|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
145
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 16:50:00 -
[1] - Quote
In thinking about the new changes to PC biomass sales, an idea came to mind this morning that might encourage more dynamic battles. All with the power of greed.
Biomass Harvesters are installations that are dropped from space onto a map much like other 'deployed' installations. At the moment, their placements are random until such time when teams are given control of their placement. The simple function that a harvester serves is to absorb clone biomass from fallen mercenaries in a given radius from the collection node (45 to 60 meters). Harvesters are hack-able by either team and the team which holds control over that node at the conclusion of the match receives a large isk bonus to all biomass collected by that particular node during the battle.
To clarify, not all nodes are valuable to a team. Players must have a battlefield awareness to pick out which major kill spots are overlapping with a particular harvester's range. A harvester located near an objective may be more enticing to hold due to the fact that many clones died trying to capture that point. However, it's important to note that clones are harvested equally by the harvester regardless of team control over the collector node. This means nodes themselves can become primary kill spots as teams fight for control over the nodes increasing the value they hold to the team which controls that point at the end of the match.
Harvesters can also be destroyed, in turn negating any collection that node made during the match. These installations have a similar shield/health composite to CRUs.
Biomass Harvesters can have an application in any game mode. With ambush especially, harvesters would add a degree of complexity to matches as teams try to defend particular regions.
|
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
145
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 17:01:00 -
[2] - Quote
Jadu Wen wrote:Oh that's really cool! I like to imagine the possibilities that teams in planetary conquest might come up with for deploying harvesters when a battle commander has the ability to pick deploy spots.
I do have a question. What happens when node collection areas overlap?
Well, in that scenario the biomass is divided equally between nodes. So if a clone dies in a the center of a three way vein diagram of death, the clone's biomass is separated equally in three parts the to respective nodes. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
145
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 17:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
The mechanic of overlapping nodes offers the benefit of a wider collection potential, however it comes with the risk of having to be able to defend multiple points from enemy incursion. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
146
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 17:39:00 -
[4] - Quote
In my head I was imagining a Dyson sphere with stabilizing legs to anchor it to the ground. Additionally, I was thinking that once it was either hacked or called it by a particular team, the only way to hack the sphere for the opposing side would be to harvest yourself to the sphere, terminating your clone. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
146
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 17:49:00 -
[5] - Quote
Jadu Wen wrote:Jadek Menaheim wrote:In my head I was imagining a Dyson sphere with stabilizing legs to anchor it to the ground. Additionally, I was thinking that once it was either hacked or called it by a particular team, the only way to hack the sphere for the opposing side would be to harvest yourself to the sphere, terminating your clone. Suiciding yourself to make a hack?! Damn, that's wicked. I really like that idea, however I have feeling it won't go over well at all with the KDR Bros. Still, are terminal going to be exposed for snipers to pick off approaching players, regardless it the end goal is death of the clone?
Well if shield bubbles were going to be a thing in this game I would opt for leaving the terminals exposed. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
146
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 18:10:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jadu Wen wrote:Alrighty, I can work with the shield bubble idea. Jadek Menaheim wrote:The sacrificial clone would be further rewarded at the end of the match if the friendly team held onto that node in which the player processes themselves to capture. I am glad you added in that bit about the additional reward. I wonder if it should be a percentage of the biomass price of all clones collected by that harvester.
I think the system should work like this. The first sacrificial clone should take a 15% cut of all clones biomassed by the harvester (again pending that this player's team hold's the harvester at the end of the match). If another player has to harvest themselves to change ownership of the harvester, both players now share a 7.5% cut of biomass sales. Each further player sacrifice reduces the biomass sacrifice bonus by half. This system encourages more end of match offensives on collection nodes in order to keep individual player bonuses high. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
146
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 18:19:00 -
[7] - Quote
Jadu Wen wrote:This would also be a cool look for the sphere.
YES! I definitely agree. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
146
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 18:39:00 -
[8] - Quote
MySpaceTom wrote:Jadek Menaheim wrote:In my head I was imagining a Dyson sphere with stabilizing legs to anchor it to the ground. Additionally, I was thinking that once it was either hacked or called in by a particular team, the only way to hack the sphere for the opposing side would be to harvest yourself to the sphere, terminating your clone. The sacrificial clone would be further rewarded at the end of the match if the friendly team held onto that node in which the player processes themselves to capture. Ouch, that's some major risk vs. reward right there. I wouldn't want to risk having to terminate a protosuit fit in order to clear the area around a harvester. However, a part of me thinks that's what it might take if you're rushing a heavy siege of that point. The big thing I am wondering is how much of a payout a heavily stocked harvester would grant.
Well, going by the biomass numbers CCP FoxFour talked about. A single biomassed clone would run 160,000 isk. If say 35 clones died within a harvester's collection zone you are 5.6 million isk in biomass sales. The cut a sacrificing clone would take is 15% of that which amounts to 840,000 isk. Yet, there's no guarantee that you'll be the only clone to sacrifice themselves from your team, unless you are on a team that designates you as the point man to die for the Dyson sphere. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
147
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 20:49:00 -
[9] - Quote
Jadu Wen wrote:Seems like that would favor clever scouts who speedily sneak up and change the alignment of the sphere last second before a match ends. Sounds fine to me. Well, in order for it to favor scouts and low ehp suits, the hacking mechanic would have to work where hack time depends on current shield and health strength. Attaching to the harvester sphere doesn't immediately kill the sacrificing player. What does occur is the sphere deconstrcts the player at a constant rate of 60 hp/sec. A player in a deconstruction phase cannot be 'killed' technically by small arms, as such fire only speeds up their deconstruction process. This includes headshots.The only way to prevent a player from successfully changing control of a harvester is to forceably dislodge their husk from the terminal via a one hit kill consussive explosion. This can be done with remote explosives, grenades, and forge guns for example. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
147
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 21:40:00 -
[10] - Quote
MySpaceTom wrote:A problem I see it stupid militia fit blueberries eating up clone reinforcements by constantly throwing themselves at the sphere.
I guess you could see that as a problem. It may speed up match times. However, I don't see it as being a widespread problem as players would utterly destroy their KDR by constantly sacrificing themselves. And they'd hardly get any sacrifice bonus for their efforts.
|
|
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
148
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 22:12:00 -
[11] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:MySpaceTom wrote:A problem I see it stupid militia fit blueberries eating up clone reinforcements by constantly throwing themselves at the sphere. You can make it work in a way where , once the harvester excepts your DNA , so to speak , you can't "hack it" anymore , to prevent any double dipping. You have already registered your DNA , so to speak , so your entry has been excepted into the database. One time and that's it. And the planetary conquest issue would be good for starters to test and see how players react to this. Then if it goes over they can move it to the factional warfare because like the clones this tec has to spread through out the system. This will make it all the more important too because now there is something at stake and a personal interest as well. As long as the "CUT" is split among the collective.
That adds an interesting bit of strategy to the mix. I know it would certainly make the end of match moments more intense. Players would have to weigh the choices of 1.) do I use a suit to get an additional cut of the harvest, 2.) when do I go about harvesting myself if I only have one opportunity to do so.
In consideration of choice two, if you expend yourself too early in the match you may run the risk of being unable to counter hack the sphere it the opposing team mounts a zerg rush of the spheres in the final moments of the match. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
151
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 02:59:00 -
[12] - Quote
DiGreatDestroyer wrote:MySpaceTom wrote:A problem I see it stupid militia fit blueberries eating up clone reinforcements by constantly throwing themselves at the sphere. I can alredy see the feed: "daaoaod suicides... x 50" How are we gonna prevent people from suiciding to make the thing more valuable? I think suicides shouldnt count towards the biomass rewards
On the contrary, I definitely think suiciding in public areas should count toward the biomass value of the harvester. Technically, hacking the harvester is suicide, however leaving the opportunity for players to chose the location and time of death in the context of adding value to harvester only opens up new ways of thinking about the war economy and value of life in the New Eden universe.
When you go into a battle you still have the ability to choose warpoint-centric options which net you additional experience in matches. On the other hand, you have the choice to boost your bank by securing control of biomass harvesters and adding to their value with your own body (Remember: this action of suicide to the harvester does not net warpoints, and in turn faster skill progression). Sometimes the goals associated with these choices overlap and sometimes they don't. The key point is the choice exists. I see novel potential here. Possibility to warp a lot of the conventions of win states we've come to understand in many first person shooters.
Sure it may subvert public contracts and faction warfare making their outcomes far more volatile. However, if you are concerned with the behavior of the other players on your team, go ahead and join or start a corporation that shares your ideals.
|
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
151
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 03:21:00 -
[13] - Quote
Hold on, we already clarified that you can only sacrifice your clone one time per harvester. As a harvester is reconstituting you it reads your neural network and rejects further hack attempts from your bodies. This introduces strategic choices as to when and if you should harvest yourself to maintain control of nodes against enemy attempts during various points in battle.
|
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
151
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 06:30:00 -
[14] - Quote
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote:You also have to take the clone limit to account. The harvester doesn't grant the limit a stay , if I'm correct , it just recycles the clones. So I can't see people running in droves to sacrifice themselves , because there is still a team limit and if you don't win the game then it doesn't matter. So in introducing this new tec , there must be lessons , so to say so that people won't misunderstand this new tec and what their goals should be in accordance. But with this being said the limit should be increased by ten to compensate for the adjustment. Ten should be enough for a whole game duration.
Right, a suicide harvest hack does lower the clone counter, but that clones value is deposited into the machine. Raising the normal clone counter by a marginal amount for public and faction warfare matches is fine.
An extension to the harvester idea came up that I'd like to run by everyone. What if it was possible to siphon off clone biomass into LAV/Dropship transport container modules? These would be used to refill Biomass levels in CRUs, raising clones counts by very small levels per successful transport. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
152
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 13:19:00 -
[15] - Quote
MySpaceTom wrote:So how many clones are we talking about for this siphoned transport container business? I was thinking 4 (small) and 8 (large container) clones per transport. The powergrid requirement of the large container would relegate it to being used on a logistics based tank for example.
|
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
152
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 16:39:00 -
[16] - Quote
This is an illustration on Border Gulch Skirmish of what the range of a harvester looks like. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
152
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 17:19:00 -
[17] - Quote
That makes sense. I guess I glossed over the whole logic behind the extraction of harvesters when hammering out these other details.
In terms of lore, the biomass could be transported instantly once collected via localized wormholes to the MCC or a space platform. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
152
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 17:26:00 -
[18] - Quote
Alright, I'm going to change the OP to reflect this new discussion. I like where it's developing. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
152
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 17:51:00 -
[19] - Quote
Krom Ganesh wrote:Jadek Menaheim wrote:Snip. As cool as this sounds, I don't think it makes sense. Why does this machine arbitrarily decide to payout after one team has retreated/been killed off? Wouldn't the surviving team "rehack" it after the enemies have been defeated and thus collect the end match reward? I think it would make more sense if it gave the controlling team the ISK as it collected each body. In other words, the machine collected the remains as they appeared and was wired to give the controlling team a "recycling refund" and hacking it would be changing where the money was being routed to. I don't think it's entirely realistic to have recycled cloned refuned in real time. Instead, I think it would work better if clones are sent to the MCC as the are much closer to the battlefield for short range uplink tethers to 'feasibly' work. Here on the MCC they exist a bonus isk bank that is rewarded to the victor because they did not lose their ship. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
152
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 18:10:00 -
[20] - Quote
Krom Ganesh wrote:Jadek Menaheim wrote: I don't think it's entirely realistic to have recycled cloned refuned in real time. Instead, I think it would work better if clones are sent to the MCC as the are much closer to the battlefield for short range uplink tethers to 'feasibly' work. Here on the MCC they exist a bonus isk bank that is rewarded to the victor because they did not lose their ship.
But the biomass can't be sent to the MCC. Or at least not if tankers are going to be able to run biomass from the harvester to the CRUs. Also, it's realistic for there to be an instant refund because the machine is paying you for what the biomass will be worth. I think of the harvester as a recycling center for the workers who are normally at the areas we fight at. Considering that, think of how real world recycling works. If I take a bag of glass bottles to a recycling center, they pay me for the bottles then and there. They then take those bottles and recycle it later.
I made a change to the OP which tries to address that point.
Jadek Menaheim wrote:Normally biomass will be transported to the MCC, however when a vehicle or foot solider is in range with the correct transport module the Harvester's protocols change and divert incomming biomass to that player. The harvester does not hold reverse biomass, so a player must wait near the harvester while soliders are dying within its range.
As for the payment upfront recycling, the problem I have with it is the biomass can't be transported much further than the distance of drop uplinks. That means the biomass is going to generally stay near by the contested region or district. In that case it would make more sense for the victor of the battle to be able to transport to those recycled reverses off planet to Genolution. |
|
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
153
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 21:11:00 -
[21] - Quote
The additional 10 clone carrying capacity could be a skill tree investment benefit. You receive +2 clones to overall capacity per level. I would bundle this in with the current mobile CRU operation. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
153
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 21:23:00 -
[22] - Quote
Technically the victor gets a small percentage of the spoils of recycled biomass + left over clones onboard the enemy MCC. The quality and value of that recycled biomass is particularly low after undergoing cellular deterioration from wormhole travel and a ship being obliterated. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
153
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 21:55:00 -
[23] - Quote
Well, I was thinking about a five tier capacity system for that.
Depending on the amount of recycled biomass brought aboard the MCC (nominal, low, medium, high, and very high capacity) I could see 5 LPs being awarded to each member of the team per tier. If your team filled the MCC to 'very high' capacity each player would receive +25 LPs in addition to the proposed +75 from a district defended. A perfect match would earn 100 LPs. Pretty simple. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
153
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 22:01:00 -
[24] - Quote
I might consider letting that go for factional warfare because percentages become a little more difficult to meaningfully disperse with single digit LP numbers.
I still wonder if your willingness to sacrifice your body could still impact your standing with a faction. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
153
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 01:27:00 -
[25] - Quote
The driving thought process behind incorporating a suicide hacking mechanic with the harvester was to play up strategic move-making and limit how often a harvester would change hands. As stated before, a player can only hack each available harvester one time per game. Additionally, this also changes the dynamics of how squads and teams communicate and organize in order to maintain placement of the right people to hold control over harvesters throughout a battle. That would be a third aspect of war, with control points, clone counts, and squad organization. Agreeably, that might just be overload. I would still like to see it nonetheless.
As for anything with drones, I love it! However, it's going to be more difficult to create roaming AI that play nice with a game system and connection speeds that are already strapped for resources. The benefit of the system I've lain out is it only introduces minimal static art assets to the mix.
|
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
155
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 04:03:00 -
[26] - Quote
Azri Sarum wrote:IWhile the isk idea is nice, i think ultimately the play we could get from making clones a second front in battles would prove to be far more interesting in the long run. Plus from just a logistics standpoint, I don't think mercs would have a need to recycle biomass mid battle for isk when they could just do it afterwards.
I was thinking that clones would be recycled for isk after the game. I'm on the same page with you there. As for the isk ticker counter in the bottom corner of your screen--I was borrowing that mechanic from GTA 5's heists. In the context of Dust, those ticker values would continue to rise or stop depending on how many harvesters you had pumping biomass back to your team's MCC. The visual indicator of an isk figure equivalent for your current cargo load would be a pressing reminder of what is on the line if you don't win this match. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
155
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 17:15:00 -
[27] - Quote
Azri Sarum wrote:I really like the idea of mid-battle clone harvesting, being able to effect clone reserves using this. Have you considered just focusing on that aspect (ignoring the isk for now). I think the additional dynamic of clone warfare sounds very appealing. They could decrease clone count in battles to account for biomass being recycled, and now we have a very interesting two aspect war, focusing on both control points and clones. If we are going to focus on mid-battle clone harvesting, the mechanic that clones can only be harvested while dying in range is essential. It makes the task of refilling clone reserves a real challenge and squad based venture. The transport courier needs the help of their team to defend them while restocking in the the midst of a heavy fire encounter that is necessary to completing the job. The more clones a squad or team can kill in that zone, the faster the courier can leave with a full tank.
Jadek Menaheim wrote:Normally biomass will be transported to the MCC, however when a vehicle or foot solider is in range with the correct transport module the Harvester's protocols change and divert incoming biomass to that player. The harvester does not hold reverse biomass, so a player must wait near the harvester while soldiers are dying within its range. This also benefits teams that become redlined, and actually encourages teams to lure opposing sides out of the redline into range of the harvester so they can continue to earn bonus money or resupply troop reserves. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
155
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 17:36:00 -
[28] - Quote
Jadu, do you think that every additional clones should encumber the players speed slightly more? That is if we are talking about foot solider speed and not vehicles. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
155
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 17:57:00 -
[29] - Quote
Jadu, with the corrosive area burn thing I could see that being used toward some unintended but clever purposes. If a canister can be set down or dropped if a player runs, like it does in Mass Effect's Multiplayer, I could see a squad setting it down on an enclosed domination objective with a remote explosive placed on top of it. If an enemy red dot picks it up to move it out of the way of the terminal or tries to deactivate the RE setting on top of the canister with a bullet, both items are destroyed and the objective is now temporarily encased in a cloud of corrosive gas. This would make a hack attempt briefly perilous as stepping into the cloud would immediately begin to eat away your health.
Oh this would be amazing! |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
155
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 19:40:00 -
[30] - Quote
Lanius Pulvis wrote:Well ****, I read the title and thought I was going to read about an idea for a match played inside a Dyson Sphere, as in a sphere encompassing a sun. This is a well thought out idea, +1 for that...but **** you for getting my hopes up...
Hot damn, I want to see that too. Yes, that's what a Dyson sphere really is, but I just wanted to apply the energy absorption concept to a miniature installation. |
|
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
155
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 19:44:00 -
[31] - Quote
deepfried salad gilliam wrote:Neat idea but seems like an extreme amount of coding Shouldn't be a priority till atleast all weapons are implemented
Agreed. The amount of programming voodoo involved with this idea is massive. The art asset of the harvester itself is a static mesh so that helps. However, branching out with the transportable biomass container cells gets a lot more tricky, especially if you can drop them off and pick them back up. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
156
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 21:00:00 -
[32] - Quote
Artificer Ghost wrote:I couldn't understand the OP very well, but I got the gist of it. When the person goes up and hack the thing, and starts the suicide process, what is the clones killed in the "harvest" were transferred to the friendly team?
Example: TeammateLover123 hacks the thingy. 6 people die. And now 6 clones are added to the friendly team. It would prolong battles, and if you're able to get in behind a team and activate one, it would be a game-changer in gamemodes like Ambush, and even Skirmish, it'd be quick to clear an objective.
Also, maybe afterwards, there'd be a "Radiation Period", where enemies that enter the area start losing a set amount of HP per second, and the HP/s decreases per second?
Clones are not stored within the harvester themselves. Clones are either diverted to the MCC or if a transport container courier is within range (5m) then the clones are diverted there.
What I love about your idea is the radiation period tied to a hacked harvester. What I would love to see from that is an initial high intensity gamma burst of about 450hp damage that fires out about 10m from a harvester once a hack is complete. There would be an audible rising tone signal that lets players know in the immediate area of a harvester when a suicide hack is about to complete. Opposing players and friendly teammates have the indication to abandon the area or stay and fight. However, in doing so they are likely going to die from the blast and fallout (this fallout damage being equivalent to ~50hp/s damage in the 15m radius zone).
What works about that scenario is you can have a friendly high EHP tanked suit holding the transport container next to harvester scooping up players that die from the gamma burst and the immediate fallout. The reason this tanked suit has the ability to survive the fallout is with the help of a long beam repair tool person on the periphery of the fallout zone healing the courier of most radiation damage.
|
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
156
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 22:53:00 -
[33] - Quote
Jadu Wen wrote:Hey, how does a suicide hacks and their potential greifing play into a player team kill counter? That might end particularly badly in the new factional warfare if you kill a bunch of friendlies in the initial blast wave while trying to capture that harvester.
Yeah, that could be an issue. You could draw a comparison to how friendlies killed in precision strikes count against your friendly fire count. An argument could be made that while both systems give you warning sound before their area of effect damage takes effect, harvesters are stationary objects that you approach at your own risk. You have a better sense of battlefield awareness with a harvester's when a gamma blast is likely to occur. The two main red flags are the solider approaching a terminal and the subsequent sound of a player in deconstruction phase building up to a gamma blast. That should give you enough warning if you are vigilant to get out of the blast area. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
156
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 22:55:00 -
[34] - Quote
So I am saying that harvester blasts should not count against you in factional warefare. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
156
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 23:14:00 -
[35] - Quote
That's gold right there Jadu. Like you said earlier it would be tremendously helpful and necessary to have a high quality virtual range finder (expanding circles on the ground plane) when 'working' near and around these dangerous but necessary battle harvesters. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
156
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 00:05:00 -
[36] - Quote
Jadu Wen wrote:There's some good points there, but I guess I'm still torn about this license to TK in this context. Anyhow, going back to Ghost's post on the radiation period, I could see it being set anywhere between 20 and 30 seconds. Catching that theorycrafting bug from Jadek, I'd like to play around with the idea of radiation buildup. This means that if an enemy player rehacks a harvester while in the radiation period, and subsequently another friendly player rehacks the harvester the gamma blast and radiation fallout damage increases exponentially. Also each hack adds an additional 5m - 10m to the radiation fallout zone and 20 to 30 seconds while the radiation damage cools down to zero.
With this mechanic teams involved in a violent rally of switching control of a harvester would temporarily make a section of the map no mans land.
Lore wise it makes a bit of sense that you're getting all of this radiation when fluxing around with a micro wormhole generator.
So exponential damage growth would looks like this for the radiation fallout. Hack 1: 30hp/s , 15m radius zone , 30 seconds Hack 2: 60hp/s , 25m radius zone , current timer + 30 seconds Hack 3: 120hp/s , 35m radius zone , - - Hack 4: 240hp/s , 45m radius zone , - -
I think there has to be some type of damage dropoff as you move farther from the harvester. These radiation figures should be representative of the damage a player would take standing right next to the harvester during this radiation period. This would give daisy chained repair healers a better chance of getting a player up to the controls of a harvester while in radiation cool down. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
160
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 03:38:00 -
[37] - Quote
I'm glad to have you guys here to keep the ball rolling on expanding these ideas. It's amazingly helpful! |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
160
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 03:57:00 -
[38] - Quote
Getting back on topic. I want to address a point Shinobi brought up about this being the "other" game people are asking for. I think its important to strive for integration of game modes rather than their separation by dividing the available player base and making match making more difficult.
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui wrote: You guys have been at work since the last time I seen this post . I love it when a plan comes together and I loved Mass Effect. You guys have been at work with great ideals might I add and I hope that CCP will roll with this. This could be the " Other " game mode that people have been asking for. It could be the training ground , a place to work on one's tactics because this sounds like that type of mode with all you have to think about and the strategic importance of the Biomass Sphere coupled with the fact that now YOU HAVE TO WORK AS A TEAM to achieve a goal because everyone has an interest. You guys are on to something !!!!
I have to catch up and read more.
To offer an initial stepping block I would suggest these installations be incorporated into a game mode like ambush initially. The installation would be placed in an area that is normally the focal point of battle engagements. Players would fight for control of the unit in order to restock clones. In Ambush every clone counts for securing a win, and being able to boost up those numbers with recycled biomass would be huge. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
161
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 13:43:00 -
[39] - Quote
The single suicide hack per unit per match reduces a lot of that potential for team griefing. Also any players that die are added to the MCC cargo bank if they are not being diverted to a transport canister. The means the team is having a potential isk bonus added to battle's profits if they can win and keep their MCC.
At the same time, if that team loses a percentage of the cargo on board the MCC can now picked up by the enemy team. This allows for a more subtle type of AWOXing where you sway the flow of battle if your timing and placement of hacks is just right. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
161
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 14:02:00 -
[40] - Quote
I don't see anybody getting past a hack 5 with 480hp/s of radiation damage at the minimum 55m range. I see no worry in being able to irradiated the whole battlefield. |
|
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
161
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 22:40:00 -
[41] - Quote
Jadu I think it might be helpful to introduce a new Gallente designed module type here. One of us brought up the usefulness before to use repair modules to increase survivability in the radiation zone. What if there was a module that provided radiation resistance up to certain levels. For example std modules would protect against 16hp/s fallout. The proto version would fully protect against 47 hp/s og fallout. Stacking penalties do not occur. This mean if you stacked all five proto radiation protection modules on a prototype Gallente logistics they would have a full protection buffer of 225 hp/s. This means that a properly fitted prototype Gallente logistics would have room for longer surviability in a hack 4 radiation zone when they are taking 5hp/s of damage per second. With 210hp of based armor this would give a solider 42 seconds of livable time in a hack 4 zone. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
161
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 22:55:00 -
[42] - Quote
Jadu Wen wrote:Woah that last bit, so you're saying radiation only damages armor then? Not shields? That might be more unfortunate for Gallente armor tankers.
Sure, armor tanker might be more receptive to damage, but at least Gallente soldiers would have the greatest ability to resist radiation levels for longer if they changed their fitting schema. That fits with their lore goals for preservation of the solider in harmful scenarios.
I would image that radiation modules would be bundled in with the armor repair skill. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
161
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 17:21:00 -
[43] - Quote
Jadu I brought his up in your topic. How do you think Caladari players are going to manage if their armor levels are low to begin with? |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens League of Infamy
161
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 17:30:00 -
[44] - Quote
Ouch, that's low. I run Winmatar, and I take that strike against me as a badge of resolve. I'll find a way to survive and thrive despite going up against invisible particles which will kill me without hesitation or feeling.
|
|
|
|