Public Starhawk BETA

[sike1779]

I think some buildings will not let you reclaim them - sniper tower and the supply bunker - either that or i cant find the control panel on them. Yesterday i had just built a bunker to turn around and see someone else had just done the same!

[TalllPaul]

The easiest option could be to put the number of buildings built on the icon of the buildings when you hold triangle.

[scapepicture]

Two problems:
1) There needs to be warning that comes up on screen with a reason why you can't sometimes build and battle: Quite often, I am scrolling through the buildings with the d pad and they suddenly all go black and I am unable to choose any. No reason is given to me as to why i cannot build.

2) Some of the buildings are really hard to select on the d-pad( the ones on the diagonals). When I try and select one of them, it flick to the one on the left or right.

[TalllPaul]

When you hold triangle in the top right there is a building counter, if it is 32 of 32 the buildings will grey out and you won't be able to select any.

[sike1779]

---

scapepicture wrote:

2) Some of the buildings are really hard to select on the d-pad( the ones on the diagonals). When I try and select one of them, it flick to the one on the left or right.

---

use the analog stick

[Pentex]

I'll try to make this really fast, as i know i have a lot more i could talk about, but for now i'll just have a few minutes to write.

So... the main gripe i have is: the enemy being able to build on our main base. That ability makes for horrendous base rapes. I haven't even played that much yet and already have been on the end of some severe punishing. Some people have built turrets all around, so when you drop down you immediately get shot at, there was a bunker right at the entrance of our base, from where the enemy was firing heavy fire at us (shotgun mostly, it overpowers most other ground weapons sadly) and also, the pod beacons shouldn't be able to be built that much on top of our base.

So i think that perhaps the pod beacons shouldn't be able to be built if any of its circle area touches either the enemy base or other beacons' circles. Also, i don't know how Zones would work but i'm seeing the possibility of it being maps with pre-positioned pod beacons that you can go over to and concert into your own. There's 3(?) side to a pod beacon with screens that look like control panels but aren't active, so they could indeed be used for Zones. Would be interesting if in other modes, those same beacons could be dealt in two different ways. You could either destroy them or try to "convert" them for your team, with the added difficulty of it taking quite some time and the enemy team being alerted to it, for example, by it's green circle flashing and turning into red.

But now, the major thing i want to say about B&B is that there needs to be a limit per structure, not just the overall limit. There's walls all over the place and sometimes no room to build anything more. On the B&B wheel, you should see each building's limit and how many you have already built. Also perhaps, who knows if not a building limit per player too.

Say, each player can build 8 structures, that's already a lot. Also, the turrets should be independent and limited to 2 per player and if you build a 3rd, the first one blows up, so when on the B&B menu, you'd see 0 out of 2, 1 out of 2 or 2 out of 2 concerning just your own turrets. But as for the limit per structure i'd say that walls could for instance be limited to 12 or 16, bunkers to 4 or 6, just like most other buildings and finally the shield limited to 1 or 2. It would be a case of tinkering with it.

And finally, if we want Starhawk to be fast paced, the way we start games right now just is inadmissable. You start with almost no rift, people end up grounded most of the time, walls are built left and right, a Hawk alone is 3 slots and nobody takes to the skies because it costs too much, let alone the issues people are having with the flight system itself.

So i would be in favor of starting the game with 6 rift slots, enough for a launch pad. But you might be worried that everyone would build one so they could take to the skies?! Well, if you limite the number of each structure, only 4 or 6 people would be able to build pads and the others would have enough rift to buy their own hawk. Bunkers could be built straightaway to avoid the shortage of weapons, another huge problem and things would be sped up, making constructing a base much faster. In due time, what this could mean would be that people would prioritize what they wanted to build, making it more strategic, and most importantly, faster paced.

[bowes_foundation]

Can you team switch in game? If so can you destroy the buildings of the team you switched to? Serious flaw if so

[mcduff32]

---

Pentex wrote:

But now, the major thing i want to say about B&B is that there needs to be a limit per structure, not just the overall limit. There's walls all over the place and sometimes no room to build anything more. On the B&B wheel, you should see each building's limit and how many you have already built. Also perhaps, who knows if not a building limit per player too.

Say, each player can build 8 structures, that's already a lot. Also, the turrets should be independent and limited to 2 per player and if you build a 3rd, the first one blows up, so when on the B&B menu, you'd see 0 out of 2, 1 out of 2 or 2 out of 2 concerning just your own turrets. But as for the limit per structure i'd say that walls could for instance be limited to 12 or 16, bunkers to 4 or 6, just like most other buildings and finally the shield limited to 1 or 2. It would be a case of tinkering with it.

And finally, if we want Starhawk to be fast paced, the way we start games right now just is inadmissable. You start with almost no rift, people end up grounded most of the time, walls are built left and right, a Hawk alone is 3 slots and nobody takes to the skies because it costs too much, let alone the issues people are having with the flight system itself.

So i would be in favor of starting the game with 6 rift slots, enough for a launch pad. But you might be worried that everyone would build one so they could take to the skies?! Well, if you limite the number of each structure, only 4 or 6 people would be able to build pads and the others would have enough rift to buy their own hawk. Bunkers could be built straightaway to avoid the shortage of weapons, another huge problem and things would be sped up, making constructing a base much faster. In due time, what this could mean would be that people would prioritize what they wanted to build, making it more strategic, and most importantly, faster paced.

---

I see your point, but I think LighBox want to give freedom to the players to build whatever they want with the tools at their disposal. Limiting who can build what and when would also limit the ways in which a typical game can play out. 

If someone wants to defend a base with 30 turrets:

They can do that.

It's this freedome that makes the game great. 

What if I'm on a really bad team that doesn't know how to collect cores effectively? I don't want to hit a personal limit on the stuff I can build because that would only contribute to a more one-sided game.

If you think there aren't enough cores to go round, they can look at putting more core pods on the maps, increase the amount of cores you have on spawn, or increase the rate at which you collect cores when a spawn beacon is up. I would rather this than putting in more limits.

[Pentex]

---

mcduff32 escreveu:

I see your point, but I think LighBox want to give freedom to the players to build whatever they want with the tools at their disposal. Limiting who can build what and when would also limit the ways in which a typical game can play out. 

If someone wants to defend a base with 30 turrets:

They can do that.

It's this freedome that makes the game great. 

What if I'm on a really bad team that doesn't know how to collect cores effectively? I don't want to hit a personal limit on the stuff I can build because that would only contribute to a more one-sided game.

If you think there aren't enough cores to go round, they can look at putting more core pods on the maps, increase the amount of cores you have on spawn, or increase the rate at which you collect cores when a spawn beacon is up. I would rather this than putting in more limits.

---

I also see your point, but i only agree to the extent of not having a building limit per player. I still think that it's imperative that there's a limit per structure because, really, having 20 walls, 10 garages and 2 sniper towers isn't going to help the team in any way. If anything, the limit per building can work to remind people that there's already too many of those built. I can se it even after only a little time dedicated to the game, i've been in a team that built walls up to our ears but has no pod beacons, no shield, no beam turrets and with luck has a launch pad.

I'm not saying that the limits per structure would equal the overall 32 limit, it would always be way above that, at least double. So, for example:

16 walls

8 garages

6 sniper towers

4 pod beacons

6 launch pads

6 beam turrets

6 bunkers

6 jetpack dispensers

2 shields

That alone equals 60, and there's still two structures that we don't have access to. So easily you can get that up to 64. This would mean that there would be a lot of room to adapt to each team's style without going overkill on a single structure. With a limit like that one i just presented you can reach almost 32 structures with just walls, garages and bunkers if your team wants to play ground.

[Pentex]

Oh, not to mention that i do feel that turrets acting like your personal weapon should mean that you don't get to spam them and instead get a limit outside of the overall 32 limit, my suggestion being 2. Your example of building 32 turrets might look cool but we both know that's just for giggles on a serious game.