This should replace domination with a more complex system like this, and of course this would be on Dusts back burner for the time being but a bump is deserved for the well though out system here.

This sounds more like a replacement for skirmish, but I like it. I say just add it in as another game mode. Would allow us to do something different and still enjoy the current Dom mode.

This should replace domination with a more complex system like this, and of course this would be on Dusts back burner for the time being but a bump is deserved for the well though out system here.

Dynamic victory/ failure state conditions and null cannon supply chains.

Ok., so iv been thinking, to spice up fw (and to a side effect domination) why not have dynamic victory/failure state conditions
(please not a failure state dose not have to mean game over)

example: having a supply chain of different instillation's making the null cannon work.
-Targeting station
-Ammo dump
-Heat synch
-Main power generator (powers a single null cannon network)
-Sub power generator (powering a network component as to not lose accumulated progress loading a missile or targeting ect...)

so rather then having one console on a null cannon you need to control multiple points, to maintain the cannon.
At this point you might be thinking ok, so what if the other team has taken the power out or has control of a component of the cannon my team is holding, lets start with the power been taking offline. So first things first you would need to repair it if its been damaged and/or hack it, how ever the main power would trigger a lock down where all the doors in the null cannon facility
meaning to go from room to room would take a cutting tool slowing the progress of the other team, while the holding team can spawn in different rooms to clear out the enemies( seeming alittle one sided but hold on) there would need to be multiple breach points in the null cannon facility so the invading team can either bust down the front door, go in through the roof .
(different entry points would have different breach times, once breached the doors can be repaired by players or auto repaired once the main power is back online.)

to make this kind of system work the game would ither need more players per match or less null cannons that are considerably more powerful.

What if the opposing team has control of the targeting system but my team has every thing else? what im i was thinking is that the null cannon can be manually operated to guide the missile to its target, how ever this would be slower and more with a higher chance to miss.
(stick with me here i know it should seem like the missile should have on bored targeting but this is just for the idea)
Now your probably wondering why dose the cannon need tho be targets at all once it has a lock on the M.C.C. in the first place.
Answer the M.C.C. will be moved across the map in a hex based system by an eve pilot or A.I if no pilot is available, controlling the position, orientation & elevation of the M.C.C.
Position control - to justify the aiming system for the null cannon, but to also give a more dynamic atmosphere to the game, also this would mean spawning on the M.C.C. might not be a viable option late in the game, meaning you would ither need to be able to get a drop ship off the M.C.C. or be fired from some kinda jump pad.
Orientation - this would control the detail of the information sent by the M.C.C. marker locations distance markers (aiming at a target would result in a clear distance marker though)
Elevation - this would be effective at disorientating incoming missiles increasing the chance to miss, also allowing the M.C.C. to use mountains as cover.
(just to note dose not have to be hex based just some sort of grid nor would the window for the eve player need to be that big just reasonably sized so a good judgement call can be made)

now before you get antsy about where the M.C.C. could move, it would be allowed a zone around the battle not directly over it as this would make it to easy to hit and to op of a spawn point.

ok now imagine the following, one M.C.C. is hiding in such a place where the null cannons cannot get a manual lock and the targeting system is locked down by the other team. this is where other victory conditions would come into play.

possible alternative victory conditions would really bring meaning into who is attacking and who is defending.
If destroying the defenders M.C.C. is deemed impossible/ improbable a lock down on a central power facility will be lifted
leave the base open to expensive sabotage or complete destruction. sabotage or destruction as a victory state would be a non wanted outcome by the attacker, meaning less pay but maybe more sp or some thing.

sabotage- damaging the facility to the point where next time it is attacked (& not repaired) functions such as lock down, targeting and power flow will be disrupted. after being sabotaged if the defender mcc still wont give the only option is either defeat or destruction. (defending team can still fight to win)

Destruction would destroy the base and be a loss for both sides, nothing more then a last hope option triggered by eve pilots.

On the flip side, if the attacker M.C.C. becomes impossible or improbable to destroy the following options become
available. (cloning them obliviously) lock down & stock purge.

Lock down- a underground facility with entrances allover the map & internal automated security, would contain a set of consoles that once activated within (x) amount of time with in each other would trigger a lock down locking down all buildings for the second attack.

- stock purge is a no win scenario where the defending team is ordered to activated a secondary system in the facility purging all clones and abandoning it. (meaning no on wins anything)


sabotage & lock down would leave the base open for a second attack witch would be offered as a contract for redeployment after the match it over. How ever destruction and stock purge would leave the base inaccessible to dust forces until intervention from ither an eve pilot or an A.I. ( A.I. only intervening if the base has been abandoned for (x) amount of time.

I have been typing this for awhile now and not sure how much sense i made, if you got anything from that let me know.