Does anyone else think it is strange that wreckage has more HP than the unit it was previously? When I say HP I'm talking about the amount of damage it takes before that wreckage turns to dust. I can only see benefits by atleast halfing this amount. Any thoughts?
EDIT: I understand the logistics behind this... I think gameplay can be improved by making wreckage a bit weaker though.
Wreckage
Moderator: Moderators
-
PauloMorfeo
- Posts: 2004
- Joined: 15 Dec 2004, 20:53
- The HP of a unit is the amount of damage until it stops working. More or less like Zaphod said.
- The HP of the carcass is the amount of damage the metal structure needs to sustain before it gets destroyed (much after it stoped working).
Still, it is not ... lack of english vocabulary ... because if we deal to a unit enough damage, it will be destroyed straight away without leaving any carcass. But that amount of extra damage beyond it's HP is less than the HP of the carcass which doesn't make sense. To solve this, 2 things must be taken care of:
1- The amount of extra damage a unit must sustain to get totaly destroyed, should be mod sided, if it is not already, and must be consistent with #2.
2- The HP assigned to the carcasses should be around the diference between the HP of the unit and the damage needed to destroy the unit straight away.
- The HP of the carcass is the amount of damage the metal structure needs to sustain before it gets destroyed (much after it stoped working).
Still, it is not ... lack of english vocabulary ... because if we deal to a unit enough damage, it will be destroyed straight away without leaving any carcass. But that amount of extra damage beyond it's HP is less than the HP of the carcass which doesn't make sense. To solve this, 2 things must be taken care of:
1- The amount of extra damage a unit must sustain to get totaly destroyed, should be mod sided, if it is not already, and must be consistent with #2.
2- The HP assigned to the carcasses should be around the diference between the HP of the unit and the damage needed to destroy the unit straight away.
-
Doomweaver
- Posts: 704
- Joined: 30 Oct 2004, 14:14
If units are pure metal (which doesn't really make much sense) then the corpse should have way more life than they do... I mean, what's an explosion going to do? Melt it?
Just pretend this: If the unit blows up, all the plastic in it melts and makes the metal really inconcenient for the nanolather to reclaim. Whereas a bit of damage can keep the internal structure of the unit intact mostly, but still destroy enough to stuff it up.
Just pretend this: If the unit blows up, all the plastic in it melts and makes the metal really inconcenient for the nanolather to reclaim. Whereas a bit of damage can keep the internal structure of the unit intact mostly, but still destroy enough to stuff it up.
-
Guessmyname
- Posts: 3301
- Joined: 28 Apr 2005, 21:07
You can't exactly mine nanobots Zoombie...
Another note on wreckages: when will be able to have it so that wreckage 3dos can have object hierarchy?
Another note on wreckages: when will be able to have it so that wreckage 3dos can have object hierarchy?
Last edited by Guessmyname on 18 Nov 2005, 23:54, edited 1 time in total.
-
GrOuNd_ZeRo
- Posts: 1370
- Joined: 30 Apr 2005, 01:10
Anyone rememeber that famous german tank commander? I can't remember his name but he shot the first and the last tank in a tank collumn going through a valley and picked off the rest after that, that's what makes it interesting stategy wise to make corpses harder to destroy.
Nanolathing works by having nanobots line up and form the structure and make it fuse together, then it turns into a gigantic molecule so the armor is very hard to destroy, the only way to destroy it is to expose it to a lot of energy that weakens the forcefield to keeps the matter together which makes it cathastropically fail...something in that sense the TA manual explained heavy armor and metal was explained to be the nanobots being stored AFAIK.
If you own the manual I suggest you look at it, if not...shame on you...you pirate :p
Nanolathing works by having nanobots line up and form the structure and make it fuse together, then it turns into a gigantic molecule so the armor is very hard to destroy, the only way to destroy it is to expose it to a lot of energy that weakens the forcefield to keeps the matter together which makes it cathastropically fail...something in that sense the TA manual explained heavy armor and metal was explained to be the nanobots being stored AFAIK.
If you own the manual I suggest you look at it, if not...shame on you...you pirate :p
-
GrOuNd_ZeRo
- Posts: 1370
- Joined: 30 Apr 2005, 01:10
-
Targ Collective
- Posts: 202
- Joined: 12 Nov 2005, 14:16
Hmm. If the nanobots are what holds the unit or structure together, the destruction of the unit should be absolute. Unless they remain functional themselves a short while before running out of power from the main 'grid'.
This would actually make sense. The gradual deterioration of a corpse even when not being fired upon could be attributed to the nanobots gradually failing within its structure. And the inability of the FARK or Necro to rez any old pile of wreckage could be due to the insufficient presence of cohesion within the unit's remnants, coupled with there not being enough information on how the unit was supposed to be formed present in the unit's composite nanobots.
These nanobots would also explain the unit's individual regen properties nicely.
So in theory a lucky shot that strikes the regen centre of the unit or structure concerned could cause it to gib on destruction, as the 'brain' responsible for the unit or structure's cohesion would no longer be functional.
This explains away all of your questions, with a blatant plothole-filling gusto.
EDIT: The additional health could be considered a last-ditch attempt to preserve the unit, by moving the 'core' of the unit to the most protected position, just on the offchance a FARK or Necro should come along. Although the inability to Self-D when an enemy tries to subvert the unit is disgusting, unless C-Units and Necros have the most amazing chameleon-like properties able to fool the enemy units into thinking they're being rezd/reclaimed by their own side. Also not impossible, but this leads to new questions such as why either side didn't use this technology to tap into the enemy's resources, or gather intel.
The Collective
This would actually make sense. The gradual deterioration of a corpse even when not being fired upon could be attributed to the nanobots gradually failing within its structure. And the inability of the FARK or Necro to rez any old pile of wreckage could be due to the insufficient presence of cohesion within the unit's remnants, coupled with there not being enough information on how the unit was supposed to be formed present in the unit's composite nanobots.
These nanobots would also explain the unit's individual regen properties nicely.
So in theory a lucky shot that strikes the regen centre of the unit or structure concerned could cause it to gib on destruction, as the 'brain' responsible for the unit or structure's cohesion would no longer be functional.
This explains away all of your questions, with a blatant plothole-filling gusto.
EDIT: The additional health could be considered a last-ditch attempt to preserve the unit, by moving the 'core' of the unit to the most protected position, just on the offchance a FARK or Necro should come along. Although the inability to Self-D when an enemy tries to subvert the unit is disgusting, unless C-Units and Necros have the most amazing chameleon-like properties able to fool the enemy units into thinking they're being rezd/reclaimed by their own side. Also not impossible, but this leads to new questions such as why either side didn't use this technology to tap into the enemy's resources, or gather intel.
The Collective
Not quite, the brain of the unit could be the amalgamation of all the anites intelligence. That way it's a highly decentralized structure based around a concurrent pattern.
The only centrallized thigns being those that give the unit its structure and ability, such as muscles, weapons, sensors, resource storage ro generation. The rest would be armour, that could be regenerated with nanites building nanites.
This would also explain any future untis that have the ability to morph or literraly change into another type of unit.
The only centrallized thigns being those that give the unit its structure and ability, such as muscles, weapons, sensors, resource storage ro generation. The rest would be armour, that could be regenerated with nanites building nanites.
This would also explain any future untis that have the ability to morph or literraly change into another type of unit.
Because they, according to the story didnt get under the patterning process.
But is the brain of an arm pilot going to control every knicknack in a mech suite?
Could you regulate all the different parts in a machine such as that at once and do your mission?
I think the pilot there would simply be the one giving the commands, go there, fire weapon, following orders, and using their tactical knowledge, which is suddenly eradicated by a thing called a mouse pointer whcih tells them what to do.
But is the brain of an arm pilot going to control every knicknack in a mech suite?
Could you regulate all the different parts in a machine such as that at once and do your mission?
I think the pilot there would simply be the one giving the commands, go there, fire weapon, following orders, and using their tactical knowledge, which is suddenly eradicated by a thing called a mouse pointer whcih tells them what to do.
-
Targ Collective
- Posts: 202
- Joined: 12 Nov 2005, 14:16