<!--quoteo(post=1945321:date=Jun 20 2012, 04:32 PM:name=.ADHd)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (.ADHd @ Jun 20 2012, 04:32 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1945321"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Sieging hives in NS1 was by far the most fun experience in the game. It really showed off the marine teams power of teamwork and coordination.
In NS2 I usually make 5-6 arcs and send them off by themselves while I tell the rest of the team to go jetpack to a different hive to distract. Theres a bit of coordination but the overall siege experience has gone down the drain. The marines and the comm should be intimately connected... any time when you give the comm the ability to sit in base hitting z on the robo every once in a while isn't skill or team based. If it gets to this point the marines ought to lose the game. Or else it is just delaying the inevitable. Really the marines just have to put a few mines and turrents and armory block the powernode... sit and hit z on the robotics factory for about 10 mins... click next to a hive... deploy arcs and win.
<i><b>Stupid easy.</b></i>
The sad thing is that there is actually an EASIER route than this... arcs are simply for commanders who don't understand meta game correctly. You don't need to spam arcs to win a game... and if you have the ability to spam arcs then you SHOULD have already won about 15-45 mins ago with coordinated pushes, phase gates and nano spam. I don't see arc trains as a huge issue really because it just shows that the balance of the game isn't there yet. The issue is not with the arc spam... it's something entirely different. It's nearly impossible to end a game in 15 mins or less in this build due to how many alien structures can be spammed. Even if the marines have the res control and are destroying the aliens. It seems like the balance in the new builds is just delaying the inevitable. I've played tons of games that I knew the marines were going to win EVENTUALLY. But even though we already nailed the coffin shut we are forced to sit in spawn spamming arcs.
I'm just trying to see the overall picture.
In this build you are better off just spamming nano shields on jetpack marines in the hive room than spending hundreds of res on arcs. Nano shields and medpack spam... hundreds of times more deadly than arcs imo.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Fixed in 2 easy steps
1) disable nano on players 2) make arcs have a 5-10 second player deploy time (the player has to hold E on each arc for 5-10s to set it up)
<!--quoteo(post=1945327:date=Jun 20 2012, 03:49 PM:name=GORGEous)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GORGEous @ Jun 20 2012, 03:49 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1945327"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Fixed in 2 easy steps
1) disable nano on players 2) make arcs have a 5-10 second player deploy time (the player has to hold E on each arc for 5-10s to set it up)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bleh... yeah I mean that would work... but the problem is will this ever happen in a public game ever? I suppose in time... it's kinda like that in NS1 anyway I support your idea.
Nano shield on structures is fine... and pretty much essential due to the lack of marine mobility early game. I do think nano shield should be removed from players for sure. It is not skill-based at all and is very exploitable.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Bleh... yeah I mean that would work... but the problem is will this ever happen in a public game ever? I support your idea though.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Is it any different from getting players to build a structure in the heat of combat? I like the idea, it would add a lot of tension, though it should be considerably fast. (Else you completely annihilate the marine team's ability to assault a heavily fortified position with ARCs) You may even have to increase ARC range or Armour if this ever happens, else it's likely going to become too easy to take them down. (Between a marine having to construct it, a fade being able to vortex it and a whole team of aliens biting it down, there won't be much time left for the ARC to actually do some shooting, certainly not if ARC trains become a thing of the past and marines have only a few ARCs on the field at a time)
The arc would be fine mobile if it required line of sight to fire on buildings.
It's the combination of mobility and firing through walls that breaks things.
Because the mobility negates the need to secure a foothold outside of the hive and build it up, and furthermore allows you to amass a large base killing force from the safety of your own base before deploying.
However, this advantage of mobility, building up a force in safety then moving it out, would be fine if you had to actually fight against upgraded whips and their supportive structures, which would at the very least delay the advance of the arcs and give the aliens time to take them out.
Tweaking costs will NEVER fix the inherent ARC problem. You can make ARCs as crappy and as expensive as you like but a turtle will always lead to ARC-trains if the turtle is secure enough. The trains will just take longer to build and be longer in length. There has to be something beyond numerical balancing by the way of (sucky) hard-caps or (elegant) soft-caps , i.e. ARC 'activating' which makes trains above a certain size possible but unattractive. The friendly-fire solution is pretty crappy if you ask me.
<!--coloro:#9ACD32--><span style="color:#9ACD32"><!--/coloro--> I was originally excited I guess at the possibilities of a mobile siege when it was announced way back, but after many builds of using them, fighting them and supporting them I have to agree they need major change in function to work.
What was really so wrong with building on the mechanics of siege turrets/turret factories like a proper sequel instead of somewhat cramming them together and putting them on tank treads? The rule of cool it seems to be based on really isn't working out here for me enough to ignore how much ARCs and (somewhat off-topic) nano shield are messing with the balance.
As far as ARCs go I don't think the remaining missing features and more balance tweaks are going to fix this honestly, if it isn't something major anyways. Nano is another story, it just needs to stop effecting players all together and it'll be alright. Though I'm honestly not fond of it either way. <!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
<!--quoteo(post=1945474:date=Jun 20 2012, 10:23 PM:name=Xostean)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Xostean @ Jun 20 2012, 10:23 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1945474"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I dont think the ARC should be removed.
Not because i enjoy raping bases with them, but because the marines are virtually helpless once aliens dig into a spot and put down fortifications.
ARCs are the only effective counter to such a scenario.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think the only thing the ARC should even consider being removed for would be the old siege cannons from NS1. I don't think anyone would argue that ALL forms of siege should be removed.
arcs are fine as is. they should be less spammable and that's it. i believe that once deployed arcs should turn into buildings which require power. if the room is unpowered the marines will have to put up power packs or something similar to power them.
<!--quoteo(post=1945482:date=Jun 21 2012, 12:27 AM:name=Wheeee)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Wheeee @ Jun 21 2012, 12:27 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1945482"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->arcs are fine as is. they should be less spammable and that's it. i believe that once deployed arcs should turn into buildings which require power. if the room is unpowered the marines will have to put up power packs or something similar to power them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
i like it. have the marines get into some danger trying to get the power on in the room before going to town with arcs.
<!--quoteo(post=1945183:date=Jun 20 2012, 03:09 PM:name=ellnic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ellnic @ Jun 20 2012, 03:09 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1945183"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think they should bring back the old seige cannon<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
+1. Let's just get it over with, turn the robotics into a turret factory and return to the ns1 model. In my meager 70 hours logged thus far, I have yet to have one arc experience that was half as fun as a typical ns1 sieging.
Hardcap on ARCs is needed. There is no sense in having more than 3 ARCs. If hard capped you can balance them again. (More tRes cost, more armor, slower, etc.) People should stop looking at the balance and see the real problem. It's just ugly to look at a clipping ARC-train and it destroys much of the fun that was meant to be added with escort-missions. Balancing ARCs when they are hardcapped at 3 is much easier and can be done after fixing the underlaying mechanic. Also, they should be deployed by a marine.
So please, at first make them fun, than think about balance! It would be so much immerse, when you only had one or two ARCs that you have to escort (much slower) near a hive. The loss of one ARC would really matter. The fights while escorting them would be much more intense etc. etc. Numbers can be tweaked easily afterwards = Balance is not the problem with the ARCs.
Best idea I have heard flying around is to have marines deploy the sieges after they are in position. Basically the marine commander bring the sieges to a hive location, puts a deploy build order on them and the marines deploy the sieges. This will gives marines some vulnerability while sieging up(instead of staying in perfect defensive formation) and give the aliens a chance to counter the sieges by killing the marines that are trying to deploy them.
Infestation and power node don't really allow to hold a forward phase gate, which was pretty much the core of the siege. So it's probably not possible to get back to more static sieges. Arc pushes are more one shot, suicide attack.
I'm for the manual deployment idea as well. If setting them up in a prominent position is still felt to be too easy with that in place, it might also be worth making them move slower on infestation, so that the aliens have more time to react if you try pushing straight into their heartland (and also make killing infestation en route a meaningful exercise).
ARCs should not function while taking damage. So, the "warm-up" to firing would continually reset if they were being bile bombed, or even grenade spammed by marines(this could just interrupt them like stomp, instead of damaging them). No more rolling massive arc trains into hives.
The comm would be required to place ARCs in more strategic positions, and marines would then be required to defend the ARCs with much greater caution, while ensuring they were keeping the alien team at a distance.
Also, I agree on a cap. Per robotics factory, perhaps?
AurOn2COOKIES! FREEDOM, AND BISCUITS!AustraliaJoin Date: 2012-01-13Member: 140224Members, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Forum staff
I personally dont enjoy the idea of an arc. It turns the game of "Destroy aliens" into "Defend arc whilst it destroys aliens" Not really enjoyable to walk something to a destination and watch (or not, if its through a wall) blow up a structure whilst you build turrets observatories or even just defend it by yourselves.
The ARC needs to go, and replaced with siege cannon from NS1.
it just looks cool, anything from the model to the idea just by talking about it (on paper) but it just doesn't work to well in actual gameplay. NS1 siege cannons worked very well, if they want to remodel them to look pretty fine, but bring those back.
If they require LoS they're not really sieges anymore are they? In terms of NS1 anyway. The whole reason of having a siege is to take out a hive that you cannot easily enter (due to it being defended, up and running, or even worse both). If you require a LoS to get those things to work, you might as well ditch the escort-mission and simply roll in with heavy-weapons, which is a lot easier and faster.
<!--quoteo(post=1945652:date=Jun 21 2012, 07:50 PM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Jun 21 2012, 07:50 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1945652"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If they require LoS they're not really sieges anymore are they? In terms of NS1 anyway. The whole reason of having a siege is to take out a hive that you cannot easily enter (due to it being defended, up and running, or even worse both). If you require a LoS to get those things to work, you might as well ditch the escort-mission and simply roll in with heavy-weapons, which is a lot easier and faster.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thinking on it, why not? Marines already have a long range, AoE weapon designed for destroying buildings. It's called grenade launcher. What's the reason for another one, which also conditions map design and tactics in such way? (I'm talking about for example, dropping a hive in Cafeteria in Docking being a bad move since it can be ARC'ed from Terminal)
ScardyBobScardyBobJoin Date: 2009-11-25Member: 69528Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Shadow
If some sort of marine deployment is instituted, then the ARCs will need some sort of buff to still make it viable, such as: - Can fire without scan again - Higher damage - Quicker ROF - Larger range
<!--quoteo(post=1945656:date=Jun 21 2012, 02:05 PM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Jun 21 2012, 02:05 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1945656"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If some sort of marine deployment is instituted, then the ARCs will need some sort of buff to still make it viable, such as: - Can fire without scan again - Higher damage - Quicker ROF - Larger range<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why?
They're already incredibly powerful. The problem is they're too easily spammed & trained across the map. This can be fixed by forcing marines to set them up (ie giving a way for aliens to deny their deployment). An initial cost of 5 seconds of a marine's time does not seem to warrant any buffs to an already incredibly powerful siege weapon.
They're already incredibly powerful. The problem is they're too easily spammed & trained across the map. This can be fixed by forcing marines to set them up (ie giving a way for aliens to deny their deployment). An initial cost of 5 seconds of a marine's time does not seem to warrant any buffs to an already incredibly powerful siege weapon.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Problem is it would become relatively easy to deny deployment. Think about it, all it takes is one onos to ruin your 'ARC arming'. In NS 1 you could often siege from other rooms, giving marines the 'defensive advantage' when setting up a siege. In NS 2 however, with the shorter ranger on ARCs, you usually have to drive them INTO a hive room, heavily exposing both the ARCs and the players trying to arm then.
That being said, I love the arming idea though, but it would be naive to think ARCs will not need a compensatory buff to go with it. The fact alone that ARC spam would be a thing of the past is enough reason they will need a buff. Marine commanders don't just spam ARCs because they have the t.res for it, they primarily field large amounts because just fielding 2 - 3 would likely be ineffective and too easily countered. If by requiring manual deployment ARC trains are no longer viable, you will need to damn well make sure that just 2 - 3 ARCs aren't going to be eaten by the entire alien team as fast as they are currently. Ergo studier ARCs are acceptable, certainly when there's only like 3 of them and they require arming on top of that. Would definitely make for exciting Siege gameplay again.
Really hope UWE takes note of the arming idea, it's by far THE best solution anyone has come up with.
<!--quoteo(post=1945652:date=Jun 21 2012, 09:50 AM:name=player)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (player @ Jun 21 2012, 09:50 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1945652"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If they require LoS they're not really sieges anymore are they? In terms of NS1 anyway.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What about the current arc usage even resembles a siege? Obviously they aren't siege weapons if they are so mobile and don't actually require a siege to function. A siege by definition is when you build up near a hardened objective and use it as a base to slowly break down the objective.
That isn't required with the current arcs because you can build up from the safety of your base then launch them anywhere on the map for a quick takedown. At that point being able to fire through walls makes them excessively powerful.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The whole reason of having a siege is to take out a hive that you cannot easily enter (due to it being defended, up and running, or even worse both).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You'd still be using arcs for that, you'd just have to start by shooting down the whips and structures at the entrance to the hive room before breaching it to directly fire on the hive.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you require a LoS to get those things to work, you might as well ditch the escort-mission and simply roll in with heavy-weapons, which is a lot easier and faster.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Arcs ARE heavy weapons in such a scenerio. They allow a group of marines rolling up on a hive to supplement themselves with necessary firepower against structures, allowing them to focus on the aliens. It becomes a partnership between the marines and arcs as a unit operating to advance.
Because of that escort like role, it makes perfect sense for them to be used in an advancing direct fire role alongside the marines, because they don't require an actual siege to function.
A siege requires that you build up and hold an area to protect the heavy weapons. But arcs don't require that because of their mobility. You are free to move them in quickly with your marines, and pull them back if necessary.
An ARC in a direct LoS of the hive-room would get tore down within moments (think fades blinking back and forth working on it, lerks spiking from afar et cetera). You don't stand in the line of fire, you'll die, this is why sieges are built behind a wall, not even in another room per se, just behind a wall so the aliens can't work on it as easily, and even then sieges get taken down all the time.
<!--quoteo(post=1945667:date=Jun 21 2012, 02:41 PM:name=Rise)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rise @ Jun 21 2012, 02:41 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1945667"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You'd still be using arcs for that, you'd just have to start by shooting down the whips and structures at the entrance to the hive room before breaching it to directly fire on the hive.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is the problem. You can't just shoot down whip/crag farms. You need arcs to do this. If you could shoot down the whip/crag farms then you wouldn't need arcs and all of this would be moot.
<!--quoteo(post=1945655:date=Jun 22 2012, 04:05 AM:name=Rowen)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rowen @ Jun 22 2012, 04:05 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1945655"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Thinking on it, why not? Marines already have a long range, AoE weapon designed for destroying buildings. It's called grenade launcher. What's the reason for another one, which also conditions map design and tactics in such way? (I'm talking about for example, dropping a hive in Cafeteria in Docking being a bad move since it can be ARC'ed from Terminal)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Whip says hi! :)
Simply put, this is how games flow when players abuse the current mechanics. A boring progression of hard counters. 1) Aliens spam free hydras to lock marines in. 2) Marines get grenade launchers 3) Aliens whip spam 4) Marines get ARCs
Efficiently taking care of whip walls and other static trash just around the corner is why ARCs are required to shoot through walls.
Comments
In NS2 I usually make 5-6 arcs and send them off by themselves while I tell the rest of the team to go jetpack to a different hive to distract. Theres a bit of coordination but the overall siege experience has gone down the drain. The marines and the comm should be intimately connected... any time when you give the comm the ability to sit in base hitting z on the robo every once in a while isn't skill or team based. If it gets to this point the marines ought to lose the game. Or else it is just delaying the inevitable. Really the marines just have to put a few mines and turrents and armory block the powernode... sit and hit z on the robotics factory for about 10 mins... click next to a hive... deploy arcs and win.
<i><b>Stupid easy.</b></i>
The sad thing is that there is actually an EASIER route than this... arcs are simply for commanders who don't understand meta game correctly. You don't need to spam arcs to win a game... and if you have the ability to spam arcs then you SHOULD have already won about 15-45 mins ago with coordinated pushes, phase gates and nano spam. I don't see arc trains as a huge issue really because it just shows that the balance of the game isn't there yet. The issue is not with the arc spam... it's something entirely different. It's nearly impossible to end a game in 15 mins or less in this build due to how many alien structures can be spammed. Even if the marines have the res control and are destroying the aliens. It seems like the balance in the new builds is just delaying the inevitable. I've played tons of games that I knew the marines were going to win EVENTUALLY. But even though we already nailed the coffin shut we are forced to sit in spawn spamming arcs.
I'm just trying to see the overall picture.
In this build you are better off just spamming nano shields on jetpack marines in the hive room than spending hundreds of res on arcs. Nano shields and medpack spam... hundreds of times more deadly than arcs imo.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Fixed in 2 easy steps
1) disable nano on players
2) make arcs have a 5-10 second player deploy time (the player has to hold E on each arc for 5-10s to set it up)
1) disable nano on players
2) make arcs have a 5-10 second player deploy time (the player has to hold E on each arc for 5-10s to set it up)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bleh... yeah I mean that would work... but the problem is will this ever happen in a public game ever? I suppose in time... it's kinda like that in NS1 anyway I support your idea.
Nano shield on structures is fine... and pretty much essential due to the lack of marine mobility early game. I do think nano shield should be removed from players for sure. It is not skill-based at all and is very exploitable.
But now were getting off topic...
It's the combination of mobility and firing through walls that breaks things.
Because the mobility negates the need to secure a foothold outside of the hive and build it up, and furthermore allows you to amass a large base killing force from the safety of your own base before deploying.
However, this advantage of mobility, building up a force in safety then moving it out, would be fine if you had to actually fight against upgraded whips and their supportive structures, which would at the very least delay the advance of the arcs and give the aliens time to take them out.
What was really so wrong with building on the mechanics of siege turrets/turret factories like a proper sequel instead of somewhat cramming them together and putting them on tank treads? The rule of cool it seems to be based on really isn't working out here for me enough to ignore how much ARCs and (somewhat off-topic) nano shield are messing with the balance.
As far as ARCs go I don't think the remaining missing features and more balance tweaks are going to fix this honestly, if it isn't something major anyways. Nano is another story, it just needs to stop effecting players all together and it'll be alright. Though I'm honestly not fond of it either way. <!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
Not because i enjoy raping bases with them, but because the marines are virtually helpless once aliens dig into a spot and put down fortifications.
ARCs are the only effective counter to such a scenario.
Now a number limit on the ARCs, thats a good idea
Not because i enjoy raping bases with them, but because the marines are virtually helpless once aliens dig into a spot and put down fortifications.
ARCs are the only effective counter to such a scenario.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think the only thing the ARC should even consider being removed for would be the old siege cannons from NS1. I don't think anyone would argue that ALL forms of siege should be removed.
i like it. have the marines get into some danger trying to get the power on in the room before going to town with arcs.
+1. Let's just get it over with, turn the robotics into a turret factory and return to the ns1 model. In my meager 70 hours logged thus far, I have yet to have one arc experience that was half as fun as a typical ns1 sieging.
if you got 5 arcs, 5 Marines are missing on the field.
People should stop looking at the balance and see the real problem. It's just ugly to look at a clipping ARC-train and it destroys much of the fun that was meant to be added with escort-missions. Balancing ARCs when they are hardcapped at 3 is much easier and can be done after fixing the underlaying mechanic. Also, they should be deployed by a marine.
So please, at first make them fun, than think about balance! It would be so much immerse, when you only had one or two ARCs that you have to escort (much slower) near a hive. The loss of one ARC would really matter. The fights while escorting them would be much more intense etc. etc. Numbers can be tweaked easily afterwards = Balance is not the problem with the ARCs.
This will gives marines some vulnerability while sieging up(instead of staying in perfect defensive formation) and give the aliens a chance to counter the sieges by killing the marines that are trying to deploy them.
The comm would be required to place ARCs in more strategic positions, and marines would then be required to defend the ARCs with much greater caution, while ensuring they were keeping the alien team at a distance.
Also, I agree on a cap. Per robotics factory, perhaps?
Not really enjoyable to walk something to a destination and watch (or not, if its through a wall) blow up a structure whilst you build turrets observatories or even just defend it by yourselves.
it just looks cool, anything from the model to the idea just by talking about it (on paper) but it just doesn't work to well in actual gameplay. NS1 siege cannons worked very well, if they want to remodel them to look pretty fine, but bring those back.
Hard caps are a lazy way of trying to address the problem and deal with symptoms rather than the core issue.
Returning to the original static siege is not necessary if the mobility can be made workable.
The way to make mobility balanced is to require line of sight to fire on targets, making them similar in operation to bombard whips.
That right there solves the arc problems while still leaving them a necessary and powerful addition to the marine battlefield.
Thinking on it, why not? Marines already have a long range, AoE weapon designed for destroying buildings. It's called grenade launcher. What's the reason for another one, which also conditions map design and tactics in such way? (I'm talking about for example, dropping a hive in Cafeteria in Docking being a bad move since it can be ARC'ed from Terminal)
- Can fire without scan again
- Higher damage
- Quicker ROF
- Larger range
- Can fire without scan again
- Higher damage
- Quicker ROF
- Larger range<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why?
They're already incredibly powerful. The problem is they're too easily spammed & trained across the map. This can be fixed by forcing marines to set them up (ie giving a way for aliens to deny their deployment). An initial cost of 5 seconds of a marine's time does not seem to warrant any buffs to an already incredibly powerful siege weapon.
They're already incredibly powerful. The problem is they're too easily spammed & trained across the map. This can be fixed by forcing marines to set them up (ie giving a way for aliens to deny their deployment). An initial cost of 5 seconds of a marine's time does not seem to warrant any buffs to an already incredibly powerful siege weapon.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Problem is it would become relatively easy to deny deployment. Think about it, all it takes is one onos to ruin your 'ARC arming'. In NS 1 you could often siege from other rooms, giving marines the 'defensive advantage' when setting up a siege. In NS 2 however, with the shorter ranger on ARCs, you usually have to drive them INTO a hive room, heavily exposing both the ARCs and the players trying to arm then.
That being said, I love the arming idea though, but it would be naive to think ARCs will not need a compensatory buff to go with it. The fact alone that ARC spam would be a thing of the past is enough reason they will need a buff. Marine commanders don't just spam ARCs because they have the t.res for it, they primarily field large amounts because just fielding 2 - 3 would likely be ineffective and too easily countered. If by requiring manual deployment ARC trains are no longer viable, you will need to damn well make sure that just 2 - 3 ARCs aren't going to be eaten by the entire alien team as fast as they are currently. Ergo studier ARCs are acceptable, certainly when there's only like 3 of them and they require arming on top of that. Would definitely make for exciting Siege gameplay again.
Really hope UWE takes note of the arming idea, it's by far THE best solution anyone has come up with.
What about the current arc usage even resembles a siege?
Obviously they aren't siege weapons if they are so mobile and don't actually require a siege to function.
A siege by definition is when you build up near a hardened objective and use it as a base to slowly break down the objective.
That isn't required with the current arcs because you can build up from the safety of your base then launch them anywhere on the map for a quick takedown.
At that point being able to fire through walls makes them excessively powerful.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The whole reason of having a siege is to take out a hive that you cannot easily enter (due to it being defended, up and running, or even worse both).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You'd still be using arcs for that, you'd just have to start by shooting down the whips and structures at the entrance to the hive room before breaching it to directly fire on the hive.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If you require a LoS to get those things to work, you might as well ditch the escort-mission and simply roll in with heavy-weapons, which is a lot easier and faster.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Arcs ARE heavy weapons in such a scenerio. They allow a group of marines rolling up on a hive to supplement themselves with necessary firepower against structures, allowing them to focus on the aliens.
It becomes a partnership between the marines and arcs as a unit operating to advance.
Because of that escort like role, it makes perfect sense for them to be used in an advancing direct fire role alongside the marines, because they don't require an actual siege to function.
A siege requires that you build up and hold an area to protect the heavy weapons. But arcs don't require that because of their mobility. You are free to move them in quickly with your marines, and pull them back if necessary.
This is the problem. You can't just shoot down whip/crag farms. You need arcs to do this. If you could shoot down the whip/crag farms then you wouldn't need arcs and all of this would be moot.
Whip says hi! :)
Simply put, this is how games flow when players abuse the current mechanics. A boring progression of hard counters.
1) Aliens spam free hydras to lock marines in.
2) Marines get grenade launchers
3) Aliens whip spam
4) Marines get ARCs
Efficiently taking care of whip walls and other static trash just around the corner is why ARCs are required to shoot through walls.