Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'ava'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Starting Zone (EN)
    • Rules & Announcements
    • General Discussions
    • Off Topic Discussions
  • Starting Zone (DE)
    • Regeln und Ankündigungen
    • Novark's Registratur
    • Allgemeine Diskussionen
  • Starting Zone (FR)
    • Règles et Annonces
    • Registres du Novark
    • Discussions générales
  • Beta Discussion
    • Beta Updates & Announcements
    • Idea Box
    • Public Test Server Feedback
    • DevBlog Feedback
    • The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly
    • Streamer's Corner
    • The Builder's Corner
    • Innovation Station
  • Organizations
    • Org Updates & Announcements
    • Novark's Registry
  • Fan Art, Fan-Fic & Roleplay
    • Novark Agora
    • Novark Story Time
    • Novark Art Gallery

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location:


Interests


backer_title


Alpha


community_id

Found 7 results

  1. SneakySnake

    AvA ideas

    I created this thread so players can submit their ideas for the future AvA mechanics here. This will make it easier for NQ to collect our ideas. My suggestions: I think NQ need to give the players the ability to plant C4 bombs with a remote detonation or a timer on other players ships, so that later they can detonate them in the pvp zone, we also need tracking beacons that will transmit the coordinates of the ship every few minutes that the ships owner can detect and remove from the ship before departure. This will be a good start for the AvA 😗 These 2 mechanics will be the easiest to do. Another AvA mechanic is the boarding mechanic. How it can work: when 1 ship approaches another at a close distance, for example 20 km, a button appears in the pilot of the ship to send a request for boarding to the pilot of another ship. A boarding request cannot be rejected if your ship has fewer players than the other ship that sent you the request. When boarding starts, the ships stop 100m apart and remain motionless, the boarding timer starts working. While the boarding timer is running, players cannot pilot and fire the ships' guns, these 2 ships cannot be destroyed by other ships, a no-fly impassable zone appears around these ships until the boarding timer stops. If none of the ships was captured during this time, then after the end of the boarding timer, the speed of the ships is restored.
  2. Usually when there's territorial warfare, the act of capturing a base may start from the air or very far away. As time goes on the Area of interest may become contested by various means. However, at the end of the day, capturing anything terrestrial usually ends with ground forces... This being tanks to weaken a base and the internal dirty work being done by foot soldiers who will get into CQC situations to capture the buildings of the base. The fact that NQ brought up territorial war fare when there's been little to no conversation of AvA worries the absolute crap out of me. As in, atmospheric combat... I'm afraid... because there's no AvA... will result in yet another poorly executed patch release that will do little to bring back the community if the 0.24 and 0.25 patches actually get pulled off well enough. I'm sorry to break this to you NQ but if you instill territorial war fare without AvA the PvP crowd... the literal thousands of people who are waiting for this game to add in the true aspects that they're willing to throw their money at, will not get on board. Adding AvA AFTER launch will just add more fuel to the fire in ways NQ doesn't need especially when NQ is already in deep need to start generating some real cash-flow during beta. As far as Territorial war fare PVP goes, AvA is absolutely critical and is the final stage of capturing land. To add in Territorial war fare and NOT have AvA with at least pistols and rifles would be like building a car but leaving out the engine. You want to bring in the money from the EvE crowd when adding in territorial warfare? Don't half-ass it. Do it right and as thoroughly as you reasonably can or you'll just get more bad publicity keeping the gaming crowd (and their money) away from DU.
  3. In many ways, a hitscan point and fire based shooting system is very similar to the way mining works at the current moment. With mining: The player shoots a raycast from the direction you are pointing, and removes voxels in the area around where the raycast hit. With a hitscan point and fire weapon system this process is very similar: The player shoots a raycast from the direction the gun is pointing, and removes voxels and damages elements in the area around where the raycast hit. If these two processes are so similar, why do we have to stick with the boring EvE-style PvP mechanics we have now? My two main theories are this: it would be too hard to aim with such high ranges (nq should definitely reduce combat range + speed) they haven't got round to doing it yet (most likely) And I know this one is far off, but the same goes for AvA. why does ava have to be a locking based system as well?
  4. What if when AvA PvP is released there is craft-able parts like helmets, gauntlets, jet-packs and other accessories that can be crafted and customized that players can add to their avatar to make custom armor and suits? Obviously like materials the accessories would drop when the players were killed so no one would be to op with what they have on their avatar but it could give players more customization of their avatar. Another feature could be that the accessories could be colored separate from the avatars suit so not everyone's avatars looks the same if they have the same color avatar. Please comment your thoughts.
  5. AvA (avatar vs avatar) combat is a basic feature of DU. CvC (construct vs construct) was added when the KS stretch goal was reached. But once ships became "shooty", it automatically opened up the possibility of AvC (avatar vs construct) combat, which is inherently imbalanced. A handheld weapon cannot match the power of a ship-mounted weapon. Infantry will need man-portable anti-construct weapons to defend themselves, otherwise they will be "farmed" by construct pilots. In PS2 that's covered by shoulder-launched missiles and by mounting AAA guns on mech suits, because that calibre of weapon is not practical for a human unless they're wearing an exosuit. Alternatively, infantry will have to operate under the cover of assault hovercraft that have anti-ship weapons. Target-locking further complicates things, because it devalues evasive maneuvers. The effectiveness of running in a zig-zag pattern to throw-off a fighter's aim in a strafe attack is difficult to model in a target-lock environment. Same with "dodge" moves or jetpack bursts. Bombardment from space has been ruled-out, but it's presumably possible to make your dreadnought atmosphere-capable. That would imply that a base will have to have defenses (both passive and active) that can cope with capital ship-sized targets and associated weapons damage. But what are the implications of that for infantry small arms ? Will they be utterly useless against base fortifications ? EVE uses target-lock timers and traverse speed limits to make large guns ineffective against small, fast-moving targets. Works fine for ship combat, but infantry are really slow in comparison to a fighter-class ship...
  6. Dual Universe's general Avatar vs Avatar combat system is still a topic to be discussed as most of it also lies in the dark for the community. Nonthetheless, I'd like to discuss a related topic: How and if different tacical gameplay elements can benefit AvA combat and which elements can be used meaningful. Having said that, it's also important to think about if certain tactical elements even make sense at all in an MMO like Dual Universe, what is feasible and what may be too much. However, I personally felt it would be disappointing if ground combat only consisted of aiming and shooting around with different weapons with barely any features around. Seeing how many non-tactic games adapted features from tactic shooters, implementing certain elements can bring a lot more depth in combat situations. So I thought of different features that many tactic shooters implemented. Surely you wouldn't expect DU to feature a full list of these and become a full-fledged shooter by the way, but I'd like to list a few specific ones that I think could be discussed well. Advanced movement systems A good basic for most tactic shooters is a movement systems that allows the player to take on different stances and have the character interact with objects and world elements during movements. Usually, this consists at least of being able to stand, crouch and lie down as stances (Battlefield, Arma), some shooters go even further with additional stances in between these three or being able to sprint in different modes and combine them into slides or throwing yourself down. But another element of this feature is the interaction with the environement, for example being able to leap over obstacles (The Division, Ghost Recon), sometimes even climb on elements These elements can commonly be seen in third person shooters, but more first person shooter adapt them as well. First person shooters also sometimes feature the possibility to lean over to a side to look around corners. (R6 Siege, Squad) Does DU need this? Interacting with the world would be great, but DU is a Sci-fi game. Cimbing a building or being able to leap over small objects would not be necessary if we can use our jetpack for it. In fact, the jetpack allows for a far more complex movement system as it creates an larger, 3 dimensional space to fight in. Jetpacks are also found in modern action shooters more and more and open other options, such as walking on walls or power leaps. However, being able to go prone is something that a jetpack can't replace and what I personally like to see in any game. Games with advanced physics or cover systems also include the leaning automatically. Cover system Especially in recent years, cover systems have been implemented in a majority of tactic shooters. It allows the player to position his character to any surface large enough and "stick" to it, moving along its course. With this, you can peek out to shoot and largely avoid getting hit easily. The problem with these systems is that they don't blend well with 1st-person, which is why most games with cover systems are 3rd-person shooters or switch into 3rd person as long as the character stays in cover. Another problem is that games with cover systems usually revolve around these (The Division, Gears of War, Rainbow Six: Vegas). Having a full cover system in DU would likely mean more work for a possible 3rd-person perspective or that combat takes place behind cover, which is fun for many but can become tedious at times. This where the soft-cover system comes in: Some recent games have implemented a cover system, that doesn't require your character to stick to a surface. Instead, the player positions his character regularly behind cover. As soon as he aims, the character will automatically look over or around the cover. The recent Ghost Recon Wildlands mixed these systems through an animation that seemingly lets the character stick to the surface without actually entering a sperate cover mode. While it's questionable if DU needs this, it would certainly be a nice feature to get just a bit more depth in the overall combat system as it opens more possibilities in combat and prevents the rushed, senslessly action-rich gameplay seen in low-effort productions. Kits / Roles Typical for an MMORPG is a class system. Shooters feature them as well sometimes, although "kits" are used more often in modern shooters as the less static pendant to classes. Kits feature a set of equipment that can usually be changed in or between rounds. Together with these kits, certain roles of a player are associated, which are often similar to traditional classes in RPGs. We have healing kits like medics, damage dealers like the normal rifeman or assault, a subsitute for tanks are usually kits with heavy weaponry like rocket launchers or LMGs and engineering kits for what in any other RPG can be a summoner, tamer or an engineer as well. NQ already stated that DU will not feature a fixed class system, but a skill tree with which players can specialize in a certain direction. These may be associated with roles as well, but in terms of overall DU gameplay. That means that AvA combat would only be one direction for a role in the whole tree. By fanning this direction of the skill tree out, a role system could be integrated into the game instead of having players assume different combat roles themselves or be determined solely by weaponry, which would be another possibility as well. A broader skill tree would also mean stronger in-depth specialization, more directions to go and being able to combine skills and equipment effectively. Communication channels A working chain of command is essential for successful operations. A complex strategy needs to be executed correctly, which is why everbody has to know their part in it. But a single squad also needs to be able to adapt to the situation in the field, which is why higher ranks make decisions and forward them to the single members. Sadly, most games neglect this complex procedure and only give access to an all-chat and team-chat, traditional MMOs mostly also to guild / clan / alliance chats. This is good, but not enough for a working chain of command. Sadly, the commonly used 3rd party programs like TeamSpeak, Skype and Discord can't satisfy this problem either. Squad implemented a good first start for this - a Radio channel for Squad leaders, for the squads and for proxmity. Squad leaders can discuss plans and strategies together, forwards them to their squad, that can in turn confirm and report single events while members can talk to people outside their squad or their immediate group through the local channel. Additional, the chat window allows to send messages to the whole team. I wouldn't expect DU to include VoIP, but besides the regular chats of traditional MMOs at least being able to have multiple chat channels for use inside organizations could be a lot to work with. These channels could maybe even be linked to the RDMS to decide who can type or read in it. If we take this step a bit further, being able to create a certain amount of custom channels would come in handy for all possible situations. In that case maybe not only for use inside an organization, but even for creating prviate chat channels with password protection to invite people from everywhere in the game. Weapon customization Not neccesarily a tactical feautre itself, but brings with it a lot of tactical depth, similar to kits and roles. Most MMOs feature equipment customization to some extent, mostly by upgrading quality and / or level of the gear. Fantasy MMOs also often allow to insert gems in sockets to boost a certain stat of the weapon. This is a very basic level of customization, but being able to put mods, modules, upgrade chips or whatever you want to call it on a weapon would definitely be imaginable for Dual Universe. Advanced customization allows the players to choose various components of their weapons like scopes, barrels, magazines, triggers and stocks. Somtimes, this is done when assembling or crafting your weapon and will determine the end stats of the finished product. In some games, this is an option in menus or on a crafting station (Fallout, Ghost Recon) While this certainly is a lot of work on the development side, the result is always a fun feature that would be a great addition in a sandbox game like DU. In a game you can create your own buildings, cities, vessels and societies, why exclude weapons from it? Interactive maps The last and shortest feature on the list is interactive maps. There are only few games in which you can customize your maps. But like with communication channels, a complex strategy needs to be explained well. Being able to illustrate and visualise a strategy or tactic is a great help and makes for a fun feature. Having a map you can draw on and show other players can be a great help to communicate even without words, this doesn't even need to be in real time. It'd be enough to craft a map, edit its content, save it and pass on the next player. Seeing as this is already the case with the blueprints in DU, making maps similar to them might not be too difficult on the development end. Now you're asked. What do you think of these features? Would you like to see some of them in Dual Universe as well? What other elements would you prefer and what would you want to add to reach a deeper combat system?
  7. Few questions about combat system: - will avatars take same amount of dammages on every points of the body? - will there be one shot kills? (head shots) - what are missing chances on moving targets? - will there be some dodge moves for avatar controls? - what does lock means on moving targets? first person cursor will keep following moving target? or lock just means locking at a fix position and moving target could easily move out? - what are chances in AvA to escape from an unknow hidden positionned fire assault? - in CvC what are chances to dodge while beeing chassed? - in CvC will we need to aproximatly apreciate the distance and movement speed of a target before locking and firing? - in one seat combat hoovercraft, will there also be the lock and fire system?
×
×
  • Create New...