DUST Search - To the Devs: Idea to Reduce Equipment spam

Aero Yassavi wrote:

Skihids wrote:

Aero Yassavi wrote:

Asha Starwind wrote:

why doesn't anyone ever suggest something sensible like an expiration timer after ### the deploy-able expires.

That combined with the idea that equipment uses some sort of signal transmission to draw CPU and PG from your suit, thus if you change suits the equipment you placed with the previous suit would be destroyed. If you die and respawn in the same suit, then your equipment stays. But if you die and switch suits, or go to a supply depot and switch suits, your equipment is destroyed.

I know some people won't like this because they use speed fits to quickly get uplinks down and then switch to something more practical for combat, but in my opinion it would only add another layer of strategy to Dust with setting up who is going to use what equipment and what fit is best of carrying such equipment.

Then you too will find you don't like it when you have to hike in from your rear spawn because the two uplinks that people decided to fit due to the restrictions get destroyed or camped. I just read a post where the author was disgusted with the blueberries who in part "couldn't be bothered to toss out an uplink".

Watch what you wish for, because you just might get it.

Not sure what you mean? Place uplinks better if they are getting destroyed or camped.

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation Legacy Rising 58	Posted - 2014.01.05 05:30:00 - [1] - Quote I propose a 'active deployable radius" , an area based restriction on placing equipment. The idea works like this: For discussions sake lets say K2 nanohive has a 5 meter radius. No other piece of equipment cqn be placed within that radius. So if i put 1 K2 down , i have to move 5 meters to drop any other peice of equipment.. I f i had used a Ishokune nanohive i have to move 8 meters to drop the next one. Perhaps only 2 meters for a contact nanohive. And so on. Drop uplinks could work the same way, but with a much smaller radius. Remotes and proximity mines would be exempt, as a high concentration is needed to be of practical use. The equipment would not be destroyed upon placement, they just wont leave the players hands untIl they're at the required distance away. This woul eliminate equipment spam at suppy depots, prevent players from standing on top of multiple triage hives at once, and force players to become creative and competitive at placing equipment in excellent locations benificial to the team. It would reduce logi WP farming practice of putting all of thier euipment in one place forcing blue teamates to come to them. It would help reduce lag, by discouraging the lag inducing practice of spamming many pieces of equipment in one location. I imagine it as the sort of coding restriction one gets in playing strategy games, where buidings and units can only be placed at a certain distance from one another. For the manual, you can simply state the active nano fields tend to cancel each other out. Will be hoping for a blue tag on this one, tell me what you guys think. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Vulpes Dolosus SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 571	Posted - 2014.01.05 05:32:00 - [2] - Quote So they'll just spread out their equipment instead of making it one big, flux-grenade-able pile. Dropship Specialist Kills- Incubus: 4; Pythons: 1; Other DS: 28 Gêå1; Tanks: 27 Gêå2 1/1
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation Legacy Rising 58	Posted - 2014.01.05 05:56:00 - [3] - Quote well, if one proto hive takes up 8 meters, then with ten it would be spread out along 80 meters in straigt line. When was the last time you saw an 80 meter long front in dust? If all 16 players dropped 1 hives tthey would be spread out along 128 meters? They would too spread out to be of ny practicle use, and nearly impossible to simply spam in close quarters. Thos exposed hives will not last long being exposed to enemy fire, and will be pretty easy to take out. Spreading just 10 hives would also be time consuming, while there are objectives to hack and people to shoot. To stop spam i thnk we should affect its practicality. Make it impratical and people will stop doing it. People should be able to drop more than one piece of equipment, just not all in the same spot. Its a quick coding proposal, rather than rebalancing the entire equipment tree from scratch, and changing up the CPU and PG requirements. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Skihids Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2634	Posted - 2014.01.05 06:16:00 - [4] - Quote Use your brain, please. One uplink next to the objective in an enclosed area and you can't drop a triage or ammo hive anywhere useful. Use a flux grenade if you don't like the enemy equipment. Fix lagging in the code, don't create artificial restrictions trying to avoid the buggy code.
Grimmiers 0uter.Heaven 408	Posted - 2014.01.05 06:23:00 - [5] - Quote I proposed an Idea like this, but instead of not being able to deploy equipment it would just create noise that would lower the efficiency of nanohives and uplinks. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1645597#post1645597 It didn't get much love, but I think it's a good idea. SoundCloud Recruiter Link Pronounced Grim-e-urs
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation Legacy Rising 58	Posted - 2014.01.05 06:25:00 - [6] - Quote lol, So you can hack and objective but not the control 8 meters in diameter aroud it? You have space to drop multiple pieces of equipment, just not enough to spam them like mad. Besides in my example (which CCP can and willl tweak and adjust if they tak it up) drop uplinks would have smaller radius of say 1 m. C''mon dude, read. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Ryder Azorria Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 778	Posted - 2014.01.05 06:39:00 - [7] - Quote Skihids wrote: Use your brain, please. One uplink next to the objective in an enclosed area and you can't drop a triage or ammo hive anywhere useful. Use a flux grenade if you don't like the enemy equipment. Fix lagging in the code, don't create artificial restrictions trying to avoid the buggy code. The lag is only partly due to less than optimized code, the server having to track so many different entities is always going to cause lag - the only way to properly fix it is to reduce the amount of equipment on the field.
Maken Tosch DUST University Ivy League 6269	Posted - 2014.01.05 07:00:00 - [8] - Quote I thought about this before but then I realized a better idea. CCP should divide each map into sectors and then put a limit on the number of deployable equipment per sector such as about 5 per sector with each sector about 100-200 square meters so that equipment won't be spammed too much in one given area. This way, you can still put the equipment close together as needed, but you won't be able to deploy 20+ nanohives and uplinks around that damn supply depot anymore. This would be on a per-team basis of course. For size reference: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=80605&find=unread Imagine each square being a sector that is about 100 square meters. CCP can make them bigger if the size is too restricting. OK, CCP. When are knives finally going to be improved? *CLOSED BETA VETERAN SINCE REPLICATION BUILD*
Asha Starwind VEXALATION CORPORATION Partners of Industrial Service and Salvage 45	Posted - 2014.01.05 07:09:00 - [9] - Quote why doesn't anyone ever suggest something sensible like an expiration timer after ### the deploy-able expires.
Skihids Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2637	Posted - 2014.01.05 08:13:00 - [10] - Quote Ryder Azorria wrote: Skihids wrote: Use your brain, please. One uplink next to the objective in an enclosed area and you can't drop a triage or ammo hive anywhere useful. Use a flux grenade if you don't like the enemy equipment. Fix lagging in the code, don't create artificial restrictions trying to avoid the buggy code. The lag is only partly due to less than optimized code, the server having to track so many different entities is always going to cause lag - the only way to properly fix it is to reduce the amount of equipment on the field. And you know this because of your intimate knowledge of the code?

Aero Yassavi Yassavi House 4276	Posted - 2014.01.05 08:16:00 - [11] - Quote Asha Starwind wrote: why doesn't anyone ever suggest something sensible like an expiration timer after ### the deploy-able expires. That combined with the idea that equipment uses some sort of signal transmission to draw CPU and PG from your suit, thus if you change suits the equipment you placed with the previous suit would be destroyed. If you die and respawn in the same suit, then your equipment stays. But if you die and switch suits, or go to a supply depot and switch suits, your equipment is destroyed. Angels of vengeance, angels of mercy, scions of Athra. Amarr Victor
Fizzer94 L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1287	Posted - 2014.01.05 08:34:00 - [12] - Quote Skihids wrote: Ryder Azorria wrote: Skihids wrote: Use your brain, please. One uplink next to the objective in an enclosed area and you can't drop a triage or ammo hive anywhere useful. Use a flux grenade if you don't like the enemy equipment. Fix lagging in the code, don't create artificial restrictions trying to avoid the buggy code. The lag is only partly due to less than optimized code, the server having to track so many different entities is always going to cause lag - the only way to properly fix it is to reduce the amount of equipment on the field. And you know this because of your intimate knowledge of the code? He knows it because its quite basic. A lot of entities can make a server laggy, regardless of the 'code'. CCP can't magically make the internet faster because they want to. Fizzer94 // Level 1 Forum Warrior // PLASMA CANNONS ARE REALLY* BAD NOW, FIX THEM!*
Skihids Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2637	Posted - 2014.01.05 08:37:00 - [13] - Quote Aero Yassavi wrote: Asha Starwind wrote: why doesn't anyone ever suggest something sensible like an expiration timer after ### the deploy-able expires. That combined with the idea that equipment uses some sort of signal transmission to draw CPU and PG from your suit, thus if you change suits the equipment you placed with the previous suit would be destroyed. If you die and respawn in the same suit, then your equipment stays. But if you die and switch suits, or go to a supply depot and switch suits, your equipment is destroyed. I know some people won't like this because they use speed fits to quickly get uplinks down and then switch to something more practical for combat, but in my opinion it would only add another layer of strategy to Dust with setting up who is going to use what equipment and what fit is best of carrying such equipment. Then you too will find you don't like it when you have to hike in from your rear spawn because the two uplinks that people decided to fit due to the restrictions get destroyed or camped. I just read a post where the author was disgusted with the blueberries who in part "couldn't be bothered to toss out an uplink". Watch what you wish for, because you just might get it.
Aero Yassavi Yassavi House 4277	Posted - 2014.01.05 08:40:00 - [14] - Quote Skihids wrote: Aero Yassavi wrote: Asha Starwind wrote: why doesn't anyone ever suggest something sensible like an expiration timer after ### the deploy-able expires. That combined with the idea that equipment uses some sort of signal transmission to draw CPU and PG from your suit, thus if you change suits the equipment you placed with the previous suit would be destroyed. If you die and respawn in the same suit, then your equipment stays. But if you die and switch suits, or go to a supply depot and switch suits, your equipment is destroyed. I know some people won't like this because they use speed fits to quickly get uplinks down and then switch to something more practical for combat, but in my opinion it would only add another layer of strategy to Dust with setting up who is going to use what equipment and what fit is best of carrying such equipment. Then you too will find you don't like it when you have to hike in from your rear spawn because the two uplinks that people decided to fit due to the restrictions get destroyed or camped. I just read a post where the author was disgusted with the blueberries who in part "couldn't be bothered to toss out an uplink". Watch what you wish for, because you just might get it. Not sure what you mean? Place uplinks better if they are getting destroyed or camped. Angels of vengeance, angels of mercy, scions of Athra. Amarr Victor
Skihids Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2637	Posted - 2014.01.05 08:43:00 - [15] - Quote Fizzer94 wrote: Skihids wrote: Ryder Azorria wrote: Skihids wrote: Use your brain, please. One uplink next to the objective in an enclosed area and you can't drop a triage or ammo hive anywhere useful. Use a flux grenade if you don't like the enemy equipment. Fix lagging in the code, don't create artificial restrictions trying to avoid the buggy code. The lag is only partly due to less than optimized code, the server having to track so many different entities is always going to cause lag - the only way to properly fix it is to reduce the amount of equipment on the field. And you know this because of your intimate knowledge of the code? He knows it because its quite basic. A lot of entities can make a server laggy, regardless of the 'code'. CCP can't magically make the internet faster because they want to. This sounds like "common knowledge" that may have no basis in fact. What does network latency have to do with a handful of fixed points? Equipment doesn't move once deployed. It can be fixed locally on your system if need be. It isn't a merc running around constantly altering his position and orientation.
RKKR The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine 611	Posted - 2014.01.05 08:45:00 - [16] - Quote Or replace the equipment by an active support role, just saying... (We would have actually roles too...awesome)
Skihids Bullet Cluster Legacy Rising 2637	Posted - 2014.01.05 08:46:00 - [17] - Quote Aero Yassavi wrote: Skihids wrote: Aero Yassavi wrote: Asha Starwind wrote: why doesn't anyone ever suggest something sensible like an expiration timer after ### the deploy-able expires. That combined with the idea that equipment uses some sort of signal transmission to draw CPU and PG from your suit, thus if you change suits the equipment you placed with the previous suit would be destroyed. If you die and respawn in the same suit, then your equipment stays. But if you die and switch suits, or go to a supply depot and switch suits, your equipment is destroyed. I know some people won't like this because they use speed fits to quickly get uplinks down and then switch to something more practical for combat, but in my opinion it would only add another layer of strategy to Dust with setting up who is going to use what equipment and what fit is best of carrying such equipment. Then you too will find you don't like it when you have to hike in from your rear spawn because the two uplinks that people decided to fit due to the restrictions get destroyed or camped. I just read a post where the author was disgusted with the blueberries who in part "couldn't be bothered to toss out an uplink". Watch what you wish for, because you just might get it. Not sure what you mean? Place uplinks better if they are getting destroyed or camped. My point is that your suggestion would likely reduce deployed uplinks to one or two per side because nobody would dedicate many slots to it all game long. That much smaller number would be more easily destroyed or camped.


Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page