Buildings should only be built in proximity of other buildings.

Discussion in 'Feedback' started by Falchion, Jul 21, 2009.

  1. Falchion

    Falchion Member

    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    With the exception of refineries. In fact, most maps have refineries where a forward barracks would usually be placed. This would also be a valid counter to ninja barracks, which is usually not fun for anyone because 1. People dont killspawn to counter that barracks, and 2. It allows for a cheap victory because an engineer snuck past the front line. The only class allowed even to do a fraction of that damage behind enemy lines should be the scout. Granted, there are some maps with the problem of forward refineries, but I hate the fact that a game can be lost from a single player.
     
  2. Chris0132'

    Chris0132' Developer

    Messages:
    9,482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's possible.

    I do thing ninja raxes are a rather silly thing, yes they allow losing teams to possibly make a comeback but they are a very poor method of doing so. Ninja raxes, ninemines, party busses, all of these are silly ways of trying to fix the problem of empires being very crappily designed in the early stages because the first five minutes determine the course of the next half hour.

    Get rid of ninja raxes, but fix the game in general as well.

    As to the general idea, the one I posted in the territory thread would be my preferred method of implementing this sort of thing, making the building area into a fully fledged game mechanic rather than just a building thing.
     
  3. Fricken Hamster

    Fricken Hamster Mr. Super Serious

    Messages:
    3,620
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There you go off ranting about turning Empires into a Quakewars type game with predefined base areas and stuff again.

    Funny how people had more motivation to play a losing game when it was easy to turn the tide with a ninja or an APC sticky rush. The huge com armor and health buff made the losing team lose even more.
     
  4. OuNin

    OuNin Member

    Messages:
    3,703
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Teams should have anti-enemy-build nodes. To ninja an area, you'd need to kill the node before you can build anything.

    Building should only take place within a certain radius of the radar, but of course, you'd have to tweak the price and power of a radar.
     
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2009
  5. Chris0132'

    Chris0132' Developer

    Messages:
    9,482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There shouldn't need to be motivation to play a losing game because 'losing games' should not exist.

    If a team is losing they should lose quickly, or suffer no major disadvantage until they have been losing for some time and then lose quickly. They should not be forced to fight at a large disadvantage for any length of time because that isn't fun.
     
  6. Fricken Hamster

    Fricken Hamster Mr. Super Serious

    Messages:
    3,620
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It is fun if u can get a apc full of people with sticky grenades and rush their com
     
  7. -=SIP=-

    -=SIP=- Member

    Messages:
    2,133
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If you take away ninja raxes and party busses you will take away the best moments of empires!
     
  8. Falchion

    Falchion Member

    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nice sarcasm there.

    Maybe to give the losing team a final push, maybe a revenge wave of extra resources or something could help give the losing team an extra push.
     
  9. Chris0132'

    Chris0132' Developer

    Messages:
    9,482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't think we should be proud of the best moments of the game being based around desperate attempts to fix the broken early game.

    Not for any of the people who aren't in the APC it isn't.

    Which is the majority of the server.
     
  10. willvette

    willvette Member

    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree with the first post, buildings should be placed near refineries, and each building should have a build radius where the com can place more buildings. This will also limit how far away a com can place turrets from a building (engs. placed turrets are not affected by building radius).
     
  11. Fricken Hamster

    Fricken Hamster Mr. Super Serious

    Messages:
    3,620
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well I'm SOOOOORRRRRAAAYYYYY nobody wanted to include you in their partyboats
     
  12. mr_quackums

    mr_quackums Member

    Messages:
    2,358
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    sounds good, but would maps need to be redesigned? i dont think so because most of the time the fronts are centered around refs anyway.

    it would lead to some interesting map ideas.
     
  13. -=SIP=-

    -=SIP=- Member

    Messages:
    2,133
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So if the enemy is better in the early game you just can sit arround the next 30 minutes and wait for your defeat.
    Ninja barracks are one of the most important parts of empires.
    Often the enemy team is too sure that they will win because they have most parts of the map. By destroying their unprotected main base and build your own base there you can make a nice comeback.
     
  14. Wertbarg

    Wertbarg Member

    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You must construct additional Pylons.:mad:

    How about turrets, refs, and armories can be built anywhere, but only refs and armories give that zone of construction.
     
  15. blizzerd

    blizzerd Member

    Messages:
    10,552
    Likes Received:
    60
    Trophy Points:
    0
    atm empires is like this, get into the "losing" zone and you will not be able to win unless you use cheat tactics

    |----------losing-----------|undecided|-----------winning----------|

    i want it to be like this, the deeper you get into "handicapped" the harder it becomes to defend but comebacks are possible, once into losing there is no turning back and games end within 10 minutes tops

    |losing|--handicap--|--------undecided--------|--favoured--|winning|

    possible ways of doing so:

    the CV gives 25% of max resources on the map (so only max 75% of resource income can be gained by capturing all the refs, and the enemy will always get a minimum 25%)

    -make resources mean "less" for example making research cost only time

    -increase mapsizes
     
  16. -=SIP=-

    -=SIP=- Member

    Messages:
    2,133
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Don't change the current system. If you are on the losing side a comeback should always be hard to achieve.
    If this would be easier these comebacks would be normal gameplay and not one of these rare epic moments.
     
  17. Chris0132'

    Chris0132' Developer

    Messages:
    9,482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No.

    If the enemy is better in the early game it shouldn't cause you to be defeated instantly but take thirty minutes for the game to register that.

    What should happen is that both teams always capture equal amounts of territory at the start and it then takes a concerted push to break the equilibrium, while it is maintained the game should have small victories and losses occuring in the space between the two territories, like the fighting between two raxes, walls slowly advancing and being pushed back until the rax itself is lost, if you can't maintain your push long enough to reach the enemy rax, you get pushed back to the middle and have to try again.

    Considering how damn hard it is to get people to stop fighting in rax trenches I think most people enjoy it, so if we could have that sort of gameplay but all the time and with all the empires components involved, all four classes and tanks and more buildings, that'd be a lot more fun than 'we already won or lost now let's make it take forever for them to win/let's mop up the survivors over the course of the next half hour'.

    That sort of slow pushing forward and backward is something absolutely unique to empires, the problem is that it only occurs on small scales. No other game I know actually creates trench warfare on its own and makes it so damn fun, considering the only two classes that really work are the engineer and the rifleman and they have three useful guns between them, I think it's extraordinary that that can be so fun. Expanding that gameplay into more things and putting more things into it would be an awesome improvement for empires.

    His diagram fairly obviously demonstrates that he doesn't expect 'losing' teams to make comebacks, he expects them to not become 'losing' because of the slightest little thing.

    He also states explicitly that once someone becomes 'losing' the game is over and ends quickly.
     
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2009
  18. Castrol GTX

    Castrol GTX Member

    Messages:
    974
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Half of the point of empires is the freedom to make bases where and how you like. This suggestion would basically limit maps to predefined bases of predefined size.

    I usually like anti-ninja stuff, but this one is too restricting.
     
  19. Nickierv

    Nickierv Member

    Messages:
    510
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You want to get rid of some of the classic empires moments: spawn backwards! for "You must construct additional pylons".

    If that is the case, barracks can only support 6 infantry, there needs to be a build time on tanks and the vehicle factory can only support 2 tanks, and there must be little units that take resources back to the base and the scout class needs to be removed.

    Get 2 apcs.

    You do have a good point: wining is not fun unless you are the one doing the wining.
    In a full 40 slot server, max vehicles is 20. Once the heavy weapons/nukes start flying, there is not a lot an infantry can do in the battle, so the best case is half of the people are winning.

    A lot of people don't get this point and not to make this personal, but it seems to be people who play scouts so they can "snipe" or "recon". There is a time and a place for scouts, and 95% of the time, scouts just arnt useful.
    If 3 scouts are next to a barracks that is getting attacked, I see them as 3 enemy engineers deconstructing the barracks.


    There has been a very lengthy and long standing argument that "getting the cv killed intentionally in any way is greafing, even if the entire team agrees to it" as "there is always room for a comeback".

    To address the first point, as soon as the enemy has broken through, the com needs to start running, otherwise they will be giving the "winning" team too easy of a win. Taken literal, 90% of the rounds are lost due to the com not dragging it out, but it may be argued that there is no where for the com to run to.

    The best ways for a comeback are: 9mineing (removed), ninja rax (you want to remove), ninja rush (implied lame/needs to be removed as 1 person is doing all the work).
    Unless the maps are perfectly symmetrical (money is, proving grounds is, thats about it) one team has some minor advantage over the other.

    There are 2 ways a game can go: once one team as a reasonable advantage, the quickly and decisively crush the other team and end the game quickly with no chance of a comeback, or the game continues with a chance of a comeback. As it stands now, the first one only happens with stacked teams. No one want to play on a team that is slowly starving due to a lack of resources. If this is the case, as soon as one team is going to lose, any vets will see it coming and may leave. If anything, this will only serve to keep the game from failing for the next half hour.

    It seems to me that this thread is addressing the second issue to get the possibility of a comeback and unless we address the issues of how we want a game to end.
    http://forums.empiresmod.com/showthread.php?t=10284 addresses how/when a game ends.
     
  20. Chris0132'

    Chris0132' Developer

    Messages:
    9,482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    When do you ever build a base miles away from a resource point?

    Also I don't think that's 'half the point of empires' seeing as 'half the time in empires' you build bases in the same place every time and 95% of the server don't have any say in the placement.
     

Share This Page