ANTs and NTU Silos - Page 3

Warborn · 2003-02-01, 01:02 AM

I think you're making the ANT out to be far less interesting that normal. Honestly, even if you see no enemies (or friendlies) during that time, I can't see it being terribly boring to the point of ruining the game. Just hop in one, burn some rubber for 10 minutes, get some experience, and then see if there's a fight going on. Hell, after getting smoked several times in the same fight I'd probably hop in an ANT just to take a break. Is it the most exciting feature ever announced? No. Is it the worst thing since the Holocaust? I doubt it. But, even still, if they make ANT runs occur too frequently, then yeah, it'll become tiring to lose bases because nobody thought to refuel it or some such. Like so much else, this idea is good on paper, but whether it'll be good in-game depends entirely on its execution. If they botch it, it'll suck. If they pull it off, it'll be interesting and add some additional depth to the game.

Bighoss · 2003-02-01, 01:05 AM

they could make an Ant squad called "FED EX"

�io · 2003-02-01, 01:23 AM

Originally posted by Ludio
SmokeJumper said that every few hours (even without combat) you will have to refill the nanites because they decay. This has nothing to do with running through enemy lines for nanites. It is for any base at all that you just have to maintain.

He also said they were currently working on exactly how long. Besides as Warborn said so you take up a precious 10-15mins in your fighting time every 5-6 hours to fill your silo up, does that sound so bad? Plus that's if your the only guy willing to do it and you get BEPs for it, i don't see how this can be considered a problem.

Ouroboros · 2003-02-01, 01:27 AM

Everyone makes this task seem so long. There's 3 to 4 warpgates on each continent, you could easily get a Galaxy pilot to give you a ride, get there, fill up, hop back on the Galaxy and be back at you base in no time.

Headrattle · 2003-02-01, 01:35 AM

Actually I am pretty sure he said a few things about how fast a base loses resources.
this is from the latest Dev chat.

1. <CrazyMike> A lot of discussion in the forums are around a concern regarding the lack of players at odd times in the day. They worry that all thier hard work will be undone. This is even more a problem with the latest info on NTU's. Can you comment on this?

SmokeJumper> Sure, it's a valid concern...as long as they're unaware of the gameplay balancing factors...which they are. So totally fair. I'll try to explain... The NTU balance is still being adjusted, but the concept is to reduce NTU consumption when battles aren't raging around the facility. That can be done by a number of factors...NTU consumption increases with respawns at the facility, or when auto-repair features kick on, etc. We're still adjusting those factors so I can't tell you numbers yet. Anyway...this means that facilities will stay owned for long periods of time...unless there are fights around them. <SmokeJumper> Thus, they don't "decay" from just sitting there very much.

<CrazyMike> So from your producers letter it seems like a base left alone long enough will eventually just revert to neutral. Is this how it works?

<SmokeJumper> It will eventually, yes, Mike. But we're talking hours. I shouldn't say "hours". The time is being determined, but is intended to be long.

What I get from that is after a half a day to a day you might have to resupply a base that isn't getting much use. But who knows. They don't even know. But I am sure that it will be a while.
As for the fighting bit I am not sure about that either. You are going to need escorts, because you will see combat. Many of the places you will need to resupply will be under attack. So you need to get past them. Then what happens after you supply the base? You get out and fight.

What if you are going to a base that isn't under attack? You are driving a nice ripe target. Thus you need escorts. Those things are going to attract firefights. There was a gamespot hands on preview that stated that the areas between bases were full of enemies. Or you do it in a galaxy, which should take up too much time.

I also think that BEP awarded for supplying a base will directly related to how low that base is. So there will be times that it will award a decent amount of BEP.
Another thing for the newbies is that it will give players practice playing the game, taking orders, and learning the maps.

I personally want to create a group that does this.
No snipers. No infiltraters. Galixy Pilots, Reaver Pilots and Mos Pilots for airdrops. Drivers, Max's, Medics and anyone else that can guard important cargo for ground escort.

With such a group, we could also be able to escort an AMS or something without changing our tactics.

I have a feeling that these things will be more important then you think. Not as important as assaulting and defending. But without such things niether would work effectively.

You are assaulting a base and finally take it over, only to find that they are almost out of NTU's. Shouldn't you take an ANT and escort with you? Or call for one in the 15 minutes that it takes to take the base? What is the point when as soon as you get it up it goes neutral a little after.

In short, I think it deepens the game both tactically and strategically.

As for how many people will do this?
I read somewhere 28000 signed up for beta in november. So lets assume that 28000 actually play the game. Over 5 servers (last I counted) that is an average 5600 per server. Three empires, is an average of 1866 per Empire on each server. There should be a few that will be able to do this.
You only need 50 or so for each empire.

So if you are for the NC on the central server, count on me being there defending my ANT. And if I don't have an ANT, you will see me hunting down other ANT's.

Look for Headrattle. All I ask is for a Galaxy or an escort to help me out.
And if I had a group to do this, all we would need is a base that needs it.

But then, all of this is conjecture.

Headrattle · 2003-02-01, 01:39 AM

Oh.

As for a name, I pick The Deliverators.

Ever read SnowCrash?

SandTrout · 2003-02-01, 01:57 AM

just a guess, but a compleatly inactive base will probably last 12-24 hours without goind neutral.

Ludio · 2003-02-01, 02:11 AM

I didnt say it was game ruining, I just think that after the first month people will get bored. If I want to take a 10 minute break from the fighting I will go get a snack and go to the bathroom, not refill some random bases NTU silo.

I agree with Warborn that we will have to see how it is implemented, but I dont like the idea that bases require maintenence. If they required supplies to keep everyone respawning and equipped during combat then it makes sense. I think that instead of making them decay and then go neutral, they should only run out of nanites when they are used. And when they run out they should stay in your possesion, useless, but not neutral.

I also want to know what happens when they go neutral, do their nanites get resupplied so you only have to hack it, or do you have to refuel it and then hack it. What about if you are attacking a base? Do you have the same amount of nanites in it once you cap it as the defenders did when they lost it? This would mean that attacking forces need ANTs almost as much as AMS (and the ANTs dont cloak).

Also Ouroboros, there are 7-12 bases on each continent. So unless everyone decided to do a sepreate one it would get tedius/uncoordinated.

If they do keep the decay I would prefer 'day/s' over 'hours'.

I dont mind the losing resources in battle, it makes the defense have another factor to worry about, and the offense has to resupply when they get it, but the decay doesnt make sense.

The game revolves around combat. If the resupplying was neccesary for combat (which it is to a degree I know), and you had to have people resupply bases in a firefight then it would be cool. But resupplying them for the purpose of keeping in peace time seems lame.

In the end I think afex put it best:

the devs have made change after change to speed up the game and now they've gone and done something which i feel not only slows down the game but will affect the fun-factor.

No matter what they do I know someone somewhere will fill the roll of the ANT driver and keep the bases topped up, thats just the way it is when you have 5000+ ppl playing a game. It is still not very fun though.

Headrattle, I dont think that ANTs will be easy targets. The backdoor continents will almost certainly be owned by their respective empires (they will be in lockdown), and on contested continents there are probably going to be rough 'lines', which you can depend on a certain amount of security when you are behind them. Of course a Galaxy would do the trick too.

If anyone is lazy and didnt read that/understand here's the summary:

Battle resupply = Cool

Peacetime Maintenence = Bad

quiet · 2003-02-01, 02:21 AM

I think ANTs and NTU silos add a very good strategic element to PS. Warfare cannot be epic without some sense of resource management and supply lines. Getting rid of the old economy was a good thing but something besides vehicle respawn timers needed to take its place.

For commanders = more stuff to monitor/cordinate

For attackers = win a base through attrition

For defenders = every spawn (char, vehic, equip) depletes your NTUs. BF1942 tickets integrated with equipent and vehicles and
supply lines.

For Galaxy pilots =

(carryalls dune style)

Escort missions =

ANT drivers = I dunno, who wants to drive a slow vehicle with no weaps that the enemy will target first? Well, if I watch The RoadWarrior a few times maybe I can get myself psyched up for it. The ANT doesn't really sound like the big fuel tanker it should be though , hmm, maybe one of those APCs could be modded to carry NTUs . . .

Headrattle · 2003-02-01, 02:39 AM

Ludio.

I agree with you about Lockdowned Continents. It would make sense if the more bases on a continent you have the longer it would take for them to run out of NTU's when it is unused. This would seem balanced and keep people concentrating on the front line continents.

If you have control of all of the warpgates, and the warp gates supply the energy, then your bases should rarely need it. This just seems silly.

But this next part I base off of the map or Cyssor here.

There are 17 bases.
And if you notice there are roads going from base to base. Now depending on what bases who controls there will be plenty of times that you will happen upon a group of badguys.

Especially if the "front line" is a little muttled.

True, a Galaxy with an ANT in back can make the runs to the fringe bases. But I wouldn't want to get caught alone.

If you could hijack an ANT (one of the FAQ's said that you could shoot the driver. Not sure if that is true.) that would make raiding for ANT's plausible, though very hard.

You might be right about them not being big targets. There might not be a need for huge convoys. But there will still be a need for an Harrasser just in case. After all, if I am in a Reaver and I happen across an ANT. I am taking that puppy out.

PrivateMonkey · 2003-02-01, 02:46 AM

I hope I don't repeat too many arguements here. I posted part of this on another forum, but it sums up my thoughts regarding resources. Before I reply to afex, let me sum up my thoughts on why resources are good:

1) Resource strategies. As if warp-gates weren't important before, now they serve a whole new role. "Controlling" a warp-gate will give an empire resources to power thier bases. This also makes for a new combat role: resource gatherer. This may sound boring, but imagine the following scenario:

An outfit is dedicated to powering the bases on a given continent. This is what they do: they fly a bunch of Galaxies, and in each galaxy they hold as many ANT's as possible. They then make relays between warp-gates and bases that need energy. When they reach the warp-gate, they empty out all the ANTs, and fill them up with energy. They could be deployed by a commander, who would assess which bases need the energy the most. At the same time, they could also give friendly players lifts from the warp-gate to the main battle.

Afex makes the claim that no-one will want to do this. I firmly disagree. I'll adress this later, but just to quote dave:

You *do* gain Battle Experience for resupplying a Silo via the ANT.

If for no other reason, people will do this to get the easy exp.

Another resource strategy: if a base is low on energy, but the defenders are holding out... Siege!!! You could effectively surround the base, and stop any Galaxies from bringing in new resources. When the base runs out of energy, you charge in.

In short, the number of strategies is only limited to one's imagination. I'm sure people will come up with some awesome ways to use (and abuse

) resources.

2) Base upkeep. In the spirit of trying to kill two birds with one stone, the resource system solves another key issue. This issue has to do with empires not having to worry about captured bases that are far behind the front lines. With resources, you will now have to keep supplying your captured bases with energy. This gives ambitious commanders an extra role, but it also means that players won't entirely abandon captured bases. This makes the game deeper, and also solves a lot of continent-balance issues.

Ok, now I'll reply to afex:

the logic is simple. the average joe gamer doesn't want to be the guy stuck with the bitch job. and he doesn't have to be. nothing stops him from fighting, so he will fight in leu of doing the boring things. and here is the boring thing in question. lugging a not-so-fast, not-so-armored buggy thing to a warpgate and back to fill up the bases energy.

Two points. First of all, since when is everyone an "average joe gamer"? The whole point of PS is that it offers a plethora of roles. You can be an engineer, a front-line figher, a support medic, a pilot, a commander... these are all separate roles. Personally I think just fighting is boring. I don't enjoy pure combat on it's own. The truth is that there is no such thing as a average gamer. At most you can argue that folks that have only played average FPS games up to now prefer straight combat. But PS is so revolutionary because it doesn't just cater to the average gamer. Some folks (me included) are giddy all over regarding resources. And here is why:

ANTs *can* be carried by Galaxies.

Nobody in thier right mind will ever transport ANTs on ground. They'll pack up a few galaxies with them, and do relays between warp-gates and bases. I personally find the idea of evading enemy fire and landing with my resources to save a base very exciting and rewarding. Without my efforts the base would have been lost.

nobody wants to do the menial tasks, they want the action.

There is plenty of action involved. I don't think it is "menial" at all. In fact, I see as the exact opposite: sitting in a base and just fighting is boring and mundane. You go through the same routines over and over. As a resource deployer, I have plenty of action. I fly all over the continent, bringing resources to whichever base needs it most. I know what's happening on a continent-wide scale, and I am in contact with my whole empire. I evade enemy fire, and am constantly rewarded. I am not bullshitting you here. I am seriously excited about relaying resources. You may not be, but that doesn't mean the game is flawed. It is because peolpe have different interests that PS will work so well.

would you want to be the grunt hording gold in warcraft? didn't think so.

Each to his own. I think I've pointed out how relaying resources is going to be an awesome role to play. Let me ask you this: is playing as a medic "menial"? By your logic it should be. Deploying resources is no different they playing medic: you must bring aid to those that need it most, and stay alive in the process. Without you the game won't work. Without resource deployers empires won't win. Who doesn't want to play as someone whos role is that important?

I'm not saying that your concern may not be legitimate. What I am saying is that we aren't talking here about a mundane task that some just "has" to do. By that logic someone also "has" to be an engineer. Someone "has" to be a medic. Someone "has" to be a commander. Someone "has" to be a pilot. Someone "has" to a defender. Someone "has" to be an attacker.

Everyone likes doing different roles. Having resources adds a whole new dimension to the game, while adding a ton of strategy. It solves problems, and it creates an opporitunity for empires to come up with creative strategies. I think you are just assuming that everyone wants to run in and fight. If games such as TFC or BF-1942 are any sign of the variety of tastes out there, I'd say resource management will get it's fair share of fans.

Ludio · 2003-02-01, 03:05 AM

Thats exactly what I mean Headrattle, I want the ANT drivers to be in the action delivering badly needed supplies to a besieged base. This is a cool game mechanic, they may have taken out the money, but we now have supplies. The part I am worried about is the mundane supply run that doesnt serve any purpose other than keeping the base from going neutral.

Limited resources could be really cool:

Sieges: The attackers may only have one AMS, but it never runs out of resources, without resupply a 30-60 minute battle could be the death of defenders, this gets rid of turtling. The defenders have to be as active as the attackers.

Counter Attacks: If the attacker gets a base with low resoucres then it is a prime target to be attacked, the attackers must bring an ANT with them to keep the base from being overwhelmed by a counter attack.

Resupply Missions: Imagine your last base on a continent is under attack, it is absolutely neccessary that it not fall. It would be so cool to be the ANT/Galaxy driver bringing in the nanites, you truly would be a hero.

I think that a system like yours could work Headrattle to keep the resupplying from becoming tedius.

I would like to know though how long a base would last without resupply when under attack. If it could last more than an hour or two, then the whole siege idea wouldnt work.

PrivateMonkey · 2003-02-01, 03:17 AM

Originally posted by Ludio
Thats exactly what I mean Headrattle, I want the ANT drivers to be in the action delivering badly needed supplies to a besieged base. This is a cool game mechanic, they may have taken out the money, but we now have supplies. The part I am worried about is the mundane supply run that doesnt serve any purpose other than keeping the base from going neutral.

This is a legit concern, but the devs have it handled. I would also think the NTU system is flawed were it not for this comment from dave:

<@SmokeJumper> The NTU balance is still being adjusted, but the concept is to reduce NTU consumption when battles aren't raging around the facility. That can be done by a number of factors...NTU consumption increases with respawns at the facility, or when auto-repair features kick on, etc. We're still adjusting those factors so I can't tell you numbers yet.

Anyway...this means that facilities will stay owned for long periods of time...unless there are fights around them. Thus, they don't "decay" from just sitting there very much.

This essentially addresses your concern: if players are fighting around a base, it looses more energy. If more players are spawned to a base, it looses more energy. If nobody is really at a base, it will "stay owned for long periods of time". Daves own words

.

TerraxNovae · 2003-02-01, 03:45 AM

As noted, they are working on the time it takes to deplete a full NTU Silo when no one's around. This could concieveably be a WEEK or more, depending on how they want to work it. Under battle conditions, with people spawning left and right, spawning vehicles (which are available from ANY base), ammo, Turrets blasting away, being blown up and self repairing... the same amount that keeps a base going for a week is gone in a couple of minutes. Then the "ANT run in the nick of time" factor comes in.

Frankly, the whole system is a stroke of genius. If they can get it worked out properly it should add loads to the playability.

PrivateMonkey · 2003-02-01, 03:58 AM

Frankly, the whole system is a stroke of genius. If they can get it worked out properly it should add loads to the playability.

That is percisely the way I see it. Hand in hand with the wheather and command systems, PS is looking to completely revolutionize the FPS genre. Folks would call it "fresh" were it just an average FPS on the MMO scale... the fact that it is adding all these features is why it will be so much more then that. When I first heard about PS, I thought it was a great first game in a genre that could go very, very far. PS has turned out to be the kind of game that I'd have expected to see as a third or fourth-generation MMOFPS. My only worry is that it will be a game ahead of it's time. It might be too radical for some people.