| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jadu Wen
Xer Cloud Consortium
4
   |
Posted - 2013.10.20 02:09:00 -
[1] - Quote
Yes, the title is very strange, but I think I've stumbled onto an interesting way we could change player tactics regarding throwing down uplinks en-mass and camping on an objective in domination modes.
The idea is an installation located near an objective, emits great radiation damage when hacked multiple times. I doing so, players would be discouraged from placing drop uplinks on an objective because of the dangers associated with spawning to that location are much higher and in some cases lead to nearly instant death.
The idea is inspired from a new installation concept found in this thread.
Basically, these biomass collectors use micro wormhole tethers to send biomass back to the controlling MCC. However, when a player switches the alignment of the collector they change the trajectory dynamics of the wormhole releasing a burst of radiation over an area for a given period of time. However, if the alignment of the collector is switched again within the radiation cool down period, the radiation damage begins to compound on an exponential scale along with changes to other factors of cool-down time and greater area of affect.
Jadek Menaheim wrote: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.
As was discussed in that forum, the irradiated zone would be indicated on the spawn map (similar to this image) in order to inform players that certain spawn pads lay within the irradiated zone and you spawn there at your own risk. Additionally, smart deploy functions would be retuned so that players are not dropped within range of these installations. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens
League of Infamy
156
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 02:17:00 -
[2] - Quote
Nicely put Jadu. I think this is a really, really novel idea.
It doesn't prevent people from placing uplinks right on the objective, because at the end of the cool-down period people are perfectly safe to spawn into those areas without worry. |
Jadu Wen
Xer Cloud Consortium
4
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 02:23:00 -
[3] - Quote
Jadek the only thing I would recommend I would recommend right now is toning down the radiation damage of the first hack by 5 or 10hp/s and re-configuring from there. I would like to see the ability of Logibros with full stacks of armor repair modules to be able to tank a good deal if not all of that radiation damage, at least for the first tier. After that they would have to be standing on top of several high grade repair nanohives in order to stay alive in the area. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens
League of Infamy
156
|
Posted - 2013.10.20 02:25:00 -
[4] - Quote
That's an interesting defensive strategy. Nice! |
Jadu Wen
Xer Cloud Consortium
11
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 01:44:00 -
[5] - Quote
Does anyone have any additional input on this idea?
|
Jadu Wen
Xer Cloud Consortium
11
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 02:42:00 -
[6] - Quote
I made some additions to the original post to reflect growing feedback in the discussion. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens
League of Infamy
161
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 02:49:00 -
[7] - Quote
Jadu, remember that point about radiation damage only affecting armor. After thinking about, that's going to be mighty disruptive to Caldari players if they've got really low armor hit points.
Also from a lore standpoint, which race would you say created the harvester recycler? Amarr? Gallente? It seems to being favoring one of those two with their armor repping abilities and large low-slot capacity. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens
League of Infamy
161
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 02:57:00 -
[8] - Quote
Jadu Wen wrote:
The average suit meta level used to hack the device will also affect the size of radiation zones.
I was thinking the meta level would act as a multiplier, where meta 1 would = 1.0x, meta 5 = 1.5, and meta 10 would = 2.0x. In the context of radiation fallout ranges, this score would impact the original radius number. The original value of Hack 1 would also be 15m, and Hack 2 would be 25m, and likewise with other values. A meta 9 suit hack would follow as 15m x 1.9 = 28.5m. If another meta 9 hacked the terminal again it would be 25m x 1.9 = 47.5m.
However, as you go higher it will be possible to overcharge the range of the harvester with the radiation fallout if one's team is savvy enough to get a player that far into the radiation zone. After hack 3 with a meta 8 suit you've broken the harvester's collection range.
Let me see if I've got this straight. You could have two opposing militia grunts push a harvester into hack two stage, then still have a meta 9 at stage push the radiation field distance to 47.5 meters at hack 3? |
SponkSponkSponk
The Southern Legion
The Umbra Combine
413
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 04:04:00 -
[9] - Quote
Drop uplinks should damage other drop uplinks when used, too. |
Jadu Wen
Xer Cloud Consortium
11
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 16:36:00 -
[10] - Quote
SponkSponkSponk wrote:Drop uplinks should damage other drop uplinks when used, too.
I wasn't originally saying that radiation damages equipment. Maybe it should. As for drop uplinks damaging other uplinks there's a way this could work. Every spawn in creates a micro gamma blast or emp pulse which progressively damages surrounding equipment each time a person spawns to that pad. I would opt more for an emp pulse.
The major problem I for see with this approach is item placement synchronization between clients and the server. Right I think there is a technical problem with them being accurate amongst all players in a match. |
|
|
low genius
The Sound Of Freedom
Renegade Alliance
733
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 16:38:00 -
[11] - Quote
I think you can just drop an emp strike and get rid of them.
(but I like the idea of an uplink jammer, or something like that) |
Jadu Wen
Xer Cloud Consortium
11
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 16:41:00 -
[12] - Quote
low genius wrote:I think you can just drop an emp strike and get rid of them.
(but I like the idea of an uplink jammer, or something like that)
Sure you can have an EMP strike. I like the idea of persistent and dynamic hazards zones rather than a point and activate weapon. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens
League of Infamy
161
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 16:59:00 -
[13] - Quote
Jadu Wen wrote:SponkSponkSponk wrote:Drop uplinks should damage other drop uplinks when used, too. I wasn't originally saying that radiation damages equipment. Maybe it should. As for drop uplinks damaging other uplinks there's a way this could work. Every spawn in creates a micro gamma blast or emp pulse which progressively damages surrounding equipment each time a person spawns to that pad. I would opt more for an emp pulse. The major problem I for see with this approach is item placement synchronization between clients and the server. Right I think there is a technical problem with them being accurate amongst all players in a match.
Jadu, I think it's important to recognize that types of radiation (gamma and beta particles) do affect electronic devices with semiconductors and crystalline structures. A lot of this is dependent upon the level of insulation and designed in radiation resilience a device is built with and the exposure level. It is possible for radiation exposure to cause operational errors but not permanent damage. In this way I would recommend that for gameplay sake, items caught in a fallout zone are not destroyed, instead they experience usability errors such as longer deployment times on uplinks or fewer nanohive clusters and diminished range.
This equipment effect could be persistent even after the radiation levels have subsided. |
Jadu Wen
Xer Cloud Consortium
11
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 17:02:00 -
[14] - Quote
Another great point! Jadek, I'm going to add that idea to the OP. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens
League of Infamy
161
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 17:13:00 -
[15] - Quote
Sounds great. We just have to hammer out a reasonable error multiple would be. 1.5x or 1.6x. That means a std 10sec drop uplink would now take 16 seconds to spawn in. A prototype drop uplink would still be proportionally better because it has a lower spawn timer to begin with. The improvement could be chalked up to a higher military grade radiation insulation. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens
League of Infamy
161
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 17:19:00 -
[16] - Quote
Jadu Wen wrote:low genius wrote:I think you can just drop an emp strike and get rid of them.
(but I like the idea of an uplink jammer, or something like that) Sure you can have an EMP strike. I like the idea of persistent and dynamic hazards zones rather than a point and activate weapon.
Yes, I am a bit biased here, but I would have to agree with Jadu. More dynamic and emergent gameplay that is accessible to more players (rather than squad strikes) feels more interesting, especially in a FPS. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens
League of Infamy
161
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 20:23:00 -
[17] - Quote
Jadu, it you wanted to add more interaction with hack levels and "Persistent Errors in Irradiated Equipment" I would suggest this system.
Each hack state raises the error modifier by 0.3. This means:
Hack 1: 1.3x
Hack 2: 1.6x
Hack 3: 1.9x
Hack 4: 2.2x
Hack 5: 2.5x
At Hack 4 radiation, a std spawn pad that takes 10 seconds to spawn a player in now takes 22 seconds. This highly discourages players from using that beacon if they want to get back quickly into the fight.
I am considering whether this modifier should continue to rise, or if after hack 5 radiation, all equipment in that zone ceases to function. On the other hand, it's incredibly improbable that players would be able to push a system past Hack 5. Even throwing down Wirikomi Triage Hives and hoping between life bubbles would be ineffective because the radiation is impacting the functionality of the hives severely. |
Jadu Wen
Xer Cloud Consortium
12
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 20:32:00 -
[18] - Quote
That sounds excellent! Following along in that vein of introducing progressive error protocols in electronic, I wonder if shields should experience a similar. With exposure to varying levels of radiation, shield recharge rate and time delay are impacted respectively. I would also add in lowered resistance to weapons damage, but that would already make shields more glass than they already are. There needs to be some kind of stationary beacon or pylon similar to these harvester that increase shield resistance when you stand nearby. |
Dirks Macker
Enlightened Infantries
89
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 21:12:00 -
[19] - Quote
Radiation from a point source is always AoE. Radiation(1) x Distance Squared(1) = Radiation(2) X Distance Squared(2) to figured out the difference in radiation at two spots from the point source. |
Jadu Wen
Xer Cloud Consortium
12
|
Posted - 2013.10.21 23:19:00 -
[20] - Quote
You're right. It was an unnecessary additional descriptor. |
|
|
MySpaceTom
Holdfast Syndicate
Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 01:16:00 -
[21] - Quote
Thinking about this from a battle clean-up perspective, I bet districts love having a mini-fukushima ecological disaster on their hands after the mercs pack up and leave. |
Jadu Wen
Xer Cloud Consortium
13
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 01:22:00 -
[22] - Quote
Chalk it up to highly advanced space magic. If we have the power to create micro-wormhole tethers, I don't see why we can't have air scrubber tech that traps gamma particles on specialized 'dust' and transfers them to radioactive waste containers for later use in high grade munitions. |
MySpaceTom
Holdfast Syndicate
Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 01:24:00 -
[23] - Quote
Specialized 'Dust.' I like what you did there. |
MySpaceTom
Holdfast Syndicate
Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 13:45:00 -
[24] - Quote
Jadu, are you having fun spamming the uplink spam topics? I love the irony. |
Jadu Wen
Xer Cloud Consortium
14
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 13:46:00 -
[25] - Quote
Yep. |
Jadu Wen
Xer Cloud Consortium
15
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 14:43:00 -
[26] - Quote
While I was scouring the uplink forums someone brought up a tangential point that a system like this would dramatically increase the tactical value of logistics dropships and mCRUs. These vehicles can easily avoid and pass above these temporary radiation zones. However, because a point source radiation emitter creates an area of effect bubble, pilots may begin to damage their equipment and slowly kill their passengers if they fly through the bubble. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens
League of Infamy
161
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 14:46:00 -
[27] - Quote
That's a good point. Plus, we haven't particular discussed the effects that radiation exposure will have on vehicles. Should it have a persistent error effect like equipment or be repairable damage? Also for that matter, do you think vehicles should have their own (high/low slot) radiation insulation modules? |
CLONE117
Planetary Response Organization
Test Friends Please Ignore
423
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 14:54:00 -
[28] - Quote
im a bit confused.
so is this something that creates a deadly field of radiation?
a field of radiation with the possibillity of making uplink spam areas a no go zone because this radiation would be around alot of the objectives.
im just confused but this is what im getting from this.. |
Jadu Wen
Xer Cloud Consortium
15
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 15:05:00 -
[29] - Quote
CLONE117 wrote:im a bit confused.
so is this something that creates a deadly field of radiation?
a field of radiation with the possibillity of making uplink spam areas a no go zone because this radiation would be around alot of the objectives.
im just confused but this is what im getting from this..
Yes, you're getting a deadly field of radiation that discourages spawning into objective uplink spammed areas for a.) radiation damage begins to take effect immediately upon spawn, and b.) spawns take longer and continue to take longer in irradiated areas.
However, players with the proper fitting of radiation insulation modules have a greater ability to work and carry out battle objectives within irradiated zones. |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens
League of Infamy
161
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 15:09:00 -
[30] - Quote
Don't forget you're getting a lot more out of this installation than radiation zones.
Installation Idea: Biomass Harvester Dyson Sphere
For starters you get:
-Dynamic Area Denial
-Refilling clone counters while mid-game
-Major Isk Bonuses to the winning team |
|
|
CLONE117
Planetary Response Organization
Test Friends Please Ignore
424
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 15:11:00 -
[31] - Quote
i see this as being something alot of the players would hate.
most of the uplink spam is located around objectives in games like skirmish and domination.
now this would kill uplink spam but i dont think the random blueberry would approve.
if this were to happen secretly i can easily see my next domination game becoming a laugh enemy team fest.
as they would all die to radiation.
although theres the possibility of making it very trouble some to capture objectives.
a player could just spam uplinks around a couple of objectives after hacking and then push forward.
i just dont see the massive good part of all this because i can really only see the negatives out weighing the good. |
Vespasian Andendare
Subsonic Synthesis
Alpha Wolf Pack
519
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 19:04:00 -
[32] - Quote
Or, you know, you could use tools available to you in game and destroy the uplinks with Flux grenades. |
Crimson Judgment
ROGUE SPADES
EoN.
130
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 20:39:00 -
[33] - Quote
i would prefer if uplinks damaged you upon spawn or something like that my reason for this being the description of the drop uplink i can't remember it and im not on the game right now so is someone could post tht here it would be much appreciated  |
Jadek Menaheim
WarRavens
League of Infamy
161
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 21:00:00 -
[34] - Quote
Crimson Judgment wrote:i would prefer if uplinks damaged you upon spawn or something like that my reason for this being the description of the drop uplink i can't remember it and im not on the game right now so is someone could post tht here it would be much appreciated
No you're right. The process of wormhole travel is incredibly painful and causes rapid cellular deterioration. If uplinks damage you upon spawn what would be the safe version of battlefield incursion. SkySpawningGäó? |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI
6634
|
Posted - 2013.10.22 21:04:00 -
[35] - Quote
Instead of making people spawn instant-dead (which would b VERY annoying), just make drop uplinks undeployabl within 100 meters of another uplink (or objective if needed). |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |