Pushwall

Yeah that's cool except there's a reason why the Cruisers on Seamist are not visible even if you spectate over to the place the shells are coming from. We don't have a model. There's a bunch of other problems too: That range suggestion means it would have a godly 5-10m extra range compared to the Destroyer... hooray... A high arc would allow it to hit subs which is totally not what it should be doing. Unless its gun was forced to a high angle which would also mean it would have a lot of trouble actually hitting certain buildings even if it had 100% accuracy. "Really slow", only 10-20% extra damage, inaccurate, and a negligible range increase... considering that a Destroyer will get in range of the enemy base much sooner and therefore deal damage sooner and can actually HIT aircraft and can reliably hit buildings other than the sub pen, and will ideally not have a dumb arc setup that allows it to hit units that it shouldn't (subs), why don't I just get a Destroyer instead? It would have to have only one turret for the same reason I've mentioned dozens of times about why the Destroyer's depth charge rack can't be turned. It's difficult enough for destroyers to navigate the icebergs on Hostile Waters, you really want something twice as big going through there?

Naval transports will also be a little flimsier in the next hotfix.

Which is why they were planned to not be very good against buildings. Of course, 5 units with anti-building damage as poor as a Ranger's popping up behind your war factory is still no joke, but that's pretty expensive to pull off and easy to thwart once defenders get there as I also planned for them to have the ground speed of an artillery and a 30+ second delay to shift out again once you've shifted in. Not to mention they'll know it's happening before it does happen if underground logic is used.

Also when I was messing with the Chronotank, the idea was that in addition to it being essentially a tank destroyer, the Phase would be downgraded to frag rockets, making it less effective against heavy vehicles, but still effective against light vehicles (which for the Soviets is the TT, V2, Hind and Supply/Demo Truck), infantry and buildings. The Mammoth would probably have to be raised to tech level 5 if this happened though (except on Seamist) since the Phase is currently one of the biggest counters to Mammoths. The Phase would probably also be reduced in price (around 1600-1750).

Don't expect to see any of these get implemented. Except maybe the Chronotank if we get someone to texture it and also we get some new scripts for it. When I was messing around with it a year ago hopeful to actually get it included, something similar to Reborn's underground vehicles was the first thing I considered as a replacement for what's currently there, and it was set up as a primarily anti-armour unit like Sarah said.

Yeah, all those vehicles that both teams get access to. What a shame.

You wouldn't be able to do barrel rolls though, the functionality that made such a thing possible was canned almost 2 years ago :<

And people wonder why I stay the fuck away from social media.

Oh dear, boats on the horizon, better spam-purchase supply trucks, surely the cutscene LSTs will collide with them eventually...

Thing is though, right now, even with infantry massively beefed up from their Gamma/Beta/earlier incarnations (and all without going the Reborn route of turning all infantry into walking tanks!) losing your war factory still kills all hope for a comeback even if you have your barracks, unless there are other vehicle factories about or the teams are massively stacked in your favour. The only map this really isn't true on is Under because of its small size and rampant tunnels. Meanwhile, on maps that aren't Under, you can lose your barracks and not your WF and still have a tangible chance at making a comeback, and that still holds true even with rocket soldiers gone, it just becomes a lot harder when you lack the support of mechs or the best anti-tank/anti-air infantry. If ST/OT were still available on WF death, supply trucks would allow more mobility for groups of anti-tank infantry and make it easier to do sneak attacks on exposed enemy buildings on maps with concealed enough routes to allow this, and ore trucks would allow you to continue to attempt to uphold the economy if your AI OT is dead but your Refinery is still alive (which of course comes at the price of there being 1 less infantry on the field) as well as being a neat artillery-proof transport for a pair of rockets/kovs/shockies or a building shield, giving the WF-less team a better chance at attacking and defending, and supply trucks in particular would give them a better chance at making sneaky comebacks with both the bar and WF dead than no-bar rocket soldiers could ever hope to do, while being much less capable of stalling than rocket soldiers are. AP mines really aren't a concern for a truck full of sergeants/captains if they don't disembark right on top of the obviously mined doorways (or if one of them sacrifices himself by disembarking in range of ALL the mines). And besides, a dead barracks still functions enough to let you respawn, not to mention buying techies/sergeants/captains, why can't the war factory do a little too?

It was never in in the first place because it doesn't work. If it did I'd gladly make supply trucks and possibly ore trucks purchasable on WF death.

...have you tried shooting tanks with the Captain? It's not as bad as it sounds. Also the situation you describe (where one team has no factories) is one where the losing team would have basically no hope of making a comeback even IF they had rocket soldiers. All rocket soldiers would let them do in that situation is prolong the game and prevent the winning team from actually ending it. Getting rid of rocket soldiers when the barracks is down just means matches end quicker so you spend less time getting killwhored and more time playing the game. Also it means people have more of a reason to destroy/protect the barracks. I don't see how either of these are bad things.

Not good, this is not good.

I'm aware super units are a bad idea. It was a joke. Something between 1000-2000 points should be sufficient for this honestly. Else people that care too much about the stats system will just demand to skip maps so they can get to the one that provides a massively disproportionate base destruction reward compared to other maps.

10000 points might be a bit much? Is that given to each team member as well? Bear in mind the standard building destruction bonus is 250*players, auxiliary buildings are 125*players, and Seamist's dome objective is 500*players. Also oh you silly teams storing nuclear warheads underground throughout your base instead of using them to make nuke destroyers and nuke subs.

The NW voice commands only had "defend the X" voices. That's kinda why I'm apprehensive about going back to them - there's a whole section of commands that are completely useless because the EVA exists, and no attack commands. If it did have attack commands I'd gladly do it though and include both "don't buy demolition trucks" and "intelligence dubious".

And having the AA launchers NOT outrange 1500cred ships would mean there is no land counter to destroyers/missile subs except arties, V2s and volkovs. None of which are available on Pacific Threat or Hostile Waters, and on Coastal Influence only V2s are actually reliable for this. Having them on the list after the bar is dead also creates a game where the winning team can't actually WIN because there's still rocket soldiers fucking everywhere preventing them from rolling in and destroying the base, which also leads to people just getting snipers and... guess what? KILLWHORING. It also means keeping the barracks alive is less important.

It was actually possible all-along. Simply put, nobody knew about it. I still don't know about it. Door tiles have no HP and are not destroyable.So what kind of preset opens like doors but can be destroyed? One prefixed with the name of the building mesh (like mabar#dr for the doors of the Allied Barracks which is mabar).

I did read the comment completely. My point still stands. Having mines and an actual firing mode on the same weapon doesn't work. Also, the missile sub and destroyers are not meant to be able to reliably destroy naval units. That's what the attack sub and gunboat are for. The destroyer gets depth charges because they're too situational to reliably handle subs when compared to mines, and also because hey maybe making the destroyer/missile sub completely identical is boring.

can I get a tl;dr on this? I went cross-eyed a couple lines down. Mines aren't missiles.

It's almost like I've pushed this idea like a dozen times in the past and so have many other people. Hopefully by this point the scripts dudes can actually figure out a way to do this...

I would recommend at least going onto the server or the IRC first though, and asking if there are any moderators around to enable RA_CamosCanyon_Bots on the server. That way you can play around and attract players at the same time!

Launcher > Games > APB > Single Player > LAN > Map Cycle List > Add RA_CamosCanyon_Bots > Play Not that different for Reborn.

I'd prefer to keep arbitrary weapon immunities to a minimum so as not to confuse people. This is also why the AK-47/TOZ secondary fires actually hurt vehicles/buildings now (though they both have identical DPS to the primary against buildings). I've lost count of the amount of derps in Gamma who spammed the AK-47's secondary fire against MCTs somehow completely ignorant of the fact that it didn't do any damage because omg it fires faster therefore it must be bettar!

If we're going to go with the "did anyone use this in RA?" argument, we might as well just make the only units in the game Medium Tanks and Heavy Tanks. And I suppose rifle infantry because those spawn on occasion when those units die.