Development Cycle Archive

---

AythenGallo wrote:

---

KaylBreinhar wrote:
Better yet, why can't this change incorporate rank at long last, and furthermore, unlock the latter levels of ranks in the progression system - Adjutant and General ranks, anyone?

It would be somewhat petty to think a mere Colonel could purchase and administrate a Strategic Base, ne pas???

---

Although I would tend to agree with you in spirit here, as active duty military I can't help but point out that command of an entire base is by no means "petty" for a Colonel. A "mere" Colonel is paygrade O-6, equivalent to a Captain in the Navy, one step below General/Admiral status, and there are bases out there that are commanded by O-5s ^_^ The base I'm stationed on is commanded by a Captain, and it's home to the entire Atlantic FLEET. A Flag officer like the Generals you're suggesting (or Admiral in this case) would be the guy actually in charge of the Fleet itself.

Just a little FYI ^_^ Don't let the ease of attaining rank in this game fool you!

---

As a Navy brat, I know becoming an O-6 in the US Armed Forces isn't exactly a "common" thing by any means (my father retired an O-5 after being passed over for Captain), but in this game, there are so many Colonels that the rank really WOULD be meaningless.

We were stationed at NAS Sigonella in Sicily, and the base was commanded by an O-6 CO and XO, and respective squadrons were typically commanded by O-5s and the OCCASIONAL O-4 if the command was a minor one.

In some form, this would also be true in canon, since the Imperial Navy and Army is so vast there would have to be an ENORMOUS wealth of high-ranking low-grade flag officers to administrate the hundreds of thousands of subcommands.

Home of the Atlantic fleet, huh? Good ol' NOB Norfolk - my father used to be stationed there - once in HC-6 and HC-8 back when the Navy used the CH-46E, and then again before Sicily when he trained on the CH-53E at HM-12.

Message Edited by KaylBreinhar on 02-03-2005 05:40 AM

Someone on my home server's forum came up with yet another concern about the potential for "cluttering" - what happens if there are so many faction bases planted down on flat terrain, that it interferes with the mining of resources?

Because everyone knows - bases and harvesters have something in common - they both need zero-degree FLAT LAND to be placed, and bases create gigantic no-build footprints around them.

PLEASE think about that, Devs. This change is nice, but it could end up SERIOUSLY undermining the mining industry if instituted as laid out, and if that happens, prices will skyrocket.

Message Edited by KaylBreinhar on 02-03-2005 05:58 AM

---

mjPboy wrote:

I can just picture a team of imperial players, roleplaying wih AT-St etc....just spoken to a smuggler friend of theirs.

Smuggler - ' Yes General, it is true, there are two more rebel bases on this planet, it is confirmed. The Rebellion pockets of resistancelives.'

General Imperial Bad@ss ' WHAT, this simply will not do. Scout troopers, comb this planet now, FIND ME THE REBEL BASE, not one rebel will be left standing'

*cue Star Wars music*

---

Pboy, I guess youll be coming to pick up A'ngelus soon then !

Just a thought, but how about allowing the bases to be 'connected' in order to control territory. You'd need a minimum of three bases in order to form an area of control. PvE bases might have a maximum control distance of say 250 meters, where as a PvP base might be 500m. Thus if you had 3 PvP bases, you could control a triangular area with sides 1k long. Or you could string together 6 PvE bases to control a polygonal area.

Any major PoI would prevent an area from being secured. But you could secure say a very nice concentration of a resource spawn for ten days.

The destruction of any base would cause the area to shrink, and in the case of destroying the third base in a 3 base area, any control of land would be lost.

Inside this controled area only those of the same faction could place houses or harvesters.


This idea really is nothing more than a City, but is more dynamic.

Message Edited by CerionSkydreamer on 02-03-2005 03:56 AM

---

Otegu123 wrote:

I dont understand why I, as an imperial, would want to place a PVE base.. i cant do anything with it once i've placed it. It'sjust a rebel farm, is it not?

and vice versa, why would a rebel want to place a rebel PVE base?

Message Edited by Otegu123 on 02-03-2005 12:00 AM

---

This is a BIG part of the story PLEASE make it worthy to have planetary control. The rewards for that should be really NICE, no more farming!!! no more farming!!!!

Give the faction controlling a planet a reason to keep it and the points awarded for PvE bases a real need to mantain that control.

But a cool reward in terms of extra XP, extra weapons, extra armors or pets, even extra faction customized buidings for cities, ...will keep the "farming" issue aside.

Sounds really nice.

• I place a PvE base somewhere in the environment.


• For each minutethe PvE basesremains intact, my faction gains 30 points.


• Once this PvE base is destroyed, it stops producing points for my faction.


• The opposing faction does not gain any points for destroying this PvE base.


• Therefore, it's in my faction's interests for me to place a base as it can only give my faction points.

And I assume the same applies to a PvP base but instead that provides 100 points every minute.

Is this correct? By not placing bases I would in fact be harming my faction rather than potentially rewarding the enemy?

Thanks in advance,

- Ymo