News: Roadmap Resource Revamp & Continental Lattice Updated - Page 9

Ragnafrak · 2013-07-23, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by Blynd

add a totally new vehicle - no weapons at al but quick as hell
- allow armour upgrades but it adds weight and thus slows you down ( trade off )
- allow chassis upgrades but these also have trade offs

It can't be fast because people will just use it as a means of transportation rather than its intended use.

Cert upgrades don't negatively effect any other vehicle, why start now?

Kran De Loy · 2013-07-23, 11:16 AM

I run PS2 at low settings to get the most optimum frames/sec possible in all situations. I bring this up because I'm really not sure at what range the visuals aspects for the modules on a vehicle begin to show. I sure cant tell at 300 meters. I can barely tell a AMS from an Ammo Sundy at 200 meters! But I can tell the difference between and MBT and a Lightning at 800 meters (<-proximate guesstimate).

So at what range should enemy factions be able to tell for sure which vehicle is the highest priority (both organized outfit and random pubs)?

Basically the ANT should be it's own vehicle because of vehicle silhouettes.

ringring · 2013-07-23, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by Kran De Loy

I run PS2 at low settings to get the most optimum frames/sec possible in all situations. I bring this up because I'm really not sure at what range the visuals aspects for the modules on a vehicle begin to show. I sure cant tell at 300 meters. I can barely tell a AMS from an Ammo Sundy at 200 meters! But I can tell the difference between and MBT and a Lightning at 800 meters (<-proximate guesstimate).

So at what range should enemy factions be able to tell for sure which vehicle is the highest priority (both organized outfit and random pubs)?

Basically the ANT should be it's own vehicle because of vehicle silhouettes.

Good point.

kubacheski · 2013-07-23, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by Kran De Loy

I run PS2 at low settings to get the most optimum frames/sec possible in all situations. I bring this up because I'm really not sure at what range the visuals aspects for the modules on a vehicle begin to show. I sure cant tell at 300 meters. I can barely tell a AMS from an Ammo Sundy at 200 meters! But I can tell the difference between and MBT and a Lightning at 800 meters (<-proximate guesstimate).

So at what range should enemy factions be able to tell for sure which vehicle is the highest priority (both organized outfit and random pubs)?

Basically the ANT should be it's own vehicle because of vehicle silhouettes.

This makes no sense to me. I can understand the argument, if you're wanting to destroy it, "make it obvious so we know which one to shoot", but if you're designing the vehicle, wouldn't you design it so it IS difficult to tell which one is which? Even to the point of mimicing a lower priority module?

Qwan · 2013-07-23, 12:31 PM

Originally Posted by Necroe

i think that means that you have infinite amount of grenades/c4 etc. everytime you use one, it deducts x amount of resources.

the auraxium mines make me think of ANT runs

Originally Posted by bpostal

ANT races are back baby!
Also, love me some continental lattice

Shhhhhhhhhh.... you fools, they are suppose to believe that they thought of these idea's not idea's that make sence from PS1, this is PS2 remember......

So back to this thing about bases having resource levels that can be depleted, its a fasinating new and inovative Idea. Please tell me more.

Blynd · 2013-07-23, 12:47 PM

Originally Posted by Ragnafrak

It can't be fast because people will just use it as a means of transportation rather than its intended use.

Cert upgrades don't negatively effect any other vehicle, why start now?

It needs to be fast to evade esf's and harrasers if it looses its convoy. And that is an issue there are no trade offs in this game

No increased dps for less mitigation is there ??

Zoe Max has this and other vehicles should have these counters to certain abilities to balance them otherwise we just get crazier and crazier damage stats from new vehicles I mean compare a souron harraser with a souron mag on paper nag is better in reality harraser is much better and has no downsides everything is a upgrade no trading speed for armour of vise versa.

Starstriker · 2013-07-23, 01:16 PM

Coming in late to the discussion, but...

I really like the proposed system. It hits most of my concerns about the resources as they stand right now.

What I would suggest, however, is that personal nanites be used for more than just major force multipliers like tanks, C4, etc, and also have minor costs associated with many of the actions that players can do. I don't know what values you're considering, Malorn, but hopefully this gives a reasonable idea:

Spawning costs something like 15 resources
Spawning at a Sunderer costs 20, slightly more, to give permanent spawn points a logistics advantage
Hot dropping costs 50... dropping from the sky is incredibly helpful, so it should have an appropriate cost!
Reviving a downed player costs 5, substantially better than having them respawn, but makes it burdensome to do so continuously.
Deploying a MANA turret costs 20, so that Engineers are a bit more mindful of their deployables
Tanks and aircraft require resources to repair, making them dependent on resources beyond just the initial pull cost. In fact, reducing the pull costs for vehicles in exchange for more action-based costs would make it so that careful pilots and drivers who keep their vehicles alive a long time still need to consider resources.
I'd love to have rearming vehicles also be resource dependent, but since most forms of re-arm are automatic that's problematic. One solution might be to make the actual FIRING of the vehicle weapons costs resources, which solves most of issues one might have with it, but might be intuitively a little odd. "I have 30 shots in my tank, but I have to spend resources to fire each one? Huh?" Then again, you're already doing that with the infantry consumables, so maybe not a big issue!
If you want to go a little crazy here, you can also use resource costs as another knob to tune in class and weapon balance. Decimators are just plain better than normal rocket launchers? Fine, but you'll pay 50 resources per shot! Want to make the empire specific heavy weapons fearsome and devastating, as they should be? Great, but spawning with one or switching to the loadout will cost you an additional 50 resources, so you better be careful with that thing! I really, really like the idea of having special, powerful weapons or vehicles who can punch above their weight but sensitive to logistical concerns!
I suspect I don't need to mention this, but on principle all player resource expenditures should be initiated by THAT player's explicit action, and never by someone else or via an automatic system. That's why I've got the medic paying the cost of the revive above, for instance.

My intent with these suggestions is to emphasize resources as a personal measure of endurance (IE, the supplies that the player is bringing with them into the field, instead of a bank balance back at HQ) and making player actions reflect that. Players attacking enemy territory or defending a base with hampered resource output should need to be thinking about this stuff.

I think making this stuff absolutely critical to moment-to-moment play is the best way to pump up the mechanics you're talking about and make them sing. If players KNOW that resources will have a significant impact on what they can do and how well they'll stand up in a fight, they'll care that a base is being cut off from resupply and resources will become a critical part of play. If you just restrict it to the cost of pulling force multipliers, players will be a bit annoyed by it but it won't really stop them from maintaining a solid infantry defense/attack, which is what wins a lot of battles.

As far as the resource gathering vehicles goes, I really like the idea of a separate ANT vehicle, for the same reason that others have mentioned: easy identification and separate balancing. Shoving it into another Sunderer module would just make that vehicle even MORE difficult to read, and would impair the counter-play to resupply efforts by making it impossible to identify the critical target in a convoy. It'd also make sense to be able to tune the cost, mobility, and defensive capabilities of the ANT separately from everyone's favourite rolling brick.

Malorn mentioned that it's not ideal to have a vehicle that's just a "space truck" with a sharply limited role, and I totally agree. My thoughts are to make it a more general resource support vehicle. If you implement the kind of resource costs for individual actions I'm talking about above, there'll be a very real risk of friendly players running low on resources in the field, especially on the attack. Why not, then, allow the ANT to resupply nanites to players as well as bases with an optional module? Either a triggered AOE resource distribution or deploying a "crate" of some kind would do the trick here. If you do that, then you might also be able to get away with nixing the attacker's ability to resupply from an adjacent base, since they'd now be able to bring in ANTs to fuel their assault, an interesting strategic wrinkle that a savvy defender might be able to exploit!

An alternative module might instead let you spend the ANT's stored power on a defensive barrier for nearby vehicles and infantry to protect them from aircraft and return fire. That way, you can pull ANTs for things other than resupply runs... those same resources can also be applied in different ways, powering powerful special abilities that REQUIRE the ANT to recharge at a resource node. They can be powerful because they're limited by the ability to recharge the ANT as opposed to ammo or HP that can be locally resupplied. There are a lot of interesting tactical and strategic implications of that, and it'd be a very different kind of gameplay!

kubacheski · 2013-07-23, 03:22 PM

The concepts in the personal resource depletion are somewhat implemented already in the design in the fact that you get resources slower when the base resources are low. Something of a trickle down effect that reduces your income over time as power gets low, not in a constant cost per use. This limiting factor is the basis for ANTs. You have to resupply or you certainly lose the seige, you can't hold out forever.

Now for the cost of respawning and turrets, this is not a personal resource per se. The base is where the energy comes to activate the spawning of soldiers and should come from the base reserves, ammo from turrets comes from base. Vehicles yes, is a personal cost so as not to spam the field with it, but still should drain the base resources as you're using a base function to turn your personal resources into somthing. The bigger a something, the more resources it costs, both individually and the pad.

I love the promotion of supply lines via ANT technology. The question I have is where does it stop? Is it only bases? Can a AMS run out of nanites? How many spawns can a base perform as compared to an AMS? Should you also have to resupply an AMS with resources after prolonged usage?

If so, then why have separate vehicles at all? All Sunderer modules are dispensing resources that a base does (people, ammo, repair, etc). It makes perfect sense to have a module that has the singular role of carrying these resources from collection spot to silo (or other Sunderer w/module xyz). All Sundy's use them, the ANT Sundy simply can carry a lot more of them.

Crator · 2013-07-23, 05:31 PM

Originally Posted by Malorn

Whether it is a module, what can equip the module, or whether it is a standalone vehicle is something we'd like your feedback on.

Can you offer up some good uses of an ANT beyond a space truck? We want all the vehicles to have a well defined role and to be fun. Being a space trucker doesn't seem like it is worth the trouble or worth investing in...what other cool uses do you think the ANT and its power mechanic might bring to make it an interesting and fun vehicle to invest in?

I didn't read too many posts after this one so not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet. It came to mind when reading the above post though. So forgive me if someone else already posted this idea.

So, as many stated, they think it a good idea to make the ANT it's own vehicle, and not a module. I agree.

What about making them empire specific, like the heavy tanks are? Each having unique intrinsic capabilities.

Examples of some capabilities for each empire:

VS ANT: Able to hover and fly to a limited height.
NC ANT: Able to take more damage and acquire resources faster.
TR ANT: Able to move faster across land and climb steeper terrain.

Each with their own unique look as well.

Ragnafrak · 2013-07-23, 05:48 PM

Originally Posted by Blynd

It needs to be fast to evade esf's and harrasers if it looses its convoy.

1. If a convoy leaves its ANT behind, it's not a very good convoy.

2. If the convoy defending the ANT is destroyed, the attackers deserve to destroy the ANT.

Originally Posted by Blynd

No increased dps for less mitigation is there ??

Zoe Max has this and other vehicles should have these counters to certain abilities to balance them otherwise we just get crazier and crazier damage stats from new vehicles

The ANT isn't a combat vehicle. It's a resource transport. It doesn't need to be especially good at killing anything because it's not going to kill anything.

It's a mobile defense objective. It needs to be defended.

vipjerry · 2013-07-23, 06:38 PM

ANT should be some kind of time bomb truck on map visible to everyone, when it goes off, remaining hack time should be reduced with instant hack on all points in range, or let say it should be instant win if it goes off on satellite base...

Hamma · 2013-07-23, 07:36 PM

I really like the idea of bringing back a small squad transport vehicle that would also have the ANT variant. When outfitted as an ANT it would hold the driver and one gunner and when outfitted as a transport it would hold 6 troops (No MAX units) and be faster.

Blynd · 2013-07-24, 03:14 AM

Originally Posted by Ragnafrak

1. If a convoy leaves its ANT behind, it's not a very good convoy.

2. If the convoy defending the ANT is destroyed, the attackers deserve to destroy the ANT.

The ANT isn't a combat vehicle. It's a resource transport. It doesn't need to be especially good at killing anything because it's not going to kill anything.

It's a mobile defense objective. It needs to be defended.

never said it should be able to kill anything. It should be an unarmed vehicle but it needs some edge over those that will chase it and speed is the only one that will keep it alive.
yes i agree if the convoy gets blown up then they deserve to get the ant too but is that the ant drivers fault ?? no he deserves to have a fighting chance against say a lightening 1v1 and with no weapons he needs to be able to evade its shots and get out of range.

i would suggest that the ANT has a high resource cost somewhere above the harresser to put people off using it as fast transport.

Carbon Copied · 2013-07-24, 04:04 AM

@Blynd: Kind of seeing where you're going but it only works on a small scale; what you're saying is it should be able to hang around with protection cover in the convoy, but also be able to leg it off at a moments notice going toe to toe with a lightning to get away. The downside of having something slow/medium speed but medium armored is exactly that - it's slow/medium and relies on others to get it there. If the convoy gets taken out and it's just the ANT left then sure it may not be the ANT driver's fault but it's a major thing so the empire as a whole suffer for the failings on either part not just the player... if it's fast then you're going to likely have people just soloing around in ANTs regardless of resource costs.

Also when people start strapping C4 to it - you've got a huge suicide bomber/4th faction griefing truck hurtling round...

While you shouldn't force teamplay you should actively encourage it to have more advantages when working together - speed just seems to promote more solo play to me..

I kind of like Crator's idea with some tweaks - maybe where the default NS systems ANT is available as a base model but the empire modifications are a high cert cost "modification" for those that want to specialise.

Ragnafrak · 2013-07-24, 04:09 AM

Originally Posted by Blynd

it needs some edge over those that will chase it and speed is the only one that will keep it alive.

no he deserves to have a fighting chance against say a lightening 1v1 and with no weapons he needs to be able to evade its shots and get out of range.

i would suggest that the ANT has a high resource cost somewhere above the harresser to put people off using it as fast transport.

If an ANT driver finds himself out in no man's land alone with an enemy lightning, he deserves to have problems.

Originally Posted by Carbon Copied

@Blynd: If the convoy gets taken out and it's just the ANT left then sure it may not be the ANT driver's fault but it's a major thing so the empire as a whole suffer for the failings on either part not just the player... if it's fast then you're going to likely have people just soloing around in ANTs regardless of resource costs.

Also when people start strapping C4 to it - you've got a huge suicide bomber/4th faction griefing truck hurtling round...

While you shouldn't force teamplay you should actively encourage it to have more advantages when working together - speed just seems to promote more solo play to me..

This. It can't be fast or it'll be abused.