Development Cycle Archive

Thread: Publish 8 Testing Feedback: Turrets with Manual Targeting

ShineKnuckle
Tue Apr 20, 2004 4:52 pm
#27

Manual targeting with a terminal? Come on, guys... this is just a bad solution. In order to USE the manual targeting, you'd beremoving yourself from the fight, which is an awful idea --turrets are nowhere near as powerful as a single good (skill/equipment-wise) player. Just allow players to 'register' as the turret controller with these terminals, andcreate a command (/requestTurretFire or /rtf, maybe?) that may only be used by the designated controller of a turret. This command could force the turret's next attack onto the player's look-at target. Much easier and more effective. Also, I really liked the idea presented in a previous post, where a Squad Leader could make special use of the turrets. Maybe allow the Squad Leader's volley fire ability to direct ALL turrets toward a given target, so thattargets of great importance could be eliminated quickly.



Other problems with turrets right now:


- Blast vulnerability and general low power. I could understand this for AT-STs, but immobile laser turrets used to defend a base shouldn't be vulnerable to anything. Blast resist should be 20%-40% at the least, the AR3 should remain, and HP should be boosted to at least 300k. Also, the turrets should be raised to a significant height off the ground so that you can't "hide" from the other 2-3 turrets surrounding the base by getting close to one of them. (Right now, it's far too easy to "trick" the LOS of a turret -- this is a HUGE issue that most people overlook, and it allows folks to isolate turrets and make them even more of a joke than they would be.)


- Inability to handle large numbers of attackers. You can only fit 4 or 5 turrets on even the largest of bases, and the entire setup costs about 100k faction points, but the turrets can be easily massacred because they're so easily overwhelmed. Make the attacks a "cone of fire", much like Fan Shot and Advanced Strafe -- then, give them heavy armor piercing. If people had to contend with 5 turrets, geometrically raised so that they could all attack at once and equipped with 1800-damage AoE blasts, it might put a LITTLE fire and teamworkback in the GCW.


- Turrets are "stupid". Sometimes, turrets don't attack coverts even after their built-in covert scanners flag a person with a TEF. They don't continue attacking as that person continues out toward the maximum range of the turret. Their covert scanners appear to scan out to only about 35 meters, which is *USELESS* against anyone other than stupid newbies and swordsmen. Covert scanning should be built right into large faction bases, out to a radius of 100 meters. Period.


If you did all of the above, I think it'd be significantly harder (though not impossible by any stretch) to take a base full of turrets. For that reason, you should give some decent faction-point rewards for killing them. Rewards on AT-ST kills and turret kills should be at least 100 or 200 faction points, and BOTH factions should have something worth buying with those points. I'm not a "rebel whiner" who wants an AT-ST with a rebel skin, but all of this "GCW patching" is academic if there's no reason to fight.





Altaire Ferrous - deceased Bounty Hunter
Rail An'geles - deceased Jedi Knight

KzinKiller
Tue Apr 20, 2004 5:13 pm
#28


2: Makeing it a SL perk is not an option in my opinion. You won't always have a SL around to defend your base. Maybe make control of the turrets a rank incentive? Make it to where you have to be a certian rank to operate it.


SL was only one suggestion, it could be a sufficiently high-ranking faction officer ... but remember that you wouldn't need the SL to actually have the turret fire on enemies, just to get the 'manual targeting' option ... under the proposed system you still have to find a volunteer who is going to sit through the frustration of operating radial targeting menus during PvP during laggy large-scale engagements.




*
The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them
Albert Einstein

CU-1 ... CU-2 ... CUL8R
Ekhvram
Tue Apr 20, 2004 5:51 pm
#29

And here I thought you'd climb on them like a vehicle and manually tab/fire, and to make up for their wussiness/your lack of fire; they'd be rebalanced so buffed players don't wade through them so easily like they do now...


Not just adding the lame fishing gui to 'em.


They all get blown up late late nite/early morning and CM's canmind-nuke people inside bases anyways.





_______ARKK [KOTOR]_______Gatica, Dant. (Live: 10-Midnite CST)_________________
Fellstaff
Tue Apr 20, 2004 7:41 pm
#30




quote blah blah you need to stop using HTML crap so we can use the quote command



Lemme get this straight, its in the publish 8 you're pushing right now, but you're asking for feedback now? This is the first I've even heard about this neat little feature.


um... just some thoughts on the entire idea of actually using terminals to control turrets in a battle


#1 GUI is ineffective if it doesen't update in realtime (which NONE of the current lists do except for some timers)

#2Why didn't you just make a turrets like pets that can be commanded to attack, defend, or free fire based on spoken commands

#3Admin shouldn't be the only one able to control turrets



---
Isa Lodeah - pre-pub 9 FSCS unlock (31/32), post-CU Padawan
Onib - pre-pub 9 Jedi Initiate 4134, post-CU full template Padawan
Raezer
Tue Apr 20, 2004 7:52 pm
#31

I agree with others when talking about the ham of the turrets, but I also like to add that I think this feature is a step in the right direction with PvP. Gives a more PvP feel then an npc(turret) to person feel.



Raezer
------------------------------------------
Founder of Night City Industries
mlucas
Tue Apr 20, 2004 10:38 pm
#32

Excuse me for saying this but someone needs to actual get in game or read your community players post.

1. The so called “admin “feature from last publish is STILL BROKE

2 The does nothing to improve the life of a turret that can be taken down by one lone riflemen at 4; 00 am or doing low players or when the 30 NPC get whipped out then all 5 turrets by the same SINGLE PLAYER

3 this system assumes you will stand guard over a turret since you have no in game notification system, sorry but the game is boring enough without standing around.

4 Will not even go into the several exploits that according to Bug tickets the December “are aware about and working to resolve” BTW that was the same Response our PA got in Nov,Dec,Jan humm every publish that was supposed to fix these exploits

If you are going to man hours on something plz at least make sure the feature is first working as this new enhancement to turrets is well next to worthless
Pootian
Wed Apr 21, 2004 2:06 am
#33

Simple answer, make the turret damage be an AOE attack.



"All your base are belong to us!"~ Old Phalanx Proverb
Thunderghost1
Wed Apr 21, 2004 4:19 am
#34

Ok, so let me get this straight...you are actually suggesting that people in Bastion on Naboo (Bria) are going to be able to use a radial menu during an assault. Ever heard of a thing called lag? Before the damn radial opens the turret will already be dead, then you hit refresh to select another turret, before it is refresh another turret is dead....rinse and repeat...


I have to agree with the suggestion that you should be able to register as a turret operator and the turret will use your target alt. a /turrettarget command






J'olan, TRW
Cartelis, Corellia
"Televangelists: The Pro Wrestlers of religion." Steven Wright
Official Carbineer motto: "Carbineer...stunning crowds since Publish 7!"
LFD Agent Codename "EuroTrash"
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." Douglas Adams
Quevey
Wed Apr 21, 2004 5:19 am
#35

how about actually fixing the turrets instead of having people forcing them to work?


control terminal outside the base lol not good.


imho this isnt a fix for anything nor will it help.





BOYCOTTING JUMP TO LIGHTSPEED UNTIL COMBAT BALANCE AND GCW REVAMP
lockder
Wed Apr 21, 2004 5:54 am
#36



i really think manual target via terminal its a bad option. You do better work fighting in pvp with your char. You need go "in" turret or a command to get assist from turret to your target in time real. But use a terminal to check targets(not in time real)that can kill you ( because the terminals are out of base) isnt too fun...



SNYSER Dark Jedi Knight
SNISER Dirty Rifleman
PARTY-IS-OVER Fat wookie
Imperial_Destroyer
Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:08 am
#37

manual targeting of turrets by taking combatant out of the fight = bad (unless this is the plan to make dancers useful besides just being covert inside the base to help heal the mind disease from the CM's?)



600k hitpoint Large tower turrets with heavy armor and 90% resists with maybe 50% blast resists.


Now thats a deterrent.


As it stands turrets are a speed bump. Speaking as a Raid team leader we would show up, remove turrets and have 2 bases on countdown in less than 10 minutes. Frequently we could do this so fast that the defenders got there in time to see the base go poof (if they even go there at all)



Attacking bases favors the attackers and does nothing for the defenders. We removed in 3 weeks over 60 Imperial bases, I literally got to calling the raids "Time to make the doughnuts". We mostly stopped taking bases down because it got boring, not because we can't. We can take any base anytime we want, we've just chosen not to at this point.


They were no challenge, hell half the time we'd destroy the bases with 5 people or less, that is seriously an issue. We were called exploiters because unfortunately at the time there were others taking bases down by using the /targetxxxxxx exploit.


Turrets need to do AP3 dmg, they need to have different EFFECTIVE types of attacks, Towers should be energy, block should be blast, and dish turrets should be truly anti-personell STUN dmg. Now these are all simple changes to make and would go MUCH further to the promotion of usuable bases than what exists or this laughable change is. 600 ham for a LARGE turret is not unreasonable, these need to provide an effective means of cover for initial defenders to rally others to help them. As it stands even with the 5 minute shuttle reduction and the 10 minute starport wait, our team could have the countdown timer at 2 minutes or less before anything significant for defenders shows up.


The /rtf where the turret attacks in concert with a defender looks like a much better solution than the travesty you're trying to foist on us as an "improvement". Be nice to be headshotting someone while a turret does AP3 dmg on them, Now that I could enjoy.






Rebel
Obide's Supplies Master Weaponsmith Master Artisan
Vendors Cor De Naboo 7184, -5311
Making weapons for too long hehe.
IThe path to opening the slot was; unimaginitive, uncreative, ruinous to the game, and flat out lazy programming.
BryGuy42
Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:11 am
#38

Slaving the turrets to a player as a Master Squad Leader perk. Brilliant. Keep your SUI nonsense, let SL's and anyone ranked at Captain or above have a /slave command.

CaseytheHutt
Wed Apr 21, 2004 7:41 am
#39

Hey, you want to help make bases more defendable. That's cool.

But nothing about the idea being suggested here actually accomplishes that. The fundamental problem with bases as they currently stand, as has been clearly said over and over and over again by every single person that has posted here before me so I would think it would be registering with you right now that it's probably true is that base npc's, AT-ST's, and turrets are so weak that they provide virtually no defense to a base.

Right now the only way to defend a base is to have people there, on the ground, waiting for an attack to come.

For instance, we have a base that had 4 large turrets on it. In the time gap between when the last member of my guild logged off (around 6am EST) and when I logged back in (around 10am EST), factoring in a server reboot in between, somebody came in and cleared out all 4 turrets. How am I supposed to defend against that? And if I can't prevent it, why should I waste my time earning faction points and then throwing them away on turrets that will just be gone the next time I walk away for 5 minutes?

Look, it goes without saying that if a LARGE, ORGANIZED force came in and there was nobody there to defend the base that the base defenses should and will be destroyed - no way around that. But I think the point I and everybody else here are trying to make is that right now those defenses go down if ANY force shows up. Neither "large" nor "organized" is required, because the base defenses are so weak.

Or to put it another way, why is it that the rebels/imps on board the Corellian Corvette are so tough but the ones I conscript to defend my base are so weak? If you have mob templates for factional troops that are actually strong enough to be a challenge for skilled, buffed players then for goodness sake why don't you make THOSE spawn at bases. And while you're at it, drop the blast vulnerability and bump up the HAM on large turrets.

Heck, and while you're at that - why don't you give Commandos (you know, the guys who are supposed to be specialized to take out armored targets) an armor piercing weapon that they can apply specials too? It's all fine and dandy that rocket launchers have a base damage in the thousands with heavy AP, but without the ability to apply damage-increasing specials it gets kinda frustrating watching a guy with a carbine do more damage to a turret than my rocket launcher.



Icaost Eave : Armorsmith, Jedi, and Director of An'gelCor
House An'geles, Naritus
Page 3 of 5