Big Tower Thoughts

[Peter Long 4345]

Vote on your thoughts in regards to the Large Towers throughout the map. 

[Fat Clemenza 1722]

Get rid of them all. "Good Players" will be brought back to reality while making things less campy and less laggy. It'll force people to think of new ways to defend positions. I'll donate if this happens.

[Guest]

The argument for removing them is that with natural cover and DIFFERENT cover, such as barracks/gang hideout buildings and other interior or sandbag based cover is more interesting to fight in.

 

Big towers make it hard for choppers to land anywhere inside of a compound tactically. It also gives a very large advantage to those defending. Not only that, but fights inside of the towers are LAGGY as hell, which really detriments fights. This is why I don't favor having it switch to 1st person in a tower because it's still laggy in CQC either way and really isn't a whole ton of fun.

 

I've noticed that at cartels with more natural, fluid cover or terrain that gangs fight more tactically. There are flanks, risky moves for certain positions inside, different tactical maneuvers around multiple parts of the compounds. At places with big towers, the objective is all about the tower. Getting under it is the #1 tactic, and taking out the lesser-manned Tertiary positions on the immediate surroundings of the tower to facilitate a push into the big tower. The progress to this is usually a pitched battle with people on the top of the tower with an advantage. The advantage comes mostly from 3rd person and the ability to line up a shot before you put yourself in the line of sight. Obviously this will always be an issue with 3rd person, but the issue is most exaggerated with fights at big towers.

 

I think it would make fights much more interesting and fluid if there was more natural cover strewn about in the defensive locations. The federal reserve for instance has no big tower and is a fight with multiple strategies, entryways, flanks, and cover strewn all over the place. That's my 2 cents.

[Peta 494]

Remove them. And bring back gang hideouts 

[ComradeGoonie 325]

Would this also apply to government compounds, e.g. police precincts and patrol stations?

 

[ToeKnee 613]

27 minutes ago, ComradeGoonie said:

Would this also apply to government compounds, e.g. police precincts and patrol stations?

 

I think cops should keep em but up to @McDili in my opinion because cops already deal with enough shit.

[Zephyr 46]

no more towers, people sit in them and camp all day and rushing a tower never works unless you are lucky because of all the lag and tele. You could implement other structures that give vantage points and still allow heli drops that are laggy and ridiculous.  

[ComradeGoonie 325]

2 hours ago, ToeKnee said:

I think cops should keep em but up to @McDili in my opinion because cops already deal with enough shit.

I have a counter offer. SimCity <3

 

[Mobundo African Warlord 335]

just change cartels from retarded places back to the old warzone style places with some good attacking and defending cover. and make towers more balanced maybe a few at rebel or no towers either way. the issues is newer players continue to be beaten out my the skilled players with towers. and honestly they are boring to fight in and the amount of lag/desync when people are in them is insane. 

[Linka 2935]

3 hours ago, Mobundo African Warlord said:

just change cartels from retarded places back to the old warzone style places with some good attacking and defending cover. and make towers more balanced maybe a few at rebel or no towers either way. the issues is newer players continue to be beaten out my the skilled players with towers. and honestly they are boring to fight in and the amount of lag/desync when people are in them is insane. 

yeah yesterday you literally flew off the fucking tower

Mobundo African warlord?

More like.. mobundo african wargod. get it. because you flew.

9 hours ago, Fat Clemenza said:

Get rid of them all. "Good Players" will be brought back to reality while making things less campy and less laggy. It'll force people to think of new ways to defend positions. I'll donate if this happens.

is that when we'll see the true power of clemenza

[BENJI 1021]

Make the Cartels more interesting

[Natsirt 5]

Before we do this, we gotta get retards to fight, only people that fight is M and MC sometimes the other gangs that just get wiped in seconds.

Legit,

We need more gangs to fight *Cough Cough* Tree

[Fat Clemenza 1722]

5 hours ago, ComradeGoonie said:

Would this also apply to government compounds, e.g. police precincts and patrol stations?

 

Yes it would. We would see the complete and utter extermination of the Big Towers. Think of it as the Final Solution to the Big Tower question. 

[Guest]

5 hours ago, ToeKnee said:

I think cops should keep em but up to @McDili in my opinion because cops already deal with enough shit.

Nope. The idea is to get rid of big towers, period. From everywhere. Rebels, Police HQ's, jail, cartels, and even the places that aren't of any significant, like old athira rebel, or the old jail.

 

The idea is to use more interesting structures for cover instead of big towers.

[Linka 2935]

option 3 shouldnt be an option IMO

[BENJI 1021]

15 minutes ago, McDili said:

Nope. The idea is to get rid of big towers, period. From everywhere. Rebels, Police HQ's, jail, cartels, and even the places that aren't of any significant, like old athira rebel, or the old jail.

 

The idea is to use more interesting structures for cover instead of big towers.

I find the complete extermination of big towers a little bit extreme don't you think?

[ToeKnee 613]

5 minutes ago, Benjamin Remer said:

I find the complete extermination of big towers a little bit extreme don't you think?

Nah they need to go.

25 minutes ago, McDili said:

Nope. The idea is to get rid of big towers, period. From everywhere. Rebels, Police HQ's, jail, cartels, and even the places that aren't of any significant, like old athira rebel, or the old jail.

 

The idea is to use more interesting structures for cover instead of big towers.

and I don't know if vanilla towers can be hidden or not.

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, Benjamin Remer said:

I find the complete extermination of big towers a little bit extreme don't you think?

Not really. It's kind of strange that they're so common to be honest. It would be a drastic change considering that we're so used to it, but to be honest it'll just make fights more interesting.

 

1. Defenders will always have an advantage in any cover on a 3rd person server, right? Just part of being a 3rd person server. But the big towers give such a boost to the advantage that it becomes a ridiculous gap between attackers and defenders. This isn't the only reason, it's a multitude. Defenders should always have an advantage but big tower exaggerate it to me.

2. The big towers kind of ruin any other strategy. It's always a blitz either from the bottom or the top. You have to make it under with an ifrit, or make it on top with an orca. There's no flanks, no maneuvers for other points of the compounds. It becomes the major focus of a fight and all the strategies and tactics involved with the fight is about taking the big tower.

3. Once you actually get into the tower, it's a lagfest. CQC turns into a joke. People shoot you around corners or from 2 floors below you because of dsync or lag. Let's be clear, CQC will always be laggy. But again, it just seems most exaggerated in big towers. 

 

So yeah, I think they should go. I don't focus on a cop perspective with that, but just a fighting perspective. It'll be better for fights, whether it be APD vs gang or gang vs gang. They'll just be more fluid and natural.

[Mobundo African Warlord 335]

3 hours ago, McDili said:

Not really. It's kind of strange that they're so common to be honest. It would be a drastic change considering that we're so used to it, but to be honest it'll just make fights more interesting.

 

1. Defenders will always have an advantage in any cover on a 3rd person server, right? Just part of being a 3rd person server. But the big towers give such a boost to the advantage that it becomes a ridiculous gap between attackers and defenders. This isn't the only reason, it's a multitude. Defenders should always have an advantage but big tower exaggerate it to me.

2. The big towers kind of ruin any other strategy. It's always a blitz either from the bottom or the top. You have to make it under with an ifrit, or make it on top with an orca. There's no flanks, no maneuvers for other points of the compounds. It becomes the major focus of a fight and all the strategies and tactics involved with the fight is about taking the big tower.

3. Once you actually get into the tower, it's a lagfest. CQC turns into a joke. People shoot you around corners or from 2 floors below you because of dsync or lag. Let's be clear, CQC will always be laggy. But again, it just seems most exaggerated in big towers. 

 

So yeah, I think they should go. I don't focus on a cop perspective with that, but just a fighting perspective. It'll be better for fights, whether it be APD vs gang or gang vs gang. They'll just be more fluid and natural.

i miss, the old pygros rebel it had no tower defense. it was so nice i remember having a Mc NW APD fight there a huge war that lasted a server restart, and consisted of pushing broken cars and hiding behind the little walls crawling to get closer to the H barriers. fights like that are hard to come by now since cartels take forever to get to and end via a tower defense or some reason. and i feel this map has some spacing issues like i never fight anywhere besides rebels Hq's and cartels. once and a while in a city. ;/ drug pros have barely any tactical fighting room either. @ToeKnee

[BENJI 1021]

40 minutes ago, McDili said:

Not really. It's kind of strange that they're so common to be honest. It would be a drastic change considering that we're so used to it, but to be honest it'll just make fights more interesting.

 

1. Defenders will always have an advantage in any cover on a 3rd person server, right? Just part of being a 3rd person server. But the big towers give such a boost to the advantage that it becomes a ridiculous gap between attackers and defenders. This isn't the only reason, it's a multitude. Defenders should always have an advantage but big tower exaggerate it to me.

2. The big towers kind of ruin any other strategy. It's always a blitz either from the bottom or the top. You have to make it under with an ifrit, or make it on top with an orca. There's no flanks, no maneuvers for other points of the compounds. It becomes the major focus of a fight and all the strategies and tactics involved with the fight is about taking the big tower.

They're common because it used to DEFEND and only that. Its great for defending and gives you the height advantage. But it literally all depends on where the tower is. Mix somethings up with the tower placements, or the whole cartel / rebel placements. The place of where the area is (rebel, cartel etc) pretty much can define the strategies that are going to be used. You have to make the areas of the big towers unique and different. That's really the only thing I can say. The whole layout of the area is key, mix it up a little. And see what the community thinks about it, better decision than flat out banning big towers.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Benjamin Remer said:

They're common because it used to DEFEND and only that. Its great for defending and gives you the height advantage. But it literally all depends on where the tower is. Mix somethings up with the tower placements, or the whole cartel / rebel placements. The place of where the area is (rebel, cartel etc) pretty much can define the strategies that are going to be used. You have to make the areas of the big towers unique and different. That's really the only thing I can say. The whole layout of the area is key, mix it up a little. And see what the community thinks about it, better decision than flat out banning big towers.

The strategies will be and always have been about taking the big tower from the defenders. A one strategy fits all is pretty boring.

[bigPat 695]

Seems like this is happening 100%. What the majority of people want. 
Fights will be more interesting, agreeing with pretty much everything and everyone has said about them. 

 

[Lethal 636]

Rebels, and HQs should have them still, all other ones should be removed. Rebels and HQs should be designed to be natural strongholds. The only cartel that people want to defend now is mushroom because you can just sit on a tower. Move mushroom cap to this compound. Problem solved.

[Guest]

You can still have defensible compounds with the bi-huts, short towers, and other structures. The fights surrounding them have always had more room for strategy execution for both sides.

 

Big towers don't make the stronghold what it is, the Fed reserve is an extremely defensible stronghold (Given you have the manpower to man it properly) and it doesn't have a big tower.

[Lethal 636]

1 minute ago, McDili said:

You can still have defensible compounds with the bi-huts, short towers, and other structures. The fights surrounding them have always had more room for strategy execution for both sides.

 

Big towers don't make the stronghold what it is, the Fed reserve is an extremely defensible stronghold (Given you have the manpower to man it properly) and it doesn't have a big tower.

I disagree with this sentiment. If you want to remove all towers, how are cops going to have a chance of defending hqs? By definition the HQ and Outposts need to be more defensive than Cartels, apd/rebel objectives (jails, feds) Just my thoughts. And the fed is the worst compound to defend, im not really sure where you heard that its easy to defend, 4 gates, multiple jump spots, flashbangs that last longer than i do in bed (about 45 seconds) Why do you think people really dont do feds