Some things i've noticed

[euan-missile]

(apologies if this is in the wrong subforum) 

So I've only been playing for around half a year, but in that time i've had some pretty interesting discussions with so many varying players regarding certain changes that if nothing, could be food for thought. (plus some little things I noticed too) 

 

1) MRLs Bending / Auto Lock.  Seeing as the ability to curve MRLs rockets so violently can really allow GDI to do some serious damage to any turtling abilities NOD might have in their base, (and suffer no retaliation) it seems only fair that the MRLs should be restricted to either having  -- auto lock ability WITH straight fire rockets,( no curving)  or TOW style rockets (free aim/curving) WITHOUT auto lock ability.  

- Another note is to nerf the Splash damage from Individual MRLs rockets, It's extremely violent, even against flak armoured inf.

 

2) Destroying Power Plant. (On AGT/Obelisk maps)  Back in original ren I was always frustrated that the power plant not only doubled the prices of vehicles & characters, but also took down the AGT/Obelisk as well. I've always felt like this was especially over powered, seeing as the power plant is almost always accessible by infantry paths in some of the most popular maps renegade X has to offer, destroying it guarantees a victory substantially more than if you was to destroy the Hon/Bar or Air/Wep.  In Ren X, the prices of items aren't doubled which is nice, but the complete loss of AGT/Obelisk is a massive disadvantage, one that I do not feel is entirely made up by the addition of turrets and smaller guard towers. (Which aren't really common in AGT/Obelisk maps anyway)  

The proposed idea, halves the effectiveness of the AGT/Obelisk, instead of completely disabling it, the way this can be implemented is very varied and very flexible, for instance you could have the obelisk shoot at the same damage rate, but at only 50% fire rate, or 50% fire rate and 50% damage, and/or even half the range detection. And the AGT could lose the ability to detect stealth targets, along with hampered RoF and Dam. - It's all left up to interpretation.   

 

3) Allow Deadeye / BH sniper to remain after Bar/Hon destruction. - The reasoning behind this is that, during the loss of the Bar/Hon, the ability to retaliate against long distance snipers drops off to 100%. The marksman rifle cannot do the job, and infantry can be Very Violently locked down in their base. However, the price for this character would be substantially increased, or alternatively, create a new hidden sniper class that only appears in character screen after the loss of bar/hon, which sits between Marksman and Deadeye / BH balance, all at the appropriate price.

 

4) the reverb / distortion on the word 'maggot' from Stealth Black Hand Character voice SFX / kill taunt sound, is a little too close to a homophobic slur. -  Maybe its just me,  but that's definitely how i'm hearing it, especially with battlefield sfx playing. I just wouldn't want anyone to think that's whats being said.  

 

Anyway, hope these can provoke some brains. 

 

 

Edited August 22, 2019 by euan-missile

[Handepsilon]

Quote

the reverb / distortion on the word 'maggot' from SBH character voice sfx / kill taunt sound, is a little too close to a homophobic slur. -  Maybe its just me,  but that's definitely how i'm hearing it, especially with battlefield sfx playing. I just wouldn't want anyone to think that's whats being said.  

Actually TF2 Soldier also uses that. So does Mendoza by the way

[Yeetler]

You have no problem talking shit ingame, but Maggot is where you draw the line? PLEASE.

I think OB & AGT should stay offline when PP is destroyed, but I would be nice if a Hotwire / Tech could power it (50%) by "repairing" the MCT & maybe an engineer could power it by 25%.

That doesn't mean 4 engineers can power it by up to a 100% again.

Edited August 21, 2019 by R E A P E R

[euan-missile]

15 hours ago, Handepsilon said:

Actually TF2 Soldier also uses that. So does Mendoza by the way

Yes, but neither the TF2 Soldier or Mendoza have the reverb/distortion SFX of the Stealth black Hand character, hence why it can be confused more easily. (The 'M' Is virtually silent.)

12 hours ago, R E A P E R said:

You have no problem talking shit ingame, but Maggot is where you draw the line? PLEASE.

I think OB & AGT should stay offline when PP is destroyed, but I would be nice if a Hotwire / Tech could power it (50%) by "repairing" the MCT & maybe an engineer could power it by 25%.

That doesn't mean 4 engineers can power it by up to a 100% again.

Firstly Reaper, none of my in-game attitudes are serious, only playful, sarcastic and humorous. (and even then, never homophobic) You do not know me enough to understand my humour, so do not worry. I care for a playful environment, not for a toxic environment - no less a homophobic one.

I do like your idea, I keep finding people repairing Obelisk/AGT when it is offline (so it's effectively a useless building) which wastes everyones time, would be nice to use that time by powering it with the repair gun as a substitute for the powerplant.

 

 

 

Edited August 21, 2019 by euan-missile

[NodSaibot]

I don't think becoming a battery would be anymore fun than just repping in the first place. PP being destroyed and affecting everything is arguably bad gameplay, but I don't think having people become batteries is any better as it stands. Doesn't seem very fun to me

[euan-missile]

6 hours ago, buttons said:

I don't think becoming a battery would be anymore fun than just repping in the first place. PP being destroyed and affecting everything is arguably bad gameplay, but I don't think having people become batteries is any better as it stands. Doesn't seem very fun to me

Very good point, but my ultimate agenda is to reduce the effects that destroying a power plant has on turning the tide of battle (on a AGT/Obelisk map) and nobody said it would be fun if you wish to recover parts of the Obelisk/AGT support for your team, that said, you could offer VP points & increased credits as a motive, perhaps even kill / dam assists. 

And consider, there are plenty of Afk-reps that wouldn't mind doing the job for the benefit of others but, I see your point about gameplay, we shouldn't count on someone to sacrifice their fun for others, which brings us back to my original idea where the AGT/Obelisk goes half-offline upon destruction of the power plant, requiring no tech/repairs to keep it in that state. 

 

So, what does anyone think about the idea?

 

 

Edited August 21, 2019 by euan-missile

[Neutron]

1 hour ago, euan-missile said:

Very good point, but my ultimate agenda is to reduce the effects that destroying a power plant has on turning the tide of battle (on a AGT/Obelisk map) and nobody said it would be fun if you wish to recover parts of the Obelisk/AGT support for your team, that said, you could offer VP points & increased credits as a motive, perhaps even kill / dam assists. 

And consider, there are plenty of Afk-reps that wouldn't mind doing the job for the benefit of others but, I see your point about gameplay, we shouldn't count on someone to sacrifice their fun for others, which brings us back to my original idea where the AGT/Obelisk goes half-offline upon destruction of the power plant, requiring no tech/repairs to keep it in that state. 

 

So, what does anyone think about the idea of a half-offline agt/obelisk? 

 

 

Maybe give the Commander the option to drop/pay some VP points to charge the Obelisk/AGT when the power plant is destroyed? There could even be an auto-pay option where it would automatically pay X amount of VP points per minute to charge up Obelisk/AGT when the power plant is destroyed.

Edited August 21, 2019 by Neutron

[euan-missile]

1 hour ago, Neutron said:

Maybe give the Commander the option to drop/pay some VP points to charge the Obelisk/AGT when the power plant is destroyed? There could even be an auto-pay option where it would automatically pay X amount of VP points per minute to charge up Obelisk/AGT when the power plant is destroyed.

I love your suggestion. It would be absolutely ideal for there to be a cost to have the Obelisk/AGT working in some capacity, the cost never being the price of fun. Instead something more trivial like points.

Creating "power plant options" as a subcategory in the commander menu, (only being accessible when the Obelisk/AGT is down) and having the option to redirect remaining base power to AGT/Obelisk (at the cost of X CP points for every X minutes) would be the best way to approach this for overall balance. 

My only gripe is that should there be an inexperienced commander at the helm, this feature will go unnoticed and the whole team will suffer but I'm sure that's not entirely a problem as poor commanders damage the team in much more significant ways. 

 

-- Of course, once you've found the method of allowing the AGT/Obelisk to come to life, you now have the question of WHAT is brought back to life. - Should it be brought back to life completely, or weakened? If weakened, what should be the RoF/Dam/Range be? Will it detect stealth targets? Will it be accurate? etc, etc, 

Loving the responses guys, lmk what else you think of. 

Edited August 21, 2019 by euan-missile

[NodSaibot]

If anything, it should be something simple and easy to understand. Have it say "Low Power" on the targetting box and have it fire slower/charge slower.

[vandal33]

I like the idea of players being forced to manually charge up the AGT/Obelisk if power plant is destroyed... something like the Tesla Coils in Red Alert 2. How about 2 people needed at the same time to charge it so a single startfire AFKer won't negate this punishment. If the base is cut from power, the opposing team deserves to have an easier time sneaking, easier to slip in during a blackout. This means teams without power won't have active base defense all the time or else they suffer 2 less players in the field and should only charge it up when they confirmed the enemy is about to do a big rush.

This way, a power plant-destroyed defense can still be useful to repel big rushes but the team is still punished (as they deserve for losing power) with inactive base defense if there are no people charging it.

As for Maggot, it isn't toxic. It's a non-serious, playful and humorous taunt said by the game characters. I've seen worse retorts on the chat. 

[euan-missile]

12 hours ago, buttons said:

If anything, it should be something simple and easy to understand. Have it say "Low Power" on the targetting box and have it fire slower/charge slower.

Yes that was my original idea, however bare in mind the biggest reason the PP is targeted on AGT/Obelisk maps is because people need them to be entirely disabled,  I don't want to make the PP a target not worth hitting. So, it would make better sense if the AGT/Obelisk required a secondary MANUAL way of power, either by players or CP, making it more of a challenge for those who have lost their PP.

 

9 hours ago, vandal33 said:

I like the idea of players being forced to manually charge up the AGT/Obelisk if power plant is destroyed... something like the Tesla Coils in Red Alert 2. How about 2 people needed at the same time to charge it so a single startfire AFKer won't negate this punishment. If the base is cut from power, the opposing team deserves to have an easier time sneaking, easier to slip in during a blackout. This means teams without power won't have active base defense all the time or else they suffer 2 less players in the field and should only charge it up when they confirmed the enemy is about to do a big rush.

This way, a power plant-destroyed defense can still be useful to repel big rushes but the team is still punished (as they deserve for losing power) with inactive base defense if there are no people charging it.

As for Maggot, it isn't toxic. It's a non-serious, playful and humorous taunt said by the game characters. I've seen worse retorts on the chat. 

 

You propose a very interesting point, a good reason the PP is targeted is because people want the ability to sneak when the AGT/Obelisk is down. My original Idea (and that supported by Buttons) is that it should go "half-offline / low power" automatically without team intervention upon destruction on the PP,

but I do fear that is a little bit unfair to the team that took the effort to destroy the PP, because even IF this change is implemented the PP will still be one the most guarded building in the game, so yes, I entirely agree there should be a punishment by the means of a manual power supply to the AGT/Obby.

Overall, powering it by CP points isn't very strategic and in some ways having it powered by players would offer an interactive element of defence, which would be the first of its kind outside of repairing and mannable turrets,  I can imagine the commander shouting at people to "POWER OB"  or " POWER AGT" as an enemy rush is preparing to steamroll the base.

As for your idea about negating AFK startfirers, I do agree but if we are having to use 2 or more people to power the agt/obelisk, it might better if it doesn't go half-offline at all, or maybe it requires multiple (3-4) people powering it before it returns to full power status.   

 

As for the word Maggot, people keep missing my point; it's NOT the word, it's the fact that with the SBH character the voice distortion and reverb HIDES the 'M' so it's just saying 'AGGOT'  which, is what I mean by it being misinterpreted. 

 

Edited August 22, 2019 by euan-missile

[Handepsilon]

I agree with buttons' points. pp shouldn't have affected every aspect of gameplay and charging low powered defense building is NOT fun. I'd rather just halve the effectiveness of the defense rather than forcing a player to stay and afk repair. People are already feeling bored having to patrol the base while others have fun on the field. Restricting them even more to be a player turret that just sits and fire on a single position for the remainder of the game is just complete BS.

Sure the concept works in RA2 but that's because the tesla troopers are not individual players. They're just pieces on the board with no feeling of boredom. You give that role to a player and their enjoyment will plummet faster than server playercount in a bad match

[euan-missile]

15 minutes ago, Handepsilon said:

I agree with buttons' points. pp shouldn't have affected every aspect of gameplay and charging low powered defense building is NOT fun. I'd rather just halve the effectiveness of the defense rather than forcing a player to stay and afk repair. People are already feeling bored having to patrol the base while others have fun on the field. Restricting them even more to be a player turret that just sits and fire on a single position for the remainder of the game is just complete BS.

 

I agreed with buttons points too, but the problem is not that the PP effected every aspect of gameplay, it's simply that it has no counter.

 I also initially dismissed the "battery" idea, but the solution to this idea is the AGT/Obelisk could need multiple people charging it, so it will only have those people charging it when a rush is about to come into the base, so it is not all the time 24/7, probably just for those 3 minutes. (Perhaps you could even twin repairing the AGT/Obelisk with charging to encourage this) Though, 1-2 person could also power it to a "low/half power" category, if said person wishes to keep infiltrating infantry at bay later on.

Plus, it is an interactive element of strategic defence. Repairing vehicles/buildings is not fun, but your team is winning because of you and that IS fun. Not to mention the addition of Credits and VP from "tower kill assists" you can earn and spend on the battlefield later. 

It will not be a one-person chore in general, so it'll be more hot potato as people come and go doing the job at different times. (probably when the commander orders someone to start powering it.) 

 

The worst case scenario, is that NO one powers it, and you're left to exactly what ren-x PP is now anyway, this just offers you an alternative should the time come you need to power it again, which is exactly what we are looking for, a counter to the PP affecting gameplay. But it *MUST* come at a cost. 

Edited August 22, 2019 by euan-missile

[Handepsilon]

So we've discussed some things in Discord and we've come up with alternative for PP.

 

Basically instead of making everything pricier, every production is just slowed down, and the Defense is only half as fast too. That means more respawn delay, more delay for vehicle production, but no cost penalty. It makes more sense in CNC standpoint too since low power slows stuff down in RTS anyways

[NodSaibot]

3 hours ago, euan-missile said:

Yes that was my original idea, however bare in mind the biggest reason the PP is targeted on AGT/Obelisk maps is because people need them to be entirely disabled,  I don't want to make the PP a target not worth hitting. So, it would make better sense if the AGT/Obelisk required a secondary MANUAL way of power, either by players or CP, making it more of a challenge for those who have lost their PP.

50% increase in price to production is already quite a lot. Added with the slowed down base defenses, it's more than enough.

[euan-missile]

1 hour ago, Handepsilon said:

So we've discussed some things in Discord and we've come up with alternative for PP.

 

Basically instead of making everything pricier, every production is just slowed down, and the Defense is only half as fast too. That means more respawn delay, more delay for vehicle production, but no cost penalty. It makes more sense in CNC standpoint too since low power slows stuff down in RTS anyways

 

I'm really glad there is being discussion on the PP, but I don't feel like this is a particularly good approach. Please hear me out.

So first things first, I don't want to keep hearing from anybody about what happens in RA2 or RTS, no disrespect, but this is Renegade and it needs to be played as Renegade. So try and look at that.

In Renegade, The powerplant has always been the most defended building on maps with AGT/Obelisk, because it's always been the most detrimental building to lose. (It's power after-all.)  This meant that accomplishing the defeat of the powerplant should be rewarded with the effort that it would take to destroy it.

And for the longest of time, it always has been. (The primary loss of the AGT/Obelisk) - but here lies the problem,  in that it was connected to the other most detrimental building for defence, upon losing that building, would guarantee a swift defeat. (I'll skip over the price increase aspect for now.) 

This is the current formula for how the Powerplant works in old ren and ren-x. --  now, if we changed the formula by say, disconnecting the powerplant from the AGT/Obelisk entirely, we suddenly find the Powerplant no longer being the most detrimental building to destroy, it won't be as defended and it won't be rewarding to the opposing team.
You've changed the entire formula and the pecking order that the powerplant holds in the building hierarchy,  the balance is gone, so you have to completely re-invent the powerplants purpose now. It's a very sensitive formula, and changing it from what it's supposed to be, even slightly, is as good as making a whole new building. 

 

Alternatively, the proposed idea in this thread is to keep the standard formula of the powerplant as same, but allow some way to recover a modified Obelisk/AGT upon destruction, which is the cleanest and most balanced way to do it because whilst it's sticking to the original formula, it's also reducing the detrimental gameplay effect of losing the powerplant, while still keeping it the most detrimental building to lose.

 

  Your proposed idea changes the formula entirely and the Powerplant will be come a completely different building. This is complicated, needless and personally I think disrespectful to Renegade because we can try harder than that. - but, for a moment, let's look at what you've got.

 

The powerplant in this formula would do very little to effect the team who loses it, strategically or economically. It will be a forgotten building, completely opposite of what it is now. Delays are frustrating, bad for gameplay and do very little overall punishment as no one really is rushing around 24/7 to get where they need to be anyway. It's just an inconvenience that's out of control with no counter, which I find to be a very poor dynamic (one of which we can avoid with the re-worked original formula) 

On top of this, scrapping the price increase gets rid of the the only "good" part about losing the powerplant - that you treat your vehicle/character which much more protection, care, value and respect. It makes you be more appreciative of the things you have, when there's less money to afford it. 

 

I really love and appreciate the ideas and creativity, but i'm not fixing to reinvent a whole new building and you shouldn't be either. 

 

 

 

Edited August 22, 2019 by euan-missile

[euan-missile]

13 minutes ago, buttons said:

50% increase in price to production is already quite a lot. Added with the slowed down base defenses, it's more than enough.

I think it might be best to implement one form of the idea or the other (manually powered weakened defence or automatically powered weakened defence) to see how it gets on in testing. 

[TheOlsenTwins]

Or maybe the ob and agt just hits vehicles when the pp is down to allow sneaking? (and even them with lower damage)
I also dont think its a good idea to just get a person to afk repair the ob/agt (and this can also be achieved with a second pc)

[roweboat]

My other thought is once the PP is destroyed, have the AGT/OB go offline for random intervals and come back on for random intervals.

 

Will it stay off line for 2 minutes? or 5 seconds? who knows =p

 

Would add for some interesting suspense and surprises =p

[yosh56]

I mean... there's also the thought of giving base defences some second functionality that would just stay online even after they have no power. E.G: Let them command spot (in a different colour), which means they can't stop infiltrations, but they still make it harder to infiltrate, as they spot intruders. That, or have them act as a comm centre, but only within the confines of the base, though they make enemies in the base visible on both the mini and overview map. 

2 hours ago, Handepsilon said:

Basically instead of making everything pricier, every production is just slowed down, and the Defense is only half as fast too. That means more respawn delay, more delay for vehicle production, but no cost penalty. It makes more sense in CNC standpoint too since low power slows stuff down in RTS anyways

...... That sounds awful. The respawn timer is already frustrating enough, and the lack of a cost increase puts the powerplant back at being one of the most pointless buildings to kill in non-base defense maps. 

[roweboat]

Maybe change how the PP affects the map on base defense vs non-base defense maps?

 

On non-base defense maps, it acts as it does now.

On base defense maps, when the PP is destroyed, it has a different negative affect besides increasing cost.

[euan-missile]

1 hour ago, TheOlsenTwins said:

Or maybe the ob and agt just hits vehicles when the pp is down to allow sneaking? (and even them with lower damage)
I also dont think its a good idea to just get a person to afk repair the ob/agt (and this can also be achieved with a second pc)

Consistency is important, it shouldn't be chopping up enemy targets into two categories. If it can hit one, it can hit the other. Besides, if it only targets vehicles, everyone will just infantry rush. --  one or two people can afk the tower, but two people will only enough to put it on "low" power. Would need 3-4 to power it up properly. 

 

1 hour ago, roweboat said:

My other thought is once the PP is destroyed, have the AGT/OB go offline for random intervals and come back on for random intervals.

 

Will it stay off line for 2 minutes? or 5 seconds? who knows =p

 

Would add for some interesting suspense and surprises =p

I like the idea and creativity for surprise, but this would only work if the tower is not being manually powered, otherwise it would be frustrating for it to cut-out mid charging, and I feel as the random intervals may be frustrating for both attacking infantry and defending infantry. 

 

1 hour ago, yosh56 said:

I mean... there's also the thought of giving base defences some second functionality that would just stay online even after they have no power. E.G: Let them command spot (in a different colour), which means they can't stop infiltrations, but they still make it harder to infiltrate, as they spot intruders. That, or have them act as a comm centre, but only within the confines of the base, though they make enemies in the base visible on both the mini and overview map. 

This could be an interesting function the Obelisk/AGT is reduced too when the power is cut, but, when it comes to the main towers, we need them to kill. As for secondary towers like turrets & watchtowers, when they're dead they should just die. 

 

 

39 minutes ago, roweboat said:

Maybe change how the PP affects the map on base defense vs non-base defense maps?

 

On non-base defense maps, it acts as it does now.

On base defense maps, when the PP is destroyed, it has a different negative affect besides increasing cost.

That will be the case anyway, the changes to the PP will likely only effect AGT/Obelisk and thus base defence maps. Non-agt/obelisk maps will be the same as now.  

[vandal33]

I always see losing a power plant in Renegade is like partially losing every other building. Your purchase cost is doubled (50% more expensive in renx, which is very kind enough) but you can still purchase units, income tick rate is halved from the refinery, but base defense is completely shut down like no difference when it is destroyed - functionality-wise.

So I'm neutral when it comes to changing the power plant penalty. I like the idea of base defense being affected but still not completely useless, but if the effect isn't rewarding enough for the team that destroyed it, I rather stick to the current power plant effect. I agree that delays do little overall punishment. I like the idea of giving primary base defenses other functions just to make it still useful after losing power, but I don't mind seeing functionless base defense when power is down like it is currently tbh. I just don't want less-punishing effect.

Anyway, about the part where it is boring and frustrating to afk charge up a defense all game, my point was you're not suppose to charge it all game, you're suppose to only do it when you know the enemy is coming. I don't expect anyone to charge it up all game, I just want base defense to still be useful against big rushes because this is the only time worth to power it up. I doubt it would be anymore frustrating to run inside an AGT/Obelisk to charge it during enemy attack because people would still hurry inside buildings to repair MCT anyway during enemy rushes. You can stop charging/repairing the AGT/Obelisk once the rush is over and resume playing normally (but without your base defense working as punishment for losing power plant).

[TomUjain]

On 8/22/2019 at 3:47 PM, Handepsilon said:

So we've discussed some things in Discord and we've come up with alternative for PP.

 

Basically instead of making everything pricier, every production is just slowed down, and the Defense is only half as fast too. That means more respawn delay, more delay for vehicle production, but no cost penalty. It makes more sense in CNC standpoint too since low power slows stuff down in RTS anyways

This sounds perfect.

I have touched upon a lot of the arguments made by the OP as well. The power plant is 'too important' and thus becomes the most sought after building on maps with AGT / Obi due to how much chaos that building can do if destroyed.

In regards to the sniper issue - I agree marksman is not the best counter against them but the new 'scope' marksmen get does give the team some basic defence at the very least so I am content with that, however I do feel that their headshot damage needs a bit of a boost. Bare in mind this unit is free and can easily be spammed.

The issue raised about base locking is a different issue, as I have said in a past post - it is a side effect of having a lot of players and only gets worse when the servers cap out.

 

Edited August 23, 2019 by TomUjain

[BeLlSiBuB]

Quote

Anyway, about the part where it is boring and frustrating to afk charge up a defense all game, my point was you're not suppose to charge it all game, you're suppose to only do it when you know the enemy is coming. I don't expect anyone to charge it up all game, I just want base defense to still be useful against big rushes because this is the only time worth to power it up. I doubt it would be anymore frustrating to run inside an AGT/Obelisk to charge it during enemy attack because people would still hurry inside buildings to repair MCT anyway during enemy rushes. You can stop charging/repairing the AGT/Obelisk once the rush is over and resume playing normally (but without your base defense working as punishment for losing power plant).

I like this idea.

I also think the accuraccy should be affected depending on how damaged the defence structures are at the time of fire but on a random basis similar to a gun jamming if damaged perhaps?

Edited August 23, 2019 by BeLlSiBuB

[euan-missile]

21 hours ago, vandal33 said:

I always see losing a power plant in Renegade is like partially losing every other building. Your purchase cost is doubled (50% more expensive in renx, which is very kind enough) but you can still purchase units, income tick rate is halved from the refinery, but base defense is completely shut down like no difference when it is destroyed - functionality-wise.

So I'm neutral when it comes to changing the power plant penalty. I like the idea of base defense being affected but still not completely useless, but if the effect isn't rewarding enough for the team that destroyed it, I rather stick to the current power plant effect. I agree that delays do little overall punishment. I like the idea of giving primary base defenses other functions just to make it still useful after losing power, but I don't mind seeing functionless base defense when power is down like it is currently tbh. I just don't want less-punishing effect.

Anyway, about the part where it is boring and frustrating to afk charge up a defense all game, my point was you're not suppose to charge it all game, you're suppose to only do it when you know the enemy is coming. I don't expect anyone to charge it up all game, I just want base defense to still be useful against big rushes because this is the only time worth to power it up. I doubt it would be anymore frustrating to run inside an AGT/Obelisk to charge it during enemy attack because people would still hurry inside buildings to repair MCT anyway during enemy rushes. You can stop charging/repairing the AGT/Obelisk once the rush is over and resume playing normally (but without your base defense working as punishment for losing power plant).

Yes, we have to maintain the right level of punishment that keeps the PowerPlant being the worst building to lose, however, we cannot have it so drastically game changing when it is lost. The last part of your message was perfect and was my point too, nobody is going to be charging it constantly if it requires multiple people to charge, people will be *ordered* to charge it by a commander, at the notice of an incoming rush. The question is, should charging the AGT/Obelisk count as repairing too, or should there be a separate terminal to shoot? 

 

20 hours ago, TomUjain said:

This sounds perfect.

I have touched upon a lot of the arguments made by the OP as well. The power plant is 'too important' and thus becomes the most sought after building on maps with AGT / Obi due to how much chaos that building can do if destroyed.

In regards to the sniper issue - I agree marksman is not the best counter against them but the new 'scope' marksmen get does give the team some basic defence at the very least so I am content with that, however I do feel that their headshot damage needs a bit of a boost. Bare in mind this unit is free and can easily be spammed.

The issue raised about base locking is a different issue, as I have said in a past post - it is a side effect of having a lot of players and only gets worse when the servers cap out.

 

The problem is not that the powerplant is too important, that has always been the dynamic of the PP inside Renegade, the problem is it's not properly balanced with its importance. Handlepsilon discussion on the matter completely alters the formula of the powerplant, changing it into an entirely different building, which is even more detrimental to balance and game flow than it needs be. It would be considerably better to just negate some effects of the penalty of losing the PP, instead of re-working it entirely.

 

I agree with the marksman to a degree, I feel like it is good enough for a free class but as a counter to long-range snipers, it's not ideal. Having another class that possibly has the increased headshot dam at a price would be a nice touch. 

 

 

19 hours ago, BeLlSiBuB said:

I also think the accuraccy should be affected depending on how damaged the defence structures are at the time of fire but on a random basis similar to a gun jamming if damaged perhaps?

I like this addition, though, I'm not sure how easily implemented this may be.

Edited August 24, 2019 by euan-missile

[Fffreak9999]

30 minutes ago, euan-missile said:

I also think the accuraccy should be affected depending on how damaged the defence structures are at the time of fire but on a random basis similar to a gun jamming if damaged perhaps?

Honestly, too much hassle for any benefit. I will rather slow down ROF rather than mess with accuracy, however the thing Yosh mentioned briefly earlier about giving an alert/q'spotting enemies in LOS when PP is down is a better idea.

[euan-missile]

3 hours ago, Fffreak9999 said:

Honestly, too much hassle for any benefit. I will rather slow down ROF rather than mess with accuracy, however the thing Yosh mentioned briefly earlier about giving an alert/q'spotting enemies in LOS when PP is down is a better idea.

Agreed. But resorting the AGT/Obelisk to the role of a watch tower doesn't stop enemy units from steamrolling the base, which is the ultimate issue with the loss of the powerplant.

[Fffreak9999]

There is always the option to slow down ROF for the weapons to still be effective 

[euan-missile]

That'll most likely be the implementation. From the many ideas pooled into this thread so far, the ideal change to the Power Plant would work like this..

Power Plant is Lost

  > Enable 50% Price Reduction  

       > AGT/Obelisk go Offline.  

           > AGT/Obelisk can be charged to a low power state with 1 tech/hot or 2 engineers.

              > AGT/Obelisk can be charged to a half power state with 2 techs/hot or 4 engineers.

                  > AGT/Obelisk can be charged to a full power state with 4 techs/hot or 8 engineers. ?

            

*remaining questions 

How does the half power AGT/Obelisk differ from normal? 
How does the low power AGT/Obelisk differ from normal?
How would engineers charge it? 
Is there a way for charging to be interrupted?
Should it be allowed to be returned to Full power status with say 4 techs or 8 engineers? 

 

*Note, charging and repairing will be separate entities but both done inside the towers. 

 

    

Edited August 24, 2019 by euan-missile

[Fffreak9999]

9 hours ago, euan-missile said:

How does the half power AGT/Obelisk differ from normal? 
How does the low power AGT/Obelisk differ from normal?

They wouldn’t need powering by anyone, just a much slower rate of fire resulting in maybe 50% reduction for the AGT

and maybe a longer “reload” for the obelisk

[euan-missile]

12 hours ago, Fffreak9999 said:

They wouldn’t need powering by anyone, just a much slower rate of fire resulting in maybe 50% reduction for the AGT

and maybe a longer “reload” for the obelisk

As discussed prior, without player involvement to recover the AGT/Obelisk, it wouldn't make it a sufficient penalty for losing the powerplant. We still have to keep the powerplant the worst building to lose,  so it has to be more difficult than that. 

Additionally, with the charging system you can have two forms of power mode that'll likely divide RoF/Dam by a specific factor. Meaning that unless a commander is specifically requesting people to charge it to half-power at the notice of an incoming rush, any sneaking infantry will likely be sneaking whilst it is only being charged at low-power. 

Edited August 25, 2019 by euan-missile

[Fffreak9999]

4 minutes ago, euan-missile said:

As discussed prior, without player involvement to recover the AGT/Obelisk, it wouldn't make it a sufficient penalty for losing the powerplant. We still have to keep the powerplant the worst building to lose,  so it has to be more difficult than that. 

Except if we did do something along the lines of allowing the AGT/Obelisk to actually work in some capacity, it would still have a massive penalty attached to losing the PP with increased costs, potentially a longer respawn counter, maybe a vehicle queue system delay similar to how the WF/Air dying works with delaying arrival of the tanks, meaning its still crippling to lose the PP, but not nullifying a building in its entirety to 100% useless. 

There are many different options available to use to discuss and test, and we may even decide that none of the changes are worth it in the long run, and just keep it how it is.

 

8 minutes ago, euan-missile said:

Additionally, with the charging system you can have two forms of power mode that'll likely divide RoF/Dam by a specific factor. Meaning that unless a commander is specifically requesting people to charge it to half-power at the notice of an incoming rush, any sneaking infantry will likely be sneaking whilst it is only being charged at low-power. 

We don't want people  just sitting around repairing a building to just power it, especially if the enemy just ignores the Obelisk/AGT and goes for another building, you have lost your defenders trying to stop the enemy from running rampant, and there will be less repairs to save your base.

Having it done on a passive level will result in automatic defenses still being provided and allow your team to focus on actually saving the base, rather than trying to stop the attack.

[NodSaibot]

3 hours ago, euan-missile said:

We still have to keep the powerplant the worst building to lose,  so it has to be more difficult than that. 

But why? Just because that's how it's always been? I don't get why this is a requirement.

[euan-missile]

19 hours ago, Fffreak9999 said:

Except if we did do something along the lines of allowing the AGT/Obelisk to actually work in some capacity, it would still have a massive penalty attached to losing the PP with increased costs, potentially a longer respawn counter, maybe a vehicle queue system delay similar to how the WF/Air dying works with delaying arrival of the tanks, meaning its still crippling to lose the PP, but not nullifying a building in its entirety to 100% useless. 

There are many different options available to use to discuss and test, and we may even decide that none of the changes are worth it in the long run, and just keep it how it is.

 

We don't want people  just sitting around repairing a building to just power it, especially if the enemy just ignores the Obelisk/AGT and goes for another building, you have lost your defenders trying to stop the enemy from running rampant, and there will be less repairs to save your base.

Having it done on a passive level will result in automatic defenses still being provided and allow your team to focus on actually saving the base, rather than trying to stop the attack.

There would be no massive penalty if the only deficit of losing the powerplant is a 50% price increase and a slightly weakened guard tower. It has to be more than that, compensating with the addition of delays is a very poor game mechanic both from a strategic point of view and a game play point of view. As I said before, there are better game mechanics you could implement before resorting to anything like delays.

I highly doubt that the powerplant will remain as it is for much longer, Ren-X has always had a softer approach to building loss than old ren, and if a building causes immediate game failure to the team that loses it, then yes, it probably will need to be even "softer."

People will stand around charging the AGT/Obelisk as they do when repairing a building that is under fire. It won't be continuous, only charged when needed. This is nothing new to Ren-x.

Charging AGT/Obelisk will destroy the amount of enemies trying to destroy the base to begin with, helping other engineers that are trying to repair. Offence is the best defence and now you have the choice of it, even if you wield a repairgun. But yes it will pull engineers from other buildings but that's the price you pay to destroy the incoming attackers. It's balance.

16 hours ago, buttons said:

But why? Just because that's how it's always been? I don't get why this is a requirement.

The powerplant has always been the priority target on maps with AGT/Obelisk  because  it effects the AGT/Obelisk. This allows a potential breach into a well fortified base like no other building, now IF you weaken the powerplants ability to grant this breach potential, you'll have people trying to constantly sneak into lesser buildings like the Refinery in a hope to start breaching base defences and that will increase the length and duration of base stalemates. Thus, you still need to keep the powerplant the worst building to lose in terms of how much it wil let a potential invasion steam roll the base, but right now, it's too much and with an automatic half-powered AGT/Obelsik, that's too little. 

Edited August 26, 2019 by euan-missile

[TomUjain]

8 hours ago, euan-missile said:

The powerplant has always been the priority target on maps with AGT/Obelisk  because  it effects the AGT/Obelisk. This allows a potential breach into a well fortified base like no other building, now IF you weaken the powerplants ability to grant this breach potential, you'll have people trying to constantly sneak into lesser buildings like the Refinery in a hope to start breaching base defences and that will increase the length and duration of base stalemates. Thus, you still need to keep the powerplant the worst building to lose in terms of how much it wil let a potential invasion steam roll the base, but right now, it's too much and with an automatic half-powered AGT/Obelsik, that's too little. 

Now i'm not advocating for no punishments. The loss of a building should yeld a cost, yes -- but the cost of your perfectly healthy 100% obi or AGT on top of the price increase seems rather unfair. Why should a perfectly healthy building become a potato? I do not think it is unfair to have the building still function at half strength or to even increase the delay if need be.

With all that said the imagionation is a wonderful thing but lets all try and be realistic and simple. It is hardly fair to expect the devs to fulfil complex ideas when normally much simplier ideas tend to suffice.

Edited August 26, 2019 by TomUjain

[euan-missile]

14 hours ago, TomUjain said:

Now i'm not advocating for no punishments. The loss of a building should yeld a cost, yes -- but the cost of your perfectly healthy 100% obi or AGT on top of the price increase seems rather unfair. Why should a perfectly healthy building become a potato? I do not think it is unfair to have the building still function at half strength or to even increase the delay if need be.

With all that said the imagionation is a wonderful thing but lets all try and be realistic and simple. It is hardly fair to expect the devs to fulfil complex ideas when normally much simplier ideas tend to suffice.

You're hitting the nail on the head with your reasoning, which is the same one that leads me to believe this will be a change in the upcoming future.

And I agree about complexity, we had some pretty creative but very complicated ideas around this. 

[Madkill40]

On 8/21/2019 at 1:37 AM, euan-missile said:

Seeing as the ability to curve MRLs rockets so violently can really allow GDI to do some serious

But don't reduce Arty splash?

How biased

[euan-missile]

22 hours ago, Madkill40 said:

But don't reduce Arty splash?

How biased

 

Yeah, one 60 rpm arty projectile vs eight MRLs rockets landing at about 250 WPM.

 

Biased

[Madkill40]

Its not necessarily the easiest vehicle to actually get the kill on infantry with, MRLS's can't lock-on to infantry - but they can avoid nasty "Camp around the corner" tactics. 

Nod get suicidal flame tanks and Lazers in case of corner-camping