Bring back Class 5 Bases!

Hello HWS community!! In PvP, all bases on HW, GG, etc are now restricted to class 1. I personally took a long time to realize that, but I don’t think it’s a good idea.

What is the most common type of base in PvP? (Besides the infamous RP base) That would be the tower, a tower just covered in turrets. How much effort does it take to “intricately?” place a few hundred blocks straight up then slap turrets on the side? How well does it look to have a square or even rounded tower that points straight up, some may look cool, but they are all the same.

Then, you don’t get to see bases like THIS and even like THIS.

Year over year we have seen intricate unique designs, like this, this, this, even this. Credit for the last picture of a ten base GG complex goes completely to [PKA] TheBigBoss, he posted it in hws-videos-or-streams Monday.

These new limits exclude all of the bases above from use. However, this picture, this picture, this picture, and this picture are all class one towers, which do you like more? The towers and the bases are all functional up to date builds, some of which are even unpublished, unused designs built in the last week.

I personally like the diversity from allowing up to class 5 bases, we can choose to have bases that are very effective, cheap, but don’t look good (towers) and bases that are larger, slightly less effective (unless you have a really good builder), and more tactical. With a tower, do you take into account the need for dragons teeth, players finding a way in, placing the bases correctly, or even just placement of ships around it? Not nearly as much as if your base was like these three, and actually had 10 HV holes built into it.

This big change to bases removes a lot of freedom and ultimately results in the removal of the most strategic PvP bases around, the non-tower designs which must be changed from season to season to keep up, or they risk immediately being outclassed by other designs. How do you improve a tower? Erhmm, add guns? There are dozens of ways to work on and improve larger designs, from changing the type of dragons teeth to moving some extra plasma cannons to the roof for extra support. You can even place HVs on the roof as extra protection and focus your turrets on the ground. Whatever you choose, you have the choice. Without class 5 bases, it’s very difficult to build an effective PvP base.

Theoretically, we could also remove the 3 base limit and change it to 1. Then triple the turret count on that one base and allow it to be class 7 or 10, theoretically this would reduce lag. The shield generators would need to be buffed, but I think it’s do-able.

I do however believe just buffing turrets to three times the damage would incentivise towers, one tower could take down a dozen enemies if the base turrets where buffed so dramatically.

Lastly, I am open to community debate. I feel this will be a hot topic that instigates change, but just because I didn’t suggest an idea doesn’t mean it is bad. I would love to hear more ideas on how to solve the issue regarding base class limit or reducing lag by reducing base count while still allowing the same amount of turrets and damage output.

Sincerely, WillEatsPie

3 Likes

I’m okay with bringing back the class 5 bases, but not the change to the base limit. The limits are fine where they are, but one base is a horrible idea. What would be done about alliance limits for RP bases? Kinda runs into an issue there, if you catch my drift :wink:

3 Likes

I do agree that the creativity of base design has been killed at this point by limiting to class 1. It is not like big bases are any more overpowered than a tower. The bigger the base, the more coverage it has to account for. The ability to make module bases that fit together as one big base was definitely one of the highlights of PvP last season for me. It is sad to see that gone. I would rather fight a cool complex rather than a cluster of towers.

1 Like

The thing I remember most about the large sized bases is lag. They looked really cool, the dragons teeth were a smart design choice, but the lag was insanity. The last incarnation of that interlocking base that I battled with had an average fps of 5. There was an invisible wall, where the client loaded the base, and if you crossed that wall you would either get a 5-30 second lock up or a straight DC. Better computers seemed to get less DCs, but some players still had issues (On the ABN/ETS side anyways). If you only had 1 or two players there it was “Playable” in the sense that you could target turrets, but it was not any kind of smooth. My first big GG war (It was the Rebels defending against ABN/TCB/ACP/TAW believe it or not) I disconnected as soon as I got in firing range. Loaded back into a 1-5 fps slideshow.

Maybe the all the performance updates and tweaks have made that scenario more playable, Eton certainly seems to be great fun and that dome is huge. The player bases look super cool, and from an outside view they seem like the clear choice, but my experiences with live battles around them has been very poor (Many seasons ago). If it was smooth I would be all for it.

2 Likes

class 5 bases will be a huge lagfest… we have already lag with class 1 ba

1 Like

It’s true a class 5 will lag more than a class 1, but it is nowhere near what you describe. I am sure it probably was that bad - in alpha 6. Since the new Unity update, I have not lagged defending a base. With twenty HVs and a couple SVs there this is an incredible improvement. Not to mention that RexXus has been doing everything he can to reduce lag already, particularly two fewer SV pulse and SV rocket launchers. I think the changes made will easily allow for the placement of class 5 bases with minimal repercussions to HWS, but… I am open to placing class 5’s somewhere and testing to see if it lags. Titan is already too laggy though, so it would need to be somewhere else.

Every performance update or patch is toted as the fix all to our problems with lag, but so far the only effective solution seems to be HWS limiting CPU calculations. I do hope it is better, that would be cool. 2 nights ago in Black Hole we had 3 CVs and 3 SVs. I could not see anyone. When they did actually load/render in, it was much less than smooth. Again, the hotfix may have been the answer to that. I am cautious about any limit increases, as in the past the correct choice for performance has always been smaller (That is always the case to some degree).

Maybe one of the admins or someone with access to more data than we have could shed some light on this one?

1 Like

The performance is better*.

*for single player

1 Like

I agree with @WillEatsPie, we should bring back class 5 bases. At class one there is only so much you can do. With a Class 5 you can build a strong entrenched base that will promote sieges to take them over and provide harder (and more fun) objectives in pvp. With a class one, swarming it with 20 HV and SV will easily overcome it and provide no real benefit then to provide cheap pvp experience. I agree with @Cyanfire700, The variety of bases we saw last season was amazing and provided a unique experience to attacking bases. But with class one I am afraid that we will see a decline in creativity and find our selves attack the same type and layout every single time. This game is about creativity and not just about performance. If I wanted to play a game with high performance I would play a more finished alpha. There are many games like Empyrion. But many of those do not match the creativity you will find in the player base or in the designs you can face. I know this game has performance issue but I for one rather lag a little and have fun challenging ABNs unique bases then to have no lag and easily take a crappy class 1. And as a base designer my self, I love the challenge of building bases but at class one there is way too tight of a restriction to have anything that is effective that is not just a tower.

Performance < better game play
.

1 Like

I also support bringing back class 5 bases. Class 1 is too small to try out many cool ideas, and you end up with just towers full of turrets. Those bases are boring! like seeing big interesting base ideas which means larger class sizes.

1 Like

I am confused, there is not much difference in class 1 and class 5 bases other than number of devices, triangles, etc. they really need a better way to differentiate classification of bases other than a few blocks and devices; would rather see some differences in turret loadout between classes, instead of 10 of this, 10 of this, 2 of this, etc.

It’s like buying groceries at this point. And I hate, HATE shopping. ( not a double negative, it’s double emphasis).

2 Likes

Huge difference. Class size changes with surface area of the build. (Exposes triangles) Surface area between class 1 and class 5 are completely different. And with more class size you can add moats, dragon teeth, ramparts, curtain walls and many more defensive structures. Even have a full function base underground for long term PVP bases (I had one ready to go ;(). Tell me there isn’t a difference between class 5 and 1 CVs.

1 Like

I tell you there isn’t a difference between class 5 and 1 CVs.

You got told!

And yes I understand surface area, triangles, blah blah. When you break it down though, besides blocks, what is the difference between a class 5 BA (or CV) and a class 1 BA ( or CV) when the weapons are all the same quantity?

Ps I could really care less about the aesthetics, I won’t lose sleep if it doesn’t have a toilet, trees, etc.

Need toilet man…

3 Likes

I would say just go by the tree, instead just go on the ventilator.

3 Likes

when it hits the fan…

I appreciate everyones input on this topic, I probably should have made it a poll, but whats done is done. Thank you for your time, looks like everyone’s done here.

WillEatsPie

1 Like