They'd have to move pretty slowly to make safely calling in vehicles possible.

lol, it was ignored the last time I suggested this. Also just like then people are in discussion/***** mode about other things. Like drop suit bonuses and equipment. Anything to do with maps is completely ignored right now.

But yes this would be nice especially if they actually bothered to add some randomness to their maps. Like changing the interior of buildings. Or changing the layout of the land features. Seriously is every planets features exactly the same? Is every research lab and mining operation built and/or set up exactly the same? Everyone (but new players) knows the exact layout of everything before they even spawn in.

Sorry kinda stole or perhaps derailed your thread a bit there.

HAVE A NICE DAY!!!

Nope, doesn't fix redline sniping. If anything it makes redline sniping much more powerful by allowing snipers to have redline shots from very different angles over the course of the match. It doesn't take very long, in the scale of a skirmish match, to gradually move around the map.
I'd much rather just have the redline be impossible to shoot out of or into, either with a big physical wall or a mystical energy shield.

Edit: how is it leaving myself open to ambush if I follow the MCC and stick to the center of the red zone?

It absolutely fixes red line sniping by having the spot the sniper is in NO LONGER THE RED LINE. That means you can come up to where he is in an LAV and just take him out. Alternatively he can spend the whole game FOLLOWING the red line as it moves by staying under the MCC but that would mean he's moving and not shooting and also that it's very predictable to guess where he's going to be if you're going to counter snipe him while he's moving around. Think it through.

+1 for a dynamic battlefield.

I like the idea of the moving MCCs and the moving redline.

But what if we took it one step further. What if the redline was actually a defensive shield deployed by the MCC (or the physical border of it's shields). A barrier that prevented high speed projectiles from entering or exiting but allowed the deployment of vehicles and troops. Perhaps when a MCCs shields are depleted this defensive shield could shrink slightly to reflect the fact that the MCC is more exposed. It makes sense that the MCC is deployed because it provides a protected environment for the deployment of clones.

I think this could solve the redline sniping (rail rifle and rail turret) and redline camping. Plus it provides real context as to why a redline exists at all, and why an MCC is used to deploy clones (as opposed to orbital drops, etc)

I actually like this idea. What most people don't realize about redline snipers is that snipers don't snipe from those locations because of the red lines, instead the red line just happens to be where the most advantageous sniping positions are. I think that idea would work well in regards to safe spawns without giving up the balance factor.

It's simply not going to take very much time out of sniping to follow the MCC. It won't take the whole game to walk 75% of the way around the map. This won't make counter-sniping any easier than it already is against redline snipers.

The only thing making redline sniping not a massive, massive problem is the fact that there aren't very many good sight-lines available from the fixed redline. If the red line were to rotate around the map, it would be nigh-impossible to design the maps in a way that doesn't allow redline snipers to have great shots with no risk.

Now that's just plain incorrect except for Manus Peak, and we all know that map is bad. Do you even snipe?

I promise you this will not solve the redline sniping problem. If anything, it will make it worse.

It goes deeper than that. Constantly moving puts you out of range of supply depots. It puts you out of range of your own hives. Snipers go through ammo extremely quickly and hives are a must. It will force snipers to maneuver around battlefield obstacles and in many cases completely lose the high ground long periods of time if they sniper HAS to stay with where the red line is. Plus a moving sniper is easier to spot than a stationary one, thus opening the sniper up to counter fire. As I mentioned in my last post snipers don't choose their location because of the red line. The red line just happens to normally be exactly where the most advantageous sniper positions are so that's where they stay. High elevation and good visibility. Look at Manus Peak. Where do you see most snipers during a game that isn't being completely dominated by one side? They're on the big mountain to the west in the middle of the map between both red lines. Snipers just want good spots to shoot down from rather than protected locations. The fact that this coincides with the red lines is because of map design in which most boards are in a valley as opposed to on a hill and the only decent accessible high points in most of these bowl shaped maps are near the starting spawn locations. The only map I can think of that completely eschews that design is Fracture Road which is hilly in the middle making sniping extremely difficult without being very mobile and very very creative. You won't find snipers on the map in most situations unless the battle is very locked down.

Point by point:
1. Not all snipers go through ammo quickly- a damage-modded CSR can put out over 10,000 damage without headshots before resupplying, assuming you don't spray and pray.
2. Many snipers use logi suits- my personal fit carries Ishukone gauged hives and Allotek (r) hives, for a total of 7 high-resupply-rate nanohives. It's no big deal to be separated from one of them. This change might help stop people from redlining in a Sentinel suit with a Thale's, but otherwise it's not going to have much of an impact.
3. Stationary snipers are much, much easier to find and counter-snipe than mobile snipers, even if you know the general area they'll be moving in. Or, at least, that has been my experience.
4. Losing the high ground doesn't matter if it means you have clean shots from an area where the enemy can't reach you. For example, on a map with the bridge socket, having your redline be parallel to the bridge would be insanely good- even though you would lose the high ground, you would get great sightlines on 3 objectives at once (the bridge and the points at either end), and still be unreachable by standard infantry weapons.
5. If you don't choose your sniping spots based on the existence of the redline, you are a rare exception to the general rule and I applaud that. However, to many players, having a position only attackable by other snipers is a very desirable trait, one which should not be achievable.
6. Why not just make it impossible to shoot in or out of the redline? It seems like a much simpler, easier to implement fix. Or, do both that and your idea- I like the effects it could have on general gameplay, I just don't think it will help with the redline sniping issue.

dude no one bothers with trying to fix the broken **** anymore, if its not this weeks QQ, you might as well go **** your self. The idea is interesting...... I was hoping to see more conversation on it, because while I don't like it straight up I do think you are on to some thing.

actually what would be interesting would be if your MCC and the red line moved back and forth trying to stay out of range of say more then two null cannons.

Point by point:
1. Not all snipers go through ammo quickly- a damage-modded CSR can put out over 10,000 damage without headshots before resupplying, assuming you don't spray and pray.
2. Many snipers use logi suits- my personal fit carries Ishukone gauged hives and Allotek (r) hives, for a total of 7 high-resupply-rate nanohives. It's no big deal to be separated from one of them. This change might help stop people from redlining in a Sentinel suit with a Thale's, but otherwise it's not going to have much of an impact.
3. Stationary snipers are much, much easier to find and counter-snipe than mobile snipers, even if you know the general area they'll be moving in. Or, at least, that has been my experience.
4. Losing the high ground doesn't matter if it means you have clean shots from an area where the enemy can't reach you. For example, on a map with the bridge socket, having your redline be parallel to the bridge would be insanely good- even though you would lose the high ground, you would get great sightlines on 3 objectives at once (the bridge and the points at either end), and still be unreachable by standard infantry weapons.
5. If you don't choose your sniping spots based on the existence of the redline, you are a rare exception to the general rule and I applaud that. However, to many players, having a position only attackable by other snipers is a very desirable trait, one which should not be achievable.
6. Why not just make it impossible to shoot in or out of the redline? It seems like a much simpler, easier to implement fix. Or, do both that and your idea- I like the effects it could have on general gameplay, I just don't think it will help with the redline sniping issue.

I recommend reading this, while probably not a solution it you may find it interesting.

I really like that idea in regards to a very interesting game dynamic but it's hard to balance that out considering a team that's dominant enough to already red line the other probably won't find any opposition once they're already in the red line. But there are some decent play/counter play ideas in there worth exploring further.

mmmmm high ground is not paramount, as a field sniper I can say that what matters most is targets of opportunity and while high ground reduces potential cover and therefore increases targets while still allowing the shooter to dictate the terms of engagement, I can think of many locations that would be equally effective at ground level due to foot traffic

+1 for a dynamic battlefield.

I like the idea of the moving MCCs and the moving redline.

But what if we took it one step further. What if the redline was actually a defensive shield deployed by the MCC (or the physical border of it's shields). A barrier that prevented high speed projectiles from entering or exiting but allowed the deployment of vehicles and troops. Perhaps when a MCCs shields are depleted this defensive shield could shrink slightly to reflect the fact that the MCC is more exposed. It makes sense that the MCC is deployed because it provides a protected environment for the deployment of clones.

I think this could solve the redline sniping (rail rifle and rail turret) and redline camping. Plus it provides real context as to why a redline exists at all, and why an MCC is used to deploy clones (as opposed to orbital drops, etc)

You have a point, yes. But typically speaking high ground offers that, plus visibility (information) and additional security against incoming enemies. Essentially high ground tends to give a sniper the three things he or she is really looking for.

This idea would create a need for more CRUs and supply depots since tankers and equipment on soldiers always eventually need a resupply and not having permanent ground spawn will cause a big problem in that regard

I see no reason as to why we would need more CRUs or supply depots, since in most battles Tankers more-often-than-not tend to destroy the opposing side's supply depots and CRUs anyway. Resulting in neither side having any of the aforementioned infrastructural elements thereby creating an intense reliance an spawn pads, nanohives, and the MCC anyway.

Although, if we were to have the ability to call down our own infrastructural elements(i.e. CRUs,Turret Installations,Supply Depots, as I've read might be coming anyway) this might alleviate your concerns in this regard.

Or they could create a module that will allow any vehicle, that can afford to equip it, the ability to become a mobile supply depot in much the same way as Tankers and Dropship pilots equip the mobile CRU module.

HEY I'M NOT DONE TALKING ABOUT THIS YET!!