Capturing?

Discussion in 'Balance Discussions' started by madmecha, April 3, 2014.

  1. madmecha

    madmecha Active Member

    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    53
    Just a thought... but these robots use nanities to construct things. Currently we can reclaim something to death, how about another option of assimilating something?

    For balance reasons assimilating would need to be slower then reclaim. Vs unit's it would be completely pointless but vs buildings their is potential. Particularly would you talk about large expensive structures that would be very beneficial to capture instead of destroying and rebuilding yourself.

    What gave me the idea was talking about adding a 3rd resource to the game, that required large expensive building to gather. In this case people would rather capture the building instead of destroying it.

    Rather a wild thought, and not sure if PA would the right kind of game to try.
    stormingkiwi likes this.
  2. brianpurkiss

    brianpurkiss Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,879
    Likes Received:
    7,438
    There's icons for capturing in the game files. So Uber has considered it. I'm not aware of anything they've said on the topic.

    While capturing isn't as big of a deal compared to SupCom since there's only one faction.

    But I say, why not?
  3. Murcanic

    Murcanic Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    601
    Likes Received:
    360
    would be sort of funny to see air fabbers capture tower outposts that have no aa defence xD
    eroticburrito and brianpurkiss like this.
  4. brianpurkiss

    brianpurkiss Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,879
    Likes Received:
    7,438
    That would be amazing!
  5. mered4

    mered4 Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,083
    Likes Received:
    3,149
    But why? the reason it was in SupCom was because of different factions - grabbing a Cybran engineer as UEF was a pretty big deal on primarily naval maps, if I remember correctly.
    godde likes this.
  6. godde

    godde Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,425
    Likes Received:
    499
    My last response in brianpurkiss thread:
    stormingkiwi and zweistein000 like this.
  7. ace902902

    ace902902 Active Member

    Messages:
    548
    Likes Received:
    212
    do you mean this icon?
    icons_command_capture.png
  8. brianpurkiss

    brianpurkiss Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,879
    Likes Received:
    7,438
    Yupp
  9. stormingkiwi

    stormingkiwi Post Master General

    Messages:
    3,266
    Likes Received:
    1,355
    Personally I think that the current self-destruct mechanic is quite cheap. Particularly when applied to the commander.

    Earth 2150 had units that could disable other units. It also had repair units, whose default behaviour could be shifted so that they would capture.

    It would be quite cool in PA to build disabling weapon units, give them a bunch of fabbers, and send them to attack the enemy. Plus you could make the default fire order be return fire only.
  10. Geers

    Geers Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,946
    Likes Received:
    6,820
    What? UEF had an awesome navy. Summit Class FTW.
  11. godde

    godde Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,425
    Likes Received:
    499
    Cybrans had a ship with a stealth field and a mobile sonar with a stealth field. Stealth is pretty good during ship combat as it forces the enemy to obtain line of sight on the ships and remains useful until the enemy got omni radar.
  12. Geers

    Geers Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,946
    Likes Received:
    6,820
    Shield boats ftw.


    Oh my god I had the best idea ever. What if T1 fabbers captured T2 units by having them pinned down (literally) by doxii. That would be hilarious.
  13. godde

    godde Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,425
    Likes Received:
    499
    Shields and stealth are a better combo.
    mered4 likes this.
  14. Geers

    Geers Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,946
    Likes Received:
    6,820
    Oh yeah? Well what if I...

    [​IMG]
    stormingkiwi likes this.
  15. ironnomad

    ironnomad New Member

    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    1
    What about expanding the role of combat fabbers to auto capture as well? (Obviously the process would be seriously slow and lower priority than repair, but a mob of expensive combat fabbers would suddenly be quite scary even unescorted.)
    nateious likes this.
  16. Murcanic

    Murcanic Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    601
    Likes Received:
    360
    xD even better since vanguards are slow, if they are sent in with no anti-air use air fabbers to capture them while they are being sent in and then use them verses their own army xD
  17. broadsideet

    broadsideet Active Member

    Messages:
    203
    Likes Received:
    218
    What about a specialized nuke that captures everything in it's attack radius (much smaller than a normal nuke, of course)
  18. siefer101

    siefer101 Active Member

    Messages:
    369
    Likes Received:
    171
    Commander capturing..... sounds osiris esque
  19. thetrophysystem

    thetrophysystem Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,050
    Likes Received:
    2,874
    Sounds like something new to add, cant think of a way to tack it onto reclaim that works right.

    If they made the health bar fill up yellow as it was converted, and it was a 5 second unassistable delay followed by the reclaim time, it would be kind of neat. That would also mean cheaper and damaged things are easier to convert, but also that nothing is insta convert because of the 5 second delay.
  20. nateious

    nateious Active Member

    Messages:
    409
    Likes Received:
    212
    I'd like to see fabbers automatically capture any enemy extractors that they find in spots they've been told to build. Much less work than finding the extractors, reclaiming them and then issuing a build command.
    stormingkiwi likes this.

Share This Page