Plotney

Semi-realistic Construction Mechanics

A Measure of this Idea's Stupidity   2 members have voted

  1. 1. How effective would a significantly less spammy construction mechanic be in improving the overall experience and competitiveness of matches?

    • Overwhelmingly effective
      0
    • Effective
      2
    • Little impact
      0
    • Ineffective
      0
    • Overwhelmingly ineffective
      0

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

5 posts in this topic

So I'm new to the community but have been following this community's endeavors, projects, etc. for the past year or so. One of the most exciting projects, in my opinion, underway currently is Harsh Doorstop. Not only does it revolutionize the way in which games are made (through piecing them together using artists and perfectly functional resources to do so) but it also allows for the community to build, quite literally, its own game.

One mechanic that I have found to be lacking in my limited (admittedly) experience with the tactical genre of games is that of construction. The logistics portion is generally adequately covered to provide a great blend of fun cooperation and realism, but games such as Squad have a rather dull, overpowered, unrealistic, and spammy construction mechanic. The idea of making construction in tactical games more "believable" is somewhat challenging considering the necessary experimentation with concepts, but I understand this project to be all about that, assuming the community is interested in such a mechanic.

Some suggestions of mine are to keep the same "voxel-esque" style of placing down fortifications, but breaking down the far too general options in to, for example, three stacked sandbags as just one of numerous small configurations to make the construction only slightly more tedious. Miscellaneous objects also necessary to certain fortifications should also be implemented into a streamlined HUD to facilitate a smooth yet balanced experience in relation to construction. A balance is all too necessary for this mechanic, however, because one of the biggest hallmarks of tactical game is the ability to utilize cover effectively whether that cover is already present or fashioned on the spot.

The benefits of implementing this could potentially be amazing. A significant reduction in insanely-well positioned "superfobs" that effectively end matches is just one of those potential benefits. I doubt that this idea is new in any way and that you've probably toyed with the concept before, but putting it in writing on the forum was something that I thought would be worthwhile. Either way this is just a simple suggestion (actually I wouldn't know if something like this is already underway), so please take it as such and continue the great work with this community.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

Hello Plotney, thanks for the suggestion.

I agree with your opinions on Squads construction due to personal experience with "FOB Squads". I'm not talking about the Squads that can use the FOB/Construction mechanic effectively, rather squads that build unrealistically large FOBs in remote locations of the map with no strategic value whatsoever. While I think the construction mechanics are nowhere near complete, I personally believe they need tweaking.

To expand on your sugestions, these are ideas I imagine would have vast gameplay changes.

  • Foxhole/Trenches: I think adding diggable defenses would add variety and allow the player to make a tactical choice on how to defend.
  • Tank Traps / Czech Hedgehogs: Setting up general traps and blockades creates many more gameplay decisions and scenarios.
  • Path Destruction: Having the option to take out a choke point bridge, or even use the environment such as trees to block roads.

Sorry for the late reply. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

No problem, Ethik. Obviously, in my original post it was my intention to leave it open to interpretation so as to not limit the possibilities of such a system, but there are several components to that system that would greatly improve the experience. Smaller items such as poles, platforms, etc. would all be necessary; however, restraint would be necessary in designing such a system as one would not want to turn the game into a construction simulator. One other important aspect is to create a fluid yet minimal HUD display for the construction mechanic (and the game in general). 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

I like the idea of simplifying the construction HUD and stopping superFOBS propping up quick. The HUD in PR is very complicated and placing can be difficult. For example placing a foxhole you have to navigate the menu place it find its not gunna work and then re-navigate. 

One Idea I've had is to use something similar to PR Arma3, but also breaking down who can build what.

Heavy weapons can only be issued from the main base.

Essentially instead of having access to build there and then on a command menu or nearby crates, you actually have to ship those assets out. Say you wanted mortar and MG positions well you have to contact logistics/ trans and they pack and ship it for you by truck or heli. Of course this is all dependant on having a good trans squad but like real life if you need supplies you have to have them come to you. It would stop any easy build up of a superFOB, also would make the FOBs mobile as once you got the gear- unless its destroyed- you can pack it and move as you advance or retreat. To a point it would negate the FOB in obscure places as trans can say er why are we going to a place out the way. One problem is stupid human players who want an easy game and take all the assets and sit out the way. Also eliminates the need for a construction HUD, or a request in HUD form.

Cover.

All you can build as players are trenches and foxholes because of entrenching tools are part of the kit. Maybe as a more defensive measure you could have a HESCO wall in a supply crate which only allows you build maybe 3 rows of barriers as HESCOs are essentially tough bags you put dirt into.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Adeftonic, I really like this added dynamic that you propose of an even higher demand from the logistics squad(s). It would require even more communication. The only problem with that is that it would require communication. It's no secret that communication in matches are not always the greatest, so although it would be amazing if that could be implemented, it probably cannot because it will not function properly. However, one workaround might be to have a "basic" logistics model and an "advanced" logistics model. I would assume that the activation of either logistics model would be up to the owner of the server, but at least that division would allow for gameplay to be streamlined according to the makeup of the server. 

To build upon your idea, it would be incredibly interesting from a gameplay standpoint if the crates loaded onto vehicles were not preset but have to be first established by the logistics team. So for example, insurgent forces obviously use (generally) different weapons from their counterparts. Generally, the basic ammunition for those weapons are different, so the logistics squad would have to set up a basic ammunition crate preset to compensate accordingly for the specific needs of their side. 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now