Grenades cost resources, which is a good thing

[Sephirex]

Originally Posted by Dougnifico

I can't imagine them doing that because it implies that Auraxium can be traded for other resources meaning that only major facilities (the areas that generate Auraxium) matter in a big way. I think they want the territory system to work so I don't think this would happen.

At least... I hope not...

He may have had no idea what he was talking about. It seems like a bad idea to me.

[Sledgecrushr]

Originally Posted by Pepsi

I think it's in the best interests of the developers to not push people away from the support roles. I can already imagine medics using their hard-earned resources to heal other people or engineers paying to drop an ammo dispenser for a random tank... oh wait, no I can't. That will never happen and will lead to a lot more lone-wolfing.

I would charge a comparable cost to the infantry for bullets. Really this is all just conjecture. I think the really important thing is we might have picked up on a possible pay to win scenario here.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by Turdicus

I don't think the developers are going to develop an MMO where players could potentially be reduced to having to charge enemies with knives, or do knives cost resources too?

Stock weapons. Just like in my resource thread don't have a resource cost. Stock ammo would be the general same idea under Sledgecrushr's proposed system.

Originally Posted by Turdicus

No thanks bud, grenades are a luxury, whereas rockets are a critical part of what makes HA a HA, and engineers shouldnt have to pay resources to perform the role they are primarily designed to do.

Stock rockets would be fine. What if the game allowed special rockets? The resource system really opens up a lot of cool systems for customization. (Longer range rockets, faster ones, EMP, etc).

I agree though that a stock weapon shouldn't be gimped for its primary role.

Originally Posted by Pepsi

I think it's in the best interests of the developers to not push people away from the support roles. I can already imagine medics using their hard-earned resources to heal other people or engineers paying to drop an ammo dispenser for a random tank... oh wait, no I can't. That will never happen and will lead to a lot more lone-wolfing.

It's also important to note you get get experience for support roles. In the proposed solution even if someone is using your turret you get experience. It's not like you're wasting resources.

[WorldOfForms]

People advocating AV weaponry to cost resources: please stop and think about in-game ramifications.

Here's a very common scenario we're going to see: infantry get cornered within a base/tower by vehicles. If AV costs resources, you can be stuck in a situation where you can't pull AV, which means you'll be absolutely dominated by vehicles.

Vehicles already have an advantage over infantry, even when the infantry have AV. Now you want AV to be able to run out?

That's just horribly broken balance. Vehicles are versatile, mobile, high-power and high-armor compared to infantry. Infantry counters to vehicles need to be free, or this entire game won't work.

Versatile weaponry that can be effective against any target: costs resources.

Specialized weaponry designed to counter a small portion of the versatile weaponry: free.

[Sledgecrushr]

Originally Posted by WorldOfForms

People advocating AV weaponry to cost resources: please stop and think about in-game ramifications.

Here's a very common scenario we're going to see: infantry get cornered within a base/tower by vehicles. If AV costs resources, you can be stuck in a situation where you can't pull AV, which means you'll be absolutely dominated by vehicles.

Vehicles already have an advantage over infantry, even when the infantry have AV. Now you want AV to be able to run out?

That's just horribly broken balance. Vehicles are versatile, mobile, high-power and high-armor compared to infantry. Infantry counters to vehicles need to be free, or this entire game won't work.

Versatile weaponry that can be effective against any target: costs resources.

Specialized weaponry designed to counter a small portion of the versatile weaponry: free.

My plan would have a resource cost per round fired from a tank.
"We're outta ammo boys, fix bayonets and prepare to charge"

[Pepsi]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

It's also important to note you get get experience for support roles. In the proposed solution even if someone is using your turret you get experience. It's not like you're wasting resources.

Wasting resources? No, I never thought that. The point is you would be attaching a cost to playing a support role. It's already a given that every class based game has trouble getting enough random gamers to play those support roles even when there was no direct cost to doing so, but now we want to impose a consequence in choosing to be a pure medic or pure repair guy?

If you do want to go down the road of paying for standard weapons and items, at least exclude the support roles so more people actually start playing them.

[Toppopia]

Originally Posted by Sledgecrushr

My plan would have a resource cost per round fired from a tank.
"We're outta ammo boys, fix bayonets and prepare to charge"

*Attaches bayonets to the tank barrel.*

CHARGE!!

[Sledgecrushr]

If everything has a cost, then potentially every action you take could impact the greater war effort. Carelessly spray your gun at a tree.. You might not have bullets later on. Spamming tank rounds into a base... Just wasting precious ammo. In the most desperate of times a medic migh have to choose a med kit over his rifle. Maybe this little plan is too realistic.

[Whiteknight]

Originally Posted by Sledgecrushr

-Snip-
Maybe this little plan is too realistic.

This is one thing I've heard that I agree with.
Standard loadouts need to be free for the classes. The entirety of the cost for a vehicle & full load of ammo need to be in the cost for the vehicle. Anything special -- read as outside of the Standard Loadout for a class -- can cost resources, but making the standard loads cost resources just to spawn... once a side started loosing resource points, they would just keep loosing more and more until they were obliterated; no supply line = no army, for realism purposes, and it would degenerate into a 2 empire game.

[Littleman]

Hence why realism can take a seat in regards to the resource system. On paper, it sounds really cool to be fighting on the last few rounds you can afford. In practice, it's an immediate game killer. No one wants to spawn with a knife, it will just encourage crappy gameplay, like sitting in a corner somewhere, passively collecting resources. If you require them to do something to earn resources - and they can't because they can't afford anything - they may as well just up and quit.

Standard issue equipment should be free. Everything else can cost something. If one is packing a scope, silencer, fore-grip and taped-double mag on their Cycler, that can be costly. Just having the Cycler with no modifications shouldn't cost anyone anything. Same goes for their class tool.

All this grenade spam BS and the perfect scenarios that allow it have huge gaping holes in their logic: anyone sitting next to a galaxy chucking grenades isn't doing much for the war effort. Whether or not they cost resources isn't much of a concern for me, I'll live either way. I just don't get why some people are talking like we can carry 10-15 grenades and they're all OHKs or like throwing one costs resources on the spot, theoretically allowing for infinite grenades on a person.

[mirwalk]

OK.. my 2 certs in on this.
First off, cost for rockets. HELL NO!!!
The only way I would agree is if rockets F'd up anything I shot it at. Man or machine. People don't want the tanks to die to rockets very easily. It seems they need to be hit with a number of them. I don't want it to cost me almost of the cost of the tank to kill it with rockets. I would prefer the tank at that point of time.
Never mind shooting down planes. As they said in the streams, the rockets don't seem that good against vehicles right now unless you got a bunch of people shooting them. If there is a resource cost you would need to buff the rockets considerably.
Right now they seem to be pointless as a spam mechanic. Long reload time, small AOE. You a few a buddies can go tank killing, but using them to clear out an area of soldiers will see you mown down by rifle fire. Working as intended IMO.
In order to make resource cost make sense you would need to buff those rockets to the point it would be useful in any other aspect but AV. currently it is not so where's the problem? The OP seems to want to buff the AOE so it can be used against soldiers, so that you need to make it cost resources.

Second, my understanding about the extras you put on guns and such, is that you will have costs to buy the attachment, but not to use it. I think it was stated by Higby in the dual commentary total biscuit video, that they didn't want to have people paying again to use a scope they already bought. So you can put it in a load out and use whenever. The same I think applies to vehicle weapons, at least at the moment. I believe they may change that, but it really seemed that you gave up something to put AA on a plane, or AV on a plane so that was strategic enough.

[Otleaz]

If a person has 0 resources, just give him the ammo for free. It doesn't make sense, but it can't be exploited.

[Zolan]

Wait a minute...

I can get behind explosives, medic/engineer heal/repair juice, and deploy-able equipment costing resources, but pistol and rifle rounds is just over the top.

Stick to the grenades, rockets, and c4. Things that are readily spam-able AT weapons. Mines and MAX units should be the exception, as there is probably a limit to mines placed and MAX units have a ton of AT/AA ammo in the first place.

Medic/Engineer super-glue should be a minor cost, if anything. Maybe something like 5-10 resources for a full resupply.

Deploy-ables such as turrets should cost a similar amount as well. A minor cost that has an effect but isn't overburdening.

Just stay away from the normal rounds. The TR would go broke.

[Toppopia]

Originally Posted by Zolan

Just stay away from the normal rounds. The TR would go broke.

I find that highly offensive.

I won't be spraying and praying, i will be carefully pacing my shots and such. Unless my squad/outfit mates tell me to put suppressing fire somewhere.

[Azovyr]

My worry here is I can see situations arising where your empire isn't doing so well and you find yourself low or out of resources, then you will be at a distinct disadvantage which is fine and intended I guess... that is until you throw in paid resource boosters in the cash store to negate some of that effect. Wouldn't that be classified as pay to win?