance to defuse just the one or maybe even two beacons if there were spot highlighting placeholders even whilst it is being defended by the opposing team seems more fair. Additionally being able to spam C4 all over them is also a really messy and obstructing tactic. 

Yes, I agree, better defence was needed and there wasn't much there initially, neither was any sort of scout or early warning, there was eventually a team wide response but not capable of stopping that much momentum, fire power and multiple beacons against all their Mendoza defenders and 8 beacon's on the ped alone? There were probably far more planted in total just listening to the audio, however after losing just one building + this rush ended the game. I'm not complaining that we lost or that they pulled of a well timed/planned ped beacon - only the manner in which they can spam the game.

I think some in this community needs to better appreciate what Over Powered and Invincible options do to damage game mechanics and gameplay. I keep saying this, but a professional team of developers with user testers would learn and discover most of these stupidly retarded over powered options and implement solutions to make it balanced/fair and not be afraid to do things.

 

[Tommy]

 

[Mystic~]

Does anyone have a recording of inside our hon, planting?

[Luhrian]

I honestly don't even like the existence of a pedestal. Because of that I actually would like to be able to remove the pedestal from a map through a property in the SDK. In my opinion it is kinda stupid that you need to defend a destroyed Hand of Nod just because of this thing.

[NodSaibot]

1 minute ago, Luhrian said:

I honestly don't even like the existence of a pedestal. Because of that I actually would like to be able to remove the pedestal from a map through a property in the SDK. In my opinion it is kinda stupid that you need to defend a destroyed Hand of Nod just because of this thing.

It's just a server-side setting. Technically you could remove it if you edited the socket out I'm sure but I don't know if that would cause a crash or any other wacky issues.

[Tommy]

It's also worth to mention that the most frequently used servers have them disabled anyway.

[Mystic~]

Could the PED be moved into a new spot in the centre of the base? Although much harder to defend. I always feel the ped spot should be something like capture the flag for end game, maybe on a lower level of the barracks underground that must be defended. Or, capture the flag becomes a new game mode and all weapons become lasers of sorts.
 

 

Edited March 5, 2020 by Mystic~

[Handepsilon]

Will require all maps to be updated. Also, the point of the beacon being inside is because it's much harder to get inside buildings to plant those beacons to begin wtih

[Mystic~]

If someone could confirm there's already an upper limit in place of beacons that can trigger the global base strike that would be really beneficial to know. I'd be less concerned if there were only 3 lit up spots on the pedestal for planting beacons; but if it turns out you really can fit and mad spam 8-10 beacon on it and it only takes one of these to end the game, then my original point is still valid and it's too much to keep and next to impossible to defuse.

The map in question, without any Tech's (hon already destroyed) there were no mines to lay, without any high tier infantry to purchase it's almost impossible to stop a team all with high tier infantry (Mendoza) the building was defended by a destructible guard tower (already gone) and no manual defences re-spawn like certain other maps such as Whiteout and Tomb. Some of this is down to map design and maybe it needs looking at? Some of it is also down to what the game may presently be allowing. When it was GDI versus Nod, someone can circle missiles to the area to fire-wall it but it's much more difficult for an artillery to protect this and there are vehicle blockers in the way to prevent getting close.

Precisely the same thing can happen on Gold Rush and I'd be just as concerned about this many beacon's and how easy it is for an enemy rushing team to defend once they are established and inside against low tier infantry. The problem with de-teching a team when a building goes down is that you lose the mining ability... this class almost seems like it's so important that it needs to remain purchasable or allow players to purchase sets of mines with any character.
 

p.s. Capture flag really is a separate game mode which could be, but it would be cool if weapon's were laser rifles only and there was some sort of pre-fabricated platform asset with a flag to be taken from in each base - maybe just certain maps like Walls, Tomb, Volcano etc.

Edited March 5, 2020 by Mystic~

[Fffreak9999]

There is no limit to the amount that can trigger the end game, in theory you could have 64+ beacons on the pedestal all capable of triggering it.

 

As long as the physical beacon is on the pedestal it will trigger it.

[Reivax]

first fact: nukes and ions are op
i remember a 20v20 game on Field which has been ended by nod nuke rush, they planted 9 nukes  (our last building was surrounded by Nod tanks)
also, another fun fact: without nuke/ion spam, a few long game could be.. longer  
sometimes nuke spam is the only way to destroy a team and win the game, so keep it without beacon limit 

[Mystic~]

Quote

As long as the physical beacon is on the pedestal it will trigger it.

Can we please then have a max limit of 3 beacons for the ped? There are already 3 light place-holders to suggest this. I think its unfair to allow that many (unlimited) base destroying end game beacons to all be allowed on the ped as there's no realistic chance of disarming them all. It's still somewhat rare that this happens, but it is much more common now on certain maps like Steppe and Gold Rush for example.

I don't like beacon spam, but to say its possible to allow 2-3 beacons at every building (x4/x5) is far too much imo.