[T:V] The sensor system

Another thing about the deployable sensors that was great was the ability to combine it with a turrent limited to motion sensing, such as the top entrance turret on Broadside or the Gen turret on Scarabrae. Because people are used to being able to slip past, it often was effective to set a pulse so they drop down and get hammered.
 
Not sure if this has been suggested before, but what about a compromise:

- give the main sensor less range (maybe 75% of the map? would make it easier for defenders by default, but a deployable sensor or two would take care of that)
- add deployable sensors (either indestructible or very difficult to destroy...perhaps shielded)
- if the main sensor goes down, all deployable sensors go down with it (and then become easier to destroy...e.g. shields disappear)
 
Thats a good idea, the concept could be that the deployable sensors relay data to the main sensor, thus if your main one is down your deployables have no way to relay the data. No need for shield on deployables, they should be easy to get rid of.
 
One more comment I'd like to add: deploying stuff is fun. I spent most of my time in T1 and T2 either sniping, repairing, or deploying. The nice thing about deploying is it rewards creativity (choosing optimum placements and such) and it gives you something truly useful to do when your ping isn't up to snuff.

So when in doubt, please try not to dumb down deployables too much. :)

Oh, as a sniper I like the no enemy IFF feature. :) It would make sniping at once easier (if the enemy's sensor net is down) and harder (if your sensor net is down).
 
Daedalus said:
Thats a good idea, the concept could be that the deployable sensors relay data to the main sensor, thus if your main one is down your deployables have no way to relay the data. No need for shield on deployables, they should be easy to get rid of.
Click to expand...

You're right, they don't need to be that rugged...I was thinking at first that the main sensor should still be the focal point, but you could always just replace the destroyed sensors with new ones.
 
I would like to take a moment to comment on some ideas SniperOmega posted earlier.


.........................................................................
..............................................................................
..........................
............................................................................
............................................................................
..............................................................................
.........................................................................................
.............
.................................................................................
...............................................................................

.................................................................................
.......................................................................................
...................................................................................................
.....................
.....................................................................................
also...................................................................................................................

PS............................. :roller:
 
I hate the hyperbole in this thread. Who else is fed up with hearing the qualifiers "utter" and "total"? None of these changes are "utter" or "total" or "completely" anything.
 
Zoolooman said:
I hate the hyperbole in this thread. Who else is fed up with hearing the qualifiers "utter" and "total"? None of these changes are "utter" or "total" or "completely" anything.
Click to expand...

I utterly agree. You are completely correct in this regard. You've totally hit the nail on the head. Nice work Zoo!!

;)
 
I'll also note that these aren't "completely" perfect, nor "utterly" awesome, and finally, they aren't "totally" final.

Yet, they aren't "utter" newbifications, "completely" skilless, or "totally" stupid.
 
Doc Holliday said:
KP of all people should know that this takes skills away from people like Nat and Special in reguards to flag awareness and just hands that skill to every newbie that steps into a server.
Click to expand...
Hey Doc. When I play with Nat and Special, they'll know they can count on me and someone else to take out the enemy sensor as they setup their cap routes, keep it down while they run their routes and also distract any flag defenders in the vicinity. And if I'm still alive by the time they grab, they can count on me to escort them. I don't see how that's taking away from anyone's skills, removing any teamwork, or relying on so-called cowboyism.

Meanwhile, on the flip side (which many of you guys still fail to consider in your arguments), the other team will be trying to prevent me from doing what I'm doing. This will consist of fighting me, trying to ignore my distractions, and if I manage to destroy the sensor, using raw awareness skills to predict and counter incoming cappers.

We made this decision because for the majority of players (based on experience and playtesting), the above scenario is more understandable and more fun than running around deploying sensors in all corners of the map, running around looking for deployed sensors that the other team has deployed, and trying to figure out where a sensor's radius is and what it means by looking at circles on a command map or deciphering an abstract 3D effect.

Since the above scenario is more understandable and more fun for the majority of players (if you disagree with this, please feel free to rally support for your cause), and since it changes how and when skill and teamwork are used but doesn't remove them from the equation, we made the change. We acknowledge that for a small minority of players this removes a slower-paced strategic element from the game. Hopefully these people will find other items they enjoy deploying and/or other roles they have fun performing,
KP
 
Instead of Capture the Flag you might starting calling in Defend your Sensor.
IMO the IFF's are a staple of Trbes gameplay that you are messing with. The one thing i loved about Tribes is the fact that there are IFF's to begin with. All the other FPS' out there lack this and arent as fun. With all that goes on in a match as it is you want to make it where the enemy could dance around like having a sensor jammer pack at your base? I honestly think that it would be annoying to have the enemy IFF's flickering on and off during the map. I say at least keep the Sensor the way it was. This is TRIBES, keep the IFF's on always for the love on God.
 
I see a lot of talk about how people did not understand the sensor system and that is why it was underused in pubs. I think this assertion is extremely off target. The reason people did not utilize the sensor system in pubs was because it was boring, repetitive and completely devoid of fun. Sure it helped but who wants to be the poor sucker running around deploying sensors everywhere? In matches winning and having the upper hand were the most important so the good teams utilized the system and got everything they could out of it.

Assume that the proposed sensor winds up being very important. It will get raped consistently because blowing stuff up is fun. Repairing a giant stupid stationary target is not real fun, nor is defending it (do not compare to the flag, the flag moves!)So either it wont get defended/repaired, or it will get done by someone not having a good time which means probably the first choice will happen. I think the best comparison is the heavy D doorman on Raindance in T1. Everyone knew that someone had to do it but how many pubs do both teams send 3-4 HO at the start and they fly into the base untouched because no one wants to do that undesireable job?

You guys already had the solution to making the sensor system more used, now that deployables are different than packs. People would use the system if they could deploy them while doing their normal business. The old system was not used because it was busy work, in the new system it could be natural.
 
booty said:
I see a lot of talk about how people did not understand the sensor system and that is why it was underused in pubs. I think this assertion is extremely off target. The reason people did not utilize the sensor system in pubs was because it was boring, repetitive and completely devoid of fun. Sure it helped but who wants to be the poor sucker running around deploying sensors everywhere? In matches winning and having the upper hand were the most important so the good teams utilized the system and got everything they could out of it.

Assume that the proposed sensor winds up being very important. It will get raped consistently because blowing stuff up is fun. Repairing a giant stupid stationary target is not real fun, nor is defending it (do not compare to the flag, the flag moves!)So either it wont get defended/repaired, or it will get done by someone not having a good time which means probably the first choice will happen. I think the best comparison is the heavy D doorman on Raindance in T1. Everyone knew that someone had to do it but how many pubs do both teams send 3-4 HO at the start and they fly into the base untouched because no one wants to do that undesireable job?

You guys already had the solution to making the sensor system more used, now that deployables are different than packs. People would use the system if they could deploy them while doing their normal business. The old system was not used because it was busy work, in the new system it could be natural.
Click to expand...

:signed:

And KP, how many of us got asked about the sensor system? I see you mention the majority of players, and you mention feedback from testing and such. Where did this come from? I can't say how much I dislike the current system, most especially the perm flag finder. I don't like the all-or-nothing approach either, regardless if that's both sides or not. I also don't like not having IFF when they are in some kind of visual range and in LOS.

I'm sure you're aware, but BF:V implements an outstanding 3D system, and it is most definitely not hard to understand, and doesn't need deciphering. I'm sure you guys could come up with something like that if it came to it.

Bottom line, I may not have all the answers, but I know what I prefer. And what is there currently isn't it.
 
booty said:
I see a lot of talk about how people did not understand the sensor system and that is why it was underused in pubs. I think this assertion is extremely off target. The reason people did not utilize the sensor system in pubs was because it was boring, repetitive and completely devoid of fun.
Click to expand...
On the 5150 servers, and Cheaters, I agree. On most pubs, people had no idea what they were doing. I can't count the number of times I saw a pulse sensor inside my base on raindance, or on the top of the base. Or better yet, saw people planting jammers all around the base. The majority simply did not understand how the sensor system in T1 worked.

But that's irrelevant. The point is that making the sensor a major point of interest adds, well, a major point of interest to a map. One more thing to defend and destroy. The rocket turret on raindance was awesome, because it was something to attack and defend other than the generators and the flag. It was a key to the map, and I for one loved playing the defender role for the RT on RD. While it was up it was hard to cap. While it was down it was easy(er) to cap. A grunt position that was important to the outcome of the game. That's great IMO.
Wolfen said:
And KP, how many of us got asked about the sensor system? I see you mention the majority of players, and you mention feedback from testing and such. Where did this come from? I can't say how much I dislike the current system, most especially the perm flag finder. I don't like the all-or-nothing approach either, regardless if that's both sides or not. I also don't like not having IFF when they are in some kind of visual range and in LOS.
Click to expand...
No offense, but what new item haven't you been against?
 
booty said:
You guys already had the solution to making the sensor system more used, now that deployables are different than packs.
Click to expand...
Hey Joe. Several people have raised this point, but still nobody addresses the flip side. Yeah it's easier to deploy in T:V. Which means if deployable sensors were included, it'd be easier to deploy more of them more often. Which means to counter that the other team would have to spend more timing looking for them and destroying them.

booty said:
Assume that the proposed sensor winds up being very important.
Click to expand...
Assume that deployed sensors wind up being important. See above.

booty said:
Repairing a giant stupid stationary target is not real fun, nor is defending it
Click to expand...
Is it really less fun than repairing/defending/replacing/finding/destroying multiple small stupid stationary targets?

booty said:
Sure it helped but who wants to be the poor sucker running around deploying sensors everywhere?
Click to expand...
Yeah, and on the flip side, who wants to be the poor sucker running around trying to find and destroy the enemy's deployed sensors? If people really find this to be fun, please speak up.

Wulfen said:
I can't say how much I dislike the current system, most especially the perm flag finder...I also don't like not having IFF when they are in some kind of visual range and in LOS.
Click to expand...
These are both valid concerns that have been raised and as I've said we can consider alternatives. No problem.

Wulfen said:
I don't like the all-or-nothing approach either
Click to expand...
How many times have you played T1, including pubs? Of those times, how often did either team deploy any sensors? How often did you play maps with more than one base sensor? I'll suggest to you that if you think about it, you might be accustomed to playing something like all-or-nothing already,
KP
 
Considering how many dajackals i saw, I think it is safe to say that most of the players in T1 did not exactly have a game manual that they could refer to about what the deployables actually did.

Only people who played in the first year ever experienced any of that anyways since clustering was a superior strategy to gearing up.
 
Back
Top