SmedBlog: Seamless Continents/Naval Units - Page 13

Masterr · 2012-08-13, 09:53 AM

@duskguy

I meant for compartmentalized damage to be only done to the carriers (GVC - ground vehicle carrier and AC). Since the carriers are mobile capture points, disarm its defenses, board the carrier, take it over.

As far as seat switching goes...since it IS a mobile spawn point/mobile capture point, I would like for it to be just like defending an outpost...that moves..on water. There doesn't HAVE to be someone in the driver seat but someone that is certified to be a captain, or the outfit guy who spawned it, i hope joe shmo cant drive it because that is a very resource heavy piece of equipment he is using.

Shoot at the carrier's turrets, lowered defenses, shoot at its hull....sinks the carrier.

Battleships will be empire specific they are the "MBT"

destroyers "lightnings"

Patrol boats "holds 6 members for beach raids"

Jet ski's "ATV's"

I would like for infantry to be in the water, but they can't swim all day...stamina bar of sorts.

For the GVC, i'm either thinking this carrier has a special hull where it could pretty much beach itself and start deploying tanks....or it pushes out "naval loadstars" at the terminal you can select what you want in the loadstar, you jump in the loadstart that has one lightning and one MBT...for example. I rather have the first option though....fewer steps is better.

I'll put my ideas of how capturing the AC and other details...in-depth..when i make my own thread.

OcO · 2012-08-13, 10:41 AM

ON SEAMLESS WORLDS:
Some good ideas starting to get tossed around. Early brainstorming on how to add this type of feature that both makes sense and enhances the over all game play is important IMO. I really think it is important for SOE to make a decision early on that this is something they plan to do or not, especially in regards to making the world seamless.

Naval aspects can easily be added with new content in the form of oil rigs, islands and other offshore objectives. If the devs do not plan on a seamless world down the line than they can basically throw offshore objectives around a continent willy nilly since each continent is basically separate. However if they do want to be able to one day open the planet as 1 huge seamless world than they need to be designing the planets surface layout with that in mind now.

As someone else mentioned the biggest hurdle to a seamless world is population density. Each continent is currently designed for roughly 2k players. Each continent added means the servers either need to be able to handle the possibility of mass 2K/4K/6K+/etc population swings from continent to continent or there needs to be some realistically explained way to avoid having half an outfit unable to cross the invisible border from 1 local server to another cause the area is population capped. I will leave this to the devs to work out.

ON NAVAL ASPECTS:
First off to people asking why have a navy at all when you can just fly across the oceans? Simple answer is you can't fly there. With the upcoming weather system it is very easy and game play realistic for the devs to limit aircraft to within a specific radius of each continent due to continual wind and electrical storms which could exist over deep water. No need to add a fuel mechanic which limits land based play also.

I can see a few options for how to handle the largest Mobile Naval Bases(MNB). I think we are limiting ourselves by just thinking of the biggest model as a aircraft carrier. We should instead be thinking of these as naval versions of the massive ground based installations we have to fight over. It is entirely possible for the largest unit to be capable of spawning both land and air vehicles if it "beaches" itself. If you at least allow part of it to land than tanks can drive off it and head inland. As long as it can touch the shoreline ground vehicles from any faction could depart from it and not just VS since they don't sink. Another option is to allow smaller ships to be spawned from MNBs so you can take landing craft and ferry ground vehicles ashore that way.

It was suggested that each faction would have at least 1 uncap-able naval base so they always have a ship spawn point. I would suggest making the largest MNBs globally limited and linking each MNB to a specific uncap-able home port. Give each faction 1 or 2 and make the MNB itself uncap but destroyable. If destroyed it begins a very long timer before another is spawned at its designated naval base. IMO these super large MNBs should not be outfit spawned as they are indeed empire-level assets. In this way you avoid the "rich get richer" problem as no faction can have more than a specific number of MNBs at a time. You also don't have to worry about situations where individual outfits don't want to spawn these to combat attacks from other factions cause they just plain cost to much resource wise.

Now I said make these MNBs uncap but destroyable however I actually mean a combination of the two and not how many of you are going to read it. I suggest that the MNB itself is not destroyable much like any other major base but instead by successfully capturing/hacking and maintaining control of a number of key points inside it for a set time you can cause it to self destruct. Should the win conditions be met a 5 minute or so countdown timer would begin and everyone on board would have that long to get away or be blown up along with the MNB. This provides an entirely new type of base capture mechanic than the current bases' faction flipping.

I would indeed add plenty of outfit-level and individual player spawned naval craft of varying types as well, as Duskguy had started to list out earlier. However like I mentioned if the largest model MNB was invulnerable to regular fire and limited in number for each faction than a zerg navy would not be invincible due to sheer DPS potential and the defending players can keep repelling the attackers if they work together better. I would have some outfit-level MNBs that are both cap-able or destroyable however.

As an empire-level assets it should require some heavy cert spending to be able to drive the largest MNB. Not just anyone should be able to do so. I'll leave specific naval certs for now though as those can be worked out after other much more important aspects of naval warfare are covered.

Thoughts/comments/concerns?

Duskguy · 2012-08-13, 10:50 AM

Originally Posted by OcO

ON NAVAL ASPECTS:
First off to people asking why have a navy at all when you can just fly across the oceans? Simple answer is you can't fly there. With the upcoming weather system it is very easy and game play realistic for the devs to limit aircraft to within a specific radius of each continent due to continual wind and electrical storms which could exist over deep water. No need to add a fuel mechanic which limits land based play also.
Thoughts/comments/concerns?

rather than not being able to fly over the water, there is a simpler answer.
it is easier to shoot down an aircraft than it will be to sink a boat.

aircraft are reasonably light, therefore reasonably lightly armored, and boats i assume will have the ability to shoot at aircraft. aircraft can shoot at aircraft as well.

boats simply have to be bouyant, and can therefore have more armor than an aircraft. they can shoot at aircraft that attack them, and if they add a setup anything like what i proposed on the previous page, boats will have armor against aircraft, and so would have an advantage in boat vs aircraft situations.

Masterr · 2012-08-13, 11:07 AM

ON NAVAL ASPECTS:
First off to people asking why have a navy at all when you can just fly across the oceans? Simple answer is you can't fly there. With the upcoming weather system it is very easy and game play realistic for the devs to limit aircraft to within a specific radius of each continent due to continual wind and electrical storms which could exist over deep water. No need to add a fuel mechanic which limits land based play also.

I dont like this idea, it limits aircraft in naval warfare. Plus my idea does not limit land based aircraft, my proposal was that u have infinite fuel on land and u have finite fuel on water. why would this make sense? you could say nanite is wave based/beam based and the aircraft are being actively fueled by these nanites that are being pumped around the atmosphere from facilities, the majority of the oceans do not have facilities...hence the need for fuel.

I can see a few options for how to handle the largest Mobile Naval Bases(MNB). I think we are limiting ourselves by just thinking of the biggest model as a aircraft carrier. We should instead be thinking of these as naval versions of the massive ground based installations we have to fight over. It is entirely possible for the largest unit to be capable of spawning both land and air vehicles if it "beaches" itself. If you at least allow part of it to land than tanks can drive off it and head inland. As long as it can touch the shoreline ground vehicles from any faction could depart from it and not just VS since they don't sink. Another option is to allow smaller ships to be spawned from MNBs so you can take landing craft and ferry ground vehicles ashore that way.

Already said this, I proposed a GVC (ground vehicle carrier). I rather have more than one carrier than an all-in-one. GVC would have water loadstars or beach itself. They COULD make just one carrier but the thing would be massive. Is there any bases in planetside 2 that can both spawn aircraft and ground vehicles? The idea of just one carrier is been made even more enticing.

It was suggested that each faction would have at least 1 uncap-able naval base so they always have a ship spawn point. I would suggest making the largest MNBs globally limited and linking each MNB to a specific uncap-able home port. Give each faction 1 or 2 and make the MNB itself uncap but destroyable. If destroyed it begins a very long timer before another is spawned at its designated naval base. IMO these super large MNBs should not be outfit spawned as they are indeed empire-level assets. In this way you avoid the "rich get richer" problem as no faction can have more than a specific number of MNBs at a time. You also don't have to worry about situations where individual outfits don't want to spawn these to combat attacks from other factions cause they just plain cost to much resource wise.

I don't think uncappable naval bases is a good move, mentioned why as well in another post.

Now I said make these MNBs uncap but destroyable however I actually mean a combination of the two and not how many of you are going to read it. I suggest that the MNB itself is not destroyable much like any other major base but instead by successfully capturing/hacking and maintaining control of a number of key points inside it for a set time you can cause it to self destruct. Should the win conditions be met a 5 minute or so countdown timer would begin and everyone on board would have that long to get away or be blown up along with the MNB. This provides an entirely new type of base capture mechanic than the current bases' faction flipping.

Don't like this idea. If your going to go through the trouble of capturing and holding key points on the ship...you should just take it over since that's better than destroying it.

As an empire-level assets it should require some heavy cert spending to be able to drive the largest MNB. Not just anyone should be able to do so. I'll leave specific naval certs for now though as those can be worked out after other much more important aspects of naval warfare are covered.

agreed

Duskguy · 2012-08-13, 11:15 AM

masterr, the warp gate is an uncapturable land spawn point, so why wouldn't it, or a similar device work for basic sea vehicles.

in my proposition about certain naval bases on certain continents allowing the build of certain advanced units, the warp gate would allow thigns like AC carrier and basic units while the naval bases allow advanced units.

it might even work better if the naval bases allowed for more (numerical) advanced units. such as base A allows for an additional AC while base B allows 2 more battleships and base C allows 2 more 2 person submarines, or something along those lines.
it would be a case of the rich get richer, but then those "rich" factions would have more area to cover on a seemless world and you could spawn at a different warp gate with naval, land or air units to get around any possible blockade

Masterr · 2012-08-13, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by Duskguy

masterr, the warp gate is an uncapturable land spawn point, so why wouldn't it, or a similar device work for basic sea vehicles.

in my proposition about certain naval bases on certain continents allowing the build of certain advanced units, the warp gate would allow thigns like AC carrier and basic units while the naval bases allow advanced units.

it might even work better if the naval bases allowed for more (numerical) advanced units. such as base A allows for an additional AC while base B allows 2 more battleships and base C allows 2 more 2 person submarines, or something along those lines.
it would be a case of the rich get richer, but then those "rich" factions would have more area to cover on a seemless world and you could spawn at a different warp gate with naval, land or air units to get around any possible blockade

So your trying to sell me an uncapturable naval base...hmm. The thing with that is....according to lore...warpgates should remain the uncapturable entity. Also lets say that your defending against a navy. The first thing the navy would want to do, is to take over the shipyards and such, its a part of their strategy. The navy would have to contest against tanks, aircraft, infantry from the land when they are taking the beaches...they don't want ships hitting their flank. That would take away part of the strategy of attacking the naval assets. Also, on land, aircraft and ground vehicles are all contestable everywhere, I don't see why naval units will get to be special and not have to worry about being taken over. Shipyards would be hit by air,infantry,ground, and from the water. Many vehicles. Now for certain shipyards spawning certain ships....i can dig it. Small shipyard spawns patrol boats. Naval base spawns everything. Naval bases will be large bases with 3-6 capture points needed to secure the base. Will also provide rare resources for naval units.

Rare resources, I was discussing this with a friend earlier. Aquarius - new resource. It will take 2000 auraxium to make a carrier it will take 1000 Aquarius to do the same thing. (of course these are ballparks but just showing you want im getting at)

The base that would yield the most aquarius would be offshore bases...think like a biodome in the middle of the ocean. Only reachable by boat. No places to land a plane. Capture this base, you get Aquarius and be able to spawn more ships.

How to acquire aquarius? Take naval bases/ship yards/offshore facilities
What yields the most aquarius (in order)? offshore facilities/naval bases/ship yards

This idea will be put into my own thread coming up soon. Writing in this thread to bounce back idea before I make my final proposal.

Duskguy · 2012-08-13, 11:46 AM

i was thinking, why not have land and air units come from one side of the warp gate and naval units come out the other, in the water. would no longer need a sperte facility, and again, wouldn't be able to create all naval units, just the basic ones so that the faction can try to recapture naval bases.

otherwise you end up with land/air/sea potentially facing a warp gate that can only create land and air units.

berzerkerking · 2012-08-13, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by Baneblade

No, I mean air navy rather than having a water navy.

that kills the fun man

Masterr · 2012-08-13, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by Duskguy

i was thinking, why not have land and air units come from one side of the warp gate and naval units come out the other, in the water. would no longer need a sperte facility, and again, wouldn't be able to create all naval units, just the basic ones so that the faction can try to recapture naval bases.

otherwise you end up with land/air/sea potentially facing a warp gate that can only create land and air units.

OH! well why didn't you say so?! lol, yes I like this idea, I just didn't understand what you meant by the way you proposed it. Will add to thread. Currently Warpgates can spawn everything under the sun...so it should be able to spawn naval units as well.

Baneblade · 2012-08-13, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by berzerkerking

that kills the fun man

Eh???

RoninOni · 2012-08-13, 01:29 PM

With carriers, there should be a 'captain' list of authorized players who can be captains. When an outfit purcahses an AC they get to determine who is allowed to pilot it to prevent some random lowbie in the unit taking it off into enemy waters by himself.

julfo · 2012-08-13, 02:37 PM

As everyone else has said, epic idea, but for later on rather than sooner.

Zapa · 2012-08-13, 03:07 PM

That would be badass. Kinda hard to do but i am sure its possible (server side). Its more about how much time they want to put into doing something like that. but a lot of it depends on what we cant see, the code.

my thoughts: it would be awesome if you want to take the time. (I cant see how it would mess up the game play)

OcO · 2012-08-13, 03:12 PM

A little rethinking on my Mobile Naval Base suggestion. I rethought my original idea to make this more of what I originally had in mind which is a super massive naval base to fight over just like the ground based installations we have atm. I think the following would work better, and allows for Masterr's suggestions on separate GVC and ACC and resources.

One problem with anything labeled as an empire-level asset is who gets to drive it. If something is spawned by a particular outfit they can lock it down to whomever they wish to give rights to.

My new idea is instead of 1-2 MNB per faction make 1 per continent. The MNB circles the island at a set distance from shore and at a set speed and can not be driven by players. If you want to attack one continent from another you are still going to need the GVC and ACC suggested as this MNB is not technically a ship but as the name suggests this is simply a slowly moving naval version of the ground bases we currently have to fight over. It would not be destroyable. Each faction would fight to cap it and try to keep control of it.

I would make it very slow moving. While exact rotation times could be worked out, I'm thinking something like 4-6 hours to circle the continent once. You want it to be slow enough that it would be considered a threat if an enemy faction had control of it when it passed behind your frontlines and gave them access to coastal hexes you controlled.

Allow aircraft spawns and some smaller naval vessels though maybe not the larger GVC and ACC suggested by others. In this way for each continent each faction would have naval spawning available from their warpgates and 1 faction at a time would have a second naval spawn point.

Another problem to consider when adding any offshore static objective like islands and oil rigs etc is that 1 faction will always be closer and thus have an easier time trying to control it. Combine this with the suggested ideas of having naval specific harvested resources and chances are whichever faction is closest to the resource node will control it more often and thus be able to build more naval units. In addition to being a mobile spawn point to base attacks from, make the MNB itself a resource node. I would even make it THE resource node and worth more naval resources per tick than any static location. Since the base is constantly moving each faction has equal access to it as it passes closest to their warpgate/sanct.

I will think on this a bit more but I'm trying to think this up as a companion to ground and air carriers and give more meaning to why have naval fighting not as a replacement to them. The MNB offers a dynamic naval battlefield that can be incorporated whether the game world is made seamless or not.

Naz The Eternal · 2012-08-13, 03:23 PM

Originally Posted by Sledgecrushr

Umm its just my opinion but i think water navy is a dumb idea when your air power can literally fly forever. Why float at boating speeds when you can fly at jet speeds. Interesting idea for modern battlefield 4, not so good for sc fi ps2.

Ever seen how much antiair a ship can hold? Much more defendable than aircraft.

Great idea, making it work is going to be tough, if accomplished it will be yet another frontier of gaming that planetside will have created

www.ToxinGamers.com - Posted via Tapatalk