CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
136
   |
Posted - 2013.06.19 01:18:00 -
[1] - Quote
Noc Tempre wrote:The code is available to have one terminal control multiple assets. What was interesting to learn, it can control the owner of any asset, not just null cannons. This can be used to make the current skirmish a little better while we wait for 3.0.
How it works - add a new console, the "Defense Command Terminal". If your team captures it, all turrets on the socket belong to you. To make this meaningful, all turrets would no longer be hack-able individually. An additional "Support Command Terminal" would do the same for CRUs and supply depots.
Their is one part that will require a change in code for this idea, and that is to disable the individual hacking of the installations if it is controlled by a single one. We would probably want to have the option to turn on or off individual hacking of said installations on a per installation basis.
Noc Tempre wrote:What it means - you have new objectives that don't directly help you win, but are still necessary to balance your tactics around. It spreads out important places to be which penalizes zerging. It make the turrets themselves more valuable since taking over the socket will flip the entire perimeter defense at once, not just the current location that is likely already cleared.
I see the value in it and would like to do it. It's a matter of getting it into our backlog (don't take that word by what you think, it just means get on the todo list).
Noc Tempre wrote:When is it - it could happen very quickly, before Uprising 1.2 even, but only if the community wants it because it would replace entirely the current mechanics if introduced for Skirmish, and would be unwise to introduce as a new queue at this time. So does this appeal to you? Why? Does it sound terrible? Why not then?
By 1.2 it would not be able to be done. That is a large amount of work. The code would probably be rather simple, but the level design team would have to implement this in all sockets, then of course test it. This also means we would probably have to actually set up entire new installation layouts in the sockets (a seperate set for this purpose), and as you may know, there are a lot of sockets.
Noc Tempre wrote:Also, turrets need at least supply depot health, it's silly they can be 1-2 shot by common fits. But that only partially is on-topic.
Once turrets are player dropped, we don't want a zerg of super strong turrets do we? We will probably have a good deal of them showing up once you guys can call them in. Those should be the ones you guys can fit to be stronger. My personal opinion on that anyways. |
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
142
|
Posted - 2013.06.19 03:40:00 -
[2] - Quote
Vallud Eadesso wrote:While you're here, Logic... is this not a slight modification of the code used in the old alpha builds?
When we hacked a point weapons and spawn points would spawn in. Why can't we just do that and 'lock' the modules dropped down to be unhackable?
I get the map guys may need more time to work on it, but I don't see it taking an incredibly long time. All the code and assets are there for both systems (Old alpha game mode + Ambush OMS).
They just need tying together, surely?
That code has been ignored since the implementation of SK 2.0. It just does not function and would require an entire re-write to work the current code. |
CCP LogicLoop
C C P
C C P Alliance
159
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 01:28:00 -
[3] - Quote
From Costa Rica wrote:CCP LogicLoop wrote:Vallud Eadesso wrote:While you're here, Logic... is this not a slight modification of the code used in the old alpha builds?
When we hacked a point weapons and spawn points would spawn in. Why can't we just do that and 'lock' the modules dropped down to be unhackable?
I get the map guys may need more time to work on it, but I don't see it taking an incredibly long time. All the code and assets are there for both systems (Old alpha game mode + Ambush OMS).
They just need tying together, surely? That code has been ignored since the implementation of SK 2.0. It just does not function and would require an entire re-write to work the current code. now that just does not seem wise.
It's not about a wise decision or not. We pulled away from SK 1.0. That is why it is called SK 2.0. All code and optimizations in terms of game modes and a lot of other game mechanics went into the support of SK 2.0 and the various Ambush settings. Have to remember as optimizations happen, as the new skirmish came in to place, a lot of its core code was based on the older stuff. It's not like we just started a whole new system on the side. We worked with what we had at the time.  |