Re: Gamma revamp testing
what do RTS games usually implement as long range base defense that is able to harm big, slow, siege units, but is less an issue for smaller, faster units?
I see what you did there!
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
what do RTS games usually implement as long range base defense that is able to harm big, slow, siege units, but is less an issue for smaller, faster units?
I see what you did there!
Now on the test server:
[*]■ Terraforming will be limited by manually painted no-terraform areas along the shoreline of islands, making sure that no teleport can be cut off from the others. (Should we decide to put fixed teleports in the inner parts of an island, then appropriate no-terraform routes will lead to it.) - Chalydor on the test server now has this. The no-terraform/no-build area is shown with a red overlay on the map/radar, and with red stripes in the last mode of the terrain slope display.[/*]
The map looks a bit weird, we'll try to make it prettier by limiting the area displays to the shoreline, but the functionality is there.
[*]■ Make single-tile terraforming more user-friendly. Height display for tiles for comparison purposes to allow for precise structures.[/*]
"Terrain height display" can be turned on and off from the terrain windows dropdown menu. It's showing the height of the selected tile and the tiles around it in a 5x5 area, and also the height difference compared to the selected tile. Feedback is welcome.
Removed:
[*]■■ When drawing a terraforming plan you can still draw anything, but the tiles that are over this limit are highlighted in red. Beacons will still only terraform as far as the hard slope limit allows. - We realize it's quite hard to terraform this way with precise structures in mind, so we're still trying to make this more user-friendly, possibly by imposing the slope limit directly in the planner.[/*]
We have decided that we won't put any more effort to make beacon terraforming usable, for now at least. Gamma will be restarted with module terraforming only.
You should look at module terraforming in light of this, probably consider my suggestion of reducing locking time for tiles, or adding tile locking time bonus for certain robots.
Will module terraforming still have the same alipe restrictions as beacon?
Everything is fine.
Will module terraforming still have the same alipe restrictions as beacon?
It does have the same slope limits already.
Jita wrote:Will module terraforming still have the same alipe restrictions as beacon?
It does have the same slope limits already.
The trouble with single tile terraforming is it would be horrific trying to build a base with it. I'm still of the opinion that we'd be better off leaving beacon charges in (with slope limitations) and limiting the plan tool to flatten only so you can make flat spaces for bases. When it works add it back in.
we'd be better off leaving beacon charges in (with slope limitations) and limiting the plan tool to flatten only so you can make flat spaces for bases.
The limit does not work for beacon terraforming, it can be exploited to create impassable slopes. That's what we can't solve.
That's why I wrote that we should rather think about ways to make module terraforming less painful.
Trouble is you cant increase the cycle time without seriously impacting offensive terraforming. A cost reduction would be nice but wouldn't really help with the problem.
Perhaps add in tiers of ammo - you have precision and normal maybe a couple of tiers above that would be beneficial.
I should be able to lock and use on a single tile and make a flat space in the same way as beacons so top end single tile effect should be 75m from point of lock.
Another issue is you cant see what its going to do before you do it. If its not hard perhaps have a reverse terraforming charge that refunds you the terraforming charge and is pretty cheap. That would be good for people to use offensively too.
Is "offensive terraforming" really a thing now with the new limits?
Is offensive terraforming making a phallus?
That's inappropriate terraforming, but back to the topic
Is "offensive terraforming" really a thing now with the new limits?
How do you plan on seiging a base?
DEV Zoom wrote:Is "offensive terraforming" really a thing now with the new limits?
How do you plan on seiging a base?
Nerfing turrets I think?
Yeah they are actually nerfed already on the test server AFAIK, and we're working on improving their AI.
Is "offensive terraforming" really a thing now with the new limits?
its the only way to directly assault a working base so if its not we have problems. I do think it can be used though, even with the new restrictions.
Just to expand a little , one way it was used before was boxing in turrets to stop them shooting you, while this may not be possible any more you can still build platforms and lips etc to hide behind. You also have to look at the behaviour of terraforming around buildings - previously you could 'donut' a building - is that still possible?
Dev Zoom :Slightly off topic, but is the risk vs reward aspect of gamma not an issue with you guys?
Edit: I think its far more important than what you are doing right now.
Turret changes:
Rail:
Damage modifier reduced by ~33%
Hit dispersion doubled (misses more)
Cycle time halved (2x faster firing rate)
Energy usage halved
Overall: about -33% less dps, with about the same energy usage as before
Missile:
Cycle time increased by 50% (this means about 33% less dps)
Energy usage increased by 50%
Overall: about -33% less dps, with about the same energy usage as before
Laser:
Damage modifier reduced by ~33%
Overall: about -33% less dps
Celebro: it is an issue, but one thing at a time, otherwise we're looking at development chaos again. Obviously we don't have anything to balance "risk vs reward"-wise if we don't have a working gamma mechanic in the first place.
They still out range players and we have nothing to hide behind.
Like so a group of plated heavys show up to attack a base. 1 explosion in the middle of the group and chain explosions rip through the middle of the group. GG
Look at turrets as if they would be players who can't move. Do you want to hide behind something or kill them?
Look at turrets as if they would be players who can't move. Do you want to hide behind something or kill them?
Can you make sure turrets shoot if what your hiding behind is destructible (such as plants). I see people setting up triandulus walls to hide behind which is dumb.
Like so a group of plated heavys show up to attack a base. 1 explosion in the middle of the group and chain explosions rip through the middle of the group. GG
And they do that strategy on purpose, yes? Let's not play the stupid player here, I know you're not
Look at turrets as if they would be players who can't move. Do you want to hide behind something or kill them?
Well 2 out of 3 things win pvp.
Speed, Terrain and Range.
Turrets have Terrain and Range.
So instead of two shotting a heavy turrets will three shot us now?
Can you make sure turrets shoot if what your hiding behind is destructible (such as plants). I see people setting up triandulus walls to hide behind which is dumb.
I'll see what we can do about that. The issue is of course terrain LoS vs destructible LoS. They should only shoot in the latter case.
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 3 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
Generated in 0.074 seconds (82% PHP - 18% DB) with 20 queries