Comtech Thought

[Earlydawn]

I think that the addition of the Advanced Technician and Field Engineer certs put too much emphasis on Engineering in general.

Thus, I am proposing that the first level hacking cert be the prerequisite for Comtech. It's logical to assume that such a cert would be less about the mechanical and engineering aspects of such a job, and probably closer to data-based skills.

Thoughts? Could you agree with this, Hayoo?

[Hayoo]

Woah, I somehow missed this post. My bad. :(

The original bent was to have a Technician cert (someone versed in electronics hardware), then branch it off into comtech (someone versed in electronic communications) and adv tech (someone versed in sensor electronics and such).

To make things easier I bundled Technician into Engineer so that the cert become an all-around expertise in Mechanical and Electronics hardware. And then from there, branch off into comtech and adv technician.

Hacking as a pre-req would give the comtech a different feel than the Radio Man bent I was trying to convey. I understand the whole eaves dropping on comm channels is like hacking, but a hacker wouldn't be expected to set rally points, retrieve HART schedules, and such. If comtechs only eavesdropped or jammed radio, then yeah I'd go for hacking as a pre-req. But cause of the other stuff the comtech does (data-processing, not just data-retrieval), an engineer/technician would be a more logical choice at this point.

Now having said that, it would be nice to have more options and branches for the Hacking cert, but it's such a specialized field like Medic, that might be hard to do.

One solution might be to rename Hacking to Technician, give them the ability to transfer NTUs and such, and then branch Adv Hacking, Adv Technician, and Cometch off of that. This would leave Engineering with Combat Engineering and Field Engineering.

Essentially we'd be creating a split between the Mechanical and Electronics aspects of technicians.

[DviddLeff]

Id rather see Comtech being from Hacking than from Egineering, it feels better due to the eavesdropping and location finding abilities.

[Hayoo]

Yeah, the more I think about it, the more I'm leaning toward that route. But to make sure the adv tech abilities have a place, I'd need to rename Hacking to Technician. I don't think people would mind. They'd know that the Technician cert allowed faster hacking and transfering of NTUs, as well as being a re-req for Adv Hacking, Comtech or Adv Tech. Makes sense to me.

[Earlydawn]

This seems like a great choice. Both Technician and Engineer have multiple branches of specialization, and that's good for game life.

Now we just need some branches for Medic.

[DviddLeff]

Sounds good Hayoo

[Hayoo]

Possible Cert trees:

Medium Assault
- Field Assault (towable equipment and weapons) - could go to Engineer tree instead.
- Special Assault (area of effect weapons)
- Heavy Assault (heavy weapons)
- Sniper (sniper rifle)
- Anti-vehicular (anti-vehicle weapons

Engineer (repairs troops and vehicles, deploys basic emplacements)
- Combat Engineer (deploys ACEs and advanced emplacements, access to CE vehicle)
- Field Engineer (deploys weapons emplacements, access to CE vehicle)

Technician (faster hacking, NTU transfer equipment)
- Adv Hacking (hacks enemy systems and vehicles)
- Adv Technician (alarm systems, vehicle system upgrades)
- ComTech (encode/decode transmissions, intel gathering)

Medic (heals troops)
- Adv Medic (heals/revives troops, something else special?) edited
- Field Medic (heals troops, access to Medical vehicle which creates med-evac tent and revives nearby troops) edited

(still working out how Medic tree works, subject to suggestions and changes).

[Earlydawn]

Hey, don't forget that the basic engineer can deploy the "primitive" emplacements.

Other then that, looks good. I don't think field assault should be a "weapon" cert, though, unless we're talking SAW / MG42 concept guns.

I'll see if I can think up anything additional for medics.

[Hayoo]

Originally posted by CDL-Earlydawn@Sep 13 2004, 11:20 PM
Hey, don't forget that the basic engineer can deploy the "primitive" emplacements.

whoops. quite right. fixing it.

Maybe I should take out revive from Field Medic and take away the ability to access the Med evac vehicle from the Adv Medic. A full medic would then cert Medic (3), then Adv and Field for (4). ...Maybe

edit: I'd still like Adv Medics to get some kind of vehicle for their troubles. Maybe with a Tech Plant they get the Medevac Aircraft or something.

[DviddLeff]

[2 cert points] - Basic Medic (heals troops)
[3 cert points] - Adv Medic (Revives troops via Medical Applicator)
[3 cert points] - Field Medic (access to Medical vehicle which creates med-evac tent and revives nearby troops)

I think thats fine the way it is, ad meds can revive in the field and inside bases, Fmeds can revive from distance, in safety, but costs extra leg work for the revived trooper.

Now with Engineering Im not so sure, Id rather the Field Engineers given the ability to lay down emplacements (of all kinds) with the Engineering vehicle, while CE stays exactly how it is (but with the details of your deployables on the hud of course). Standard engineering can also swap out turret barrels in a Tribes style for something more useful.

[2 cert points] Basic Engineer (repairs troops and vehicles can swap out turret barrels)
[3 cert points] - Combat Engineer (deploys ACEs)
[3 cert points] - Field Engineer (deploys emplacements, access to CE vehicle)

[Earlydawn]

Logically, the Adv Medicsshould get stimpacks / regen patches and other items, not Field Medics.

Field medic, imo, should be the "logistical medic" setting up medivac stations with corrdination from the advanced Engineer classes, while the Adv Medic is the specialist who goes in to actually medivac them or revive them. A basic medic is just the squad guy who wants to keep his teammates alive.

Good thing we've got going, here.

[DviddLeff]

Yeah stim packs would work well, boosting the players stamina up to decent levels after they get killed.

[Hayoo]

Originally posted by CDL-Earlydawn@Sep 14 2004, 02:10 AM
Logically, the Adv Medicsshould get stimpacks / regen patches and other items, not Field Medics.

Field medic, imo, should be the "logistical medic" setting up medivac stations with corrdination from the advanced Engineer classes, while the Adv Medic is the specialist who goes in to actually medivac them or revive them. A basic medic is just the squad guy who wants to keep his teammates alive.

Good thing we've got going, here.

All sounding good to me guys.

Updated Cert trees:

Medium Assault [2] - (assault rifles)
[3] - Special Assault (area of effect weapons)
[4] - Heavy Assault (heavy weapons)
[3] - Sniper (sniper rifle)
[3] - Anti-vehicular (anti-vehicle weapons
[3] - Field Assault (towable equipment and weapons) - could go to Engineer tree instead depending if we view towables as weapons skill or equipment skill.

Engineer [2] - (repairs troops and vehicles, can deploy basic cover)
[3] - Combat Engineer (deploys ACEs, acces to CE vehicle, can deploy up to 2 standard emplacements excluding weapons emplacements)
[3] - Field Engineer (access to CE vehicle, can deploy up to 3 standard or advanced emplacements)

note: Field Engineer could have CE as a pre-requesite, in which case FE would be [2] or even [1]. Thoughts?

Technician [2] - (improved hacking, NTU transfer equipment)
[3] - Adv Hacking (hacks enemy systems and vehicles)
[3] - Adv Technician (alarm systems, vehicle system upgrades)
[3] - ComTech (encode/decode transmissions, intel gathering)

note: Could include evregade's RID into either ComTech ability (due to it's intel skills) or in a seperate cert [1] with any of the three as a pre-req. Thoughts?

Medic [2] - (heals troops)
[3] - Adv Medic (heals/revives troops, can acquire stimpacks and regen patches)
[3] - Field Medic (heals troops, access to Medical vehicle which creates med-evac tent and revives nearby troops; If Tech Plant connected, access to small Medical air vehicle which revives nearby troops or medevacs them to nearby med station)

note: Field Medic could have AM as pre-req, in which case FM would be [2] or even [1]. Thoughts?

notes:

Originally I was to bring Field Medic down to 2 because all they get over the Medic is the ability to create the tent (with item terminals) and a defensless vehicle. But then I remember the air version so I've kept it at 3. This way, anyone who has the guts to go "all Medic" gets 2 vehicles and the ability to create a support station in the field, without having to go Engineer or Transport.

Due to the types of emplacements availabe, I have allowed CE to place up to 2 standard emplacements because of their logistical/non-offensive abilities: storage, radar, communications, etc.

Field Engineers, on the other hand can deploy these same emplacements, in addition to placing advanced emplacements like artillery, AA nest, AV gun, etc.

I've omitted engineers swapping out turret barrels at it conflicted with the OHQ turret upgrade ability. There's ways around it but I haven't devoted thought to it yet.

[Earlydawn]

Good thing we've got going, here. All sounding good to me guys.

Updated Cert trees:

Medium Assault [2] - (assault rifles)
[3] - Special Assault (area of effect weapons)
[4] - Heavy Assault (heavy weapons)
[3] - Sniper (sniper rifle)
[3] - Anti-vehicular (anti-vehicle weapons
[3] - Field Assault (towable equipment and weapons) - could go to Engineer tree instead depending if we view towables as weapons skill or equipment skill.
[i]I think that Field Assault should be added to the vehicles catagory, the prerequisite being either Assault Buggy or Ground Transport. (The Two vehicles that can tow them... basic Deliverer and the assault buggies.[/quote]

Engineer [2] - (repairs troops and vehicles, can deploy basic cover)
[3] - Combat Engineer (deploys ACEs, access to CE vehicle, can deploy up to 2 standard emplacements excluding weapons emplacements)
[3] - Field Engineer (access to CE vehicle, can deploy up to 3 standard or advanced emplacements)

note: Field Engineer could have CE as a pre-requesite, in which case FE would be [2] or even [1]. Thoughts?

Nah, keep it an individual tree. Makes for more variety.

Technician [2] - (improved hacking, NTU transfer equipment)
[3] - Adv Hacking (hacks enemy systems and vehicles)
[3] - Adv Technician (alarm systems, vehicle system upgrades)
[3] - ComTech (encode/decode transmissions, intel gathering)

note: Could include evregade's RID into either ComTech ability (due to it's intel skills) or in a seperate cert [1] with any of the three as a pre-req. Thoughts?

Nah, attach it to Adv Technician.

Medic [2] - (heals troops)
[3] - Adv Medic (heals/revives troops, can acquire stimpacks and regen patches)
[3] - Field Medic (heals troops, access to Medical vehicle which creates med-evac tent and revives nearby troops; If Tech Plant connected, access to small Medical air vehicle which revives nearby troops or medevacs them to nearby med station)

note: Field Medic could have AM as pre-req, in which case FM would be [2] or even [1]. Thoughts?
Same opinion as with Field Engineer. Keep it seperate for more choices.

notes:

Originally I was to bring Field Medic down to 2 because all they get over the Medic is the ability to create the tent (with item terminals) and a defensless vehicle. But then I remember the air version so I've kept it at 3. This way, anyone who has the guts to go "all Medic" gets 2 vehicles and the ability to create a support station in the field, without having to go Engineer or Transport.
Seems logical.

Due to the types of emplacements availabe, I have allowed CE to place up to 2 standard emplacements because of their logistical/non-offensive abilities: storage, radar, communications, etc.
Question: What are we considering "basic" and "advanced" emplacements? My earlier comment was refering to the small tech-boxes and firing slot walls. Who gets to deploy those? I'd suggest CE, since small, basic emplacements is their thing.

That way, Any old grunt could deploy the small cover with storage. An engineer could place either the big one or the small one, either of which with the attached MG. I'd also reccomend allowing the engineer to deploy the noncombat emplacements, since we have two different paths that engis can take.

Combat engineers could deploy their regular stuff, and primitive cover (Tech-sandbags, slotted firing walls.) that would be allowed in base walls. Finally, Field Enigneers could do the whole shabang as far as emplacements go. If they wanted the smaller stuff, they'd need Combat Engineer too.

Field Engineers, on the other hand can deploy these same emplacements, in addition to placing advanced emplacements like artillery, AA nest, AV gun, etc.

I've omitted engineers swapping out turret barrels at it conflicted with the OHQ turret upgrade ability. There's ways around it but I haven't devoted thought to it yet.

[Earlydawn]

Oh, and I'd just like to apologize for the incredibly ugly post. I like PSU's reply system better, TBH.

I'd also like to comment that this makes full-time support a MUCH more involved job, which I love. Combine that with more to do (Urban Areas, Empire Tech Levels, OHQs), and this could *easily* be the best MMO on the market.

My ideal character:

- Medium Assault
- Engineering
- Field Engineering
- Combat Engineering
- Technician
- Adv. Technician
- ComTech
- Medical

My ultimate support player. The disadvantage would be I would be vehicle-less, but hey. I consider that a fair tradeoff to being able to deploy firebases by myself and still be able to upgrade vehicles and gather intel.

[Hayoo]

Does the post look any better? Made my words blue so people would see your suggestions better. I haven't read all the comments yet, have to go grab something to eat. I'll be back.

[Earlydawn]

Yeah, much. Thanks. And please note I slipped one in since the blue and your last post, boss :D

[Edit: Duh, I guess you noticed that since you helped me. I can't think straight tonight.]

And just one more thing that needs adressing, could you finalize how many emplacements / primitives each engi class gets? I'd suggest:

Basic Grunt: 1 Emplacement (Can only build the smaller lockbox cover anyway)

Engineer: 2 Emplacements (I'd like this since I'm suggesting that they can build the noncombat emplacements. So they could set up, hypothetically... let's say, one of the 180-Covers, plus a Command/Communication emplacement)

Combat Engineer: 2 Emplacements, plus their regular alotment of the original deployables, Plus five of any combination of primitive, direct damage baracades (Tech-sandbags, slotted firing walls). Additionally, they gain the ability to slap a machinegun on any lockbox covers.

Field Engineers: 3 Emplacements. Granted access to 360-weapon emplacements. Gains access to Construction Vehicle, which speeds up noncombat emplacement construction, and is REQUIRED for 360 weapon emplacements.

There's my take on things. If any of this is confusing, let me know.

[Hayoo]

I think that Field Assault should be added to the vehicles catagory, the prerequisite being either Assault Buggy or Ground Transport. (The Two vehicles that can tow them... basic Deliverer and the assault buggies.

I hadn't considered that before. Good thinking. :)

note: Field Engineer could have CE as a pre-requesite, in which case FE would be [2] or even [1]. Thoughts?

Nah, keep it an individual tree. Makes for more variety.

Hmm. I can do that, though I'll have to tweak a few things. I can also have any survaillance equipment going to Adv Technician so they can be known to handle Security, Survaillance, and System Upgrades.

Question: What are we considering "basic" and "advanced" emplacements? My earlier comment was refering to the small tech-boxes and firing slot walls. Who gets to deploy those? I'd suggest CE, since small, basic emplacements is their thing.

Basic 90 cover with no storage and tech-boxes - Any grunt, ENG, CE, or FE (entrenching tool)
Larger 180 cover has storage and MG attached - Pre-req: ENG, CE, or FE (entrenching tool)
Standard emplacement (previously called adv emplacement) - Pre-req: CE or FE (CE vehicle)
Advanced 360 emplacements (prev. called wep emplacement) - Pre-req: FE (CE vehicle)

I'd also reccomend allowing the engineer to deploy the noncombat emplacements, since we have two different paths that engis can take.

I'd like to keep the standard non-combat emplacements for the CE because of the sheer support power some of them possess. Plus it's more of a construction skill than mechanical. Plus to place one, the ENG would suddenly gain access to the CE vehicle. That would be quite a buff for choosing a 2 cert skill. Both the standard and advanced emplacements (the 360 dirt mounds with tent or weapon) require the CE vehicle to construct.

I can keep FE special in that they can create standard and advanced emplacements but they can't lay mines, sensors, and stuff.

My ultimate support player. The disadvantage would be I would be vehicle-less, but hey. I consider that a fair tradeoff to being able to deploy firebases by myself and still be able to upgrade vehicles and gather intel.

Actually, Early, you'd get the Combat Engineering Vehicle, remember? :) You just wouldn't have an offensive vehicle.

And yes, with all of those certs you would be a formidable trooper and extremely valued asset to your empire, by being able to:

Hack faster than standard trooper.
Lay mines, sensors, explosives, and sentry turrets.
Place alarm systems in a base.
Repair vehicles and upgrade their systems.
Heal troopers.
Encode and Decode Enemy/Friendly transmissions.
Pinpoint location of enemy commanders based on transmissions.
Refuel NTU Silos and AMSs.
Deploy Command Posts, Radar stations, Supply posts, Service stations, field guns, SAM sites, MG nests, Lookout posts, and mortars with your CE vehicle.
Sweep mines with your CE vehicle.
View HART, Respawn, and Rally Point information.

:)

And just one more thing that needs adressing, could you finalize how many emplacements / primitives each engi class gets?

Basic Grunt: 1 Basic 90 cover (no lockbox), or 1 tech box (using entrenching tool). Cert Example: 1 basic cover near backdoor of base.

Engineer: 2 basic cover (with lockbox), tech boxes, or larger 180 cover aka MG nest (using entrenching tool). Cert Example: 1 180 MG nest facing north, 1 basic cover facing south.

Combat Engineer: 3 basic/large cover (using entrenching tool) and 2 standard emplacements (using CE Vehicle), plus ACEs. I guess I could allow them to put an MG on a basic cover, I'll have to toy with that. Cert Example: 3 MG nests surrounding a Command Post and Support station (NTU recharger). Mines, spitfires, sensors all around.

Field Engineers: 3 basic/large cover (using entrenching tool) and 3 emplacements, either standard or 360 advanced emplacements (using CE vehicle). Example: 1 double MG nest, 1 100mm field gun, and 1 SAM Site guarding a Command Post. No mines or sensors, cause the FE can't place ACEs.

That's what I'm envisioning so far, but it's subject to change depending on other factors.

(edit: Grunts cannot create lockbox covers, only engineers and up).

[Earlydawn]

Okay. My only complaint is I imagined the tech-boxes and slotted firing walls (the direct-damage barriers) to be Combat Engineer benefits, and much more numerous then any of the lockbox covers or the large emplacements, plus you could build them in base walls.

How do you feel about that?

Now all we need is a finalized list of all the emplacements, what they do, and how they relate to the other concepts. Then we can debate that. But I understand you're a busy man, so we understand if that takes some time.

As for the CE vehicle, I didn't count that because I'd imagine it would be slow.

[Hayoo]

Okay. My only complaint is I imagined the tech-boxes and slotted firing walls (the direct-damage barriers) to be Combat Engineer benefits, and much more numerous then any of the lockbox covers or the large emplacements, plus you could build them in base walls.

I just figured since there are more grunts and engineers than combat engineers, we'd get more variety of cover in the field. I think I have only engineers and up able to make the lockbox covers too, which take longer (and more juice?) to create than the tech-boxes. Still working that out.

(edit: went back and made sure grunts couldn't make lockboxes. Tech boxes are easily produced but conspicuous on terrain so I've left it creatable by grunts. So many variables to keep track of. This might change yet again.)

Now all we need is a finalized list of all the emplacements, what they do, and how they relate to the other concepts.

Yup, that's currently in the queue and I'll be devoting what graphics time I have to that project.

As for the CE vehicle, I didn't count that because I'd imagine it would be slow.

In travel mode it would move about as fast as a Prowler. In CE mode it would move slower.

[Hayoo]

By the way, I updated the cert section on Idealab to match the latest decision to turn Hacking into Technician and then have it branch off into Adv Hack, Adv Tech, and Comtech.

[Earlydawn]

You agree that the "Primitive" covers (Tech Boxes, Slotted Blast Walls) should be buildable within base walls, as long as they don't block doors?

Also, I think basic grunts should have a choice of the Tech-Box cover, and one 90 Degree cover with storage. That would be helpful for holding one position, even for a basic soldier. I'd reccomend this:

-Grunt: Can build 1 Techbox or Slotted Wall Cover, or One Lockbox 90 degree cover.

-Engineer: Can build any combination of two 90 and 180 covers, and two primitive covers.

-Combat Engineer: Can build 3 Covers of any combination (Two 180s, one 180 and one 90, two 90s...), plus one support emplacement and three primitive covers, along with regular ACE stuff. Also gains the option to use ACEs to attach a machinegun to the 90 and 180 covers. Gains CE vehicle.

-Field Engineer: Can build and combination of three covers, plus three primitive covers. Can also build two weapon emplacements, and two support emplacements. Gains CE vehicle.

[Hayoo]

You agree that the "Primitive" covers (Tech Boxes, Slotted Blast Walls) should be buildable within base walls, as long as they don't block doors?

Well...actually, I can't really agree to that because people will use it to block entrances to a base or movement through the courtyard. I've actually said all along that covers and emplacements can't be built in courtyards. There are tons of covers and corners within the base already, I don't think adding more is such a good idea with the current facilities.

Also, remember I said slotted walls wouldn't be in the main release. A grunt could just as well build a basic cover since they're about the same height. The slotted wall would be a bit redundant.

Also, I think basic grunts should have a choice of the Tech-Box cover, and one 90 Degree cover with storage. That would be helpful for holding one position, even for a basic soldier.

Well each grunt only gets to build one cover, either the quick box cover or better 90 degree cover. I want grunts, untrained in fortification, to work together to create 180 and 360 degrees of cover.

I was getting myself confused before with all these numbers, but I referenced my design doc to refresh me:

Basic Grunt: (1 cover w/entrenching tool)

OR


Engineer: (2 cover w/entrenching tool)
I'd rather restrict Engies to 2 total objects, rather than 4.

OR OR



Field Medic: (1 Medical Tent w/entrenching tool)




Combat Engineer: (2 cover w/entrenching tool and 2 standard emplacements w/CE Vehicle)
I'd rather CE's be restricted to 4 total objects, rather than 7.

OR OR

plus




Field Engineers: (2 cover w/entrenching tool and 3 standard OR advanced emplacements w/CE Vehicle)
I'd like FE's to be restricted to creation of 5 total objects, rather than 10.

OR OR

plus


Unofficial Terms:

Box cover - quick and dirty to make, limited coverage
90 cover (basic) - relatively quick to make, broader coverage
180 cover (larger) - longest to make with entrenching tool, widest cover. ability to upgrade it with attached MG

support (standard) emplacement - non-offensive, save for double MG emplacement
weapon (advanced) emplacement - offensive/defensive

[evregade]

Ooohh I had an idea, a branch of Adv Medical, Combat Medic could have the ability to use thier Medical Applicator by firing into the decon station of the ams, which would spread out the healing to everyone within the bubble, it would repair the same speed, and to make up for it it would drain faster.

*IE- 1 person in bubble, normal

- 3 people in bubble, heal rate- normal, heal juice drain rate x3

This would allow them to use AMSes as healing points.

*Heal 2x as fast as an adv medic, using 1/2 as much med juice.

*Also they could use thier medical applicator to release nanites that release toxins into the bloodstream rather than repair the tissue damage, this means that if they are attacked while healing, they dont have to whip out a gun, they can run to the enemy and stuff him full of biotoxins, sort of a long lasting plasma effect with low damages on hit, able to kill if held on the target for about 4 seconds (like melee booster knifing) Spraying them once would take off 25 hp total, so 4 sprays would kill (5 damage immidiatly, 20 over time)

So to get this it would be...

3 certs- Medical/ 2 certs- Adv Medical/ 2 certs- Combat Medic

[DviddLeff]

Liking the pics of the barricades Hayoo, helped me understand what you guys were talking about a lot :lol:

Im not too sure about giving basic grunts the power to make defences though, kinda weakens the Engy skill tree, like the Hacker Tree at the moment, Basic Hacking is hardly used without ad hack it seems, as everyone can hack, and all Basic Hack can do is speed up the hack and hack lockers.

Back to a few posts back, I agree that things like Ad med, Field med, etc should just have a prequisit of Basic Medical, rather than being dependant on each other, that way we see people filling the role they want to fill, rather than being forced to get say Ad med when they want to be a Field med, not using the ad med skills.