PDA

View Full Version : Temporary Prohibition of Outpost Turrets



Nidhogg
04-04-06, 17:03
Due to the current issues surrounding outpost turrets their use has been prohibited until further notice. This decision has been made in order to improve the quality and fairness of outpost fighting for both sides until such time as the issues have been resolved. The Gamemasters have been authorised to remove any and all turrets so please create an in-game call ticket or email helpdesk@neocron.com if you require their assistance. Also, we request that no further turrets be placed until further notice. Clans that ignore this instruction will be reported and action may be taken against them. This decision has been taken for the benefit of everyone involved and we appreciate your cooperation in this matter.

N

Tratos
04-04-06, 17:13
Apart from this only being dealt with now after almost a month since the patch that broke the turrets its nice to see action has now been taken and that it's on the launcher too which has been kept more up to date latley. Again nice to see.

Slight offtopic but i think the main website isn't updated with community information as much as it should be. -shrug-

Looking forward to a fix.

pabz
04-04-06, 17:47
woohhooo :lol:

cRazy-
04-04-06, 17:50
A wise decision.

ashley watts
04-04-06, 18:17
well i dont know how any other profession takes damage from turrets but for a tank they dont even do any damage, even the artillery ones but yes, its wise to make it even for both attacking and defending OP wars :)

-FN-
04-04-06, 19:16
Turrets become indestructible...
instead of fixing it, we ban turrets.

TL3 Heal becomes useless...
instead of fixing it, we leave it alone...

TL10 Heal becomes overpowered...
instead of fixing it, we leave it alone...

Ceres Cyclops are too easily damaged...
instead of fixing it, we 'close' the ceres lab dungeons...

Ceres Discs start dropping too much...
instead of fixing it, we 'close' the ceres mine dungeons...

KK still employs coders, right? It just happens to not look that way at the moment...

*sigh* I suppose this is better than leaving them.

Nidhogg
04-04-06, 19:27
All of those things you mention will be addressed properly as part of the overall upcoming balancing changes. We're trying to do away with bandaid solutions, so for now we have to live with them.

N

RusSki
04-04-06, 19:32
maybe if the same certian ppl (and i can guess who they were) send emails to KK about holy para, it will also get removed/banned.

Zheo
04-04-06, 19:33
Turrets become indestructible...
instead of fixing it, we ban turrets.

TL3 Heal becomes useless...
instead of fixing it, we leave it alone...

TL10 Heal becomes overpowered...
instead of fixing it, we leave it alone...

Ceres Cyclops are too easily damaged...
instead of fixing it, we 'close' the ceres lab dungeons...

Ceres Discs start dropping too much...
instead of fixing it, we 'close' the ceres mine dungeons...

KK still employs coders, right? It just happens to not look that way at the moment...

*sigh* I suppose this is better than leaving them.


You of all people should know that what the players notice/complain about takes KK months/years to realise/listen/fix.

NC has been running how long and it's only NOW they talk of balancing? Instead of having a flavour of the 3month overpower/nerf patching?

I'm not saying that it's their fault indeed im sure they work very hard and that things are difficult perhaps these things take longer than we reliese and that they have a limited staff/time to do things.

However better communication would solve alot of problems for example saying: "Yes TL 10 heal is overpowered we know this but rather than patch just that we're going to work on this, this and that and patch it all at once, please be patient with us we know it must be frustrating, we hope that the next patch will be released in 2-3 months, when we have a more accurate date you will."

RusSki
04-04-06, 19:35
However better communication would solve alot of problems for example saying: "Yes TL 10 heal is overpowered we know this but rather than patch just that we're going to work on this, this and that and patch it all at once, please be patient with us we know it must be frustrating, we hope that the next patch will be released in 2-3 months, when we have a more accurate date you will."

At one point comunication between us and them had a good feeling. But like most things they do its died off. Which is a shame cos i think nid was doing a great job of it

Nidhogg
04-04-06, 19:40
However better communication would solve alot of problems for example saying: "Yes TL 10 heal is overpowered we know this but rather than patch just that we're going to work on this, this and that and patch it all at once, please be patient with us we know it must be frustrating, we hope that the next patch will be released in 2-3 months, when we have a more accurate date you will."
Apart from the timescales, which aren't set in stone yet, I believe I pretty much just said that a couple of posts up. Some longstanding fundamental bugs have been fixed which has for the most part improved things even in the short term, but they've had a negative impact on one or two other systems. As I said above, rather than repeat the mistakes of patching those systems we'd rather wait until they are also properly fixed in line with our ongoing balancing efforts.

N

woOpin
04-04-06, 20:27
Well its about time turrents been unkillable and a certain clan using them to block every hackroom so they can hold ops was just stupid. But its a good call even though some people are whining saying its unfair turrents have been removed lol I mean how can this be unfair that there removed get some skill ffs.

kurai
04-04-06, 20:57
Thank christ - about bloody time.

Presumably someone @ KK knew that Codi was going to be on vacation. Did it really take till now to realise that the astoundingly obviously broken turret situation wasn't going to be fixed till he returned ?

This whole fucked up mess could have been solved with this announcement the day after the patch.

virgil caine
04-04-06, 22:23
At one point comunication between us and them had a good feeling. But like most things they do its died off. Which is a shame cos i think nid was doing a great job of it

What has changed, Nid seems to be communicating to me ?

l8m0n
05-04-06, 11:46
too little too late imo, server pops have droped alot since that patch and yes i know theres a "big" fix comin out soon but would be nice to fix some of the little things like turrets? not too hard wouldnt take a week to do and would make some people come back.

And the update for the forum wheres that? :rolleyes:

Brammers
05-04-06, 12:10
Ok patch came out on 10th March 2006. It was reported in the 154/155 bug thread on 16th March 2006.

And on the 4th April KK Finally get their act together and ban the use of turrets.

That's nearly 3 weeks to act on a reported problem. Granted the TL3/10 heal and the Ceres lab problem was acknowledged and dealt with by Dirus within a few days.

When KK don't act or communicate to players, the players start leave the game. Even if you say, "We don't have any news on X" is good enough, the total silent response to some problems is just unacceptable.

woOpin
08-04-06, 17:40
Yeah 3 weeks was poor Dirus got sick of the Help tickets spam :P

Seen as all DoY and All pro was at cy pretty much. Everyone in DoY just put tickets in my idea something needed to be done I guess only way is to show frustration in numbers to get somthing fixed but 3 weeks was way way too long.

Anyhow thanks for Dirus for going to every op removing every turrent must have taken a while :o

Dirus
08-04-06, 17:54
Anyhow thanks for Dirus for going to every op removing every turrent must have taken a while :o

Hours... People seem to love hiding them inside things.. Which is against the rules in the first place.

CMaster
08-04-06, 17:59
Hours... People seem to love hiding them inside things.. Which is against the rules in the first place.

Althought its not neciessarily deliberate. Are you aware of turret creep? That is that turrets that are placed will slowly edge their way in a certain direction, often through supposedly solid objects.

Spermy
08-04-06, 18:25
Hours... People seem to love hiding them inside things.. Which is against the rules in the first place.

Yet nothing was done way back when I posted up images with locations and owning clans? O_o

Deus Ex Machina
08-04-06, 23:18
Hours... People seem to love hiding them inside things.. Which is against the rules in the first place.
Well... is it?
don't misunderstand me, im not sure in which objects People hide Turrets, but the placement rules, as far as I found them, seem to be... well legally unstable? unclear? (hmm always easier to get messages across in the mothertongue)
From the rules of conduct:

15) You will not exploit any bug in the NEOCRON product or the NEOCRON Service to gain unfair advantage in the game and you will not communicate the existence of any such bug (either directly or through public posting) to any other user of the NEOCRON Service.
From the List of Prohibited ingame actions from the Homepage:

Dropping turrets in boxes/trees (or any other place that renders them untargetable ) or on outpost walls. Placing turrets on OP roofs is forbidden too.
From the end of that list:

This list will be continuously updated and is therefore subject to change at any time. Ignorance of these rules is not an acceptable defence.
This list is not subject in the rules of conduct - which makes the thing of "it is forbidden" very problematic, since no one ever agrees to this list, or is forced to read it - one agrees to to update on the homepage for changes of the rules of conduct, nothing else...
Another thing is "untargetable" - one can hide things, and they are still targetable, one way or another...

What everyone also did agree to though is that the rules of conduct are subject to change...

I hope i have not written to much of a mess, I just wanted to say that there are some things which are very unclear to someone who is new to the game, I remember how long I searched for the turret posting rules, they were really good hidden ;) (Sure I heard ingame about it, but nothing official is in the rules or elsewhere - e.g. putting a Turret on an Outpost Roof doesn't really seem to be a bug or else, although it's forbidden by the list)

So what I really wanted to say: It is very easy to make this legally more stable and also more transparent to the users...

P.S.: On the Homepage in Section "Community - Gamemaster Info" a "Lupus" is still mentioned - as far as I remember that is a little bit outdated (or whatever the fitting word would be)

Kame
09-04-06, 11:35
How could you ever enforce a rule about turrets emplacement in a game where the turreys move by themselves :confused:

Dont make me laugh any more.

Tesee
10-04-06, 12:56
i want a gat turret in my home !!

Kenpo
10-04-06, 16:08
Hours... People seem to love hiding them inside things.. Which is against the rules in the first place.
its also something that people have been doing for years, ive seen and been part of op fights were the turret placers would find the most inconvinient spots to place a turret.



How could you ever enforce a rule about turrets emplacement in a game where the turreys move by themselves

ahaha they still do that?

remember at one op watching 3 turrets slide all the way to the bottom of the hill.

though they would of sorted that but guess not.....

Trilaac
16-04-06, 16:09
hey guys, i got an idea.. how about you group together and try to make a game that's completely stable? No online game is ever completely stable, so stop nitpicking at Reakktor because they haven;t got it right. Yes, there are annoying little things, but just report them and they wil eventualy get round to fixing them, there are plenty of things that don't get done in the real world, no matter how many times you complain about them.

Trilaac
16-04-06, 16:14
Another thing is "untargetable" - one can hide things, and they are still targetable, one way or another...


starting weapon for a tank is a grenade launcher, and you can get rocket launchers. both these weapons have area of effect damage, so find the turret, or see it shooting out of something, and blast away at the general area.. you're sure to damage something. i used to go to sidestreets in doy with my grenade launcher and shoot grenades through doorways and kill 3 or 4 mutants at a time by getting damage to loads at once.

(but besides, see my post above)

FlashFF
16-04-06, 16:20
hey guys, i got an idea.. how about you group together and try to make a game that's completely stable? No online game is ever completely stable, so stop nitpicking at Reakktor because they haven;t got it right. Yes, there are annoying little things, but just report them and they wil eventualy get round to fixing them, there are plenty of things that don't get done in the real world, no matter how many times you complain about them.

I think most people complain because NC is a unique pay to play game with more bugs than a playerworlds RPG.

It seems to me like they dont need to fix bugs, because theres no competiton against this type of mmo.

athon
16-04-06, 16:21
I think most people complain because NC is a unique pay to play game with more bugs than a playerworlds RPG.

It seems to me like they dont need to fix bugs, because theres no competiton against this type of mmo.
That looks set to change when Fallen Earth comes out =D

Trilaac
16-04-06, 16:26
i ahven't heard of that game, but i remeber a year or so ago there was Face of Mankind, which was basically a rip-off of NC, i think that crashed into the dirt and failed too.
Also, Anarchy online was a nother cheap rip-off of NC, but that's stil going strong... last time i checked anyway (had a years free account from PCGamer).

also, i'm hoping to apply to KK this year if i fail first year Uni,maybe as a developer, since i got some crazy imagination stuck i my head, and i can find a solution to loads of prolems... some problems though, i'm not 21, and i don't speak german.

-FN-
15-05-06, 18:40
So, is this 'temporary prohibition' still in place?

CMaster
15-05-06, 18:48
With no patch to fix the reasons for the prohibition one can only presume so.

unreal
15-05-06, 18:48
Temporary: Lasting or existing only for a short time. (ie, not months)

Nidhogg
15-05-06, 19:02
Duration is not part of the meaning of temporary, it merely means impermanent. I think you'll find that your definition actually applies to the word ephemeral.

The prohibition will be lifted when it's safe to do so.

N

unreal
15-05-06, 19:13
It applies to both. I picked the definition of ephemeral merely because it describes it better. Here's what the Oxford English Dictionary has listed for temporary:

adjective: lasting for only a limited period.
— DERIVATIVES temporarily adverb temporariness noun.

— ORIGIN Latin temporarius, from tempus ‘time’.

If duration (ie, time) isn't part of the meaning, how would you determine what a "limited period" is?

Edit: Surely it would have taken a small tweak to make turrets damagable again.

Nidhogg
15-05-06, 19:33
It applies to both. I picked the definition of ephemeral merely because it describes it better.
No, you chose the definition of ephemeral because it describes what you wanted it to describe, not what we actually said. I'll try and find out if the fix is in the upcoming patch.

N

unreal
15-05-06, 19:46
Quite the opposite, which is why you didn't answer my question. ;) Enough said I think, let's wait for the patch to find out.

RogerRamjet
15-05-06, 19:52
Stop being pedantic :rolleyes:

Zheo
15-05-06, 21:30
Deus Ex Machina,

If you play a game it is *your* responsiblity to find and read the rules. I found them easily enough with the old and new website. I also found them very clear and easy to understand.

The part that says

"Dropping turrets in boxes/trees (or any other place that renders them untargetable ) or on outpost walls. Placing turrets on OP roofs is forbidden too."

How is that difficult to understand? Though if the turrets move into the place by themselves is obviously not the placers fault is it? So that rule does not apply, as it states that you cannot "place" or "Dropping" them into place is against the rules but i didnt read anything about it being against the rules for them to move into a prohibaity place by themselves.

Tratos
15-05-06, 21:39
Deus Ex Machina,

If you play a game it is *your* responsiblity to find and read the rules. I found them easily enough with the old and new website. I also found them very clear and easy to understand.

The part that says

"Dropping turrets in boxes/trees (or any other place that renders them untargetable ) or on outpost walls. Placing turrets on OP roofs is forbidden too."
You're barking up the wrong tree again mate ;)

The reason they're currently prohibited is due to the fact its impossible to destroy them due to something odd in patch 154/155 not the fact they get hidden in stuff, the latter problem would take a hell of a lot to prevent.Thats why the quoted rule is in existance, if a mechanic to prevent them being placed within other items existed the rule wouldnt be needed.

trigger hurt
11-06-06, 19:40
All of those things you mention will be addressed properly as part of the overall upcoming balancing changes. We're trying to do away with bandaid solutions, so for now we have to live with them.

N

How long does it take to fix the things he's listed there? I mean my account has been inactive for about a year now, save for the free period KK gave to check out their new changes, and the ceres mines are still closed?

Neocron, in all it's incarnations has been around for almost 4 years. The time to "do away with bandaid solutions" was about the time people started paying for the game.

Heavyporker
12-06-06, 05:16
I want to ask why mounting turrents on outpost roofs are banned.

I mean, artillery turrets are f'kin *worthless* if they're in direct line of sight of ground troops storming into the gate. The artillery turrets' ability to aggro wasn't all that great, if I remember rightly, unless you ran *RIGHT* up to one and tapped it. Then, yeah, it'd fire at your ass for kilometers out. I'd know.

Simply put, the artillery turret's non-standard type of firing (rounds are fired in an arc) and special damage ability (rounds are Area of Effect and Damage over Time) means the turrets need clear fields of fire (can't be near walls) and the ability to sense opponents before they get close enough to fire directly at the turret itself.

Hence, the only way to sensibly use artillery turrets would be to mount them on roofs, where they'd be almost guaranteed clear fields of fire, and if the roofs were near the outpost's outer walls, they can sense opponents coming up to the outpost.

ashley watts
12-06-06, 18:26
I rekon that Runners should be aloud to actually gun them, so then OP wars would be funner than they are, and they wont be invincible as you could just traget the gunner. :confused: Just an idea though

Mighty Max
12-06-06, 18:48
I want to ask why mounting turrents on outpost roofs are banned.


Maybe because there is no way to avoid them in that case for runners which does not want anything from the OP, but pass the zone or use the GR to get away.

unreal
12-06-06, 18:53
Errr yes there is? Just stay out of their range, and the genreps nearby the Outposts have roofs, and in most cases, the OP walls themselves will block the turrets line of sight, along with their ability to hit the target. OP walls are taller than they actually appear.

Edit @ Heavyporker: I'm confused as to why you're not allowed to place turrets on top of roofs as well. In general they're easier to see and easier to target than when they're on the ground. Other than shifting around now and then, which will be the same as they do on the "ground", I really don't see the problem with it.

Mighty Max
12-06-06, 19:09
Errr yes there is? Just stay out of their range, and the genreps nearby the Outposts have roofs, and in most cases, the OP walls themselves will block the turrets line of sight, along with their ability to hit the target. OP walls are taller than they actually appear.


How will the wall block the line of sight when they are on the roof?

And to the range? Let me just quote Heavy:


Then, yeah, it'd fire at your ass for kilometers out.


But i won't start on arguing about what range is acceptable and what not. The turrets have been abused to the max, therefor these rules have been established.

unreal
12-06-06, 19:30
Go stand on top of the OP wall and find out. Some sections are way wider, and higher than they appear (the equivalent of being invisible walls).

If those turrets have incredibly long range, then "abused to the max" is rubbish, it's just another case of Reakktor not being bothered (not to mention, it obviously wasn't tested to begin with if that's the case) to make the incredibly simple change to make the range similair to the other turrets . "kilometers" must be an extreme exaggeration.

Mr Kot
12-06-06, 22:04
Given the tactics used in some OP wars, i've often wondered why it is necessary to restrict turret use to within OP walls.

Surely the best defence would come from turrets outside an OP to prevent entry. All that needs preventing is the placing of turrets right on a zoneline.

The game mechanics don't allow the placing of turrets too near to GRs. In the vast majority of cases, where the turrets are programmed to attack a particular group of runners, those runners cannot GR into the OP anyway.

I vote for the old turret rules to be revoked. Let's have more options in outpost fights, not fewer.

Anyone disagree?

[VP]Orion
13-06-06, 06:25
I vote for the old turret rules to be revoked. Let's have more options in outpost fights, not fewer.

Anyone disagree?
I disagree, lets remove turrets from the game instead. They are almost never used to help defend when you cant come to defend, they are almost only used by dropping in the middle of OP wars to give the defending clan a BIG help. There were even PPUs that had constructing just so they could run out from the UG and survive long enough to drop a bunch of turrets.

Sure, if it took 15 secs where you had to be completely still and not being able to move, then it would be a different matter.

Heavyporker
13-06-06, 06:58
I speak from personal experience of an artillery turret's range. Years ago with my old clan R & D... Dear Crahn... the nostalgia is hammering me now... *sniff*...

Anyways... *sniff*... we set out to take Tescom once, but we found out it was a little heavily turreted than we ancipated. That didn't faze us, really. We thought we'd have some reinforcements coming. So I attacked an artillery turret in the open spot near the entry bulwark with a poison beam, making for really harsh stacking, when it started shooting at me. Well, the news came in that our backup wasn't coming on time, so we (my squad) left the entry bulwark and started out for the GR. You know, that huge concrete hut *way* off in the distance?

Well, that sucker was hammering me ALL THE DAMN WAY TO THE GR HUT. I was practically blind from the blue haze.


But hey... that was fair play. I attacked the thing. It was acting according to its programming.

An artillery turret only aggros if you come into sensor range. If you shoot it, it'll keep shooting at you until you zone, just like any other damn thing ingame.

The problem is when PPUs come into the mix. I mean, fuck... 12 artillery turrets could be firing at you full tilt, but one shitty PPU with a blessed heal can keep you alive with no trouble.


I love the idea of artillery turrets. It's just that they have a bit too much going against them already. The official no-no of putting turrets on the roof means a big negative to artillery turrets.

Nidhogg
13-06-06, 10:34
If all goes well you should be able to use turrets again today. ;) Patch incoming...

N

Pantho
13-06-06, 10:48
If all goes well you should be able to use turrets again today. ;) Patch incoming...

N


Sex Now? Or Sex l8r?

SnowCrash
13-06-06, 10:49
Sex Now? Or Sex l8r?

Nope. No sex for Nidhogg until marriage!!ONE!! :p :D

Nidhogg
13-06-06, 10:59
Nope. No sex for Nidhogg until marriage!!ONE!! :p :D
LOL, phew, safe. :p

N

Pantho
13-06-06, 11:02
*cries*

Ok, I Do, Hope you dont want a church marriage, i aint paying for that.

-edit, I just thound out what a Nidhogg is, Thats it Marriage off. its over Nid, Sorry....

http://hem.passagen.se/bifrostfolket/Nidhogg.jpg

Mr Kot
13-06-06, 14:43
Orion']they are almost only used by dropping in the middle of OP wars to give the defending clan a BIG help.You've just given the best reason to keep turrets. It's been said before that the attacking clan in an opfight has the advantage, especially of speed and surprise if properly organised. Giving the defenders an advantage, even if to buy some time while reinforcements arrive, would be classed as 'balancing' wouldn't it?


Orion']There were even PPUs that had constructing just so they could run out from the UG and survive long enough to drop a bunch of turrets.Would be ideal protection against zerg attacks, especially if there is only a single defender. Again, this could buy valuable time to call in reinforcements. Like i said, we want more options in fights, not fewer. We don't want fights that are over in 5 minutes now, do we?

CMaster
13-06-06, 14:46
I do read the 'cronicle and VotR - pretty much as soon as any new articles come out. It was more the allies than the enemies that seemed odd - although I suppose working with the two weapons supplier factions makes sense for mercs.

And yeah, Turrets shouldnt be able to fight on their own. They are there to assist defenders.

giga191
13-06-06, 15:55
/set delete_thread 1?

Nidhogg
13-06-06, 16:05
Thread closed.

N