Discussion: GamePlay and Units Ideas

That's definitely a fantastic idea, plus, I'd say the Littoral Combat Ship is a perfect example of a ship we want to include in TAOW.

We are planning at least about 2 types of Frigate-sized (or Corvette to Frigate sized) ships per faction, each one with their own properties, the LCS is the perfect US counterpart.

Usually there'll be a more "anti-aircraft dedicated" Frigate (which is also equipped for standard anti-ship roles and medium off-shore support), the other "Frigate" option will be specialized on a type of warfare, the LCS is a perfect example.

The modules idea is fantastic though I think we could need to "group" some if it's capabilities (making 2 in 1) and/or include a specialized upgrade.

The DDG-1000, though it'll be formidable in all kinds of warfare, it's more of a "multimission Destroyer" and thus it won't have a unique armament configuration which would allow it to do a specialized LCS role (like supporting Spec Ops from much closer ranges, not to mention it would be a perfect transport ship for helicopters such as the Venom or Sea Hawk (a lighter and more agile counterpart of the heavier Amphibious Assault Ships so to speak).

I recommended the LCS some time ago, and in my opinion it's a perfect ship to be included (specially as a "modular" ship with several specialized capabilities, while the other US Frigate would do more "conventional" roles like long range AA.

I like your ideas. It's a nice combination of ways to sort of blend all the ships naval roles in the fleet in that way.

I would have to say that this new modular LCS frigate would be sort of be the crown jewel of the ships in the mod because of the multi-roles it could play in the game.

One thing I'd like to bring up though as an idea, and I don't know if the Overlord logic can be coded in this way, but in the article that I read and posted, it mentioned that the modules are interchangeable at a port within usually 24 hours or so.

I was wondering if the Overlord logic could be coded, where I could change the module while out at sea, but suffer a long term EMP like strike to disable the ship, in order to simulate the time it would take to change the mission modules out? (or some similar type of idea to simulate the time it takes to change a module)

I like your ideas. It's a nice combination of ways to sort of blend all the ships naval roles in the fleet in that way.

Thanks , we diversified the ship's roles while keeping ZH limitations in mind (that's why we have to limit larger vessels such as Destroyers and Cruisers , the standard warships will be lighter Corvettes, followed by the "Medium" Frigates and then the heavier and heavily armed Destroyers and Cruisers (there will be many smaller and special ships in the middle of all those fighting classes, some will need to be unlocked via Rank or even by General Point).

I would have to say that this new modular LCS frigate would be sort of be the crown jewel of the ships in the mod because of the multi-roles it could play in the game.

As a matter of fact, the LCS would be a perfect "special" counterpart of some "special" ships we already selected for the other factions.

After an analysis of the possible role of the LCS in game, I'd say it would be a prime candidate as a special General Point unlock (a "special unit" so to speak), while the standard Frigate would be unlocked by standard ranking.

One thing I'd like to bring up though as an idea, and I don't know if the Overlord logic can be coded in this way, but in the article that I read and posted, it mentioned that the modules are interchangeable at a port within usually 24 hours or so.

I was wondering if the Overlord logic could be coded, where I could change the module while out at sea, but suffer a long term EMP like strike to disable the ship, in order to simulate the time it would take to change the mission modules out? (or some similar type of idea to simulate the time it takes to change a module)

That's a very good idea, in fact, we also have an idea of ships being able to "repair themselves" (think of the ships fighting personnel being rerouted for repair duties), which will basically turn the ships "offline" for a set period of time (depending on the longevity and extensiveness of repairs).

Even though, we may only include that on larger warships like Frigates, Destroyers, Cruisers and most of all: Aircraft Carriers (which slowly auto-repair themselves, kind of what happens to the US's HQ in ZH).

The catch is connecting the module change with the offline/EMP effect (it may be possible, but we'll have to take a look first ).

Snake wrote: That's a very good idea, in fact, we also have an idea of ships being able to "repair themselves" (think of the ships fighting personnel being rerouted for repair duties), which will basically turn the ships "offline" for a set period of time (depending on the longevity and extensiveness of repairs).Even though, we may only include that on larger warships like Frigates, Destroyers, Cruisers

That's a great concept. I like it for most of these ships, but...

Snake wrote: ... and most of all: Aircraft Carriers (which slowly auto-repair themselves, kind of what happens to the US's HQ in ZH).

... having an "offline" status because of personnel rerouting for the carrier doesn't exactly fit in this case, in my opinion, unless the carrier is heavily damaged (below 50% health in the game). The reason I say this, is because of the crew consists of a ship's company of 3,200 and an air wing of 2,480 people. A good chunk of this is normal on board trained damage control personnel, as well as non-critical operations personnel, that could be rerouted to damage control duties, all while still performing normal (or semi-normal) carrier air operations. (Dependent of course on how bad, and exactly where the damage occurred)

I would recommend for game purposed (if it can be coded in this way) that the carrier goes in to "offline" status below 50% health.

... having an "offline" status because of personnel rerouting for the carrier doesn't exactly fit in this case, in my opinion, unless the carrier is heavily damaged (below 50% health in the game). The reason I say this, is because of the crew consists of a ship's company of 3,200 and an air wing of 2,480 people. A good chunk of this is normal on board trained damage control personnel, as well as non-critical operations personnel, that could be rerouted to damage control duties, all while still performing normal (or semi-normal) carrier air operations. (Dependent of course on how bad, and exactly where the damage occurred)

Actually, our initial Carrier repair method is different than the one on Destroyers/Cruisers, it was to have two initial "speeds" of repair (each one would hopefully have different effects).

The maximum limit of recovery (after the ship was damaged) would be about 75 if not even 50% (it couldn't reach the 100% again, remember the Mammoth Tank from Red Alert? It could repair itself after it's health dropped below 50%, and it couldn't repair itself any further than that value, further repairs would require external intervention like a Repair Depot (Repair Building)).

I would recommend for game purposed (if it can be coded in this way) that the carrier goes in to "offline" status below 50% health.

Hopefully we can create a similar method, about the "speeds" of recovery I mentioned earlier, one would do small repairs (basic repairs, very light) and critical repairs after the Carrier's "health" dropped to extremely low levels which would (if possible) turn it offline.

More recent "rethinking" on the Carrier's recovery will probably even lower the maximum recovery limit so players will focus on it's defense (rather than "abandoning" it), since the Carrier is the Flagship, the Heart of the Player's Armada.

So... the carrier won't go into operationally "offline" mode until when? Like 40% health or something?

I mean like I said before, air operations (for the most) part can potentially continue as normal while the ship is being repaired. I would hate to see all air ops, ship movement, & ship defense come to a complete stop (go completely "offline" somewhere above 40% to 50% health) based solely on ops crews being diverted to damage control for ship repair. I'm just having trouble with that thought based on a crew complement of over 5000+.

A random critical hit in a vital area of the ship at any damage level I could see most (if not all ops) going offline for that reason alone (and since you have a randomizer you may want to investigate the potential of that idea), but not for total ops crew reassignment that would fully stop all shipboard operations just so everyone goes and does damage control. I don't see that happening until a dangerously low health level has occurred to the carrier during the game, in my opinion. Then it's every man grab a bucket, and start bailing. lol

I like your idea of the carrier not fully recovering until it returns to the shipyard, or other repair facility. That definately adds realism to the operations.

Tusker2Zero wrote:So... the carrier won't go into operationally "offline" mode until when? Like 40% health or something?

Well, if so then it'll be a bit lower (more like 25% probably), though it's just a theory, the coding phase will be the true challenge (so we aren't even sure if it'll be included).

Even the standard Destroyer/Cruiser repairing process is still being "developed", the Carrier's repair will be sort of a "byproduct".

Tusker2Zero wrote:I mean like I said before, air operations (for the most) part can potentially continue as normal while the ship is being repaired. I would hate to see all air ops, ship movement, & ship defense come to a complete stop (go completely "offline" somewhere above 40% to 50% health) based solely on ops crews being diverted to damage control for ship repair. I'm just having trouble with that thought based on a crew complement of over 5000+.

Yeah, if the carrier is offline, then it'll have to be on a really bad shape (critical damage), if it is slightly or even moderately damaged, then all operations and ship defense will work normally.

Speaking of the ship defenses, the carrier itself won't be "offensive", the weaponry it'll carry is normally Long Range AA or Point Defense (close range) Close-In Weapon Systems (CIWS) which in addition to targeting enemy fighters is able to shoot down enemy ASM's (Anti-Ship Missiles).

Tusker2Zero wrote:A random critical hit in a vital area of the ship at any damage level I could see most (if not all ops) going offline for that reason alone (and since you have a randomizer you may want to investigate the potential of that idea), but not for total ops crew reassignment that would fully stop all shipboard operations just so everyone goes and does damage control. I don't see that happening until a dangerously low health level has occurred to the carrier during the game, in my opinion. Then it's every man grab a bucket, and start bailing. lol

Well, in that case it would take some serious coding (which would be possibly included later on, kinda what is happening with subs at this point, only a theory, even though it's a possibility).

Tusker2Zero wrote:I like your idea of the carrier not fully recovering until it returns to the shipyard, or other repair facility. That definately adds realism to the operations.

Yeah, plus it's a way to avoid having players abandoning their carriers, and since carriers themselves will have some seriously heavy armor and defense, it would be kinda tough to sink it if it could fully repair itself, know what I mean?

Snake wrote:

Tusker2Zero wrote:So... the carrier won't go into operationally "offline" mode until when? Like 40% health or something?

Well, if so then it'll be a bit lower (more like 25% probably), though it's just a theory, the coding phase will be the true challenge (so we aren't even sure if it'll be included). ...

25% to 30% definitely sounds fair for the termination of all operations (going "offline"), assuming that the damage controls maximum repair cap is theoretically somewhere in the 60% to 75% range. And if the damage control max cap were higher than the 60 to 75 percent range above, then I could see the "offline" trigger jumping up to about 40% range.

Yep, I realize that specific values, and even the whole concept is all theory at this stage of development. I'm just debating all of this on a hypothetical level, and realize that everything could change based on coding issues, personal tastes and concepts of the team, etc... .

Snake wrote:

Tusker2Zero wrote:I mean like I said before, air operations (for the most) part can potentially continue as normal while the ship is being repaired. I would hate to see all air ops, ship movement, & ship defense come to a complete stop (go completely "offline" somewhere above 40% to 50% health) based solely on ops crews being diverted to damage control for ship repair. I'm just having trouble with that thought based on a crew complement of over 5000+.

Yeah, if the carrier is offline, then it'll have to be on a really bad shape (critical damage), if it is slightly or even moderately damaged, then all operations and ship defense will work normally.

Yeah, I agree. Though, I wonder if there isn't a way to code a longer delay in launching aircraft, to simulate the effects of air operational delay when a carrier has been moderately damaged, like in the 40% to 60% range. Just another one of those things to consider way down the line, if codeable.

Snake wrote:Speaking of the ship defenses, the carrier itself won't be "offensive", the weaponry it'll carry is normally Long Range AA or Point Defense (close range) Close-In Weapon Systems (CIWS) which in addition to targeting enemy fighters is able to shoot down enemy ASM's (Anti-Ship Missiles).

Yep, that's a given. The aircraft themselves do the offensive work, along with some of the support ships in the carrier group.

Snake wrote:

Tusker2Zero wrote:A random critical hit in a vital area of the ship at any damage level I could see most (if not all ops) going offline for that reason alone (and since you have a randomizer you may want to investigate the potential of that idea), but not for total ops crew reassignment that would fully stop all shipboard operations just so everyone goes and does damage control. I don't see that happening until a dangerously low health level has occurred to the carrier during the game, in my opinion. Then it's every man grab a bucket, and start bailing. lol

Well, in that case it would take some serious coding (which would be possibly included later on, kinda what is happening with subs at this point, only a theory, even though it's a possibility).

All theroy at this point. I understand.

Snake wrote:

Tusker2Zero wrote:I like your idea of the carrier not fully recovering until it returns to the shipyard, or other repair facility. That definately adds realism to the operations.

Yeah, plus it's a way to avoid having players abandoning their carriers, and since carriers themselves will have some seriously heavy armor and defense, it would be kinda tough to sink it if it could fully repair itself, know what I mean?

Yep. Carriers should not be nearly invincible. It should have that same set of weaknesses as it does in real life, in my opinion.

25% to 30% definitely sounds fair for the termination of all operations (going "offline"), assuming that the damage controls maximum repair cap is theoretically somewhere in the 60% to 75% range. And if the damage control max cap were higher than the 60 to 75 percent range above, then I could see the "offline" trigger jumping up to about 40% range.

Same thought as mine, if the max recovery limit is lower, then I'd say the ship will most likely become offline in about 20 to 30%.

Yep, I realize that specific values, and even the whole concept is all theory at this stage of development. I'm just debating all of this on a hypothetical level, and realize that everything could change based on coding issues, personal tastes and concepts of the team, etc... .

Thanks for understanding , even though talking about this is very important (since we can establish clearer and better planned coding objectives which is almost as important as the coding itself ).

Yeah, I agree. Though, I wonder if there isn't a way to code a longer delay in launching aircraft, to simulate the effects of air operational delay when a carrier has been moderately damaged, like in the 40% to 60% range. Just another one of those things to consider way down the line, if codeable.

Yeah, we also thought about that (plane launching delay depending on the deck damage) though that's another one of those questions which are part of the actual "testing".

Yep, that's a given. The aircraft themselves do the offensive work, along with some of the support ships in the carrier group.

Yeah, in a way, if the player is experiencing some heavy enemy air attacks, he/she could probably "cover" the ships around the Aircraft Carrier to make use of it's AA defense perimeter (which is very powerful) though it'll be defenseless against other surface vessels.

Yep. Carriers should not be nearly invincible. It should have that same set of weaknesses as it does in real life, in my opinion.

We want to make the Aircraft Carriers as a sort of a "challenge", instead of raining/spamming Harpoons (Anti-Ship Missiles) upon the enemy carrier, players should instead use tactics and take out the escorts first before converging on the carrier, this is where closer range naval weapons such as deck guns will be quite useful (the Carriers can protect against missiles, but not against shells).

ey i hope that u guys will be able that the solider can crouch and prohne

if they crouch they are stealth

if they prohne it is difficult to hit them;-)

nice idea and i hope that its will be able to put in

Once the mod is out for a while is there any chance of adding a Chuck Norris unit? If it is too powerful I will understand (no superweapons e.g. roundhouse kick to the face!) Maybe the A-team?

no i dont like this with super soldier its very unrealistic

Jarhead wrote:Once the mod is out for a while is there any chance of adding a Chuck Norris unit? If it is too powerful I will understand (no superweapons e.g. roundhouse kick to the face!) Maybe the A-team?

I think a Chuck Norris figure in the game would make for a wonderful hero unit that mappers could use for mission based maps and such.

Squadleader wrote:ey i hope that u guys will be able that the solider can crouch and prohne

if they crouch they are stealth

if they prohne it is difficult to hit them;-)

nice idea and i hope that its will be able to put in

Yup , check this response I posted yesterday:

Yeah, infantry in TAOW can either stand up or going into prone position.

The main difference at first is moving speed obviously (a standing unit can run and therefore move much farther) however, a soldier in prone position is much more stealthier and can achieve a high hit ratio, basically:

Stance:	Pros:	Cons:
Standing	Speed / Agility	Easily Revealed / Easily Targeted / Less Accuracy
Prone	Stealthy / Enhanced Accuracy	Slower Speed / Can't use certain weapons

About the crouching position, we're not sure at this moment if it's possible (on the coding level), but we may try to include it

Tusker2Zero wrote:

Jarhead wrote:Once the mod is out for a while is there any chance of adding a Chuck Norris unit? If it is too powerful I will understand (no superweapons e.g. roundhouse kick to the face!) Maybe the A-team?

I think a Chuck Norris figure in the game would make for a wonderful hero unit that mappers could use for mission based maps and such.

He would be a fantastic addition to the mod (specially as an unique easter egg) or the US's Ace of Spades (the last unlock after alll weapons were unlocked ).

Chuck Norris deadly technique:


Chuck Norris in Iraq:

Squadleader wrote:no i dont like this with super soldier its very unrealistic

Don't worry , "heroic" units won't appear in TAOW (no Rambo's or MacGyvers. ).

yeah cool its very cool with the prone

but if u can do that with crouching it would be cool too:D:D:D:D

Chuck Norris is too powerful for this, or any mod. For instance look at scrabble...you spell Chuck Norris in a game of Scrabble you win,
Forever.

Squadleader wrote:yeah cool its very cool with the prone

but if u can do that with crouching it would be cool too:D:D:D:D

Well, it's a matter of coding

Jarhead wrote:Chuck Norris is too powerful for this, or any mod. For instance look at scrabble...you spell Chuck Norris in a game of Scrabble you win,
Forever.

It would be an impossible coding task to include Chuck Norris (there are not enough 9's for his attacks - 999999999999 ... dmg ).

LOL! Hey I found a few things you guys might be intersted in.

Making hijackable units
Weapons upgrade with science
Riding on tank
Garrison trees (better range)
Tank pull howitzer (train logic)
transparent rotor blade*
Firing while moving*
suspension (for realistic movement)
How to create new science/rank powers

Faster than a speeding bullet ... more powerful than a locomotive ... able to leap tall buildings in a single bound... yes, these are some of Chuck Norris's warm-up exercises.

Jarhead wrote:LOL! Hey I found a few things you guys might be intersted in.

Making hijackable units
Weapons upgrade with science
Riding on tank
Garrison trees (better range)
Tank pull howitzer (train logic)
transparent rotor blade*
Firing while moving*
suspension (for realistic movement)
How to create new science/rank powers

Interesting , though we decided to create brand new logics to better suit TAOW, specially by "coupling" some of those older concepts like the train logic + riding on a tank (to create the "squad riding alongside a vehicle" logic).

About sciences and general unlocks, that's a BIG point in TAOW, after the player completes objectives (primary and secondary), captures points and takes out enemies, he or she will be able to use the general point to "rank up" to a higher military class.

A higher military rank/class will award the player with extra hardware and higher quality arsenal and upgrades. Also, the player is able to manually choose some more "specific" weapons and classes, for example:
- Artillery;
- Special Forces;
- Tanks;
- Helicopters;
- UAV/UCAV's (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles / Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles)
among many others.

Jarhead wrote:Faster than a speeding bullet ... more powerful than a locomotive ... able to leap tall buildings in a single bound... yes, these are some of Chuck Norris's warm-up exercises.

Chuck Norris invented the Cesarean section when he used a Roundhouse Kick on his mother's womb to "born".

I agree, your first instinct tells you, "If I only had...this" (some high tech gaget/vehicle) so everyone wants it right off the bat. But when you actually earn the thing your looking for it's that much better when you get it.

I also agree about Chuck... ahh, better not say it. He could be watching.

no chukc norris pls:D:D:D:D

yeahman marc do got work and yeah iam just happy

Jarhead wrote:I agree, your first instinct tells you, "If I only had...this" (some high tech gaget/vehicle) so everyone wants it right off the bat. But when you actually earn the thing your looking for it's that much better when you get it.

Exactly right , these weapons will be very effective, but players will need to make a choice to unlock certain ones first.
For example, a player that loves tanks may unlock a certain tank first:
... And then the bigger and better armed tank later

Jarhead wrote:I also agree about Chuck... ahh, better not say it. He could be watching.

Too true, we'd better be careful

Squadleader wrote:no chukc norris pls:D:D:D:D

yeahman marc do got work and yeah iam just happy

If you want extra Chuck Norris, just check this thread: https://taow.forumotion.com/off-topic-f8/hey-snake-t195-30.htm

:D:D:Di hate chuck norris:D:D:D:D

what about russia??do they got spetznatz

Yup, Spetznaz are Russian Special Operations (спецназ = Spec Ops).

yeah coolll:D:D

man damn i cant wait for this but until he get release iam maybe 18:D:D

iam 17