Trifaction Core (3FC)

Development areas for Allegiance core (IGC) design.
Jersy
Posts: 250
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:30 pm

Post by Jersy »

Okay, seeing the "difference core" thread somehow triggered an urge in me to share the work I have done so far on my idea of a core. Those of you who browsed by blog sometime might already know something about it, anyway, this is something like an official announcement for the masses.

As of now, I pretty much have the whole core planned (except for some tiny issues), I am somewhat confident that I am be able to create it core-wise, so it's pretty much in the stage of getting myself to actually sit down for a few hours every now and then and core my lowermost part of my back off, which, so far, is proving to be quite a challenge.

First of all, 3FC is supposed to be rather radically different from CC, no minor changes of a number here and another one there. Basic idea behind it is to provide maximum variety across all the faction/tech combinations.

Okay, here I go:

1. The first major difference, as you might have guessed from the title, is the fact that there will be only three factions. Like this, it is easier to differentiate the three, as it's quite easy to come up with three faction-unique versions of something.

2. All the factions will be economically equal - identical miner capacities, yield and stuff (so that no faction has advantage depending on game settings)

3. There will be no Shipyard (game-setting "shipyard on" button will be prolly used for toggling some special tech.)

4. Techbases will not be rock-limited (so that everyone can go their favourite tech).

5. Basic and Advanced Techbases will be two separate bases (basic being the prereq for the adv one)

6. Each techpath will have a "dogfighting ship", "basekilling ship", "capturing ship" and "support ship" - basic versions of the latter three will be researchable under garrison and will be prereq for tech-specific advanced versions.

7. Each faction will have it's own unique approach to "Luxury" stuff.

Now to give you a taste of some other key concepts and give you an idea of how is should be like:

Basic idea behind techpaths:
- SUP: Supremacy is about having more equally important ships either carrying out the same role, or capable of quickly switching from one role to another. You could say that the characteristic SUP strategy would be Galv/Figbee runs.
- EXP: Exp is about having one important ship and other, less important escorting. Characteristic EXP strategy would be a classic Bomb Run.
- TAC: Achieving victory through less-honourable, but effective strategies. Enough said.

Factions:

Iron Coalition
- General description: This faction relies heavily on boosters for transportation. Unlike the other factions, they are also dependant on boosters for normal transportation (they use special low-power high-efficiency booster for that). Those allow them to be really low-sig, while standing still, as their standart sig is lower than the other factions, but higher while moving.
- SUP: IC sup relies on the usage of fighter drones in combination with other, pilot-controlled fighters.
- EXP: IC medim class ships benefit from the fact that they don't have to use their "cruise" boosters and can go real low-sig by relying on other ships to push them.
- TAC: IC tac is straightforward tac as we know it - sneak in and attack key assets. Except they don't use signature cloaks, but "Smokescreens" - a special booster that does not increase speed, but decreases signature.
- Luxury: Instead of having luxury ships, IC has "luxury equipment".

Rixian Unity
- General description: This faction relies heavily on ripcording for transportation. Although they are familiar with booster technology, their boosters are less then effective.
- SUP: Rixian SUP relies on strong fighters and variety of ripcording technology.
- EXP: Rixian Medium-class ships are small ripcord recievers, making it easer to gather excort.
- TAC: Unlike other factions, Rixians choose to see, rather than not being seen. Their superb surveilance technology allows them to strike when enemy is busy elsewhere.
- Luxury: Rixian luxury ships have enhanced ripcord capabilites (might result in a ship becoming a small ripcord reciever, etc.)

Belters
- General description: Standart Booster/Ripcord combination used for transportation. Also, their capturing technology is based on the Nerve Gas Missile.
- SUP: They achieve space supremacy through the use of gun probes.
- EXP: Pretty much standart.
- TAC: Belter TAC is about laying down traps and waiting for the enemy to kill himself on them. Special minefields and gun probes, that's the way they do things.
- Luxury: Luxury ships are stronger/carry more equipment and stuff.

---------------------------

That's pretty much it for now. Of course, since no actual core work (aside from reducing the amount of factions to three) was done, I'm still open for suggestions.

It was also brought to my attention that some of you thing that "Galving" and "Figbeeing" is "boring" or stuff, in which case, I might re-think the basic idea of SUP techpath.

Also, if you can think of any strategy realisable within the boundaries of Allegiance given appropriate tech, let me know. especially if it would mean more difference to faction-specific EXP strategies, as I am definitely sure about TAC, and also possibly SUP, unless I'll be changing it ;-)

I have also considered IC ships having normal handling, Rix ships having their weird sideways handling, and giving belts a variation of it - an "up-down" handling, but then someone said to me that he always considered the Rix handling to be more like a nuisance, so I am also considering to make all the ships handle the same. I would really appreciate your opinion on this matter.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Image
Link: Allegiance Stuff on "Jersy's Ultimate Blog of Concentrated Nerdiness"
Current stuff-count: 97
(Latest update: March 7th, 2011, in "Jers_Core Diary")

Stationed in CZECH REPUBLIC (link)
(GMT+1)
Spunkmeyer
Posts: 2013
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:00 am
Location: Contact me regarding: CC, Slayer and AllegWiki.

Post by Spunkmeyer »

This is a very interesting idea.. I don't have time right now to read the whole thing (I'll get back to it) but I did spot a few concepts that could seriously improve the gameplay overall.

The original three factions were IC, Giga and BIOS, FWIW.
Last edited by Spunkmeyer on Tue Mar 01, 2011 6:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.


Want bigger games? Log on to play at the official game time: 9pmET/8pmCT/7pmMT/6pmPT every day of the week. Also Saturdays 8pm UTC.

Makida
Posts: 1793
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 12:04 pm
Location: Canada

Post by Makida »

This sounds interesting, but I'm a bit worried about the heavy use of drones you mention. Like having the entire sup path of one of the factions focus on fighter drones, and the Belters relying on drones for tac and so on. I think from the start, the focus of Allegiance is to have players doing the fighting and flying, with towers and other drones playing only a support role. It sounds like you want to give them more prominence in some cases, and I'm not sure that is a good idea.
WolfDeSol
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:40 pm

Post by WolfDeSol »

girlyboy wrote:QUOTE (girlyboy @ Mar 1 2011, 02:32 PM) This sounds interesting, but I'm a bit worried about the heavy use of drones you mention. Like having the entire sup path of one of the factions focus on fighter drones, and the Belters relying on drones for tac and so on. I think from the start, the focus of Allegiance is to have players doing the fighting and flying, with towers and other drones playing only a support role. It sounds like you want to give them more prominence in some cases, and I'm not sure that is a good idea.
if i recall the tcore has a lot of warnings about how too many drones can crash the server, is that still an issue?
[img]http://www.freeallegiance.org/forums/st ... erator.gif" alt="IPB Image">
When in Rome, do as the Visigoths did
<img src="http://www.freeallegiance.org/FAW/image ... dJul10.png[/img]
sfx_offender
Posts: 319
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 5:34 pm

Post by sfx_offender »

I'd say its more an issue that drone AI is retarded with terrible aim and its @#(! simple to dispatch massive numbers of them on a single fighter/interceptor load, so if you use lots of them your enemies will get super high KBs very easily if they get the oppertunity to take them on. Maybe if you perk the drones a large deal it would be worthwhile.

You can limit the number of drones available, people would crash the server by putting the miner setting up to 10, allowing 10 drones of each type out, then researching like 7 different types of drones making a total of 70 drones + whatever # of live pilots, miners, carriers, constructors/etc in that sector at a given time.

If people use sane levels of max miners (4), and the constructable types of drones are limited to say.. interceptors//hvy interceptors w/ an advanced sup (the code for the drones makes them not use missiles iirc so fighter drones have little value).. maybe even give them custom ships with like.. 4 miniguns/gats/AC cannons/whatever, extra hull, and extra full capacity (this -sounds- good, but since they have such @#(!ty aim and AI and the such it isn't much of a deal, so the drones have to be 1337 on paper to be at all worthwhile)
Jersy
Posts: 250
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:30 pm

Post by Jersy »

Spunkmeyer wrote:QUOTE (Spunkmeyer @ Mar 1 2011, 07:42 PM) The original three factions were IC, Giga and BIOS, FWIW.
Well... I didn't exactly choose the three factions to be left... It was a result of a proces of trial and error in deleting factions from zone_core. Deleting IC or Belts caused my server to fail to load the core, and deleting Rix caused my server to crash upon connecting to it :-D
girlyboy wrote:QUOTE (girlyboy @ Mar 1 2011, 08:32 PM) This sounds interesting, but I'm a bit worried about the heavy use of drones you mention. Like having the entire sup path of one of the factions focus on fighter drones, and the Belters relying on drones for tac and so on. I think from the start, the focus of Allegiance is to have players doing the fighting and flying, with towers and other drones playing only a support role. It sounds like you want to give them more prominence in some cases, and I'm not sure that is a good idea.
IC SUP:
I was thinking like one set of drones for basic sup, another one automatically with adv sup, and AB drones researchable under adv sup. All three of them having a special station (Fighter Drone Control Station / AB Drone Control Station) as a prereq. It's really supposed to be only a support thing, not actually THE main offensive force. Good maybe for harassing miners/cons/bases, something like that.

Belt TAC:
The thing is, towers and minefields will be deployed primarily by pilots. This is supposed to change the gameplay from "sneak to the mining sector, rush the miner, and kill it" to "anticipate where the miner will be and lay down some minefields and turrets to kill it" - at least thats the basic idea. There is also some fun to be had with turrets that shoot only the selected target and turrets that simply shoots anything in range, also long-duration / low damage vs. short-duration / high damage variations and stuff. It is yet to be decided if the traps will be supposed to do all the job, or just soften up the target for easy kill by the Belt SF itself (so that it has to stay nearby it's traps and wait until the unsuspecting prey triggers them).

(For example, I had the idea that Belt SF would drop an Anti-Util Tower by a He3 rock. That tower however, would attack any target - therefore, the enemy could negate it by sending a scout or something to "sweep" the area. The tower would shoot it, but due to lower effectiveness against non-util targets, it would use up all it's ammo and become useless.)
sfx_offender wrote:QUOTE (sfx_offender @ Mar 1 2011, 10:17 PM) I'd say its more an issue that drone AI is retarded with terrible aim and its @#(! simple to dispatch massive numbers of them on a single fighter/interceptor load, so if you use lots of them your enemies will get super high KBs very easily if they get the oppertunity to take them on. Maybe if you perk the drones a large deal it would be worthwhile.

You can limit the number of drones available, people would crash the server by putting the miner setting up to 10, allowing 10 drones of each type out, then researching like 7 different types of drones making a total of 70 drones + whatever # of live pilots, miners, carriers, constructors/etc in that sector at a given time.

If people use sane levels of max miners (4), and the constructable types of drones are limited to say.. interceptors//hvy interceptors w/ an advanced sup (the code for the drones makes them not use missiles iirc so fighter drones have little value).. maybe even give them custom ships with like.. 4 miniguns/gats/AC cannons/whatever, extra hull, and extra full capacity (this -sounds- good, but since they have such @#(!ty aim and AI and the such it isn't much of a deal, so the drones have to be 1337 on paper to be at all worthwhile)
Yea, they need to have energy weapons (drones can't reload) and stuff (no boosters, no cloak, no missiles, no chaff...)... Aiming issues can be compensated... AOE, higher damage... But like I said, they are meant to be "fire-support" only, not the main battleforce (on standart settings, it would mean maximum of 12 combat drones, provided only one side goes IC sup, on maximum settings, it would be 30 - counting both fighter drones and AB drones).
Last edited by Jersy on Wed Mar 02, 2011 7:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Image
Link: Allegiance Stuff on "Jersy's Ultimate Blog of Concentrated Nerdiness"
Current stuff-count: 97
(Latest update: March 7th, 2011, in "Jers_Core Diary")

Stationed in CZECH REPUBLIC (link)
(GMT+1)
Jersy
Posts: 250
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:30 pm

Post by Jersy »

Okay, I'll also give you an early draft of the final ships for each faction/tech combination (it's the first complete collection of all the ships I arrived to, so of course, it is not in any way final):

RIX General:
- Scout
- Lxy Scout
- Bomber - researchable under garr - is SR (no luxury version)
- Troop Transport - researchable under garr - is SR (no luxury version)
- Deployer (Think "mini freighter") - researchable under garr - is SR (no luxury version)


RIX EXP
- Tele interceptor: Can rip to large tele recievers, low-range booster.
- Lxy tele int: Can rip to SR
- Heavy Bomber: Is SR
- Lxy hvy bbr: (either greater energy capacity, or large teleport reciever)
- Heavy Troop Transport: Is SR
- Lxy HTT: (either greater energy capacity, or large teleport reciever)
- Manned Turret: Can rip to large tele recievers, otherwise static and strong defensive structure (think Guardian)
- Lxy Turret: Faster rip time

RIX SUP (strong fighters type)
- Fighter
- Lxy Fighter: Is SR
- AB Fighter: Can rip to SR
- Lxy AB Fighter: Is SR
- Commando Transport: Can rip to SR
- Lxy CT: Is SR
- Dropship: Medium-class ship, is highly efficient SR

RIX TAC (surveilance type)
- Strike Fighter: No cloak, high speed,
- Lxy Strike Fighter: Faster rip time
- Strike Bomber: No cloak, high speed
- Lxy Strike bbr: Faster rip time
- Strike Transport: No cloak, high speed
- Lxy Strike Transport: Faster rip time
- Sentry: Medium class ship with large scan range, is SR
- Lxy Sentry: Has more energy

Belt General
- Scout
- Lxy Scout (heavier armor, larger payload...)
- Bomber - researchable under garr (no luxury version)
- Nervegasser - uses Nerve Gas Missile - researchable under garr (no luxury version)
- Deployer - researchable under garr (no luxury version)

Belt EXP
- Missile Interceptor
- Lxy Missile Interceptor (heavier armor, larger payload...)
- Heavy Bomber
- Lxy hvy bbr (heavier armor, larger payload...)
- Heavy Nervegasser: Uses Nerve Gas Missile
- Lxy HNG (heavier armor, larger payload...)
- Missile Ship (think "gunship" but relying on missiles)
- Lxy MissShip (heavier armor, larger payload...)

Belt SUP (turret deployment type)
- Fighter
- Lxy Fighter (heavier armor, larger payload...)
- AB Fighter
- Lxy AB Fighter (heavier armor, larger payload...)
- NG Fighter
- Lxy NG Fighter (heavier armor, larger payload...)
- Dropship: Medium-class, SR (lower efficiency than RIX version), can mount missiles
- Lxy Dropship (more energy, heavier armor, larger payload...)

Belt TAC (Trap-layer type)
- Trap Fighter: Has SigCloak, Weak on-board armament, drops minefields and turrets
- Lxy Trap Fighter (heavier armor, larger payload...)
- Saboteur: Drops "Demolition Charges" - One-shot high-damage short-range AB turrets with long activation time. Saboteur itself can approach the base virtually invisible, but will be out of energy by the time it drops the charge. All to give defenders enough time to launch and destroy the charges, but not too much time, to still make it challenging.
- Lxy Sabot (enhanced cloakage, more armor...)
- Stealth Nervegasser: Like stealth bomber, but fires NG missiles
- Lxy SNG (enhanced cloakage, more armor, larger payload...)
- Stealth Deployer: Deployer with Cloak
- Lxy Stealth Deployer (enhanced cloakage, more armor, larger payload...)

IC General

- Scout
- Bomber - researchable under garr
- Troop Transport - researchable under garr
- Deployer - researchable under garr

IC EXP
- Interceptor
- Heavy Bomber
- Heavy Troop Transport
- Gunship

IC SUP (fighter-drone type)
- Fighter
- AB Fighter
- Commando Transport
- Dropship: Lower rip efficiency than RIX dropship, has turrets

IC TAC (hunter type)
- Stealth Fighter: Uses "Smokescreen" "booster" instead of Cloak
- Stealth Bomber: Uses "Smokescreen" "booster" instead of Cloak
- Ninja Transport: Uses "Smokescreen" "booster" instead of Cloak
- Stealth Gunship: Uses "Smokescreen" "booster" instead of Cloak

--------------------------------

Note: "Dogfighting" ships all have two tiers - basic and advanced (Scout / Adv Scout, Lxy Scout / Lxy Adv Scout, Interceptor / Heavy Interceptor, ...).
Last edited by Jersy on Wed Mar 02, 2011 8:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Image
Link: Allegiance Stuff on "Jersy's Ultimate Blog of Concentrated Nerdiness"
Current stuff-count: 97
(Latest update: March 7th, 2011, in "Jers_Core Diary")

Stationed in CZECH REPUBLIC (link)
(GMT+1)
Lutra
Posts: 56
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 5:42 pm

Post by Lutra »

I like this core... reminds me of another small thing I was working on, Kwing would know :)
I was thinking of disposing of the base factions entirely, and giving only slightly modified ships. I agree with many of the quirks developed here, and if you wish, we might be able to team up
Image Lutra Also known as Lupara Image
Jersy
Posts: 250
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:30 pm

Post by Jersy »

Thanks for the offer, see the PM I sent you ;-)

--------------------------

Once again, I ask the rest of you, if you have anything to say on the following things, please do:

1. Do you consider Galving/Figbeeing a good part of Allegiance gameplay? If no, is there anything you can imagine it can be replaced with?

2. Would you rather have all factions have "X axis turning = Y axis turning" handling, or would you prefer "Faction 1: X=Y; Faction 2: X>Y; Faction 3: X<Y"?

3. Are there any current strategies or gameplay features you speciffically like / don't like?

4. Are there any currently non-existant strategies or gameplay features you would speciffically like / don't like to appear in this core?

(however, don't feel restricted and share any other relevant thoughts you might have (-; )
Last edited by Jersy on Fri Mar 04, 2011 1:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Image
Link: Allegiance Stuff on "Jersy's Ultimate Blog of Concentrated Nerdiness"
Current stuff-count: 97
(Latest update: March 7th, 2011, in "Jers_Core Diary")

Stationed in CZECH REPUBLIC (link)
(GMT+1)
DasSmiter
Posts: 3820
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 7:00 am
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma

Post by DasSmiter »

Personally I think that x=y handling is the way to go
ImageImageImage
Get over yourselves, don't try to win arguments on the internet where the option of a punch in the mouth is unavailable
"It is not that I cannot create anything good, but that I will not." And to prove this, he created the peacock.
Post Reply