Fortresses should be togglable

[Arreon]

To be frank, I'm sick of fortresses. I don't use them because I don't want to be dependent on them. They are seriously overpowered in my opinion and not even bunker busters (except the VTOL ones) can destroy them because they are shot before they get the chance to do any damage. The only convenient way to destroy them is by using artillery. But my units can't even approach the AI when their fortresses are finished because of their range.

This is why I believe fortresses should be added to the Structure Limits screen. However, people like fortresses so don't put a numerical limit on them. Just add them to the list so players can choose to have them or not. I like to stick to regular defenses and I'm sure there are some who would agree with me.

And for those of you who are thinking "why don't you disable them yourself if you don't like them?" I've got a few reasons why I can't right now.

1: I've already blown up my speakers and my radio. I don't want to do the same to my computer by messing with the WZ files.

2: I have no programming experience or training whatsoever.

3: Zarel can tell all of you just how easy mods are for me to make.

If this could be put into the game, I (and possibly others) would appreciate it.

[KukY]

To be frank, I'm sick of fortresses. I don't use them because I don't want to be dependent on them. They are seriously overpowered in my opinion and not even bunker busters (except the VTOL ones) can destroy them because they are shot before they get the chance to do any damage. The only convenient way to destroy them is by using artillery. But my units can't even approach the AI when their fortresses are finished because of their range.

This is why I believe fortresses should be added to the Structure Limits screen. However, people like fortresses so don't put a numerical limit on them. Just add them to the list so players can choose to have them or not. I like to stick to regular defenses and I'm sure there are some who would agree with me.

And for those of you who are thinking "why don't you disable them yourself if you don't like them?" I've got a few reasons why I can't right now.

1: I've already blown up my speakers and my radio. I don't want to do the same to my computer by messing with the WZ files.

2: I have no programming experience or training whatsoever.

3: Zarel can tell all of you just how easy mods are for me to make.

If this could be put into the game, I (and possibly others) would appreciate it.

If you take 15 Scorpion Hover BB they will be destroyed along with fortress you attacked...
Other than that, they aren't so overpowered.
I have also been thinking about limiting fortresses.
However, placing ON/OFF limit isn't possible in WZ, there are only numerical limits.
And I would love to make you one mod with numerical limit on fortresses.
Actually, I think I already made one.
Let me see.....

[Zarel]

Reallies? I've heard lots of people saying they're underpowered, too. A T3 super cyborg can take like 14 hits from a rocket fortress, enough for arty spam. I really don't know what I should do about them. :/

I thought fortresses were already present in the limits screen, with a limit of 255 by default or something?

[Arreon]

Reallies? I've heard lots of people saying they're underpowered, too. A T3 super cyborg can take like 14 hits from a rocket fortress, enough for arty spam. I really don't know what I should do about them. :/

I thought fortresses were already present in the limits screen, with a limit of 255 by default or something?

1: If people saying they're underpowered, that's because cyborgs are the only units somewhat resistant to fortresses. Tanks that can't outrange these things are useless.

2: Fortresses do not exist in the Limits Screen. The biggest number I see there belongs to the VTOL pads, which is less than 255.

Answer to

I really don't know what I should do about them.

I suggest adding the fortresses to the limit screen. Since the screen only uses numerical limits, why not try 255? You can kill two birds with one stone. The fortress lovers can build to their hearts' content and the fortress-haters can play untroubled by masses of fortresses.

[Assault Gunner]

Feh. Single fortresses are easily destroyed with a couple VTOL attack wings, especially Gauss, Rocket, and Cannon. The Missile fortress is a little more problematic, given it's AA capability.

[Dalton]

I think Fortresses are at a very good power and the can be destroyed fairly easily if there is less then 6 but then it gets a little difficult but still due-able. Build medium body tanks about a group of 25 at least and you can take out multiple of them. If there is only one you only need like 10 BB.

Edit: And there are no limits on defenses currently

[NF-Elemental]

They are over powered, no doubt! The fact the a few BORGs can take one down is evidence enough of borgs being seriously over powered. I recently did some testing with a friend on this very issue. I found that fortresses are so cheap for there hp. versus tanks. That when I used a group pulse lasers, that if protected from arty say its behind a geographic wall. Then it take something on the order of 20 pulse laser to bring one of these down. Consider the resource compaison. To build the fortress its something like 2000-3000. Now compare that to the to 20 pulse laser mantis, i'm afraid that this is a bit of gap. The game dragged on for sometime when the ai had nothing but the fortress. Vtols are how we beat it, but if that was player and they built 4 AA positions that could have been nearly impossible to over come.

Allow me to pose a strategy that illustrates this imbalance. You can even test this your self when playing someone. If it only cost a couple of thousand to build one of these, then, if you were to fortress walk a map. Then you could build these faster and for less than your opponent could tear them down even if they had the the resources they wanted. This could be accomplished by using a small ground forces to attack any arty your opponent trys to build, and frankly after I discovered this imbalance I don't see why they would. You can leap frog your way to their base. GG try it let me know what you think.

[Zarel]

They are over powered, no doubt! The fact the a few BORGs can take one down is evidence enough of borgs being seriously over powered. I recently did some testing with a friend on this very issue. I found that fortresses are so cheap for there hp. versus tanks. That when I used a group pulse lasers, that if protected from arty say its behind a geographic wall. Then it take something on the order of 20 pulse laser to bring one of these down. Consider the resource compaison. To build the fortress its something like 2000-3000. Now compare that to the to 20 pulse laser mantis, i'm afraid that this is a bit of gap. The game dragged on for sometime when the ai had nothing but the fortress. Vtols are how we beat it, but if that was player and they built 4 AA positions that could have been nearly impossible to over come.

That's because you're using pulse lasers.

• New Laser Weapon Available
  Fires pulses of laser light
  Best Targets: Cyborgs
  Body Points: Medium

You'll notice it doesn't say "Best Targets: Fortresses".

Things that do good damage to fortresses:

Bunker buster. Cannons. Rails. Mortar. Howie. Ripple. Seraph. Archie. Bombs. LasSat.

...yeah, pretty much everything except MGs, lasers, direct rockets, and direct missiles.

Allow me to pose a strategy that illustrates this imbalance. You can even test this your self when playing someone. If it only cost a couple of thousand to build one of these, then, if you were to fortress walk a map. Then you could build these faster and for less than your opponent could tear them down even if they had the the resources they wanted. This could be accomplished by using a small ground forces to attack any arty your opponent trys to build, and frankly after I discovered this imbalance I don't see why they would. You can leap frog your way to their base. GG try it let me know what you think.

You run out of resources fairly quickly... $1000 is a lot of money, and that's just the cheapest fortress. The good fortresses are $1600+. That's a lot.

[NF-Elemental]

They are over powered, no doubt! The fact the a few BORGs can take one down is evidence enough of borgs being seriously over powered. I recently did some testing with a friend on this very issue. I found that fortresses are so cheap for there hp. versus tanks. That when I used a group pulse lasers, that if protected from arty say its behind a geographic wall. Then it take something on the order of 20 pulse laser to bring one of these down. Consider the resource compaison. To build the fortress its something like 2000-3000. Now compare that to the to 20 pulse laser mantis, i'm afraid that this is a bit of gap. The game dragged on for sometime when the ai had nothing but the fortress. Vtols are how we beat it, but if that was player and they built 4 AA positions that could have been nearly impossible to over come.

That's because you're using pulse lasers.

• New Laser Weapon Available
  Fires pulses of laser light
  Best Targets: Cyborgs
  Body Points: Medium

You'll notice it doesn't say "Best Targets: Fortresses".

Things that do good damage to fortresses:

Bunker buster. Cannons. Rails. Mortar. Howie. Ripple. Seraph. Archie. Bombs. LasSat.

...yeah, pretty much everything except MGs, lasers, direct rockets, and direct missiles.

Allow me to pose a strategy that illustrates this imbalance. You can even test this your self when playing someone. If it only cost a couple of thousand to build one of these, then, if you were to fortress walk a map. Then you could build these faster and for less than your opponent could tear them down even if they had the the resources they wanted. This could be accomplished by using a small ground forces to attack any arty your opponent trys to build, and frankly after I discovered this imbalance I don't see why they would. You can leap frog your way to their base. GG try it let me know what you think.

You run out of resources fairly quickly... $1000 is a lot of money, and that's just the cheapest fortress. The good fortresses are $1600+. That's a lot.

Wow that's ... different. The rail used to be the high end anti tank turret, and pulse was the high end anti structure weapon. Thanks for the info, say is there a document showing current balance structure? perhaps this would help me to prevent making this error twice.

[Zarel]

Wow that's ... different. The rail used to be the high end anti tank turret, and pulse was the high end anti structure weapon. Thanks for the info, say is there a document showing current balance structure? perhaps this would help me to prevent making this error twice.

Hmm... I had forgotten I changed that. :/ Well, do you like the change? Personally, I think a cannon or railgun should do more damage to a reinforced concrete-like wall, than a machinegun or laser.

The current balance structure can be found here:
http://guide.wz2100.net/w/#weapontable

Rockets, missiles: Anti-tank
Lasers, MGs: Anti-personnel
Cannons, rails: All-rounder

You can hover over the damage of each weapon to see what damage type they do.

[3drts]

I seem to recall at one point there was a slider to set the limit for fortresses.

Personally, I'd like to see fortresses changed from being what is essentailly a super-hardpoint, into something that really seems like a Fort or Bastion- and as such would almost be like a base structure (note, every base structure, aside from power gens, has a limit of 5).

One of the problems with the old Fortress limits, was that it applied only to a single fort type- set all the fort limits at 4, and you can still have 16 forts.

I think a limit of 5-10 fortresses, total, of any type, is a good one.
but these forts would have....
A rapid fire AP weapon, a sensor (either standard, or CB, but not both - except maybe on T-3 Forts), a heavy AT weapon, and an AA weapon or artillery weapon.

Forts would be well rounded against any adversary, but would be as costly as building defenses of the equivalent weapons using standard 1x1 defenses.
Thus the disadvantage would mean if your enemy concentrates on one unit type, you wasted money on defensive weapons you don't need (ie, the price for anti-cyborg MGs was included in your fort, but your enemy has no cyborgs)
The advantage would be concentration of firepower (ideal for securing a chokepoint), and the ability of your defenses to remain at full firepower even at 10% health, and to repair to full health at no additional cost:
ie if we say 1 fort has the HP of say... 10 hardpoints- when you enemy has done enough damage to destroy 9 hardpoints, you still have the same firepower, whereas a hardpoint based defense with 10 starting hardpoint would be down to a single hardpoint - so the defense is more likely to fail to kill the attackers, and even if the defense holds, you have to pay for 9 more hardpoints to get back to starting strength....


I'm thinking the following:
Projectile Fortress
-armament:
1-4 Heavy machine guns - as if you just built 4 HMG hardpoints in that space
1-4 heavy cannons (or one Über cannon) - as if you just built 4 HC hardpoints in that space
A Standard Sensor
1-2 Mortars/Bombards,
A hurricane AA turret (maybe)
-- Possibly function as repair facility for units?
-- cost: close to the sum of what it would take to build all of the above defenses in hardpoint form - at least 1.5x the cost of 4 heavy cannon hardpoints
Initial Research Requirements:
-Heavy Cannon
-Mortar/Bombard
-Hurricane AA (if used)

Later upgrades (that would replace it in the build list) would have Assault guns replacing the HMGs, HPV/Assault cannons replacing the Heavies, pepperpots or howitzers replacing the mortars, possible addition of cyclone/Whirlwinds.

Rocket Fortress:
Lancer Rockets x4 (later replace with TK's?)
Mini-rocket array x4 (with increased range to equal that of a mortar for this fort only, artillery damage type allows it to function as an anti cyborg weapon, range increase would allow it to engage hostile sensors spotting for longer ranged units)
or if the range is not increased:
Mini-pods x4 (possibly changed to all rounder damage or even AP, for only this fort type)
and maybe later a Ripple rocket
Some sensor type...
-- Possibly function as repair facility for units?
-- cost: close to the sum of what it would take to build all of the above defenses in hardpoint form

T-3 High energy weapon fort
Gauss x4
Pulse laser x4
Stormbringer AA
Wide Spectrum Sensor (maybe not initially, but after WSS is researched, a new fort type replaces this one in the build menu)
-Possibly add something like that Plasma artillery from the last campaign mission as an upgrade (but make it balanced) - or maybe some sort of Gauss artillery, a "mass Driver" that outranges the ground shaker.
-- Possibly function as repair facility for units?
-- cost: close to the sum of what it would take to build all of the above defenses in hardpoint form

Missile Fort:
4x scourge launchers
2x SAMS (either type)
2-4x Seraph missile launchers (possibly upgrade range to ≈3,000? artillery damage type allows it to function as an anti cyborg weapon, range increase would allow it to engage hostile sensors spotting for longer ranged units)
Wide Spectrum sensor (upgrade from a CB or standard sensor)
1-2 Archangels (upgrade, particularly if Seraph missiles still are short range for T-3)



Oh yea, and all hardpoints would have *really* long build times: if we say each Fort is equivalent to 10 hardpoints (4 AT, 4 AP, 1 artillery, 1 AA), it should take as long to build as *20* hardpoints.
You should have to control the area for some time to get one of these babies up - easy to put up in your main base, not so much on the front line.

[Assault Gunner]

Sounds kinda complicated...

But one of the real issues with forts, for the player using them is the distinct lack of dedicated AA or AP fortresses. That means that most fortresses cannot fire back at VTOLs, and it takes a large group of fortresses to do significant damage to any Cyborg attack force.

I believe that Pumpkin put it together this way for the reasons of balance. That way, Fortresses are quite defeatable if you know how. Furthermore, fortresses cost more than almost any other building, except for LasSat and Satellite Uplink. The most expensive is the Gauss fortress, which, despite being extremely effective against ground targets, has no AA capability. The best all-around fortress is likely the Missile fortress, which can hit air targets, and are the only ones capable of this. Furthermore, it is quite possible to take a flight of NEXUS-bodied VTOLs or Super-heavy body VTOLs through a significant number of missile fortresses.

Therefore, any player who does not place dedicated AA and AP near his fortresses is leaving them wide open to enemy retribution via VTOL, LasSat, or cyborg attack.

[Zarel]

I seem to recall at one point there was a slider to set the limit for fortresses.

Oh, good, that means I'm not hallucinating. I wonder when/why it was removed...

[3drts]

Yea, but the limit wasn't like: 0-100 fortresses,
It was like: 1-100 Cannon Fortresses
1-100 missile fortresses,
1-100 gauss
1-100 rocket bastion.

So in theory, you could set everything to 1, except the missile fort, so early in the game you can only place a single fort if you are doing the cannon line, and 2 forts if you diversify.
Then when you reach T-3, you can start spamming missile forts all over the place.

If I wanted a 10 fort limit, I could arbitrarily set the limits to 2:2:2:4, but then you feel handicapped early in the game by the limited number of forts you can build, and handicapped later in the game, because you have these old rocket or cannon forts when you wanted T-3 forts.
If you wanted a 10 fort limit, and set the limit at 10 Missile forts, or 10 gauss forts, so that a player could have 10 forts of the type of their choosing, now you'll surely see players building 40 forts - 4x more than you wanted.

If a Fort limit is put in place again, make it a combined limit, not a limit for each individual type

[3drts]

I believe that Pumpkin put it together this way for the reasons of balance.
...
the Missile fortress, which can hit air targets, and are the only ones capable of this.
...
Therefore, any player who does not place dedicated AA and AP near his fortresses is leaving them wide open to enemy retribution via VTOL, LasSat, or cyborg attack.

Did pumpkin implement Forts, or did they come in a later unofficial patch, I know they weren't included in the original game.
They did have badass multi turret fortress artwork, and I seem to recall the forts having doors that it looked like units could fit inside (hence my wanting them also to function as a repair facility, as if they went inside the fort for service, to make the fort more like a compact forward base near a combat zone)

Doesn't the rocket bastion fire at air target? or was that changed, I remember it always tried, but rarely ever hit any VTOLs.

Lastly, Everything is wide open the a LasSat attack if the enemy has one, no matter how much AA and AP you have