Denied Add a Combat Engineer role for E-11 or just in general

["Devious"]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
This suggestion will add a new Combative Engineer role to the job selection menu.
Possible Positives of the suggestion: (At least 2)
Will enhance RP, can add a new role to play as, gives people opportunities.

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
Will require work to add into the game.


Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
Because it can count as RP enhancement and will make things a lot more fun.

 

[Otters]

Mind elaborating on what you mean with "combatitive engineer"? Just a guy with a gun and a repair tool or?

 

[Harold Hawks]

-Support
Techs and engis already barely have a reason to stay on their job, would be worse to take even more opportunities away from them.

 

[Michael Dzhetnikov]

this is more pointless than the combatative chef, since techies are the most combat trained personnel onsite, adding a combatative engineer is just 2 tech expert jobs

-Support

 

[Lightsoulist]

Also you realize there will probably be a combat engineer job when the hcz update releases right?

 

[Ismaaeel]

-support
Engineers and techs already have like the whole armoury on them. They are the main reason the foundation is not destroyed.

 

[Ben10083]

-Support Foundation has a dedicated job force for facility maintenance, why should they be denied the ability to repair THE MOST IMPORTANT PART of the facility? Combat engineers will only lead to E-11 denying engineers and tech experts since they can have their guys do it instead.

 

[Jericho]

Previous threads have already debunked why adding more roles into MTF that are already filled by other jobs is a pointless idea and does the opposite of "RP Enchancement".

- Support

 

[Scopes]

-support

Tech experts & Engineers are non-combative.

 

[Free "Spirit"]

-support e-11 wont ever let techs into HCZ then they will have one of their reg get on the E-11 tech and fix et their own guys in doesnt enhance RP in any fashion

 

["Devious"]

Mind elaborating on what you mean with "combatitive engineer"? Just a guy with a gun and a repair tool or?

My apologies when I first thought of the Combative Engineer this is what I originally pictured but now I have a better vision on it. I now imagine a guy with a gun, that has the ability to build cover for breaches; stuff like sandbag walls or something. Also, for him to have the normal repair tool as well; he could also have a demolish tool to destroy the fortifications that he built. It doesn't have to be just a guy with a repair tool and a gun, there can be many different things implemented into this.

 

["Devious"]

Also you realize there will probably be a combat engineer job when the hcz update releases right?

Yes, I do realize this, and this post was really more meant for when the HCZ update does come. In hopes that the role would have a better chance of being added.

 

["Fanboy"]

-Support

 

[Aura_]

- Support for the Engineer Job to be added to E-11. As someone said, it would likely just lead to E-11 taking care of repairs themselves (even though it's not rare for one to just swap to TE to do repairs). Reducing the number of interactions in HCZ is not good imo.

++ Support for it to be a general job. We can safely apply the same logic we use for combat doctor. Locked behind a progression level, limited active slots. Give it a Nova or something alongside the Repair tools. The job can assist Gensec whenever their D-block Airlock breaks, E-11 in HCZ repairs mid-combat with SCPs (which could be needed in this upcoming HCZ update), Nu-7 with field repairs to their vehicles and gates, etc.

The best argument for a combative engineer job is almost parallel to combat doctors... unless people here genuinely believe combat doctor is useless. To make this class different from the previous, as Karl suggests, being able to place minor blockades, sandbags, etc. could really make it an unique and viable route to grind for new players and even returning players.

I don't understand some of these -supports seem to not take this suggestion seriously and just meme. On top of that, there seems to be contradicting -supports in this thread, but I'm not here to start an argument with anyone.
Good luck.

 

[Kito]

Wtf are people talking about in half of these replies?

+Support for a combat engineer, maybe not for E-11, but overall.

Clearance 3 Combat Engineer, similar to how the medical department gets a Clearance 3 Combat Medic. If you don't support Combat Engineers, you shouldn't also support Combat Medics, because it's basically the same thing.

 

["Fanboy"]

Wtf are people talking about in half of these replies?

+Support for a combat engineer, maybe not for E-11, but overall.

Clearance 3 Combat Engineer, similar to how the medical department gets a Clearance 3 Combat Medic. If you don't support Combat Engineers, you shouldn't also support Combat Medics, because it's basically the same thing.

Im sorry, what?
Healing is very much necessary in combat, but engineering is very much not.

 

[Second]

The ONLY way this would work is if MTF Nu-7 got their repair tools back, which they used to have.

 

[Lightsoulist]

The ONLY way this would work is if MTF Nu-7 got their repair tools back, which they used to have.

mfw Combat Engineers level 3

 

[lefty?]

Neutral
To be fair, its a good idea but the reason im not leaning towards a +Support is because it would take away from the normal engineers.

 

[Bill Nye The Guy]

-support like the 1000 other suggestions like this we shouldn't be discouraging cross-dept activities (eg e11 escorting tech people) by making each department completely functional with no help