No announcement yet.

The new construction system

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The new construction system

    Been messing about with the construction system on PTS. I'm going to summarize what the system offers, with some commentary.

    First off, the basics:
    • Cortium harvesting comes from semi-randomly spawning crystals in the world, ranging from tiny ones that hardly fill a quarter of an un-upgraded ANT to massive formations that will fill several loads of a fully upgraded vehicle. On the test server it's very easy to find crystals to harvest, but in live or high population conditions they're going to go fast, especially near the front lines. Actually harvesting crystals, especially a large one, can take a little bit. An ANT will be at a crystal for a while while it's loading up, and it's a bit vulnerable in this time.

    • ANTs are the vehicles that harvest Cortium, move it around, and can be deployed to reveal a terminal in which cortium can be exchanged for deployable buildings. They're... interesting. They're bulky, not especially fast, and not especially tough (I caught one in the open with an AP lightning, it was easier to take down than a Sundy would be). They've got a mining laser turret on top (which can, and probably should, be swapped out for one of the standard suite of secondary weapons, unless you're desperate to reduce the amount of time you're sitting still on a Cortium crystal. In addition to the gunner and driver, there are two passenger seats (I didn't check to see if they can transport MAX units, but I expect they can), but it doesn't make for a great transport vehicle.

      In the right hands, though, I wonder if these things could become pretty scary. Their configuration is like a somewhat clumsy Harasser, and they've got a suite of unlockable abilities that can (rather rapidly) burn Cortium for shields, turbo boosts, or temporary cloaks. I don't think this will make them competitive hit-and-run vehicles with Harassers (especially since the ANT cannot mount the empire specific secondaries) but I would hesitate to underestimate them; I could easily see a behind enemy lines ANT group gobbling up enemy Cortium crystals (denying their use) while using those abilities to make their vehicles more nimble, tanky, or illusive than you might expect.

      By default, the ANT only has 5K cortium storage. With a substantial investment of certs, they can carry up to 10K. To make the most of them, expect to have to invest a fair number of certs into them.

    • Silos are Cortium storage. They can take up to 50K cortium (five fully upgraded ANT loads), which can then be used to build buildings or passively power certain types of modules. Like a deployed ANT, they have a terminal where you can procure building materials. A silo is mandatory if you want to build a base that can support a VP generator (called a HIVE) or use modules like turret AI that require constant power. They are not mandatory if you're happy to forgo those modules and just want to block off a road with a wall, place a bunker, or man turrets yourself. They have a maximum range for powering structures, but I don't know what that range is.

    • HIVEs, previously known as Victory Point generators, generate resources that contribute to continent lockdown over time. The further they are from your warpgate, the faster they accumulate this resource, so more aggressive base placement is rewarded. They can only be destroyed by pouring a decent amount of firepower into the shields at the base of it, then destroying the much more vulnerable core, at which point they explode violently. The chassis can't be destroyed any other way, which makes it difficult (but hardly impossible) for non-infantry units to kill them. They need to be protected, though; a small group of players and I came across an undefended one on the test server and destroyed it fairly quickly from our Reavers.

    • Buildings require cortium to build, and are actually more limited in their placement than you might expect. An individual soldier has hard limits on how much of each type of building they can build, requiring multiple players to coordinate their construction to make large bases. Additionally, the different modules aren't unlocked by default; you need to unlock each type with certs or daybreak cash before you can start placing them. I don't know how much of an investment that will end up being on the live servers (since everything costs 1 cert on PTS), but the Daybreak Cash prices looked like they were in the 50-100 range (so relatively small purchases. Expect there to be cash bundles on launch day.)

    • All buildings degrade over time, losing HP slowly until destruction. Left unattended, they will disappear. Use of repair modules can mitigate this, but a base will need constant maintenance to stay online. Engineer repair tools are sufficient to reverse the damage.

    Now, more specifics on the modules!

    • All turret types are tower mounts, with an access hatch at the bottom and the actual turret placed fairly high up. This makes them fairly easy targets, but you can hide the tower behind walls or terrain to reduce that.

    • Turrets need to be manned, unless an AI module has been placed in close proximity to them. Giving them AI dramatically changes their character; turrets only engage automatically against targets at relatively close range (eg, the AA turrets won't engage two fighters dueling overhead). However, they get VERY aggressive if you do any damage to the base they're part of, and will engage you at extreme range if you do. Doing strafing runs on a base with automated AA turrets is not advised. AI modules require cortium in a silo to function.

    • The Spear Phalanx deployables behave exactly as you'd expect.

    • The Aspis AA deployables are NOT flak based like their base mounted counterparts, but more like Walkers. I suspect this was mainly done for performance concerns to avoid filling the sky with flak particles.

    • The Xanthis anti infantry turrets are absolutely monstrous. I don't think they're too overwhelming without the AI modules, but with the AI modules they will mulch anything in their detection range. I honestly expect them to be nerfed pretty aggressively before they go live, but if they remain as is an infantry assault on a base with them will be essentially impossible without combined arms support to knock the turrets down.

    • AI modules are fairly small and low profile, and not particularly hardy. They add AI to every turret within a radius.

    Structures and defensive elements
    • Shield modules are exactly the same physically as all other module types. Shield modules will take defensive fortifications and add one-way, team coded shielding to them!
    • Walls are pretty straightforward. They seem pretty tough, their placement is fairly permissive, and the firing ports have good cover and a clear field of fire. With a shield module, all the portholes are covered by one-way shields that protect people firing from them. It's like having a spawn room shield.

    • Bunkers are interesting. They're beefy structures with a door on the base, and two stairwells to either side of that (for best results face away from enemy). The interior has a series of deep ports that can each cover a roughly 60 degree range around the bunker. Seem like they'll be good defensively (easy to control whether enemies can see you) but awkward firing positions, especially up close. The upper section has alternating open and covered railings; placed on high ground, this would be a fairly nice firing position. Incidentally, if you can get a lightning up top (easier said than done), the low frame of the vehicle sits perfectly behind the railings, giving you an ideal hull-down position. Harassers might be in a similar boat there.

      Shield modules add shields to the inner portholes of the bunker. I can't recall if they also put a shield on the back door, I seem to recall no.

    • Garages are promising as safe Sunderer hidey holes and as gates (they're open on two ends). They barely have enough room for a single Sunderer inside, which makes me suspect they've got a potential trolling problem. Even well-meaning blues might stash a Sunderer in your gateway and block it off. With a shield module, both ends of the garage are covered by team coded shields.

    • Repair modules will use up cortium power from a silo to repair all structure around them over time. While they WON'T repair themselves, this reduces maintenance overhead substantially, and it also makes your structures very tanky. A single enemy vehicle firing on a turret with a repair module is just wasting their time.

    • Sky shield modules (I forget the actual name) put a massive, one-way shield above themselves over a substantial radius. Its not a full dome shield (it won't cover oblique angles, but more of a curved roof. This shield can be fired through (from below), is counted as part of the base as far as turret AI is concerned, takes a fair beating (the extent of which I have not explored in detail) and on TOP of all this also acts as a strong infantry deterrent. They don't block infantry or vehicle movement (at least, not friendly, didn't try enemy aircraft), but enemy infantry that pass through it instantly lose their shields and are set aflame, which will reduce them to a sliver of health over time.

      These things are pretty amazing. They'll provide a robust defense against high altitude drops, especially paired with an anti infantry turret or a couple spitfires to finish off the attackers once they land. I don't expect this deterrence to be absolute; driving a galaxy through the shield for a low altitude drop will get your troops down, you need to have SOMETHING there to finish the wounded enemies off, and on-the-ball medics may be able to revive everyone or heal the damage off. In fact, a drop using only/mostly medics could be a pretty effective breach. No idea how these affect MAX units... I suspect they'll mostly shrug it off, leaving another vulnerability to consider.

      There's an added bonus to these things; they don't require clearance with terrain at all. The shields can be tight to a wall or terrain. Placed at the bottom of a hill so that the shield intersects with the slope, they become a bullet blocking, infantry torching force field.

    Aaaaand that's pretty much a comprehensive overview. I'll put my thoughts on attack, defense, and harassment/gathering down below.

  • #2
    Re: The new construction system


    Before we can figure out how to defend these bases, I think we need to figure out how they can be attacked, and make our countermeasures based on that.

    A typical base, I figure, is going to be positioned to take advantage of local scenery as defensive works as much as possible. A base in the open, no matter how formidable, is likely to get worn down from more angles than can be realistically covered. The base is then going to consist of walls and bunkers covering or blocking off obvious checkpoints and securing the flanks from easy intrusion, with spear turrets along the edges, AA turrets inside, and anti infantry turrets mixed between the two. Expect the AA and anti infantry turrets to have AI modules installed for certain, likely with repair modules scattered about as well. The silo is going to be central and low, as well as the HIVE, to avoid exposure. Topping it all off will be sky shield modules providing comprehensive cover of the base.

    Aerial bombardment is unlikely to be fruitful because of the turret AI. Likewise, the anti infantry turrets and sky shields will make surgical strike drops difficult to execute without overwhelming numbers. Medics, MAXes, and shear numbers may allow you to power through that anyways--I would be reluctant to bet on a single squad's base to survive a multi-platoon drop--but that'd be a costly and failure prone operation. Advancing on the base with infantry would be costly; active defenders will already cause issues, but the force multiplies of the fortifications and the turret AIs will make it slow going, especially on open terrain.

    This leaves two relatively reliable approaches; finding a chink in the defenses to exploit using infantry, using terrain or the fortifications themselves to approach and destroy crucial pieces of the base until the defense collapses, or using vehicles and focus fire to knock it down from a distance. I expect most attacks to fall into those patterns; tanks can easily drop turrets, simply disengaging and repairing once they've taken too much damage. Infantry can then exploit the hole in the defenses, pressuring the defenders and making it difficult for them to stop the armour and possibly knocking out modules in the bases to pave the way forward. Defenders might in turn just keep erecting defenses, repairing what they've got, and denying the infantry a foothold. I don't know who I'd favour in that scenario; on the PTS, the TR seemed to be able to hold their big base and then some, but the attackers were uncommitted and unorganized.

    Another approach might be building a siege base of your own, sans a HIVE, to provide a foothold for assault or turrets to use as siege weapons. You could even progressively build fortifications close and closer to the enemy in preparation for an assault. Not sure how well this would work, but I'd be up for trying!

    I suppose my standard playbook for killing a base would be to set up a squad as armour/siege (NC phoenix missiles are also promising as a siege weapon, able to hit targets behind the walls) and then one or two other squads as infantry making a careful, stealthy approach and then carefully disassembling the defenses.

    However, I'd argue that--more than ever--an attack on one of these fortifications requires a scout, perhaps the commander themselves, to get eyes on and see the situation. These bases are going to present very different playing fields, even when they eventually settle into using a few particularily favourable map positions. The module placement will be different, and the surrounding strategic situation will have a big impact. A base on the front lines will be complicated by the enemy's defense of the base next to it. A base behind enemy lines will make it easier to have an isolated fight but will make it harder to manage logistics and equipment. The enemy might have set up their base with glaring weaknesses to be exploited, or might have set up their HIVE too early before they'd built their defenses up. There might be an angle through which a clear shot at the enemy silo or HIVE can be made, allowing a surgical strike to be effective for a kill.

    There's also the matter of the base's Cortium supply. I didn't get a good sense of how quickly the silo was drained by regular operation, but if the base is under attack a lot of its ability to hold the line will be determined by whether or not it can afford to replace damaged modules. If a base is a tough nut to crack, then making sure that no new ANTs are able to enter it might be crucial to finishing the siege.

    Harvesting and Harassment

    I think there's going to be a LOT of fun to be had in managing Cortium harvesting and disrupting the same. Harasser and Liberator crews are going to have a field day hunting ANTs, which makes defending them fairly crucial. At the same time, both ANT hunters and ANT defenders are going to want scouts to spot targets, as threats can come from anywhere, Cortium deposits are unpredictable, and time spent searching is wasted.

    On the harvester side, I can think of two scenarios to optimize for. The first is harvesting in friendly territory:
    • A half squad or less for the job (no sense wasting too much manpower on this unless the enemy is pretty aggressive about it)
    • 1-2 ANTs with walkers or basilisks for self defense. Can have gunners if you're paranoid, or not if you want more ANTs driving around. ANTs operate independently, trying to cover ground and return resources as optimally as possible.
    • Airborne recon/escort which might include 2-man Shredder Liberators (for hitting enemy Harassers) and/or A2A Reavers for scouting and anti air work. The aircraft spot Cortium for the ANTs, spot threats, and engage with attackers.
    • An alternative setup is to integrate the ANTs into a full air squad, which handles the typical duties of such a squad while also providing scouting and escort as a side benefit.

    The other scenario is harvesting near the front lines or in enemy territory:
    • A larger group dedicated to the task, organized like an armour group. Moves as a convoy
    • Given the relative nimbleness of the ANT, it might be viable to insert them into a Harasser wolf pack and use them as roving escorts instead of a less maneuverable tank column.
    • Harassers or Reavers for scouting, if needed.
    • Group stays pretty tight, substantial enemy contact is likely and they need to be able to quickly assist.

    Whether any of that is worth engaging in depends very much on how aggressive the ANT hunters on live turn out to be. If they don't end up doing it too often, it might be better to just let the ANTs do their own thing, using a single Reaver as a spotter for them.

    Now, on the ANT hunter side, there are a lot of interesting possibilities. Obviously, Harasser, Liberator, or even ESF groups will be able to hunt ANTs with impunity if not escorted. I won't explore that too heavily because, aside from maybe adding a scout to the equation, that stuff is a known quantity. However, there's also a lot of fun possibilities for behaving much more sneakily.

    For instance: you could scout enemy territory for Cortium deposits, preferably large ones. Upon finding one, you now have an option to set up an ambush (multiple ambushes if the enemy isn't paying attention!) Simply scattering mines around a Cortium deposit is a low effort way to frustrate enemy miners, but I think there are more insidious ways to undermine their efforts. A small kill team watching the deposit and killing anything that comes to mine it is more reliable, and might make sense if the Cortium deposit is high value (close to a base that needs it, large, etc) but might soon find themselves getting attacked in revenge, or might be ineffective if ANTs don't come to the node often or simply get their Cortium elsewhere.

    Another option, one that's better positioned to make the enemy hurt, is to simply maintain observation of the node. Let ANTs come up and siphon it, THEN sic a kill team on them (Harassers, aircraft... even infantry in ambush!) With a full tank of Cortium the loss of the ANT will waste more of the enemy's time and deny them the use of their resources, not just delay it. Similarily, finding freshly built bases and destroying them before they can become defensible has the potential to scrap even more enemy Cortium supplies.

    Setting up a static ambush (or, if you're feeling particularily mean, a blockading base of your own) might be a very interesting way of denying Cortium to a specific enemy base, if that's your aim. Any chokepoints along the way to that base can be festooned with mines and guarded with rocket launchers, in wait for ANTs to come up the road. If you have an ANT of your own (preferably loaded with Cortium from enemy territory) you can block off roads or put turrets in the way to further frustrate them or funnel them into ambushes.

    Since this is already a wall of text and I need to muse about it a bit more, I'm not including a section on running a defense yet. I'll put that in later!


    • #3
      Re: The new construction system

      Alright! Here are my initial thoughts on defense:

      For a well constructed base in a reasonable position, I expect that the primary threat to watch for is an armour attack combined with a steady infantry push. Tanks can wreck defenses from a distance and, if the defenders are suppressed and no active AV turrets are up, can basically walk right over a base. Expect squads of lockdown prowlers to rip bases apart with regularity. Infantry can use your own defensive structures against you, sneak through the cracks to hit important targets, and kill your defenders. With good sunderer placement, they'll also just be an endless and persistent source of contact.

      A secondary threat is a surgical strike or brute force drop from an organized group. In particular, multi-platoon drops to kill a HIVE could end with relatively small defense teams getting overwhelmed out of nowhere. Sky shields and automated anti infantry turrets will go a long way towards making such attacks potentially embarrassing disasters, but there are other forms those attacks could take. The brute force drops themselves can probably be mitigated using lots of medics, revive grenades, and MAXes to mitigate the burn and auto turrets, and with a large group a HIVE can be taken down very quickly. The same group could also engage less suicidally and just drop NEAR the base before moving in in force, acting as an unexpected and overwhelming infantry siege.

      A tertiary threat is a large, coordinated enemy air offensive. I expect that this will be difficult to execute or require that ground units knock out turrets or shields ahead of time, but if you've been rendered defenseless (or they take steps to mitigate the auto turrets like using a Galaxy to tank the fire) then an air raid could do some real damage.

      A longer term threat is the base's Cortium supply. Necessary for ongoing operation, it's even more important if you're in a siege scenario or trying to recover from a failed attack, since it's crucial for reconstruction. This one is local concern if the enemy has surrounded and blockaded you, and a more wide-ranging one if they're hunting your ANTs in the field.

      Finally, I'd be worried about a deficiency in the base's positioning or layout being exploited. No base will be perfect, and if there's an angle that a sneaky infiltrator can take to engage the HIVE without making line of sight with a Xiphos turret, eventually someone will see it and use it to destroy the base. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked if a group of Stalker infiltrators could get close as a group and use their secondaries to make the kill. Similarly, if there's a hilltop or odd angle where something vital in the base can be hit, expect that it'll eventually be used to bring the base down.

      Given all those ways to bring a base down, here's my initial thoughts on actually running a defense:
      • Carefully consider the positioning of the base. You want it to be exposed from as few angles as possible, and you want your turrets to have as little target profile as possible while still being able to fire on the important threats. There should be few good firing positions for enemy armour to shell the base.

      • Beyond using the natural terrain, consider using nearby friendly bases and the shape of the overall strategic situation to reduce the angles your enemies can easily approach from. For instance, if you're on one side of the Bastion wall and the enemy is on the other, they'll struggle to bring armour to attack you without hacking a terminal behind you. At the same time, you need to worry about the Bastion itself falling (and turning that base against you) and enemy infantry taking the wall and using it as a firing position.

      • Don't install a HIVE until you're ready to defend it. It shows up on the map to everyone, and if you aren't prepared then a few aircraft might be enough to drop it. Make sure the basic defenses, at least, are up, or that you've got enough forces nearby to bridge the gap.

      • The sky shields, turret AI modules, and repair modules are crucial lynchpins of the defense. Make sure you have them, ideally with redundancies.

      • Avoid putting all your eggs in one basket. If you have one Sunderer and one Cortium silo then losing either will probably cripple your ability to defend the base. Multiple Sunderers are ideal (and shielded garages will make them safer), and multiple silos are a possibility as well, to the best of my knowledge. In the absence of a second silo, it might make sense to keep a fully loaded ANT parked in the base as a backup so you can rebuild it if it goes down. This is, of course, all dependent on having enough resources to be so redundant.

      • As for the actual, moment to moment defense, the baseline needs to be a squad, even a small one, that can keep the base repaired, the walls and turrets manned, the modules built, and serve as a last line of defense for the crucial parts of the base.

      • Enemy units sieging the base from a distance are a major threat. If available, a second squad should run armour, hold a forward position, or do sporadic infantry AV drops on hillsides to break up and harass that armour. Defend the base from a distance and prevent the heavy equipment from being comfortably deployed against it.

      • The old Heavy Interceptor strategy might be very helpful here to deal with large scale drops, particularly for bases well behind the front line that are more likely to be attacked that way. The gist of it is that an air squad, consisting of Liberators and ESFs kitted for A2A, has a single scout watching for enemy air incursions. If anything is spotted moving towards the base, the squad scrambles to shoot it down.

      TL;DR: Build a base in the right position, make sure the most important modules are up, defend and/or add redundancies for your critical elements (HIVE, Silo, Sunderers) and deploy your forces so that there is a dedicated caretaker/close defense group and then more maneuverable assault groups that can be deployed forward to frustrate and distract any attempts to disassemble the base from a distance.

      That's a starting point, anyways. It will be fascinating to see how the meta evolves around these bases on live; many of these measures might be overkill, or the threats could be understated. More likely is that many of these threats will be situational and that it won't be possible to have a cookie-cutter defense strategy; if you're in a position that enemy armour can't reasonably assault, for instance, that's really not going to be a concern, and now you need to watch for other methods of attack more carefully. If you're building a base right outside your own warpgate, then a skeleton crew might be all that's required since the low efficiency of the base will make it a low priority target. Or it could turn into a massive warpgate siege. Players are unpredictable like that!

      Interested to hear other people's thoughts on this!


      • #4
        Re: The new construction system

        TG armor squad leaders needed.

        Harasser drivers/gunners requested.


        • #5
          Re: The new construction system

          +1 rep for the detailed report! SAdly it won't let me give you more rep. But nice job man!
          The question foremost in my mind is "what will bring the most tactical fun to the server?"


          • #6
            Re: The new construction system

            So if im not mistaken walls are destructible? Because if that's the case, I anticipate the number one base killer will be zerg platoons of armor. Particularly from TR since between lock down and their superior DPS will melt base walls I would think. Unless the walls are not destructible or killing them literally takes like a 10+ min of platoon lvl bombardment per single wall piece.


            • #7
              Re: The new construction system

              I didn't experiment with how much fire it took to knock a wall down, but given the relatively fast repair time and the health of the turrets I don't expect they're too difficult to take down with coordinated fire.

              I agree, if an armour zerg can hit your base, it's probably going to melt in very short order. HEAT (not AP) gets a damage bonus, too. This is why I think positioning and forward defense is so important. If critical parts of your base are in view of armour, it's going to fall apart and you'll be basically helpless. I suspect that the best approach to mitigating this is to limit the number of angles that enemy armour can approach you, and then turn those into kill zones. As they say, the best defense is a good offense.

              After that, if infantry get close enough they'll also disassemble it. C4 is pretty effective in knocking base structures down, so an unattended wall is not going to slow anyone down for very long.

              Overall, I feel like maintaining initiative on defense will be crucial. If the enemy gets to choose how and where you fight, I don't think constructed bases will hold up well.


              • #8
                Re: The new construction system

                Sounds like an innovation made for hossin. And not for esamir. Agree with you star. Location critical to limit the long ranged tank fire which is main weakness. QRF might be a valk or airborne. Dropping 5 AT infantry behind an enemy tank line may change their perspective. ( assuming you need a portion of the 12 man squad to be in the base itself. Air assets as qrf are ideal to me. Lib in particular for its AT power with small squad member investment(2-3)
                The question foremost in my mind is "what will bring the most tactical fun to the server?"


                • #9
                  Re: The new construction system

                  Nice write up [MENTION=16189]starstriker1[/MENTION]

                  Did a test on a ( non manned ) VS installation today.

                  Note this is after Saturday and I was restricted in what I can build.
                  Others were either able to build more, or managed to maintain them since Saturday

                  I could build(as a non squad member):
                  Anti Infantry Turret(1) only, could not rebuild it again this day

                  I managed to drive my sunder up to the AT gun and sustained 1 hit, the AV turrets has large dead zone where you can drive around without it shooting.
                  I am guessing the dead zone is around 50-100 diameter from the centre of the turret maybe a radius of 75m

                  I have yet to test the dead zone fully as I have found no other active AV turrets to play with.

                  With the sunder cloaked, the AV turrets stopped tracking.

                  I dropped lots (used all recourse) of C4 on most things, no damage

                  Killing structures with the basilisk was fast and easy:

                  AI for turrets (easy and first target)
                  repair mod (second target)
                  shield gen(last)

                  The Walls and turrets did not take noticeable damage
                  Since the AI mod was taken out the turrets were useless

                  Range of the AV turret was around 100 - 200 meters
                  The AV turrets will stop firing IF another base structure is in the way BUT can be made to hit if you time your drive pass (also little to no damage to that structure)

                  I could load an TR silo and other NC silos with Cortium , but could not take from them.

                  Might play again later see if I can find out more.

                  I was also able to repair NC structures including my own
                  I could dismantle my own structures except my silo.

                  (6..~)Z Z z z....


                  • #10
                    Re: The new construction system

                    Thanks for doing additional experimentation, vts!

                    It'll be interesting to see what's just unimplemented or buggy and what's intended. There's a loading tip, for instance, that C4 and HEAT are better for knocking structures down.

                    On my own end, two tanks putting AP fire down on a turret with a repair module had no issue bringing it down, though it easily took 10-20 hits to do so. I wouldn't be shocked if the repair module was outdoing your basilisk on the bigger structures. Fortunately, as you noted the modules seem to be pretty vulnerable, and they seem to be the most crucial bits of a base. Knock them down in a surgical strike and the turrets stop working, the aerial shields drop, and the auto repair stops cleaning up the damage.

                    The AV turrets seem to be the most underwhelming of the trio. At range they do alright suppression of armour, but they're not a huge threat, as you note they're useless at short range, and they don't track infantry. Some AI on them is better than nothing, but I suspect that the best use of them will be to man them and get proactive target acquisition and anti-infantry work for your trouble.

                    The other two turrets are both frighteningly efficient at their jobs, though. Unless you have need of them to engage targets at longer range (or engage targets outside their specified unit types) you are far better off leaving them to their own devices.


                    • #11
                      Re: The new construction system

                      I was on the test server today and we were treated to a play test on indar.

                      Alpha setup a remote base and built the perimeter with a solo and walls with a sunder house either side and a shields above and structure

                      Some of the team moved to bravo and pulled armour

                      While I marked out the main base build, our nearest capable base, and two location for out posts with the tacticaloverlay

                      we requested a VP gen in the main base from the devs.

                      I requested alpha to build up outposts one, adding to the silo,repair mod, av,AA,AI turrets and AI modulewhich I already has secured.
                      I had built the outpost on the edge of a no deploy zone so could only fortyfy the right half with a smoke stack blocking the toward flank and outpost two covering our left flank.

                      I also requested anyone to who had them to drop mines in the dead land left side of the base.

                      Bravo tasked it's self with hunting down VP generators and taking out everyone else's bases

                      They mopped up the map but could not destroy the walls and turrets so just focused on the modules and silos.

                      At this point I took over the platoon with chalie running back and forth loading the silos.

                      Other squads were building up outpost two and a small base behind our own, locking up locasl ore supplies

                      I noticed some armour build up near outpost one and called bravo to support and alpha to man the turrets and walls.

                      The battle lasted for a very very long time, but while defending the outpost, the main base VP generater was uncontested and ticking away.

                      I ordered the whole platoon to disengage and fall back to the main base to fortily it.

                      Outpost one lasted another ten minute, unmanned, before it fell, mainly due to everyone redeploying thier structure in the main base.

                      The main base did not fall and took on wave after wave of armour and air strikes and still held up well after the play test was over

                      Unfortunately we kinder got warpgated by the TR and the continent was locked.

                      With the lock, all the structure started to explode and disappear.

                      But then we were treated to fireworks and God mode and took a ride in a flying sundered, then dropped from a hight of around 5000 meters, to which we went splat.

                      Even if we lost the map, the fight was the best ever...

                      thank you DEVs.
                      Last edited by vts; 04-12-2016, 04:56 PM.

                      (6..~)Z Z z z....


                      • #12
                        Re: The new construction system

                        -just gonna add what i tested myself the other day a base ap lightning with zero ammo capacity upgrades takes down a wall, if it utilizes every shell at its disposal witch I beleive is about 24 to 25 and so far it looks like a single person can add only about 3 walls at a time so that will make squad cohesion if we wish to rectify a base with more than three walls a must. also in testing the The anti Infantry turrets will lightly damage friendly structures, actually something Im hoping that they remove purchasing structures seemed a little buggy for me as well. Im also thinking that this will give light assaults a little more utility for assaulting bases. Im also hoping that some modules will be vulnerable to small arms say like two clips of a carbine, similiar to how gens were vulnerable to that in alpha game play.ah well back to editing the vfx for my latest you tube video.
                        Oh and seeing how I mentioned it anyhow heres a link to one of the videos ive done in the past in case your interested in the sorts of videos I do You guys might like them (also hoping to set up this sort of scenario with the construction system mwhahahahaha.
                        also channel link
                        Also you can watch the stuff if your curious as to what I look like in real life.
                        Last edited by RaymondScout; 04-12-2016, 09:33 PM.


                        • #13
                          Re: The new construction system

                          Agh! Wish I'd been able to join in that playtest, VTS, sounds like a blast. Alas, work beckons. :/

                          Good thought on using the map drawing for laying out base designs for the squad to build. Seems like a great use of the system, and a good way to keep everyone on the same page. What kind of detail did you go into? Just walls and bunkers, or down to the modules and turrets as well?


                          • #14
                            Re: The new construction system

                            Someone did a test for time to kill with various vehicle weapon. Useful data, but one of the more startling data points is that ESF secondaries have a remarkably short kill time.

                            I don't share the poster's concern that Liberators are going to be a major threat. They might have relatively low TTK, but 40s is FOREVER and even with a couple Libs pounding the same target that's enough time for the AA turrets to chew them up. It's also for only a single rampart wall, which might well have repair modules and player repairs on it in that time. With a squadron of well-coordinated Libs involved, maybe, but a lone liberator team is not going to be a threat.

                            ESFs, though... could be something to that. A 12 man squad with A2G secondaries would kill a wall in two seconds, and could hit and run to minimize turret exposure. As part of a ground offensive, that squad could selectively air strike priority targets. Another tool to add to the toolbox, I guess. As far as defending against it goes, local troops with flak to help discourage them MIGHT dissuade the attacks (or add enough attrition to make them unwieldy), but I think the real defense will be to engage them from a distance with some kind of air patrol. Intercept and scatter them, then retreat to friendly AA. Rinse and repeat for every attempt at an attack run; if you catch them during an attack run, when they're already committed or distracted, then you could inflict heavy casualties.

                            Did some additional testing. The HIVE shield is tough... no idea how much it takes to knock it down. 2 C4 wasn't enough, for sure. The Skywall appears to be completely invulnerable, which means that if you can build a base in a pit you can make it practically invulnerable to direct attack; a couple AI driven Xiphos turrets down below will seal the deal there.

                            I found a place where you can do that on Amerish; there's a big pit in the central mountain in the center of the triangle between the Ascent, Lithcorp Central, and Raven's landing. With two skywalls I think you can completely wall it off (there COULD be a couple entrance points left... maybe. A third skywall would seal that) which means external attacks aren't getting in and infantry attempting to descend are going to get lit on fire. While human wave attacks might be able to knock down critical AI or skywall modules (all the more reason to have redundancy) that'd be very, very costly.

                            The main problem with the location is that it's VERY inaccessible, and the Cortium cost to set it up is still reasonably high. There's only two real access points for vehicles, and those are the goat trails from the Ascent and Raven's landing. The Ascent one looks relatively easy to traverse, but the Raven's landing one requires negotiating the bridges over the main road. The ANT will fit, but just barely. The important takeaway here is that it'll be difficult to get enough resources up there to keep it running, and it'll be trivially easy to prevent resupply by securing whichever goat path the enemy can reasonably access (it's unlikely they'll have both unless they have the entire mountain locked down). That can be done with a few mines and an occasional watchful eye; negotiating the paths requires a long, cautious approach with no room to maneuver. If you're in the position of getting an ANT up those roads, send an infantry escort ahead to sweep for mines and ambushes. Losing a Cortium resupply to a base like that would be tragic.


                            • #15
                              Re: The new construction system

                              Clearly you haven't thought this through.

                              Haha, j/k.

                              +Rep, thanks for the report.
                              "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw




                              TeamSpeak 3 Server


                              Twitter Feed