Talk:Proposals/Larger Bases

If we're going to do this, then I propose we actually go farther with it, making the base 3-layered -- top (hangars and defence), bottom (power plant, antimatter storage, other facilities that are either hazardous or require maximum protection from the top), andmiddle (everything else). Then we could include some facilities which occupy 2 layers, such as base defence silos. This will make tactical placement of buildings a bit more interesting and challenging.

Only the middle layer would be the full 5x5 size. I agree with 4x3 for the top layer, and the bottom layer could be smaller still, 3x3 (or we could just stick with 4x3, I'm not bothered).

--Winter 12:37, 11 April 2008 (CEST)

go even further

Why stop there? Why not have each base map surface dependent on the terrain (mountains, coast, plains, city, etc.) and make placing tiles (cubes) even MORE challenging (I agree that it would also be fun).

How about this: break the tiles down into smaller, 2 by 2 (by 2) pieces and make each base building a different size / dimension. Living quarters could be added onto a little at a time - the command center could be a multi-level piece like NORAD in the movie "Wargames". Make the player install elevator shafts, stairwells, and connecting hallways. How about security checkpoints and bulkheads? Where's the server room for all the computers? (it doesn't have to be big).

The smaller "tile" dimensions would afford more flexibility / creativity in base design, as well as being able to fit more stuff in less space. Let's say the whole base is now 5 x 5 - reduce it by 1 tile to 4 x 4, then subdivide all those tiles by 2, so now the base grid is 8 x 8. Four floors would be plenty of room, and 6 would be more than enough.

Some of the tile pieces / map models could remain the same, and now their dimensions are 2 x 2 x 1 (like the living quarters.) Some of the new pieces, for example: (length x width x height) --stairwell: 1 x 1 x 1 (stackable, always facing the same direction) --security checkpoint 1 x 2 x 1 (this could be the space-hogging "entrance," too) --missile silo (single) 1 x 1 x 4 (with a "touching the surface" requirement) --server room 1 x 2 x 1 --laboratory 2 x 3 x 1 --workshop 2 x 3 x 2 (machine shops usually have a high ceiling)

Also consider additional base pieces that the extra room would afford: --mess hall / officer's lounge --practice range (why can't soldiers sitting on their butts all day work on their skills? they're being paid, after all!) --workout room --AA guns

I like the idea of missile silos taking up more vertical space, and requiring certain building types to be on the surface or bottom level. This way, the aliens could bombard the base and blow up the surface structures, raid the base, and if the player manages to defend it, they would still have to reconstruct the surface structures.

I do realize that in order to effectively manage a base, there would have to be a 3-d editing tool for it, at least with labelled, wireframe boxes. Maybe just a simplified version of the mission engine would work - utilizing the "slices".--Albamuth 23:02, 30 May 2008 (CEST)

Let's discuss precise formats.
We have at our disposal 8 levels in total. With 3 layers of building and one layer of surface that gives us 2 levels per layer. In other words, bottom and middle layer facilities should use 2 levels, while top-level facilities (hangars, entrance, silos) should use their 2 levels on the upper layer and the 2 levels on the surface layer, to complete the 8 levels. --BTAxis 11:05, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

If the base is in multiple levels...

I posted about this in Talk:Base_Facilities, but why not make each level of the base a separate mission? This leaves a lot more leeway for representing the entire base without pushing too hard on the engine. If you had 3x3 tile levels, each level of the base could be several layers high without any problems. You could require a 'down' access facility at each level to access the next level down, and PHALANX personnel could retreat to that facility if the defense on a given level were hopeless. If the player yielded a level of the base, the facilities would get trashed and the player could be taken to the base screen to regroup and re-equip. Then, when trying to fight back out, PHALANX would start at the 'down' facility and try to clear the trashed level.

Is the game effect of a facility being 'trashed' decided?

Anyway, you could make the base as many levels deep as you wanted, but I suggest stopping at four levels because that gives 3x3x4 minus 4 access facilities and 3 'down' facilities for a total of 29 tiles free (minus 4 'blocked' tiles for 25). It can also be represented in the base management screen with a fairly minor modification of the current display, 6x6 cut into quarters rather than 5x5. Of course, if you wanted to use the scheme to support a larger sized base size, you could use fewer blocked tiles, have the access facilities serve for both up and down, or even add more levels (though that would require a more dramatic redesign of the base management screen).

The main strength of this is that no tactical map would have to be larger than 3x3 tiles, and thus facilities could be two or three layers high without any difficulty. You could even have the corridor system underneath the facilities themselves (though running the corridors through the bottom layer of the facilities seems more logical to me). It also presents the potential for a base defense mission to actually take several missions to complete, though whether that's a benefit is debatable. Certainly, it might be interesting to have the initial base invasion force be overwhelming enough to make a fighting retreat a necessity. Depending on the defensive weapons implemented, it could make pulling back once or twice worth the cost in 'trashed' facilities (depending on exactly what it cost to let the aliens trash a facility, though I imagine the cost would be different for different facilities).--ChunLing 03:30, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

multiple level

i'm against this idea. i i have more tile available in the base, it will do bases more easy to defend (the impact of letting some troups to defend the base in case of attack will be reduced as there will be less bases). Having a radar is not mandatory, i have a means of 0.5 radar per base (the less the better as they have a opening on the floor that aliens can use) and having little base is more chalenging: you have to do choices, for example when you what do dismantle ufo or build some stingray... or sending load of dropship.. so you've need some specialization of bases: that is really realistic you know !