DUST Search - The DUST 514 'Slippery Slopes'

Protected Void wrote:

Good points, especially the one about Orbital Bombardments. If I'm not mistaken, the points earned from OB kills count towards the next OB, enhancing the slippery slope effect further.

I like your suggestion for changing what makes it available, but I'd prefer it if each squad earned them through active game time. Something along these lines:

Each squad member playing actively earns one OB point for that squad each second played
When enough OB points have been accumulated, the squad leader can deploy it the same way he can now
The number of OB points required should be set high enough that a full squad needs to play at least 5 minutes to get one (or it could just be unavailable for the first 5 minutes)
The total possible OB points for a three man squad should allow one OB, say, 11-12 minutes into the match, possibly one for two man squads right before 15 minutes have passed
The total possible OB points for a full squad shouldn't allow more than two (or possibly three) OBs in total for a skirmish that times out (assuming size and power of the current warbarge strikes)
What the squad actually achieves with the deployed OB doesn't affect how quickly they'll accumulate OB points for the next one
Different types and sizes of OBs could have different costs to provide more strategic decisions
In the future, squad leader skills or equipment could be introduced, which could be trained/used to increase the rate at which OB points are earned

This would still reward organized squad play, but ease the slippery slope/snowballing effect. Any organized squad would have a chance to deploy an OB if they played most or all of the match, while one-man-squads wouldn't get any.

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
The Black Jackal The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine 865	Posted - 2013.10.03 11:56:00 - [1] - Quote I was recently pointed to an article that described a term I'd long known about but hadn't given much thought to for DUST 514. The 'slippery slope' that games like DUST do have. (Credit to David Gimble for pointing me to the article.) To give everyone a reference, a 'slippery slope' as it pertains to gaming is a mechanic that makes winning harder, when you lose resources. In DUST 514, this would be many things, but the first would be Skirmish Null Cannons. The longer you don't hold them, the harder it is to come back. If Team A Holds the cannons for 'most' of the match, they are practically guaranteed a win, because the other team (Team B) would be unable to turn the tide before their Mobile Command Centre was destroyed. This alone, is a slippery slope, and though realistic, can lead to people rage quitting games, or 'giving up' prior to the end of the match... of course increasing the detrimental effect of the slippery slope. But alone, this single mechanic is not game breaking. Why? Because it is a single slippery slope. DUST 514 incorporates many slippery slopes, but to illustrate the point I'm trying to make, i'll take the above 'Null Cannon in Skirmish Mode', 'Clone Resources' and 'Orbital Bombardment' slopes. Quote: Null Cannon in Skirmish Mode This Slippery Slope is pretty easy to explain. The longer you don't hold the majority of points, the harder it is to get back into a winning position. And at one point, there is a balance that tips, and it is actually impossible to gain back that ground, even if your team rallied and captured every cannon. Possible Solution (In current Iteration of Game): Adopt the Domination-style for Points. Multiple Points, that do damage, but the MCC to MCC damage is minor. So, as with Domination, you can have half armor comapartive to their full Shield, and still pull of a victory so long as you rally together. Beyond that, giving players control of the MCC (so it's non-linear) and possibly players controlling the Null Cannons (so they are too non-linear) would alleviate this slippery slope. Quote: Clone Resources Every Clone lost is one more clone that you cannot use to take a point. In the grand scheme of things, this is a minor slope, but one that enhances the above Null Cannon Slope, and gets more impactful as the enhanced slope gets worse. Less clones means it's harder to regain objectives, as the people holding them are more capable of defending them, due to not having to capture it. Possible Solution (In current iteration of Game): Clone Pool Resources for each structure and/or vehicle capable of allowing spawns. (Clone Reanimation Units, Vehicle-Mounted CRUs). Each with a certain number of spawns for that structure. CRUs may hold enough clones for 50 respawns, while Vehicular CRUs may hold enough for 10 (with the ability to resupply at the MCC / Base). If these vehicles are destroyed, or the stuructures destroyed, those clone resources vanish, and if they are captured, the other team will gain those resources. The MCC would carry the 'initial' Clone Resources (the one's sent by the contract corporation) while on field structures etc would have excess clones. This mechanic would allow both sides to increase, and decrease the opponent's ability to spawn. Quote: Orbital Bombardment The biggest escalation reward in the game, and aside from skill points, the ONLY thing in the game dependant on War Points. The team that does better, gets more war points, and they get enough war points to get an orbital, orbital then depletes clones / vehicles and possibly allows a point to be captured. It's again, not a game breaker on it's own, but combined with the others, it's another slippery slope enhancer. Not to mention that you can farm Warpoints hitting nuetral installations without risk, and if you're smart, these alone at the start of the match can give you enough War Points for said Orbital with no risk. In a game where the words 'risk vs. reward' are toted about quite alot, this is clearly not in the overall 'scheme' of things to come. Possible Solution (In current game iteration): Unlock the Orbital from War Points. Give the command of Orbitals to the designated 'Ground Commander' on a Cooldown. This way both teams have access to the same Orbital Numbers, and thus eliminating the slippery slope DUST-side at least. These are just some of the slippery slopes DUST 514 has built into it. Each on their own are not so bad as to break the game, but the sheer number means that each game gets to a point where it is 'hopeless' to be able to win, and you have people leaving mid-game or giving up and sitting in the MCC so as not to lose more investment. The slippery slope mechanics need to be reduced, or removed where possible, making it so a team that is losing can make a comeback, and the winning team must be on guard, becasue even if it seems like a sure win, it could still be turned around. Making it much more fun for everyone.
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon 514 Turalyon Alliance 3657	Posted - 2013.10.03 12:19:00 - [2] - Quote I do like the idea of clone resources on a per structure basis. Your proposed solution for null cannons scaling is actually quite nice. Initially I thought that it'd just make the match take forever if relatively evenly matched but after some thought I realised it would be controlled by the effect of clone counts, also making for more strategic possibilities if the clones per structure is implemented as clones become more important, but focusing too heavily on clone structures leaves the objectives open. So, I like it. It'd also serve to prevent particularly one-sided games from going on for an obnoxiously long period of time. As for your third and final point, I like it, but when considering orbitals it's also necessary to think about the EVE side. Warbarge strikes are being removed in FW and PC so eventually that'll become important. At the same time, the pubmatch mechanics also have to be considered and as orbital mechanic suggestions in pubmatches go this is a fairly good one.
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 301	Posted - 2013.10.03 13:12:00 - [3] - Quote The Black Jackal wrote: 'slippery slope' Very good suggestions. Solid application of game design. ...Sometimes I wonder whether CCP actually has game designers at their office or just video game enthusiasts...
Protected Void STRONG-ARMED BANDITS Public Disorder. 107	Posted - 2013.10.03 14:37:00 - [4] - Quote Good points, especially the one about Orbital Bombardments. If I'm not mistaken, the points earned from OB kills count towards the next OB, enhancing the slippery slope effect further. I like your suggestion for changing what makes it available, but I'd prefer it if each squad earned them through active game time. Something along these lines: Each squad member playing actively earns one OB point for that squad each second played When enough OB points have been accumulated, the squad leader can deploy it the same way he can now The number of OB points required should be set high enough that a full squad needs to play at least 5 minutes to get one (or it could just be unavailable for the first 5 minutes) The total possible OB points for a three man squad should allow one OB, say, 11-12 minutes into the match, possibly one for two man squads right before 15 minutes have passed The total possible OB points for a full squad shouldn't allow more than two (or possibly three) OBs in total for a skirmish that times out (assuming size and power of the current warbarge strikes) What the squad actually achieves with the deployed OB doesn't affect how quickly they'll accumulate OB points for the next one Different types and sizes of OBs could have different costs to provide more strategic decisions In the future, squad leader skills or equipment could be introduced, which could be trained/used to increase the rate at which OB points are earned This would still reward organized squad play, but ease the slippery slope/snowballing effect. Any organized squad would have a chance to deploy an OB if they played most or all of the match, while one-man-squads wouldn't get any.
Skihids Bullet Cluster 2230	Posted - 2013.10.03 17:01:00 - [5] - Quote I suggested that CRUs actually hold clones that can be captured or destroyed in another thread. I wasn't thinking about the slippery slope at the time, but rather injecting more strategy into the game. This gives just one more reason for it.
The Black Jackal The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine 874	Posted - 2013.10.03 22:13:00 - [6] - Quote Protected Void wrote: Good points, especially the one about Orbital Bombardments. If I'm not mistaken, the points earned from OB kills count towards the next OB, enhancing the slippery slope effect further. I like your suggestion for changing what makes it available, but I'd prefer it if each squad earned them through active game time. Something along these lines: Each squad member playing actively earns one OB point for that squad each second played When enough OB points have been accumulated, the squad leader can deploy it the same way he can now The number of OB points required should be set high enough that a full squad needs to play at least 5 minutes to get one (or it could just be unavailable for the first 5 minutes) The total possible OB points for a three man squad should allow one OB, say, 11-12 minutes into the match, possibly one for two man squads right before 15 minutes have passed The total possible OB points for a full squad shouldn't allow more than two (or possibly three) OBs in total for a skirmish that times out (assuming size and power of the current warbarge strikes) What the squad actually achieves with the deployed OB doesn't affect how quickly they'll accumulate OB points for the next one Different types and sizes of OBs could have different costs to provide more strategic decisions In the future, squad leader skills or equipment could be introduced, which could be trained/used to increase the rate at which OB points are earned This would still reward organized squad play, but ease the slippery slope/snowballing effect. Any organized squad would have a chance to deploy an OB if they played most or all of the match, while one-man-squads wouldn't get any. The only issue I have with this is an MCC-camping Squad that could potentially come out with an Orbital. 6 guys, all 'afk' in the MCC (it does still happen) can get Orbitals at the same rate as an active 6-man squad. I wouldn't be adverse to squad leaders being able to call in Orbitals on a CD individually, but the CD would have to be higher and possibly require you to have an 'Orbital Uplink' Equipment or Module that goes onto Cooldown once used. Conversely, the Fanfest rules would be a great addition. You get an orbital every 3 minutes if you control the space above the district uncontested in EVE. The Warbarge strike is completely removed and Orbitals only come when you have space superiority. This mechanic is still a slippery slope, of sorts, but one that is player controlled, as a friendly fleet can jump to the district space and halt the current holder's Orbital Bombardment Timer.
Thurak1 Psygod9 D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 246	Posted - 2013.10.03 23:26:00 - [7] - Quote Very well written and very good points. I myself cant remember the last time i was in a match where it seemed like either side could win after about 10 minutes one side is getting stomped.
Goric Rumis Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn 216	Posted - 2013.10.03 23:43:00 - [8] - Quote Great post. Some of your solutions could use some work, but they're a solid starting point for discussion. The Black Jackal wrote: Null Cannon in Skirmish Mode Possible Solution (In current Iteration of Game): Adopt the Domination-style for Points. Multiple Points, that do damage, but the MCC to MCC damage is minor. So, as with Domination, you can have half armor comapartive to their full Shield, and still pull of a victory so long as you rally together. Beyond that, giving players control of the MCC (so it's non-linear) and possibly players controlling the Null Cannons (so they are too non-linear) would alleviate this slippery slope. In principle, I like the idea of players operating the Null Cannons, so that the more cannons you've captured the fewer clones you have in play. In practice, however, no one's going to want to operate the null cannons if they're just pointing and shooting at the MCC. It's even less fun than guarding an unchallenged point. I do think reducing MCC-on-MCC damage could help alleviate this problem, but I believe this was added to fix a different problem. Can't remember exactly what it was, but there was a time when the MCC didn't have weapons. The Black Jackal wrote: Clone Resources Possible Solution (In current iteration of Game): Clone Pool Resources for each structure and/or vehicle capable of allowing spawns. (Clone Reanimation Units, Vehicle-Mounted CRUs). Each with a certain number of spawns for that structure. CRUs may hold enough clones for 50 respawns, while Vehicular CRUs may hold enough for 10 (with the ability to resupply at the MCC / Base). If these vehicles are destroyed, or the stuructures destroyed, those clone resources vanish, and if they are captured, the other team will gain those resources. The MCC would carry the 'initial' Clone Resources (the one's sent by the contract corporation) while on field structures etc would have excess clones. This mechanic would allow both sides to increase, and decrease the opponent's ability to spawn. The most problematic solution, as it could result in adding a slippery slope rather than alleviating it. The team that captures more null cannons is very likely to have captured more installations as well. If that's the case, the team that's losing is even more outnumbered than before. Sure, they can capture the installations back, but then they've lost the advantage of however many clones the enemy team has already used. Speaking of which, what gets depleted first--MCC clones, structure clones, or vehicle clones? Does it depend on where you're spawning? Could losing a structure take you down to 0 clones and end the match? The Black Jackal wrote: Orbital Bombardment Possible Solution (In current game iteration): Unlock the Orbital from War Points. Give the command of Orbitals to the designated 'Ground Commander' on a Cooldown. This way both teams have access to the same Orbital Numbers, and thus eliminating the slippery slope DUST-side at least. My preference is for the squads to still get rewarded. Here's an alternative: Each team gets a periodic orbital strike (say, every 5 minutes). The squad on the team that has earned the most war points since the last orbital was awarded receives the ability to lay down an orbital. The counter gets reset each time a strike is awarded, so even if a team dominates early on they're not getting more orbitals by resting on their laurels. Thurak1 wrote: I myself cant remember the last time i was in a match where it seemed like either side could win after about 10 minutes one side is getting stomped. Really? I was in one just last night, on my sub-1M SP alt. (Not an academy match, by the way.) My team won a Skirmish by probably 10 seconds. I'll grant they're the exception rather than the rule, but I'd say one out of every four or five matches is close enough to be exciting.
The Black Jackal The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine 875	Posted - 2013.10.04 00:01:00 - [9] - Quote Quote: The most problematic solution, as it could result in adding a slippery slope rather than alleviating it. The team that captures more null cannons is very likely to have captured more installations as well. If that's the case, the team that's losing is even more outnumbered than before. Sure, they can capture the installations back, but then they've lost the advantage of however many clones the enemy team has already used. Speaking of which, what gets depleted first--MCC clones, structure clones, or vehicle clones? Does it depend on where you're spawning? Could losing a structure take you down to 0 clones and end the match? The structure and vehicle Clones would deplete when you spawned on them. And these clones would be in Addition to the ones already stared. So there is not one big pool of clones, but rather a big pool in your MCC, and more able to be attained. Thus it wont make the current slope any worse, but allow players to circumvent it.
SponkSponkSponk The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine 389	Posted - 2013.10.04 02:15:00 - [10] - Quote The Black Jackal wrote: The structure and vehicle Clones would deplete when you spawned on them. And these clones would be in Addition to the ones already stared. So there is not one big pool of clones, but rather a big pool in your MCC, and more able to be attained. Thus it wont make the current slope any worse, but allow players to circumvent it. wait, so you mean that after someone spawns at Point B a couple dozen times, it's out of clones and you can't spawn there any more? That sounds awesome.

low genius the sound of freedom Renegade Alliance 617	Posted - 2013.10.04 02:22:00 - [11] - Quote the damage done to the mcc needs to be directly tied to the objectives controlled. it's crazy that you can't make a late match comeback in this game. that should certainly be changed.
Thurak1 Psygod9 D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 246	Posted - 2013.10.04 03:03:00 - [12] - Quote I know myself when i am in a match and there is only 1/4 of the enemy mcc hull left and friendly is full or better i only worry about holding 1 objective. Course at that point in a match even the enemy has pretty much given up it becomes hard to even find clones to kill.


Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page