This feature will be great to enable more creative defence arrangement. The current setup of always facing the first contact path is not optimize in several condition. Please consider this in your next patch,
This is rule. You must make best defence with this rule. It rule for always because without it, game become hard.
This would make attacking others harder than it already is.
Rules can be change, it does not give any unfair advantage, I think it give more flexibilities and provide more defense combination. Are we all up for a bit more challenge?
One thing I want to mention: If a tower does face e.g. the 2nd or 3rd path contact, most or all of it’s range will face other directions than where the attackers come from, for many/most cases.
So generally 1st path contact rule not that bad. Also, as “direct contact beats diagonal contact”, there’s already a lot of variety possible with the current system. Not sure how much new options a “choose freely” feature would really bring you?
Plus if you have to manually select and specify each tower orientation, that makes base-building a lot more work and quite annoying at times. Also, this opens up room for lots of mistakes by accidently not specifying or specifying wrongly the new orientation for a tower.
Btw this whole idea has already been discussed (among others) here:
Might be worth a read
Would this effect any tower besidz firebolt? All of the others are so close, it doesnt make a difference which way they face.
But, yea. Picking for firebolt would be nice, as it places it a good distance from the path it faces, but sometimes close to another
For all other towers the effect would potentially be bigger than for firebolt, as firebolt tower is already relatively centered while other towers are adjacent to the path tile they face.
Consider this: [PathA] [Tower->] [PathB] - where [text] denotes a tile and PathA comes before PathB. Rotating Tower to face PathB (instead of default PathA) would place it close to pathB and out of range for melee attacks and all short-range damage spells as hammerstrike, firestorm, blizzard, bladestorm, sonicblast from PathA, and also the tower range would be mainly into the direction of PathB. Take e.g. an arrow tower: Placed as described above, it could barely hit on the PathA tile (only it’s border area), not be hit with melee troops and spells from PathA, and cannons or ranged units could still attack it from PathA.
That would 1. change the way one could build his base (or raid other players’ bases) quite a lot, and 2. probably lead to tougher bases even though the “facing away from first path contact” technique would only be applied to few towers (as applying it to all towers would on average make a base weaker as far as I can estimate that).
Most probably, it could make skull towers a lot more deadly, as as a base builder you could decide to let it face away from PathA and thus prevent the hero from destroying it unless he walks all around to PathB. This would also increase importance of cannon and shield or heal spells and decrease effectiveness of damage spells such as sonic blast. Depending on the exact distances, ogres might get more or less powerful than before (depending on whether they can reach towers from their back side or not). Definitely, carefully and cleverly placed across-chokepoint towers would lose their importance, as just almost any tower could act in a similar way.
Path-overlap-heavy bases (such as the well-known L-shape bases) that have lots of towers firing at you(r troops) across path overlap would probably be replaced by paths with no path overlap but the same effect for towers, while also allowing monster-heavy waves (no path overlap = mummy, werewolf, ogre can’t get killed/injured in advance) at the same time. Such bases would be crazy hard to beat… just imaging monster bases where every single tower acts as an across-path-overlap-tower that is out of reach for all your hero skills!
Thus, no, definitely I don’t want that to come.