Make structures that are being captured unsellable so it will actually be possible to capture buildings without finding stupid tactics

[FireRainV]

• Duplicate discussion Disable the ability to sell a structure if it's being captured #2585

It's so easy to prevent your enemy from getting access to your army by simply selling the building that being captured.
Capturing buildings should actually let you capture buildings instead of relying on out-of-place tactics like microwave tanks, lag or hoping the player wouldn't notice and instantly sell their building. Players should actually try and prevent their building from being captured, like denying the capturing unit or selling the building right before the capturing unit even started capturing the building.

Most of the time, GLAs are the only armies who manages to get access to another army thanks to Jarmen Kell and Hijackers, but this just allows you to steal dozers, not capture buildings. Imaging trying to get access to another GLA army, as any army actually, or using the enemy war factory you just captured against them.

I think EA didn't really account for that because the game tells you that you "captured the building successfully" and the other player that you "lost the building" even when finished capturing during the selling animation.

[DrGoldFish1]

This should be a big no go. The capture building ability is already overpowered when used correctly. No need to make it even more stronger.
If every player would add just some rangers, rebels or redguards to there armies and instead of killing the base capture it and camp production, you would have 2 bases easy.

Stealth rebels are easy to get into the enemy base definitely when using saboteurs first to disable power. USA paradrop when used correctly is also already strong, since the rangers can capture straight away after landing.

[FireRainV]

Seems like everyone is against this change, is it really such a bad change?
I know it's a huge game changer, but will it really hurt for the worse casual and competitive play?

I won't mind if this change won't happen, but I just liked the idea that capturing building will actually let you take control of the building instead of forcing the enemy to sell it easily so you don't get control.

For now, the only building worth capturing is the oil derrick.

[xezon]

It is a highly controversial change. Capturing and selling is generally not seen as broken or exploitative. It's just working normally. Now as for being able to sell disabled buildings, that may be another story.

[FireRainV]

but won't that be unfair for most GLA armies? since not all of them have saboteurs.

[FireRainV]

And also, what about og generals? Only china can disable buildings in that game using EMP and hackers. How would it work there? USA will be the most weak in that regard since they'll have no way to capture buildings at all without them being sold.

[FireRainV]

@xezon maybe instead of fully implementing it, make it a toggleable config? You know, like game custom rules menu for the match, like the limited superweapons but as a list. That way, everyone will be happy.

I think I will open a new discussion about it.

[xezon]

Selling is blocked when the building is disabled, right?

[FireRainV]

Only for microwave tanks, any other type of building disabling will still let you to sell the building.

[xezon]

Maybe we should look into that, and establish fixes for selling during disabling.

[FireRainV]

@xezon look at the comment I wrote for the guy above, I still think that disabling the building from being sold while it's being captured is the better way to go. We can give it a try and see how it goes.

[barefootlogician]

I'm pretty sure its intended design and disabling with black lotus or hackers also blocks selling.

[xezon]

Duplicate of #2585

[FireRainV]

I legit searched for it, I thought you removed it when you made the issues tracker exclusive to bug reports.

[FireRainV]

okay, I updated this discussion to link to my old feature request.