Saurva New Base Layouts on Public Test - Page 2

Canaris · 2013-05-13, 04:02 AM

looking good, can't wait to try out fights there

Nathaniak · 2013-05-13, 04:25 AM

Originally Posted by Sifer2

True but before they added the balcony they nerfed its defensive capability too hard by putting gens that take down the shields into hard to defend shacks outside. It has the effect of allowing greater numbers to just overwhelm by quickly removing the choke points. Before that you pretty much needed shield breaker Sunderers to deliver men inside to cause chaos an blow up the enemy Sunderer which could win the battle.

Now that more entrances are added I don't really think the gens should be outside in shacks. One should probably be on the roof area, and another on the first floor somewhere but still inside the base.

Agreed. It seems that the devs don't want it to be hard to take bases. They don't want hours-long battles over a single base. They don't want to see hordes of attackers charging towards enemy bastions, weapons fire pounding down from the walls into the onrushing horde...

This makes me sad.

Shogun · 2013-05-13, 05:33 AM

Originally Posted by TheSaltySeagull

Adding a router like vehicle would be horrible in this game since you have light assaults that can jump over walls and onto buildings etc. Getting in and setting up a router would be trivial and then have zergs pour forth into bases that many people already argue are difficult enough to defend.

valid point!

so completely get rid of teleporters!

oh, but a router vehicle might work, if the telepad cannot be placed by light assault. easy to do with the class system.
maybe only give it to infiltrators. and have it replace the dartgun or even the rifle, to make placing a telepad a challenge.

also the infiltrator has to spawn with the pad, walk up to the router to register the pad at the router and then place it.

but i don´t like teleporters at all. the router was just an idea to compensate for removing the stupid telecampfarms we have now. and it could be a new tactical option for serious outfits.

Whiteagle · 2013-05-13, 12:01 PM

Personally I don't mind the Teleporters, but their placement in Bio Labs is a bit atrocious...

I mean they're only where they are at now because someone designed an elevated Terrarium Dome without ANY built-in Staircases...
Seriously, how are they suppose to move samples in and out of this thing?
The only options right now are to have guys carry it down the Grav Lifts or chance a Brundle though the Telepods.

ringring · 2013-05-13, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

Personally I don't mind the Teleporters, but their placement in Bio Labs is a bit atrocious...

I mean they're only where they are at now because someone designed an elevated Terrarium Dome without ANY built-in Staircases...
Seriously, how are they suppose to move samples in and out of this thing?
The only options right now are to have guys carry it down the Grav Lifts or chance a Brundle though the Telepods.

Transmitted by nanite power.......

RANDOMpercent · 2013-05-13, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by ringring

One other thing.

The generator to the SCU has been removed. I don't like this. Bio Labs were the best bases to attack or defend and the pivot of the battle was the SCU generator room.

Technically they are still there, but they will only control the shields at the base of the lab. You can still fight over it, it's just less vital to defense. This is unless they changed bio labs even more since I last played on test.

Assist · 2013-05-13, 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by ringring

Mmmm, disagree.

Tactics wins out in both circumstances. I've been in squads that have broken defences at both old-time Techs and at Bio's.

Either defending or attacking Bio's can turn into a farm if done right.

Problem is the huge outfits were just sitting in those tech plants, along with the rest of their faction joining them. They would ignore everything else on the entire map to sit in that tech plant, because they knew if people wanted a fight they had to come to them.
In the end, tactics were the one thing not used and it ended up being a pure numbers game.

Figment · 2013-05-13, 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by TheSaltySeagull

Adding a router like vehicle would be horrible in this game since you have light assaults that can jump over walls and onto buildings etc. Getting in and setting up a router would be trivial and then have zergs pour forth into bases that many people already argue are difficult enough to defend.

On the other hand, you could kill the pads with LA's or infils with ease and the interference radius of 75m. Also, with the distance restriction of 150m and Router destruction options, as they'd be placed near the CY instead of a distant base, they would be easier to handle than constant teleports.

Shogun · 2013-05-13, 07:25 PM

damn, the south saurva satelite looks sweet!

i just visited it on pst, but it was enemy territory, and i was on foot, so i couldn´t enter the biolab itself.

the south fortress really seems to be a fortress now! it has several things i missed so hard!

especially the wall around the base with just one gate and a lot of good places for defenders!
i think attackers will have a hard time storming it if there is a good squad inside! can´t wait to actually fight in a base like this! the design reminded me a lot of the ps1 bases! walls you can entrench on, to stop vehicles before they steamroll your base and most importantly only a few openings in the wall so you could predict where the majority of enemies will come from. light assaults will still be able to jump in from any direction, but the really dangerous stuff will have to cross a chokepoint.

and the biolab seems good as well!
i could only check the groundlevel under the lab, and i think there are still too many holes in the wall, but i totally love the design that makes sense now for a military building!
right in the middle of the main opening in the wall there is a building type i haven´t seen before with turrets that are placed strategically. details like this make a base look and feel good. and i really think this will play out very good.

we need more bases with encapsuled courtyards and full fledged walls.

TheSaltySeagull · 2013-05-13, 08:08 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

On the other hand, you could kill the pads with LA's or infils with ease and the interference radius of 75m. Also, with the distance restriction of 150m and Router destruction options, as they'd be placed near the CY instead of a distant base, they would be easier to handle than constant teleports.

Not really. Current teleporters have set locations so you always know where they will come from creating make shift choke points for the defenders like we see in biolabs. Router pads can be placed virtually anywhere and bypass defenses.

Routers worked in ps1 because it was far more difficult to penetrate a base and set up a pad. In ps2 a LA can just jump over the walls. Or hell ANYBODY can run in and establish the pads given how open bases are. And if you try and counteract this with strict restrictions on distance and who can place pads you end up making the router near useless given the effectiveness of infantry AV and the chances of it being rocketpodded by ESF etc. There is no cloaked AMS bubble you can hide the router in to set up an ams/router combo.

ringring · 2013-05-14, 06:22 AM

Originally Posted by Assist

Problem is the huge outfits were just sitting in those tech plants, along with the rest of their faction joining them. They would ignore everything else on the entire map to sit in that tech plant, because they knew if people wanted a fight they had to come to them.
In the end, tactics were the one thing not used and it ended up being a pure numbers game.

I don't think the old Tech Plant was perfect by any means but I was quite amused at the way tactic to 'break' a Tech Plant defence progressed over time.

Firstly the was the big farm from the balcony looking over the double doors.

The response to this was masses assaults by LA's to clear the balcony and gain entry. ( I was the victim to the VS doing this and it was really well done).
The next response was the shield breaker into the side doors.
The next phase was the counter to the shield breaker by defenders laying mines.
The counter counter response was two shield breakers one of which was a sacrifice to trigger the mines.

And at that point the devs changed the base and tactical moves ended, which was sad because I was interested to see what the next evolution would be.

Greenthy · 2013-05-14, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by TheSaltySeagull

Not really. Current teleporters have set locations so you always know where they will come from creating make shift choke points for the defenders like we see in biolabs. Router pads can be placed virtually anywhere and bypass defenses.

Routers worked in ps1 because it was far more difficult to penetrate a base and set up a pad. In ps2 a LA can just jump over the walls. Or hell ANYBODY can run in and establish the pads given how open bases are. And if you try and counteract this with strict restrictions on distance and who can place pads you end up making the router near useless given the effectiveness of infantry AV and the chances of it being rocketpodded by ESF etc. There is no cloaked AMS bubble you can hide the router in to set up an ams/router combo.

Solution: Bring it all back

Bubble's to AMS as defense system
More closed off bases to break into

Obstruction · 2013-05-15, 02:11 PM

In the end, tactics were the one thing not used and it ended up being a pure numbers game.

The counter counter response was two shield breakers one of which was a sacrifice to trigger the mines.

And at that point the devs changed the base and tactical moves ended, which was sad because I was interested to see what the next evolution would be.

we also started driving MBTs (nonvanu at least) up to the shield and raising the cannon so that heavies/medics could run up the cannon barrel and over the side shield.

the most glaring thing i see about these "new" base designs is that the same pussy shield exists so that pussies can shoot out from a position of total invincibility.

player spawns should be enclosed with one way exits that spit you out into a structure that can be fortified and provides cover for a defending group to form up and push out.

they should not provide "tactical advantage" in being able to damage what can't damage back. whatever the concept was initially, defenders can either farm the points from safety, or go outside and die. guess which strategy strictly dominates?

Redshift · 2013-05-16, 04:03 PM

Originally Posted by Sifer2

True but before they added the balcony they nerfed its defensive capability too hard by putting gens that take down the shields into hard to defend shacks outside. It has the effect of allowing greater numbers to just overwhelm by quickly removing the choke points. Before that you pretty much needed shield breaker Sunderers to deliver men inside to cause chaos an blow up the enemy Sunderer which could win the battle.

Now that more entrances are added I don't really think the gens should be outside in shacks. One should probably be on the roof area, and another on the first floor somewhere but still inside the base.

Just chuck the side shield gen on the roof somewhere, then you have another secondary objective but one that's still pretty defensible thinaks to the friendly porters up there. You can still have the back shield accessed from outside.

Then defenders have 2 doors and a gen to worry about, with responses needed every so often when LA or shield diffusers crash the sides or a gal takes the balcony

Figment · 2013-05-17, 10:28 AM

Originally Posted by TheSaltySeagull

Not really. Current teleporters have set locations so you always know where they will come from creating make shift choke points for the defenders like we see in biolabs. Router pads can be placed virtually anywhere and bypass defenses.

Main difference: Routers are temporary, teleporters are fixed in place.

Routers worked in ps1 because it was far more difficult to penetrate a base and set up a pad. In ps2 a LA can just jump over the walls. Or hell ANYBODY can run in and establish the pads given how open bases are. And if you try and counteract this with strict restrictions on distance and who can place pads you end up making the router near useless given the effectiveness of infantry AV and the chances of it being rocketpodded by ESF etc. There is no cloaked AMS bubble you can hide the router in to set up an ams/router combo.

Indeed, which means that you can make a bit of a trade-off which you can't with fixed teleporters. Hence I'd rather have a Router/Routerpad I can kill, than having to camp a fixed in place teleporter for all eternity, not being allowed to move away.

A LA might be able to get in pretty easily, but then don't allow them to carry them. Make it an infil only tool: you now already restrict their access points to gates and some sort of airdrops. The Spawn Beacon is my biggest concern here, since you can't control that or see it coming.

Spawn Beacons near bases ruin a lot of flow and make Galaxies useless, I really wish their use was restricted to neutral/friendly open ground areas instead of usable in bases.

But IMO, a Router which can be destroyed, with a limited range, telepads with interference ranges with one another and limiting the players that can carry them (and task them to always collect one at the Router first) create a lot more complications than you might think. Especially since - unfortunately - compared to PS1 the infil decloaks regularly (damn you snipefil/gankfil design!).