Base Management

Discussion about the upcoming Wasteland 3!

Moderator: Ranger Team Alpha

User avatar
fuzzyballs01
Novice
Posts: 48
Joined: April 4th, 2017, 9:56 am

Re: Base Management

Post by fuzzyballs01 » July 10th, 2017, 4:44 am

best way for me would a location, like say a big, hidden, pre-war militairy bunker where you blew up the door with your tutourial character so now it's open, but it's still defensible because A) it's a bunker and B) a skeleton crew can hold the entrance hall using only a heavy machinegun
and inside the cracked open bunker is basic equipment for a base
MRE's, medical supplies, some weapons and ammo, and most importantly a radio room

and as the game goes on, and different rooms are needed, they are created
starting with a garage, mess hall, medical area, store, and adding in training rooms (like I suggested)
and you can like, upgrade them twice or something to improve passive buffs base personnel get
not like Metal Gear Solid V where you build an entire new platform, but a visual upgrade that adds larger equipment piles and more staff to a room, and cleaning it all up and turning into a real fortress over time

that combined with optional upgrades like a defensive wall around the outer perimiter and finding (randomised but skill level based on player level) staff out in the wasteland who want to trade whatever useful skill they have for safety, food and medical care
I'd like to have an effeciency % for every room starting at 1 and more staff, better staff (which you can also train) and slowly making it's way up to 100%
and I do mean slowly, I don't like games that make 20% jumps


but then that would be too fleshed out and you'd be playing Wasteland 3 + a base management game in one, and that's probably too much work

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Base Management

Post by Remo » July 10th, 2017, 6:45 am

Mole204 wrote:
July 9th, 2017, 11:39 pm
There's too much reliance on having a base. That's Fallout gameplay. There was no base in Wl1.
That's no single franchise gameplay, as shown by WL2 (and many other games like the classics mentioned before). In essence it's just a quest-hub brought about by the plot need.

In WL2, Ranger Citadel made perfect sense both thematically, for a paramilitary organization like the Rangers, and from player convince stand point, with everything you need to prepare (equipment, NPCs etc) for your missions packed near by. And with this being a central location that the player kept revisiting allowed them to spurs it up, adding a verity of detail that brought more color to the location and setting e.g. the briefings on the situation in the area, see other teams leaving (and later hear their progress on the radio), see fresh recruits training (like you only recently did), the museum stuff, etc - and that is what I want to see more off, just as part of the whole rebuild the Rangers pioneer theme.

That said, in WL2 your team still spent most of its time traversing the wasteland, dealing with arising issues, scavenging for resources, and trading with towns on the way. So this is not an 'either or' proposition.
Mole204 wrote:
July 9th, 2017, 11:39 pm
I wonder if there's places you could get a kitchen remodeling done? Granite tabletops, or kitchen counters.
Bone tables and human skin cowboy hats? no.. I am probably thinking of the wrong game :P
fuzzyballs01 wrote:
July 10th, 2017, 4:44 am
best way for me would a location, like say a big, hidden, pre-war militairy bunker
You mean pretty much like the Ranger Citadel ;) Something like that is good bet, it both make sense and a good way for them to manage our PC resources better, and easily expand the base by clearing (uncovering) other rooms. But personally, I hope for something else, because as much as I love "vaults" they are a bit overused, me think..

A while back, one of the post mentioned the Olympic training center, which is a bit wacky idea for a military base but sounded kind of nice.. and no worries few sandbags, weapon mounts and armed guards and you can easily get that military feel to it.. From experience in RL, given resources and will, you can easily do crazy things like that e.g. a hightech communication/server room inside crumbling early 20 century buildings, with one of those small archer tower on the second floor? no problem ! Obviously setting up other facilities like barracks, armory and workshops is even easier ..

User avatar
Zombra
Global Moderator
Posts: 6184
Joined: March 8th, 2012, 10:50 pm

Re: Base Management

Post by Zombra » July 10th, 2017, 11:10 am

I like base management gameplay, but I'm not expecting it from W3; it's out of scope.

What I DO expect:
* Free healing
* A merchant rich enough to buy everything I want to sell

What would be nice:
* A "slept at home" buff when resting there, +1 to all skills for 24 hours, something like that
* The barber/gym/plastic surgeon, allow us to change heads, haircuts, body size, whatever. Plus all companion cosmetics (I had to edit my save file to change Ralphy's hat in W2)
* The radio, allow us to actively call certain contacts when appropriate instead of always having to walk everywhere to turn in missions
* Training ground to increase the level cap - but oh wait, there won't be a level cap in W3, will there? Certainly not, so never mind
* Training ground or library for very expensive but unique Perks such as "Learned How To Learn" permanent +5% to all xp ... or "Helicopter Training" :)
* Recruitment center to replace fallen PCs with new player-created characters a la POE
Image

User avatar
Mole204
Scholar
Posts: 217
Joined: May 6th, 2013, 3:17 pm

Re: Base Management

Post by Mole204 » July 10th, 2017, 8:23 pm

Remo- You're right about all of that. Yes Ranger HQ WAS a base, but it didn't HAVE to be your base. You could pitch tent wherever you needed to- or wherever you found water. That made RHQ a cool center of supplies and level exploration. Building a base Fallout-style is different from that, and putting it in WL3 would be surrendering to the Fallout series. Which came after Wl1, and because the company couldn't work on Wasteland anymore. There's been too much "base building" in games lately, from Skyrim to, yes, Fallout. It's not meant to be part of this game any more than a game of Bejeweled is.
And yeah, Zombra's right, where were the Libraries from WL1 in WL2?

User avatar
fuzzyballs01
Novice
Posts: 48
Joined: April 4th, 2017, 9:56 am

Re: Base Management

Post by fuzzyballs01 » July 11th, 2017, 7:41 am

Remo wrote:
July 10th, 2017, 6:45 am

in WL2 your team still spent most of its time traversing the wasteland, dealing with arising issues, scavenging for resources, and trading with towns on the way. So this is not an 'either or' proposition.
but now you're not JUST playing as the Ranger team
you're playing as both the Ranger team and the broad guy who's in charge of the base (well you get to select the big things, he'll handle the small details)
I never said "put a ranger squad in charge of a base and let random numbers play the game for you"

the whole point of this suggestion is that you're moving to Colorado as a scouting party, and you have to set up some sort of base to collect all your finds and NPC's who need/want help, and turn it into a staging area for a full scale, long term fortified, self-sufficient base with staff and equipment
and now you're in charge of improving your base by going out and collecting all of that

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Base Management

Post by Remo » July 11th, 2017, 9:23 am

Mole204 wrote:
July 10th, 2017, 8:23 pm
Remo- You're right about all of that. Yes Ranger HQ WAS a base, but it didn't HAVE to be your base. You could pitch tent wherever you needed to- or wherever you found water. That made RHQ a cool center of supplies and level exploration. Building a base Fallout-style is different from that [..]
When you say Fallout-style, I assume you mean FO4 because prior to that it was always about the lone wanderer and his party. And by 'style' mean the ability choose improvements to your "base", which as noted is no more FO-4 style than any number of titles like NWN2 or the more recent PoE mentioned above. (**)

Finally, I assume that your problem is with 'base management' part i.e. you don't want to deal with resource management aspect, however, that just mechanic that gives the player more control but not necessary for what I am asking. As noted, you don't need a base building mechanic to have the base built around you, which can be simply triggered through quest. You already seen this in WL2 when at certain time during the plot (spoilers) more parts of Ranger HQ become available to you, and the same can be done to reflect the player progress through out WL3 until you have a fully functional and stuffed base worthy of the Rangers.

Simply put, I see the base as an opportunity to make a less static location and offer more reactivity, reflecting your progress and immediate consequence of your choices through out the game. Think of it as in-game ending slides if you wish.. As for how its done --whether through quest completion triggers, effected though dialogue choices like in NWN, have build menu like PoE, or freeform building like in FO4; AND what type of resource management, if at all; AND what benefits it should give, if at all; etc -- is just details to me that i'll leave to you guys to argue about.
fuzzyballs01 wrote:
July 11th, 2017, 7:41 am
but now you're not JUST playing as the Ranger team
you're playing as both the Ranger team and the broad guy who's in charge of the base (well you get to select the big things, he'll handle the small details)
I never said "put a ranger squad in charge of a base and let random numbers play the game for you"

the whole point of this suggestion is that you're moving to Colorado as a scouting party, and you have to set up some sort of base to collect all your finds and NPC's who need/want help, and turn it into a staging area for a full scale, long term fortified, self-sufficient base with staff and equipment
and now you're in charge of improving your base by going out and collecting all of that
Yeah, I don't know how they are going to handle the 'you are in command' part. But otherwise I want to see the same progression on screen (visually and otherwise).

User avatar
fuzzyballs01
Novice
Posts: 48
Joined: April 4th, 2017, 9:56 am

Re: Base Management

Post by fuzzyballs01 » July 11th, 2017, 10:33 am

your squad isn't in command
whoever you left in charge is, probably the tutourial character
all you need is an extra screen in the menus to let you select options

or you could have your squad be in command, radio in commands to the guy who carries them out, the guy who got his leg blown off in the tutourial or whatever

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3556
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Base Management

Post by Gizmo » July 11th, 2017, 2:10 pm

Grohal wrote:
July 1st, 2017, 3:04 pm
As long as the base is close to Baldurs Gate 2/Neverwinter Nights 2 and far away from Fallout 4 I'd say they are on the right track.
What about a base similar to the Disciples series? The Disciples games are essentially exactly what the OP asked for, but in an elven fantasy setting. Not only is the main game mostly sending out squads, but the the player builds on to the base a little bit every day, and this expands their abilities. Squads can also take neutral and enemy outposts in the field. They gain AC against enemy attack while inside their own base (entrenched), as well as gain access to reinforcements and medical treatment; better than that found in the field.

User avatar
Grohal
Adventurer
Posts: 999
Joined: April 26th, 2013, 9:51 pm

Re: Base Management

Post by Grohal » July 12th, 2017, 1:19 am

Gizmo wrote:
July 11th, 2017, 2:10 pm
Grohal wrote:
July 1st, 2017, 3:04 pm
As long as the base is close to Baldurs Gate 2/Neverwinter Nights 2 and far away from Fallout 4 I'd say they are on the right track.
What about a base similar to the Disciples series? The Disciples games are essentially exactly what the OP asked for, but in an elven fantasy setting. Not only is the main game mostly sending out squads, but the the player builds on to the base a little bit every day, and this expands their abilities. Squads can also take neutral and enemy outposts in the field. They gain AC against enemy attack while inside their own base (entrenched), as well as gain access to reinforcements and medical treatment; better than that found in the field.
Honestly I can't say. I think I even played part one and two many years ago. But as I have no special rememberance of the bases nor does your text ring a pleasant bell - seems I wasn't overly impressed. :)

Let's just wait until InXile tells us what they plan - and analyse and tear it apart then I'd say. :mrgreen:
Hell is no place, hell is a condition.

User avatar
Mole204
Scholar
Posts: 217
Joined: May 6th, 2013, 3:17 pm

Re: Base Management

Post by Mole204 » July 12th, 2017, 1:43 am

Remo- I think the part we're disagreeing on is the "how" and what it means. The F4 base was practically it's own mini-game. Players go out and collect junk and people and use it to build a tin shack into a small building, or a version of the old style frontier outpost. The same as with Skyrim, I think, where they just store all sorts of stuff that's in the game to collect and store, including decorations and intentional things to collect. It's got no real purpose.
In WL2, you didn't "unlock parts of the base" (not even literally, because that could have been fun), that was all part of the game. It wasn't YOUR base, you were just doing fetch and carry for successive Rangers.
So what I wouldn't want to see in WL3 is a base that you fill up and add rooms and absolutely have to be tied down to the same location. If they do stuff like the "leave Wasteland and goto LA, and never return" that could really bite the player. "The ranger base" is a term that covers two things. 1- It's just the point on the map where the bossman with the radio is. Unreachable and non-enterable, and not threatened by the events of the game. 2- where the players hang out for now, making use of the healer, merchant, and water, until they go find another healer and merchant in a more convenient location.
The idea of finding a military base with impressive and immovable equipment, like radar, sounds neat, but I'd bet that that would become just another "friendly" point on the map to visit when it becomes necessary, not because You Must go there because You Must use it because the programmers added it.

Let's just wait until InXile tells us what they plan - and analyse and tear it apart then I'd say.

They just gave us an update a little while ago, but they didn't talk about much other than "here's news about a car" and more talk about the other games they're making.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3556
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Base Management

Post by Gizmo » July 12th, 2017, 2:21 am

fuzzyballs01 wrote:
July 11th, 2017, 10:33 am
your squad isn't in command
whoever you left in charge is, probably the tutourial character
all you need is an extra screen in the menus to let you select options

or you could have your squad be in command, radio in commands to the guy who carries them out, the guy who got his leg blown off in the tutourial or whatever
This is how the Disciples series works. The player has a stronghold, (and probably other minor settlements of various size—village to full cities). These locations can hold a squad; left to defend them. That squad could be raw recruits, veterans, or the player's best troops—but if its them, then they are not out in the field, where they are best used. Enemies can attack and take these places if they defeat the defenders.

The player can be concentrating elsewhere on the map, but if their city is attacked, that's their next fight.

User avatar
fuzzyballs01
Novice
Posts: 48
Joined: April 4th, 2017, 9:56 am

Re: Base Management

Post by fuzzyballs01 » July 12th, 2017, 7:56 am

Mole204 wrote:
July 12th, 2017, 1:43 am
The idea of finding a military base with impressive and immovable equipment, like radar, sounds neat, but I'd bet that that would become just another "friendly" point on the map to visit when it becomes necessary, not because You Must go there because You Must use it because the programmers added it.

I never said anything about forcing your rangers to go back after ever sortie
you didn't do that in W2
I don't want to do that in W3 either, going through the same map, even if it's evolving, just to sell loot is going to get old pretty quick
it should be just one of the many different locations where you can pick up randomised quests, get healed, and get rid of junk
I just want to feel like we're in charge of more than just dialogue options, I want to be in charge of the entire Colorado chapter in a non-intrusive way
you are the law
you advise people on what to do
you can be the selfless good guys or you can be the mercenaries who'll do anything for money, and the base you build should reflect that

User avatar
Mole204
Scholar
Posts: 217
Joined: May 6th, 2013, 3:17 pm

Re: Base Management

Post by Mole204 » July 12th, 2017, 8:47 pm

I'm not saying the journey to the merchant is either/or, just what we did in WL2, kind of what we did in WL2, and we'll probably do so in WL3. We don't know anything about how it'll all go together.

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Base Management

Post by Remo » July 13th, 2017, 1:20 am

Mole204 wrote:
July 12th, 2017, 1:43 am
In WL2, you didn't "unlock parts of the base" (not even literally, because that could have been fun), that was all part of the game. It wasn't YOUR base, you were just doing fetch and carry for successive Rangers.
You mentioned this before, but i feel that this is a meaningless distinction. In WL2 the prison and helipad areas were unlocked after certain quests/plot triggers, so in exact same way you can have base building be "part of the game". And obviously you can phrase these in any way you want, whether it is "your base" you choice, or you are choosing what quest you want todo to help someone.. Underneath it all it is the exact same mechanic as far as what I asked for, no matter if you trigger these things through quests, dialogue or build menu etc.

---

Also nitpick wise. In all such games you spend most of your time adventuring, but Ranger HQ is very much your team's base, which is both a quest hub to which you keep returning and an essential part of the plot where a certain fight will be forced based on your choices --like it was with Crossroad Keep(NWN2) and Caed Nua(PoE)-- while as far as I know in FO4 you can ignore the settlement building aspect completely.. So its kind of the opposite of what you were suggesting.

Also, I feel that people underestimate some of FO4 achievements because its Action-RPG from Beth.. They give you the tools to make use of all the junk you scavenge in the wasteland, which you can either sell or scrap for parts and reuse to macgyver armor/weapons and or constructions. And sure, If you wish you can use it to help locals to grow stronger, but you can also ignore it completely or simply use any of the uninhibited location to set up camp. Just put up a bedroll, some storage container and automated turret for good measure, rest and continue on your adventure..

And isn't that exactly what you have been doing.. p.s. that not to suggest that their gameplay is applicable to our game.
Gizmo wrote:
July 12th, 2017, 2:21 am
This is how the Disciples series works. The player has a stronghold, (and probably other minor settlements of various size—village to full cities). These locations can hold a squad; left to defend them. That squad could be raw recruits, veterans, or the player's best troops—but if its them, then they are not out in the field, where they are best used. Enemies can attack and take these places if they defeat the defenders.
I don't know how the 'Disciples' series works**. And based on your description alone, I am having a hard time figuring out what this has todo with topic of base anything and the suggestion you quoted. Besides, wouldn't JA2 1.13 be a better fit for what you described here? Which also has more similar gameplay and theme ( you play as the hired help, brought about to re-establish order to war torn land ruled by dictator)

** Quick look at youtube suggest that it has similar gameplay to 'Heroes of Might and Magic'.
Last edited by Remo on July 13th, 2017, 2:00 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3556
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Base Management

Post by Gizmo » July 13th, 2017, 1:46 am

Remo wrote:
July 13th, 2017, 1:20 am
p.s. that not to suggest that their gameplay is applicable to our game.
It's not applicable to Fallout either. ;)
Mole204 wrote:
July 12th, 2017, 1:43 am
In WL2, you didn't "unlock parts of the base" (not even literally, because that could have been fun), that was all part of the game. It wasn't YOUR base, you were just doing fetch and carry for successive Rangers.
I don't have any issues with that. The party are active duty Rangers; (or am I mistaken about that?). It's not like Baldur's Gate, with a sovereign band of individuals, out for their own reasons. The party in Wasteland games has always been obligated to the organization, and on a mission for them... Why should any stronghold be their own—personal holding?

What would happen if the Ranger Center sent additional squads into the land, and some arrived at this stronghold? Would they not see it as Ranger property; occupied by rangers, and for all rangers alike? How would the organization react to being told "Get off my lawn, this place is mine!" ?
If the party cannot do that, then it is not their own place. IMO, this would be a bit like a S.W.A.T. team sent to take over a mansion, outing the criminal owner, but then claiming it as their own pad for after hours recreation team time sharing. That wouldn't fly with the city police.

A big problem with FO3, was that a Fallout series protagonist should never have the time —or inclination(!) to settle down in a house. Doing so should have been grounds for the game to end... having no reason to bother continuing with a tangent story-line of the player's own whimsy. Fallout 1 simply quit if the player abandoned the quest, or was incapable of completing it in reasonable time. Personally, I would certainly hope that Rangers will be held to a schedule, and held accountable for ignoring their assigned missions. An indefinite vacation in a fortified house counts as desertion in my book.

**I don't actually look forward to a player base; especially not the kind seen in BG2, or PoE.

User avatar
undecaf
Explorer
Posts: 398
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 5:48 am

Re: Base Management

Post by undecaf » July 13th, 2017, 7:25 am

Don't know about management stuff, but InXile could randomize what occurs inside the ranger base. Kind of set up random encounters there for every time you enter (and add a timer that prevents getting different state every time by just walking out and back in from the front gate).
- Who/how many people are outside and inside,
- Who/how many people are jailed,
- Captured new critters at the kennels (possible animal whisperer fodder),
- People gathered around a violent accident,
- Infighting between fellow rangers,
- Cleaning up and nursing the wounded after a "recent" attack of a rival faction that you didn't get to witness,
...and so forth...

All kinds of little stuff to add interactivity and surprising little bits of reactivity. Maybe, if you get certain encounters, you get side missions that you'd not otherwise get (and maybe you won't even get the right encounter so you'll not see that mission and thus can't help the situation...). Interactions with the people and objects in and outside based on the base based on its state (in what ever way it evolves through the game).
Last edited by undecaf on July 13th, 2017, 8:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
"A human being in his last extremity IS a bag of shit."

Remo
Scholar
Posts: 144
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 3:16 am

Re: Base Management

Post by Remo » July 13th, 2017, 7:59 am

^ That is more inline with what I was thinking. Only not just random encounters, but also have certain events and or things change along with the progress you make.

----
Gizmo wrote:
July 13th, 2017, 1:46 am
I don't have any issues with that. The party are active duty Rangers; (or am I mistaken about that?). It's not like Baldur's Gate, with a sovereign band of individuals, out for their own reasons. The party in Wasteland games has always been obligated to the organization, and on a mission for them... Why should any stronghold be their own—personal holding?
Again meaningless distinction as it pertains to the topic. While 'Your' implies ownership --and indeed in BG2, NWN2 and PoE you, the player, came into possession of those strongholds-- this only matter for how you shape your narrative --as in the other whole 'chosen one' discussion--, meanwhile the Ranger HQ wasn't any less "your" team's base of operations, and IMO functionally it was more so than in any of these games.

Here is an excerpt from the WL3 design doc:
Command Your Ranger Base
Early in Wasteland 3’s story, you will take command of a new Ranger Base in Colorado, establishing a foothold in hostile, harsh, and unforgiving territory. The Ranger Base will present events, moral and ethical dilemmas, and quests based on your choices. It will be up to you to recruit promising new Rangers and support personnel from the local population and decide how to deal with the crises and challenges that are brought to your door.
We can argue that it isn't your base, or that its not you but the team that take command.. but lets not get derailed with nitpicking and stay the the course :roll:

----
Gizmo wrote:
July 13th, 2017, 1:46 am
A big problem with FO3, was that a Fallout series protagonist should never have the time —or inclination(!) to settle down in a house. Doing so should have been grounds for the game to end... having no reason to bother continuing with a tangent story-line of the player's own whimsy. Fallout 1 simply quit if the player abandoned the quest, or was incapable of completing it in reasonable time. Personally, I would certainly hope that Rangers will be held to a schedule, and held accountable for ignoring their assigned missions. An indefinite vacation in a fortified house counts as desertion in my book.
Comon you know better.. Yes, FO1 had a strict time limit for the water chip mission (for obvious reasons) but there was no restriction for how long it takes you to finish the game (removed in the final patch) and while FO2 had overall time limit it was so high that it was virtually insignificant and you could run around the wasteland and do everything. Same goes for FO:NV which had no overall time limit.

So depending on your story, you could wonder the wastes for few month or years.. And obtaining some place to call your own, so that after month in wasteland sleeping in bedroll on the hard ground you can kick on something better than rented flee ridden mattress in some dump, this isn't the same as settling down (it's just money sink, good investment, and or perks of getting somewhere ) Also according to the wiki, In FO:NW you had 10 player house locations.. and I doubt you will say that obsidian used them to let the player settle down ..

So FO3 reasoning was perfectly fine in this regard. But in either case, we aren't talking about player houses.. only the new Ranger HQ in Colorado.

User avatar
Gizmo
Grandmaster
Posts: 3556
Joined: March 6th, 2012, 6:25 am

Re: Base Management

Post by Gizmo » July 13th, 2017, 5:03 pm

Remo wrote:
July 13th, 2017, 7:59 am
Yes, FO1 had a strict time limit for the water chip mission (for obvious reasons) but there was no restriction for how long it takes you to finish the game (removed in the final patch)...
That was a shame too.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9462
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: Base Management

Post by Drool » July 13th, 2017, 10:20 pm

Gizmo wrote:
July 13th, 2017, 5:03 pm
Remo wrote:
July 13th, 2017, 7:59 am
Yes, FO1 had a strict time limit for the water chip mission (for obvious reasons) but there was no restriction for how long it takes you to finish the game (removed in the final patch)...
That was a shame too.
Not exactly. The water chip timer remained. It was the invisible, unannounced timer for the Master invading the vault after the water chip that was removed.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

User avatar
Mole204
Scholar
Posts: 217
Joined: May 6th, 2013, 3:17 pm

Re: Base Management

Post by Mole204 » July 13th, 2017, 11:52 pm

I don't know about time limits for missions, that's exactly what I meant about (one of) the reasons why restoring from backup freely is needed. "Oh, I went to get enough ammo to survive the trip. ... What do you mean I won't have enough time left to succeed in the mission?" or something to prevent other variations of "But I've been playing the mission for over (time)! What a ripoff!"
And that idea of having to manage the Ranger Base sounds enough of a reason to appoint a sub-commander and take to the road!
Like Gizmo was saying about taking over a building, there should be nothing preventing a player from setting up camp, taking a level or gathering supplies, and then starting the mission. I can see why that might not apply to "Timmy fell down the well" or "Mabel is about to be torn apart by werewolves.", but there's been a long history of RPG flexibility about when you get there. Sometimes you just want to stop and look around.
---
-In WL2, you didn't "unlock parts of the base" (not even literally, because that could have been fun), that was all part of the game.
-You mentioned this before, but i feel that this is a meaningless distinction.

There is a distinction, I've just avoided enough lousy games that I can't describe the down side properly.
"You defeated the dragon! Here's an extra room just for storing pretty wands!"
"You defeated the minotaur! Here's an extra room just to put racks of shields in!"
The "you MUST do the mission so you can do interior decorating" can be very iffy. Perhaps I should have played more Fallout, Skyrim, or Barbie, where much of the "Please don't" example comes from. You don't really need to do base-building, all I needed in WL2 was the storage box and where I chose to put the ammo dump. Deciding on throw rugs would have been too far, maybe. I preferred the stripped-down game of WL1, after all. In WL2 the base was already furnished. Not saying there isn't something I could think cool, but it could fit in the storage box anyway.
Now, if you could unlock parts of the base, you could be getting into things that hadn't been touched since the week of the WW3 blow-up. There's no shortage of room outside, but characters might want to get the indoors room with the surviving gas-line hookup, or the modem line run behind the concrete wall, etc. Waiting for Snake to unlock the helicopter isn't doing anyone any favors, and isn't getting your team any new territory to stash your heap of gear in. Or maybe I'm just a bit of a fan of "loose cannon" craziness.
We're going to have a car or two (at least) in WL3. Where are we going to put them? What are we going to do when we're faced with the inevitable "Alright, vehicle destroyed." or Scotchmo Junior steals our car while we're being forced to stand around and (wishing we could just shoot him)/listen to some moron npc try to imitate R. Lee Emery? We're going to need another car. So we're going to need a car park, or a garage, or some place our grease monkey lesbians from Daymonta have to work in.
Does Fallout 4's flying saucer TOTALLY block off any possibility of stealing a Serpoid saucer from Mars just to park outside the base? There's a lot of "X did it first" back and forth on that one.
Now I can't help but want to do flying-saucer fly-overs of Bastion, playing Accept, Ratt, and Quiet Riot, records.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests