Building Forward Bases - Supply Bases.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Tycho

I dont think that a couple of guys should be able to set up multiple forward bases. Just like one guy couldnt set up multiple AMS's in the original Planetside. There needs to be an owner for that vehicle even in a deployed state. An AMS driver couldnt go deploy an AMS and then go pull a tank without the AMS deconstructing.

I dont think this removes sandbox play. I think it encourages teamwork and strategy. If you want multiple forward bases then multiple people will need to set them up. These battles are supposed to be huge with 100s if not 1000s of players. I dont think this is limiting. If you dont want to dedicate your resources to deploying a forward base then another squad will.

If we use the OP example, one Galaxy, one Sundy, one Liberator. Then as engineer enhances the defences. Thats four people out of a squad of ten. These four could then crew vehicles for others in their squad. I dont see how this is limiting. How many vehicles do you think one person should be able to pull? How does this remove sandbox play?

Sandbox play means being able to do anything you can think of. This limitation means that the player trying to set up the base cannot do just anything while the base is active. That part is pretty clear.

It's not about how it limits the overall faction, it's how it limits the individual player who was setting up the base. You said it yourself, they can then "crew vehicles for others". That means they can't pull their own vehicles. That is a limitation. You may agree with that limitation, but it's still a limit.

Originally Posted by vampyro

No forward bases that deploy vehicles in the middle of nowhere. Just my opinion.

Maybe have deploy-able vehicles in designated outpost areas, where you can only deploy certain types of vehicles.

If you want a tank, you need to go to a major base like a tech plant or something.

The fight has be to be fair, why in the world would we want to be able to pull vehicles from anywhere on the battle field with a couple of deployed vehicles.

SOE may indeed decide not to allow tanks and such to spawn from a forward base, but even if they do that's no reason to abandon the entire concept. At a minimum you should be able to spawn quad bikes from a forward base.

[Tycho]

Originally Posted by vampyro

[COLOR="Red"]If you want a tank, you need to go to a major base like a tech plant or something.

I think the vehicle spawning should be limited to Lightnings, ATVs and buggies(when they add them). I agree that pulling MBTs, galaxies and aircraft would be a bit much. There should be a limit on the number of vehicles pulled from a forward base. I think that I saw someone suggest five vehicles earlier in the thread.

[vampyro]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Sandbox play means being able to do anything you can think of. This limitation means that the player trying to set up the base cannot do just anything while the base is active. That part is pretty clear.

It's not about how it limits the overall faction, it's how it limits the individual player who was setting up the base. You said it yourself, they can then "crew vehicles for others". That means they can't pull their own vehicles. That is a limitation. You may agree with that limitation, but it's still a limit.



SOE may indeed decide not to allow tanks and such to spawn from a forward base, but even if they do that's no reason to abandon the entire concept. At a minimum you should be able to spawn quad bikes from a forward base.

Theres classes dude, typically the engy would setup an ams and then gun for a tank and repair it....
Or said person could switch to a MAX...
There arent any limitations you can do what you want.

[EVILPIG]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Sure there's a lot to do, but if all of it requires them not pulling a new vehicle that whole time, that's too limiting. What if it becomes necessary during the course of the fight to respond to some kind of enemy vehicle defense action with vehicles and as everyone else respawns vehicle, he has to stay alone and plink at the enemy as infantry? Also, it removes sandbox play, what if they want to set up multiple forward bases(for the same assault)? Which brings up another question, should there be a limit on how many there can be?

It's just like an AMS. You deploy it and you have to not get other vehicles. You need vehicle support? Ask your outfit.

Should there be a limit? Again, it's like an AMS, so, no.

[EVILPIG]

Originally Posted by Tycho

I think the vehicle spawning should be limited to Lightnings, ATVs and buggies(when they add them). I agree that pulling MBTs, galaxies and aircraft would be a bit much. There should be a limit on the number of vehicles pulled from a forward base. I think that I saw someone suggest five vehicles earlier in the thread.

The Lodestar would be a ground vehicle spawn. MBTs are debatable. Even consideration as a sidegrade. Everything would be a sidegrade. You would have many options available with the Lodestar. It could be vehicle transport, V-repair terminal, vehicle spawn, etc. You have to choose. Also, there could be different Combat Ribbons (merit) for performing each function, like first ribbon for transporting vehicles X number of miles, etc.

[Tycho]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Sandbox play means being able to do anything you can think of. This limitation means that the player trying to set up the base cannot do just anything while the base is active. That part is pretty clear.

It's not about how it limits the overall faction, it's how it limits the individual player who was setting up the base. You said it yourself, they can then "crew vehicles for others". That means they can't pull their own vehicles. That is a limitation. You may agree with that limitation, but it's still a limit.

I see your point. However, I think the proper/balanced way to implement the Forward Base is how I described it above. If you allow one group to set up a huge number of these bases, I think that its just an exploitation of the ability and it clutters up the battlefield.

I really believe this is a good idea that I can support. It does need to be balanced to ensure that it adds to the gameplay instead of breaking it.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Tycho

I see your point. However, I think the proper/balanced way to implement the Forward Base is how I described it above. If you allow one group to set up a huge number of these bases, I think that its just an exploitation of the ability and it clutters up the battlefield.

I really believe this is a good idea that I can support. It does need to be balanced to ensure that it adds to the gameplay instead of breaking it.

Now, limiting the number of bases may be a good idea. Depending on how it's set up, one forward base per hex should be plenty, right? But then there becomes a quasi-griefing issue, what if some tool places the first deployment in a bad area?


And back to the placer(s) of the base. What if an assault lasts for hours? What if they have to log, will logging poof the base? What if when they come back 2 hours later after logging they want to do something else?

[EVILPIG]

Originally Posted by Tycho

I see your point. However, I think the proper/balanced way to implement the Forward Base is how I described it above. If you allow one group to set up a huge number of these bases, I think that its just an exploitation of the ability and it clutters up the battlefield.

I really believe this is a good idea that I can support. It does need to be balanced to ensure that it adds to the gameplay instead of breaking it.

A "Forward Base" is nothing more than a collection of vehciles, engineering tools and players performing in concert. It is no different than AMS's and CE littering the battlefield in PS1. The limit is how much the players want to put out there.

[EVILPIG]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Now, limiting the number of bases may be a good idea. Depending on how it's set up, one forward base per hex should be plenty, right? But then there becomes a quasi-griefing issue, what if some tool places the first deployment in a bad area?


And back to the placer(s) of the base. What if an assault lasts for hours? What if they have to log, will logging poof the base? What if when they come back 2 hours later after logging they want to do something else?

Again, think about an AMS. Same thing.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by EVILPIG

Again, think about an AMS. Same thing.

I've been playing around a bit in PS1 to see how things work, mostly in VR. Not enough to know details. How does an AMS work with respect to if the person who placed it logs out, pulls a new vehicle, etc? Well, logging out anyway, you just said they can't pull other vehicles. Which I disagree with emphatically.

[EVILPIG]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

I've been playing around a bit in PS1 to see how things work, mostly in VR. Not enough to know details. How does an AMS work with respect to if the person who placed it logs out, pulls a new vehicle, etc? Well, logging out anyway, you just said they can't pull other vehicles. Which I disagree with emphatically.

In both cases, it becomes unowned and unless claimed by someone else, it dissolve after 15 minutes.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by EVILPIG

In both cases, it becomes unowned and unless claimed by someone else, it dissolve after 15 minutes.

First : Ah, that's good. You can prevent it from dissolving.

That said, second: The other team can claim unowned AMSs? Interesting...I'm guessing owned AMSs could not be hacked, though?

[atomos]

I think having a mobile vehicle spawn point is too big an advantage as it reduces the value of having a base with a vehicle terminal in the first place. If there was a mechanic like the the previous NTUs system so that the vehicle terminal needed replenishing after a vehicle spawn then I think it could be balanced. I think the function of the galaxy being the new AMS makes perfect sense because once the players have been dropped off you can do something useful with the galaxy and go join the battle. The way I see it is the deployed galaxy is a temporary spawn point which is armoured and has turrets used to reinforce a base assault, it should definitely should not have the advantage of spawning MAXes and I think it would be a fair limitation that you cannot then spawn another vehicle without the galaxy deconstructing. What I would like to see is that you can choose someone to take ownership of your vehicle when you log off provided they have the correct certs. What if they made it so that some areas require the deployment of a Galaxy to capture or speed up the capture of a facility like Kurtz was saying with WW2online? I think that would be a good game mechanic because then you are forced to defend the Galaxy.

[Captain1nsaneo]

Originally Posted by Stardouser

First : Ah, that's good. You can prevent it from dissolving.

That said, second: The other team can claim unowned AMSs? Interesting...I'm guessing owned AMSs could not be hacked, though?

Vehicles are only useable by other empires if they have been stolen via Adv Hacking or Expert Hacking. Just because a vehicle does not have an owner does not mean that anyone can get into it. Who owns the vehicle is decided by who was in the driver seat last. It is very possible to pull 2 AMSs and just jump between their driver seats resetting the 15 min timer.

[EVILPIG]

Originally Posted by atomos

I think having a mobile vehicle spawn point is too big an advantage as it reduces the value of having a base with a vehicle terminal in the first place. If there was a mechanic like the the previous NTUs system so that the vehicle terminal needed replenishing after a vehicle spawn then I think it could be balanced. I think the function of the galaxy being the new AMS makes perfect sense because once the players have been dropped off you can do something useful with the galaxy and go join the battle. The way I see it is the deployed galaxy is a temporary spawn point which is armoured and has turrets used to reinforce a base assault, it should definitely should not have the advantage of spawning MAXes and I think it would be a fair limitation that you cannot then spawn another vehicle without the galaxy deconstructing. What I would like to see is that you can choose someone to take ownership of your vehicle when you log off provided they have the correct certs. What if they made it so that some areas require the deployment of a Galaxy to capture or speed up the capture of a facility like Kurtz was saying with WW2online? I think that would be a good game mechanic because then you are forced to defend the Galaxy.

If you want to safely spawn a vehicle and rally with your outfit or squad, the base is your best option. If you want to keep feeding the fight and possibly get blown up while doing so, use the Supply Base.