Make Drop Uplinks Self Destruct when the originating suit is swapped/destroyed.

There is already a varriant that acts that way. Go look it up.

Ah, so you want to make it impossible for someone to use his own uplinks.

You also want a kill on any uplink deployer to give a DU kill bonus and negate all the effort expeded in placing uplinks in strategic locations.





No.

I know, I'm proposing that they all act that way.

I'm looking for a way to make CRUs and mobile CRUs matter again verses the current uplinks. They are simply better. How would you improve the balance between them, Skihids?

I'm looking for a way to make CRUs and mobile CRUs matter again verses the current uplinks. They are simply better. How would you improve the balance between them, Skihids?

What if Uplinks have the # of Spawns per uplink Reduced?
OR
What if the uplinks cannot be placed in a certian distance from one another?

So MLT Uplink 3 spawns
STD Uplink 5 spawns
ADV 11 Spawns (2 squads)
Normal PRO 15 Spawns (1 team)
Special PRO Spawn that can deploy more people per uplink (30 spawns)

OR

MLT cannot be placed in 50 m of another Uplink
STD cannot be placed in 40 m of another Uplink
ADV cannot be placed in 25 m of another Uplink
PRO cannot be placed in 15 m of another Uplink
Special PRO Spawn can be placed anywhere the user pleases

nope but how about you get 10% less armor when you spawn on one like the description says

And your shields regenerate 10% slower.

Random modules on the drop-suit are deactivated when spawning in on an uplink. Maybe your gun is damaged and is at 0/0, maybe one or two of your shield modules are burned out, perhaps your regulators etc may be malfuncting. I think it is an interesting mechanic.

More ideas, anything that might buff the Mobile CRU or regular CRU and bring them into balance with the current Uplinks? Any changes to current uplinks that will bring Mobile CRUs and regular CRUs into line with them, making them a true part of any tactician's toolbox?

Question,

What specifically are you trying to solve? You say CRU's are inferior, but what aspect of them makes them inferior to you? I think the issue can be better addressed by looking at that.

Immobility, longer wait to spawn in on, ease of detection.

say no to balancing until we have a full set of suits and vehicles.

Immobility, longer wait to spawn in on, ease of detection.

Hackability.

Speed trade for strategic deployment:
Something like this may be viable: Militia Uplink: 25s spawn in timer, and with bleed out wait, would be a 18s timer.

A proto uplink would be a 17 second wait, or 10 seconds with bleed-out timer finished.

What if Uplinks have the # of Spawns per uplink Reduced?

What if the uplinks cannot be placed in a certian distance from one another?

I'm looking for a way to make CRUs and mobile CRUs matter again verses the current uplinks. They are simply better. How would you improve the balance between them, Skihids?

Make it so People cannot spawn on objectives in skirmish

Taking that idea further, you would actually need to declare just where those clones are if you have a fixed number of them.

How many are in that particular CRU? How many are in your warbarge and available for DU wormhole placement?

Then you get into the fun of being able to steal clones in battle by hacking CRUs or being able to destroy multiple enemy clones by blowing up a MRCU.

Oh, the strategic implications of being forced to conform to your lore...

Taking that idea further, you would actually need to declare just where those clones are if you have a fixed number of them.

How many are in that particular CRU? How many are in your warbarge and available for DU wormhole placement?

Then you get into the fun of being able to steal clones in battle by hacking CRUs or being able to destroy multiple enemy clones by blowing up a MRCU.

Oh, the strategic implications of being forced to conform to your lore...

What if CRUs had a set number of respawns or added to the number of available clones over time to what team had control over it?

You would have to eliminate physical clone bodies as the limiting factor and substitute some non-physical limit in its place, akin to the BPC concept.

The problem with that is CCP has already specified physical clones as the limit in PC and I don't see an easy way to reconcile the two.

There could exist a mechanical variable that allows for a bonus of X amount of clones based on retaining a CRU for a period of time; if you successfully keep and defend your CRU, you gain 25 clones. Hack and retain an enemy CRU, you gain 10, for a potential total of 35 extra clones. There is only one chance on each timer, as soon as it is disrupted there is no chance to regain the bonus clones.

The timer could be 5 minutes on each CRU.

I think this would also mean that each team would have no 'starting' CRU (as in already owned) and would have to hack it at the beginning of the match to begin the timer.

That was poor wording. The mechanic I was referring to would be the timer to achieve the bonus clones.

as seen in pc, a small mobile spawn has the ability to break the game. would like to see uplinks cost most cpu/pg as well as be limited to one per player [it is a mini wormhole after all] they should be separated by how many spawns they allow not by allowing them to be spammed.

5 for blue print, 8 for std, 15 for adv and 20 for proto.

That wouldn't do anything to rationalize physical constraints of clones as you can't grow any inside a CRU.

I didn't assume that clones would be growing within the CRUs.

My line of thought would be that during an emergency situation (a district under attack), the activation of a CRU would signal Genolution that the mercenary corporation may have need for 'emergency clones' (produced in a Genolution lab). Use of these clones would have an ISK equivalent due to the short notice need (the five minute timer) and providing the wormhole transport of the clones (through the CRU). Payout would be taken from the corporate wallet with each clone used or taken from the total payout at the end of the match, an overall percentage that each player would lose.