Page 1 of 2

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2007 1:24 am
by Andon
I was wondering why starbases don't have any turrets. Any base in modern times have some form of self-defense. So why don't these futuristic ones have any?

I don't know how much coding this would involve but it would be a pretty realistic thing, and it would prevent camping. Sure you wouldn't be able to launch fighters, but you'd be able to shoot them with the turrets. Don't know about weapons or how it would work, but it would be pretty interesting at least. Perhaps have upgrades in the proper base's research thing. Outposts would follow the Garrison's research. Perhaps have the turrets upgradeable so they can be anti-capitol ship as well.

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2007 2:14 am
by apathos
This has been discussed previously--base turrets are too much of a gameplay change in the eyes of many. It prevents camping as a viable strategy, and the turrets are impossible to be destroyed as long as the base lives.

I suppose it could be done and balanced fairly well with slow rotation rates and slow fire rates or something. But then that turret-er would be better off defending in a ship. So you've defeated the purpose.

So, balance them and no one will use them; make them excellent for defense and games will last 2x longer (or more), so everyone will hate them and the guy who codes it.

I don't think you'll find a lot of supporters, but I've been wrong before.

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2007 2:40 am
by TheBored
Nope, perfectly correct Apathos. Been discussed before, been denied 10+ times now.

TB

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2007 2:58 am
by Camaro
just slip a little code in that only members of PK can man the turrets. /biggrin.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":biggrin:" border="0" alt="biggrin.gif" />

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2007 2:59 am
by Adaven
Now, if destroyable sub-systems are ever coded in, then you could make the turrets powerful but destroyable, and therefore balanceable.

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2007 4:14 am
by Paradigm2
Adding to what Adaven said, think of Artillery in BF2

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2007 3:15 pm
by Andon
Alright, makes sense as to why there are none.

One way of balancing it may be to have only a limited number, like perhaps two on garrisons and one on any other station. This would prevent the turrets from killing everything (Only able to hit two sides at once on garrisons and one side on any other)

An idea: Perhaps have the 'Turret' a special ship. No movement on it, but the fire of a turret and movement of one. This would make it destroyable. Only problem would be launching other ships from the station, but I think that that could be changed somehow. Perhaps have it have a booster and a very small amount of fuel to move it out of the way?

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 10:25 am
by AaronMoore
Andon, what you are suggesting sounds like the small turret ship of GT:
Guardian - A slow mobile manned turret(AC/SC/Lt). Requires Research,Palisade.
http://www.allegacademy.org/factions/gatar...ederation.shtml

I have never seen this used though, do you guys think we could make these more common on any way? perhaps provide equivilants in other factions? or make them cheaper or easier to get?

That would be cool IMHO /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 11:04 am
by Andon
That would be pretty handy. I'm going to have to play a game as GT to see how well it works.

And something like that would provide a good compromise to the problems - It's a turret, but it is also destructable. Maybe up the armor on it a bit so that it is not too easy to destory

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 6:03 pm
by Dex_Solo
I used the Guardian as commander on small <16ppl (noob) games against bomber runs. It was impossible for the bomber to kill a base - But this bomber had only 1-2 nanite scouts max. I tried to use Guardians vs Capships too. But without shields you are too easy to kill. And you are $#@!ing slow when you have no fuel for the boosters left.