FOBs - diversity or a failed idea

[TheScar]

Alright,just spending my time on a session of a fresh (restarted) mission and we go live with 3 FOBs unlocked (Martian,Guardian,Marathon).

First observation,pilots spawn immidiatly to get their favourite chopper with no work effort at all > spawn to Guardian,get BF + get Orca > ignore transport as AO is close to main base anyway.

Secondly tower is downed in minutes by a "regular" UAVop without any requirement of a LD before bombing shit.The BF arrives at AO,firing shit up in minutes too.No communication seen whatsoever (Teamspeak doesnt count as communication on a 60player server,dont make me explain that to you)

Third observation: Its useless to spend work on usual side missions,as with FOBs available 70% of map procedure changed to teleport to FOB,get tank/APC > drive max 2k > profit

 

Then lets have a look at the current FOB condition :

• Martian     >>  Ammo truck,no service
• Guardian   >>  Fuel truck,no service
• Marathon   >> no truck(?),no service

So,what other than having more diversity on assets (spread all over the island) and non logical spawn options (no respawn on main base by default when dead) and the (wanted) impression of a ongoing invasion by our side do FOBs cater?

Often leads to pubs either asking/waiting to be transported from FOBs to action,while pilots sit on main base waiting for people to pickup,but they respawn on FOBs.

I m not even beginning to mention how pointless operating a vehicle/APC/tank is when you have no option to service,so you often find non respawning vehicles/rewards bingo ammo or derailed in the wilderness.

 

Bottom point,i dont see the advantage in the decicion for FOBs in the first place,at least in their current condition opposit to having 1 main base like in I+A 2 and before

It cost server performance,is difficult to overwatch (for admins/ZEUS) and takes extra effort to do so.

Ofc it ll improve (loadouts of assets @ FOBs will most likey change,spawn protection to unlocked FOBs will improve too most likely along the way,etc.) but my main question is:

 

Do FOBs cater to the initial mission and gameplay?

Imo not.

Decap!

 

Opinions?

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 15, 2017 by TheScar
added screenshot

[Aegis_RVIR]

Short story, good idea behind the FOB, pispoor execution.

 

Long story. I love the idea to fight over an facility to aid our progress, I imagined heavy and glorious combat. What we got iiiiiiiiisssssssss....

 

O wait this ain't Planetside 2, ummmm. 1 sec

 

*Thinking in progress*

 

Remove FOB'S, give us small resupply stations for health, ammo and fuel and transfer the desired FOB assets to the main base, case closed.

[Stanhope]

46 minutes ago, TheScar said:

Often leads to pubs either asking/waiting to be transported from FOBs to action,while pilots sit on main base waiting for people to pickup,but they respawn on FOBs.

Yesterday (i think) we had an AO almost at the absolute NE edge of altis.  That's about 20km from base?  So as i pilot i called out to people that i was standing by at fob guardian to bring them to the AO.  I was at that time flying an orca.  I waited there 5 minutes and not a single person came, even though there were 15 people waiting at base for transport.  After five minutes i got fed up with waiting, went to the AO and utilized all my guided missiles on enemy vehicles.  I basically wiped the AO of enemy vehicles.  Nobody cared because even though there were about 30 people online, there were only 2-3 in the AO.  And yes pilots were flying back and forth all the time, i was the only pilot not ferrying people from base to the AO.  I'm not gonna fly 20km if i can fly 10km and achieve the same result.  It reduces the boring stuff for me and reduces the time inf spends in the air.  

 

That being said, i don't disagree that something could be done about the FOBs.  Upon receiving we indeed get 2 rather OP helis (at least against AI, if a zeus decides to remote control the jet it's over and out rather fast)

And when marathon unlocks we get what?  A hummingbird and a mean-suicide-machine? (= pawnee) It almost always stays at the FOB because unless the AO is between 'vehicles have been destroyed' and 'the AO is finished' you'll get shot down rather fast if you try to go near the AO.  

But i don't think that the FOBs being closer to side missions is a bad thing.  Maybe some of the stuff at those fobs are a bit overkill but the fob locations themselves make sense if you were invading and annexing altis.  

And repair pads at the fobs would indeed be nice.  I don't see any reason not to have them there, but that might just be because of my lacking imagination.

About server performance i don't think a limited amount of vehicles and a respawn point hurt server performance that much.

 

 

So for an actual solution: (and again just my point of view)

 

Remove 1 marshall from FOB last stand (molos airfield),

 

remove either the blackfoot or the orca from guardian,

remove either the slammer or the gorgon from guardian,

swap 2 of the transport hemtts at guardian for (unarmed) hunters,

 

remove 1 marshall from martian,

switch the gmg hunter for an unarmed one,

either remove the cheetah or the jet (and i prefer the jet),

 

remove the pawnee from marathon,

remove the 2 hunter gmgs from marathon

 

and finally add a repair pad to every fob.

 

 

46 minutes ago, TheScar said:

Do FOBs cater to the initial mission and gameplay?

In my opinion, yes.  It's already strange that when you're invading an island you're jumping from one side of the bay to the other, let's at least keep the only annex part.

[Nibbs]

I like having the FOBs as a way of feeling like we're getting some progression on Altis, but I would suggest something like the following set of alterations.

 

Remove the option to teleport/respawn at an FOB, which pushes people to use the Choppers for the further AOs, deploying in groups, not individuals.

Swap the Guardian's Orca, with the Marathon's Pawnee, and give the Orca a much longer respawn time, similar to the Blackfoot / Kaiman.

Keep the ammo crates at the FOBs for the purposes of localised resupply.

Add a ground repair/rearm/refuel pad, to support the people who drive the vehicles out to where the FOB is.

Make the mission to get the FOB the first mission in the cluster, so it feels like we're establishing a foothold for the ground vehicles, then pushing out from there to secure the area. (Maybe this is already the case, but it feels like we get an FOB then 1 more mission close to it, then the next will be on the other side of Altis so the vehicles don't get used.)

Remove any resupply Hemtts from the FOBs, but also add a plane resupply pad in the main base so the Hemtts there are free to be driven out creating a mobile mini-servicing depot in the field, if anyone desires that style of gameplay.

Any aircraft from the FOBs should use the main base repair pads as applicable.

 

 

Additionally I see a lot of people soloing the side missions. Maybe it would be worth increasing the AI difficulty for the sides, making them a quick challenge, rather than just an easy way to get vehicles.

[Nibbs]

Oh and with regards to the Experienced UAV bombing the tower in minutes, I'm not sure how possible it is, but could you split who can control which UAVs?

 

Essentially you'd have 2 roles

 

UAV Operator sat in main base, focused on Greyhawks (and if lucky the Falcon) running airstrikes, and rapid recon of new AOs. (UAVs revealing vehicles on the map)

 

JTAC working within the AO's operating Darters, Laser Designators, and Remote Laser Designators (UAVs revealing Infantry positions on the map)

 

Everyone else, remove the Laser Designator from their loadout options.

 

I realise people will miss the thermal view on the laser designator for spotting targets, but with a JTAC working to show enemy positions in real time on the map, and lasing Targets for the Greyhawks, the JTAC becomes a role centred around making things run smoothly for everyone, in particular for the UAV guy, The FSG Gunner, and snipers who can have a hard time locating targets at range without the laser designator. I realise UAV can solo lase the tower still with a greyhawk, but it's a pain in the arse locking the laser onto the right place.

[TheScar]

1 hour ago, Cryo said:

Remove FOB'S, give us small resupply stations for health, ammo and fuel and transfer the desired FOB assets to the main base, case closed.

 

1 hour ago, Stanhope said:

In my opinion, yes.  It's already strange that when you're invading an island you're jumping from one side of the bay to the other, let's at least keep the only annex part.

 

31 minutes ago, Nibbs said:

I like having the FOBs as a way of feeling like we're getting some progression on Altis, but I would suggest something like the following set of alterations.

 

thank you for your opinion   keep it coming

 

 

 

 

 

 

not going to offtopic with the proposed/suggested asset change,the pilot/UAV stuff or the side mission they r just fine,except UWdiver ... argh,i´ll not even start

Im just curious how other people playing the mission feel about it,or to confirm i m just a grumpy,nitpicking,ranty but lovable prick that invests way to much lifetime in this mission.

Anyway,interesting read so far.

[Jason.]

It did seem quite strange to go from a base with a single type of transport helicoper, and a bunch of hunters, to having multiple attack helis and tanks.

imo the best option would be closer to the old setup but with some apcs and variety of helis.

 

As for FOBs, I agree we shouldn't start with them and maybe remove the option of spawning there. Definitely add service pads to the FOBs, or at least more supply trucks.

 

Lastly, I don't mean to be pushing me own agenda buuuut...
You could solve the UAV issue by removing the greyhawks and replacing them with a Buzzard armed with the same GBUs.

That way you keep the firepower but remove the ability to self designate targets, making teamplay vital.

It's also much less buggy!

[Lone]

Concerns have been noted, in my opinion FOB's do need a rework but exactly what they need can only be decided through lengthy discussion and community input, feel free to throw more stuff down here and in a couple days ill put together a summary for our devs for discussion.

 

After that is done I will feedback to you guys on any new decisions / questions the dev team have come up with.

[GamerbugUK]

If we keep with invading/annexing then it makes sense to progress with FOBs, but they sooo need a revamp.

 

Alternatley how about we switch it up, provide an alternative to I & A, same base principle but it's defend and repel invaders. Same AO principle, same side mission principle, but stick the base back in the middle again whee it would make sense for the defending force to have it and it'd be easier to get to AOs due to it's central location.

 

Ok yes it's pretty much I&A 2 again, but without the necessity of FOBs as we are the established force, we are central and we are repelling attack on our assets (AOs).

Heck I'd be up for a switch to CSAT as well.

 

2 game modes - I&A (Altis/Tanoa EE1/2) and D&R Altis (EU4)

[Eagle-Eye]

The main problem with FOBs right now is that they are spawned in on markers, and 1 marker = 1 unit. This really limits how complex you can make an FOB, while FOBs in real life are just as, if not more, fortified than MOBs.

 

Ways to fix this?

- Change how FOB is spawned in. Create a script that can spawn entire complex structures, instead of just a few single units.

- Have complex structures scattered throughout the map from the start (nothing wrong with using the bases already on the map by default, by the way) and set up FOBs in those locations. As a bonus, these can also be used in AO's in which the enemy is defending a fortified position. It's more challenging and rewarding for BLUFOR to overcome and seize an FOB this way.

 

But doing it like that, I can almost guarantee you will run into server performance issues. (Possibly fixed by 64bit support?)

[Nibbs]

14 hours ago, Jason. said:

You could solve the UAV issue by removing the greyhawks and replacing them with a Buzzard armed with the same GBUs.

That way you keep the firepower but remove the ability to self designate targets, making teamplay vital.

 

I rather like that idea, Currently the buzzard has someone just jump in it when they get bored, and when we actually need it, it's been blown up. I'd be in favour of the Buzzard having an armament of AA missiles and 1 or 2 GBUs, would feel like there's more point to flying it for longer periods.

 

Right now it just has far too few targets to be worth flying. And people get cranky if you use its guns for CAS, out of boredom

[Jason.]

6 hours ago, Nibbs said:

 I'd be in favour of the Buzzard having an armament of AA missiles and 1 or 2 GBUs, would feel like there's more point to flying it for longer periods.

 

By default the CAS buzzard has 2 AA missles, 2 GBUs, and 2 ATGMs, personally I think it would be fine like that, but the ATGMs could potentially be removed if deemed OP.

[Nibbs]

Damn, just tried out the eden editor, the buzzard is quite tricky to take off on the airstrip we have, it literally needs the whole thing and still almost scrapes the fence at the end

 

Likewise Landing also gets a little exciting

[TheScar]

 

 

keep on topic or derail your own thread,else ...

 

 

 

[Nibbs]

Maybe I see things differently, but it's an ideas forum, to my mind things are meant to derail and inspire. In this case we're throwing around ideas on how to solve your solo bombing the tower complaint in the original thread. However this post and your previous one are in fact off topic, so I assume the Mods will likely clean these up. 

 

It's clear we have a difference of opinion, so I'll say nothing more on this matter, apart from throwing more ideas in the mix.

[TheScar]

So,me reminding you in a "funny" way to keep ontopic and not discuss useless stuff (to me) as the AAjet (thats was/and still is abused) in my topic about the opinion of other people in FOBs ist inappropiate?
Guess what,feel free to open your own topic with issues you concerned about and we both be done with this (again) offtopic post.

No offenes.

Habe a nice fun free evening.

[Jason.]

Ah Scar...

 

We're directly addressing a solution to your second point, so I don't see how it's off-topic.

 

Back to the UAV point...

The Buzzard can land and take-off at that airstrip fine, you just need to make sure you use the full length of it.