You are not logged in. Please login or register.
You didn't answer the question. Can walls be deployed by an attacker?
As far as I know walls can only be deployed within a certain radius of the terminal, and only by a member of the owner corp. (But correct me if I'm wrong.)
This too could change, unless we see a reason not to allow it.
[*]■ All buildings received a bandwidth parameter. Terminals provide the bandwidth for the network, and all buildings connected to the network use a certain amount. Works pretty much like CPU vs modules in the case of robots.[/*]
With the additional structures you guys are adding I think an increase in the terminal bandwidth may be needed
[*]■ Buildings go offline if they get disconnected from a network.[/*]
Good Addition
[*]■Both single module terraforming and beacon terraforming has a limit of how steep slopes you can build. The limit is currently set between the slope capability of assaults and mechs.[/*]
Mineral fields will need to only spawn in “accessible areas on gamma islands in order for them not to get “trapped” before they could spawn anywhere.
[*]■ Buildings go offline in emergency phase, except for the main terminal and facilities.[/*]
FINALLY !!
[*]■ Buildings can only be deployed within a certain radius of a terminal. Suggested radius: 1km. Exceptions: mining outpost, command relay, energy transmitters, and the planned highway node.[/*]
I would make it a slightly larger foot print 1.5 2.25 3 depending on Tech Level of terminal
[*]■ Only 3 terminals per island.[/*]
Please limit this to 1 >> If more than 1 terminal per island is allowed players will naturally place them near gates for defending the Island << This is not theory craft it was done in the past it will be done again. We need to make the gammas roam-able … even @ 1 km away from the terminal I can place turrets
(Turret ~~~~1KM~~~~Terminal~~~~1KM~~~~Turret)
to cut off some Islands form roamers If Im allowed to place 3 terminals. Please start with 1 Terminal and balance from there more can always be added later if you feel the need.
[*]■ Terraformed landscape will slowly degrade to the original terrain with time, but this only affects areas that are outside of a certain radius of buildings (ie. unclaimed land). Suggested radius: 300m[/*]
Good Addition
[*]■ Reactors will not generate energy on their own. Instead, we will introduce a new underground resource, which can only be exploited by a building, but it does this passively over time. The exploited resource is directly sent through the existing network into the reactor(s), which has a buffer for this resource. (So if you lose all your miner buildings in the network it will still provide energy for some time.) - This feature is still heavily discussed/in development, and I bet you have a lot of questions too, feel free to ask.[/*]
This is the mechanic we have needed all along to balance and limit the size of colony networks on the islands. If there is a limit on the geothermal energy that can be harvested from an island then there will be a limit to the number of structures you can effectively use.
The same mechanic that has been applied to all modules and robots needs to be applied to gamma structures.. we have a prototype system for a reason …. Make structures so they need to be prototyped and not just reverse engineered all the way up to t3.
In general I like the progress so far. Some things still hanging in the air that is really hard to balance without proper testing. The shooting on wall idea seems pretty good, the passive mining of 'Energy' I like too.
I would also add a way to upgrade structures without decon. them.
Lastly my biggest concern is it worth it to move to gamma, will there be Epriton? Will Colxium have more uses?
Please limit this to 1 >> If more than 1 terminal per island is allowed players will naturally place them near gates for defending the Island << This is not theory craft it was done in the past it will be done again. We need to make the gammas roam-able … even @ 1 km away from the terminal I can place turrets
(Turret ~~~~1KM~~~~Terminal~~~~1KM~~~~Turret)
to cut off some Islands form roamers If Im allowed to place 3 terminals. Please start with 1 Terminal and balance from there more can always be added later if you feel the need.
If that's the concern then I would rather add more teleports than to "waste" an entire island on one terminal.
One terminal per island cap? I think its a bad idea. Find the best natural hard point on an island, drop terminal, attach defensive structures up the wazoo and presto, power projection and island denial for very little effort. Apparently this happened in Gamma 1.0, and wasn't well recieved by the forum posters. I think terminal limits should be determined by proximity and sustainability, perhaps a 4 km limit and an average resource available cap that allows 4 small bases to run is best. Or 2 medium and one small, or one mega. And perhaps as someone mentioned, structures that increase bandwidth to allow existing base expansion but then limit terminal placement.
One step further, how about an island bandwidth cap? This would allow all sorts of different base types and configurations but ultimately limit the overall number of structures and systems that could be substained on an island. Effectively limiting building sprawl and server load.
Lastly my biggest concern is it worth it to move to gamma, will there be Epriton? Will Colxium have more uses?
We don't plan to bring back epriton to gamma, its exclusivity on beta is one more thing that keeps betas populated.
And colixum will definitely have more uses. Whether it's hybrid robots, a new module tier, or new module variants is yet to be decided. As I mentioned earlier I wouldn't want to derail this topic/testing with that, since what you can do with colixum hardly affects the building/terraforming mechanics.
Ville wrote:You didn't answer the question. Can walls be deployed by an attacker?
As far as I know walls can only be deployed within a certain radius of the terminal, and only by a member of the owner corp. (But correct me if I'm wrong.)
This too could change, unless we see a reason not to allow it.
Are you not giving attackers a way to get close enough to the base without getting shot by a turret?
Turrets hit hard and with Server Lag and Graphical lag a Mesmer can be vaporized in under 15 seconds causing explosion damage to be absolutely horrid.
I suggest something: Let some of the master base builders put a stronghold together. We rally all our guys, you (the devs) and anyone else wanting to do this to try and attack it and see some of the logistic hassles both sides see. Or have You the devs (5) try to attack a small base.
Some players(10) literally spent 3 days 17 hours each terraforming into a base to siege it. You the devs need to see this, and realize what you want to do.
[*]■ All buildings received a bandwidth parameter. Terminals provide the bandwidth for the network, and all buildings connected to the network use a certain amount. Works pretty much like CPU vs modules in the case of robots.[/*]
With the additional structures you guys are adding I think an increase in the terminal bandwidth may be needed
[*]■ Buildings go offline if they get disconnected from a network.[/*]
Good Addition[*]■Both single module terraforming and beacon terraforming has a limit of how steep slopes you can build. The limit is currently set between the slope capability of assaults and mechs.[/*]
Mineral fields will need to only spawn in “accessible areas on gamma islands in order for them not to get “trapped” before they could spawn anywhere.
[*]■ Buildings go offline in emergency phase, except for the main terminal and facilities.[/*]
FINALLY !!
[*]■ Buildings can only be deployed within a certain radius of a terminal. Suggested radius: 1km. Exceptions: mining outpost, command relay, energy transmitters, and the planned highway node.[/*]
I would make it a slightly larger foot print 1.5 2.25 3 depending on Tech Level of terminal
[*]■ Only 3 terminals per island.[/*]
Please limit this to 1 >> If more than 1 terminal per island is allowed players will naturally place them near gates for defending the Island << This is not theory craft it was done in the past it will be done again. We need to make the gammas roam-able … even @ 1 km away from the terminal I can place turrets
(Turret ~~~~1KM~~~~Terminal~~~~1KM~~~~Turret)
to cut off some Islands form roamers If Im allowed to place 3 terminals. Please start with 1 Terminal and balance from there more can always be added later if you feel the need.
[*]■ Terraformed landscape will slowly degrade to the original terrain with time, but this only affects areas that are outside of a certain radius of buildings (ie. unclaimed land). Suggested radius: 300m[/*]Good Addition
[*]■ Reactors will not generate energy on their own. Instead, we will introduce a new underground resource, which can only be exploited by a building, but it does this passively over time. The exploited resource is directly sent through the existing network into the reactor(s), which has a buffer for this resource. (So if you lose all your miner buildings in the network it will still provide energy for some time.) - This feature is still heavily discussed/in development, and I bet you have a lot of questions too, feel free to ask.[/*]
This is the mechanic we have needed all along to balance and limit the size of colony networks on the islands. If there is a limit on the geothermal energy that can be harvested from an island then there will be a limit to the number of structures you can effectively use.
The same mechanic that has been applied to all modules and robots needs to be applied to gamma structures.. we have a prototype system for a reason …. Make structures so they need to be prototyped and not just reverse engineered all the way up to t3.
If a building goes offline when it enters emergency stage what stops a well planted group of spys into a corp and shooting the Key things (energy nodes, repair nodes, and boosters[all which do not shoot back]) then let an enemy force over night wipe out your base?
-1 to 1 terminal per island. I was hoping for like 5 or 6. That would allow Alliances to Hold ONE island instead of needing to own 3 or 4.
One step further, how about an island bandwidth cap?
THIS is what the "geothermal" mining tower system i wrote in my post is doing. If you run out of places for your mining towers to generate resources to power your base, you have reached the cap. you could max it out, but then you run out of base power as soon as someone starts shooting your mining towers.
Mostly I agree!
I still will miss this things:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/f … =252277550
I still omitted some things from the original post because they kinda hang in the air:
1. Nerf turrets a bit (directly or indirectly the boosters), mostly regarding their extremely long ranges.
2. Deployable walls could be destroyed by normal weapons, but the damage would be propagated along the wall to multiple neighboring wall tiles. This would make it harder to just simply cut a hole into a wall.
3. Gates on the wall. The easiest way would be to do another type of wall tiles that ask for a code like field containers and open up for a set time.If you agree with any of these I'll include it in the first post.
Zoom add Number (2) and (3).
I am against nurfing the turrets, because some corps could roll up with a 100 man team and simply roll over them anyway (especially with the current placement restrictions and terminal bandwith restrictions and range from terminal restrictions)), even with their current bonuses and ranges.
I mean as I stated before this system is already broken, and nurfed to the point of a gamma colony being a waste of time. (unless you just really really want one). Nurfing the turrets just means there is absolutely No reason to go to gamma and waste the resources period.
Nurfing the defenses just makes even having them pointless.
Is malsier a troll Alt? Honestly have you ever been to gamma?
Is malsier a troll Alt? Honestly have you ever been to gamma?
Yes I have, and I've watched CIR and 77 roll over many bases like they were paper. I am what someone mentioned earlier as a master builder / Planner when it comes to gamma colonies.
I know exactly what these changes will do in the lkong run, because I've seen what some corps could do in the old system without the proposed limitations.
The only thing this system will do is ensure that the massive corps/Alliances Own all the gammas. Because if your corp can;t beat them on it's own, and your gamma defenses and base is worthless, what do you have left to help you take on Big brother?
The answer is nothing.
The entire point of a gamma colony is to have a base of operations which is self sustainable, and a *** to take from you (especially with the billions of NIC required and materials for it). I agree that gammas need to be able to be roamed and explored and should not be able to be locked down. However I also agree that a Gamma colony should NEVER be easy to take or be able to be rolled over like it's paper.
It's a risk Vs reward thing, and these changes take every ounce of reward out, from having a gamma colony. This system makes it all Risk, and no reward. An NIC dump which a corp may spend weeks and months developing, only to lose it because a breath of wind comes along and puffs at it.
As I stated before however, all of the above issues are easily fixable.
Simply add 2 building types:
1. Facility which expands terminal Control range.
2. Facility which expands terminal Bandwith.
And you should be able to place as many of these as you desire (or as many as the energy source in the ground will let you power). This means that bases will become editable and expandable, rather then lumps of unchanging, can;t be developed or edited buildings clustered into a tiny area.
When I think of a colony, I think of a customization area of the game where I can build a home for my corp. I don;t really care if people whine that well just live on gamma. If they have an issue with it, they should come to us, we should not be forced to rely on another island type to propagate or live on the one we want.
As someone else stated there is currently no reason to even go to gamm (unless you simply want to) anyway. Since there is no longer any epriton found on them. So until thats fixed gammas mine as well not even be added back to the game because they are pointless.
Jita wrote:Is malsier a troll Alt? Honestly have you ever been to gamma?
Yes I have, and I've watched CIR and 77 roll over many bases like they were paper. I am what someone mentioned earlier as a master builder / Planner when it comes to gamma colonies.
Wait CIR and 77 rolled over many gamma bases? I don't remember that. I did take a break but......
It's a risk Vs reward thing, and these changes take every ounce of reward out, from having a gamma colony.
The problem is there is no reward for the risk of building bases on gamma.
The problem is there is no reward for the risk of building bases on gamma.
that may be the issue with the whole concept - since up to now, the reward for taking the risk of building a gamma base, was risk-free mining and production with higher efficiency and save transportation of goods to 100% save alpha.
basicly, the same reward you get for building a powerblob... sorry, powerblock and keeping the pvp risk-free for your own side.
when i read "risk vs. reward" balancing, i want to see an example where that actually works after someone survived the risk, milked the rewards, and is then the even higher risk factor for the next one, while he still can milk the high rewards with next to no risk.
I am against nurfing the turrets, because some corps could roll up with a 100 man team and simply roll over them anyway (especially with the current placement restrictions and terminal bandwith restrictions and range from terminal restrictions)), even with their current bonuses and ranges.
I don't really understand your reasoning here. Turrets were never meant to be a means for perfect base defense, you HAVE to be there to make sure you did everything you can to defend it. (I don't blame you though, lots of corporations made the same mistake of thinking their base was invincible on its own.)
There is no way to balance this if you want to defend your base purely using turrets. If we let you build enough of them to defend against 50 people, they will bring 100. Then we increase the limit and they bring 200 people. Soon the whole island is full with turrets and we're back to square one, and you still lose your base.
Because if your base can't be destroyed in any way, then the system is broken.
Furthermore, the new system rather helps smaller corporations compared to the old one. And this is exactly because of the limitations. Pumping more and more money into your network to build more buildings like in the old system will not work. The limit will be the same for big and small corps alike, so a successful construction will now much more depend on the way you put the pieces together, and less on the amount of NIC you throw at it.
Zoom, what? How does this help smaller corps? Nerfing turret defenses make bases harder to kill?
Nothing I've seen proposed indicates more difficulty in killing a Gamma settlement. Everything geared towards making it easier with the possible exception of not being able to make offensive cover.
The rest, not seeing it.
That said, bases do need to be destroyable, but if its too easy it won't be worth the investment. 1 guy should not be able to hold off 100, either. I don't think a small corp 10+ should be able to hold off an alliance with 50 active PVPrs either. If gamma is not sustainable then no one will live there. Many people learned the hard way in Gamma 1.0.
Anni's idea about available geothermal (fuel) on island and my idea about island wide bandwidth cap (structures) should be all the rules you need to nerf bases to a manageable server load while still allowing many different configurations. Ville's suggestion to test how OP bases can be is good as well. I don't like your suggested terraforming limits tied to slope, it essentially encourages one base style only, and that's a base on top of a pyramid, I wish terraforming was tied to the original land elevation, and allowing terraforming either +50 or -50 from that tile. Can you comment on this, I've suggested it before.
Finally, it was pointed out that the current bandwidth values in the terminal did not allow for a complete base. Ie you could not have defenses and production facilities, In fact I don't think you can hook all facilities only with. Posters to one terminal. This is a problem in itself. Being forced to use multiple terminals several km apart, to run all aspects of production wi only make general Gamma living unsustainable.
I wish terraforming was tied to the original land elevation, and allowing terraforming either +50 or -50 from that tile. Can you comment on this, I've suggested it before.
That wouldn't be any different from the current system. The problem is not 1km high vertical walls, the problem is vertical walls, however high. Terraforming was not meant for that, walls are meant for that.
has noone an idea how to implement something like "inertia" does? the bigger the impulse, the stronger the counterforce is?
like a system that needs you to shoot over a longer time at something to destroy it, and to much firepower will be counterproductive (and not as simple as "you cannot do more then X damage per second to this shield" ?
Why is 1 Terminal on an Island a waste?
Your insinuating that:
1. A corporation should need to deploy 3 terminal/networks on an island in order to "start" to secure the island.
2. A group of several Corporations is needed to secure an island 1 Per terminal
3. An island Is large enough to fully support 3 Corporations
From past experience the gamma Islands are Barely capable of fully supporting 2 Corporations of a moderate size let alone 3 or more.
Is the 3 terminal per corporation limit going to stand or will you limit this to 1 per corporation?
How will you balance the 2 TP 3 TP and 4 TP Islands so the number of terminals does not pre determine what islands are going to be able to be locked off form the outside? << keep in mind that if its possible in any way shape or form players will do it, its just a matter of time.
If i can TF a slopped "wall" around a teleport and put turrets at the top of the slope. and my enemy cannot Tf the slope to attack me then what have we solved. If i have 3 terminals on an island and 3 teleports i can secure my island, people will not be able to roam at all. the only thing the "locked slope" does is give clean LOS from my turrets to the attacker.
(turret)
\ <<< you cant change this part of the slope
\
\ <<< you cant change this part of the slope
\
\ <<< you cant change this part of the slope
\_________
Please keep thinking about the terminal / teleports on the islands ... build distance from the teleports is not the solution it only makes it take longer to achieve the same defense (in conjunction with the placement of multiple terminals around an island. ).
Tux wrote:Please limit this to 1 >> If more than 1 terminal per island is allowed players will naturally place them near gates for defending the Island << This is not theory craft it was done in the past it will be done again. We need to make the gammas roam-able … even @ 1 km away from the terminal I can place turrets
(Turret ~~~~1KM~~~~Terminal~~~~1KM~~~~Turret)
to cut off some Islands form roamers If Im allowed to place 3 terminals. Please start with 1 Terminal and balance from there more can always be added later if you feel the need.If that's the concern then I would rather add more teleports than to "waste" an entire island on one terminal.
when i read "risk vs. reward" balancing, i want to see an example where that actually works after someone survived the risk, milked the rewards, and is then the even higher risk factor for the next one, while he still can milk the high rewards with next to no risk.
There is nothing to milk on gamma......
If a building goes offline when it enters emergency stage what stops a well planted group of spys into a corp and shooting the Key things (energy nodes, repair nodes, and boosters[all which do not shoot back]) then let an enemy force over night wipe out your base?
-1 to 1 terminal per island. I was hoping for like 5 or 6. That would allow Alliances to Hold ONE island instead of needing to own 3 or 4.
what stops an alliance form living out of 1 terminal ?
whats the difference between 6 and the 12 we had? with 6 Terminals you can double cover gates ... no roaming 
I understand the concern with Spys .. this could effectively shunt down a whole network ... which is really bad.
I would ask with this change that combat logs for structures that are put into reinforce are kept. .. so then the spy is outed by his actions. Because of this change i would support reinforcement for all structures even turrets. This will allow you to root out the spy and then properly defend your self.
OR (intensive coding) make it so players can not do any type of damage to structures their corporation owns 
, this was done kind in the past when plasma bombs were not allowed to kill saps this could be done the same way with structures. ... making the spy have to leave corp to do this. ... which would then make him a target to turrets.
Also with this mechanic Corporations need to be able to fully repair their structures and take them out of reinforcement at their own will before the timer allows. This is because a Corporation need to be allowed. to prepare their defenses for a second assault. With everything offline it will be nearly impossible to do anything that will embolden the defenses.
a few ideas ....
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 3 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
Generated in 0.069 seconds (82% PHP - 18% DB) with 21 queries
Copyright © Avatar Creations
