Free Allegiance Forums

Clay_Pigeon wrote:QUOTE (Clay_Pigeon @ Aug 2 2011, 10:28 PM) Ok, I'll bite. Fill me with your knowledge. How else can a one-sided aleph res be used.

scroll up, I gave some examples already.

I can think of a funny one too: 'int cleaner' = kill all the interceptors (med hull ships) in the sector.
but you'll say it's anti-camp.

I also like the 'shield base cleaner' = "disrupt all station shields in the sector" combined with a timed TT (not HTT) run. now that's teamwork.

and don't forget that even if it's one-sided, it's still a rez so it affects everything whatever the team/ally side ('int cleaner' will kill all ints in the sector whatever their team for instance. actually to be precise, 'int cleaner' will kill all med hull unshielded ships (mostly ints i think since other med hull ships usually have shields).

but how would any of those things be conducive to good (or better) gameplay?

KGJV wrote:QUOTE (KGJV @ Aug 2 2011, 01:55 PM) scroll up, I gave some examples already.

I can think of a funny one too: 'int cleaner' = kill all the interceptors (med hull ships) in the sector.
but you'll say it's anti-camp.

I also like the 'shield base cleaner' = "disrupt all station shields in the sector" combined with a timed TT (not HTT) run. now that's teamwork.

and don't forget that even if it's one-sided, it's still a rez so it affects everything whatever the team/ally side ('int cleaner' will kill all ints in the sector whatever their team for instance. actually to be precise, 'int cleaner' will kill all med hull unshielded ships (mostly ints i think since other med hull ships usually have shields).

In these cases you're talking about new special typed aleph reses that are more like HoD type weapons, with specific targets. In such instances you're going even farther in the direction of what Clay Pigeon is saying in terms of trading teamwork and player actions for a tech.

Also talking about TTs that can't mount EMP missiles means you are ignoring basic allegiance gameplay. TTs have no use in all cores outside XC (where they can mount EMP missiles), in the 550 hours I have spent playing this game I have never seen a TT used, because they are useless. You guys need to be realistic about what players can do, and how gameplay works. The next updated CC core really needs to implement the XC changes on TTs, or remove TTs entirely and just add extra cost to the HTT; leaving things the way they are is simply poor design.

As far as 1 sided aleph reses go, again, it would be a game ending tech to break a turtling team. Players will be divided on if that is good for gameplay or not, but that would be it's use.

NightRychune wrote:QUOTE (NightRychune @ Aug 2 2011, 02:19 PM) but how would any of those things be conducive to good (or better) gameplay?

I hate to agree with Night, as he's a meglomaniac @#$%@#, but his point is right on.

KGJV wrote:QUOTE (KGJV @ Aug 2 2011, 03:20 PM) and really, if you find that camping an aleph is a nice teamwork thing and it makes the game 'human' than we don't like the same game at all. Camping alephs is one of the worst thing of this game.

I'm gonna derail a bit, but QFT.

I know what Clay is saying, you need to get together to camp an aleph effectively and that is team work of a sort. But having a binary chokepoint is such a piss-poor mechanic: if it's camped, you are $#@!ed. If it's not camped, you're home-free. It's not like it results in epic back and forth battles.

Onion said something along the lines of "Allegiance without alephs is not Allegiance" in the FS thread. So wrong... Allegiance without alephs would be far more excellent.

In fact the only thing stopping us from doing so is lack of an alternative to the minimap mechanism and potential lag big games - but big games don't exist anymore.

On another note, you guys are being too argumentative I think. I can't see an immediate workable application for selective targeting, but it's a novel idea and I don't think there is any reason to dismiss it outright as if it's something Alien51 said.

I'd rather that team gatherings were central around carriers, capital ships, and other supports, not static choke points.
I think that way you'd have more fleet clashes (fun), and less aleph prox plowing (boring)

In large sector fleet clashes it would be a fight to see who can destroy the enemy support ship(s) and defend their own. It wouldn't drag on as long as DM sectors, and camping would be non-existent.
The supports would be the primary pod pickup and teliport receivers that would keep the fleet in action for as long as the ship is alive.


too many game mechanics would need to change, this would also need some code changes, and a core built around the idea of large sector maps.

Precisely.

remove prox, caltrops, and sc towers from the game

problem solved

Wait, wasn't there some internal thing that was never used that's supposed to eat things that are too close to the aleph? Could that apply to mines and towers?

I swear I saw it quoted somewhere... some kind of 'aleph probe kill radius'