This idea has been brought up in the Barracks a few times over the past couple of years: "Just think it would be a great way to make gameplay more dynamic.. If a town to the rear of a supplied frontline town is also supplied, why not give that town a fb to the adjacent frontline town? Think it would make for great open field tank battles... Gives the defending side a fighting chance at relibbing a camped town...
Maybe up the bde movement timers and make it so people would have to drive ms's and tanks in instead of being able to rotate a new bde in almost instantly and have full supply... Just a thought"

KFS1: Players have long asked about the ability to have/use defensive firebases - that is, an FB between two friendly towns to allow you to spawn armor etc from the next town back to assist in defending/liberating a front line town. We've had something that does pretty much that for quite a long time but it largely gets overlooked.

At first we introduced the "Fallback" system as a means of getting the hell out of dodge when your ABs are camped. It transfers ownership of the military facilities to your enemy bringing up your defensive firebases.

When we added TOEs, however, we also introduced the notion that a brigade can project FBs of its own, with a couple of limitations: The forward town must be frontline and must have no brigades in it.

I hear light bulbs going on, most of you know this as the "No-mans Land" system.

What we don't do is project FBs between two friendly towns with brigades in them. Apart from the fact that we feel this would excessively dilute the meaning of a brigade being in Town X, it also just has too many quirks and depends too much on players limiting themselves to the intent of the system. Take a moment to think about what it would be like if the enemy was attacking you with this kind of FB setup...

If your brigade is sitting in Town X and is camped to heck, get the OIC or HC to pull the brigade out and make the town a no-mans town. Unlike doing a fallback, you don't hand anything to the enemy and you don't lose any of your supply in the retreat.

We did discuss the possibility of turning on an FB from TownY to TownX when TownX has an AO on it, but we don't want to discourage the placement of counter-AOs. (Infact, we're trying to figure out how to encourage the HCs to place counter AOs instead of tossing them someplace else on the map when they're worried system might place one).

I believe what players are actually asking for here, though, is the ability to use the TownY->TownX FB when my brigade is in TownX.

The problem there is largely presentation. If you're in a brigade at TownY, it shows the TownY->TownX FB as open (if it doesn't, then you create the possibility that a player driving past the FB sees it as closed on the map and wonders WTF is going on with the server).

There would also be an inter-office war over whether or not these defensive FBs should be destroyable. If they are destroyable, that creates the situation where you go to spawn at the FB only to find its closed but there is an enemy FB on the link. Players already get confused when they see this, and the producers are likely to insist on a better way this is presented before tying more features onto it. On the other hand, the coders are likely to argue that tying more features onto it will make it more commonly seen and thus less confusing.