What do you think of adding a motorcycle unit? It could be treated as an infantry unit (weak vs anti personnel) with a bigger move radius, fewer terrain penalties than the rover (since a dirt bike could probably handle bumps better) and the ability to jump from the very high to very low terrain (but not vice versa) with no penalty. I got the idea from the combat cycle in Generals:zero hour. So would it be good or would it be a gimmick unit?
Unit idea
- Thread starter V3N0M
- Start date
Keeper_GFA
Prince
Infantry units can gain the APC special ability (with a tech the I can't recall) which allows them 2 moves over open terrain.
Maniac
Apolyton Sage
Or you could build a chopper.
wouldn't a chopper be more expensive than a dirt bike/quad?
And what about a robotic/radio control unit that can engage mindworms in normal combat. It could start out weak but become more effective as computer and A.I. Technologies improve and there could be a limit to the number of robots the player can have, like mindworms
And what about a robotic/radio control unit that can engage mindworms in normal combat. It could start out weak but become more effective as computer and A.I. Technologies improve and there could be a limit to the number of robots the player can have, like mindworms
Maniac
Apolyton Sage
The problem is there already is an anti-native unit line: the flamethrowers.
Keeper_GFA
Prince
Too many unit types isn't necessarily a good thing. Remember that the special abilities are there so that you the player can create and define the specific units that you want.
IMO anyways.
I wasn't really thinking of the robots as anti native so much as an alternative strategy for players that have pissed off planet (edenists, terraformers, etc). They would be more expensive than regular units too so they wouldn't dominate the game. Anyone else have any ideas for units/niches?
I see your point about clutter but I'm thinking that if handled right it would result in the player having several ways to to fight, basically making it a game of creativity as well as logic
I see your point about clutter but I'm thinking that if handled right it would result in the player having several ways to to fight, basically making it a game of creativity as well as logic
Keeper_GFA
Prince
Bunkers are already in game to add defense. I guess they could be made buildable. But then attacking a city full of bunkers would be extremely difficult.
I never really liked the implementation of the machinegun unit. Better for defense, sure. But completely unable to attack at all seems harsh, especially since it wasn't always a better defender.
Maybe an ability to add defensive strength to a unit. Heavy armor (+1 Defense, -1 Move or Attack). If available early however, it would make a Heavy rover better than a scout for defending.
I never really liked the implementation of the machinegun unit. Better for defense, sure. But completely unable to attack at all seems harsh, especially since it wasn't always a better defender.
Maybe an ability to add defensive strength to a unit. Heavy armor (+1 Defense, -1 Move or Attack). If available early however, it would make a Heavy rover better than a scout for defending.
Like I said GFA, mg-theme units, a cheap defensive unit. Building a billion bunker units is silly. Besides bunkers can attack via bombardement iirc.
Why does a defensive only unit always need to be better than all potential attackers. Defeats the point of a strategy game.
Keeper_GFA
Prince
It doesn't, I didn't said that. I just don't see the point in a new defense-only line of units. Especially when there's a system already in place to give that function to currently existing units.
And a billion bunkers is better than you'd think. In a previous version, the AI Spartans literally built bunkers everywhere. With magtubes and bunker units everywhere, it was the best defended AI I've ever played against.
It doesn't, I didn't said that. I just don't see the point in a new defense-only line of units. Especially when there's a system already in place to give that function to currently existing units.
And a billion bunkers is better than you'd think. In a previous version, the AI Spartans literally built bunkers everywhere. With magtubes and bunker units everywhere, it was the best defended AI I've ever played against.
lol. A billion bunkers is still silly dude. You said bunkers were buildable in cities (at least you said bunkers were a sub for machine guns anyhow).
GeoModder
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2005
- Messages
- 7,512
Bunkers are less silly then unprotected infantry sitting in a spot with a semi-heavy weapon which ensures they can't change positions easily if they are about to be overwhelmed.
Mobility is key for modern soldiers. Fight on the same position too long and you're quite dead.
Mobility is key for modern soldiers. Fight on the same position too long and you're quite dead.
Mobility is key yet bunkers are the penultimate defense? Doesn't make sense. last time I checked, a machine gunner can move while the bunker cannot...
Bunker busters yo.
GeoModder
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2005
- Messages
- 7,512
That's the second time you distort someone's response in this thread alone, deadliver.
But yes, I do think a future bunker (like Planetfall utilizes) with appropriate protection/armament will be more capable of fending off infantry then a 20th century-style machinegun operator.
But yes, I do think a future bunker (like Planetfall utilizes) with appropriate protection/armament will be more capable of fending off infantry then a 20th century-style machinegun operator.
Then why have infantry at all? Infantry in Planetfall are effective at base defense aren't they? I am not saying bunkers have no place in the mod, I like 'em around my bases.
Sorry I hurt your feelings btw GeoModder.
Sorry I hurt your feelings btw GeoModder.
GeoModder
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2005
- Messages
- 7,512
It's not a matter of hurt feelings. It's a matter of you, perhaps deliberately, taking someone's words out of context or exagerating them. I merely expressed that observation.
Infantry = mobile all-round unit.
Bunkers = strong defensive immobile unit.
It's not a matter of hurt feelings. It's a matter of you, perhaps deliberately, taking someone's words out of context or exagerating them. I merely expressed that observation.
Infantry = mobile all-round unit.
Bunkers = strong defensive immobile unit.
Whatever dude. Bunkers exist to be popped by artillery, bombs and missiles. So does infantry, the difference is that infantry can move around and frankly they are cheaper to recruit and train than bunkers cost to build.
Just look at the landscape of Europe, there are many many pillboxes and bunkers (I grew up scampering around pillboxes in England). Why not have defense only infantry units that gain a benefit from bunkers? A radical concept.
