Re: Gamma revamp testing

Merkle wrote:

Also, I suggest you take the time to optimize your structure code, when you open the colony management it would always be quite laggy and such.

Suggestion.

+1

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

127

Re: Gamma revamp testing

DEV Zoom wrote:
Ville wrote:

-Tweeks:  If networks go offline and stop working when control is lost(command) I see some problems with this.  Spy shoots reactor.  Network goes down.  Players log off sequers plated to the teeth with plasma bombs.  Mass login/staggered login and with its 1 reinforced timer.  Shut the network down again.  Attacking force turns into who brought the most guys /win.

Right. I mean you're not right since we have emergency shields, but that reminded me that we might have to exclude reactors and energy transmitters from the emergency-offline thing smile

Why not make it so a member of a corp can not damage his own structures instead of cherry picking the structures that are most valuable and not allowing them to go off line.

In an assault if the defender puts his energy grid in places that can be attacked then thoes structures should go off line when attacked.

Tux ~ Kill the messenger, he was part of it all along.
Euripides ~ Ten soldiers wisely led will beat a hundred without a head.
Bertrand Russell ~ War does not determine who is right - only who is left.

128

Re: Gamma revamp testing

DEV Zoom wrote:
Ville wrote:

-Tweeks:  If networks go offline and stop working when control is lost(command) I see some problems with this.  Spy shoots reactor.  Network goes down.  Players log off sequers plated to the teeth with plasma bombs.  Mass login/staggered login and with its 1 reinforced timer.  Shut the network down again.  Attacking force turns into who brought the most guys /win.

Right. I mean you're not right since we have emergency shields, but that reminded me that we might have to exclude reactors and energy transmitters from the emergency-offline thing smile

Alright let me slow down.

At 3AM my time Agent XYZ alone in corp chat decides to walk over and shoot the reactor.  He puts the reactor into reinforced.  The network goes offline.  The enemy fleet shows up, and puts the entire base into reinforced mode, in under an hour.  Corp wakes up the next morning, boots the spy.  Meanwhile accounts (up to 2) that are attached to primary fleet accounts, spend enough EP to get into Sequers with all plates and slow boat with plasma bombs in cargo.  Those accounts are logged off on top of the reactor patiently waiting.

3 days later the primary fleet shows up.  1/4 of the fleet shows face to the enemy base to lure the guys away from the base at the corps set time for the emergency shields to drop.  The emergency timer goes live and all those little sequers login and start bombing the *** out of the energy system, using LOS to block incoming turret fire from other buildings or suiciding onto the structures using the help of the turret so that the base is now complete incapacitated.  The rest of the fleet logs in, wipes up the defenders pushes straight to the base that is completely vulnerable.  Then start the camp of the Island. 

Then the corp can do a couple of things, rebuild or give up.  If they choose to rebuild they will have to build a reactor and then have to put up energy towers to gain accumulator and hope the enemy doesn't have a force big enough to keep harassing the towers trying to gather energy choking the newly setup defenses out of accumulator.

Am I reading something wrong?

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.

129

Re: Gamma revamp testing

Cassius wrote:

Zoom. maybe you and the other Devs could build a base on the test server? Just to demonstrate what you are trying to achieve.

Makes sense?

+1

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.

130

Re: Gamma revamp testing

The "entire network" will not go offline because 1 reactor in incapped, only that one structure will go offline.. which could cut of energy to some structures but if properly designed the batteries will keep the network up and running for a long time after said reactor is offline.

the spy would need 20 + people all in the target corp to effectively do what you talking about

Ville wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:
Ville wrote:

-Tweeks:  If networks go offline and stop working when control is lost(command) I see some problems with this.  Spy shoots reactor.  Network goes down.  Players log off sequers plated to the teeth with plasma bombs.  Mass login/staggered login and with its 1 reinforced timer.  Shut the network down again.  Attacking force turns into who brought the most guys /win.

Right. I mean you're not right since we have emergency shields, but that reminded me that we might have to exclude reactors and energy transmitters from the emergency-offline thing smile

Alright let me slow down.

At 3AM my time Agent XYZ alone in corp chat decides to walk over and shoot the reactor.  He puts the reactor into reinforced.  The network goes offline.  The enemy fleet shows up, and puts the entire base into reinforced mode, in under an hour.  Corp wakes up the next morning, boots the spy.  Meanwhile accounts (up to 2) that are attached to primary fleet accounts, spend enough EP to get into Sequers with all plates and slow boat with plasma bombs in cargo.  Those accounts are logged off on top of the reactor patiently waiting.

3 days later the primary fleet shows up.  1/4 of the fleet shows face to the enemy base to lure the guys away from the base at the corps set time for the emergency shields to drop.  The emergency timer goes live and all those little sequers login and start bombing the *** out of the energy system, using LOS to block incoming turret fire from other buildings or suiciding onto the structures using the help of the turret so that the base is now complete incapacitated.  The rest of the fleet logs in, wipes up the defenders pushes straight to the base that is completely vulnerable.  Then start the camp of the Island. 

Then the corp can do a couple of things, rebuild or give up.  If they choose to rebuild they will have to build a reactor and then have to put up energy towers to gain accumulator and hope the enemy doesn't have a force big enough to keep harassing the towers trying to gather energy choking the newly setup defenses out of accumulator.

Am I reading something wrong?

Tux ~ Kill the messenger, he was part of it all along.
Euripides ~ Ten soldiers wisely led will beat a hundred without a head.
Bertrand Russell ~ War does not determine who is right - only who is left.

131

Re: Gamma revamp testing

It should have been changed already that if a friendly agresses part of a base then the whole base should agress him.

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."

132

Re: Gamma revamp testing

Well now that you mention that Tux...lolol...  But seriously if no ones online in during a few hour stretch...  Than sit a mech out there 10K rounds close range all tuners, reinforced in 25 mins tops.

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.

133

Re: Gamma revamp testing

Corporations should be able to pull their structures out of reinforcement by repairing them and setting them online again. I know this would cause the attacker to have to watch the base 24/7 in order to destroy it, but i feel that the attacker needs to do more than just show up once every three days will superior numbers in order to destroy a gamma base. turning the reinforcement system to an intrusion type system mechanic is i think the wrong direction to do in.

The Defender needs to have as much control as possible in order for balance.

Tux ~ Kill the messenger, he was part of it all along.
Euripides ~ Ten soldiers wisely led will beat a hundred without a head.
Bertrand Russell ~ War does not determine who is right - only who is left.

134

Re: Gamma revamp testing

+1

Jita wrote:

It should have been changed already that if a friendly agresses part of a base then the whole base should agress him.

Tux ~ Kill the messenger, he was part of it all along.
Euripides ~ Ten soldiers wisely led will beat a hundred without a head.
Bertrand Russell ~ War does not determine who is right - only who is left.

135

Re: Gamma revamp testing

Tux wrote:

+1

Jita wrote:

It should have been changed already that if a friendly agresses part of a base then the whole base should agress him.

+1

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.

136

Re: Gamma revamp testing

Tux wrote:

Corporations should be able to pull their structures out of reinforcement by repairing them and setting them online again. I know this would cause the attacker to have to watch the base 24/7 in order to destroy it, but i feel that the attacker needs to do more than just show up once every three days will superior numbers in order to destroy a gamma base. turning the reinforcement system to an intrusion type system mechanic is i think the wrong direction to do in.

The Defender needs to have as much control as possible in order for balance.

Then no base will EVER die.  Until there is over 5K people playing

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 revamp testing

A Hitech terminal already has 5 emergency phases. 5 chances over 15 days in total from siege to destruction, assuming every timer is hit and won by attacker.

That's already borderline ridiculous, no need to make it more so by limiting 1 terminal per island/pulling stuff out of reinforce willy-nilly.

When I build my Gamma base I want it to be vulnerable to attack.

[18:20:30] <GLiMPSE> Chairman Of My Heart o/
CIR Complaint Form

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

138 (edited by Gremrod 2014-05-15 16:56:06)

Re: Gamma revamp testing

The old system had some issues that could be corrected easily IMO. I like some of the changes mentioned by Zoom with the OP.

But.....

I think the old system was fine too. It only needs some tweaks. Limit the turret range/boosting. Rework some of the tier structure numbers.

Find a way to keep TF as it was but can't be used to turtle the island or build walls that can close off a base from the outside world.

Don't hard cap an islands limit on terminals. Let the mechanics handle this with a terminal building range of 3k etc like some have suggested.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

139 (edited by Annihilator 2014-05-15 16:59:08)

Re: Gamma revamp testing

Cassius wrote:

Zoom. maybe you and the other Devs could build a base on the test server? Just to demonstrate what you are trying to achieve.

Makes sense?

makes sense... i am really intrested in looking at the DEV corps base.

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

140

Re: Gamma revamp testing

Syndic wrote:

A Hitech terminal already has 5 emergency phases. 5 chances over 15 days in total from siege to destruction, assuming every timer is hit and won by attacker.

That's already borderline ridiculous, no need to make it more so by limiting 1 terminal per island/pulling stuff out of reinforce willy-nilly.

When I build my Gamma base I want it to be vulnerable to attack.

When you attack a gamma you need to take 2 weeks off work and play 24/7 to make sure the defender is not rebuilding his base. When games start moving toward a scheduled pvp event (un changeable reinforcement timers) it always favors the guy who brings the most numbers.

I want to be clear i do not want a mechanic that allows a 5 man corp to control a gamma island while under siege from a 50 man corp. that is bad for the game and is a broken mechanic. But the 50 man corp that wants to go around knocking down bases needs to fully commit to doing so. this means around the clock surveillance of their targets, and response fleets at the ready for when the defender makes a move.

"Corralling cats" once every three days to shoot something or defend something is "borderline ridiculous" so why have it be the mechanic at all. why not develop something much more fluid? For both sides the attacker and the defender.

Tux ~ Kill the messenger, he was part of it all along.
Euripides ~ Ten soldiers wisely led will beat a hundred without a head.
Bertrand Russell ~ War does not determine who is right - only who is left.

141

Re: Gamma revamp testing

Lets also hope that "Gamma" won't be the last new Island class to be developed. Putting in some restrictions on base sizes makes sense if we consider they can always release new Islands that will allow mega bases to be built when the population can support it.

142

Re: Gamma revamp testing

Gremrod wrote:

The old system had some issues that could be corrected easily IMO. I like some of the changes mentioned by Zoom with the OP.

But.....

I think the old system was fine too. It only needs some tweaks. Limit the turret range/boosting. Rework some of the tier structure numbers.

Find a way to keep TF as it was but can't be used to turtle the island or build walls that can close off a base from the outside world.

Don't hard cap an islands limit on terminals. Let the mechanics handle this with a terminal building range of 3k etc like some have suggested.


Terminal ranges are only balanced if the islands the terminals are on are balanced as well. If their is no cap on the amount of bases on an island then attacking a base becomes way to easy. If ranges are implemented the TP networks need to be redesigned so you still have the freedom to place Terminals freely.

Islands with 4 teleports will force and inhabitant to place their terminals in the center of that island because of distance limitations. remember these islands are only 10KM x 10KM in size minus the shape .. so the space in which you can build become extremely small once all of these 3km form teleport and other bases are put in place.

Tux ~ Kill the messenger, he was part of it all along.
Euripides ~ Ten soldiers wisely led will beat a hundred without a head.
Bertrand Russell ~ War does not determine who is right - only who is left.

143 (edited by Gremrod 2014-05-15 17:28:14)

Re: Gamma revamp testing

Tux wrote:
Gremrod wrote:

The old system had some issues that could be corrected easily IMO. I like some of the changes mentioned by Zoom with the OP.

But.....

I think the old system was fine too. It only needs some tweaks. Limit the turret range/boosting. Rework some of the tier structure numbers.

Find a way to keep TF as it was but can't be used to turtle the island or build walls that can close off a base from the outside world.

Don't hard cap an islands limit on terminals. Let the mechanics handle this with a terminal building range of 3k etc like some have suggested.


Terminal ranges are only balanced if the islands the terminals are on are balanced as well. If their is no cap on the amount of bases on an island then attacking a base becomes way to easy. If ranges are implemented the TP networks need to be redesigned so you still have the freedom to place Terminals freely.

Islands with 4 teleports will force and inhabitant to place their terminals in the center of that island because of distance limitations. remember these islands are only 10KM x 10KM in size minus the shape .. so the space in which you can build become extremely small once all of these 3km form teleport and other bases are put in place.

Then the numbers could be messed with to allow for it to work. And yes they would need to balance the islands too. I think for a re-release of gamma the islands should not be the same as the islands that got wiped.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

144

Re: Gamma revamp testing

Gremrod wrote:

I think for a re-release of gamma the islands should not be the same as the islands that got wiped.

I think the Devs would use the same islands just to save time in coding. maybe as zoom mentioned move around some teleports but there needs to be a common balance between all of the gamma Islands.

I was hoping for new islands ... it would bring some fresh life in to this whole proccess. Hell it would be awesome if the Pioneer of the island could name it lol (wishful thinking i know)

I think the 2KM that we had in gamma 1.0 worked well ... I do not think there needs to be a limit other than that ... but saying that if you allow 3 + terminals on the islands we are back at square one where the owning corporations will wall off the teleports. ... this can be done at the suggested 3KM from the TP just takes more time.

Tux ~ Kill the messenger, he was part of it all along.
Euripides ~ Ten soldiers wisely led will beat a hundred without a head.
Bertrand Russell ~ War does not determine who is right - only who is left.

Re: Gamma revamp testing

Tux wrote:
Gremrod wrote:

I think for a re-release of gamma the islands should not be the same as the islands that got wiped.

I think the Devs would use the same islands just to save time in coding. maybe as zoom mentioned move around some teleports but there needs to be a common balance between all of the gamma Islands.

I was hoping for new islands ... it would bring some fresh life in to this whole proccess. Hell it would be awesome if the Pioneer of the island could name it lol (wishful thinking i know)

I think the 2KM that we had in gamma 1.0 worked well ... I do not think there needs to be a limit other than that ... but saying that if you allow 3 + terminals on the islands we are back at square one where the owning corporations will wall off the teleports. ... this can be done at the suggested 3KM from the TP just takes more time.

If I recall correctly they used code to generate the gamma islands and did some manual tweaking. They could do the same again for 2.0.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

146 (edited by Celebro 2014-05-15 17:46:01)

Re: Gamma revamp testing

I think they should replace some gammas with more betas islands at least 3 more considering its the only way to get Epriton. No need to redesign just use the same islands and add a few terminals. With the player number increasing there is no need for so many gammas I think but more betas.

RIP PERPETUUM

147 (edited by Tux 2014-05-15 17:59:04)

Re: Gamma revamp testing

YES but NO more BETA terminals ...

Charlie islands ... = epriton with ... no safe place to run (terminals)

These islands could also have erosion or shifting terrain that changes the landscape every month or so.

Celebro wrote:

I think they should replace some gammas with more betas islands at least 3 more considering its the only way to get Epriton. No need to redesign just use the same islands and add a few terminals. With the player number increasing there is no need for so many gammas I think but more betas.

Tux ~ Kill the messenger, he was part of it all along.
Euripides ~ Ten soldiers wisely led will beat a hundred without a head.
Bertrand Russell ~ War does not determine who is right - only who is left.

Re: Gamma revamp testing

Tux wrote:

When you attack a gamma you need to take 2 weeks off work and play 24/7 to make sure the defender is not rebuilding his base.

Tux highlighted the issue that IMO plagued Gamma 1.0 the most.

Don't get me wrong I'm all for so-hardcore-like-wiping-a**-with-cheesegrater mechanics, but if Gamma will again revolve around 24/7 gameplay for weeks on end... Well, suffice to say not a lot of gamers are able to play 24/7 for weeks and weeks.

[18:20:30] <GLiMPSE> Chairman Of My Heart o/
CIR Complaint Form

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

Re: Gamma revamp testing

Syndic wrote:
Tux wrote:

When you attack a gamma you need to take 2 weeks off work and play 24/7 to make sure the defender is not rebuilding his base.

Tux highlighted the issue that IMO plagued Gamma 1.0 the most.

Don't get me wrong I'm all for so-hardcore-like-wiping-a**-with-cheesegrater mechanics, but if Gamma will again revolve around 24/7 gameplay for weeks on end... Well, suffice to say not a lot of gamers are able to play 24/7 for weeks and weeks.

Totally agree with you and Tux on this one.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

150 (edited by Gremrod 2014-05-15 18:26:34)

Re: Gamma revamp testing

I really feel like the gamma building is not the foundation of gamma islands. I feel the islands should be developed with the idea of what they have to offer the player/corps. WHAT rather then HOW for right now.

What can I get from gamma that I cannot get on beta or alpha? Create that foundation first and then build the gamma structure mechanics on top of that foundation.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23