Allied teleporters should be able to be linked

Eatch teleport would have to drain energy for their part (half) of the connection.
I think the current code drains energy by link and not by teleport tough.

I thought @masterdigital said to look into it like 2 months ago or so

Lets not go down the who said what thing again, don't want to prevent the devs commenting. He has been busy with other stuff

Still, worth mentioning this is something we'd like, so hopefully bumps it up the list a bit

I'm just too lazy to search the actual comment But ofcourse I understand that other work has higher priorities or that he forgot

The teleporter consumes power. So right now, if it were to be this way, owning the teleporter consumes power. That is how that works.

So if 2 people had 1 teleporter each, and linked them, then each would have 1 teleporter of drain on their energy, unless they turned their own teleporter off. Which, would allow the other to link, but not "activate", and would activate whenever the other one does power on.

Exactly as it does now, except 2 seperate owners.

Absolutely, it is a major advantage of share army being switched on, but a lot of players don't like playing with shared armies. This would definitely be a good change for the game.

So this is what I gather to what might be a good idea:

1. Secure teleporters, where you can't link to an allied teleporter if it is already linked.
2. Teleporters can't be linked unless your allies are allowing shared resources.

EDIT: (and not sure about this): Or if you are already a team from the start (when you are playing non-shared team armies, not dynamic alliances), then you both have to attempt to link to the other person's teleporter (may be helped via pinging and asking the teammate to link), and which to ensure that the player knows that he successfully linked on his side of the portal to the other friendly teleporter, the wheels rotating inside the portal which is linked. If the other player doesn't have enough energy or hasn't linked the teleporter, then the bright blue portal sprite/state will not happen, and the teleporter doesn't teleport stuff. If it does meet the teleporting criteria, then it will (obviously) show the bright blue portal sprite/state, and is able to teleport stuff.

3. Each different teleporter takes up their own separate energy.

simple it is half for both ... if one player has a active gateway that costs him 5k power per sec a gateway between 2 players would be half of it for each ...
intresting issue that gateway would less stable as both players have to ensure powersuply

Each player would support their own teleports. I think it will be better strategy if we could share teleporters in non-shared games.

An expansion on number 1, perhaps make it so that allies can only link to your own, unlinked but active teleporters? A bit more involved and requires more communication, but I think perhaps a little more robust.

No no no no no no no. Go play shared armies!

This would remove any risk involved with spawning away from your team mates. It would remove the risk reward factor. Do I spawn away from my team mates and maybe get a planet to myself? Or spawn away from my team mates and oops there are multiple enemies on my planet.

I like shared armies- but categorically not with randoms. It's great when your on team speak, with someone you've played with a few times- you can co-ordinate and play so much better.

However! When you host a random team game, it's a lottery who you'll get. 9 times out of 10 you wind up with someone who doesn't know how to manage their eco, or who doesn't 'get' sharing, or otherwise who takes over stuff your doing (and invariably does it worse that I would have). No, in those situations I'd like to play alliance.

The point is, that there is no logical reason from a gameplay perspective why allied tele's shouldn't link, and it gives you so many more options. I may well be teamed with a weaker ally, however with alliance + gate linking,

1: I can manage my eco and expansion properly and therefore put up a decent fight
2: I'll have the unit counts and resources in order to support them (and with gates I can actually do this).

I agree, in an ideal world sharing is better (2 players working well together will outpace 2 equally skilled players using alliance mode, as the whole works out better than the sum of its parts, but only when coordinated). The issue is that isn't always practical. This one change would make alliance mode much better, the only logical reason for it not being in is there is some technical issue that prevents it being possible...

half and half, if one can't pay the other pays whole.

both can choose to turn off their own gate if they wish to save power.

the most straightfoward answer seems like the best in this case.

I only would like the idea of sharing teleporters without sharing armies if it is a mod. I would not want this feature in the vanilla game.
How PA plays and works, it would not be balanced at all.

What's stopping you from building your own teleporter within their base? Why do you have to link to a teleporter they have built?

nothing really....

well apart from building :

1. orbital factory
2. orbital engineer

(not to mention their absurdly higher price)
then

• moving orbital engineer to said planet

so yeah it feel kinda stupid when your ally's teleporter is right there.

No it's not stupid. You can't control your allies units or anything else of your allies so why should you be able to control their teleporter? As I have said before, if you take the risk of spawning away from your team mates on another planet (which could give you the reward of spawning on a planet alone, giving you free reign of the metal spots on that planet) then their should be some risk involved. Yes/no?

because THAT'S WHAT IT'S THERE FOR

seriously what else are you going to do with it?

why is it such a big deal to you?

spawning on same planet is ALWAYS an inferior strategy.
whether you can or can't use teammate's teleporter.

No it's not ALWAYS an inferior strategy. If you all spawn on the same planet with only one enemy of that planet you can pretty easily take them out. You then have the advantage of one less enemy, but the enemy team has the advantage of having maybe one or two planets all to themselves, which they can build up on undetected and free to expand while you are focusing on killing their team mate who has "unfortunately for them" spawned on your planet. It's a risk reward thing. If you can connect ally teleporters then it becomes too easy for them to escape and the risk reward mechanic is totally removed. It's still pretty easy to escape the planet without the OP-ness of linking allied teleporters, but you need to make the decision early, whether to flee or stand your ground.