| Author |
New Defense Base Discussion |
_x$witchBladex_ [1.480 Fanboy]
Grand Admiral
Joined: February 26, 2003
Posts: 849
From: Upstate New York
|  Posted: 2008-06-15 18:54
As the title implies, I want to see what you all think about defense bases and what they should do. We all know that defense bases are being revamped, but don't really know as to what. What are ideas for defense bases we can offer to the Dev's? I know the Dev's are considering removing the IT missiles to reduce server stress, but with the different level bases still being in play shouldn't there be a purpose for each?
Currently we have level 1, 2, 3 with each being more powerful than the previous one. How could we change them up so that each defense base has it's strengths and weaknesses versus other defense bases?
Right off the top of my head I can consider Beam Bases, IT Missile Bases, Psi Missile Bases, etc. Of course these were just thrown out of my head as I am typing this, but you get the idea. Personally, I think that beams should no longer attack passing by ships because:
- A) Way too powerful and
- B) Helps those pesky planet molesters.
With my idea of seperating it so that each base only fires a specific weapon, it makes it a challenge to have a balance between bombing defense, and overall planetary defense against fleets.
So, with this random idea being suggested what can you the community think up?
_________________
* [=TB=]Enterprise @39933 sent to Clan: "Thats a lie Switch, you'd never let anyone else drink rum if it were right there. You'd slip teh roofies in and start drinking it yourself and not even realize it."
|
doda *EP5 no longer exception...*
Grand Admiral
Joined: December 11, 2005
Posts: 1012
From: happy land
| Posted: 2008-06-15 21:38
well im ok with that suggestion
I think that missle bases should have few but very powerful missles
_________________
Please resize your Admin - signature
VCA since June 5th 06
|
Axianda The Royal
Fleet Admiral
Terra Squadron
Joined: November 20, 2001
Posts: 4273
From: Axianda
| Posted: 2008-06-16 03:43
if they go for the 3 base idea *not lvl's* then how about this.
Planet defense base
* Beams set mainly for PD but they CAN attack ship that do a flyby
* Negative point, hardly able to do damage
* good point, designed to stop them pesky Bombs and missiles
Planet Assault base *hell i cant figure names*
* designed to attack ships that are within dictor range with 1 beam to serve as protection
*Negative point, Not very good on PD, and costs more power to run as well as manpower
* good point, it can serve as a good protection against incomming ships that are caught in the grav well.
Planetary Fortress. *inspired by the Guns of Navarone*
* Designed to counter the assault of the Heavy ships/stations the fortress was designed as all out offensive. however due to the fact it has a lot of powerfull weapons the power requiremenst/manpower are through the roof so you will not find these around much.
Perhaps these have 1 Capital ship gun with a 1K Gu range *atmospheric interference*
-discuss
_________________
- Axi
|
Gejaheline
Fleet Admiral
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 19, 2005
Posts: 1127
From: UGTO MUNIN HQ, Mars
| Posted: 2008-06-16 08:46
Looking at it from a fluff point of view, defences on the planetary surface would have a very hard time attacking anything beyond the atmosphere, which in DS terms is barely short of hitting the planetary surface; missiles would have to work against gravity, and lasers would be attentuated and refracted by the atmosphere.
So, really, they would be dedicated to stopping things that have made it past the defensive system in orbit (i.e. platforms).This leads me to suggest that, in game terms, they emit a form of shielding effect that protects nearby installations from bombs and troops until they are overwhelmed (i.e. reduced to 0% "shield"). Defensive laser installations could have a high degree of protection in a limited radius, fighter installations provide a weaker degree of protection over a wider area, and missile installations be a compromise between the two. Obviously, ICC shield installations would still cover the entire planet with a high degree of protection, but wouldn't be able to stop neutron bombs and troops.
This would make def bases truly defensive, with platforms taking the more offensive role of shooting at ships and so forth.
_________________
[Darkspace Moderator] [Galactic Navy Fleet Officer]
|
_x$witchBladex_ [1.480 Fanboy]
Grand Admiral
Joined: February 26, 2003
Posts: 849
From: Upstate New York
| Posted: 2008-06-16 09:43
I really like those idea's Axi. The only thing is that the Planetary Fortress Cannon should be very inaccurate versus smaller ships to give it a specific use against massive invasion fleets. Possibly have it shoot core weapons or something with a lot of splash damage. But as you said, make the requirement costs outrageous so that maybe only clusters will use them, and even if that, have to be on the correct facing side of the planet in order to be used.
Geja, I understand what you are trying to say, but shields are really only for ICC. Making it so that defense bases only protect against bombs/missiles/etc. and only having platforms attack is one idea in the air though.
[ This Message was edited by: _x$witchBladex_ [1.5 Ahoy!] on 2008-06-16 09:45 ]
_________________
* [=TB=]Enterprise @39933 sent to Clan: "Thats a lie Switch, you'd never let anyone else drink rum if it were right there. You'd slip teh roofies in and start drinking it yourself and not even realize it."
|
Enterprise
Chief Marshal
Raven Warriors
Joined: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2576
From: Hawthorne, Nevada
| Posted: 2008-06-16 11:24
Quote:
|
On 2008-06-16 09:43, _x$witchBladex_ [1.5 Ahoy!] wrote:
Making it so that defense bases only protect against bombs/missiles/etc. and only having platforms attack is one idea in the air though.
|
|
A bad idea, given the high maintenence of platforms.
Personally I feel that there should only be two kinds of defense bases. Ones that are PD only, that do not attack ships. And newly christianed assault bases, which serve no other purpose other than to attack ships in orbit.
Personally, I feel that to cut down on the amount of lag and spam associated with such bases, these bases could have IGBM's (Intergalactic Ballistic Missiles), which is just a fancy name for the PCM's. With a wider detonation area and more power behind them they would be alot more effective at repelling invaders (providing even a missile shot down has a shockwave large enough to cause some damage), as opposed to how IT, AR, and their KLuth variants are working (effectively useless against anything but Dreads and Stations).
And perhaps outfit them with long range, single fire cannons that can do a decent bit of damage.
That way, an engineer would have have to carefully balance his defenses with his offenses, or he could just go for an uber defense planet (or uber offense planet). It leaves alot of room for variety in planetary construction.
-Ent
_________________
|
Eledore Massis [R33]
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: May 26, 2002
Posts: 2695
From: tsohlacoLocalhost
| Posted: 2008-06-16 11:54
#placeholder#
Ok i just noticed Axi's post when i was about to leave.
I got some my old files of my idea of defense bases, i'll try to dig it up tonight and place it in here.
But so far i like axi's idea but as read Ent's post this to makes sense. and with the addition of platforms i might have to re-think about the usage of planet defence platforms and reconstruct parts of my old file. or i could just as wel type out a new chapter about this. anycase first dinner.
_________________
DS Discordion
|
Axianda The Royal
Fleet Admiral
Terra Squadron
Joined: November 20, 2001
Posts: 4273
From: Axianda
| Posted: 2008-06-16 12:57
well the biggest drawback of the fortress is that cuz of the big guns the main weakness is en are small ships. a small ship can jump in first and be the bunny that keeps the bases occupied while the bombers go to work..
sounds simple but there are always nmy ships around to go on a bunny hunt 
so you see while very powerfull and costly it has major setbacks... then again if that thing should work as intended it can ben a hell for the capital ship pilots.
but pls dont focus on the fort alone
and ofc it only fires at what in the line of sight.
_________________
- Axi
|
_x$witchBladex_ [1.480 Fanboy]
Grand Admiral
Joined: February 26, 2003
Posts: 849
From: Upstate New York
| Posted: 2008-06-16 14:38
Ent, I like it. It is true that the majority of the time IT and Psi missiles always miss their targets. Replacing them with PCM/Shock missiles might be a good change up so that they A) Cause Damage and B) Don't spam as many.
With that being said, there would have to be a greater limit on how many are launched per base and all that jazz...
With this being said, I think we generally have defense bases broken down into 2 or 3 general groups.
- Point Defense -- Strictly shoots down bombs and missiles within range but causes very little damage to enemy ships
- Assault -- the "offensive" defense base which attacks ships within range
- "Fortress" -- Very powerful weapon that is effective against capital ships, but has a lot of setbacks which make it a risk in using one (power, workers, cost, very limited arc to shoot from)
Just from what I have read/thought, the so-called "Fortress Base" really falls under the job of platforms. That way, the platform is limited to only the position it is built, but also has a limited life. One setback could be building time combined with limited time. By making the building time long it makes sure that players do not spawn 20 of them when they are under attack and defending a system.
Discuss.
_________________
* [=TB=]Enterprise @39933 sent to Clan: "Thats a lie Switch, you'd never let anyone else drink rum if it were right there. You'd slip teh roofies in and start drinking it yourself and not even realize it."
|
Axianda The Royal
Fleet Admiral
Terra Squadron
Joined: November 20, 2001
Posts: 4273
From: Axianda
| Posted: 2008-06-16 14:58
then again a platform is vulnerable to normal weapons fire and that alone is a pretty big drawback for em, and an engineer is a pretty easy target for fast attack ship like destroyers.
the fortress would act like some sort of SY class.. its in a league of its own and can only be built on certain type of planets due to the high build costs. in general the planets that are more worth do need the extra "protection" IMO since they are such a prize to have.
[ This Message was edited by: Axianda on 2008-06-16 16:44 ]
_________________
- Axi
|
Panduh
Grand Admiral
Pitch Black
Joined: June 03, 2007
Posts: 250
| Posted: 2008-06-17 19:50
A point to offer for all this, which i hope will lighten or 'fluff' the contraversy concerning darkspace as a skill-based game: destroyers will become very effective, especially near planets. They'll be so hard to touch with platforms, and the only ones who can hit them without taking major damage, effectively at least. I kinda like it, not having dreadnaughts as the centerpiece of a fleet in every single combat situation imaginable.
But yeh, library closing, gotta finish fast.
_________________
|
CrashDown
Cadet
Joined: May 29, 2007
Posts: 63
From: Estonia
| Posted: 2008-06-19 16:19
i like the idea of using core weapons, maybe do it this way that you can build x number of defence bases which act as just PD and then add an upgrade base which takes sick ammounts of res, which adds core weapons or whatnot to the existing bases.
_________________
|
Col.O
Vice Admiral
Joined: March 06, 2003
Posts: 5
| Posted: 2008-06-24 14:41
why not have the beam weps actually bassed in orbit. that way you couls have them attack ships approaching the planet. give them power restrictions that drain the power output from a planet... much like a beam wep drains power from a ship.
Then you can change up the tatics and dynamis of planetary assault. Like creating gaps in the orbital network to bomb planets, or getting behind the satellite's to drop inf... making it harder for large ships to bomb and cap a planet without a small fleet of ships. then a planet builder can add ground bassed def. to harass a ship in orbit.. like missiles. Then if you actually create seperate def basses orbital/ground it should cut down on the missile lag.
_________________
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
