13 replies to this topic

[Rasc4l]

Like everybody knows, one of the silliest aspects of CW are the gates, which are powered by the generators, which in turn have been built by treasonous engineers right in the field of enemy fire. Even if the power was cut, such gates would be designed to close by default in the case of emergency.

So I was thinking that now that PGI is learning to make certain objects destructible in the new River City, on their way to actual destructible environment, perhaps they could practice that by making the CW gates destructible. And remove the generators. Or at least place them somewhere in the back where they are in proper cover (to retain the possibility of opening other gates via destroying the generators after breaching one gate physically).

Now of course the gate destruction damage states would have to be done pretty well to make it cool and perhaps such tinkering is not worth the time. But who hasn't wanted to use their lasers as a blowtorch?

In addition to boosting realism and being cool, I think this would also slightly improve gameplay, because it would be easier for the attackers to send mechs to knock on the gates with gauss from 1 km away to create a distraction instead of that mech having to go all the way to the gate to reach a generator.

[Appogee]

Stop making sense. Your logic, good ideas and suggestions have no place here.

[Tom Sawyer]

Just deep 6 the gates, gens and gun

Use the new river city as the template and add REAL objectives

[Vellron2005]

Destructable gates aren't a bad idea, but they aren't the real problem.. the problem is the overwhelming lack of realistic objectives and CW maps that have no need for gates at all..

[Helsbane]

These destructible gates you speak of.... Will my lasers hurt them? Cause they don't do sh*t to trees...

[Nik Reaper]

Yeah, you could say that gates are the same as turrets before in assault , they aren't a real roblem to a team going that way but they buy a bit of time before they go down so that the deffenders can deploy.

So far on;y boreal vault has a bit of a different concept where the deffenders have somewhat good fireing line on the attackers trying to get the generators , thus giving the deffenders an advantage as the attackers actually will take damage before they get in ( unless you use the lrm boat near the gate that can shower the generator out of sight ) .

The problem with the gate being destructable is obvious if you think about it, as there rearly are any good position for defenders to "man the wall" right next to the gate, as most fighting happens after they get in, the attacker wouyld just sit out and fire ERL or ERPPC for 2 min and then get in... and the deffenders on most maps would still not be able to attack them before the gate gets destroyed.

But yes, all in all it makes no real difference on most maps, as I feel that PGI wanted for a castle siege where the defenders on the walls fire at the attakers trying to destroy generators, as in boreal but some how forgot and abandoned that idea mid way and now we have generators that we can't defend and gates we can't destroy, and the easiest fix would to create climbable space near and on the walls and around them so that mechs could mount the wall and fire back.

[Ace Selin]

How about we just make River City into a CW map, wouldn't mind fighting over that map in 48v48.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Id rather CW be a layered game mode. Enemy has to burrow through more then 1 randomly placed gate to get to an ODG. Id rather we have what could be belived was an actual Orbital defense station. Right now it looks like a dropship was crashing and just started pushing things out the back to save weight so they could coast out to sea for an easier crash landing......then the workers that hot dropped just decided to put the gates in the most convient spot in the drop zone.

Edited by LordKnightFandragon, 09 July 2015 - 01:43 PM.

[TLBFestus]

Make the gates destructible, but also in such a way so as they "crumble", allowing different firing views as they degrade.

Also instead of separate generators for all 3, one master generator that could be attacked causing any still intact gates to open.

That gives the attackers some options at least.

[aniviron]

This came up in the last town hall. Russ says they considered making the gates destructible but decided against it, and that they are not considering adding it to the game, as it promotes having the attackers just sit back and whittle away at the gate, which is boring for both teams.

[BigBucket]

For enjoyment, realism ignore.

[IraqiWalker]

Rasc4l, on 08 July 2015 - 04:47 AM, said:

But who hasn't wanted to use their lasers as a blowtorch?

You had me at exactly that line.

[Rasc4l]

aniviron, on 11 July 2015 - 12:21 AM, said:

This came up in the last town hall. Russ says they considered making the gates destructible but decided against it, and that they are not considering adding it to the game, as it promotes having the attackers just sit back and whittle away at the gate, which is boring for both teams.

Interesting, I did not catch that although I tend to go through the written versions of town halls (which may or may not reflect what was actually said).

However, I do not understand the argument Russ presented assuming that argument is presented accurately in your post. The attackers are either "whittling away" at the gate or sitting back and destroying it from distance, which one is it? Because these two things exclude each other as far as I understand. The minor gameplay point, which I make at the end of my OP is indeed the fact that the attackers do not need to "whittle away" at the gate; they can destroy it from distance. I'm using "" symbols because as a non-native speaker I'm not entirely sure I understand the word whittle correctly but for the sake of argument I'm understanding it as "to reduce or eliminate gradually". The attackers I mean, not the gates, although they as well are whittling away alongside the assumed attackers who are also assumed to whittle away by Russ IF they go the gate, which however is no longer necessary.

Like I said in my OP, I completely understand if such a thing presented, which is not critical to gameplay and may thus take too much resources to implement properly with minor gains, is not implemented. But please PGI, spare us the BS that there would be some "logical" gameplay reasons not to do this. With all due respect and so forth.

[aniviron]

Rasc4l, on 11 July 2015 - 08:46 AM, said:

Interesting, I did not catch that although I tend to go through the written versions of town halls (which may or may not reflect what was actually said).

However, I do not understand the argument Russ presented assuming that argument is presented accurately in your post. The attackers are either "whittling away" at the gate or sitting back and destroying it from distance, which one is it? Because these two things exclude each other as far as I understand. The minor gameplay point, which I make at the end of my OP is indeed the fact that the attackers do not need to "whittle away" at the gate; they can destroy it from distance. I'm using "" symbols because as a non-native speaker I'm not entirely sure I understand the word whittle correctly but for the sake of argument I'm understanding it as "to reduce or eliminate gradually". The attackers I mean, not the gates, although they as well are whittling away alongside the assumed attackers who are also assumed to whittle away by Russ IF they go the gate, which however is no longer necessary.

Like I said in my OP, I completely understand if such a thing presented, which is not critical to gameplay and may thus take too much resources to implement properly with minor gains, is not implemented. But please PGI, spare us the BS that there would be some "logical" gameplay reasons not to do this. With all due respect and so forth.

Look at it this way: the gates would have to have a TON of health to be balanced out in terms of risk/reward vs taking out the generators. The generators need the attackers to expose themselves to the defenders, so there is a cost to the attackers to shoot the generators. The gates have no such cost; they can easily be shot without the defenders being able to see the attackers, and thus, to balance these out, the gates have to have a huge amount of health. Thus, whittling- gradually reducing the huge amount of health that the gates have. Furthermore, the attackers have very long sight lines to the gates on almost every map, meaning that the best tactic to destroy the gates while taking the least amount of damage from the defenders is sitting back as far from the gates as possible and shooting them, taking off small amounts of health until they are destroyed.