My proposal for the turret problem.

[ShadowDragon8685]

*snip*

So you keep saying you want to nerf them, what you're really saying is that you just want to make the game a lot harder and more painful to the player, and make it a lot more likely for him to lose by giving him no effective defensive options, forcing him into a stand-up fight against superior numbers of superior enemies who have limitless reinforcements, which will inevitably become a battle of attrition in the player's disfavor.

Actually i have never thought of it in that way. I just want to feel more proud when my colonists defend their camp well. Not stupid when they had to fight when I could have just planted 200 mines outside. Because the game is still going to change a lot. I was merely hoping the unfairness of current raider attacks would change with time.

If it matters I will append to my statement that fighting with colonists is more fun, but the usefulness of automated defenses should not be overlooked. But be honest that it is -too- easy to use them (gun turrets) right now?

Not really. Frankly, without the mines, gun turrets simply serve as something to draw Raider fire while my colonists shoot them down. Even upgraded, they're utter shite at killing raiders on their own and they blow up way too easily, exploding like a goddamn blasting charge themselves.

And since something of mine is gonna get destroyed when I fight raiders, quite frankly I'd rather it be 375 metal worth of blasting charges than 480-640 metal worth of gun turrets, which is still preferable 1,800-2,200 to sky's the limit metal worth of basically irreplaceable colonist.

[Produno]

So you keep saying you want to nerf them, what you're really saying is that you just want to make the game a lot harder and more painful to the player, and make it a lot more likely for him to lose by giving him no effective defensive options, forcing him into a stand-up fight against superior numbers of superior enemies who have limitless reinforcements, which will inevitably become a battle of attrition in the player's disfavor.

Well, we are in alpha and all thats likely to change. Theirs no point altering raider spawns until the core of the issue is solved, and thats turrets. If Tynan reduces the amount of raiders but leaves turrets how they are how does that solve anything? My guess would be the raider spawns have been increased to offer more of a challenge because of the turrets making it too easy, so sort the turrets so it dont offer a tower defence type playstyle which makes it easy to defend, the raiders can then be reduced as balance tweaks.

Whats happens then is you get the same kind of difficulty but without the tower defence playstyle, which is what Tynans expressed he wants.

The raiders are just a ripple effect of the core problem. If you offer the player something powerful but you want the player to have a challenge then you need to up the power of whatever it is your throwing at the player.

Whilst the turrets allow a tower defence type playstyle this gives the player something powerful.

[Lothar]

I didn't read all five pages of this so forgive me if this has already been said. Why are the turrets not manually operated? You should be able to put a colonist in a seat on the turret and allow him or her to fire it and without the colonist it does not work. To me its an easy compromise because then you can only build so many turrets due to only having so many colonist and it still puts you on edge because your colonist could die if it gets blown up.

[ShadowDragon8685]

The problem is raiders altogether. They run in and try to burn down everything you've built/murder all of your colonists. You can't bargain with them, you can't reason with them or try to recruit them.

They only exist to be a zerg-rushing lunatic horde. As long as that pressure exists, combat defense is going to be the single and sole concern for base-building. Making them smarter won't solve that. If turrets stop working, players will just use massive waffles to shoot helpless, bogged-down raiders. If raiders are changed so they stop pathing straight to the nearest colonist to murder him and start pathing to the nearest structure to set it on fire, then players will start building in the mountain exclusively. If raiders are changed so they shoot mines upon first seeing them, then players will just use hydroponics tables to make a zig-zag shooting gallery.

The core of the problem is that combat is the problem. Combat screws with all of the player's plans, and it's the primary reason for a fort to fail and game over to happen. Therefor, players are going to do everything in their power to minimize the amount of combat they have. Nerfing the tools they have at their disposal to effectively defend themselves won't change that core requirement - "Survive combat with as little damage to me and my things as possible." And you're never going to change that core requirement, because contrary to what DF players tell themselves, losing is not fun. If the player doesn't yet know how to play, it can be a learning experience, but it's not fun. If they already know how to play and simply lost because they couldn't get everything set up in time/lost their most effective tools/raiders were patched specifically to work around the most effective solutions, then it's a kick in the crotch.

[ShadowDragon8685]

I didn't read all five pages of this so forgive me if this has already been said. Why are the turrets not manually operated? You should be able to put a colonist in a seat on the turret and allow him or her to fire it and without the colonist it does not work. To me its an easy compromise because then you can only build so many turrets due to only having so many colonist and it still puts you on edge because your colonist could die if it gets blown up.

No, no, NO! Putting colonists inside fucking explosive barrels with crap-ass guns pointing out is not a solution! It's another fucking nerf, and an unneeded one!

Players wouldn't be relying on turrets and explosive highways of death so much if they didn't need to, but they do! So players do. Stop trying to kick the player in the crotch for playing effectively!

[Produno]

I didn't read all five pages of this so forgive me if this has already been said. Why are the turrets not manually operated? You should be able to put a colonist in a seat on the turret and allow him or her to fire it and without the colonist it does not work. To me its an easy compromise because then you can only build so many turrets due to only having so many colonist and it still puts you on edge because your colonist could die if it gets blown up.

This idea seems to be the favourite and i think this plus increasing the price of a turret dramatically but then balancing the hp or stop it from exploding (so people feel confident enough to use them) could be the first steps to help solve the problem. Though this would probably take some time for Tynan to implement.

@shadowdragon
Just plonking a colonist in a turret the way it stands now wouldnt work, other balancing issues would need to be addressed too like i mentioned above so stop freaking out man.

[ShadowDragon8685]

This idea seems to be the favourite and i think this plus increasing the price of a turret dramatically but then balancing the hp or stop it from exploding (so people feel confident enough to use them) could be the first steps to help solve the problem. Though this would probably take some time for Tynan to implement.

Only if the turret:
a: Does not explode or otherwise kill the occupant when the turret is destroyed.
b: Is not stupidly combat-ineffective. It's a goddamned mounted LMG, it should be spewing hot death, fully automatic, and suppressing the hell out of every raider it sees. Being caught in open terrain by a spray of machine gun fire shouldn't be an "Oh shit, run towards it and melee it to death!" situation, it should be an "Awh fuck! Get into cover NOW!" situation. One turret should be capable of mowing down an entire mob if they face it clumped up together under its effective range and out of over.
c: Does use the colonist's own shooting skill, so you can put your assassins, space marines and pirates in it, so the turret isn't so fucking laughably ineffective.

[Produno]

Well thats idea behind the thinking, i think. But please re-read the quote in the first post to remind you what this thread is about.
Its not really about balance, that will come in time, but about the fact Tynan himself wants to remove turrets because of the playstyle they introduce and no matter what you do to anything else, if you keep the turrets how they are now the tower defence playstyle will never change!!

[ShadowDragon8685]

Well thats idea behind the thinking, i think. But please re-read the quote in the first post to remind you what this thread is about.
Its not really about balance, that will come in time, but about the fact Tynan himself wants to remove turrets because of the playstyle they introduce and no matter what you do to anything else, if you keep the turrets how they are now the tower defence playstyle will never change!!

If you're under constant attack from raiders, defending your home with goddamned turrets is a good idea. Hell, I'd defend it with cannons! And mortars, and rocket launchers, and landmines everywhere, and sandbags and barbed wire and fighting pits and trenches. It would look more like Echo Base or something along the Sigfried Line than a nice rustic outdoorsy settlement.

But we can't build that. So we build something as close to that as we can. Taking that away is just a kick in the crotch.

[Produno]

Sorry but either your not reading what i put properly or just not understanding.

Tynan has stated he wants to remove turrets because of the playstyle it creates, alot of people agree. This is because of the tower defence playstle.
So the easy solution,
Remove the turrets,
Remove the sandbags,
Balance the raider spawns to fit.

If you want to keep the turrets then come up with a solution for the problem were talking about. Anything else is irrelevant at this point in time. I guess the same will come with sandbags down the line too, but thats for another thread.

[Galileus]

IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE RAIDS, TUNE DOWN DIFFICULTY FOR YOU INSTEAD THAN FOR EVERYONE ELSE!

SERIOUSLY! You're spamming the forum with idea no-one seems to agree with! Take a hint already!

WE LIKE OUR COMBAT! So if anyone would be to ladykick... it would be you!

Produno - ignore him. He openly asks for no-combat game, yet refuses to even notice he can just lower the difficulty. He openly asks for more OP mechanics that will allow him to survive with no losses and no sweat EVERY TIME.

[Lothar]

I didn't read all five pages of this so forgive me if this has already been said. Why are the turrets not manually operated? You should be able to put a colonist in a seat on the turret and allow him or her to fire it and without the colonist it does not work. To me its an easy compromise because then you can only build so many turrets due to only having so many colonist and it still puts you on edge because your colonist could die if it gets blown up.

This idea seems to be the favourite and i think this plus increasing the price of a turret dramatically but then balancing the hp or stop it from exploding (so people feel confident enough to use them) could be the first steps to help solve the problem. Though this would probably take some time for Tynan to implement.

@shadowdragon
Just plonking a colonist in a turret the way it stands now wouldnt work, other balancing issues would need to be addressed too like i mentioned above so stop freaking out man.

Ya relax a little bit shadow there would obviously have to be other balances to it like the hp of the turret would have to be increased so it does not explode after two shots and such. As it stands now though the turrets make it so there is no risk to your colonist which from what the dev has said is not what he wants the game to be about. He wants you to be scared of losing your colonist and having a mine field with 20 turrets after just does not do that.

[ShadowDragon8685]

Sorry but either your not reading what i put properly or just not understanding.

I both read and comprehend; I reject the entire premise!

Tynan has stated he wants to remove turrets because of the playstyle it creates, alot of people agree. This is because of the tower defence playstyle.

And if he does that, I'll hate this fucking game forever. Constant raids not only bore me, they aggravate and enrage me. That's why in DF, I seldom bother having fighters, I just use Boatmurdered-style deathtraps to kill everything that dares march on my fortress.

Because I don't want to fucking deal with it. I like them as a nice nuisance that hangs around for a bit, preventing trade, then realizes that I'm not coming out there and they're definitely not getting in here and so they sod off.

So the easy solution,
Remove the turrets,
Remove the sandbags,
Balance the raider spawns to fit.

Remove turrets and sandbags? You'd make the game unplayable! You're a bloody lunatic.

If you want to keep the turrets then come up with a solution for the problem were talking about. Anything else is irrelevant at this point in time. I guess the same will come with sandbags down the line too, but thats for another thread.

Solution: Embrace "Turret Defense" as a perfectly valid response to endless raiders. Machine gun turrets that spit out endless hot lead, mortar turrets that lob explosives over walls if they have a spotter, tall platforms that let colonists with snipers fire over unroofed walls with practical impunity, barbed wire that blocks movement but offers no cover whatsoever. Let the raiders come, if they feel like throwing themselves suicidally into the jaws of defeat!

Let the people who don't want those things simply not build those things.

[Produno]

Produno - ignore him. He openly asks for no-combat game, yet refuses to even notice he can just lower the difficulty. He openly asks for more OP mechanics that will allow him to survive with no losses and no sweat EVERY TIME.

Heheh, i know it gets boring trying to explain the same thing over and over and over again for the small minority. Luckily most people understand the problem and want to help make the game as fun as it can be by offering solutions.

[ShadowDragon8685]

Produno - ignore him. He openly asks for no-combat game, yet refuses to even notice he can just lower the difficulty. He openly asks for more OP mechanics that will allow him to survive with no losses and no sweat EVERY TIME.

Heheh, i know it gets boring trying to explain the same thing over and over and over again for the small minority. Luckily most people understand the problem and want to help make the game as fun as it can be by offering solutions.

You're not offering solutions at all. You're offering to make the game head-banging-on-wall frustrating and angering.

And no, "Turn down the difficulty" doesn't help. Because that turns down everything! Part of the fun is designing defensive positions that can, in fact, chew up entire zerg-rushes of idiots with rifles without taking casualties.

Or did you not think of that? That I might like seeing hordes of idiots mowed down like so much wheat? That for me, the challenge isn't in "losing is fun" kicks to the crotch, but in making defenses that kick "losing is fun" right in the crotch.