Turrets on bases

[ImANewbie]

I don't think balance issues will be a problem with this, instead I think how players use it will be a problem. I've noticed an annoying habit of noobs and voobs hopping on your turret even if you tell them not to cause your hvy scout is only probing. Now imagine if they could hop on base turrets, they would stay there the whole game being extremely useless to the team especially if the base is in some back sector which the enemy is very unlikely to attack.

[asheron2k]

QUOTE (Technical Wonder @ Jan 1 2008, 07:54 PM) I hate when people try to argue against new features by bringing up balance issues. This is the same as the sector overload business..

I say, add the functionality (if you feel so inclined youngmoose, or can get someone to add it), make it optional and let the core designers worry about balancing it (or if they eve want to make use of the new features!).

Um... Orion
No one objecting to it has used that as their reason
if you are referring to me... I was simply bringing old conclusions into the discussion(I assumed that was obvious)

[Bacon_00]

QUOTE (asheron2k @ Jan 1 2008, 07:52 PM) Um... Orion
No one objecting to it has used that as their reason
if you are referring to me... I was simply bringing old conclusions into the discussion(I assumed that was obvious)

Errr, ash, people are definitely using the "it would unbalance things" excuse to not implement it. I don't think anybody used those specific words, but still... this has been brought up before, and every single time, that excuse is used.

Personally I think it'd be a really cool addition. Nothing says they'd have to be massively powerful turrets with long range. Make em short range (500m or so) and give them low damage. And who says that they *have* to have unlimited ammo? Make them limited... why wouldn't you?

[WhiskeyGhost]

1k range turret, low powered, that uses energy, give bases energy. 1k range isn't enough to stop bombers firing at it, due to speed increasing missile range, energy usage would mean you could only fire a short time then you fire much slower as energy regenerates.

Even at 1k range, all it does is make people stay out at maximum galve range. Thats also not including that the turret could do as little as gat 1 damage when fired.

also @ Chaotic Bunny : Those voobs/newbs don't have the attention span to do that. I've changed ships to push em off my turrets before, and watched them merrily launch in another ship 3 seconds later (usually a basic fig or some nonsense, while team has Hvy ints), and proceed to fly to (rather then ripcord) to a forward teleport.

[madpeople]

QUOTE (madpeople @ Jan 1 2008, 02:24 PM) that's up to the core dev.

my implementation is basically the same as building towers next to the base (actually slightly less effective probably)

so i ask you, how do you sb a base with towers built next to it?

QUOTE (TheBored @ Jan 1 2008, 06:30 PM) Get a SF to do a suicide mission on the towers, then bomb.

TB

it was a rhetorical question in response to this:

QUOTE (ShadowMoses @ Dec 31 2007, 02:23 PM) How to SB?.. unless the turrets going to have their own base in the way

my point was that my implementation was almost exactly the same as building towers next to the base, so my response to the above question was, "its the same way as you deal with towers built next to the base"
...

QUOTE (Technical Wonder @ Jan 2 2008, 01:54 AM) I hate when people try to argue against new features by bringing up balance issues. This is the same as the sector overload business..

I say, add the functionality (if you feel so inclined youngmoose, or can get someone to add it), make it optional and let the core designers worry about balancing it (or if they eve want to make use of the new features!).

its impressive how people still don't know this in these forums. of course, we still have to come up with an implementation that is balanceable. [turrets that use the base's hull and have infinite ammo with only what they shoot variable probably can't be balanced and probably wouldn't get used]

QUOTE (ChaoticBunny @ Jan 2 2008, 03:14 AM) I don't think balance issues will be a problem with this, instead I think how players use it will be a problem. I've noticed an annoying habit of noobs and voobs hopping on your turret even if you tell them not to cause your hvy scout is only probing. Now imagine if they could hop on base turrets, they would stay there the whole game being extremely useless to the team especially if the base is in some back sector which the enemy is very unlikely to attack.

that is a good point, we would need to give coms a power to boot people off a base's turret (perhaps for a certain amount of time?)

QUOTE (Bacon @ Jan 2 2008, 04:10 AM) Errr, ash, people are definitely using the "it would unbalance things" excuse to not implement it. I don't think anybody used those specific words, but still... this has been brought up before, and every single time, that excuse is used.

trueQUOTE Personally I think it'd be a really cool addition. Nothing says they'd have to be massively powerful turrets with long range. Make em short range (500m or so) and give them low damage. And who says that they *have* to have unlimited ammo? Make them limited... why wouldn't you?[/quote]
leave that to the core devs


for this, i will use red for a core change[for a core dev to worry about] and green for a code change

QUOTE (WhiskeyGhost @ Jan 2 2008, 04:54 AM) 1k range turret, low powered, that uses energy, give bases energy. 1k range isn't enough to stop bombers firing at it, due to speed increasing missile range, energy usage would mean you could only fire a short time then you fire much slower as energy regenerates.

Even at 1k range, all it does is make people stay out at maximum galve range. Thats also not including that the turret could do as little as gat 1 damage when fired.

energy based is a good idea [though they don't have to be]

and re: infinite ammo, they could have infinite ammo, but still use clips, so you get occasional reloads.

[Youngmoose]

Thank you Tech, All I wanted to know is the difficulty to code it up. 80 hours for the dev team. The question is now, does the community want to use dev team resources to do this? I have 50 posts now. Maybe I should start a poll.

[Avalanche]

QUOTE (Youngmoose @ Jan 2 2008, 03:56 PM) The question is now, does the community want to use dev team resources to do this?

Considering that we are not paid to work on Allegiance I somehow find this attitude a little... Unsettling. /huh.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":huh:" border="0" alt="huh.gif" />

[Dogbones]

Lol. We are a limited resource and while what we work on can be swayed (heavily at times) by the community what we end up working on (in our spare time and for no charge) is ultimately our choice. But that said. People have asked us to do things and we have done them. However, to date, we have not had a request that was deemed large enough effort wise for the community to have to pose this question.
QUOTE The question is now, does the community want to use dev team resources to do this?[/quote]

[Kltplzyxm]

Debating the gameplay aspects are important as they help set the priority of the feature. I can see multiple issues with baseturrets beyond what's already been stated:

1. Smart gunners will shoot ABs and XRMs fired from a bbr, nullifying their effectiveness unless there are multiple attackers. Get a couple of lxy scouts sitting around a giga base and you will be virtually unstoppable.
2. Gunners with high KB will hog these turrets and whore everything in sight.

These two issues make base turrets highly questionable. Toss on the fact that we basically have such concepts available currently:
* Build a tower next to your base.
* Guardians
* and to a certain extent, gunships

Guardians are the best example of having something like base turrets. Personally, I hate them and I think they ruin gameplay by being such cheese. There are bigger fish to fry.

[Orion]

moose, I don't think the dev team itself would focus on something like this; seems more like a side project that any one person (who has the necessary time, knowledge & initiative) to get done. I have no idea what would be involved. Somehow you'd need to configure it so that turrets could be entered from base, manage either energy/ammo, make it configurable in ICE (how many turrets for what kind of base), etc.