Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
|
CCP Rattati
C C P C C P Alliance
17821
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 04:57:00 -
[1] - Quote
Dear players,
using some future technology, one of our QA testers was able jury-rig a portal.
It can be placed on the map by a level designer, not a player.
It can either have a one way transport, from A to B, but not B to A, or fully A to B, B to A functionality.
When I saw this, my jaw dropped to the floor, and have been possessed by the possibilities this has.
However, this needs careful consideration so as to not become some round-robin gameplay mechanic where the blob just uses teleports to react to any change.
Good 1) My first thought is to really help redlining issues. Place three portals behind cover, near the safe spawn point. These would be one way to eliminate fleeing to safety in the redline. The end points could be at three places, midway from objectives,
2) Simply reduce walking distances in the big maps. So you could have two or three both-way portals
Bad 1) Portal camping, which could be remedied by granting cloak through using the portal much like an mcru. Remotes would be annoying as hell. Could also give each portal a strong scan precision and range to reduce that.
2) Round Robin gameplay
Please discuss constructively
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
Fizzer XCIV
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
2466
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 05:02:00 -
[2] - Quote
This seems like something that new maps would have to be designed around, rather than just tossing them into our current maps. Besides maybe Iron Delta, Boulder Rim, and Border Gulch, I can't see these working well in our current maps. Suck powerful assets are best implemented on fairly symmetrical maps.
Something like this is a HUGE shake-up to point to point transportation, and would have huge effects on the flow of battle. If implemented well, it will be awesome. If implemented poorly, it will be horrifying.
Tread carefully Ratatti. Do it, but do it right.
Home at Last <3
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P C C P Alliance
17822
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 05:04:00 -
[3] - Quote
Fizzer XCIV wrote:This seems like something that new maps would have to be designed around, rather than just tossing them into our current maps.
Something like this is a HUGE shake-up to point to point transportation, and would have huge effects on the flow of battle. If implemented well, it will be awesome. If implemented poorly, it will be horrifying.
Tread carefully Ratatti. Do it, but do it right.
That's why my focus is using it for simple new player experience, such as long walks and redlining, and not too far reaching into competitive meta, I don't want to diminish the role of transports and or logistics.
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
Fizzer XCIV
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
2466
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 05:10:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Fizzer XCIV wrote:This seems like something that new maps would have to be designed around, rather than just tossing them into our current maps.
Something like this is a HUGE shake-up to point to point transportation, and would have huge effects on the flow of battle. If implemented well, it will be awesome. If implemented poorly, it will be horrifying.
Tread carefully Ratatti. Do it, but do it right. That's why my focus is using it for simple new player experience, such as long walks and redlining, and not too far reaching into competitive meta, I don't want to diminish the role of transports and or logistics.
That's probably best. I'd implement it as short range transportation from the home spawns to the closest point to said home spawns. 1 way transport.
Maybe have some as "elevators" to elevated positions, but I'm not too sure about that...
Home at Last <3
|
MINA Longstrike
Kirjuun Heiian
2274
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 05:13:00 -
[5] - Quote
So to comment on something kind of like this... I really really enjoyed the new MCC repair facility map, because it has a lot of verticality to it, but after playing it a few times I realised that all the control points were still very much on the ground.
It would be interesting to see a map with a lot of verticality where one of these 'jump portals' is able to say move you to the 'top' of a map (an area where you wouldn't necessarily be able to just stay up there and rain down fire) but you would be able to stage assaults on say D & E points.
That said, with 'jump portals' being a thing, you'd have to set them up so that they can either have multiple exits or there's some other way of preventing 'spawn camping' of them.
One place where I *would* like to see a jump portal in an existing map is in the 'boulder ridge' cavern, having a portal there could allow one to jump up to the 'top' area of it. so you have the 'gameplay' of people assaulting into or ninja-dropping onto the point, and people at the point defending or preparing 'teleport' attacks onto the upper level.
Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian.
I have a few alts.
|
Fizzer XCIV
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
2466
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 05:22:00 -
[6] - Quote
For example:
I'll use Border Gulch, as it seems the obvious choice for something like this...
1.)1-way transporter from the blue MCC spawn room to the little indent in the wall on the roof of C-12. 2.)1 way transporter from the blue ground spawn to the same indent. Mirror that on the other side for the red team.
3.)2-way transporter from the back of K-13 to the slanted roof you can see in E-9 Suddenly the mostly ignored Delta becomes a power-point in Skirmish, able to mount a strong attack onto the center point.
Home at Last <3
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P C C P Alliance
17822
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 05:42:00 -
[7] - Quote
Fizzer XCIV wrote:For example: I'll use Border Gulch, as it seems the obvious choice for something like this... 1.)1-way transporter from the blue MCC spawn room to the little indent in the wall on the roof of C-12. 2.)1 way transporter from the blue ground spawn to the same indent. Mirror that on the other side for the red team. 3.)2-way transporter from the back of K-13 to the slanted roof you can see in E-9 Suddenly the mostly ignored Delta becomes a power-point in Skirmish, able to mount a strong attack onto the center point.
I am loving these. Please, everyone, think about and propose great spots, to make maps more dynamic, unused objectives, those pain points you hate. Be as specific as possible.
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
Fizzer XCIV
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
2466
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 05:49:00 -
[8] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Fizzer XCIV wrote:For example: I'll use Border Gulch, as it seems the obvious choice for something like this... 1.)1-way transporter from the blue MCC spawn room to the little indent in the wall on the roof of C-12. 2.)1 way transporter from the blue ground spawn to the same indent. Mirror that on the other side for the red team. 3.)2-way transporter from the back of K-13 to the slanted roof you can see in E-9 Suddenly the mostly ignored Delta becomes a power-point in Skirmish, able to mount a strong attack onto the center point. I am loving these. Please, everyone, think about and propose great spots, to make maps more dynamic, unused objectives, those pain points you hate. Be as specific as possible.
What do these transporters look like? Are they Halo 3 style energy pads, or are they Halo 1 style portal-doorways? Or something completely different? It would be nice to know so we can provide ideas that make more sense.
Home at Last <3
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
7219
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 05:49:00 -
[9] - Quote
Love it!
Remotes were the first thing which crossed my mind, and it looks like you've already worked that out. Exit Nodes would need strong scan precision (to show remotes) and scan range (to show campers).
Question: If a unit stood atop a Entry Node, would it be possible for his FOV to "phase between" Entry and Exit Nodes? This way he could look around the Exit Node from the safety of the Entry Node. If all looks clear, press "X" to commit warp. If not, press "O" to cycle to next Exit Node.
Shoot scout with yes.
- Ripley Riley
|
Foehammerr
Dead Man's Game RUST415
156
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 05:53:00 -
[10] - Quote
Easiest source of information to use as a reference would be to use Halo 2 and 3 maps as a gi Uide as they had great design in terms of how teleporters were used
De Opresso Liber
Beta Vet since 2/5/2013
|
|
Fizzer XCIV
Tal-Romon Legion Amarr Empire
2466
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 05:54:00 -
[11] - Quote
Adipem Nothi wrote:Love it!
Remotes were the first thing which crossed my mind, and it looks like you've already worked that out. Exit Nodes would need strong scan precision (to show remotes) and scan range (to show campers).
Question: If a unit stood atop a Entry Node, would it be possible for his FOV to "phase between" Entry and Exit Nodes? This way he could look around the Exit Node from the safety of the Entry Node. If all looks clear, press "X" to commit to travel. If not, press "O" to cycle to next Exit Node.
I think an easier and more absolute way to provide RE protection would just be a vicinity based feature that made REs(and possibly all equipment) impossible to deploy near the teleporters. This would go a long way towards preventing Repair Hive, Uplink, and RE spam near the links, all of which could easily become a problem.
Home at Last <3
|
THUNDERGROOVE
Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback
1569
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 05:56:00 -
[12] - Quote
I would imagine there would need to be several of these if you were to completely prevent camping.
Just trust that, coming from someone in a corporation who had to open our own bottling plant from the tears we get from spawn camping/etc.
In the end, I feel like this is just a way to "cover up" bad map design.
Our lives are nothing but a means to an end.
AIV member.
21 day EVE trial.
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
7219
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 05:57:00 -
[13] - Quote
Fizzer XCIV wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:Love it!
Remotes were the first thing which crossed my mind, and it looks like you've already worked that out. Exit Nodes would need strong scan precision (to show remotes) and scan range (to show campers).
Question: If a unit stood atop a Entry Node, would it be possible for his FOV to "phase between" Entry and Exit Nodes? This way he could look around the Exit Node from the safety of the Entry Node. If all looks clear, press "X" to commit to travel. If not, press "O" to cycle to next Exit Node. I think an easier and more absolute way to provide RE protection would just be a vicinity based feature that made REs(and possibly all equipment) impossible to deploy near the teleporters. This would go a long way towards preventing Repair Hive, Uplink, and RE spam near the links, all of which could easily become a problem.
That's an excellent idea. If EQ deployed within X meters of Exit Node, EQ fizzles.
:: Campers watching Exit Node ... waiting ... :: :: HAV comes crashing through and mows them down ::
Shoot scout with yes.
- Ripley Riley
|
Foundation Seldon
Heaven's Lost Property
873
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 05:58:00 -
[14] - Quote
Could this end the concept of redline camping as a whole? Like use this as an opportunity to create a defined "deployment" zone which is an area far removed from the battlefield and surrounded on all sides by a redline that kills both sides. It'd be an island of safety. The deployment zone would be setup in an area that's all but impossible to take advantage of from a tactical perspective and would mean the moment you transport from the "deployment zone" to the "battlefield" you have to commit to whatever you've called out (there'd be no portal going from the battlefield back to the deployment zones). This would address the redline in its current state being vulnerable to rail tank sniping while deploying vehicles and snipers using it as a means to snipe with impunity on the smaller Domination maps.
Skirmish idea? I'm not sure of the technical limitations here but I hate joining skirmishes that "end" in the first 5 minutes of the match - ie the teams are so unmatched (tactically speaking, I know we've done work on the matchmaking) that you're already redlined from the beginning and have to sit and take the stomping for however long it takes the null cannons to finish the job. In a situation where the enemy has all the capturable points the deployment portals would become vulnerable assets that could be destroyed with a combined vehicle push (they'd take like multiple tanks firing constantly for X amount of time). Destroying all deployment portals would end the match instantly and give an additional bonus in SP and ISK to the winning team so that the stompers can end the matches quicker than they would otherwise and the defending team doesn't have to stick around in a clearly lost battle for longer than they have to. This would immediately give vehicles a real and defined "role". While also realistically giving the redlined infantry a better chance at taking a point (More people in vehicles trying to get instant win condition = less people defending vulnerable points)
Conversely the enemy team could coordinate a defensive push as well (suddenly 5 tanks rush out of the portals and break the enemy team). Could be fun.
So yeah, if possible, allow vehicles to use these portals as well and consider the implications that this could be used for in terms of completely removing all remaining issues with redline camping
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
7219
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 06:04:00 -
[15] - Quote
Foundation Seldon wrote: Conversely the enemy team could coordinate a defensive push as well (suddenly 5 tanks rush out of the portals and break the enemy team). Could be fun.
Exactly! The surprise aspect could be a blast. We'd need some kind of "Fog of War" to prevent us from snooping via overhead map. A Tank Column would be pretty easy to spot during the prep stage otherwise.
Shoot scout with yes.
- Ripley Riley
|
Terry Webber
Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance
596
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 06:08:00 -
[16] - Quote
This is awesome! I thought it would be a while before jump portals would be possible. |
Lady MDK
Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire
302
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 06:17:00 -
[17] - Quote
With the small size of most maps i dont really care for the idea. If ccp were to enable the full scale of the maps and battle fields per match (someone recently had a thread showing maps that were part of the same area) i could see the logic, but then i feel this would make vehicles all the more irrelevant.
Personally id rather see squads being packed into dropships and transported as it feels more like a gritty new eden like experience rather than an arcade game mechanic.
Anyone getting annoyed by reading of the above post should consider the following.
I don't care so neither should you :)
|
voidfaction
Nos Nothi
1238
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 06:23:00 -
[18] - Quote
Would I be able to run into the redline and kill a redline sniper and use their portal to get out quick before the timer kills me, lol
noi¦Ü+ö+Æßû+(V)Faction
|
Lady MDK
Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire
302
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 06:23:00 -
[19] - Quote
Lady MDK wrote:With the small size of most maps i dont really care for the idea. If ccp were to enable the full scale of the maps and battle fields per match (someone recently had a thread showing maps that were part of the same area) i could see the logic, but then i feel this would make vehicles all the more irrelevant.
Personally id rather see squads being packed into dropships and transported as it feels more like a gritty new eden like experience rather than an arcade game mechanic.
If the NPE is the focus why not have a message pop up at the top of the screen if someone calls in a vehicle during the first minute of an academy match that says - x has called a LAV get in by pressing circle. To change seat press triangle.
Sorry typing on mobile phone fail. I did add some though but meant to edit not quote.
MODERATOR!!!
Anyone getting annoyed by reading of the above post should consider the following.
I don't care so neither should you :)
|
Raffael-Puma Austria
Storm.Fighters E.B.O.L.A.
3
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 06:26:00 -
[20] - Quote
Remove/delate mb/s give logis std-3,adv-4,pro-5 equipment slots and a over powered uplink bonus and all is fine! You guys from ccp never play this game, you didn't know that remote explosives destroyed the gameplay so much! We need more teamplayers, this means min. 32 on every side and special-gamemode with 50/50 players! The sentinel died every minute on remote explosives (and i only take the best from the best-PRO) we need a delate/remove from remote explosives or only damage at vehicles (HAV_not LAV!!!) The cpu/pg from gallente sentinel is to low when i want to take only PRO in this suite i can't! Make an efficence on plates and reduction from CPU/PG by skillbonus from sentinels and set hp to 650 or more ,because gallente havy is REALLY low powered (set damage from boundless hmg to 20,5 and heat to 14!) With all skills i saw it on protofits.com) you don't have enought cpu and pg in gallente sentinel to fit is only PRO!
So the game can be better and not with portals! More havy-logi combos and isk payment not only by wp, we need it also for kills, because when i die more than ones the isk-paymet at end from battle is miserable!
So please think intensive about this what i wrote and make the game playable, then for now it is so frustrating!
I hate all Updates after Uprising 1.7 and the RailRifle nerf! Only selfrepair is cool, but havy need more HP/s
|
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P C C P Alliance
17828
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 06:46:00 -
[21] - Quote
Fizzer XCIV wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Fizzer XCIV wrote:For example: I'll use Border Gulch, as it seems the obvious choice for something like this... 1.)1-way transporter from the blue MCC spawn room to the little indent in the wall on the roof of C-12. 2.)1 way transporter from the blue ground spawn to the same indent. Mirror that on the other side for the red team. 3.)2-way transporter from the back of K-13 to the slanted roof you can see in E-9 Suddenly the mostly ignored Delta becomes a power-point in Skirmish, able to mount a strong attack onto the center point. I am loving these. Please, everyone, think about and propose great spots, to make maps more dynamic, unused objectives, those pain points you hate. Be as specific as possible. What do these transporters look like? Are they Halo 3 style energy pads, or are they Halo 1 style portal-doorways? Or something completely different? It would be nice to know so we can provide ideas that make more sense. doorways, I am not sure if we can modify them to be pads
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
Regis Blackbird
DUST University Ivy League
649
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 06:50:00 -
[22] - Quote
Initial thought; Cool!!! After some further consideration, I am not so sure anymore.
The potential negative sides are too great if not handled with uttermost care, even if just providing an escape from the redline. Some maps might be logical, but under no circumstances should these portals be used all the time (on all maps); just because..
Another concern I have is the required development time/effort required to get this from QA to the actual game client. You don't want this to feel "tacked on" or "gimmicky", so you will need animations for the portal, some 3D modelling for the actual structure (if you don't want it to float in mid air), UI map markers to indicate which portals lead to where, and which ones are one way and which ones are A <-> B. I suspect it might take some effort to do this properly.
TDLR: It's a really cool idea, but I think there are more things which I would rather have than portals, such as racial symmetry of vehicles (models), completly new game modes, etc.
I really like Foundation's idea for a separate deployments zone, connected to a battle zone (with common redline) using portals. This is how portals should be used; As a completly new map / concept / game mode. Then it's worth it. |
Avallo Kantor
469
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 06:52:00 -
[23] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Fizzer XCIV wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:[quote=Fizzer XCIV] ...
What do these transporters look like? Are they Halo 3 style energy pads, or are they Halo 1 style portal-doorways? Or something completely different? It would be nice to know so we can provide ideas that make more sense. doorways, I am not sure if we can modify them to be pads
Could these doorways be big enough for vehicles, or infantry sized only?
Also can they be "toggled"? For example, could a portal only be Open on a conditional? (For example a portal from MCC to A if A is blue?)
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P C C P Alliance
17828
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 06:55:00 -
[24] - Quote
Regis Blackbird wrote:Initial thought; Cool!!! After some further consideration, I am not so sure anymore.
The potential negative sides are too great if not handled with uttermost care, even if just providing an escape from the redline. Some maps might be logical, but under no circumstances should these portals be used all the time (on all maps); just because..
Another concern I have is the required development time/effort required to get this from QA to the actual game client. You don't want this to feel "tacked on" or "gimmicky", so you will need animations for the portal, some 3D modelling for the actual structure (if you don't want it to float in mid air), UI map markers to indicate which portals lead to where, and which ones are one way and which ones are A <-> B. I suspect it might take some effort to do this properly.
TDLR: It's a really cool idea, but I think there are more things which I would rather have than portals, such as racial symmetry of vehicles (models), completly new game modes, etc.
I really like Foundation's idea for a separate deployments zone, connected to a battle zone (with common redline) using portals. This is how portals should be used; As a completly new map / concept / game mode. Then it's worth it.
Sure, but this is not a choice between portals OR this other thing, certainly not those two things you mention,
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
Thaddeus Reynolds
Facepunch Security
213
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 06:59:00 -
[25] - Quote
I have some ideas on where these could be useful, I'll post them when I wake up tomorrow (and when I have time to find the map coords...btw can we get the rest of the maps of the outposts?)
All I can say is,
Now you are thinking with portals
Khanid Logi and Tanker, sometimes AV Heavy or Sniper.
Vehicle Re-vamp Proposal
|
Regis Blackbird
DUST University Ivy League
649
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 07:07:00 -
[26] - Quote
Avallo Kantor wrote: Also can they be "toggled"? For example, could a portal only be Open on a conditional? (For example a portal from MCC to A if A is blue?)
This is a VERY good question If possible, this would basically allow similar game modes as Skirmish 1.0, where it's impossible to traverse unless some conditions are met.
Imagine a map consisting of multiple independent battlezones, all connected via one-way portals (big enough for vehicles?) which can only be switched by some vehicle action (destroying shields?). Within each zone are normal control points for infantry hacking. |
Regis Blackbird
DUST University Ivy League
649
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 07:12:00 -
[27] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Regis Blackbird wrote:Initial thought; Cool!!! After some further consideration, I am not so sure anymore.
The potential negative sides are too great if not handled with uttermost care, even if just providing an escape from the redline. Some maps might be logical, but under no circumstances should these portals be used all the time (on all maps); just because..
Another concern I have is the required development time/effort required to get this from QA to the actual game client. You don't want this to feel "tacked on" or "gimmicky", so you will need animations for the portal, some 3D modelling for the actual structure (if you don't want it to float in mid air), UI map markers to indicate which portals lead to where, and which ones are one way and which ones are A <-> B. I suspect it might take some effort to do this properly.
TDLR: It's a really cool idea, but I think there are more things which I would rather have than portals, such as racial symmetry of vehicles (models), completly new game modes, etc.
I really like Foundation's idea for a separate deployments zone, connected to a battle zone (with common redline) using portals. This is how portals should be used; As a completly new map / concept / game mode. Then it's worth it. Sure, but this is not a choice between portals OR this other thing, certainly not those two things you mention,
I know I guess my point was that I would rather have the portal concept used for the Trello card "New game modes" than applied to existing maps.
|
Avallo Kantor
469
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 07:12:00 -
[28] - Quote
Regis Blackbird wrote:Avallo Kantor wrote: Also can they be "toggled"? For example, could a portal only be Open on a conditional? (For example a portal from MCC to A if A is blue?)
This is a VERY good question If possible, this would basically allow similar game modes as Skirmish 1.0, where it's impossible to traverse unless some conditions are met. Imagine a map consisting of multiple independent battlezones, all connected via one-way portals (big enough for vehicles?) which can only be switched by some vehicle action (destroying shields?). Within each zone are normal control points for infantry hacking.
The idea wasn't so much separate battlegrounds, as Rattai seems to have indicated we are unable to do such, but instead to allow for things such as
-Red Line Escape (If all points held by enemy, portals open to other side of map)
- A way to breach into the "city" from the outside. [If city controlled by A team, each outer node controlled by B team would lead to city]
- Potential Squad WP expenditure: 3000 WP - Open Portal from MCC to X for 1 Min
- "Hackable" portals that when hacked lead one way to other side. |
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
7481
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 07:18:00 -
[29] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Dear players,
using some future technology, one of our QA testers was able jury-rig a portal.
It can be placed on the map by a level designer, not a player.
It can either have a one way transport, from A to B, but not B to A, or fully A to B, B to A functionality.
When I saw this, my jaw dropped to the floor, and have been possessed by the possibilities this has.
However, this needs careful consideration so as to not become some round-robin gameplay mechanic where the blob just uses teleports to react to any change.
Good 1) My first thought is to really help redlining issues. Place three portals behind cover, near the safe spawn point. These would be one way to eliminate fleeing to safety in the redline. The end points could be at three places, midway from objectives,
2) Simply reduce walking distances in the big maps. So you could have two or three both-way portals
Bad 1) Portal camping, which could be remedied by granting cloak through using the portal much like an mcru. Remotes would be annoying as hell. Could also give each portal a strong scan precision and range to reduce that.
2) Round Robin gameplay
Please discuss constructively
What if they open and close at set intervals? Hack the point to light the wormhole generator. Thirty seconds later it shuts down.
Only usable from the hack point, not two way.
AV
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
5164
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 07:23:00 -
[30] - Quote
Question. Is this something that could be used as a hackable installation?
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |