Upgrade basebuildings - another way

[tomvondeek]

You guys are funny...
I thought of an (base-) improvement and you discuss some hypothetical theories why cameras are nonesens. yes, i already suggested they might be destroyable, if its possible to program.

Look at today, every mall, bank is using cameraobservation. in ufo:ai we're talking about a high secure militry base! during missions, it might be fun to search aliens, but if i'd construct a billion dollar high security base - damn i'd pay some million more to get it really high secure. and that means like for example cameras. i just suggested it, because of

a) still talking about a military base
b) its big
c) easier defendle, because you see the aliens right from the start.

it was an idea to ease it up a bit. no, i don't think base missions are to hard or something like that, but its getting really repetetiv. so i tried to find a way to finish them faster.

and even if you don't have cameras, you could trigger a "better base protection" after first mission. like "ups, they found our base and are attacking. well, we got lase defense, rocket defens, plasa defense, whatever defense, but they still managed to get in. so lets research a way, to improve our base secuirty" and tadaa, after a short while of research "we found our base is too big, soldiers take too long to find all the aliens or some might even get in their backs and kill them. lets build cameras, so we know how many there are, where they are and where they move". even if they destroy the cameras, we still got the information "how many" and "where". two very very useful informations.

but i thought this thread was forgotten, nice to see it up again

[vulkus]

Actually you really left us hanging with your suggestion. In order to make the use of cameras more credible you need background, so the idea needs to be fleshed out. First you need constructive critique on why the idea might well be nonsense. That is one of the ways you get a debate happening, searching through the ufopedia it was found that background information had already been researched, and it would require further research to gain a better understanding of the idea you wish to implement.

OK you would pay a lot of money for high security I understand that, but I would pay with the lives of my home world for cutting edge technology that was a hybrid AI, aka part construct, part alien tech.
Basically I've taken your idea and boosted it to a higher level of tech, by fleshing it out, by debating over hypotheticals. Isn't that what scientic research is all about? Taking a hypothetical debate and creating a reality?

[Tamanfodder]

I fully support cameras and motion sensors and all kinds of sensors, but one extremely helpful and easyly added thing would be some kind of information box which tells you which bulidings hawe acces to the surface! That would make planning the base a LOT easyer.

[vulkus]

Unfortunately that is what the stairwell does, and only it does it. Well maybe the hangers too, but how would you get out?

[Tamanfodder]

Actually almost all bulidings seem to hawe surface level...  ...which is stubit since the base schould be as un noticable as possible i suggest to dump those surface levels of bilidings so there would be only four bulidings that could be seen on surface: Enterance (obviously), small- and large hangar(blast doors), and missle/laser -silo(blast doors again)

[tomvondeek]

@vulkus

I have no problem with constructive critic. But it wasn`t It was't even my leven of discussion.

I am talking from a players point of view. I am sitting in front of the computer, playing the game, doing ingame research and missions.
Defending base missions are taking very long, because base isn't that small. So i thought of a way to make (only this type!) of mission faster: Knowing where your enemy is, how many there are, where they move. So i suggested cameras as a quick logic argument to make this possible. or motion sensors or whatever, i only suggested to make enemys during base defence visible.

so lets talk about THIS idea. would you agree or disagree, that enemy is visible?

if no, why? if yes, why? i am standing on the point yes, because this missions are repetitive, and a very big map, in worst case you need a long time to find last alien.
thats my argument why i want my idea of change in game. my solution was: put camreas in the base.

you answer, oh camreas no the aliens have so much furher technoligie, emp etc, they destroy everything like this befor they enter. this is an "ingame reality" answer. it has nothing to do with my suggestion, it only discusses my solution. so there IS NO constructive critic!

if you want continue argueng with me, i ask again:

Should your base invading aliens be visible all the time or not?

[Hertzila]

you answer, oh camreas no the aliens have so much furher technoligie, emp etc, they destroy everything like this befor they enter. this is an "ingame reality" answer. it has nothing to do with my suggestion, it only discusses my solution. so there IS NO constructive critic!

That is constructive critisism. Constructive critisicm against your solution but that doesn't somehow invalidate it. Without a working solution, the idea is useless, isn't it?

Should your base invading aliens be visible all the time or not?

Nope. [/thread]


Oh yeah, you want arguments too  .
Seeing them all the time is a bad idea, as besides the fact that no solution work like it, it takes away too much of the tension. There is absolutely no element of surprise and at least with the present AI, that translates to poor predictable fights without any other fun than completely curb-stomping the enemy. No threat of any kind is left. Limiting the <insert solution here> coverage to only most of the facilities and corridors + making them destroyable gives the aliens at least a chance of surprise with rare blind spots and destroyed <solutions> while still giving the player a fairly good idea of where the enemy is. Enough at least to prevent wild goose chases.

[tomvondeek]

That is constructive critisism. Constructive critisicm against your solution but that doesn't somehow invalidate it. Without a working solution, the idea is useless, isn't it?

Replying to your "thats constructive critism". I can lash out with critic like that too: Aliens have so much better weaponry, instead of invading a base, why not destroy it with a giant plamsa blast from outer space? BOOM. Instead of a former base is a huge crater left in the ground. because aliens are smart. they try to invade it, get shot down, so they destroy the whole base. thinking as an alien who wants to eliminate the threat. and no, they don't need to get someone alive or steal our computers to get some data or something. their technologie is superior, they have no interest in ours, so they can destroy it without regretting it.
and yes, if you may say "but the base is faar deep under ground", i would say "oh, that giant super plasmacannon, invented to quickly destroy defenses of resisiting planets, can sourly blast a few miles deep whole into the ground".

due to exaggeration and fantasie we can find arguments against or for anyhing. so now i am arguing complety AGAINST BASE MISSIONS. because aliens don't need to take the risks. when they figured out where the opponents base is, they can just destroy it. so now argue with that! you can't say aliens wandering throug space, eliminating every race on every life-suitable planet they meet, didn't had any resistance before, where say needet a bit bigger canon, can you? ;

Now next to your argument (mhm, if i say something wrong or so, dont take it personal, my english s not that good and i am having this conversation with fun)
I am talkign only abour base-defending missions, other missions are not affected:
 there may can be an element of suprise, or as you tall it my solution takes away much of the tension. But in my opinion wild goose-chases are absolute less fun than seeing your enemy and having the chance to slaugther them.

you have enough tension during the game. there are landed ufos, crashsites, missions and and and. everything fine with tension and stuff.

and like i said in one of the posts before:
you should be able to research "improved base defenses to invading aliens" after your first base mission. reason for that? "Hell no, we didn't thought of aliens entering our base... we have rocket defense, lase defense, plasmadefense... we never thought of they might get through. but they did. soldiers reportet that there are lots of spaces where they could hide, it was hard work to find any alien. after this first base entering of the aliens, we gathered our scientists how we can improve base security: they suggestet to....."

so, if you don't like the idea, you don't need to use it if you don't want to. when you want your base defense missions you don't need to research "improved base defenses due tu invading aliens".


in my opinion, why i came up with the idea:
there are a loads of missions to do, they all have their fun to discover things. but basemissions are way to repetive. after 20th basedefending it gets soooo boring and its really annoying. and no, after 20th basedefending i dont need "tension" or "element of suprise". the mainpart of the game is not to defend your base in hundrets of missions, its aim is do defeat the aliens. and rescue earth. but you can't move on with the rest of the game, when you have a basedefending and a base defending and...

i mean i don't want to cheat like every alien is visible all the time in every mission, thats not my point. i'd like to have a way to ease up base defense missions a bit.

but ok, you don't like it - and still got no arguments :-p

[Hertzila]

Replying to your "thats constructive critism". I can lash out with critic like that too: Aliens have so much better weaponry, instead of invading a base, why not destroy it with a giant plamsa blast from outer space? BOOM. Instead of a former base is a huge crater left in the ground. because aliens are smart. they try to invade it, get shot down, so they destroy the whole base. thinking as an alien who wants to eliminate the threat. and no, they don't need to get someone alive or steal our computers to get some data or something. their technologie is superior, they have no interest in ours, so they can destroy it without regretting it.
and yes, if you may say "but the base is faar deep under ground", i would say "oh, that giant super plasmacannon, invented to quickly destroy defenses of resisiting planets, can sourly blast a few miles deep whole into the ground".

due to exaggeration and fantasie we can find arguments against or for anyhing. so now i am arguing complety AGAINST BASE MISSIONS. because aliens don't need to take the risks. when they figured out where the opponents base is, they can just destroy it. so now argue with that! you can't say aliens wandering throug space, eliminating every race on every life-suitable planet they meet, didn't had any resistance before, where say needet a bit bigger canon, can you? ;

There are arguments against that... kinda. They want to assimilate us, not kill us. Why kill lots of people when it's simpler to just attack them?
Maybe they still aren't exactly genius.
Perhaps they forgot their BFG to another star system.

But yeah, some things that are simply necessary for the game can only be argued in the meta level. Why it doesn't make sense in the game design perspective, etc.
I disagree on the notion that your suggestion is one of them though.

*rest of the words*

Please note that you said "all the time". That is what I'm arguing against. I'm fine with seeing them 90%-95% of the time while still letting the aliens disable/destroy/circumvent the <solution> or letting them take advantage of the (inevitable at first) gaps in coverage. If your memory isn't horrible (and I don't think it is), you'll have no problem predicting where every single alien is/can be.

I realize that this only applies to base defence but that too is a place where some aspect of the tension must be kept, so that they won't turn into routine, boring slaughtering. Seeing them all the time is a complete tension killer. Simply telling me that "I can either see them all the time (the way the game is designed) or only seeing them in the same way I see them in every mission(and thus handicapping myself)" is besides the point.

What do you mean I have no arguments? I've been throwing them all around all day.

[vulkus]

@vulkus

I have no problem with constructive critic. But it wasn`t It was't even my leven of discussion.
Actually it was.

I am talking from a players point of view. I am sitting in front of the computer, playing the game, doing ingame research and missions.
Defending base missions are taking very long, because base isn't that small. So i thought of a way to make (only this type!) of mission faster: Knowing where your enemy is, how many there are, where they move. So i suggested cameras as a quick logic argument to make this possible. or motion sensors or whatever, i only suggested to make enemys during base defence visible.
This game like many others of this genre is XComesq, that is to say it is a homage to XCom the original and in many opinions the best. Your presented a point I argued against your point, that is called debating. When done in a friendly way while giving both for and against answers and giving a solid tech tree to gain a hybrid AI OSA, that is constructive criticism.

so lets talk about THIS idea. would you agree or disagree, that enemy is visible?
As already stated, no I wouldn't as HatZ has already stated it would make the game boring and repetative. XCom Apoc had a nice little bug where you could set up a cross fire and blow the crap out of the Aliens before they had any chance of doing you any harm. They would always come out at exactly the same area. Because you would lead them to a bottle neck and they'd have to come through one at a time. It got boring in every mission.

if no, why? if yes, why? i am standing on the point yes, because this missions are repetitive, and a very big map, in worst case you need a long time to find last alien.
thats my argument why i want my idea of change in game. my solution was: put camreas in the base.
[bIf that is all that is bothering you, then ask them to make the alien a suicide alien, where the last one will always come to you loaded for bear.[/b]

you answer, oh camreas no the aliens have so much furher technoligie, emp etc, they destroy everything like this befor they enter. this is an "ingame reality" answer. it has nothing to do with my suggestion, it only discusses my solution. so there IS NO constructive critic!
Yes it is an in game reality answer, and has everything to do with your ingame reality question.

if you want continue argueng with me, i ask again:
Not arguing, debating.

Should your base invading aliens be visible all the time or not?
NO, for reasons stated above.

[Quester]

What about the installation of actual security corridors?  These would be corridors armed with both video cameras and rotary cannons mounted int he cielings.  Ther locations for these systems would the entrace to vital facilites, the CnC, the main reactor and the anitmatter containment unit.  Another possiable location would be the base elevator and the entrances to the hanger.  When the xenos alarm is tripped these things arm and start to track enemy incoming, but becasue of thier nature they would be both, prone to running out of ammo becasue fo the high rate of fire and the vulnerablity to plasma ordnance being fired at them.

[vulkus]

Not a bad idea and your right they would have to be in special corridors or you'd be blasting the crap out of your base. Like you do when you go to theirs.
This where I think mechs would be awesome, you can't take them on missions with you. But when you do a base defence mission. Part 1 of that mission is to get one of your soldiers to the holo suite to activate and control the mechs.
Not available every time your base comes under fire but when say a battle cruiser drops on you.

[Quester]

I am not a big fan of mechs.  Period.  And to me, the corridors are a time honored HUMAN military tactic of establishing a choke point in and around vital instaltions and entrances.  The corridor weapon systems, as arms are researched could be upgraded to A) be more resistant to plasma ordnace, or B) armed and equiped with lasar, plasama or even railgun type weapon systems.  But to me, this mitigates the reaon for the security corridor.  It is meant to supliment the small arms that the soldiers carry.  At one end, closest to to the entrance of the instaltion, you would have the CCTV camera with fish eye and IR lense.  In the center of the cieling a drop drop Vulcan/Shiva cannon firing solid state ammo at the poor unfortunates.  And, hiding behind security barricades, several PHALANX soldiers with automaticv weapons returning fire with arms ranging from assault rifles to sub machine guns. 

An assault on a secured and hardened installation is MEANT to be dicey and bloody, esp for the attacker.  It is not ment to be a free fire zone like many of the ground assault runs.  And, if the bugs have penetraded deep enough into your base to hit the security corridors, then something REALLY bad is going down.  I envision them as a LAST line of defense for the vital base structures, as well as choke points to thin them out on the initial landing.  At the entrance, and, the hangers, I EXPECT to lose the automated weapons there.  However, if they are deep enough into my base that my CnC is threatened, I will be digging in at those corridors and bringing all guns to bare,as well as any surviors with a riotgun, a hand grenade, and a chip on thier shoulder.