Re: Gamma Balancing

fair enough, we can giuve it a shot. Personally i think if you losened the mechnic you have for single tile so that you can get small sheer walls that would be fine - creating impassible terrain is 90% of base making.

Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."

Re: Gamma Balancing

Zoom, the problem is simple.  The turrets out shoot players and Hit 3 times as hard as players.  If you take offensive terraforming away then (building cover for players to hide behind)  we as attackers will need some way to "cover" us during an assault.  Similar to what Opti said.  If not the bases will just be OP as hell.

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 Balancing

We do extreme things on purpose to try and give you examples of how it is broken or needs to be adjusted.

It is like this game we play with you.




DEV Zoom wrote:

Jita/Celebro: We all know if something is allowed by mechanics then it will be done, even if it's stupid.

I admit one of my reasons against those vertical terrain walls is that they look really bad. I know many of you don't care about that, but there are screenshots and publicity and potential newbies looking at it.

The other thing is that it messes with our LOS mechanics, sometimes the walls are so thin that you think they block shots, when they actually don't.

Again, our intended purpose of terraforming is mainly to terraform a suitable place for your base, and maybe some decorative purposes. But definitely not the main line of defense. I think pretty things can be done with the proposed change too, but think more like pyramids (with deployable walls on top of them), instead of sharp ridges and cubicles.

DEV Zoom - "If you mean the NPC aggro, that's been like that for months already."

Re: Gamma Balancing

Ville wrote:

Zoom, the problem is simple.  The turrets out shoot players and Hit 3 times as hard as players.  If you take offensive terraforming away then (building cover for players to hide behind)  we as attackers will need some way to "cover" us during an assault.  Similar to what Opti said.  If not the bases will just be OP as hell.

this is also true - offensive terraforming is essential

Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."

55 (edited by Inda 2014-01-19 21:54:12)

Re: Gamma Balancing

Or nerf the Turrets more.


EDIT:
And yes

FUEL FOR REACTORS !

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 Balancing

Ville wrote:

Zoom, the problem is simple.  The turrets out shoot players and Hit 3 times as hard as players.  If you take offensive terraforming away then (building cover for players to hide behind)  we as attackers will need some way to "cover" us during an assault.  Similar to what Opti said.  If not the bases will just be OP as hell.

Naturally the terraforming change will require balancing of other things. Not only that, but the building limit as well (which means fewer turrets, so they would possibly have more HP than currently). But the first step here is to declare that terraforming should not be for direct defense, then comes the rest.

Re: Gamma Balancing

Ville wrote:

Zoom, the problem is simple.  The turrets out shoot players and Hit 3 times as hard as players.  If you take offensive terraforming away then (building cover for players to hide behind)  we as attackers will need some way to "cover" us during an assault.  Similar to what Opti said.  If not the bases will just be OP as hell.

Good point Ville

RIP PERPETUUM

Re: Gamma Balancing

I was looking for a poodle grooming thread and I found this thing about changing everything everyone has done.


yarr

DEV Zoom - "If you mean the NPC aggro, that's been like that for months already."

59 (edited by Burial 2014-01-19 22:05:11)

Re: Gamma Balancing

Ville wrote:

Zoom, the problem is simple.  The turrets out shoot players and Hit 3 times as hard as players.  If you take offensive terraforming away then (building cover for players to hide behind)  we as attackers will need some way to "cover" us during an assault.  Similar to what Opti said.  If not the bases will just be OP as hell.

Exactly. Close to impossible to breach walls covered with turrets that are double repped, double armor boosted w/o terraforming.

About the change? I stopped caring long ago.

DEV Zoom wrote:

I admit one of my reasons against those vertical terrain walls is that they look really bad. I know many of you don't care about that, but there are screenshots and publicity and potential newbies looking at it.

Triplanar texture mapping?

Re: Gamma Balancing

DEV Zoom wrote:
Ville wrote:

Zoom, the problem is simple.  The turrets out shoot players and Hit 3 times as hard as players.  If you take offensive terraforming away then (building cover for players to hide behind)  we as attackers will need some way to "cover" us during an assault.  Similar to what Opti said.  If not the bases will just be OP as hell.

Naturally the terraforming change will require balancing of other things. Not only that, but the building limit as well (which means fewer turrets, so they would possibly have more HP than currently). But the first step here is to declare that terraforming should not be for direct defense, then comes the rest.

Kool, I just want a deployable shield, or a Wall unit that I can place and hide behind so turrets that can hit at 1.5K to block LOS, till I can get into range.

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 Balancing

Welcome to Gamma, thanks for testing for 2 years.  k thx bye

DEV Zoom - "If you mean the NPC aggro, that's been like that for months already."

Re: Gamma Balancing

DEV Zoom wrote:
Jita wrote:

make terraforming and contruction only able to be done 3km from a terminal

Chicken/egg problem - how do you terraform a suitable place for the terminal itself?

Eggs you say how about you make dropping a base while its constructible you can terraform under it. Kinda like station Eggs in eve. cept not.

Anonymous: lobo is the only hero left in this god foresaken game / :also, Lobo is god among men
http://killboard.sequer.nl/?a=agent-his … mp;month=7 Best month 104 to 1 k/d

Re: Gamma Balancing

Ville wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:
Ville wrote:

Zoom, the problem is simple.  The turrets out shoot players and Hit 3 times as hard as players.  If you take offensive terraforming away then (building cover for players to hide behind)  we as attackers will need some way to "cover" us during an assault.  Similar to what Opti said.  If not the bases will just be OP as hell.

Naturally the terraforming change will require balancing of other things. Not only that, but the building limit as well (which means fewer turrets, so they would possibly have more HP than currently). But the first step here is to declare that terraforming should not be for direct defense, then comes the rest.

Kool, I just want a deployable shield, or a Wall unit that I can place and hide behind so turrets that can hit at 1.5K to block LOS, till I can get into range.

If you remove defensive walls from bases I think it should not be easy for 20 or so players to destroy a well built gamma base. So at least attackers still has a challenge but not enough its too easy mode if not no one will build anything there and defeats the purpose. What's good is you will be able to go and roam, miners and farming guys will be there too shoot, gamma will not just be for base killing.

RIP PERPETUUM

Re: Gamma Balancing

Zoom, I like the proposed changes so far.  Something that others have not touched on yet is how the new system of terraforming will work with tiles that are currently too steep to cross with a light bot.

I would assume that you could terraform it so that it was passable but not back to it's original slope. 

Will the placement of buildings cause impassible tiles in some situations?  If so this might be exploitable in making a base.

I noticed a few people talking about making zones around bases that are not terraformable.  I would think that this would be an easy thing to do with a new building that creates a anti terraforming zone around it (when turned on).

Re: Gamma Balancing

Allow terminals to auto tf underneath them upon placement. But then have a distance limitation from other structures that a terminal can be placed. 3000 km from any other structure, etc. Then you could only allow tfing within a certain radius of terminal if you so desire.


Don't reimburse tf charges, it will screw the market, and the wealth accumulated behind terraformed walls is probly more than enough to compensate anyway.

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

66 (edited by Rage Blackout 2014-01-19 22:53:10)

Re: Gamma Balancing

You cant just ninja wipe peoples work and not compensate them in any way.

We cant get our RL time back, so a little reimburse will do.



Shadowmine wrote:

Allow terminals to auto tf underneath them upon placement. But then have a distance limitation from other structures that a terminal can be placed. 3000 km from any other structure, etc. Then you could only allow tfing within a certain radius of terminal if you so desire.


Don't reimburse tf charges, it will screw the market, and the wealth accumulated behind terraformed walls is probly more than enough to compensate anyway.

DEV Zoom - "If you mean the NPC aggro, that's been like that for months already."

Re: Gamma Balancing

Rage Blackout wrote:

You cant just ninja wipe peoples work and not compensate them in any way.

We cant get our RL time back, so a little reimburse will do.



Shadowmine wrote:

Allow terminals to auto tf underneath them upon placement. But then have a distance limitation from other structures that a terminal can be placed. 3000 km from any other structure, etc. Then you could only allow tfing within a certain radius of terminal if you so desire.


Don't reimburse tf charges, it will screw the market, and the wealth accumulated behind terraformed walls is probly more than enough to compensate anyway.

+1

Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."

Re: Gamma Balancing

First up just a Quick note to say: ABOUT TIME ZOOM!  lol lol *Golf claps* tongue
I got a few things i wanna point out but im still reading thru all the posts but i just have to make i point with regards:

Jita wrote:

This would force people to create small contained bases but still have some of the awesome beautiful terraforming you see around the game now. Changing terraforming inh the way you describe will make gamma bland and miss out on some really cool design.

The Current terraforming yes does allow for very cool looking bases it has 1 problem: Players are given WAY to much power. This power will always be abused. And the current form of Terraforming is VERY bad for game play. Terraforming should never be your first choice for base defense Like it is now. Terraforming should be a secondary option to add to your defenses.

So on this note i support Zooms idea for changing Terraforming.

@ Zoom: one issue i can think of tho is even if you allow for terraforming to be passable to ligh/ assault bots heres an issue i see. With the current TF plans we can make you could raise up the plan & form a "shear cliff" edge along the plan boarders thus allowing players to still  form walls.

any way that will do for this post for now smile

Re: Gamma Balancing

Whatever the changes will be, we will just break it in some way.


Guarenteed          ,    like Cassius said

DEV Zoom - "If you mean the NPC aggro, that's been like that for months already."

Re: Gamma Balancing

I guess you metagamed yourself.


Cassius wrote:

Ok, so I am a little late to this party.

Currently there are changes to the political landscapes on Gamma. All good, no complaints.
I understand Gamma mechanics constantly get changed for balancing purposes, or to fix unintended uses of mechanics. Fine. And depending if you are on the giving or recieving end, you are either happy about this or cry about this. Of course.

With one side building bases, and another side reconfiguring, at what point will the basic laws of building on gamma be set?

Right now, the low hanging fruit and afk bases are being removed by players. Working as intended. Our enemies are creative and have some very good ways to attack our main bases. I have some creative and simple ways to correct this. Should I bother?

Gamma is an investment. There is justifyably an attitude in the game today that there's no point in investing in Gamma, in the "Endgame" of Perpetuum, because of the changes that negate players hard work and time investment.

So my TL;DR is

Devs, when can we expect the Gamma mechanics fundamentals to be set? Steam Release?


As far as trolling or whatever comments to follow ... I am not referring to something specific, nor am I complaining at all with the other side bringing it to our main islands ... its about time for that, and I'm quite happy there is a threat.

DEV Zoom - "If you mean the NPC aggro, that's been like that for months already."

Re: Gamma Balancing

Homer J Simpson wrote:

@ Zoom: one issue i can think of tho is even if you allow for terraforming to be passable to ligh/ assault bots heres an issue i see. With the current TF plans we can make you could raise up the plan & form a "shear cliff" edge along the plan boarders thus allowing players to still  form walls.

Yes, it's certainly not an easy problem to solve. It's one thing that the server can easily validate terrain slopes, the harder part is to make the client-side terraforming tools consider the limits in real time. Or if not, then at least help you in easily resolving invalid slopes.

Re: Gamma Balancing

Also, I will delete corporation dialogue from this topic without notice, just so you are aware.

Re: Gamma Balancing

DEV Zoom wrote:
Homer J Simpson wrote:

@ Zoom: one issue i can think of tho is even if you allow for terraforming to be passable to ligh/ assault bots heres an issue i see. With the current TF plans we can make you could raise up the plan & form a "shear cliff" edge along the plan boarders thus allowing players to still  form walls.

Yes, it's certainly not an easy problem to solve. It's one thing that the server can easily validate terrain slopes, the harder part is to make the client-side terraforming tools consider the limits in real time. Or if not, then at least help you in easily resolving invalid slopes.

Well i would just do your original plan. You can always add more terraforming tools in later.

Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."

Re: Gamma Balancing

Ville wrote:

Zoom, the problem is simple.  The turrets out shoot players and Hit 3 times as hard as players.  If you take offensive terraforming away then (building cover for players to hide behind)  we as attackers will need some way to "cover" us during an assault.  Similar to what Opti said.  If not the bases will just be OP as hell.

Perhaps Its time to get artillery into the game as part of some PROPER gamma siege game play while were at it. This would go some way to helping solve some of the issues you have mentioned.

Also Destroyer / Walker mechs! big_smile

Re: Gamma Balancing

Gunner get to the point.  Wut are you rambling about?