Game play ideas = resource fields, mobile yards
Post ideas and suggestions on new features or improvements here.
1, 2
posted on July 2nd, 2012, 7:26 pm
Last edited by 23down on July 2nd, 2012, 9:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hi while talking with Kamk over teamspeak I came up with some interesting ideas and am therefore posting em here.
While it's been a while since my last post it will never be to late to come up with some new ideas...
And here we go.....
Resource Fields:
My basic idea for that is to get a more or less new game mode or resource type into the game (In the last case the mapper would decide if he goes by the classic moon setting or with resource fields or even mixing it.)
Now what does resource fields do and what are they good for you may ask. Resource fields are pretty much the same thing as dilithium or tritanium moons with the exception that they can get find all around the map similar like it was in Armada2 with Latinum fields.
The advantage in such a system is that it would bring us away of this constant repetitive concept of going for a expansion which forces you to play a certain game style even though that each race plays differently. In my opinion such a thing would offer great battles about vast & important resource fields in the middle or elsewhere of a map when other fields has been harvested empty. Turtling up also would just play a secondary role due to the fact that the resources are not really laying around at 1 specific fixed point in fact all around the map.
Of course such fields would be limited and if harvested off they wouldn't return unless there is a special setting enabled so that they re spawn after a 30 minute delay for example. Such a thing mixed with a limited amount of regular moons maybe only in the main base section surely would reshape the entire game play what in my opinion could sound very interesting. But such a thing should be
A.) only an additional setting .
or
B.) getting decided by the specific mapper.
Pro:
- It'll force players to reshape their strategies
- Fights are no longer just limited about expansions and main bases. People will now fight for the additional resources lying around to be able to outproduce the enemy. That will guarantee some great battle all over the map.
- People which lost an expansion for what ever reason could still survive with such resource fields on the maps
- It is open to decide how those resource fields could look. They could look plant like or just look like space dust etc.
- We could use a new class of mining vessel for all factions for example so that it remains balanced and nothing of the currently used systems has to be changed.
- If the option is disabled that fields wont regenerate after a certain amount of time then it would also end the endless spam of ships. Forcing all players to use their ships very good in order to win at the end. That actually could force people to learn micromanaging their ships properly 'cause that's half of the price in Fleet ops the micromanagement. Play without micromanaging you the player usually loses unless he gets a massive fleet out.
Contra:
- could give certain advantages towards cloakers but then again be it on a resource field or just about fleet following or expansion raids the cloaker always has that little advantage when he scouts properly.
- Would require a lot of work.
That brings me straight to my second idea I had.
Both Kamk and me argued that at the moment it's really though if not impossible to rebuild once the player loses his star base. At that point it's mostly "Good game'. Simply because you can't reconstruct miners for a long time. You may still have a fleet at that point but A leads to B & B to C.
Meaning if you're still able to defend yourself against your opponent you can't really continue the production of combat vessels 'cause you have to save up for a new star base in order to rebuild miners which also may be down to just a few of them left. At the same time your opponent is of course rebuilding his forces as well eventually outproducing you without the star bases and the so desperately needed miners.
It would be interesting if all factions could get a cheaper star base for lets say half of the price without being able to upgrade it. So those stations will be a lot weaker but are able to produce new miners, constructors and may even serve as forward command post. Still their weapons should be very weak so that nobody will abuse it by spamming them as combat stations.
Another possibility could it be to call in a free warp in for each race onto the field. This warp in sends you some miners, 1 constructor along with 2000D 1000T to your bank account so the player could rebuild that base immediately (what would be useful in team games as it doesn't necessarily mean that if you're dead your entire team is.) However such a feature should be in idle mode and should only work ONE TIME. Of course there needs to be a condition in the script checking if the specific player still had other star bases before losing one. If he has then nothing is gonna happen. If he didn't then the script goes true.
It could extend the amount of a game drastically and would also make it a lot more interesting in that regard and also would be a great help for noobs who knows. But it remains to be seen how well such a thing works it would certainly require a lot of balance testing.
Or to be just very simple. Enable the possibility of miner unit exchange between the different allies but that's only useful in team games though.
23-down
While it's been a while since my last post it will never be to late to come up with some new ideas...
And here we go.....
Resource Fields:
My basic idea for that is to get a more or less new game mode or resource type into the game (In the last case the mapper would decide if he goes by the classic moon setting or with resource fields or even mixing it.)
Now what does resource fields do and what are they good for you may ask. Resource fields are pretty much the same thing as dilithium or tritanium moons with the exception that they can get find all around the map similar like it was in Armada2 with Latinum fields.
The advantage in such a system is that it would bring us away of this constant repetitive concept of going for a expansion which forces you to play a certain game style even though that each race plays differently. In my opinion such a thing would offer great battles about vast & important resource fields in the middle or elsewhere of a map when other fields has been harvested empty. Turtling up also would just play a secondary role due to the fact that the resources are not really laying around at 1 specific fixed point in fact all around the map.
Of course such fields would be limited and if harvested off they wouldn't return unless there is a special setting enabled so that they re spawn after a 30 minute delay for example. Such a thing mixed with a limited amount of regular moons maybe only in the main base section surely would reshape the entire game play what in my opinion could sound very interesting. But such a thing should be
A.) only an additional setting .
or
B.) getting decided by the specific mapper.
Pro:
- It'll force players to reshape their strategies
- Fights are no longer just limited about expansions and main bases. People will now fight for the additional resources lying around to be able to outproduce the enemy. That will guarantee some great battle all over the map.
- People which lost an expansion for what ever reason could still survive with such resource fields on the maps
- It is open to decide how those resource fields could look. They could look plant like or just look like space dust etc.
- We could use a new class of mining vessel for all factions for example so that it remains balanced and nothing of the currently used systems has to be changed.
- If the option is disabled that fields wont regenerate after a certain amount of time then it would also end the endless spam of ships. Forcing all players to use their ships very good in order to win at the end. That actually could force people to learn micromanaging their ships properly 'cause that's half of the price in Fleet ops the micromanagement. Play without micromanaging you the player usually loses unless he gets a massive fleet out.
Contra:
- could give certain advantages towards cloakers but then again be it on a resource field or just about fleet following or expansion raids the cloaker always has that little advantage when he scouts properly.
- Would require a lot of work.
That brings me straight to my second idea I had.
Both Kamk and me argued that at the moment it's really though if not impossible to rebuild once the player loses his star base. At that point it's mostly "Good game'. Simply because you can't reconstruct miners for a long time. You may still have a fleet at that point but A leads to B & B to C.
Meaning if you're still able to defend yourself against your opponent you can't really continue the production of combat vessels 'cause you have to save up for a new star base in order to rebuild miners which also may be down to just a few of them left. At the same time your opponent is of course rebuilding his forces as well eventually outproducing you without the star bases and the so desperately needed miners.
It would be interesting if all factions could get a cheaper star base for lets say half of the price without being able to upgrade it. So those stations will be a lot weaker but are able to produce new miners, constructors and may even serve as forward command post. Still their weapons should be very weak so that nobody will abuse it by spamming them as combat stations.
Another possibility could it be to call in a free warp in for each race onto the field. This warp in sends you some miners, 1 constructor along with 2000D 1000T to your bank account so the player could rebuild that base immediately (what would be useful in team games as it doesn't necessarily mean that if you're dead your entire team is.) However such a feature should be in idle mode and should only work ONE TIME. Of course there needs to be a condition in the script checking if the specific player still had other star bases before losing one. If he has then nothing is gonna happen. If he didn't then the script goes true.
It could extend the amount of a game drastically and would also make it a lot more interesting in that regard and also would be a great help for noobs who knows. But it remains to be seen how well such a thing works it would certainly require a lot of balance testing.
Or to be just very simple. Enable the possibility of miner unit exchange between the different allies but that's only useful in team games though.
23-down
posted on July 2nd, 2012, 7:45 pm
About resource fields, i would like them. but you already identified the big problem, in that cloakers get an advantage. it would be hard to balance cloak for both normal moons and the fields. cloak has to be powerful enough that they can stand a chance raiding moons, but weak enough that they don't make mining fields too difficult. that would be the biggest challenge imo.
if added i would want it to be up to the map maker.
@warpin of ships when destroyed: i'm against this. if you defeated the other player he should stay defeated. not get a second life.
if he got his starbase destroyed then he's been beaten. those things have huge health, and should be protected. comebacks are fun in sports, but look at it from the other player's PoV, you just put in the effort to put serious hurt on this guy, then he gets free stuff to get back on his feet. it would make you feel like you wasted your time beating him if he doesn't stay beaten.
if added i would want it to be up to the map maker.
@warpin of ships when destroyed: i'm against this. if you defeated the other player he should stay defeated. not get a second life.
if he got his starbase destroyed then he's been beaten. those things have huge health, and should be protected. comebacks are fun in sports, but look at it from the other player's PoV, you just put in the effort to put serious hurt on this guy, then he gets free stuff to get back on his feet. it would make you feel like you wasted your time beating him if he doesn't stay beaten.
posted on July 2nd, 2012, 8:05 pm
Well it depends in theory the guy that got beaten is still in big trouble also dont forget sending a possible warp in plus rebuilding the base will take up to 4 minutes... 4 mins which can mean a lot in late game. I still think it could be an interesting idea and it could be a selectable option for the hoster of a game if he wants that on or not who knows.
And theoretically he's not beaten yet as I said in that example he still has a fleet left so does the opponent. At such a point it's usually a time race which the guy without a star base eventually automatically loses.
Anyway cheaper star bases in that regard are most likely still the best possible approach so that's true.
And theoretically he's not beaten yet as I said in that example he still has a fleet left so does the opponent. At such a point it's usually a time race which the guy without a star base eventually automatically loses.
Anyway cheaper star bases in that regard are most likely still the best possible approach so that's true.
posted on July 2nd, 2012, 9:38 pm
Well, not saying i'm a fan of the one time warpin cons idea, especially NOT with ressources, but overall it sounds fascinating for larger team games, where people usually quit once the fleet + base is lost, even if they could sustain mining somewhere else, or be helpful in other ways. On the other hand: keeping one cons alive is a skill more or less.
Basically the idea doesn't really change the endgame itself (at least currently i think so)
If the sb get's killed by an enemy fleet, while you don't do base trading, trying (!) to rebuild yourself will not make a difference, but if you do the mentioned base trading, then there might be an upcoming run for comebacks (which is sadly rare these days) - the real goal of this idea if i understood 23 correctly. (?)
Basically the idea doesn't really change the endgame itself (at least currently i think so)
If the sb get's killed by an enemy fleet, while you don't do base trading, trying (!) to rebuild yourself will not make a difference, but if you do the mentioned base trading, then there might be an upcoming run for comebacks (which is sadly rare these days) - the real goal of this idea if i understood 23 correctly. (?)
posted on July 2nd, 2012, 10:22 pm
Last edited by 23down on July 2nd, 2012, 11:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Yes that's exactly what I was trying to say. Of course we will never get the ultimate perfect situation regarding that however if one of your 2 or 3 allies is still very much alive allowing a come back for somebody or having a 2nd cheaper star base from player X, Y at his disposal could be beneficial indeed. Not just for the player but also for the entire team in fact for both teams as they all get the same chances.
The major point behind this idea is it to make the mid & late game somewhat more interesting perhaps even extending it by some degree with allowing such things. It's certainly an idea that could need some discussion to enhance it properly balance it out and who knows maybe some day even implement it into Fleet ops.
The major point behind this idea is it to make the mid & late game somewhat more interesting perhaps even extending it by some degree with allowing such things. It's certainly an idea that could need some discussion to enhance it properly balance it out and who knows maybe some day even implement it into Fleet ops.
posted on July 2nd, 2012, 10:41 pm
i like the idea of limited resource nebula's/moons. if they were mined like regular moons. would create new situations and tactics.
with it been up to the map maker to balance it i dont see a problem if its not like it doesnt have to be added to every map. but some would be good.
with it been up to the map maker to balance it i dont see a problem if its not like it doesnt have to be added to every map. but some would be good.
posted on July 3rd, 2012, 5:20 am
You know, I've noted that the warp in one is possible, but setting it up for a pushable button, which doesnt need a unit selected, is the hard part. Making it a one shot thing is simple, just add something that lets you do the warp in, but have an invisible object that takes up a slot in a new cap.
As for the resource field, I did something simpler by making hulks of destroyed ships that could be mined for salvage. (I need broken up versions, but it works) What it sounds like to me is you just need a dust/asteroid field with a resource file.
As for the resource field, I did something simpler by making hulks of destroyed ships that could be mined for salvage. (I need broken up versions, but it works) What it sounds like to me is you just need a dust/asteroid field with a resource file.
posted on July 3rd, 2012, 6:56 pm
Hm maybe something like the avatar selection menu screen should work which appears on the screen when the last star base died.
posted on July 5th, 2012, 5:37 pm
I think the Starbase in general could be made less expensive if it was capped at 1. There are several balance issues resulting from multiple starbases that would just go away.
One way to solve the issue would be a mini-starbase structure that produces workers and constructors but has no weapons. Perhaps it could be refitted into a full starbase if your original is destroyed.
Still, if your starbase is killed, it's because your fleet was either severely outgunned or hideously out of position. In either of those cases, you probably deserve to lose the game.
One way to solve the issue would be a mini-starbase structure that produces workers and constructors but has no weapons. Perhaps it could be refitted into a full starbase if your original is destroyed.
Still, if your starbase is killed, it's because your fleet was either severely outgunned or hideously out of position. In either of those cases, you probably deserve to lose the game.
posted on July 10th, 2012, 1:25 pm
Tryptic wrote:...There are several balance issues resulting from multiple starbases that would just go away...
Example please.
I think people overrate an outpost (a starbase) too much. Had a couple of games where base trading was going on all over the place, and both sides tried to rebuild at the same time - those were actually the real fun ones. On the other hand as well, people kept attacking a heavily fortified expansion with a dozen turrets, instead of just the lonely starting base (it's really not that strong).
This is obviously a bit easier for Dom (switching modes) & Borg (more mobile ressource gathering, CCs keep going, all you need are some sneaky nodes).
If you lose your main base, and the majority of your fleet, you are not a major threat anymore, but this doesn't mean you can't keep contributing when your mates are still in good shape.
That's where additional options for rebuilding would help.
Anyways, just talking about larger mp games, not duels though.
posted on July 10th, 2012, 1:42 pm
beserene wrote:Tryptic wrote:...There are several balance issues resulting from multiple starbases that would just go away...
Example please.
the starbase being available from the start enables rushes on maps with chokepoints (eg asteroid halma) and on really small maps. on small maps you can put a borg starbase almost anywhere between starting points before your con can be stopped.
i agree with capping starbases at 1. for gameplay and lore reasons. 1 starbase covers large areas in canon.
posted on July 10th, 2012, 7:40 pm
Sir Myles, i have to contradict you.
On those maps you can rush turrets pretty good as well.
These maps only got one small'ish bottle neck, maybe that's why people don't consider playing them for more or less "serious" matches. The SB rush even works for / against other races on even more occasionally played maps, there it is less useful in my opinion (more paths).
Hm, capping the SB in general might solve a few problems, map wise, but people will still be able to turret wall those areas. So, i'm not really sure...
Anyways, what about additional buildings to produce freighter / constructor / etc, or smaller outposts?
On those maps you can rush turrets pretty good as well.
These maps only got one small'ish bottle neck, maybe that's why people don't consider playing them for more or less "serious" matches. The SB rush even works for / against other races on even more occasionally played maps, there it is less useful in my opinion (more paths).
Hm, capping the SB in general might solve a few problems, map wise, but people will still be able to turret wall those areas. So, i'm not really sure...
Anyways, what about additional buildings to produce freighter / constructor / etc, or smaller outposts?
posted on July 10th, 2012, 10:32 pm
beserene wrote:Sir Myles, i have to contradict you.
On those maps you can rush turrets pretty good as well.
i don't understand how you are contradicting me, i didn't mention turret rushes at all
i agree that in nearly all cases where a SB rush works, you can cheese it up with a bunch of turrets too.
we can fix SB annoyances independently of turret annoyances.
freighters being buildable elsewhere is something i'd be for. balancing suggestions for that are iffy considering the next patch almost certainly changes a lot of things.
i'm also thinking back to a playstation game with airbases and a mobile repair/rearming facility could be nice. no building (by default, maybe allow upgrades to build light ships), just repairing (and probably slower than yards unupgraded). but has engines. would introduce some interesting styles.
currently i love leahvals with singularity gens, as the gens are basically a mobile (and cloaking) yard, supplying energy for auto repair. all they don't give is crew. you don't even need to push repair.
posted on July 10th, 2012, 11:25 pm
im not keen on mobile yards, it doesnt sound like star trek stuff to me.
tho about the star bases thing, perhaps it could be distance wise or only in certain places (like it had a "star base only" blocking area footprint that stretched 2 screen lengths or something)
not sure if im keen on having a limit of 1.
not tried that one, will have to give that a go
tho about the star bases thing, perhaps it could be distance wise or only in certain places (like it had a "star base only" blocking area footprint that stretched 2 screen lengths or something)
not sure if im keen on having a limit of 1.
Myles wrote:currently i love leahvals with singularity gens, as the gens are basically a mobile (and cloaking) yard, supplying energy for auto repair. all they don't give is crew. you don't even need to push repair.
not tried that one, will have to give that a go
posted on July 10th, 2012, 11:42 pm
hellodean wrote:im not keen on mobile yards, it doesnt sound like star trek stuff to me.
I agree there's little precedent in the show for the suggestion, but that's also true of several fleetops things such as:
- Magnan super giant phaser cannon
- Specially designed troopships
- Carriers - fighters had warp drives
- Repair ships
- Pings - cloak detect was done using nets or plot devices (hard to implement gameplay wise) in the Alpha Q, DQ had pings in one episode, but voyager never made it home in fleetops
- Almost all Romulan ship designs
on the up side, ds9 could move slowly with some technobabbling.
the decades of time between canon and fleetops can hand wave some crazy stuff into the game.
hellodean wrote:not tried that one, will have to give that a go
add a couple phase plate rhienns if you can afford to, phase plates is great, cloak early to avoid hull damage to your rhienns. then you can recharge them with your singularity gen. and they will have phase plates ready very often with the energy.
1, 2
Reply
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests