Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: Death from above.
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
2012-08-11, 12:49 PM | [Ignore Me] #1 | |||
PSU Admin
|
I'm doing targeted feedback threads on all items from Smed's Blog. This one is for player harvesting.
__________________
PlanetSide Universe - Administrator / Site Owner - Contact @ PSU Hamma Time - Evil Ranting Admin - DragonWolves - Commanding Officer Last edited by Hamma; 2012-08-11 at 12:56 PM. |
|||
|
2012-08-11, 12:57 PM | [Ignore Me] #3 | ||
First Lieutenant
|
Moveable capture points has some potential.
Weak harvesters like Star Craft II that are susceptible to air and ground raids would force players to guard them. Depending on effectiveness, it might generate a great aspect of battle, or it might force players into a boring position. |
||
|
2012-08-11, 01:00 PM | [Ignore Me] #4 | ||
Corporal
|
Honestly, while killing people in PS2 will always be fun, it would be interesting if there were other elements besides killing people. I am definitely looking forward to them letting us build our own bases/towers/outposts in the future and it would be awesome if this was part of it. Like you have to use the minerals these things gather to upgrade your base, so they become another strategic asset to defend/attack.
|
||
|
2012-08-11, 01:01 PM | [Ignore Me] #5 | ||
Contributor General
|
I don't mind as a concept.
However the questions that occur to me is why would you do it? Would the resources you harvest accrue to you? To your outfit? To your squad? To your empire? I'd presume harvesters (oh god it sounds like fishing in rift when I say that) can be attacked to prevent them from doing it? It does make you wonder that they took ant runs out because they wer boring, alledgedly, but then are thinking about introducing this. |
||
|
2012-08-11, 01:06 PM | [Ignore Me] #8 | ||
Private
|
By proposing Harvestable resources he also wants to say that conquered space wont generate engouth resources to support a player needs for vehicles and suff. And that it require more resources, itherwise such option wouldnt have a point.
|
||
|
2012-08-11, 01:09 PM | [Ignore Me] #9 | |||
Contributor General
|
link this to additional vehicles that require special rare resources .. it's all getting a bit rpg, gathering, crafting.... |
|||
|
2012-08-11, 01:30 PM | [Ignore Me] #12 | ||
Contributor Second Lieutenant
|
A havester should be claimable by outfits.
As long as you defend it your outfit is gathering resources for building a base/tower/Hideout for your outfit. i think it would be nice if the resources have nothing to do with gaining access to weapons and vecs. A mechanic to push an outfit-specific warfare Last edited by Mox; 2012-08-11 at 01:33 PM. |
||
|
2012-08-11, 01:31 PM | [Ignore Me] #13 | ||
First Lieutenant
|
I'd like the idea better if it wasn't restricted to just outfit made bases.
If the resource harvesters functioned from every base, that gives a very distinct possible target for spec-ops teams to go after for resource denial purposes. It generates a vulnerability and would add a great deal to continental combat. The gatherers should spawn from bases only though, not towers. And have to travel to locations where the resources are. TBH, it's a nice idea but it might be impractical. NPC ANTs would have been a far better solution. Every base in PS1 had roads leading to nearby Warpgates and it wouldn't be hard to program an ANT to follow the road to and from a warpgate to it's target base and unload it's NTUs. |
||
|
2012-08-11, 01:32 PM | [Ignore Me] #14 | |||
Master Sergeant
|
I could imagine players could deploy machines that their outfit mates would help defend. Sound cool? Anyone? |
|||
|
2012-08-11, 01:37 PM | [Ignore Me] #15 | |||
Private
|
|
|||
|
|
Bookmarks |
Tags |
smedblog |
|
|