As an Old Tribes Player, I'd LOVE to see....

[Peroxide]

I dont think legions should have vehicles it would be changing the game type from what it is to something that there is like tribes if you want to play a game with vehicles, etc. go straight to tribes if not and you want skiing and no vehicles, etc, here's legions.Not saying its bad to have vehicles,I did play tribes 2 but not alot,People are working hard to have legions back, And to add vehicles it would extend the time of not playing and more hardwork.
I WANT TO PLAY LEGIONZ!

 

[WildFire]

@ Peroxide, we all do, but here we are discussing the long-term development of legions.

I've just read though the entire thread, and I have to say, I am somewhat disappointed on how we are falling back on Tribes. Its true that the two have many similarities, but the two have to remain separate. Period. Instead of just adding the things from tribes, I think we need new classes, more variety (though they have hinted at custom classes). New weapons are needed (plasma anyone? Or mortar). I'm not saying everything from tribes shouldn't be included, but we need to see what can fit in where.

Here goes an incredibly long rant

First off, lets start with Turrets and mines. Personally, I think mines could really add something to the gameplay. You place down a mine on a popular route to your base, crash bang wallop, you have fragged someone and prevented them from getting your falg. This forces the opposing team to think of new fast ways to your base, creating more dynamic gameplay. Another example of this could help prevent a E-grab by laying down a mine. Auto - Turrets in my opinion, are a complete and utter waste of space. They add nothing to the gameplay. You outfit your base with them, the enemy cappers have a hard time getting through. Balance is destroyed? They destroy the actual point of defending, as it will all be done for you.

How would mines and turrets give players extra roles in pubs? Mines and turrets only substitute their roles as defenders and therefore they are unable to improve their defending skills. If you argued that they could both put mines/turrets AND defend, you still see the gap in skill created by the fact that they do not harness the skill it takes to take out an oncoming capper.

He said it well.

I've always liked vehicles, on smaller maps, it would wreck the gameplay - but on larger ones - it would be awesome! Zooming around in little scout fighters is great. Or a massive drop ship in bigger games could deliver 4 players into the enemy base.

However, I have to say, ground vehicles are pretty much pointless.

Sensors, and a command map, are good. It gives the player a in-depth view in what the enemy is up to. Imagine planting a sensor inside the enemy base, and then seeing exactly where they are on the command map! Tactical information on the enemies whereabouts would be great for defenders, as they'll be able to see oncoming cappers easily, but only if the sensor can see them. Like all things, sensors should be destructible, plus the fact that sensors should be able to see sensors.

Big turrets, the ones the player shoots, should be in the game. In what form they will be in I do not know, but the idea that struck me was a massive chain gun, aka minigun. These should be powered by generators, and if the generator goes down, the turret does too. Seeing as I am moving on to the subject of generators, they need to be in a place where the Offense can easily destroy them, and the Defense can easily repair them.

Sticky Grenades, may never ever work in legions. In Quake, they have proximity mines, and what happens? The newbies just spam them. As for the capper exploding in midair.. It is incredible hard to get a direct grenade on him, imagine the amount of precision you would need to do that... Out of reach for many players me thinks. I'm still open to the idea - if it is thought up well and executed well.

I am also a big fan of the 'less is more' idea. Smaller maps without vehicles and other assorted items would be great, but as long as it was with the 'full' version of the game.

At the end of the day, everyone has their own ideas on how to develop the game. Some ideas will make it through, some will not. Thanks for bearing with me!

 

[Peroxide]

nicely said

 

[Fixious]

Big turrets, the ones the player shoots, should be in the game. In what form they will be in I do not know, but the idea that struck me was a massive chain gun, aka minigun. These should be powered by generators, and if the generator goes down, the turret does too. Seeing as I am moving on to the subject of generators, they need to be in a place where the Offense can easily destroy them, and the Defense can easily repair them.

See, whenever I think of turrets in Legions I think small. If you've played the first Tribes, I pretty much mean Ion Turrets. Weak little bastards that do moderate damage and are easily destroyed. There's also another small turret in Tribes which I can't quite remember the name of, but is quite dangerous to Light players yet has a slow activation time and firing rate. Then of course there's the ELF turret which merely drains your energy, taking away your ability to fly for a few seconds. So many possibilities...

As for mines, I'm 100% for them. If you see one ahead of you, either get out of the way or shoot it.

 

[Tucker Watson]

Legions has perfected basic CTF gameplay, skiing, movement, weapon physics, and balance. However, as Astrum said, it lacks depth. One main reason legions failed at IA because it was extemely unfriendly to new players. I've never played a game where pub stomping was SO easy for good players, I can't imagine how frustrated new players must have been (well Quake is probably on par).

So, to my point - turrets, mines, generators, sensors, inv stations, etc. provide multiple newb friendly roles that are beneficial to the team. It takes months to become a decent capper or chaser, yet these are really the only roles in Legions current form. A new player could learn to set up turrets, mine the flag, and repair assets in DAYS. Meanwhile, they learn primary skills by perfecting these secondary roles and don't feel completely worthless. This exact scenario actually happened to me through playing TribesNext after being away from Tribes for 8+ years. I really think the only way for Legions to grow and maintain players is to sharply decrease the learning curve. The only way to do this without dumbing down the game for good players is to provide secondary roles.

 

[DudeofDeath]

Turrets, mines, generators, and the ability to repair work for me... maybe a limited number of forcefields active when gens are up. (Like 2 or 3 per team). Of course mortars would be awesome too.

 

[NYPD219]

Where the hell do you see me referring to your post, oh raging one? I didn't even mention you! But you're right, there's quite a big amount of that special metaphorical fecal matter to be found in there. Maybe spice it up with some real arguments and facts? I'm pretty sure everyone would be thankful for that. I definitely would.

You sure you're not mixing something up here? Even if I would have wanted to grief someone, I would've hardly found the time to do so, as I was quite busy administrating the servers. Hm, thinking about it, I might have been griefing the griefers. Aye, mea culpa.

Notice the tongue stick bud. lol

 

[aus.hsp]

We have to keep in mind how much work the developers of Legions: Overdrive are going to have to put into creating vehicles. It's a lengthy process and not an easy one either.

 

[NYPD219]

To be legendary I think you need to have more than a dozen players.

Alright, let's talk shop for a bit. Legions has very repetitive gameplay and it's very simplistic. If Legions were an RTS it would have a single building where you produce a single unit type, some of which you leave at home for defense, others which you send en masse to attack the enemy (like the Blood custom map for StarCraft). The gameplay is relatively static when compared to Tribes - and yes that is a proper comparison. Yes I know everyone likes going fast and ZOMG DOWNJAT but that does not make a game. Hell, Call of Duty has more content and dynamic gameplay than Legions, Black Ops even has primitive deployables. When it comes to pubs Legions is even worse. It's just a constant (llama) cap train. And before anyone says, "pubs aren't how the game is meant to be played!", screw you. Tribes had a million people playing at one point. How many of those were competitive players? 1%? If you want to tailor to 20 competitive players in Legions and no regular players, have fun with a dead game and boring competition.

So let's talk about what I'd like to see Legions become. First off, base assets. The holy trinity of generators, sensors, and turrets. Without power the other two are useless, without turrets the safety of the other two and your base in general are compromised, and without sensors, at least what I always thought sensors should do, your turrets are less effective (slower tracking, shorter range, whatever). Of course inventory stations as well, but I couldn't fit those in the trinity otherwise it'd be a quadinity and that isn't a word! I have a lot of opinions on what would constitute a good turret in Legions, but I'll leave that for another time.

So what does this do for the game? Well it removes the sole focus on the flag. Your base is at least as important as your flag. If you can't keep your flag safe you'll probably lose, and if you can't keep your base running, you'll probably lose. It would no longer be a case of, "Is the flag at base? No? Get it back. Yes? We're good" (simplified of course). There would be many other variables to consider. Deployables would mitigate, though not remove, the negative effects of a good base raping.

So yes, I think Legions can be improved by leaps and bounds rather than relying on DOWNJAT as a game mechanic.

I seriously believe the complaints are coming from youngins that never played Tribes or T2. They know not what they speak!

I also can not believe that 2 people in this thread actually complained about "thinking" and "learning". lol

Reminds me of the news story I read about modern kids looking at caned goods, and shrugging their shoulders cause there is no button to open it. L A Z Y!

 

[By-Tor]

My 2 cents.... (remember I'm from T1, T2 and alittle T:V) ....

Legions left off as a game barely developed. The basic core was there. Spawn, kill, grab flag, die, repeat. Strategy was difficult to employ in Legions simply because it's way too fast.

The depth of the game for me has to come from:

1. Map and Base design as well as Flag placement
2. Deployables - Turrets, stations
3. Assets - Gens, vehicles, sensors

I think with bigger maps and harder flags to grab, along with different objectives (gens and turrets) it will bring much more strategy to the game. I'm not saying I want just Tribes. I realize Legions is not Tribes. And I'm all for a new and different game, but I think what I'm describing isn't far off from what was originally planned for the game.

 

[mausgang]

Wow, I leave this thread for 20 hours and there's a whole lot more. There are some great arguments for both sides. I'd agree with Fireblasto that we may need deployables but not necessarily the ones used in Tribes. Mines, while being a seemingly good idea for boobytrapping routes to the base, in a game with jetpacks, the mines are easy to get over without detonation. Also, turrets would hamper the balance of the game. Generators may be a good idea, but adding too many facets to base defense will leave everybody wanting to go on offense in PUBs and leave the game to go by quickly, or in clan competitions or in PUGs, while there would be few defenders needed for a more brutal offense, those few players would suddenly be overwhelmed by the offense and once the generator goes down, there wouldn't be enough defensive power to hold off the onslaught while the generator is being repaired. I could see much more frustration from all sides coming up from a turret/generator combo to aid in base defense.
Sensors, or some other method of spying on the enemy base or cap routes, on the other hand, I think is a great idea. The sensors could be set up on cap routes so that the defense knows which way the next invader is coming from, or for chasers to know which way the flag went (though if the flag is always on the HUD, that may not be the greatest priority.) Obtaining tactical knowledge is important for defense and cappers moreso than the others. If the cappers can look through a spycam and see if their approach is good moments before they execute it, then they can use that information to make a decision before they actually go in.
Turrets (possibly the tetchiest subject on this thread) is something I disagree with. The turrets would, in order to be effective, have a huge radius of awareness, and then create this large circle of body parts around the base. Deployable turrets could be set up on cap routes, and while that may encourage people to think about new routes, there would need to be a limit on how many turrets could be placed by each team or else turrets would dominate the landscape and nobody would be able to get past a no-man's land.
Capturable mid-point bases: I like this idea, the maps would have to be huge, and how many would there be on each map? There could be many, and then a game similar to Onslaught from Unreal Tournament or Capture Point from TF2 could be produced from this, but with the legions touch. Advantages to having a capturable base in a game of epic CTF would include a closer spawn point for offensive players and desperate chasers, but not a capping zone in that base. I could see there being one midpoint base for a very long and thin map, which doesn't sound like fun, but if there was a map that was huge, then there could be bases scattered throughout. They don't all need to be large, either. Some could be like those tiny buildings in Blade Run that are out by the perimeter. Also, by huge maps, I mean something significantly larger than Blade Run.

 

[NYPD219]

Hmm. Just got an idea for a neat mine that might fit in a Z axis game well. Make it deployable on the ground only but make it deployable in a Pair. If a Skiier skis through the pair "think it to be a fence" have an ORBITAL LASER fire instantly at the spot, possibly taking out the player no matter how high it is flying. Or have a mine shoot a laser straight up if the mine senses a player skiing over it at any hight.

You could also make Floaters, that are camouflaged by a holo image or something that are barely visible.

 

[SeymourGore]

I don't know, it seems like if the mines were placed intelligently, they would be effective even against jetpacked players (jetpack energy doesn't last forever!).

Also, "adding too many facets to base defense" thus forcing players to play offensively, doesn't make much sense to me. By making the defensive side of Legions more involved, you make playing defense itself a much more exciting and varied position. Seems to me that'd make more people want to play defense and protect their objectives.

The turrets would, in order to be effective, have a huge radius of awareness, and then create this large circle of body parts around the base.

I don't see why the turret would need to have a huge radius of awareness to be effective. Deployables could have a smaller radius, deployed intelligently where they are not spotted right away and complement the defense. I think there's a misconception that turrets would replace defensive players, I like to think of them as complementing defensive players (making a smart defensive player more effective).

Also, you need to think that if base structures were introduced, perhaps there should be weapons introduced to the game that would be more effective in dealing damage to these new structures.

 

[Whitewhale]

Turrets in my opinion, are a complete and utter waste of space. They add nothing to the gameplay. You outfit your base with them, the enemy cappers have a hard time getting through. Balance is destroyed? They destroy the actual point of defending, as it will all be done for you.

lol u every tried defending RD gens with ur turrets against 4 HO

trust me turrets dont detract from skill....far far from it

 

[mausgang]

Okay, as a resolution, somebody else, volt, I think, had the brilliant idea of weapons tethers and I love the idea. Basically, you have the option to go to these things, plug a weapon of yours in and it gives you different advantages. You can't move everywhere with it, but you can still move out of the way of explosions, you essentially have this set radius of movement, but you still have movement. While giving up movement, though, you increase your firepower. It could be deployed within a certain radius set by a base (or a capturable base, thus giving greater incentive to capture them) Again, this isn't my idea, but I think its completely awesome, and would help with the turret issues. Seymour, I can see why you would think that turrets will complement the defensive players, and I'm a little afraid that people will find ways to use them to replace. Also, defense is exciting already Non-stop action and shouting "GTFO MAH BASE!" for the entire game.

 

[Volt Cruelerz]

The basic idea behind Tethering is to not replace defenders with turrets, but to turn defenders into turrets.

Basically, you walk up to a Tethering Coupler which would be found at a few select locations at a base. These would attach to the gun and so long as you are attached, they give certain benefits, however because you are physically tethered, your movement is still limited somewhat. It allows you to trade some mobility for power.

Along with the buffing the default weapons, some weapons could be Tether-Only, such as mortars and other heavy weapons. For instance, a plasma cannon might be on a mobile base so that you can assault the defending base assets without having to make yourself a sitting duck inside a traditional turret.

Basically, tethering makes players the turrets, just like the jet packs makes the players the fighters. It keeps the all-purpose-legionnaire idea alive while opening up a new option for defenders.

 

[SeymourGore]

Yar, Seymour's always been a fan of a user controlled turret. While I'm not exactly sold on a 'tether' system and moreso a traditional-styled turret (ie: pivots on its base). I'm trying to visualize a tether turret, and I'm having a hard time with it. I'm visualizing an attachment with a big cord that wraps over your weapon arm. Now when I let go of this attachment, does it just snap back into its base? Fall to the ground? I dunno, I'm not really feeling it. I guess the added mobility would be interesting... though I could see scenarios where a player is turning around and the tether is 'wrapping' around the model (ie: tight 360 movement).

I do like the idea of there being attachments available that take up an item slot and that allow customization to a weapon (ie: an attachment that makes a standard laser rifle into the MK-II).

Here's a snippet from an old forum thread re: a configurable turret. What I liked about this turret design was that it had an AI-mode, and a manual mode which allowed the player to not only control the turret and fire, but also change it's "fire mode" relatively quickly and easily.

Medium Turret
Moderate shielding, AI-controlled or player controlled, turret type can be switched by a player when in use. When near the turret a player can take control of the turret, aiming and firing the turret at their discretion. While under player control, the player can switch the turrets weapon mode. After the player disengages from the turret, it resumes being AI-controlled and utilizes the last turret type that was selected by the player. This allows players to quickly adjust the turret configuration to deal with the situation at hand.
Turret types:
Chaingun Mode: Moderate damage, high rate of fire, moderate range, fast projectile speed, less effective against shielded units, weapon can overheat after prolonged use (resulting in a cooldown phase), most effective with short bursts. In AI-Mode, the AI does not use short bursts, so will periodically overheat.
Plasma Mode: Moderate damage, moderate rate of fire, moderate range, moderate projectile speed, light splash radius, effective against shielded units.
ELF Mode: Moderate damage, short range, steady damage against target within range, similar properties to ELF gun, however energy drain is much more effective as is the health drain.

 

[Volt Cruelerz]

Should a player detach the tether, the tether would fall to the ground and fade as would any other debris.

As far as graphics go, it should probably directly connect to the central part of the jetpack with a rotating joint of sorts with a little arm/belt/tube off to the side that binds to the weapon itself. That way it wouldn't get tangled during flight...

 

[mausgang]

The problem I have with a traditional turret is that this game is about freedom of movement, so by turning a player into the turret allows for the freedom of movement to be maintained to a certain extent. Also, Legions is (apart from Tribes) a non-traditional game, so a non-traditional turret would fit better into the theme. If the tether were to fade away, would the connection point stay the same or would it be re-deployed? I guess my question is whether the tether would be a deployable within a certain region of the base, or would it be a part of the base itself?

 

[SeymourGore]

The problem I have with a traditional turret is that this game is about freedom of movement, so by turning a player into the turret allows for the freedom of movement to be maintained to a certain extent. Also, Legions is (apart from Tribes) a non-traditional game, so a non-traditional turret would fit better into the theme. If the tether were to fade away, would the connection point stay the same or would it be re-deployed? I guess my question is whether the tether would be a deployable within a certain region of the base, or would it be a part of the base itself?

I dunno, sure it's great to be able to hop around for a limited distance when controlling a tethered attachment turret, I just think aesthetically it wouldn't look right. Even if the tether is strapped to a players back, you're going to have instances where the tether will appear to 'wrap around' or 'pass through the player' (or other players for that matter), unless you really limited the distance the player could travel, and at that point a 'traditional' non-disappearing turret might be a better choice.

As far as graphics go, it should probably directly connect to the central part of the jetpack with a rotating joint of sorts with a little arm/belt/tube off to the side that binds to the weapon itself. That way it wouldn't get tangled during flight...

Argh? I always thought it was a turret attachment connected to a 'power node' or some sort of structure, that attaches from this point to your weapon arm. Is it more of a backpack attachment then?