Turrets 2: Electric Boogaloo (Or, what are we actually doing?)

[CobraD]

35 minutes ago, CODz said:

Have you guys actually seen the vids on youtube of people testing the turrets with stegos and trikes with a 400% turret buff? look how big the area is upon when you can place your next 100 turrets plus within 30 secs they are virtually done so more expensive turrets plus bullets for 30 seconds? DILO how is that fair? plus how easy is it to raise 4 of these tames? plus the next four in case they die like the vid your better off having a thatch hut with a 100 dodos on aggressive!!! If you dont like turrets shooting your character stay away its what they are there for.

Would you line showing the video? 

[CODz]

16 minutes ago, CobraD said:

Would you line showing the video? 

1ST ONE IS 120% BUFF 2ND ONE IS 400% REMEMBER ITS NOT 100 TURRETS ITS A BOX(SQUARE BASE) 4 WALLS 25 TURRETS PER SIDE PEOPLE

 

 

 

[Jerryn]

12 minutes ago, CODz said:

1ST ONE IS 120% BUFF 2ND ONE IS 400% REMEMBER ITS NOT 100 TURRETS ITS A BOX(SQUARE BASE) 4 WALLS 25 TURRETS PER SIDE PEOPLE

 

 

 

If you post these, please be kind and list the creator of the video.  I personal don't click on blind links as they may take me to someone I choose to not support because of their style, habit of click baiting, and/or just getting things wrong.  And, there are others like me that feel the same way. 

Thanks.

[invincibleqc]

3 minutes ago, Jerryn said:

If you post these, please be kind and list the creator of the video.  I personal don't click on blind links as they may take me to someone I choose to not support because of the style, habit of click baiting, and/or just getting things wrong.  And, there are others like me that feel the same way. 

Thanks.

You are not missing anything. I started watching the second video and stopped as soon as he said that TheRightHand was probably Jeremy's alt account for not getting hate... how can you take the video seriously after hearing that...

[ThzNutz]

1 hour ago, invincibleqc said:

Would a Cake nerf be viable if the 62.5% damage reduction from fire was fixed for the Dragon breath on herbivores? If so, maybe this could be a good compromise, nerf the cake for PvP soaking meta and fix the damage reduction for Dragon fighters!

i like it  

sold!!!!

[Hobofetus]

@TheRightHand Please explain to me then what I experienced. I had maybe 150 turrets d/c my server when we got attacked by a tamed titano. This is a legacy server, all the other tribes had been raided, very few buildings left on the map, no plant x at my base and we had maybe 100 dino's in the base on herb island. At the time there was 4 or 5 people on the server. This was about 3 weeks ago. Also I really hope you guys play test this, in a recent interview jat said they don't play test the updates which is very concerning considering WC has made well over 200 million dollars with this game. Personally, I don't see why I'm getting punished b/c some servers have 15k turrets yet I still encounter the problems you claim will be fixed on a near dead server.

I've lost all faith in WC and decided a while ago to not purchase any future products, that happened when we were attacked by people cheating, supplied video of them counting down the server ddos and it happening, nothing happened to that tribe. I've had more attention paid to me in WoW by the mods and they have many many many many more players. WC has no excuse other than simply not wanting to do it.

[DarthaNyan]

1 hour ago, CODz said:

1ST ONE IS 120% BUFF 2ND ONE IS 400% REMEMBER ITS NOT 100 TURRETS ITS A BOX(SQUARE BASE) 4 WALLS 25 TURRETS PER SIDE PEOPLE

54 minutes ago, CODz said:

HOW CAN YOU DEFEND THIS? NOW YOU GUYS SEE THE PROBLEM?

Both videos mislead with biased stance of the YTer:

- In both videos he put 33 foundations from 8x8 (8x6 in 2nd) base's walls to show "no turret build zone" which is not technically correct: proper presentation should have been closer by 10 foundations on each side (not so big and scary now, right?) because turrets are spread around.

- both "raids" are mostly invalid because of the turret placement. Had they elevated turrets slightly above the base - then riders on stegos might have received more damage and riding  trikes in a raid is out of question when you are shot from above.

[ooStuStu]

Also his reading comprehension is not very good because the vegi cake nerf is not confirmed ..just a possibility

[Hobofetus]

2 minutes ago, DarthaNyan said:

Both videos mislead with biased stance of the YTer:

- In both videos he put 33 foundations from 8x8 (8x6 in 2nd) base's walls to show "no turret build zone" which is not technically correct: proper presentation should have been closer by 10 foundations on each side (not so big now, right?) because turrets are spread around.

- both "raids" are mostly invalid because of the turret placement. Had they elevated turrets slightly above the base - then riders on stegos might have received more damage and riding  trikes in a raid is out of question when you are shot from above.

Pretty sure the zone is close enough. What you describe is grossly inaccurate based on my experience with the build cap zone which is about the same size as the turret zone.

[Olivar]

4 minutes ago, Hobofetus said:

Wow you guys really want to hide your heads in the sand when presented with something tangible. Watch the video if you want some facts, or just plug your ears and close your eyes while spouting nonsense like you have been. Sometimes boot lickers are just gonna lick boots.

It's warm in the sand.

[Stronger]

@TheRightHand As we see in the video of ThickFreedom the buff isnt helping at all...Make it 4x damage, 8x the cost and remove the old turrets and the turret limit completely and it can be balanced. As it looks right now, offline raids and also bigger raids are pretty much unstoppable, since fobs will be almost as well defended as bases that have been there for months.

I thought you guys are from Murica, land of the free. So give us the freedom to put as many turrets as we want, if we can pay the price.

[Joebl0w13]

Just now, Stronger said:

@TheRightHand As we see in the video of ThickFreedom the buff isnt helping at all...Make it 4x damage, 8x the cost and remove the old turrets and the turret limit completely and it can be balanced. As it looks right now, offline raids and also bigger raids are pretty much unstoppable, since fobs will be almost as well defended as bases that have been there for months.

I thought you guys are from Murica, land of the free. So give us the freedom to put as many turrets as we want, if we can pay the price.

His second video is with the buffed turrets. And the raid has a clearly different outcome.

[Hobofetus]

1 minute ago, Joebl0w13 said:

His second video is with the buffed turrets. And the raid has a clearly different outcome.

That's a joke right?

[Ranger1]

15 minutes ago, Hobofetus said:

Pretty sure the zone is close enough. What you describe is grossly inaccurate based on my experience with the build cap zone which is about the same size as the turret zone.

Are you going to overlook the fact that in the 2nd video (the only one that actually gets at least a "few" of the facts close to correct) the raiding party died in short order.  Yes, it was a small base and a small raiding party, but it was also extremely poor turret placement.

Of course, it's only the vaguest idea of how things will actually work since there were many things they couldn't simulate (as they freely admitted in the video) which will be working to the defenders advantage.

Perhaps the most important point to be made here though is, seriously, there is a reason why people aren't taking your "proof" at face value.  At least they aren't if they are the least bit familiar with that particular channel.

 

[invincibleqc]

Just now, Hobofetus said:

That's a joke right?

Any tests made before the 27th are pointless. Increasing the damage of the actual turrets won't reflect how the new one will plays out because it will have more health and will be released with other balancing listed in the first thread.

[Joebl0w13]

2 minutes ago, Hobofetus said:

That's a joke right?

No. This is a joke. How did the dodo cross the...

[Ranger1]

3 minutes ago, Hobofetus said:

That's a joke right?

What?  The video... or the channel?

Doesn't matter, the answer is yes.

[GP]

Just now, invincibleqc said:

Any tests made before the 27th are pointless. Increasing the damage of the actual turrets won't reflect how the new one will plays out because it will have more health and will be released with other balancing listed in the first thread.

Exactly. A "heavy turret" would be expected to have more HP than a standard turret.

Tests like that video shows it not conducting an accurate test and is in fact spreading false information.

[ooStuStu]

4 minutes ago, Hobofetus said:

That's a joke right?

well it did in a way ... the trikes were melted pretty quick even with the horrible turret placement  and no ground clutter they had to clear. turrets were too low to the ground anyway

... hopefully we get a higher number of allowed turrets I am hoping 300 ..

[DarthaNyan]

1 minute ago, Hobofetus said:

Pretty sure the zone is close enough. What you describe is grossly inaccurate based on my experience with the build cap zone which is about the same size as the turret zone.

If the "no turret build zone" works as it should - they could have placed about 70 more turrets in 10-foundations long yellow zone simply because they dont have 100 turrets on one side to make it full 33 foundations long zone.

[Ranger1]

10 minutes ago, DarthaNyan said:

If the "no turret build zone" works as it should - they could have placed about 70 more turrets in 10-foundations long yellow zone simply because they dont have 100 turrets on one side to make it full 33 foundations long zone.

I would like to think that this obvious mistake was unintentional.  Unfortunately, considering the channels history and format,  that would be highly unlikely.

[invincibleqc]

22 minutes ago, DarthaNyan said:

If the "no turret build zone" works as it should - they could have placed about 70 more turrets in 10-foundations long yellow zone simply because they dont have 100 turrets on one side to make it full 33 foundations long zone.

Do you know if, they start counting from the very first placed turret or if the range is dynamically re-calculated for each of them? I think this could be an interesting info to gather.

6 minutes ago, Ranger1 said:

I would like to think that this obvious mistake was unintentional.  Unfortunately, considering the channels history and format,  that would be highly unlikely.

Yes... I have a feeling he is just pouring oil on the flames in hope to redirect the hate wagon his way and get subscribers. Which is unfortunate, as he could use his platform to spread actual researched facts instead of just rushing videos with assumptions.

[DarthaNyan]

11 minutes ago, invincibleqc said:

Do you know if, they start counting from the very first placed turret or if the range is dynamically re-calculated for each of them? I think this could be an interesting info to gather.

I like to entertain the thought that devs are sane and just put a simple check to calculate amount of "turrets" in a sphere around the spot where you are trying to place new turret: If it exceeds 99 - no deal. Although sometimes their implementation of things is questionable to say the least.

[CobraD]

 

2 hours ago, invincibleqc said:

You are not missing anything. I started watching the second video and stopped as soon as he said that TheRightHand was probably Jeremy's alt account for not getting hate... how can you take the video seriously after hearing that...

That was my same reaction too! It was just so harnto watch that I had to just stop the vid and go walk my dog instead. But eventually I decided to give it another. My perspective on it is the same as everyone else in here, pretty misleading. From the way the turrets were arrange, to the no build area being bigger then it should, to using inaccurate turrets.

56 minutes ago, Joebl0w13 said:

No. This is a joke. How did the dodo cross the...

I don't know how?

13 minutes ago, DarthaNyan said:

I like to entertain the thought that devs are sane and just put a simple check to calculate amount of "turrets" in a sphere around the spot where you are trying to place new turret: If it exceeds 99 - no deal. Although sometimes their implementation of things is questionable to say the least.

Well there's only one way to find out, hopefully someone can do a proper test of it.

[Arkton]

"We want you to still be able to defend your bases and all of the stuff you've spent enormous amounts of time to make."

Seems to me this is the underlying driver of the situation that could benefit from a different approach. When being raided means (to some) losing everything and starting over. 

How about introducing something like a Tek Vault, limited to 1 per tribe. 

The Tek Vault could store a very limited amount of items but would be indestructible. It could also use element to run. For example, a tribe could store 10 highly prized blueprints. 

A Tek transmitter/receiver could store/retrieve remotely in case your Vault is being "camped", and you could set up shop or regroup elsewhere.  Once you've retrieved your most prized items you could remote detonate the Vault if you so choose, allowing your tribe to build a new one.

The Tek Vault could possibly also store DNA samples of prized parent Dino's, also in limited amounts. Maybe sacrifice an egg for the 'store DNA' action (using stats on the egg), and retrieve using a surrogate Egg to fuse to. 

Basically, if there was a mechanic to limit the "we lost everything in one night" scenario people might not go to such extremes to protect it.  Or at the very least allow a decent recovery without starting from scratch.

... just an idea.