DUST Search - Multi stage Factional Warfare battles - Dust players seeing the big picture

All Channels

General Discussions

Multi stage Factional Warfare battles - Dust players seeing the big picture

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Booker DaFooker Seraphim Auxiliaries 128	Posted - 2013.10.23 15:12:00 - [121] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Varying levels of player groups, much like in Faction Warfare in Eve Online. Have some districts restricted to 6v6, another for 10v10 and a final, full-on district which encompasses 16v16. I'm sure the community would froth at the mouth for the opportunity to play in a game mode where there is less likeliness of being ganked by large organized teams, just as well they would appreciate the ability to field entire teams for themselves. I do think that Team Deploy is part of the puzzle and could really add a lot to Faction Warfare. On the matter of district size you would think that 6 v 6 may help against less organized teams but it can have the opposite effect at times allowing a larger force to actually cover more ground. Maybe the smaller fights happen alongside the main district conflict? been thinking about this. How about if each district had several "support mission". Vehicle free 6 man infiltrations to other smaller areas of a district to a target defended by a small 6 man team. For example the target could be a CRU and controlling it would reduce available clone reinforcement in the main district battle. I'm sure there would be a whole load of viable side mission ideas that would work then give tangible advantages to the progress of the battle as a whole. The support mission are available for each match but if not filled then so be it no problem, but if small teams do fill them then off they go. If it is too difficult to apply bonuses to main battle in real time then maybe they can set improved conditions for the next rouind
Aeon Amadi A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S. 3449	Posted - 2013.10.23 15:22:00 - [122] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Varying levels of player groups, much like in Faction Warfare in Eve Online. Have some districts restricted to 6v6, another for 10v10 and a final, full-on district which encompasses 16v16. I'm sure the community would froth at the mouth for the opportunity to play in a game mode where there is less likeliness of being ganked by large organized teams, just as well they would appreciate the ability to field entire teams for themselves. I do think that Team Deploy is part of the puzzle and could really add a lot to Faction Warfare. On the matter of district size you would think that 6 v 6 may help against less organized teams but it can have the opposite effect at times allowing a larger force to actually cover more ground. Maybe the smaller fights happen alongside the main district conflict? Well, in Eve Online no amount of small complexes are going to flip the sovereignty, still need to get in there and do the larger complexes (unless I'm mistaken). So you could potentially have five or six small districts consisting of 6v6 matches and win them all, but if you don't win the 16v16 than it's not going to matter because it's not going to flip the sovereignty. Makes to where the tighter groups can still participate and make a meaningful impact while the larger groups can do what they do best. Just a thought, really, I didn't think it out too much. Best to let CCP do that anyway.
Fox Gaden Immortal Guides 1370	Posted - 2013.10.23 15:24:00 - [123] - Quote IgniteableAura wrote: Fox Gaden wrote: Kazeno Rannaa wrote: Aero Yassavi wrote: I rather like the idea that it could possibly take hours, or longer, for control of a district to change. To me, then, winning the district would be a much greater accomplishment than just a 15 minute skirmish. Agreed. I also think the probability of fighting over a single district for a day or longer would be very slim and practically non-existent. Aero, I think that may, more than likely be true, yet the possibility still remains. If you have several teams of highly motivated crews participating in the contest for the district it could possibly go for hours, i.e., Hamburger Hill moments that turn into ULTRA-meat grinders. Keep in mind that, though many players may become disenfranchised in a district due to consistent red-lining, you may get a number of people that will become stubborn and tough it out to the bitter end. If the Defenders are Red Lining the attackers, then a District Battle could be over in 1 match. If the attackers are Red Lining the defenders, then the Battle will be over in 4 or 5 matches. For a District Battle to go on for a full Day, both teams would have to be very evenly matched. Think about that. Any battle that went on for that long would be EPIC!!! Let me explain. The old mechanics in PC, where you had to grind and grind and grind for 4 or 5 days to take a district was not fun. Also having to grind for 5 hours to take a district is equally terrible for the same reasons. Having a progression is nice, but I don't want it to feel like its a grind to get there. If the teams are equally matched you could end up with a perpetual state of stalemate and its just a matter of which team burns out faster. A great example would be a corp that is great at Ambush game mode but can't manage to hold objectives in skirmish. I also don't want casual groups who can't play consistently every day for 4 hours to get the wide end of the stick. They should be able to drop into a battle and be able to "finish" in a couple hours. Reducing the number of consecutive battles from 4, to 3 would make a big difference in that aspect. Even just two would probably be a good starting place and they could add, subtract from there. Having different districts have different number of battles could also be a neat idea...similar to how many players can be deployed as well (8v8, 16v16, 32v32 etc)[/quote] So have different districts have different conquering criteria. Maybe some districts only have 1 Null Cannon and other Districts have more, for instance. Possibilities: Ambush > Domination Ambush > Skirmish Ambush > Ambush OMS > Skirmish Ambush > Ambush OMS > Domination Ambush > Ambush OMS > Skirmish > Domination Maybe make the ones that include Skirmish more common, as there are some that donGÇÖt like Domination. You could also vary the number on each side for different Districts. You would be more likely to get EVE support for the longer maches, but not all the battles have to be long, and if conquering one District started a battle in the next district for the eventual capture of the planet, then EVE players may stick around for more than one District Battle and be able to provide support even in the short ones. Of course different planets have different numbers of districts, so the time to take a planet will vary greatly.
Fox Gaden Immortal Guides 1370	Posted - 2013.10.23 15:39:00 - [124] - Quote Victor889 wrote: What about the possibility of people taking advantage of this - like two factions decide to win one round and lose the next - if the prizes are cumulative, they could use this to their advantage and get a crap ton of salvage.. And what if the rounds never end - if one side wins round 2, but then loses round 3 and repeat ad infinitum.. Some cool initial ideas but need fleshing out - which is why we're here. Not trolling - just my opinions. The District battles will eventually end. If two sides are balanced it may go on for a while, but as players leave and new players join the battle the balance will change. It would require a great deal of cooperation and coordination to have a battle last days. Players on both sides would have to cooperate to drag it out.
Fox Gaden Immortal Guides 1370	Posted - 2013.10.23 16:21:00 - [125] - Quote Booker DaFooker wrote: been thinking about this. How about if each district had several "support mission". Vehicle free 6 man infiltrations to other smaller areas of a district to a target defended by a small 6 man team. For example the target could be a CRU and controlling it would reduce available clone reinforcement in the main district battle. I'm sure there would be a whole load of viable side mission ideas that would work then give tangible advantages to the progress of the battle as a whole. The support mission are available for each match but if not filled then so be it no problem, but if small teams do fill them then off they go. If it is too difficult to apply bonuses to main battle in real time then maybe they can set improved conditions for the next rouind That would be an interesting iteration on the original idea that could be added in later to add additional dynamics to the battle.
Booker DaFooker Seraphim Auxiliaries 128	Posted - 2013.10.23 16:25:00 - [126] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: Victor889 wrote: What about the possibility of people taking advantage of this - like two factions decide to win one round and lose the next - if the prizes are cumulative, they could use this to their advantage and get a crap ton of salvage.. And what if the rounds never end - if one side wins round 2, but then loses round 3 and repeat ad infinitum.. Some cool initial ideas but need fleshing out - which is why we're here. Not trolling - just my opinions. The District battles will eventually end. If two sides are balanced it may go on for a while, but as players leave and new players join the battle the balance will change. It would require a great deal of cooperation and coordination to have a battle last days. Players on both sides would have to cooperate to drag it out. support missions may in fact ensure longer drawn out battles aren't so drawn out if they are allowed to effect conditions in main battle. if the support missions are played then one side will always play with an advantage or handicap depending on support mission outcome
Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 1188	Posted - 2013.10.23 16:38:00 - [127] - Quote Maken Tosch wrote: I like it a lot. Although, can I add in a suggestion? How about instead of returning to the warbarge waiting to proceed to the next case (ie: case 1 to case 2) how about introduce a dynamic redline just as what was once featured in Skirmish 1.0 in closed beta (Replication Build)? Case 1: Ambush-like redline which is small and constricted as usual. Case 2: Ambush-OMS redline which is still small but more expanded to accommodate the installations. Case 3: Redline in Ambush OMS will expand outward to the nearest outpost to include the objectives. Case 4: Redline in Skirmish expands further to include a final objective to fight over. Note: Just like Skirmish 1.0, the default spawns move closer to the objectives with each case and the MCC slowly moves in. This could work if in between each battle, the losing side has to "retreat" to a socket behind the newly expanded redline for a given period of time. The winning side would have gained ground, so they would have a chance to "regroup" at a Socket which would be located behind their redline, which would have advanced into the territory, or in the MCC, which could move up as ground is gained. Each Socket would have Defensive installations, Supply Depots, a mobile Marketplace and Fitting Room. Perhaps the last two items could use the same resources found in our Merc Quarters. The MCC already has these stations, so I can't see where this would require much in terms of development. EDIT: Instead of expending in all directions, the Redzones would expand in a more lateral direction, to give the feeling of gaining or losing ground in the battle over the district.
Fox Gaden Immortal Guides 1370	Posted - 2013.10.23 17:12:00 - [128] - Quote Tweaking the way current game match mode mechanics work to make it more cohesive: I am in favour of implementing the system as stated in the Original Post initially, without additional modifications, in order to get it in place faster. However, once it is in place, there are things that could be done to improve the experience that could come as future iterations. One of these is tweaking match mechanics to make them flow more cohesively, so they work in a logical progression. Ambush (the Beach-Head) - The Attackers have to hold their ground for 5 minutes until a CRU is deployed. - Defenders have to clone out the Attackers before the 5 minutes is up so that they can prevent the CRU from being deployed. - Defenders have 2 or 3 times more clones available than the Attackers have, but the Attackers only have to hold their ground for 5 minutes. The Defenders have the resources, but the Attackers have time on their side. Ambush OMS (Getting a Foothold) - The Attackers are attempting to clear out the defenders in the immediate area so that they can setup a base of operation. This base will be their Red Zone in the following Domination and Skirmish matches, but the Defenders need to be cleared out so that a base camp can be setup. - This stage works like a current Ambush OMS with both sides trying to clone out their opponents. Domination (Shutting Down the DistrictGÇÖs Automated Defences) - The objective is the terminal which accesses the Automated District Defences. All Null Cannons are operated by the District Defence Computer and are targeting the Attacking Dropship. - The Attacking team must hack the District Defence Computer to shut it down before their MCC is destroyed. But the Virus upload on the District Defence Computer takes 5 minutes. This means the Attackers must take the objective and hold it for 5 minutes before their MCC is destroyed. - When the Virus upload is successful, the District Defence Computer is compromised and control of the Null Cannons reverts to the targeting computers linked to the individual Null Cannons. With the Automated defences compromised the Attacking MCC has time to repair armour and regenerate shields. The Defenders must bring in their own MCC in a last ditch effort to defend their district, which results in a Skirmish match. Skirmish (Taking the District) - With the District Defence Computer taken down and the Attacking MCC repaired, the Defenders must bring in their own MCC in a last ditch effort to defend their district. - Since the two MCCGÇÖs are evenly matched, both sides are vying for control of the individual Null Cannons to help take out the enemy MCC. - If the Defending MCC is destroyed it gives the Attackers time to repair the District Defence computer and take control of the District. The Defenders are driven completely out of the District. - If the Attacking MCC is destroyed, the attackers will have to bring in another MCC and in the time that takes the Defenders will have repaired the District Defence Computer, setting it back to Domination mode. This setup requires a slight modification to Ambush, and a more substantial modification to Domination, but I think it would make the progressions make sense. Ambush OMS and Skirmish would be unchanged.
Aero Yassavi PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 3129	Posted - 2013.10.23 17:35:00 - [129] - Quote Woke up to 125 notifications, haha. This thread really took off, that's awesome! Also thank you FoxFour for the comment.
Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 1189	Posted - 2013.10.23 18:06:00 - [130] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: *snip* Very nice suggestions. This could also be mirrored to emphasize completely securing a district, and preparations to capture the next district on the planet. Domination (Reboot and Reprogram the DistrictGÇÖs Automated Defences) -New District Holders must Secure, reboot, and reprogram the Automated Defense Computer. -Failure to complete mission objectives results in the Targeting Computers resetting and the District becoming contested once again in another Skirmish (Taking the District) in which the new Defender's MCC would be forced to retreat, and the new Attackers would deploy an MCC of their own. -Winning results in the remainder of enemy forces being pushed back into Ambush OMS (Getting a Foothold) Ambush OMS (Capture or Destroy Enemy Reinforcements/Advance Logistical support for Ground Defenses) - New Defenders must Push back enemy forces and either capture or destroy any remaining enemy installations in the District. -Failure to complete mission objectives results in enemies advancing to Domination (Shutting Down the DistrictGÇÖs Automated Defences) -Successfully completing mission objectives results in driving the enemy back to it's last contingent of remaining ground troops between two Districts in an Ambush (the Beach-Head) Ambush (the Beach-Head) - Defenders of the previously captured district mount an offensive on the next District. - The Attackers have to hold their ground for 5 minutes until a CRU is deployed. - Defenders have to clone out the Attackers before the 5 minutes is up so that they can prevent the CRU from being deployed. - Defenders have 2 or 3 times more clones available than the Attackers have, but the Attackers only have to hold their ground for 5 minutes. The Defenders have the resources, but the Attackers have time on their side. This would give the feeling of a perpetual war over districts on the planet and make taking the entire planet, not only districts the top priority. Once all Districts on a Planet have been taken, it would go into a cooldown period where it could not come under attack for a given period of time, perhaps 24 - 48 hours. At the end of this cooldown, attackers may initiate hostilities in an Ambush (the Beach-Head)

Buzzwords Deadly Blue Dots RISE of LEGION 494	Posted - 2013.10.23 18:14:00 - [131] - Quote op is decent idea, but it really just makes me pine for the old closed beta skirmish. for those who weren't there, think of it as a mix between battlefields "rush" mode, and our current skirmish mode. -there was a clear attacker/defender split. -defenders are attempting to destroy the attackers MCC. attackers are attempting to deactivate/destroy ground based AA (the objectives) to escort their mcc in (yes, the mcc would actually move as the battle progressed) -game started with 2 DESTROYABLE objectives. they could be hacked like we're used to, but the hack was actually setting a charge/self destruct/overload. counterhack was defusing. if the charge went off, the objective was gone forever. they could also be destroyed by heavy weaponry; swarms, forges, HAVs, maybe even remote explosives. -if the initial pair is NOT destroyed by the time the MCCs shields are depleted the MCC retreats and the defenders win. slaughter rule -if initial pair is destroyed, second set of objectives are opened. second set work exactly like the null cannons we're used to, except there is no defending mcc for them to shoot at. hacked by attackers just turns them off, defenders can reactivate by recapturing. -defenders start with resupplies, CRUs, and turrets pre-deployed and captured to their team. -the MCC would deploy equipment as the battle progressed, like ambush OMS but "pre-captured" by the attacker team. was it perfect? no. if the attackers destroyed the first pair of objectives quickly enough, the second set couldn't generate enough damage on its own to win the game, resulting in a very long drawn out unstoppable loss. not to mention that the VERY first objective (we only had one map) could be destroyed by a tank from very far away. the second was better protected by the map though. it had plenty of other problems, but they were more about the state of the game that early in the beta than the actual game MODE. it gave battles a natural flow as opposed to just chasing our tails around a big ring of objectives, i'd like to see it come back.
Vinsarrow New Eden Blades Of The Azure 13	Posted - 2013.10.23 18:27:00 - [132] - Quote This would be great to see & as for the "train" he probably means like a red or blue line wrapping around the planet in like a view of the planet, district to district before you enter the battle though you probably wouldn't see the lines if you were on the EVE side directly looking at the planet. This would help possibly balance The 4 Empires more but if the opposing team has a EVE Pilot it be great if they can do more & remain in orbit longer on they're side but wouldn't be so great if your on the receiving end XD it could drastically side things possibly too much but I like the link though. I also like the idea as the attacker has to work more to get the District in Factional. As we all saw the impact clone mercenaries can do in the Factional Event where it suddenly went from Gallente having a edge on Caldari & Minmitar practically ruling Amarr to Amarr & Caldari basically had fully conqurored Gallente & Minmitar. After the Event you can see how it has changed I also noticed good players playing strictly for Gallente & Minmitar to restabalize the territory. However doing it like this will be long & a tug of war people probably won't be able to have the time so perhaps the wait you have for each battle should be spaced longer then that, like a 30 minute break till next battle then 5 minutes in the war room also you should still get a reward for both sides for each battle incase 1 or more of the people in the battle has to leave a sec, relog or go offline.
Kain Spero MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 2170	Posted - 2013.10.23 18:51:00 - [133] - Quote I agree Buzzwords that the current skirmish game mode does lack the distinct feeling of one side being attacker and the other being a defender.
Phazoid the unholy legion of darkstar DARKSTAR ARMY 82	Posted - 2013.10.23 19:09:00 - [134] - Quote a total clone count could work as a safe measure to avoid perpetual stalemate, if x team lost 75 of 100 clones on the 2 first battles, the team would be left with 25 clones for skirmish, instead of a clone count per battle, a total clone pool that doesnt regenerates after battle
Phazoid the unholy legion of darkstar DARKSTAR ARMY 82	Posted - 2013.10.23 19:14:00 - [135] - Quote also i could give the chance after each battle for the defenders to deploy instalations, but this is just a wild idea
Aero Yassavi PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 3135	Posted - 2013.10.23 19:21:00 - [136] - Quote Phazoid wrote: a total clone count could work as a safe measure to avoid perpetual stalemate, if x team lost 75 of 100 clones on the 2 first battles, the team would be left with 25 clones for skirmish, instead of a clone count per battle, a total clone pool that doesnt regenerates after battle That's actually a pretty good idea. So basically there is a very large clone count at first that is representative of how long it should take to capture or defend the single district through these multiple battles, and then number gets stored and carried from match to match until a new attack on a new district begins.
Phazoid the unholy legion of darkstar DARKSTAR ARMY 83	Posted - 2013.10.23 19:28:00 - [137] - Quote Aero Yassavi wrote: Phazoid wrote: a total clone count could work as a safe measure to avoid perpetual stalemate, if x team lost 75 of 100 clones on the 2 first battles, the team would be left with 25 clones for skirmish, instead of a clone count per battle, a total clone pool that doesnt regenerates after battle That's actually a pretty good idea. So basically there is a very large clone count at first that is representative of how long it should take to capture or defend the single district through these multiple battles, and then number gets stored and carried from match to match until a new attack on a new district begins. exactly, and it avoids that perpetual going and coming stalemate, eventually one team will be left with no clones, so the double ambush works to weaken the attacking force as well as weaken the defensors grip by eliminating the soldiers attcking of defending, and unless the district is sucessfully capture or defended the clone count for both teams will not regenerate, it also allows premature capture or defenses by eliminating all enemy soldiers
The Robot Devil Molon Labe. RISE of LEGION 1082	Posted - 2013.10.23 19:29:00 - [138] - Quote Maken Tosch wrote: I like it a lot. Although, can I add in a suggestion? How about instead of returning to the warbarge waiting to proceed to the next case (ie: case 1 to case 2) how about introduce a dynamic redline just as what was once featured in Skirmish 1.0 in closed beta (Replication Build)? Case 1: Ambush-like redline which is small and constricted as usual. Case 2: Ambush-OMS redline which is still small but more expanded to accommodate the installations. Case 3: Redline in Ambush OMS will expand outward to the nearest outpost to include the objectives. Case 4: Redline in Skirmish expands further to include a final objective to fight over. Note: Just like Skirmish 1.0, the default spawns move closer to the objectives with each case and the MCC slowly moves in. The skirmish 1.0 setup would be the best type of battle for the FW style fights. It gives a feeling of progression and accomplishment to the winners and the loser not making progress or being set back makes it seem more like a loss. We need a system like this to make FW more visceral.
Greasepalms Ahrendee Mercenaries EoN. 241	Posted - 2013.10.23 19:42:00 - [139] - Quote +1 corporate and factional warfare should be the core of this game
Booker DaFooker Seraphim Auxiliaries 129	Posted - 2013.10.23 19:44:00 - [140] - Quote Greasepalms wrote: +1 corporate and factional warfare should be the core of this game if this kind of play mode was adopted then it certainly would be

Goric Rumis Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn 234	Posted - 2013.10.23 20:04:00 - [141] - Quote Buzzwords wrote: op is decent idea, but it really just makes me pine for the old closed beta skirmish. for those who weren't there, think of it as a mix between battlefields "rush" mode, and our current skirmish mode. Interesting. Sounds like what needed to happen is for the first two objectives to be defense systems, so that none of the null cannons are destroyed. The damage output from the null cannons should also be adjusted so the attackers and defenders have a roughly equal chance at winning, with perhaps a slight advantage toward the defenders. If done right, it could be an interesting game mode. Something else with respect to these progressions: If you lose, do you just get knocked back to the previous step? I like Fox Gaden's thematic progression, but say you establish a base with an Ambush OMS game, but you lose the subsequent Domination match to shut down the defense systems. Do you then play another Ambush OMS, or do you play another Domination where you're defending your base from being shut down? The progression might look more like one of those old Wing Commander storyline maps rather than a straight line. Just a thought.
Maximus Stryker Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 659	Posted - 2013.10.23 20:12:00 - [142] - Quote random thought to keep both sides happy (the ones who one one long escalation battle and the ones who want separate shorter matches). BOTH You still have the the battle/maps set up in the same fashion, the only things that changes is which type of attack was launched. A Slow attack (1 battle per night) could be cheaper to launch while (previous "follow up" model we saw in original PC) A Blitz attack (all battles in one night) could be expensive to launch (similar to a MAG style of advancing the battle field) It could start similarly to how you have laid it out already Ambush Skirmish Domination Slow attack: you have a new spawn in each night (similar to the follow up attacks in old PC) Blitz attack: you spawn in on Ambush, win, and the redline expands and you now spawn drive to Skirmish, win, and the redline expands you spawn or drive to Final Domination Letter Basically, just offer two different types of attacks...
TechMechMeds Swamp Marines Kleenex Inc. 855	Posted - 2013.10.23 20:17:00 - [143] - Quote Iv also heard of making fw battles like skirmish 1.0, I wasn't around for that but iv heard enough about it, maybe work on that as it sounds damn good.
TechMechMeds Swamp Marines Kleenex Inc. 856	Posted - 2013.10.23 20:21:00 - [144] - Quote Also battlefield 2142 was quality where you fought inside the MCC ship, forgot its actual name but maybe something to do with the ability to board mcc's in game that could give a slight advantage but you'd need to work on more for the MCC interior. I'm just chucking a random vague idea out there.
crazy space 1 Unkn0wn Killers 1897	Posted - 2013.10.23 20:56:00 - [145] - Quote also I'd like to add that I like the idea of the warbarges in FW being owned by the NPC faction. However I think the fight over the Orbital artillery should play a larger role and help teach players how PC battles work. Since they will be more complex and require more input from both eve and dust. flying warbarges to planets So here is my proposal, it's not going to be perfect I'm sure CCP could do it better but I hope it helps CCP with some of it's direction in this part of the feature. So each FW planet has a Warbarge in orbit. This Warbarge will be spawned based on which factions own the system during release. Having a warbarge in space should give your team an advantage but it shouldn't be a bonus % per level that's boring and complex to the game. Instead the advantage of having your factions warbarge is in the mechanics. I'm going to explain this from the point of view of the team doing the attacking. So a dust corp gets together a 16 man squad and wants to take some planets in system A in order to help their allies. Being able to keep the planets under control makes the system easier to flip in eve online. They enter the FW lobby where they can wait for successful battles to be opened and join them. The 1st thing standing in their way is that enemy Warbarge in orbit. So in order to start an attack an eve player must drop a beacon over a district to start a battle there. This pops up a battle to join for dust players. Once the attacking team joins a 5 minute timer is started and the district beacon is now lit up on the eve side overview so eve people know there is a battle going on as well. Now from the defenders point of view, how do they get to the battle? what does the warbarge do exacttly? So you are a defending team. You as well get together a 16 man squad and enters the FW window. There is a second tab for defence contracts. In this tab you can see any battles opened up and join them to defend. Now the nice thing about this system is teams can see where the planet is and eve support can very quickly react. People want fights, adding the beacon system and adding LP and large rewards for ground strikes is genius. Make sure the beacons are cheap we'll need a lot of dust side battles so keep them under 1 million isk. So simple having the warbarge puts that planet in the defence contract tab and not having a warbarge puts that planet onto the invasion orders tab. There is a bit more to this in regards to districts changing hands but you can control the whole planet and not have control of the warbarge yet which means they could freely send in attacks at each district. Now here's where I think my idea gets fun. To take down the Warbarge and turn the planet to your side you must attack and fight over the orbital artillery. If you control the orbital artillery map it starts a 10 hour cooldown. During this cooldown the district can be attacked normally, but once the timer reaches 0 the warbarge gets shot down and your team gets a warbarge in orbit automatically placed by NPCs, giving you free range to attack the remaining districts freely without eve assistance. And now it's a planet that defence contractors can take when the other side attacks to take the planet back. Now the real question is, should dust players somehow be able to set up a contract that asks for an eve player to take and place a beacon? As in let us pay for the beacons so it costs the eve players nothing. I know that's asking us to pay more isk for a game mode that doesn't even reward isk though so maybe have it as an option. A tight group of dust and eve players can have the eve players covering the cost, but rich dust corps that have 4 billion isk don't have to depend on eve players to start battles and attack whoever they damn well please.
crazy space 1 Unkn0wn Killers 1898	Posted - 2013.10.23 21:33:00 - [146] - Quote Phazoid wrote: also i could give the chance after each battle for the defenders to deploy instalations, but this is just a wild idea why not? if you lose you get pushed back to the next battle zone, I mean it might sound wierd but, why not make the attacking team have to bring in LAVs and dropship to travel 1-2 mins to the next battle zone? I mean that's shorter than the time between being booted at the end of the game to the 2nd PC match. Maybe I'd be fun to move the MCC across the map and in a no combat phase of the game. installations where a market section during beta after all. So instead of random poorly placed turrets, let the defending team use that 2 mins to set up defences since it's now MCC vs. No-MCC over the planetary installation building.
Mortedeamor Internal Rebellion 506	Posted - 2013.10.23 22:16:00 - [147] - Quote Aero Yassavi wrote: Maken Tosch wrote: I like it a lot. Although, can I add in a suggestion? How about instead of returning to the warbarge waiting to proceed to the next case (ie: case 1 to case 2) how about introduce a dynamic redline just as what was once featured in Skirmish 1.0 in closed beta (Replication Build)? Case 1: Ambush-like redline which is small and constricted as usual. Case 2: Ambush-OMS redline which is still small but more expanded to accommodate the installations. Case 3: Redline in Ambush OMS will expand outward to the nearest outpost to include the objectives. Case 4: Redline in Skirmish expands further to include a final objective to fight over. Note: Just like Skirmish 1.0, the default spawns move closer to the objectives with each case and the MCC slowly moves in. It's a cool idea no doubt, but the problem with this in my opinion is it makes the individual matches too long and gives the players no convenient opportunity to leave. I know some of us can have massive gaming sessions, but not everyone always has that much time. To me, it is important that individual matches still last about the same length. Again, just my opinion. just have payout after each mode and give a timer to safely leave without it counting against ..
Fox Gaden Immortal Guides 1387	Posted - 2013.10.23 23:18:00 - [148] - Quote Aero Yassavi wrote: Phazoid wrote: a total clone count could work as a safe measure to avoid perpetual stalemate, if x team lost 75 of 100 clones on the 2 first battles, the team would be left with 25 clones for skirmish, instead of a clone count per battle, a total clone pool that doesnt regenerates after battle That's actually a pretty good idea. So basically there is a very large clone count at first that is representative of how long it should take to capture or defend the single district through these multiple battles, and then number gets stored and carried from match to match until a new attack on a new district begins. A finite number of clones on each side yes, but not all clones would be available for each match. There are the logistical issues of getting the clones to the section of the district where the battle is taking place. So in the initial Ambushes the defenders only have the Clones available for quick deployment to that area, and the Attackers only have access to the clones they are able to land in the enemy District. Once it progresses to the main areas and the MCCGÇÖs get there, then both sides would have access to more of their clones.
Aero Yassavi PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 3151	Posted - 2013.10.23 23:21:00 - [149] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: Aero Yassavi wrote: Phazoid wrote: a total clone count could work as a safe measure to avoid perpetual stalemate, if x team lost 75 of 100 clones on the 2 first battles, the team would be left with 25 clones for skirmish, instead of a clone count per battle, a total clone pool that doesnt regenerates after battle That's actually a pretty good idea. So basically there is a very large clone count at first that is representative of how long it should take to capture or defend the single district through these multiple battles, and then number gets stored and carried from match to match until a new attack on a new district begins. A finite number of clones on each side yes, but not all clones would be available for each match. There are the logistical issues of getting the clones to the section of the district where the battle is taking place. So in the initial Ambushes the defenders only have the Clones available for quick deployment to that area, and the Attackers only have access to the clones they are able to land in the enemy District. Once it progresses to the main areas and the MCCGÇÖs get there, then both sides would have access to more of their clones. Yup, we actually discussed this in the skype channel shortly after I posted that and I agree.
howard sanchez expert intervention Caldari State 799	Posted - 2013.10.23 23:22:00 - [150] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: Fox Gaden wrote: They are talking about having EVE pilots fly the War Barge to the planet and anchor over the district to start PC battles in Planetary Conquest 2.0. They could easily adapt that to allow EVE players to start district battles in FW in this manner. Then EVE/DUST Alliances that specialize in FW can do as you suggest and plan their attacks at the meta level. I do like the idea of potentially using War Barges in FW as well to direct fights. It seems like a good fit, but at the same time I wouldn't want to outright limit the other things that may be possible as well (spending LP, etc.). You know those deploy able ship dock boxes that CCP is rolling out in rubicon? What if they sold a deployable 'thing' ( flag, beacon, shielded ammo container..whatever) for LP in the FW store. Eve pilots could buy it and deploy it over the district beacon, or planet, or at the system hub ( maybe add an additional mechanic that added an LP cost to this deployment that is used as added reward to dust match winners). Dust FW matches of the sort described here would spawn in the system, planet or district deployed over.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.