interacting with pw structures ingame

Page of 2 (25 records)

sort
[V]sheep 12 years ago PW structures are not interacting enough with the game. They are only a burden to defending team. They can be destroyed in-game, leaving no wrecks. But they can not be repaired (resurrected) in-game. What about leaving (small) wrecks and allowing resurrection in-game? That would only be for patient people though, given their size. It should probably be limited to structures destroyed during current game and should leave wrecks making up far less than 40%, or they would become the biggest source of metal in pw games. Going a bit further, they should only uncloak for owner clan (or faction). Even further, they could be self-d by their owner in-game. That would give a (costly) tactical advantage to defending team, if frontline is near structures. +0 / -0
[V]sheep 12 years ago Moar further, structures could be placed at ~1/3 of the map instead of middle, near defending team, and they could provide LOS to owners. After all, they own this! Not sure how big an advantage that would be, but it would benefit defending team... +0 / -0
Saktoth 12 years ago You can already stick pitbulls behind them and use them as defense. Thats too much interaction, IMO. They are objectives, they arent meant to interact with the game. It is interesting and not game-breaking to have these kind of random obstacles in the middle of the map, but LoS, metal, etc would be too much. Using them as defense for pitbulls is too much already... +0 / -0
[DE]Rick 12 years ago Saktoth move them to the defending team side and that pitbull stuff is fixed. Its stupid to porc on your half of the map. In middle (some) porc can be effective through due to more eco. +0 / -0
Licho 12 years ago Who is defending team? +0 / -0
[V]sheep 12 years ago The team having players from the clan/faction owning the planet. What else could it be? +0 / -0
Licho 12 years ago What if its both teams? What if its none of them? +0 / -0
[V]sheep 12 years ago Can a clan be split among teams? If not, then there is at most one defending team. If it can, balance is still broken. Unless you are fine with ppl sabotaging games to win the meta-game. If there is no defending team (because fight is team(fac W+fac X) vs team(fac Y) on a planet owned by some player in faction Z), then why would structures be anywhere but in the middle of the map, as it is now? If pw structures positions were persistent from game to game, I would understand the hidden meaning of your questions. If the planet is not owned, how could there be a defending team? If fight is team(fac W+fac X) vs team(faction Y); planet owner is a player from clan C; clan C is part of faction W; no player of clan C plays this game, then it can be decided whether team(faction W+X) is considered defending or not. It could be, but it could also be argued against. A choice has to be made, a simple static choice, or more dynamic based on clan diplomacy. But clearly, team(faction Y) cant be considered defending... Is there a case that is not covered? Resurrection should only be allowed for defending team. Unless you want to mess with planets harboring structures from multiple clans... +0 / -0
Licho 12 years ago Look at balance code.. there is nothing certain about it. its controlled by math. Anything can happen, including clan vs clan if its the only way to save elo balance +0 / -0
Licho 12 years ago Even if planet is not owned there can be structures .. and even if clan is not present, faction might be etc.. Lots of cases that can happen .. or allies of faction .. or 2 allieas one in each time.. +0 / -0
Saktoth 12 years ago The pitbull isnt fixed, as the attacking player can still use it as wall, even if for the defending player, the pitbull will refuse to shoot through friendlies. Obviously, pw structures shouldnt be auto-fired upon- its bad enough that they uncloak units. +0 / -0
[V]SeoAiri]0K[ 12 years ago Whats the point of basically giving the investor only disadvantages ingame from metagame structures? Is bombing a planet not enough? It's not logic for me that the team, who controlles the planet and structures has only disadvantages ingame, if at all they should start with better eco or army or mapcontrol, sure that wouldn't make the game fair but we all know pw is not about fairness :P +0 / -0
Saktoth 12 years ago We shut down the first PW entirely because it was not fair. If PW cannot be made fair long term, it has no future. Unfair games arent fun long term. The problem with almost all interactions with PW structures is that it just depends on how long the game takes and whether the enemy resigns or not. Having different 'game modes' like one where the defending players start in the middle of the map ringed by enemies, or 'hold out' where you have to defend a structure for a fixed amount of time, etc, are fine (but propper FFA and 1v1 support needs to be added first). Asymmetrical battles are okay, if balanced. But they have to be fun for all involved: Flat bonuses arent. +0 / -0
NeonSturm 12 years ago Pitbull :( the only thing that it was good for... You can stun them with rakeeter anyway... I think Pitbull should get 2 different altitudes where it can fire - to fire over low targets or the default state it has about 25% armor - else it can have 0% and fire even over other pitbulls. That would make more sense to me. Also it should be able to fire through terra walls. They have too many disadvantages. Or add some range to them since they do less damage than a stinger. It is going to be redundant +0 / -0
GoogleFrog 12 years ago Pitbull is good for wreck fields. +0 / -0
LobHunter 12 years ago IMHO there should be 2 kinds of metagame structures: 1. Mines, facs and all this shit - those are just standing there waitin to get owned. Owning team can selfd those if they want. If they do not they leave wreck. That wreck has like 50% of their M. Now this means 50% repair cost. If someone sucks M away- more repair costs lol. If you selfd them - 100% repairs but no M for the bad guys. 2. Def structures such as orbital defence are lame. What about some real def? As in a free defenders, e.g. 4x that defending team can place with their coms? Would be quite nice to have. And it would balance the trouble with the PW structures - come closer and put a couple turrets nearby! +0 / -0
NeonSturm 12 years ago Orbital or Planetary Defense = Defenders? We could spawn screamers! @Pitbull - I want a Pitbull that fires through razors or I want free wreckages around it! Stinger can shot over wreckages - that argument doesn't count. +0 / -0
LobHunter 12 years ago Well screamers would be kinda OP. but still given appropriate cost on strategy map, this would make it fun - as in no air raids for the attackers. +0 / -0
NeonSturm 12 years ago you will still need to pay for the shots which can effectively drain with bomb drones. +0 / -0
[DE]Rick 12 years ago Only nubs leave a screamer on fire at will. +0 / -0

Page of 2 (25 records)

Forum index > General discussion > PlanetWars >