Can we please get rid of the silly tile blocking now?

[Mister_Crac]

I don't know who designed this or why it was done, but it was not really a good idea. Seriously, it makes no sense, no matter from what angle you look at it:

1.) It does not make sense physically. Infantry blocking a vehicle? Yeah, right.

2.) It does not make sense from a military point of view. Such a tactic simply does not exist in real-life warfare.

3.) It does not make sense within the game's own logic itself. Either any unit blocks the path for other units, or none does. The distinction between friendly and enemy units is complete bollоcks here.

Actually, I wonder why we even have hex tiles at all. Those are a characteristic feature of round-based strategy games, but C&C Rivals is no such game. It is real-time. The old C&C games never had any tiles. Do we actually need them in this game?

So please, let's get rid of this nonsense for good. C&C Rivals will be a better and more consistent game when this is removed.

[Killa2321]

This is a very integral part of play. 

[Mister_Crac]

---

@Killa2321 wrote:

This is a very nonsensical part of play. 

---

I fixed that for you.

[EA_dance210]

Hiya @Mister_Crac,

For the tile blocking, are you referring to the fact that a unit is able to stop an enemy unit from going onto the platform, by microing? Or simply the fact that enemy units can't occupy the same hex as your unit?

If it's the latter, that does make sense to me - you would allow allies to move past while attacking/blocking enemy units. And while it's good to pull from real world examples, strategies, etc. this is a game and we need to do what's best for the game, even if it doesn't translate directly to real world scenarios.

The decision to use hex tiles for gameplay was made based a lot of testing of hex-based and non hex-based gameplay, so the simple answer to that one is that yes, hex-based was the way to go. 

[Marine_CorporaI]

There is also no double harvester in real life or a resign button.

[AcidSnowScArab]

My low cost, and slow moving infantry units often get micro-movement blocked by faster moving buggies/hummers, so I can never occupy the tile, they just keep moving their unit back and forth...  Gets mildly annoying sometimes, but it was my choice to use a slow unit (same applies to when I use a GDI tank, they are slow but beefy).

[iLikeToSnipe21]

I think the only change that should be made in this area is that a unit that is moving on a pad cannot control or contest it. Would get rid of people just spamming air units to fly over it. And it would give a drawback to a unit driving back and forth to occupy two tiles.

[TeutonicVvarrior]

---

@iLikeToSnipe21 wrote:
I think the only change that should be made in this area is that a unit that is moving on a pad cannot control or contest it. Would get rid of people just spamming air units to fly over it. And it would give a drawback to a unit driving back and forth to occupy two tiles.

---

It would make for some interesting mechanics if you had to have at least one unit remain still for a minimum amount of time before it is considered held or contested.  Likewise, as soon as the unit starts to move, it is no longer held / contested.  This might encourage more fierce fighting for pad control.

[incia]

When using artillery units I do like the hexes, I can strategically place my artillery to cover an area and I can exactly see how far it will reach (3 hexes), without hexes it would be harder to see this fast.

[MarcT22186]

---

@Marine_CorporaI wrote:

There is also no double harvester in real life or a resign button.

---

That explanation will be get interesting, why is there no "double Harvester" or "resign button"? You can be sure there's examples:

double harvester = industry and finance sector in real Life

resign button = come on, capitulation?

If you now going to say, but that's a different, microing is also different to blocking...