What would defence be like with a pool of 8 Reinforcements

This is just a thought. What if defenders only had 8 reinforcements? Please keep an open mind about this change because it is something to potentially talk about, due to the impact it would have on the game. Read on and maybe re-evaluate at the end :)I think it maybe doesn't suit the map design necessarily, with the maps balanced and designed around 10 reinforcements BUT I do think potentially asking defenders to make a choice in what they reinforce knowing that there is a good chance that SOMETHING will be left soft for attackers to use and manipulate.I do think a lot of maps, and the sites on most maps DO NOT need all 10 reinforcements for a standard hold, but players put up them reinforcements elsewhere, or lock off site even more making the attackers job harder, and obviously adding more NEED for hard-breachers.The benefit of only having 8 reinforcements is that now defenders will likely always leave a weak spot in their defence which is good for many reasons -->Firstly, attackers have a focal point for their attack based off how defenders set up. This means droning in prep phase and finding the weaknesses is more important, while prep phase for defenders is more focused on prepping their defence.Secondly, it means there is less dependency on Hard-Breachers which is a good thing. On several maps running more than one hard-breacher is important and some times needed. That takes up more space on the attacking line-up if you have to run two hard-breachers over one. Secondly, it provides more chance and opportunity for attackers if the Hard-Breacher(s) get killed early in the round, as there is still a place where the defence is weaker and you can still exploit.Next, it means gadgets on defence will have more use on-site helping to cover that weakness of maybe an important wall not being reinforced. This means less Shields, Cams etc elsewhere on the map delaying time and making attacking really hard. The defence do have a lot to help cover and compensate for that weakness which would be really nice.It also means defence have more time to set-up gadgets for example, and more chance of all reinforcements being used especially combined with the new quicker reinforcement time. With less overall to do, operators with several gadgets to place, or places to set-up may feel more inclined to help which promotes better behaviour overall.An example of a site where this change would have an obvious impact is say Kitchen on Kafe. There are six soft walls on the edge of site, two in prep, and a hatch in Freezer. Thats nine right there, and the last will maybe be used on the single wall by Bar, outside service doorway.Or take most sites on Clubhouse (which is quite a defender-favoured map especially at a pro level). On cash, you'd have to sacrifice something whether its one of the walls in Garage, or maybe logistics wall. Or on Armory, maybe 1-2 of the hatches could not be reinforced due to a lot of important walls needing to be done there.It would certainly add more ways of attackers to execute, and differences for defence to work around. Different pro teams may decide to run different set-ups compared to others which would spice up pro league for sure. It would certainly help even out the attacker/defender win rates in Siege across the board.I think the philosophy should still be for the level designers to create sites and maps around having 10 reinforcements BUT then forcing defenders to have to adapt based off how they perceive the map/site and the line-ups they have. This means there will likely always be different ways a round plays out even more so than before.At a pro level I think this would be a godsend. IF any players could adapt, it would be the players at that level of play. I certainly think this idea has MANY benefits, with a few noticable downsides but some I think could well be overcome.A clear disadvantage is that a lot of the base game maps do require a lot of reinforcing potentially spreading their defence too thin if they dont have all 10. Also, it may swing the game into an attacker-favoured meta, as we really cannot gauge the impact of a HUGE change like this.But the more i think of it, the more I like the idea. Yes it isnt perfect and every change always has a clear downside. Thats expected. But I think the benefits outweigh the negatives. I think this could and should be tested in a mid-season patch or something, just to gauge its impact.What do you think of the idea? Are there any other big negatives I haven't considered (guaranteed there will be!)? Let me know :) via /r/Rainbow6 https://ift.tt/38CUZs1