Eliminate Blocked Spaces for Bases

[Captain Skill]

Why do they exist? They don't do anything for the game, and the existence of indestructible pockets of rock in a place you have surveyed and determined to be the 'ideal' location for a base in a given geographic area doesn't make much sense at all, besides the obvious reloading abuse that can be done. Eliminate.

[Destructavator]

Hmm...  I agree they are irritating, and although I recall that the first base is supposed to be more important or superior than others, perhaps that could be achieved in a different way.  There's already plans to re-vamp base levels in the future, maybe when we get there the first base could simply have something extra, such as additional space or something else special?

[zapkitty]

Agree on the illogicity of the rock blocks in subsequent bases.

Perhaps some changes could be implemented in steps?

Interim suggestion: free up some first base space for the player. If you want the first base to be special and you don't want to use different size formats between the first base and the subsequent bases then give the first base some immediately operational extras such as a supply dump/warehouse for a storage area, external SAM batteries, and a UFO yard. These would be represented by icons adjacent to the first base and would be subject to the same game effects as their normal game counterparts.

(What do you mean "What warehouses?" Of course you have warehouses... you just haven't noticed them yet...)

But that's a stopgap. My best suggestion is a major change: let the player buy as big of a base as they like, up to as big as the game allows... but at a price scaled to the size of. the excavations the player wants.

And there are two catches to the pricing. The first catch is that any expansion of an existing base costs double price (or more) because of the difficulties in modifying the base without disrupting current operations.

The second catch is that space for the first base is 1/2 off *but only for the initial excavations*

A substantive change but it should give the desired results.

[Hertzila]

IIRC devs have said that they don't intent to just straight up increase base size, limitations from the graphics engine if memory serves. And with the current size I don't think there would be that much point in making different size available as we are already running out of space. The max size would be the only option.

[Destructavator]

What if we had some special, advanced buildings that come with the first base that can't be re-built or reproduced?  That would make the first base superior without having to increase any potential space.

[homunculus]

and i thought the random unusable blocks were there so that each base would not look exactly the same.

[Hertzila]

What if we had some special, advanced buildings that come with the first base that can't be re-built or reproduced?  That would make the first base superior without having to increase any potential space.

The cheapest thing would naturally be to just place a special Command Center there. Call it a "Main Command Center", "Main Headquarters" or "Atlantic Operations Command" where basically YOU reside and command the whole thing. And if that falls, it's game over.

Other possibility is to place stuff there that is a bit more effective, possibly exactly because there is the special CC in place. Bigger radar area, best relations to the nation it resides (even making it immune to complete XVI infection, so it will never quit funding), faster production or research, more effective base defences... And while I'm not sure how exactly battle morale is kept up in real life, I think it would raise the general spirit when you could actually talk to your boss at lunch when needed.

[zapkitty]

The cheapest thing would naturally be to just place a special Command Center there. Call it a "Main Command Center", "Main Headquarters" or "Atlantic Operations Command" where basically YOU reside and command the whole thing. And if that falls, it's game over.

I was pondering the same thing... a specialized base the loss of which would end Phalanx and therefore the game.

To make it worthwhile I was thinking of an notional command complex that would bundle a set of standard buildings: command, power, quarters, storage etc... but would be separated from the main base by heavy blast doors and a short tunnel... and thus would be not be rendered with the main base. Instead there would be just one building containing an armored door that's presumed to lead to the command complex.

(This assumes that the 3d rendering of the base is what's defining the upper size limit of bases)

This means that the aliens must fight their way through the base until they reach the building that houses the entrance to the command complex and force their way through the blast doors and tunnel before they can be assumed to have stormed the final complex and won the game.

The player would have to defend the building that defines the entrance of the complex but would have the benefits of a set of buildings that are readily available and yet only take up one block of space in the main base.

Workable?

It'd be nice to have the complex as an actual fightable map... but...

[BTAxis]

and i thought the random unusable blocks were there so that each base would not look exactly the same.

That's basically it, yeah. I think making each base's building area exactly the same will lead to players laying them out exactly the same every time. That would largely defeat the whole base building aspect of the game. I think the key lies in changing the building area from one base to the next, with the initial base having the best building area. Once we move to the larger bases model, we could forego the unbuildable tiles in favor of different sized area levels, which will influence how many of each type of building you can place (since some buildings can only be built on one level and others have to be built on multiple levels simultaneously).

The idea bout a special CC that boosts the initial base doesn't really appeal to me.

[Captain Skill]

While I understand you want to increase variability in base layouts, why is that such an important thing? The base building aspect remains important (after all, if you want extra space for research/manufacturing, or new interception platforms for faster responses, you need new bases), and while a readily identifiable singular strategy may be ideal (isolate and group entry points, organize base in snaking pattern a single module wide), I honestly don't see homogeneity in layouts being worse for the game than the imposition of random building areas. Besides, the layouts for randomized areas will be built in accordance with the snaking setup anyways. If you really want to encourage base variability, do it with organic pros and cons that make sense for different kinds of layouts, so that the snake paradigm is not clearly supreme; the lack of such tradeoffs and their resultant interesting choices is what's truly at the root of layout homogeneity.

[BTAxis]

How would you go about that, then? Keeping in mind the future base model as well as the concept of 2x2 base tiles.

[H-Hour]

I think overcoming the snaked-distribution model would be a good thing, and should be compensated with control over soldier placement, such as having them spawn only in living quarters or something. This way the player has a few more variables to play with when designing the base defense. Just as a preliminary proposal on this, I'd suggest the following for discussion:

Taking into account the 2-level base system, perhaps it could be done so that aliens only penetrate the top level (of course) and certain top-level structures other than the entrance have links between the levels (hangars?). If it's a 3x4 grid up top, the player must then contend with more than one entrance to his lower level, where the living quarters, etc. are.

These entrances to the lower level should be more centrally located, since the top level is a smaller grid and should perhaps be always centrally located above the bottom level. If the player had multiple transitions centrally located, they would then have some different viable strategies for base layout, depending on fighting style, such as:

1. Concentrate living quarters to one side, to allow soldiers to organize and assault en masse as the aliens come down.

2. Spread living quarters around the perimeter to flank the aliens.

3. Place living quarters as close as possible to transition points to bottle the alien up in the top level.

4. Concentrate transition buildings to one side, but leave one transition building on the other side. Concentrate living quarters next to lone transition to quickly battle their way up to the top level and confront aliens before they reach level 2.

Other factors which could effect the base layout decisions would involve the spawning of scientists and engineers -- where they appear, what the effect of letting them die is, etc.

This would, of course, require additions and modifications to the existing base maps, so it would be a long-term proposal.

[BTAxis]

According to the plan so far, the only penetrating top-level structures would be the Entrance and the weapon facilities. The aliens would be able to start anywhere in these facilities.

First, let's look at mission-critical buildings. The aliens will have several objectives:
- Free other aliens in Containment (if any)
- Destroy the power plant (and with it the rest of the base)
- Destroy PHALANX craft (on the top level)
- Destroy the Command Center

It follows that a player would be encouraged to place these critical facilities as far away from the entry points as possible. What we need, therefore, is a stimulus that will encourage the player not to do this. For the Command Center this is relatively easy, since we can simply make the PHALANX soldiers spawn there. The farther away the command center is, the longer it will take to respond. With the power plant, it gets tricky. A system that disallows facilities to be built farther than X tiles from the power plant comes to mind. In the case of Alien Containment, I have no ideas at the moment.

Now, base defence missions only happen every so often, so they can't be fully responsible for the layout decision-making process. We need some other influence, a reason why a player would choose NOT to build a facility in a particular place. Perhaps cost-modifying properties per tile? Or maybe minor performance bonuses? And of course, there's always your basic blocked tile (which I don't consider a bad thing myself).

[H-Hour]

That's interesting about the targets of an alien attack. Is the AI (or will the AI be) capable of seeking out and attacking specific entities/areas?

It definitely throws another element into the mix, especially if they're taking out aircraft before they even come down to the second level. But I still think the main issue when trying to prevent the snake-layout is in where the aliens come from, not where they're going. Bottling the aliens up will always be the most successful strategy as long as it can be done.

If there were some way to enforce a wider distribution of transition points, I think this would be really useful. If I can bunch up my entrance and weapons facilities into a few adjacent tiles, then I can still construct a snake layout while risking only the aircraft. I liked the idea of hangars having transitions because they'll be 2x2, so if you've got a base with two hangars you'll have transition points at least not directly next to each other. I can't think of any other way to spread out the transitions at the moment.

I also like the idea of soldiers spawning at multiple locations, rather than just the command center, so that some flanking could be done. But other players may dislike having their soldiers split up. Of course, those players could place all soldier-spawning buildings in one location.

I don't know how I would feel about cost or performance bonuses based on location of the mission-critical buildings you mentioned. I can't find a plausible reason that wouldn't feel like a gimmick, but if one could be found it would be good to find some incentives. I guess my mind is thinking more about the 3D space of the base, and its tactical implications, rather than a kind of hex-based attributes-with-values sort of base.

[BTAxis]

The AI currently isn't capable of a whole lot, but to make the base assault concept work it's going to have to be. At the least, the AI should be able to pursue a goal over multiple turns. It doesn't have to be too terribly smart, though, superior numbers will compensate.

As for hangars, keep in mind that only the dropship hangars will be 2x2. Interceptor hangars will be 2x1 and UAV hangars 1x1. A connection to a lower facility would probably be hard to do, since you don't know what facility is underneath. That means ALL second level facilities will need a connection point, and that means you're limiting what can be on each tile. I don't think it's worth it.

You're right about the bonuses, I think. I'm not too fond of that idea myself. However I maintain that unless there is some impetus for the player to choose from a number of possible layouts, the base building process will end up being a routine chore more than a proper game element.