Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

I think what your able to do with Tfing needs to be nerfed.

Re work Walls into proper Modular walls.
Make wall Tech part of MPC Research Tech.
Straight Walls sections, Wall section with: Access Ramps, Corner sections, Wall Sections with Turret Sockets Etc.
Gates... this could just be a "gate" with a shield effect that you can raise or lower with a pass code or something.

I agree that Reactors should require Fuel to function.
Turrets should require Ammo (tho i have seen a few good ideas on intruducing a new MPC building which acts like a ammo dump so you dont have to go around re arming EVERY turret).

Turrets should have a 3km limit to around a station But all other MPC buildings you should be able to build any where on the island.


I just think it would be cool if we had actual Siege Battles Where attackers have to brake down the walls to get into a base & start blowing *** up yarr

And for the Love of every thing good Give us player build Highway Buildings!!!

I do think having only 3 stations on a Gamma is a little low ... maybe some where in the range of 4-6

27 (edited by Shadowmine 2013-09-03 04:20:24)

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

I just think that gamma is closer to being balanced than most people think. It wouldn't take a lot to tweak it.

I do think a corporation should ave only one outpost per island. It would encourage active corps to work together to keep an island secure. Or if one corp wants to own an island it has to string defences across the island to each tele. Leaving connections to teleports vulnerable for being taken over. Or leaving defences tied to alt corp terminals, which is always risky to do.

As for an outpost limit per island. I like the idea of gamma 1 and gamma 2 islands. Gamma 1 islands have 12 or 24 terminal limit as now and are closer to betas. Gamma 2's would be farther out and allow only the number of outposts as the island had teleports. This would make the farther islands more dangerous but slightly easier to defend, while allowing new corps to still have space.

And curious what you can do with terraforming that needs to be nerfed?

Those of you lucky enough to have your lives, take them with you. However, leave the mods you've lost. They belong to me now.

Scarab Kill Count:2

28 (edited by Homer J Simpson 2013-09-03 04:40:41)

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

Shadowmine wrote:

And curious what you can do with terraforming that needs to be nerfed?

I just think that Tfing being used to make "walls" around Gamma bases looks stupid & that wall actuall walls we currently have are to half arsed to actually be used as proper defenses in the creation of an actual base.

I like what can be created with TFing but i think we have to much freedom as players in changing whole islands like we can.

that would be one of my main reasons

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

The new terraforming mechanics actually discourage walls being terraformed very high. It isn't really worth it anymore. And it is more difficult to actually do if you were so inclined.

Those of you lucky enough to have your lives, take them with you. However, leave the mods you've lost. They belong to me now.

Scarab Kill Count:2

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

I disagree with the terminals.  As we have it now (12) all of us just put alt corps down so we have the cap on the island.  That is just stupid.  Lower the limit per island, and make on a per corp basis, one per island.

As far as what HJS is saying, I like that the restriction would only apply to turrets (the 3k rule) all else would be open, so as people can mine with towers as they please.  This would also allow highways and other cool things, just not locking down the entire island.

The reasoning behind all this talk of nerf gammas. 

I'm really conserned that all of us are rushing to the end game, of this game far, far too soon.   Gamma's are looking to be end game.  Sure we can bring in deltas but what more can you do, we can already build everything, after that its just adding fluff in to make it interesting. 

Again I would much rather see gamma removed (Not the islands just structures) and re worked.  Sure keep terminals in the game.  Just remove everything else.  Allow us to use them on the islands and live out of them. 

I would rather see more development toward the PVE, PVP (bots mods), and Lag issue (memory issues) of the game.  Then to take the time to rework gamma.

The Gifter
Top  Killer 2013  - 01: 334 -- 17 -- 317  : Merkle
Top  Killer 2012  - 01: 027 -- 472 -- 445 : Merkle

Scarab Kill Count - 13

31 (edited by Homer J Simpson 2013-09-03 05:09:17)

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

after a year or more or playing with & testing Gamma since it came out on the test server i have to agree with Merkle.

Gamma to me just doesnt feel right / balanced / complete.

now i have to go wash my self roll

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

Any Gamma change will kill it. Add more meaning to it first, then all the restrictions you want second. Right now, the only profit of Gamma - is more or less safe resource gathering. Remove that safety - and all it turns in building Gamma bases for Scarabs mk2 and building more/advanced Gamma bases.

Then don't forget that current Gamma bases just look indestructible. With more ppl online, that will change.

Have a productive day, runner!
R.I.P. Chenoa, you'll never be forgotten.
DEV Zoom: Line, sorry, I was away for christmas.
http://perp-kill.net/?m=view&id=252086

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

Line wrote:

With more ppl online, that will change.

Actually with more people on & about Gammas become even safer.

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

Line I agree!  No, not one gamma base is ever safe, ever.

With more people however this problem will multiply.   I, my opinion again, do not think that we should have Islands locked down, more so we should be locking down land.  If you move to a more land value (3k rings) then you allow more fluid game play.  More interaction with the environment, and allow more play styles to come out. 

I do NOT disagree, we are making a killing off of gammas right now.  Gammas are ONLY for profit taking as it stands now, what I would like to see is that profit taking to be lowered, as well as the cost of setup lowered, but for the risks to be lower as well.   With more fluid game play. 

If we were to go back, we can see the decline right after gammas are released.  I dont think that is random.

I would really like to see exactly what Line is suggesting gamma is now, just with out all the fluff (turrets) we have now.

The Gifter
Top  Killer 2013  - 01: 334 -- 17 -- 317  : Merkle
Top  Killer 2012  - 01: 027 -- 472 -- 445 : Merkle

Scarab Kill Count - 13

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

Let me be a bit more clear as well. 

I do not think more players will make gammas move more.  It will only make them safer.

The Gifter
Top  Killer 2013  - 01: 334 -- 17 -- 317  : Merkle
Top  Killer 2012  - 01: 027 -- 472 -- 445 : Merkle

Scarab Kill Count - 13

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

I see 2 solutions for Gammas.

1st (nearly Merkle idea):

-Let players go in the island, coastline should not terraformable > players can go into Gammas
-Reactors need material to make energy > that against the building spams

2nd (nearly Tux idea):

-Let the existing Gammas alone > dont need reimburse
-Make new island with really good amount of reward > players will go there to grind
-Let players terraform and build MPC just 3-4 place on the island far away from teleports at 4-5 km radius place

This is just the basics and the most needed mechanics to change the state we have now what I also DON'T like atm. All players on Gamma in untouchable way I dont like it.

Energy to Earth!

18.01.2014. [12:57:58] <BeastmodeGuNs> after that i remembered all those warning about 1v1 you lol, and i found out why xD

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

The only thing that needs to change is reactors.

Give reactors a need to be fueled and a base will only be as large as a corps active player base can sustain.

Other than that gamma is fine as it is.

38 (edited by Burial 2013-09-03 17:07:16)

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

Line wrote:

Any Gamma change will kill it. Add more meaning to it first, then all the restrictions you want second. Right now, the only profit of Gamma - is more or less safe resource gathering. Remove that safety - and all it turns in building Gamma bases for Scarabs mk2 and building more/advanced Gamma bases.

Then don't forget that current Gamma bases just look indestructible. With more ppl online, that will change.

The meaning is yes, semi-safe resource gathering and great manufacturing bonuses, but it's not something that should be regarded lightly. Everyone benefits from great industrial capabilities and that alone is worth building and defending for. Wars are fueled by industry. With Merkles suggestions, you open the islands up for some roaming PVP and balance against betas but the core is still behind defences that would require a siege to be breached.

While not allowing coasts to be terraformed/builded could work out well too, I think radius around terminal is a lot cleaner solution, in essence you will have three ~6km diameter circles around the island that are safe, everything outside them is PVP area. With coast changes, people would just literally make a wall around the inner part of an island and place turrets. It's a lot of work but it will be done gradually.

Either way I doubt anything is going to happen any time soon, another controversial topic that spans 30 pages..

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

Making a Gamma safe, even a little, requires lots of manhours (getting money, hauling, terraforming, mining, producing etc.) so it's not that easily achieved. Add here a possibility of sabotage maneures which can waste your efforts.

Main issue is that you're trying to balance Gammas around current population which will (I hope) change. Ok, let's assume that's necessary for a while - then there is easiet way to do that - simply turn off all the teleports leading there and move every character who is currently there back to Alphas-1. Simple and easy and no reimbursement needed. Everyone will get their bases back when the time will come.

Whats for the solution - add artillery and siege weaponry. Walkers ans Devastators, deployable artillery cannons, etc. That's it! Make 'em all require some colixium, and you're killing two rabbits with one shot - you will need Gamma to be able to assault other's Gamma. Add some gamma-only racial resources as an additional requirements - and you will get a reason for conflicts. That's the way the things should be changed.

Now Betas - hey, someone promised us Energy Collecting System! Implement that, then make it Beta-ownership related (like, greatly increased prices or some kind of special rewards in Syn-Shop, etc.) - and there goes your reason for Beta PvP. People will try to collect and haul that energy - roamers paradize!

tl;dr: lock the teleports as temporarily solution and keep developing.

Have a productive day, runner!
R.I.P. Chenoa, you'll never be forgotten.
DEV Zoom: Line, sorry, I was away for christmas.
http://perp-kill.net/?m=view&id=252086

40 (edited by Martha Stuart 2013-09-03 15:30:39)

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

Merkle wrote:

Gamma.  In short.  Gamma's need to change.

The problems with gamma are large.  Zero Access for a hostile force.  Completely safe mining environment.  Limited movement of forces through the general map.

What I would suggest will mostlikly be hated, and mocked.  I digress.  What needs to happen is the same with walls, a massive change to undo the damage of what was done.  First, Tell the player base that all the gamma will be pulled down and returned to there said parties.  Second, put in place rules for new gammas to be build.

1. No Base within 3k of a tele.
2. Base defenses can not sprawl more then a 3k radius.
3. Three bases Per Gamma.
4. Two Bases no closer then 2.5 Radius.
5. Buff Defensive reinforce timers. (Double Them)
6. Require Fuel for all Reactors. (No new minerals just existing ones.)
7. Re-balance turrets, possibly buff them.

As far as getting to this point.  The Dev Team needs to go in, ask the gamma holders (Mostly STC, Nebs, Rem, TOG, Dream, Doy, and others.)  Ask then where they want there stuff moved to, any terminal in the game they wish.  Wipe there bases, and re balance.

As it stands now there is no eb and flow of gammas, some will say this will change when more players come into the game, I think the problem will just get far worse.  We need the ability to get roams ON islands, so that hostile forces can agrees and create conflict. 

This is how I see it, I do NOT speak for STC and its allies.  This is my personal Opinion.  One that I do not think will be popular.

So when did you sell your accounts to Syndic?
Also, Burn the witch? He clearly weighs the same as a duck.

41 (edited by Celebro 2013-09-03 15:21:06)

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

Line wrote:

Making a Gamma safe, even a little, requires lots of manhours (getting money, hauling, terraforming, mining, producing etc.) so it's not that easily achieved. Add here a possibility of sabotage maneures which can waste your efforts.

Main issue is that you're trying to balance Gammas around current population which will (I hope) change. Ok, let's assume that's necessary for a while - then there is easiet way to do that - simply turn off all the teleports leading there and move every character who is currently there back to Alphas-1. Simple and easy and no reimbursement needed. Everyone will get their bases back when the time will come.

Whats for the solution - add artillery and siege weaponry. Walkers ans Devastators, deployable artillery cannons, etc. That's it! Make 'em all require some colixium, and you're killing two rabbits with one shot - you will need Gamma to be able to assault other's Gamma. Add some gamma-only racial resources as an additional requirements - and you will get a reason for conflicts. That's the way the things should be changed.

Now Betas - hey, someone promised us Energy Collecting System! Implement that, then make it Beta-ownership related (like, greatly increased prices or some kind of special rewards in Syn-Shop, etc.) - and there goes your reason for Beta PvP. People will try to collect and haul that energy - roamers paradize!

tl;dr: lock the teleports as temporarily solution and keep developing.

+1 good post except moving anything from gamma

RIP PERPETUUM

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

Would just like to take the time to say Gamma is balanced and needs no cooldown timer....

Those of you lucky enough to have your lives, take them with you. However, leave the mods you've lost. They belong to me now.

Scarab Kill Count:2

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

I do see alot of people with the opinion that gamma should only support one type of PvP: seige warfare. This is generally serious PvP that recquires a large ammount of upfront time investment (much like building the gamma base). Even an increase in population won't change this. Lets also establish one other fact, gamma removal can be tedious and tiring. Much more so than just sitting in one space shooting something. Factor the lag that would be caused with a large number of players and the current building spam into it and it looks even more ugly.

Even with an increase in population, this type of PvP will still be few and far between and will be long and tedious.

We need something to drive fun PvP whether its on gamma, beta, or wherever because all that is going to happen when "super serious pvp" is all thats happening is people are going to burn out.

Looking forward to new players and new conflicts.

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

Well all of the islands should have the opportunity for both kinds of PVP.   Gamma has siege warfare now, but little to no driving force for smaller (turning into larger), and more agile engagements.

I agree with Burial any change that takes place needs to be taken from the larger scale.  As if we can, we will, if we can't, were find a way to do it anyway. 

Throwing my point back out there I'm generally looking to make gamma bases smaller in scale yet harder to breach and kill in practice.

The Gifter
Top  Killer 2013  - 01: 334 -- 17 -- 317  : Merkle
Top  Killer 2012  - 01: 027 -- 472 -- 445 : Merkle

Scarab Kill Count - 13

45 (edited by Burial 2013-09-03 22:27:10)

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

To put things into perspective, that circle has 3km radius. Now imagine you can strategically place 3 of those circles on a single island.

Result is that your island still is very usable and you can find plenty of fields inside defence perimeter for afk mining. Only difference is that now there is a chance to catch some PVP every now and then when the fields inside defence area are gone and people need to travel pass them.

There is a lot of talk how roaming PVP is dead and one reason is that gammas are too safe against roamers. Other reasons are not important. This problem needs to be fixed either from one(beta islands) or the other(gammas) side, but I think better for the game would be to get gammas a little more open.


Merkle wrote:

I like that the restriction would only apply to turrets (the 3k rule) all else would be open, so as people can mine with towers as they please.  This would also allow highways and other cool things, just not locking down the entire island.

Restriction should also apply to terraforming, otherwise the island would be cut off with a lot of time consuming terraforming. While not as bad as current situation it still would effectively kill off roaming PVP(reminds me walls on beta). Roaming PVP is already race against the clock to catch slow people.

46 (edited by Sundial 2013-09-03 19:25:49)

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

Burial wrote:

To put things into perspective, that circle has 3km radius. Now imagine you can strategically place 3 of those circles on a single island.

Result is that your island still is very usable and you can find plenty of fields inside defence perimeter for afk mining. Only difference is that now there is a chance to catch some PVP every now and then when the fields inside defence area are gone and people need to travel pass them.

There is a lot of talk how roaming PVP is dead and one reason is that gammas are too safe against roamers. Other reasons are not important. This problem needs to be fixed either from one or the other side, but I think better for the game would be to get gammas a little more open.


Merkle wrote:

I like that the restriction would only apply to turrets (the 3k rule) all else would be open, so as people can mine with towers as they please.  This would also allow highways and other cool things, just not locking down the entire island.

Restriction should also apply to terraforming, otherwise the island would be cut off with a lot of time consuming terraforming. While not as bad as current situation it still would effectively kill off roaming PVP(reminds me walls on beta). Roaming PVP is already race against the clock to catch slow people.

Yeah, that actually still gives the majority if the island to be covered in bases. Have to agree with Merkle completely about the "fluid" gameplay part of it. If the effort to access even a tiny part of the gamma island is huge, it will rarely ever lead to interesting situations with the potential to escalate creating interesting content.

Though I would still like the Delta islands described by Tux, I think Gammas as they are currently are too far in the direction of safety and don't have mechanics for "fluid" interactions/escalations.

Also a lesson learned from steve: Cost/time invested shouldn't directly correlate into pure reward with no disadvantages or drawbacks, see Titans/Supercarriers.

EDIT:

clarification

Looking forward to new players and new conflicts.

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

We already have open pvp on beta, and a different kind of pvp in gamma give us more tools to siege and with more players and it will be balanced. I don't want another beta on gamma. Make different betas with more rewards with one terminal no OP, make gamma islands with no MPCs but higher rewards.

RIP PERPETUUM

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

I guess I'm going to have to bite on this troll.

Let me explain the 'Snow Ball' effect.  It's kind of like a well fed juggernaut in DOTA2.

In pre Gamma perpetuum new corps were able to take on veteran corps by applying pressure to industrial or by ghanking to decrease morale, or build morale which ever side your on.  This was very effective and made it possible for smaller corps to compete overall.  There was no instant travel and lock out mechanics so players could effectively 'hide'. 

What we have now is well fed corporations with unlimited mobility and unhampered industry.  It's only going to get worse the longer it happens.  If an influx happens, and I say if.  I see NEX 2.0 happening.  3 months and out.  No one will be able to compete against a secured Gammas Industry.

Well Ville they can just build their own!  Yeah, in between getting their faces smashed in, during the process.  Which causes most people to rage quit or split their corp (see Rawr as an example).  I like your suggestions Merkle but your intentional trying to ignore the elephant in the room:

1.  Unlimited mobility.
2.  Unlimited resources.

It's to the point now the damage is too deep for repair.  Because with the onset of new players inflation will run rampid further lining the pockets of vets and enlarging the gap between veteran corps and new players. 

Merkle, I understand the opening up of the Gammas, but when I can just ninja up a terminal next to an ore I need then place some defense turrets it's adding up to the same thing.

Steam achievement Unlocked:  Being a Badass
http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/239407
Dev Zoom: I think its time to confess, Ville is my alt
Dev Zoom: Ville can be sometimes so sane it's scary.

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

4 hr cooldown on spark teleports.  1 week respawn on ores after the threshold is low enough on Gamma.  See the bizzilon threads out there already.

Steam achievement Unlocked:  Being a Badass
http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/239407
Dev Zoom: I think its time to confess, Ville is my alt
Dev Zoom: Ville can be sometimes so sane it's scary.

Re: Gamma Suggestion. The Problem.

Celebro wrote:

We already have open pvp on beta, and a different kind of pvp in gamma give us more tools to siege and with more players and it will be balanced. I don't want another beta on gamma. Make different betas with more rewards with one terminal no OP, make gamma islands with no MPCs but higher rewards.

Here here! Gamma must be different to Beta and vice verca, not just a more extreme version. Can't agree with you about no MPCs though.

Why shouldn't a really large and active corp be able to effectively partition a whole island - thats the reward for having lots of people active and knowing how to use them. Its not like a gamma can be made impenetrable.

As I already stated. Make reactors require fuel - energy storage cells only since these require some of every raw material in the game - and you can have as big a gamma base as your player base allows.

Devs, go have a look at some well established bases (you know where they are) count up the reactors that are require to power the place and then make a judgment on fuel requirement. There is no way that a mere handful of players should be able to keep bases of the current size going on their own. That is what is happening now.

Turret spam: Turrets require ammo.