Commando Archive
Thread: Commandos should be able to sabotage...
... opposing faction harvesters/factories.
I mean, in a war, isn't the strategy to cripple an opponent beforeyou actually attack? You do this by attacking their infrastructure. The way it stands now, our Guild Hall (which is rebel) could have an IMP player place a harvester right next to it. In war, that would not be allowed - no doubt about that.
I want to make mines, grenades or whatever and have commandos lob them at opposing faction structures.
One way would be to make it so it's only able to be done by overts. Your structure could only be attacked if you were overt and only by someone else who is overt. This would practically ensure that crafters remain crafters.
Or as in my example above, it could only be destroyed if placed within a certain distance of an opposing faction structure.
Is there any chance we'll see this happen?
Interesting idea, however i think allowing commandos to blow up harvesters and shuch would be a greifing nightmare. Imagine factional powergamers running about all day destroying all opposing harvesters. That'd be worse than tossing mind posion into a med center killing all the defensless medics that got a TEF from healing people cause they were trying to make a living.
Maybe if you could sabotage factional structures only, or like factinal PA halls where the damage would be taken out of the maintinance pool. The structure doesn't actually get destroyed, but with the loss of maintinance it would cost them money, so they'd have to pay more in maintinance.
PadawanChong wrote:
... opposing faction harvesters/factories.
I mean, in a war, isn't the strategy to cripple an opponent beforeyou actually attack? You do this by attacking their infrastructure. The way it stands now, our Guild Hall (which is rebel) could have an IMP player place a harvester right next to it. In war, that would not be allowed - no doubt about that.
I want to make mines, grenades or whatever and have commandos lob them at opposing faction structures.
One way would be to make it so it's only able to be done by overts. Your structure could only be attacked if you were overt and only by someone else who is overt. This would practically ensure that crafters remain crafters.
Or as in my example above, it could only be destroyed if placed within a certain distance of an opposing faction structure.
Is there any chance we'll see this happen?
I whole heartadly agree. I want to destroy some harvesters and factories particularly.......
*cmoouygbgahcough*
I wouldnt want to see the harvets/generators destroyable, but maybe you cross a few wires, push the blue button and lower its ability to function(harvest less, generate less power and so forth). Then give architects a repair structure ability. Violla good idea to defense your stuff, architects get repeat buisness without totally screwing someone.
Anyway i dont think it should be a commando ability, at least not a commando only ability. Maybe have every elite/hybrid combat class able to savatage them in a different way, a TKA kicks the bolts out of that wind generator and thus it requires more maitnence, a pistoleer hooks up a wire to his pistol and overloads the system causes the harvest to lose a chunk of power it has stored.
Oh the public outcry this would cause....we'd be seen as the ultimate grief class. Crafters want to participate in the GCW too...which they can at present. It wouldn't be feasible to do so if this type of change went in.
Imagine logging in to find your house destroyed, harvesters and factories gone......all to a few hs kids that got the day off school and were commandos. It'd be ugly and we'd be hated.
If they could come up with "faction factories, faction harvesters" that functioned at 25% more efficiency but at the risk of destruction....that'd be something. But having all harvester/factories/structures that way wouldn't be nice IMO.
Sounds interesting, but it would create a new dynamic to the game. Part-time crafters would be forced covert to protect their investments while full time crafters (their competition) would have a distinct advantage if those factioned crafters decided to PvP or do some faction missions.
I would love to do it, but I think it would hurt the economy and the "play nice" policies. If you really hated a particular factioned individual or PA, you could really hurt them by destroying their ability to gather resources. It would be like taking their credits away. Plus alot of the Master crafters are already factioned... you may actually end up hurting yourself by destroying their ability to craft for you.
I am a factioned master WS and I support it. It would force crafters to remain that - crafters.
Either that, or it would make turrets and other various means of protection a more neccessary option.
See, that's what I'm lost on. Why do they put the symbol above the structure? It just burns me up when I see an IMPERIAL harvester sitting right next to mine. Especially if I had mine down first. Some IMPs are nice, but I don't want their stuff giving mine the cooties.
DarkCobra wrote:
Yea,they should do something about faction harvestors,dunno give a great bonus to harvesting but sabotageable or do away with teh faction mark beside the name.
I dont know... I think it would be a good idea but for smugglers to do and the sabotage could be as simple as turnign the unit off until it is pulled up and set back down. That would be enough insentive to keep it in a neutral or faction aligned territory. It can be a simple as if a rebel harvester is:
In Neutral Territory it cant be touched.
In Rebel Territory it cant be touched
In Imperial Territory it can be disabled. / In order to disbale a building in neitral of faction opposite territory the land must first be converted to faction aligned land by the placement and a faction building in proximity to the object then it must be disabled but the faction building must be on the land for a couple of hours before it becomes faction aligned and the size of the building determines it area of influence.