< < < DEAR DEVs: A letter from the Base Builders > > >

Just because they're thinking about it does not mean they've committed to it. Or even moved beyond casual internal conversation about it.

If that's the case, it'd be stupid to announce anything. EVERY time a game developer has done that, commented that they were considering some feature or another, folks inevitably read that as some sort of promise and become rabid angry if it isn't later implemented. It causes headaches. Better to say nothing until you either know you're at least going to definitely try to do it, or know for sure you're not going to do it.

Rabid fans tend to be their own worst enemies.

In the meantime, even if they are just thinking about creating a new base engine, they are certainly going to be reluctant to expend resources on improving the old one.



-np

I wonder how many resources it took to add beakers to the beaker rack. Did anyone ask for that? Would it take more effort to just add a couple of things that are already in game? Things that threads and threads of people have asked for? Really, where is the harm, and what is the valuable resource cost to add something while working in secret on some new and bright base shiny? When are people going to stop making excuses?

You know, when it's considered a bad change to make a thing more closely resemble the thing it's supposed to resemble, because people have been using that thing as a kludge to represent a whole bunch of other things it's not really intended to resemble... there are problems. Big problems.

When the current bases are so heavily reliant on completely unintended side effects of the original design, it becomes difficult to even tell when you're going to break something. All the bugs are now undocumented features. At this point, you have three options:

1) Never ever touch it again.
2) Go through a great deal of work every time you do touch it to make sure you don't break things you never intended in the first place.
3) Set it on fire and start over.

If you're a company with limited resources and a large installed user base who will jump ship at the first sign of trouble, you do number 1. If you're a big company, and you need to keep pushing updates to feed your product cycle but you also need to keep existing client software working even though it relies on dirty hacks into undocumented features of your API, you do number 2. And if your installed userbase is small, your application is crap, and you see the opportunity to gain a much wider audience by jettisoning the crud and starting fresh, you do number 3.

Right now, with respect to bases, PS has been sticking with number 1. In other cases, they've tried number 3, with mixed results. With respect to the game overall, they're pretty much sticking with number 2, whilst probably dreaming of the day they can start work on CoH2 and put plan number 3 into full effect. With respect to bases, it is up to (the tiny minority of) base builders to either convince the devs that if plan 2 can't work, plan 1 with tiny incremental improvements is better than plan 3, OR to leap with both feet and without the slightest complaint onto whatever new plan for bases emerges, accept that the old system is dead, dead, dead, and try to get as many of the features they want into the new system.

Of course, what is more likely to happen if prior experience is any indication is that the tiny minority who use the current system will pitch a fit, ragequit without testing the new system, and the rest of us will be left with an equally unwieldy if not worse new base system and no one to use it.

It's like you're in the trash can of my mind and are spitting it out for me to read.

Not that what you said is actually trash (not at all), haha... But it's all the stuff I've kept in the dark and don't want to necessarily think further on... Because... Well, because of exactly what you said.

Well said.
Now, stop saying it!!

So that's 3 votes for plan 1 then.

I have been playing for a while, and consider myself a Base Builder...but I never regtistered on the message board because I saw no need.

After reading this thread though, I had to speak up.

The Base Building community is not as small as everyone makes out...this message board community is a very small sampling of the players. Very few of us register on the forums when compared to the number of players in the game.

I see threats here. Tokyo says:

You know, I could argue the point - but when serious comparisons are being made between feature requests in a game and the campaign for civil rights, the discussion is more emotionally fraught than I am comfortable with. I am not a troll, and while it would be easy to needle people with that level of investment into wild emotional outbursts, I'm just not cruel enough to consider that entertaining. I don't think the expectations being expressed in this thread are realistic, but fortunately for me it is not part of my job to determine that.

I wish you all the best.

I'd like to leave a general word of advice for aficionados of any underutilized, underdeveloped game feature, whether that be bases, PvP, or anything else.

You do not want to position yourself in my-way-or-I'll-quit opposition to changes that the developers feel are necessary to meet their design goals, because once you do that, they no longer have any reason to listen to anything you have to say. The devs are going to do what they feel they need to do, and (rightly or wrongly) they will believe that the outcome is going to be worth the loss of the existing community. This is not a democracy; your only vote is with your feet, and they're already expecting you to leave and have accounted for it in their plans.

This does not mean that you cannot have a major and positive influence on the shape of the eventual outcome. If you can use your knowledge and expertise to demonstrate that the changes don't meet the stated goals, or that they create unintended problems, or that they can otherwise be improved upon, and if you can refrain from editorializing excessively about how the old system was better and the changes are terrible and those responsible should be sacked, then you have a good chance at having an effect. Sadly, history suggests that this line of thought will be ignored and the discussion cast as an ideological battle, the result of which will be a flawed new system, the majority of existing feature users leaving, no new players taking up the feature, and a few embittered kibitzers hanging around on the forum and bringing up how their favorite part of the game was Hard Done By at every opportunity. Please, please prove me wrong.

You will note that I'm not talking about the role of the developers in this. Of course they will make mistakes: they are human. No player action can prevent that from happening, though, so it's irrelevant to your decisions. Your options are to try to work with them to create a system that, while it will lack things that you loved about the old one, might still have much to recommend it - or to refuse to do so on principle, end up with crap, complain, and leave. You can't decide to have everything, but you can decide whether to have something or nothing.

And I'm out. Again, I wish you all the best.

I don't see anywhere in Trashcan's post about having to accept anything or whatever...
I just saw it as observation.
*shrugs*
I think it is accurate observation...
The 3 bullet points in the post aren't all negative either.
Sure, 3 could turn out badly (Black Market UI, PvP), but it could be GREAT (Power Customization, a number of other things we all have grown to love in this game).

So... "Relax, Frances"

Small additions would be good with me. Those could fall under 1 or 2, depending on how far the changes go.
3 could be great. I think we need to focus on what we do not want to lose in bases, in the case that they do perform an overhaul.

We all know the bulk of what we want added... What don't we want to see go away?

I'm just gonna agree to disagree with Trashcan and Electric Knight regarding the merits of trying to bring attention to base improvements. There is really no point debating any of these points until a developer actually shows up and says what they want for bases.

Perhaps the Devs would be kind enough to start a base builders suggestion thread much like the costume thread, hosted by an actual Dev to communicate with. It's very understandable that Going Rogue is Paragon Studios number one priority at the moment, but base builders are a real part of this game. For many of us, it's an highly enjoyable feature, that definitely adds depth to the characters. Not only that but SG's (which bases are a part of) are one of the foundations on which our games communities are built.
There is definitely a need for a revamp of the base building system. And player feedback, which should never be discouraged, though should be properly represented, should be vital to not only this aspect of the game, but ALL aspects of the game. Say what you will, but we CoXers are a dedicated and passionate bunch of people when it comes to this game.

Weird... I must have walked away from the computer for a while yesterday and then come back and submitted my reply, because there were a few posts that weren't there when I wrote my earlier reply, hehe...

I had only seen Trashcan's 3 bullet point post and subsequent replies to that.

I just want to make it clear that I do not believe that a complete revamp is what they will definitely want to do, nor do I believe that it will be terrible (Or simply lack too much of what we like) if/when they did do a revamp.
Like I said before, I think these developers do some great things and I have no reason to believe that the changes would be more negative than positive, nor even negative at all.
All I said is that it is a possibility and that, perhaps we should all think about what we do love about the current system, so as to let them know, "Hey, I'd hate to see this changed".

So, no... I am not someone that says, "Keep quiet and hope they don't turn their attention to you". I've never ever suggested anyone not speak up, heh. That is quite the contrary from what I believe.

Anyways... You have people here that say, "why bother", people that say, "don't bother", people that say, "Do it this way" and people that say, "Don't do it that way".
All I am saying is... if you've got something to say... say it. If you might be able to cover all bases, cover them. We'll see if/when anything happens and I hope whatever happens... it'll be great. It's pretty great as it is right now... So, I would be happy if we just got additional toys to work with in bases... Then again... I'd like to see rotational control, finer control in moving things around (Not so broad of jumps from one spot to the next)... proper Y axis movement, etc, etc, we all know the lists
It has been intimated by developers in the past and it has been this team's credo often times... They don't want to do something without doing it right.
It's easy to see the base editor as one of those things that they feel the need to revamp it.
The word "revamp" doesn't scare me. I hope that IF they do a revamp, they will be super awesome in keeping to what works in the current system and not break our existing bases. *shrugs*
What I hope and what happens... I don't know if they'll be different.
And without direction from the developers, we're just discussing it amongst ourselves. Whether it's for sport, interest or whatever... I don't think that's bad though. If someone doesn't want to discuss it, so be it. The only thing I suggested was that everyone might want to think hard on details of what you don't want to lose. The earlier ideas are conveyed, the more likely they are to influence the design.

I'm not calling for people to list out these ideas or thoughts... But if anyone has them, you may as well. If you don't want to... Don't!

Anyway, this thing rambled out of my control, hehe. Hopefully it made some sense.

Well said, Electric.

My power supply went out and being poor, I had to dig through boxes to find a working one...running on a 480 watt right now (eek).

So I haven't been on to reply in this thread.

Here are the types of opinions I see in this thread:
- Total Overhaul
- Just add some easy items from the game and a few new features
- Shutup for fear of nerfing
- We PVPers deserve attention more
- Make more lists
- Be nice about it when asking
- Don't bother, it'll never happen

I don't think I missed anything...if I did point it out and I'll edit.

As I've said above...I actually do not need a whole issue to make me happy. I would be happy if they just added 1-3 items to bases that are already in the game (so the rendering is already done, it's a simple matter of pathing and pricing), say, every issue or every 2 months...and maybe a new feature here and there.

For example...adding textures to the bottom of things like floor tiles would be good, or adding the feature of being able to rotate objects with more control.

Simple thing to add really.

In base items are not hard either. Want a Trainer that sells or buys items? They are stationary and already in the game...heck, make it a bartender if needed. Or a simple Trainer in red and white.

Want computers like we see in tech control rooms that can be placed in any room? Easy. Just remove the restrictions. They don't have to actually work...it's decor.

Want water? It's already placed in pool form throughout the game. Just add it to the editior.

Want taller steps? Shoot, in RWZ they have metal steps that lead to rafters. Ramps that lead up 3 floors or more.

It's all there in the game. It's already pathed for the game. All they have to do is decide on pricing and placement rules in the editor. Not a huge challenge.

Tech, for example, has been hugely ignored. It's got far fewer options than arcane.

My best suggestion outside of this is a booster pak for base builders. This pack could be $10 and contain the Arachnos base items, along with tons of stuff from the game. And it could be tied in with the badge/personal items interface for placement...just like the vet reward items.

I would gladly pay for a base booster pack...and I suspect many here would as well. That way the devs turn a profit and can justify spending time on it.