DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] Transporters

Avallo Kantor wrote:

Luther Mandrix wrote:

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

Portal Vehicle
Transport Vehicle with a Portal somewhere on the dropship or Hav Transport only
No Guns maybe a limit on how many are the field
Or you have two one in and one out Dropship to tower uplinks up there ,enter Portal transport vehicle come ou at other portal transport vehicle

Rattai already stated that they would be dev created, not player created. By that he means they would have to be coded into a map, they aren't dynamic enough to be linked to player deployed items, such as vehicles.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
Sir Dukey G0DS AM0NG MEN General Tso's Alliance 1849	Posted - 2015.03.04 21:46:00 - [91] - 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. You can do it but make sure it's not point to point. Just areas. Maybe from one city side to the other. Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 17461	Posted - 2015.03.04 21:46:00 - [92] - Quote Probably mentioned but do we even have to use these as deployable equipment? Can they not be the ladders or interactive transport options players can use to move around different kinds of sockets? "This is the Usumgal boy, the exalted dragon, wreathed in the fires of heaven. He is a true symbol of God's majesty."
One Eyed King Nos Nothi 8231	Posted - 2015.03.04 22:10:00 - [93] - Quote I think the two-way portals could be used in certain spots to prevent some of the camping that goes on in high places. For example, in Line Harvest, you could have a two-way portal to the top of each of the towers so anyone going up against a team who has a Uplink spamming Dropship pilot can have some means of getting up there and popping the links. Also, this would give snipers a means to find a perch without it being inaccessible to sniper hunters. Former CEO of the Land of the BIind. Any double entendre is unintended I assure you.
Taipaen Loose Cannon Security 24	Posted - 2015.03.04 22:30:00 - [94] - Quote Forgive me if this has already been mentioned, time is short for me at the moment. Camping the exit points of one-way portals could be addressed by having the "spawn" point be a bit varied. Perhaps make it a random spawn point within a certain radius on the map (15m?), similar to the smart deploys in Ambush mode. This would make them fairly predictable to use but much more difficult to camp than just standing there aiming at a single spot. RE's would require a lot of luck using effectively as well.
anaboop NECROM0NGERS 159	Posted - 2015.03.05 00:59:00 - [95] - Quote What if the portal destination was set in increments to spawnat different locations Fully sick Anaboop trading card
RedBleach LeSanglant Hellstorm Inc General Tso's Alliance 768	Posted - 2015.03.05 01:10:00 - [96] - 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. I can't speak to transports. Speaking to Logistics. Any Teleport will automatically diminish Uplink Placement. How much it will affect placement and earnings is more at the heart of the matter. Good Making them fit with the environment of one base to another construct or crate/depot area makes sense if they were placed Lore-wise for moving shipments or just allowing a Logi/Technician to more easily repair or replace difficult to reach machinery. Or perhaps lookout/monitoring stations where a ladder doesn't make sense. - This is good. Bad If we are saying they are battle place by the opposing sides before the start of the clone war then they would need to be placed in more tactical situations meaning the tops of spires, common rally nodes behind cover etc. - and I can't really agree with that. That makes them simply set up for battle and drives the fight blobs to specific areas to be perma watched. As to how it will affect Uplink placement... wow. If they are placed at the already common spawn areas outside of objectives that could hugely impact the reasons for carrying uplinks or more than 1. Commonly 1 is placed at the objective and the other is at a fall back area. SO, making the teleport areas in more commonly open areas would not diminish, as much, the use of uplinks. These would be more of the common base areas and depot/crate areas talked of earlier. As to where specifically on a map.... that will take some research. The Logi Code. Creator, Believer, Follower
Luther Mandrix WASTELAND JUNK REMOVAL 438	Posted - 2015.03.05 01:42:00 - [97] - Quote Avallo Kantor wrote: Luther Mandrix wrote: 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 Portal Vehicle Transport Vehicle with a Portal somewhere on the dropship or Hav Transport only No Guns maybe a limit on how many are the field Or you have two one in and one out Dropship to tower uplinks up there ,enter Portal transport vehicle come ou at other portal transport vehicle Rattai already stated that they would be dev created, not player created. By that he means they would have to be coded into a map, they aren't dynamic enough to be linked to player deployed items, such as vehicles. Future tech
WeapondigitX V7 The Exemplars RISE of LEGION 234	Posted - 2015.03.05 02:21:00 - [98] - Quote I would suggest putting 1 way portals at the base of some narrow towers to allow shotgun scout, nova knife scouts, and HMG sentinels, and shotgun assaults to assassinate enemy snipers and heavy forge gunners on top of the tower, and assassinate large amounts of enemies that are camping those specific places. This would mean that a team would require at least 2 players on a tower in order to attack players below and have 1 player watch the portal in case of a stealth attack. (using dropships instead would allow players to use missile turrents or blaster turrents at long 50m distances that are powerful, so hovering dropships would still be usefull). Although dropships with only the pilot to hop out and assassinate players on towers, that would be made redundant. Possible portal locations could be: Skim Junction: H12 and H15 allows 1 way access to the top of the towers from the ground or (if you think its a better idea, leading to currently existing platforms with railings at mid height of the towers, they are built into the towers already) Spine Crescent: D9, G9 at base of towers to allow 1 way access to the top of towers, they can jump off anyway but reveal themselves if they jump off using inertia dampeners. (to allow access out of the city) F4 with a 1 way 'enter' portal leading out of city with a 'exit' portal outside the walls. Line Harvest: 1 way portal on the ground in G10 allowing 1 way access to the mid height of the tower where there is already a small platform with a railing where players can snipe and use rail rifles with a good height advantage. (not the top of the tower) H7 where a 1 way portal on the ground leads to mid height of the tower to a small platform with a railing that already exists that is built into the tower (snipers can defend objectives easier but be more exposed cause its a railing, its not solid cover that they can duck behind) F6, 1 way portal to mid height of the tower F10, 1 way portal to mid height of the tower Most of these portal locations lead to places on tower that drop ships are not currently used to reach.
KEROSIINI-TERO The Rainbow Effect 1824	Posted - 2015.03.05 02:30:00 - [99] - Quote No need for teleport pads or launchers, they are kind of an immersion breaker. Also, they would really really make the loved transport role of vehicles weaker. But consider: Use of the portal mechanic as elevator to top of a skyscraper is okay. Yes, that would be good. Because, of the top of a skyscraper can be reached by dropship, it needs an alternative. But ladders are impractical, and no one wants the horror of fighting a 30 floor spiral staircase... (oh well maybe someone would but some people stick needles onto themselves so...) Looking at both sides of the coin. Even Aurum one.
Greiv Rabbah M.T.A.C Assault Operations Command Lokun Listamenn 144	Posted - 2015.03.05 04:52:00 - [100] - 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. When I read your initial post, I was amazed. As I read on ithought about this exactly. Logistics are used to create limited use portals already, and reducing travel time reduces lav usefulness(which us shaky at vest already). I also have some concern about it potentially making minja more useless than ever, but perhaps it will help me win the lav race to the objective at early game. This is an awesome and powerful concept. I can't make up my mind about it but I definitely want to see it happen. PS, still begging that twitter follow, I really wanna DM you about something important (IMO) that isnt appropriate for the forum Sebiestor scout, MTAC pilot, Merc w/ a face

Greiv Rabbah M.T.A.C Assault Operations Command Lokun Listamenn 144	Posted - 2015.03.05 04:58:00 - [101] - Quote Kaeru Nayiri wrote: The way I see it, this will only work if the portal is an objective in and of itself, that must be fought over and controlled. If that is NOT the case then: [/b]I do not see how this remedies redlining any more than say.. additional hard spawn points. Functionally, there is no difference between spawning in the red line, and taking a portal midway, or just spawning mid way.[b] Reduces usefulness of vehicles CONSIDERABLY If the placement is done by the designer, be careful not to run into more "hard coded, can't be changed" kind of issues down the line as new game modes pop up and new toys change the meta. If instead you make it so that both teams fight over the use of the portal system to gain an advantage, you create a more dynamic play where a team has to decide if splitting forces to actually defend null cannon installations AND the portal console (which ideally would not be near a null cannon) is worthwhile. Sidenote: What happened to the idea of Damage Type Null cannons (Laser, Hybrid, Explosive)?? and Null Cannons that could be damaged (reduced effectiveness) by large turrets? These ideas were truly great and would perhaps play into this portal thing for more depth. Re:side note: agree wholeheartedly Sebiestor scout, MTAC pilot, Merc w/ a face
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 1064	Posted - 2015.03.05 05:09:00 - [102] - Quote This is quite the can of worms to be opened. So many different angles we could approach this from... It's an interesting feature, but do we do it just because we can? I think there could be some very good features with this, but any teleporting would have to be pretty severely limited. Like you mentioned in the OP, this would be great for preventing marathons between Objectives, especially for new players. Here's some brainstorm ideas. One way link: A player could drop a 'link' in a certain location. At any time the player could bring up his left arm digital interface pad thingy, and pressing R1 would teleport the player back to his pad. It would be interesting to have a scout batman into a building, hack a point and teleport out. I would propose having a range limit. 50-100 meters or so, also, about a 5 second materialization period where the player is vulnerable. If you see a player teleport you know they're still close. The pad could be picked up and retrieved, otherwise you'd have to get a new one at a supply depot. Two way installations: Installations placed on the map in semi-strategic locations. Owning two or more points cold transport you between them. A point would have to be held for 15 seconds to become active. Only one clone can use the point at a time with a 5 second cooldown between clones to prevent a giant blob from dropping in. Who cares what some sniper has to say. **--CCP, let's push for the license of Dust/Legion on both current Gen consoles-
xTheSiLLyRaBBiTx Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 390	Posted - 2015.03.05 05:12:00 - [103] - 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 Would this option be considered an installation??? *\|LOGi GOD\|* Director of Fatal Absolution
Vrain Matari Mikramurka Shock Troop Minmatar Republic 2526	Posted - 2015.03.05 05:47:00 - [104] - Quote Sigourney Reever wrote: How about you put this idea away for later. Its a good one, you can make it work, keep it under your hat. What we need is map assets (sockets, terrains, and moods) and game modes (at least 4-5 more) and some work on randomizing the rotations (of everything) a little bit more. If everything wasn't as repetitive as it is now, you'd go a long way towards not needing alternative deployment methods. It's a great concept, keep it 'working' and use it later, but really, its not something Dust "Needs" with so many other things not fully fleshed out. I agree. Portals are an interesting idea and it's easy to get excited for what they might offer. But adding portals now with other systems incomplete or dysfunctional won't teach us much about what portals really have to offer. Portals may require a fair bit of care and feeding before we get it right. We have lots of things that require dev and player attention. The one place portals might justify time invested in them would be to devalue redline sniping as a viable tactic. We could spawn behind deep redline and use portals to throw us past all that redline to a half-dozen approach points spread around the friendly end of the map. That being said, there are most likely other ways to address redline camping with current assets and judicious rule changes. PSN: RationalSpark
Brush Master Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 1466	Posted - 2015.03.05 14:12:00 - [105] - Quote My only question is, will this hurt the role of vehicles even more? Dust Veteran. June 2012 - ? True Logi. Flying DS from the start. @dustreports
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7525	Posted - 2015.03.05 14:54:00 - [106] - Quote Brush Master wrote: My only question is, will this hurt the role of vehicles even more? If portals are limited and one way? No. Especially if running a tank through it is an option. AV
Ku Shala UNITED MERCINARY AND PILOTS ALLIANCE 1284	Posted - 2015.03.05 15:03:00 - [107] - Quote I could see these as a replacement to stairs or ladders, short range so you can see the entrance and exit. could be really fun to have a room with like 20 of them in it and have some really messed up peak-a-boo *-¦a+ó a+ú-Æa+äla+ä (CK-0 Specialist)* Caldari Loyalist Superior technology will privale.
Ansla Valier One Corps 23	Posted - 2015.03.05 15:10:00 - [108] - Quote Very cool. It's hard to come up with specific examples but I know I'd like asymmetry a lot. Eg not having 2 one way portals to the same spot where both teams can have a weird portal war lol. More the idea that both teams have quick access to different strategic areas of the map that aren't primary objectives using one-way portals. I'm only for this idea if the portal entrances can be accessed by both sides without a huge amount of effort. That way you could cut them off if it starts getting really bad. Having this be a place vehicles can't easily get to would be nice. Otherwise you risk hurting LAV and dropship usage early on in the match. I'm sure specifics would be way more helpful but this is all I have for now lol.
Booby Tuesdays Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 1367	Posted - 2015.03.05 17:39:00 - [109] - Quote I can see a couple ways these could be very useful. They become active when either... (A) The enemy team has captured all objectives (B) Your MCC has lost it's shields To keep them from being camped... (A) There are 12 total locations (B) These locations are chosen randomly to prevent advanced knowledge of where the enemy team will come from These could be invaluable against roof campers. Everyone says, "just fly a dropship up there and take 'em out!". That's easier said than done when they have Forges and Swarms waiting as well. Would be really cool if they took you from the redline and dropped you from the sky. Half-Assed Forum Warrior / Half-Decent Commando / Damn Good Logi / Matari Loyalty 7
HOLY PERFECTION UNIVERSAL C.A.R.N.A.G.E 55	Posted - 2015.03.05 18:45:00 - [110] - 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 CAAAAAAMMMMPPPINNNG *I WILL WIN... DESTINY*

Derpty Derp Dead Man's Game 874	Posted - 2015.03.05 18:55:00 - [111] - Quote Boulder Rim - Skirmish and Dom (Possibly ambush) : D6 to G10 I11 to F10 D6 - Under building. G10 - Rooftop. I11 - In one of the buildings, room at the top of stairs. F10 - Rooftop Will make the rooftops less of a 'first to fly up there and camp it' and more of a strategic option for getting close to A. Fracture Road - Domination: E7 to G7 H6 to G7 E7 - Skirm A. H6 - Building across from skirm B. G7 - top of the tower. Stop people camping the tower, while adding an alternate area to fight over, when kicked off the pipes Depending on how the 'portals' work, it could be a nice way to make unused areas of the map more important... However if it's an 'exact' position, then camping the portals will become a massive pain and completely ruin the idea.
Finn Colman Immortal Guides Learning Alliance 151	Posted - 2015.03.05 18:58:00 - [112] - Quote My concern, as an often underutilized transport pilot, is how this will effect vehicle based transport. I'd love for this to be implemented as long as it doesn't ruin the role of transport pilots. Jack-of-most-trades, master of one.
CommanderBolt KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 3172	Posted - 2015.03.05 20:08:00 - [113] - Quote You are using the Unreal engine. For the love of all things good please please remake the classic Facing Worlds map from Unreal Tournament with a portal to the top of each tower!!!!!! Would make me so happy. Vitantur Nothus wrote: Why hide a solution under frothy pile of derpa? MY LIFE FOR AIUR!
Imp Smash Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 724	Posted - 2015.03.06 01:01:00 - [114] - Quote Can the portals be hackable? As in, only the team that controls them can use them? Because then they could be put on large maps halfway between objectives (much like supply depots or CRUs) making them one more piece of map equipment to control for tactical gameplay to either be defended, lost, or blown up.
Talon Paetznick II Gallente Federation Resistance 75	Posted - 2015.03.06 04:09:00 - [115] - Quote a suggestion from me would be personal portals the control scheme would obviously mirror the RE R1 deploys the portal and L1 warps you to it obviously you would only carry one portal at a time an d the warp itself should have windup speed of cloak and decloak also maybe ad a flux effect (shields are depleted when you warp) and this would be less so in the higher tiers all proper murder is premeditated, that's what makes new Eden fun acidental mansluaghter charges in FW however are not
Baltazar Pontain Blauhelme E.B.O.L.A. 134	Posted - 2015.03.06 16:38:00 - [116] - Quote Here are my thoughts about it: * Sad that it is not deployable by players. But maybe some deployable versions will be implemented later. * Have you thought about introducing mass? So a blob would not be possible. If too much mass transists in short time the gate has to recharge. * If deployable: Think about different sizes. For vehicles and persons. * Against camping: What about the possibility to remote blow up a gate? Pro's: Camper dies and other comrades cannot accidently use the gate anymore.
Thor Odinson42 Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback 6169	Posted - 2015.03.06 18:19:00 - [117] - Quote I skimmed through and didn't notice it, but couldn't you use jump fatigue to prevent jumping back and forth? Slightly OT: Anybody remember when Warriors, Inc would glitch in and out of objectives to keep people from hacking them?
GLOBAL RAGE Consolidated Dust 111	Posted - 2015.03.07 10:11:00 - [118] - Quote It sounds as if these gates exist, because they were part of the planets infrastructure not deployed at the start of hostilies. So as a maintenance portal to service the installation they have to make sense and not purely as military access, but as plant servicing ie the rings and roofs. Redundant to ladders, but safer. Entrance and exit would be in proximity to one another. It would make rooftop play more exciting while also being easily countered. Why would you build roads or bridges when you could just teleport?
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 862	Posted - 2015.03.07 10:27:00 - [119] - Quote Just spitballing here, but would it be possible to have these jump gates "link" different districts on a planet together by putting you in a queue for other battles happening on districts within a planet? If possible, that would be a cool way to "open up" the playing field and make dust feel a bit bigger I got enemies, got a lot of enemies , got a lot of people tryna drain me of this energy
Snake Sellors Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 500	Posted - 2015.03.07 19:03:00 - [120] - Quote I think a good idea would be to use them as a point to point transport for squads in skirmish maps, it would allow fast movement between objectives, though i wouldnt suggest directly into the point. it could also be a godd way for full squads to fall back and regroup, etc but you will need to come up with a way of avoiding portal camping, what about auto turrets next to them, it could require hacking the portals for red/blue to use, once initially hacked it will try to kill the other teams if they are too close.



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

Acquire Currency, Disregard Female Canis lupus familiaris

MY LIFE FOR AIUR!