Construction in 2023 - Dev Letter

Discussion in 'Official News Feedback' started by Mithril, Jan 17, 2023.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. RiP0k

    It is better to transfer the modules to the view as equipment improvements. For each of the walls or buildings. With tabs protection, repair, attack. so that no one can destroy all the modules while you are wandering behind the cortium. And also make an inaccessible entrance for the enemy to the respawn room.
  2. Intro

    I generally like those ideas so far, though I have several comments. Will try to make it short:

    - Building on inclined surface is a Hell. And slopes are the most common type of surface compared to flat areas. If there will be even larger structures that requiers flat ground... Instead of tunning every single one object for better placement, it is better to add a Construction Platforms which players can build upon and that should be easily placed even on non-flat ground,

    - If Cortium Bomb becomes a such niche object, then it should be accessible to all players (including Freelance NSO) just via certs.

    - This is a part of larger problem of players' unawareness, but still, it should be made clear how those new changes and Construction overall works. Is adding new missions will be enough? I suggest add rewards for first-time reading of Codex. Also, it's better to HIDE tutorial SKIP BUTTON, until at least one character gets to Battle Rank 20 (same requirements as for NSO), Players at least should get used to vehicles via tutorial.

    - Default kit of Construction objects for new players must include Spawn object and Ground Vehicle Spawn object. Even if you not planning to something with forced 20K Cortium restriction on Silo, at least make an object that can spawn only transport vehicles. Let say, it can't spawn tanks or Harassers, but can spawn Flash and Sunderer. You can even made pre-build lodeouts for them without weapons and make it free to spawn and serve only as a transport and logistics. Simple transpot hubs should not take 15 mins to make.

    - Last one, but the most important one in my opinion:
    Defenders will care about defending a base unless it located strate up on the Capture point.
    All stated above in dev letter doesn't mention a thing to adress this issue, This can be mitigated a little by make map UI more clear (friendly base in under attack) and reducing No-Construction-Zones, to make player-made bases stick closer to normal ones (maybe then they will have a chance for defenders to come by). Hope that you will do something about it.
  3. AntDX316

    I think there should be stuff to setup that takes time to craft such as BFRs but having such emphasis on base creation can lead people to forget about winning the continent as a bunch of population will be at the factories especially zerg outfit-owned ones.

    Turning a playerbase into a great roadblock or a better superbase at say Tapp Waystation could be good or worse.

    The issues with some bases are:
    -3-5 people can easily destroy a base.
    -A base can be nearly impossible to destroy until Glaive IPC and OSes go off which is good.

    We should just try the original developer intent first then consider feedback as some of the feedback could be lacking greater insight. The risk is having a construction bases way too nerfed or way too buffed. It would be better if silos can be constructed closer together this way a base can span longer like The Great Wall of China. Doing that in AOE2 was awesome to establish trade routes. There will be vulnerabilities on the wall span no doubt and people can mass up to push through and make the game more interesting. Perhaps there can be AI cargo that the longer they go to each other, the more special materials. Dynamic collaboration and co-op is what makes this game so great.

    Perhaps the zone that stuff can be placed shouldn't be based on a fixed silo radius but each item has it's own distance this way walls can be placed further away and still have say a shield and repair module attached to it. The way to prevent an area from being way too OP is to limit the amount of turrets and stuff that can be built within a silo radius.

    I think there has to be a vertical exclusion zone (like the out-of-bounds grid in VR training but with more grid lines and more transparency) than just a line on the floor. This way people can tell how far the edge is without looking over a mountain or walked to the absolute end.

    People should be able to press tab or the tetiary key to see what items and how many are at that silo. There should also be a small map in the same screen to show where everything is placed.
  4. 110china

    I just want to know whether you can refund if you delete the module and spend money on building
  5. c2h5oh

    I'll keep it short:

    1. New module mechanic adds a boring chore outside of core game loop. This chore is likely going to fall to people who are defending, not building the base making them dislike construction before they even try it. Make it a secondary objective somehow (same idea as generators in large bases). If you can't make it something fun at least make modules not drain when base is not under attack.
    2. What's the plan to make building a base less of a pain in the ***? Too tight terrain overlap restrictions and not being able to overlap construction items to lock gaps between them is my mayor complaint.
      • make wall ends "stick" to buildings and each other
      • if snapping/sticking is not in the cards let them overlap a bit
      • "extra features" (e.g. wall stairs) should be not included when checking for collisions
      • benchmark: a single person should be able to put a complete, if small, defensible base in the time required to capture adjacent hex
    3. Please increase max number of constructed passive defenses (walls, pillboxes, towers, repair modules etc) per player. It lowers a barrier of entry when you only need 1-2 people in squad/platoon to be into construction to have a base to defend.
    4. How do you intend to prevent a single stalker infiltrator from destroying an empty base (it's not uncommon for a base to be temporarily empty when pop is low of fight is still far away)?
    5. How do you intend to decrease effectiveness of crash-n-burn base destruction tactic (fly galaxy with maxes/mines/c4 through skyshield into the base)?
    6. How do you intend to solve bases requiring constant babysitting when away from main fight because they are harassed and slowly destroyed by very long range fire from a tank? Since you don't know how fast a fight is going to reach your base and it takes too long to build one last minute you will often have a base ready half an hour before it needs defending. Having to drop everything and rush because someone is plinking at your base that you may or may not end up defending at all is not fun at all. Also if you start repairing they just leave. Maybe make bases regenerate HP rapidly when not connected with a lattice to an opponent-held hex?
    • Up x 1
  6. Shaws7

    Since the beginning of Planetside 2, nanite system has been monitored and tweaked to try and balance costs of vehicles and prevent spam - construction made vehicles indefinitely free after only a few minutes of initial investment.
    For years, the maps have been worked on and reworked where a change seemed necessary - construction threw design out the window.
    Removing defender advantages from bases is a step in the right direction but still, all it accomplishes is creating a standard base where, provided the builder is experienced, the layout greatly favours defenders.
    If all sides in the fight are balanced - how do you defeat defender advantage? With zergs. There is no other way if both sides are evenly matched. The greater the defenders advantage the greater zerg it begs to create. I don't know about you but I find the zergs to be the most unenjoyable part of Planetside 2. It's boring to play inside of one and hopeless to play against it.
    Why not just design a fair construction base and place that as a permanent fixture in the game and if you want to involve the community have them provide examples/modules/advice. From a business standpoint I can understand trying to attract a new playerbase to the game but really Planetside would have had great player count if it simply focused on the core gameplay which once made it such a popular game.
    Squad leaders are the lifeblood of this game and I've seen little in the way of making their life easier over the years. Listen to your squad leaders, give them the tools they need and give the team members more incentives to play as a team. Construction was a mistake.
  7. WorldOfGamers

    PLEASE rethink/be careful when changing how the Flail targeting dart should be fired.
    I fully agree that the Orbital Strike dart needs more risk, but i'm worried how it will affect the Flail.
    For all darts i would rather disallow Infiltrators to cloak for a short while after firing, and/or have a delay to fire after uncloaking.

    As to why i think the Flail dart gun should not require a longer line of sight requirement?
    It's because of this gimmick:


    I absolutely LOVE doing this. It's a super high risk flying an exposed vulnerable aircraft above an open base and also getting the exact trajectory right is really hard, yet super fun, and if pulled off successfully, can actually be quite rewarding sometimes.

    It's a difficult, fun and in my opinion quite balanced gimmick that, from what it sounds like, wouldn't be possible with the new system.
    Please let us keep doing this <3
  8. Dazerio

    I'm onboard with everything mentioned, except for the modules section and hives. Il only talk about what I disagree with here to save reading time.

    One factor of base management we actually enjoy is resource management, it gives us an excuse to keep mining if we want to grow more and also makes us decide on and manage our passive cortium usage. This is actually what makes an active base or a decaying base. A passive base left unattended will kill itself with bad resource management if it's got too much going on. It also allows an attacker to cut off supplies to a large base the attacker normally couldnt overpower. A cortium guzzling base spamming orbital strikes can be taken down quicker if you fight it's economy, kill it's ants and allow it to drain itself. High risk high reward bases. If you remove the cortium drain, such bases become low risk high reward.

    I do like the sound of tbuilding upgrades, however it should not replace the existing module system as I believe it would detract from common modules being able to affect all things more easily aswell as be something easy to destroy in the open. I don't fancy the idea of having to run back and forth a hundred times to get basic essentials on every single building over and over. Any building upgrades should have a passive cortium rate cost too.

    I figure that you wanted to remove passive cortium cost due to having infinate silos on certain lattice bases, but you can get around this by making these infinite silos not simply be infinite, but generate a steady rate of cortium, so bases cannot become to large and beefy.

    I do very much like the sound of artillery and stuff being converted into buildings for indoor fights, this is an amazing idea. But I am concerned how this will effect building space. Player bases are often made in strange place where space to build is limited, perhaps you want to remove being able to build in those places, that's fine if that's the intention, otherwise it might be a good idea to keep the compact outside variants of things, while also having full building variants with indoor fighting spaces, these full building versions can be better in some way, like allowing for upgrades for the buildings main function aswell as being much tankier.

    When hives were removed planetmans rejoiced. Hives were bad because it interferes with peoples prefered alert meta, which should be purely territory percentage based with clear and familiar means to capturing or defending territory, with capture times well understood. Even CTF steps on these delicate toes because it's not timer based, and people do know know how long it takes to capture a CTF base in the best or average circumstances. I highly highly suggest leaving alert meta where it is, it is a sacred thing that should remain pure. Bastions new abilities are fine for alert meta because you can see it coming and plan ahead, im pretty sure the majority of people like the bastion changes.

    Off topic construction bugs and suggestions:
    1. Aircraft terminals can have aircraft land on top, however theres no way to get up. We need a ladder or jump pad.
    2. Some buildings like the pillbox have an opening above, but there is no means to go up through it. Perhaps a ladder ot jump pad would be nice?
    3. I am unable to repair or deconstruct gate walls with my hand tools.
    4. It would be nice if the silo owner had more control over whether platoon and non-platoon have access to build in the area and use cortium (like pulling vehicles) from your base. Perhaps allow us to set cortium numbers like how low until silo locks out vehicle pulls from platoon and then non platoon. Same for allowing building, and setting a passive cortium drain rate cap.
    5. Some buildings have one way shooting barriers like on the normal walls and tower windows. One way shooting makes for a terrible attacker experience, so these one way barriers should be beatable. Perhaps the barriers only have a small amount of health and can be destroyed by small arms. Building upgrade slots can increase barrier health and resistance to vehicle base weapons. (I think construction bases should be more attackable by a group of infantry, and less so by sniping tanks)
    6. It's been mentioned before that anti aircraft turrets have too much range while also being a tickle. The ESF experience of flying past a base is more of an annoyance that you cant get rid of no matter how far away you fly. We want bases to defend themselves but only at things close enough to be threats, and probably should deal more noteworthy damage the closer enemy air is.
    7. Router spire range is quite difficult to work with right now. Alot of bases have their no construction zones quite big, and it's suicide to have player bases in the open right next to a contested base if you even can find a spot with the terrain near some lattice bases, 500m spire range is sometimes just too impractical or impossible. Anywhere from 700 to 1000m is far more viable.
  9. Toumal

    I think there's a lot to like about the proposed changes. As long as the automatic silo refill isn't too fast, it would mean that defenders eventually have to bring in more cortium. That's a good thing, and mind you, you're very much starting to go towards how PS1 handled NTU silos in fixed bases. Which worked, btw.

    The Ant changes sound awesome. Introducing some skill elements to make mining more satisfying would be great, along with audiovisual cues when you pick up cortium shards. Small rewards, but they work.

    Base defenses, pain spire: I still fundamentally disagree with that direction. Base turrets are never really a huge problem for attacking vehicles, infantry turrets really only kill the most reckless of infils (and there's decoy grenades...). Without any base defenses I fear for the worst. Rethinking automated defenses - sure why not. There's a lot that could be tweaked like accuracy and fire rate. Heck, you could make it so base turrets have to be restocked with ammo for example. Just... please don't listen to people who claim that base turrets give you hundreds of passive kills in a fight. You have the data, you know it's not true.

    I still hope we can introduce more systems and counter-systems. The decoy grenade is such a thing that I like a lot. Sensors and sensor shielding are another good example, and I think more things like these would be great. What could be added? For example, a counter-artillery radar, that gives you the location of a flail that's firing at your base. Or a (fragile) module that prevents darts from working in a certain area. Want to flail an enemy base? You might have to deal with that first. These are just random ideas but you get the idea - systems and counter-systems.

    Be careful with making buildings too difficult to destroy, or making it so there's only one way to damage them - this can quickly lead to inflexible and uninteresting gameplay loops.

    And I still say you could've balanced the cortium bomb in a different way, for example by making placement more difficult. They got an inadverted boost when you started allowing them to be placed anywhere really. There was this time window where you could build the core of a base in such a way that it made cortium-bombing the core structures almost impossible. Of course this wasn't ideal and very few builders ever caught on that putting modules into a garage in a certain fashion made it very hard to place bombs, but you get the idea - rewarding smart construction placement would be great. Not sure how I feel about cortium bombs on module slots but eh, why not give it a go.
  10. Hyoubara

    *The following sentences are sentences that I typed while using a translator.
    I'm re-translating and checking and correcting, but there are many parts that I can't convey well.
    Please understand that it is very difficult to read.



    ◆1.Construction – What it does well, and what needs work

    To give my opinion on this,

    "It's not boring to participate as a defender",
    Because when the base is completed, you can go to support other places until the time comes.
    And when the enemy invaded the place where the base was built, it made me realize that the word "boredom" never existed from the beginning.

    "It can be frustrating to fight as an attacker"
    There's a lot of potential for this, because it's easy to sabotage ANTs laying the groundwork before construction.
    And the purpose of the side that interferes with ANT is not "interference", but "ANT is harmless, one-sided destruction is possible, and experience points can be easily obtained".

    And regarding the creation of an open place that can be built at the capture point, "this place is basically difficult to build".
    The cause is "the fragility of the base due to the lack of damage nullification by the repair module", and "it is easy to be attacked because it is an important place",
    Because it is essential to have a large number of allied escorts in the building, and the presence of a large number of allies who will rush instantly when attacking.
    The current situation is that the demerit of building a base around the capture point is very large, except for the extremely limited outfit.


    ◆2.Goals

    ・"Allow builders to develop bases that non-builders enjoy fighting at."

    Regarding this, I think that the current situation is largely based on the "side that builds bases" and the "side that uses bases built by allies."
    Isn't it best to extend that part?


    ・"Reduce barrier to entry for players looking to engage with the system."

    This is described in "7." below.


    ◆3.Lattice-based Construction Outposts

    ”Lattice-based construction outpost"、
    Does this refer to bases that can be captured in 1 minute between key locations?
    Either way, I feel that updates on this topic are in danger of becoming very rough.

    The reason is

    First, ``If this point becomes an important point like a tower type or a tech plant, it will greatly affect the game balance and the movement of the battlefield.''

    Secondly, ``more than ever, a huge and unreasonable building by a major Outfit will be completed, and the attacking side will probably be annoyed.''

    Third, ``Because of the important point, it will be a place that is almost untouchable and unrelated to individuals and small groups who are engaged in construction.''


    It is very risky that all resources will go to the enemy side if they are occupied by the enemy, so it may become a very complicated place both in terms of barriers and knowledge.


    ◆4.Combat In and Around a Base

    Totally agree with this item.

    Another suggestion would be to make connectivity between objects a little easier when building.
    If it becomes possible to embed the edges of architectural objects so that they can be connected by embedding the edges of walls in objects such as rocks.
    I think it will reduce stress during construction and at the same time create diversity in shape.
    However, when doing this, it is necessary to be careful because there is a possibility that it will be abused unless certain restrictions are partially put in place.

    Other things I'd like to see are bridges across small rivers and valleys, Elysium Spawn Tubes that can be placed on architectural objects, and so on.



    ◆5.Modules Reworked

    ・"Module socketing"

    I am very interested in this because the idea is unique and the inside of the base will be beautiful. However, there is one big problem with this.
    Since the location of the module is fixed, it is not possible to devise the module position.

    "Both the side that creates and the side that infiltrates to destroy go to the same place every day."
    This is not interesting.

    Is it possible to reduce the durability and make it smaller so that it can be placed anywhere in the architectural object room while maintaining the effect and range?
    I think it would be interesting if instead of being able to destroy it with a knife or two, you could place it anywhere inside or outside the building, even on walls and ceilings.

    A breaker operation type that ends with an interactive one push may also be good, instead of "destroy, repair, reinstall"
    Make OnOff easily touchable by friends and foes, and it would be even more interesting if it emitted a loud power-down sound effect to the surroundings.


    ・"Eliminate passive wear and tear"

    I would like to say "I agree with this...", but honestly it's a delicate part.
    Even in the current situation, if you don't want to consume it, you don't have to put unnecessary modules.
    I don't see any point in changing to a socket format with a 20 minute limit.

    Twenty minutes is a very short amount of time for a builder when even a lock alert is an hour and a half.
    I think it would be interesting to increase the types of modules, but do you run around all the building objects to check the remaining time or replace them every time their life expires? .
    Impossible, when the time comes to transport these modules to the sockets, we see unilateral interruptions during transport.


    ・"Cortium Bomb"

    Until now, I think that the management has had a hard time coordinating this bomb.
    Basically, I'm mostly on the construction side, but I agree with the opinion that the attacker says, "I don't feel the need to defend until an explosion."

    There was certainly a bit of a problem with Inf's hacked bunker terminals being able to take them out indefinitely.
    I feel that the current Inf unpossible fix is only a temporary measure, both offensively and defensively.
    In addition, the number of players who can use this bomb is very limited due to acquisition conditions, and it is not acceptable to use this as a basic for attacking.

    If you let it exist as it is, how about putting two switches on the bomb and asking the defender to take a two-choice quiz?
    The time limit is long, the attacker decides the correct answer and installs it, if the correct button is pressed, it will be canceled immediately, if the wrong button is pressed, it will explode immediately, and it will explode even after the time limit has passed.
    It would be even better if there was a way to know the correct answer for only some classes, so the defenders could be in a pinch if they should be released now or have time to change classes.
    It would be nice if the bomb had a cooldown before it could be used next time, an area it could occupy, etc.



    ◆6.Finding the Fun in Attacking Construction

    ・"More like Rush game mode than Control game mode."

    This is a matter of personal subjectivity.
    There are those who "build as temporary consumables" and those who "maintain it for a long period of time for continent-wide bargaining."
    I tend to choose the latter, but I think more and more people are giving up on the latter option since it's become easier to destroy buildings.
    For the latter, the key is how quickly the tube can be restored when it is destroyed, whether there are backup spawns, and how to defend the silo from being destroyed.


    ・「Change skywall shield bi-directional」「Remove Pain Spire」「Removed automatic turret」

    I disagree. In the days when HIVE existed, these fixes would have been mostly fine.
    However, nowadays the importance of destroying even small building bases has increased, and the methods of destruction are beginning to become widely known.
    Losing them greatly increases the chances of the attacker gaining a one-sided advantage.


    If you use Skywall as a two-way shield, you won't be able to get out if you enter as an escape.
    If you remove the pane, the area directly below the anti-personnel turret and all building entrances will be full of gaps.
    Remove turret automation and you won't even notice intrusions or approaching
    Even if the alarm sounds, it doesn't mean that you can return in 1 second
    Boost turret instead of removing auto? Are you trying to lock the people who built the base up forever?

    Even in the current situation, if you build it on the front line, it will be unilaterally overrun and will not function as a defense.
    Currently, I spend most of my days worrying about where to build in the shadows of existing bases or in the depths of the map while being frightened by the small number of Inf and tanks that come to attack.
    Infantry with glaives and flail dart guns are very difficult for defenders to spot, so I think those who wield them already enjoy one-sided overruns.



    ・Conclusion.


    If you're going to make these changes in the current situation, either give the building base stealth or other invisibility, or restore and add buildings that can't be broken or hacked.

    I think that if you are assuming a battle with a building in the truest sense, something with equal effort and planning is appropriate.
    It would be my long-cherished wish if something I made in an hour or two would be destroyed in a 100v100 decisive battle.
    A silo that took 20 minutes to build up was destroyed in 10 seconds by a vehicle, a base that took 40 minutes to be overrun by a Glaive that was built in 5 minutes.

    I somewhat understand that there are people who feel that it is fun to destroy things that others have built up in an instant.
    But if you remove "Primary Weapon", "Launcher" and "Shield" from Heavy Assault, who uses that class?



    ◆7.Barrier to Entry

    1. Building unlocking is expensive, and it's harder to get interested in than other weapons.

    2. It is difficult to obtain knowledge about how much the field of architecture affects the battlefield

    3.PlanetSide 2 is "basically an STG where infantry fights with rifles."
    Most of them have no interest in entering the construction industry because most people start with that knowledge.


    ・"Training mission and daily addition"

    I don't really agree.
    Adding building missions and dailies is unlikely to interest existing players.

    It may be easier to understand if you add a VR Room for architectural training, place a Cortium and a prototype square, and put a video that shows harvesting, installation, effects, etc. for each part...
    However, I think that only a few people are interested in it, so I feel that the fact that it is a game that allows you to build buildings should be more appealing to the outside world.


    ◆8.Harvesting and the ANT

    This is a very interesting item.
    I also like the fact that it is a change from the laser type, which currently has many bug users.
    There was no visual change during harvesting, so this is a very good idea.
    I'm also looking forward to the spec change to Cortium related by diverting the Orbital Mining Drill.


    ◆9.Quality of Life

    I think it's probably a part full of improvements that are hard to understand with text alone, so I'm really looking forward to it.
    It may be even better if the rotation speed of the construction object can be changed in the settings.


    ◆10.Odds and Ends

    While HIVE is a unique system, it was also something that had problems in construction.
    Since it is an important part of the victory system, the installed base has a high probability of being attacked.
    When other people installed it on my base without permission, it was a thing that held my head many times.

    Except for some recent bugs, I'm not very dissatisfied with the alert timing.


    ◆11.etc

    ・"When an ANT is hit, the enemy will also appear on the surrounding ANT minimap and the squad member's base turret will start attacking the target."
    What do you think? This is a problem even if the ANT body is equipped with transparency, and considering that it is too strong even if the armor is extremely hard,
    It is a product that considers the resonance function of the ally that is suitable for the name ant.
    No, it's too strong...


    ・"C-Barrier"
    I haven't seen anyone currently using it.
    When using it, I often wonder if it really reduces damage by 30%.


    ◆12.at the end

    Thanks for reading this far.

    Thank you for the ongoing maintenance of PlanetSide2.
    I'm looking forward to seeing what you do in the future.
    • Up x 2
  11. Vindicore

    Been a while since I posted on these forums, but let's give it a go.

    I really, really like the sounds of these construction changes. I've wanted construction ownership to flip since I heard it suggested a few years back. It will make construction much more meaningful if you knoww that your constructions could be there in hours, and fight all the stronger if you know it could be used against you. Larger structures which infantry can actually get inside of will make it much more engaging, and provide some cover from aircraft and the like which are even more unpredicable at these dynamic bases.

    Modules as slots in buildings is something I have wanted since constructions implementation, and will make it more predictable and help protect them if they are installed internally, and help add more depth to the system if different modules can be attached internally and externally.

    The ANT changes seem solid, as do the rest of the changes to be honest.
    • Up x 1
  12. VV4LL3

    Could DBG finish their work on NSO before taking on something as big as new construction, please?
  13. Bezlikiy

    I would advise you not to change anything at all, except for the convenience of placing the building. Give Ant back the upgrade that gave him invisibility, make it easier to connect objects to each other, and forget about it. Do you want to nerf Orbital Strike? What nonsense? Interest in the battle for the bases? I build bases, but not because I'm interested in fighting for them, but because I'm interested in destroying enemies with artillery. That's all. I build them to get a tactical ADVANTAGE over the enemy. And I'm not interested in defending the base. And if you nerf the targeting of the orbital strike, then it will become uninteresting for me to build it.

    P.S. In general, I got the impression that the new team is frankly hacking. The game has existed for 10 years, and despite this, people were interested in playing it. The cards have been worked out, in terms of design. All new weapons have been thought out and balanced. And what do we see now? Oshur - empty spaces with towers poked without meaning according to the principle of CTRL + C, CTRL + V. And these towers... Just a symmetrical circular corridor with a couple of rooms. Design NO. Did the creator of this tower try to play a shootout in the annular corridor without hiding places? Remember how detailed the interior space of the Biolaboratories is. Now compare it with the ring corridor of the Oshur Tower.

    What about weapons? The latest weapon update from the old team brought us such barrels as Jackal, Promise, Gladius. What did you add? A bunch of random useless guns, with almost the same models. And then you also nerf the old models, because someone complained that he was being killed with that weapon over there. What was the point of the shotgun nerf? The apotheosis for me was the JGX - I really liked the idea of ​​long-range artillery with a ballistic trajectory. It makes it possible to shoot at coordinates, without a direct line of sight to the target. True, you didn’t think of adding any guidance, but okay, the game has a marker on the map, and thanks to it I learned how to hit a target from the JGX at a distance of 400, 600, 800 meters.

    [IMG]

    It was interesting - to calculate the ballistic trajectory of the projectile, like a real gunner, and hit the target. However, for this you need to know all the data about this very ballistics of the projectile. And you know what? I contacted technical support, requesting specific data on the projectile trajectory needed for calculations. And do you know what they answered me? LOOK FOR THE ANSWER IN THE COMMUNITY FORUMS. That is, the developer who created the mortar cannon CANNOT provide data on the ballistics of this mortar, necessary to calculate the trajectory and use it effectively. Also advises to address to forums. After that, I just deleted the game, unable to endure this mockery any longer.
  14. Bezlikiy

    Another brilliant idea is to distribute mines with different effects to the factions. Who thought of this before? It's like leaving one faction only tanks, another - only aircraft, and the third - only small arms. The game has a unique faction weapon, but it allows you to gain an advantage in a SPECIFIC situation. And the goal of the player is to create this situation. And what's the point of giving one faction concussive mines that turn the player into a vegetable and a 100% corpse, and the other - EMP mines? In general, my opinion is this - if you want to make the game better, just start a separate server where everything was the same as before. Make us vanilla, and then refine your version, and do whatever you want there. And play it yourself
  15. Nogrim313

    Thank you for running with a suggestion ive been making since the outset of construction!

    please also use the idea i gave for perimeter walls and put an magnetic attachment point on the ends. having walls connect is one of the most irritating and tedious parts of building bases imho.

    im going to suggest you take the current assets (walls, gates, towers, bunkers etc) that are meant to be part of a bases "walls" or outer defence ring. put mounts for laser posts on them in a bunch of sensical mounting points (walls get ends, bunkers could operate as hubs, towers with mounts on all 4 corners, etc)

    and then when you slot a "laser wall" module in to those hard points, it spawns a marker to drop a connection post, you click again and it drops the post tower on what ever elevation it is or snaps on to another nearby mount with LOS, draws a line between the tops of each tower and then just projects that down to the bottom of the world (the lazy method)

    suddenly you have a functional wall and a few access points (if suddenly infils can't get in to bases because the walls are too good or the pain fields too much, you can always give them an implant to block the pain field that they have to swap out deep operative, or sensor shield to use.

    personally id rather the pain fields just turned in to darklight fields that block enemy stealth but did no damage, they end up addressing the same problem, but one requires players to actually do the dirty work to get rid of you instead of it baby sitting.


    i can see some issues with affixing a free silo to the "base cap points"
    1. the silo is going to either suffer from always being in a good or bad spot based on which side of the lattice you are attacking from and the natural terrain your forced to build around.
    2. if the silo location is always known, then its going to be very hard to allow it to be vulnerable or people will find ways to snipe it.
    3. if the silo is invincible, well then one of the current ways to destroy a base disappears.

    so imho, the base points should just have a terminal at them that allows you to buy a silo and a spawn tube for free.

    that way any one can start the base, and you still maintain the creative and reactive gameplay around protecting it. if you want to make it easy for noobs, you can pick a few suggested locations, and just design the terrain to look like it should go there and make sure the placement is easy and obvious in those locations.


    on to turrets, i think the current towers actually work pretty well (as crappy as they sometimes are) but i would also suggest you make some of the structures like towers/bunkers/pillboxes have slots add to accommodate similar turrets.

    ie. putting an AI turret on top of a pillbox instead of that +health module, or an AA turrets on top of the tower or bunker, you could even extend it to things like vehicle repair for the sundy garage, or discount modules for the vehicle spawns, basically implants but for buildings.
  16. Captainking42

    I like these proposed changes. I wanna go through each section with the stated goals in mind. The barrier to entry is huge in terms of cert cost and most new players (in our outfit and public platoons on emerald) get advised to spend certs on their classes and tons of other stuff first.

    I'll put the TL;DR up here:
    Permanent nodes are neat but could de-incentivize building if in the wrong place
    AI modules and Pain Spire are good, they should stay.
    EMP on Skywall absolutely must stay or it invalidates everything
    Modules are a neat idea and I'd try them.

    Lattice-based Construction OutpostsA cool idea. I know that my platoon won't be able to sit on that lattice all alert though, so we'd either build basically nothing, or a mega base. The mega-base takes time so it'd have to be a group smaller, like a squad operating something like that. There isn't time to do that if your platoon is playing for the alert win. I don't want to build a base that I know my enemy will own in 20 minutes. If we're losing the base ahead then we'd be in a hurry to tear down as much as possible before they move up the lattice. Depending on what lattice lines these are on I'd probably just build nothing most of the time. Berjess and Lowlands on Indar as well as Cobalt Geo on Amerish would be good candidates for actually building something. Berjess is good for a forward base on Scarfield or a buffer, and it's often a win condition. Lowlands is good to stage Indar Ex to Quartz (and vice versa) and is also often a win condition (Indar tends to be very close). Cobalt Geo can help prevent Scarfield cutoffs for West against South when south tries to go up Scarfield>Kwahtee, and good for north as a buffer to Cobalt Comms (an underrated defensive base imo).
    All of the hexes on the outer lattice (like Solar) I'd ignore, as I expect the outer lines to change and sacrificing them for a better position (like a counter cutoff to the Biolab) is just better when playing for the alert.

    Combat In and Around a BaseThe new structures sound cool, so do the changes to orbital, spawn tube, and modules.
    Too many people put way too much importance on the AI turrets. They need to stay. Idk where people get the idea that people will defend the base, the must play in like groups of three or something. I am NEVER bringing a platoon or squad to defend a construction base unless it's for memes, or it's a last minute win condition, even if it's mine. It's a waste of too many players.

    The purpose of the turrets and pain spires is to prevent a base from getting solo-killed. It's true that the net almost zero kills, but they aren't there to farm kills. It's for area denial. If a couple of dudes get into a base with zero ai nor pain spires right now, that's a dead base. The spawn tube can be killed in seconds by even a single player. One only needs to look at how long a base WITHOUT those things survives in the game right now. They die like nothing, and some lucky vehicle gunner is gunna wait for a minute or so to get the free certs for the construction kills. What's the point of a base if players can evaporate it at ease? The defender WANTS his base to be annoying. Once someone learns how to kill a base (kill repair modules, the spawn tube, ai modules, then just go ham on the silo) it becomes easy. I think part of the lack of knowledge is that so few of the players engage in construction (barrier to entry) and consequently don't know what they're doing. The Pain Spire can be killed with small arms fire. It is outranged by every weapon in the game lol. The point is to prevent an enemy from camping inside the base, not kill hordes of players. I've hunted bases solo for sport and glory, they're not as impregnable as reddit says.

    The additional cover objects sounds fantastic.

    Modules ReworkedSounds cool, I'd try it. Cortium drain isn't a problem for new bases, it's a problem for long term bases. So that proposition isn't really doing anything for new bases.
    Cortium bomb is an interesting change, but the damage would need to be different. Right now it's efficient since more than one can be placed at a time, and can damage multiple structures at once. Too few players run them and I'm surprised that most players still don't know that they're an essential kit for killing a base. So many people try C4 which is just not as good. Idk the best way to disseminate this knowledge but I try to tell everyone every time we attack bases.

    Finding the Fun in Attacking Construction"A defender attempts to build the most impenetrable base they can, either to protect a capture point or to create an impassable object. "Yes. I'm always happy when i see an explanation from devs that is the same thing a player would tell another player. Everyone's on the same page. With the exception of router bases, as those get thrown up ad hoc with bare minimum to try and get a router off.

    We start to diverge a bit though. If I'm building a base as a roadbloack (which I do), I'm not going to get a ton of guys to come defend it. Let's say i build one between Chimney Rock and Heyoka Chemical on Amerish. That's a great spot for a roadblock. I'd just take my squad and go backcap the base that the enemy came from instead, and bring a router from the base that's up. They either leave and come back to defend, or press on to kill the base (killing the router) but it should buy enough time for a one minute point hold and we take the actual base. The only scenarios where there are large infantry fights in player bases is the end of an alert on a win-condition base, as that's the only time it's worth it to invest the population. All other bases will virtually always have a barebones defence.

    The non-Skywall shields being two-way sounds good. removing Pain Spire is something I'd be hesitant to accept, as it probably means infils camping airpull bases. The point of a Pain Spire is to prevent enemies camping in the base, same with AI turrets. The AI turrets also prevent a single aircraft (like a lib) from plinking a whole base for free. The Skywall should absolutely keep the EMP, as it prevents people from dropping directly onto the silo and killing the whole base in a couple seconds. No EMP, and no AI means any base will die to one airdrop of half a squad in seconds. There was probably a reddit thread about some goober crying about EMP. I've watched noob leaders Steel Rain their whole squad into a base and killed all his guys on the shield. It's a reddit goof that doesn't know how to play. It's not that the shield is OP, it does what it's supposed to do: make people fight through the base instead of ending the whole thing in seconds with a drop. The EMP absolutely needs to stay.

    Barrier to Entry

    New kit is cool. Missions is neat. The main barrier is cert cost, and new players really should be prioritizing a lot of other things above construction anyway. The best cheap thing a new player can do to get into building (that is also alert-adjacent) is routers. One only needs a silo, spawn tube, routing spire, and an air term. That's it. One load of cortium is enough. Almost everyone wants to get that Orbital Strike, and it's honestly one of the last things a player should get, as an Orbital Strike (rightfully) shows up on the map and makes the base a target. The new player is virtually never prepared for inevitable attack that they've invited and then their base dies and they never get to fire the orbital. Some kind of priority should go into the tutorial for what is important on a base: longevity>mobility>defences>offences.
    I've seen some youtube tutorials. Some are okay. I wouldn't recommend any in their entirety.

    Harvesting and the ANT

    Pretty well all of this sounds cool. I like the increased radar and the mandibles becoming weapons. I do not like the cortium coming off in chunks that you drive over. The mining does not need this. It sounds like it would take a bunch of time to implement as well, and it's not a good mechanic unless you can gather wayyy more cortium than you currently can in the same timeframe. I really liked the change to the amount of cortium on a node. That was a top-tier update. I don't think this is worth messing with. Mining is what it is. The fun part of building is placing all of the stuff and makin a lil redoubt, that's the payoff for a taking a few minutes to go mine. The mining itself doesn't need to be a lil challenge, it already is. Dodging enemy vehicles roaming around can make it tricky already. If you need to break off and book it then at least you have everything you mined. If there's no time to pick up everything you just spent time mining and need to book it then that kinda sucks, and all that time was wasted. The risk for turning mining into a waste of time is not worth changing this mechanic.

    Quality of Life

    everything listed here sounds great

    Odds and Ends

    The changes to artillery sounds fine.

    I don't know what metric anyone is using for the rates of alerts firing, but no one I play with would call it "high". If anything primetime alerts still take too long to pop. They were taking agonizingly long to pop all through the Christmas break. I'd get on after work, play for four hours and get through mayyyybe one alert. I do like the mechanic to force alerts to pop, that's a great idea. We'll spend hours with our platoons just trying to make the alert start and we do put time into setting up hexes so it's a nice position to start an alert. We would ABSOLUTELY build bases for the sole purpose of popping more alerts.

    Thanks for the proposed updates! I hope to see nearly all of them and that this feedback was helpful or useful. Please fix outfit chat!

    Best,
    Captainking42, VSTD, Emerald.
    • Up x 1
  17. Captainking42

    Impulse grenades
  18. Captainking42

    have you considered airdropping to the back/forward cap?
  19. Cosomos

    I think the module/small constructible change needs a bit more elaboration on how it will impact the layout of the base.
    Module Change
    What I believe is happening is the days of cramming all your modules/spawn into a pillbox/sunderer garage are coming to an end.
    They are either removing or enlarging the size and HP of some constructibles to the scale of full constructible buildings.
    This will cause bases to be more spread out to accommodate these building and give cover to the occupants
    I speculate the new/revamped buildings maybe a one per base deal; and could possibly have weakpoints like SCU's, Shield Generators, and maybe some exotic points like a terminal for a Skywall Shield similar to the tempest siphon terminal.
    In exchange for the removal of maintenance costs, these buildings would probably have a high Cordium buy cost and maybe lose the option to pay with certs, in order to make these constructions not spammable.
    It is possible that this will be semi true with the other constructions aswell so you can't spam out fortifications while under fire.
    Comments/Suggestions
    I think this is great and it will make attacking a player base more fun and more similar to fighting standard bases.
    However the collision/hit box of constructions in general, would probably need to be adjusted to block line of sight and explosions like normal buildings do. That way any AI Turret will not shoot through walls at you, and orbitals won't nuke you while in one of these spawn rooms.
  20. RabidIBM

    Ok, I waited a few days to answer so I could collect my thoughts. Yes, this comes at the cost of not being the first to reply, I hope you guys are still reading.

    Overall concept:
    Too often an objection I have to the way this game is developed is that the wheel gets reinvented when it ought to be realigned. I feel like that is what is happening with construction. I also am concerned that too much emphasis is being placed on what non-builders want from construction, and that the people ripping the guts out of it to rework it may not have the time on the system themselves to make informed decisions. In this regard, I don't see a viable replacement to the function provided by the automated defenses. Builders have to deal with a lot of griefers. By griefers, I don't mean that they are outright cheating, but are people who play with an attitude that they are only having fun if they are causing someone else to not have fun. Automated defense protect our most creative members of the community from those who want a cheap laugh from kicking a sand castle. Automated defenses DO NOT change the outcome a of real battle fought at a player made base, they only ensure that the base lives long enough to have a real battle.

    My own 2 cents:
    I've already made numerous posts about what I would like to see changed about construction, and I won't reiterate everything here. I'll just link to posts I've made in the past, read if you want to. The TLDR is that the current system has a lot of creases which it could iron out to make a much better system without fundamental change. Further to that, if the new fundamental changes will come with just as many of their own creases, then the player response will probably be negative.

    First off, address the bugs please:
    https://forums.daybreakgames.com/ps2/index.php?threads/everywhere-is-a-no-deploy-zone.255938/
    https://forums.daybreakgames.com/ps2/index.php?threads/construction-rings-not-displaying.255795/

    Regarding "everywhere is a no-deploy zone" bug: It tells me that I am in a no-deploy zone when I am not. Given that "building is in a no-deploy zone" and "player is in a no-deploy zone" are separate functions, one is redundant. If the "player is in a no-deploy zone" feature were removed the buildings would still have their own restriction and the bug would be removed by removing the buggy feature.

    Beyond that, here are the suggestions that have come from me, including one dedicated to what to do with the much hated flail:
    https://forums.daybreakgames.com/ps2/index.php?threads/flail-overhaul.260475/
    https://forums.daybreakgames.com/ps...et-me-deny-buildings-close-to-my-silo.255936/
    https://forums.daybreakgames.com/ps2/index.php?threads/long-read-rabid-fixes-construction.256679/

    ^Tucked into the "long read" is what I would do with pain spires.

    Anyways, that's the 2 cents from a builder main. TLDR? Realign the wheel, don't reinvent it.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.