Faction Warfare right now has some flaws and CCP is addressing some flaws with the recent changes, mainly adding rewards. But even after these changes, faction warfare will still lack a sense of progression and EVE players trying to give support to their Dust players will still end up getting ping-ponged across New Eden. So why not knock out two birds with one stone?

Part of the progression issue is that it seems odd that a 15 minute skirmish is all that decides the outcome of a district. Instead of making the battles longer, I propose the following.

Say the Imperial Guard is attacking a district owned by the Republic Command. The battle will proceed as follows:

1. Ambush. The attackers are trying to gain a foothold in the district. If the defenders win, then the district is successfully defended and temporarily locked up. If the attackers win, proceed to case (2).
2. Ambush OMS. The attackers gained some ground and opened up the battlefield to off map support. If the defenders win, return to case (1). If the attackers win, proceed to case (3).
3. Skirmish. The attackers have made their presence known and are trying to seize as much territory as possible. If the defenders win, return to case (2). If the attackers win, proceed to case (4).
4. Domination. The attackers are going in for the finishing blow on the critical objective. If the defenders win, return to case (3). If the attackers win, the district is successfully captured and temporarily locked up.

Here is a flow chart by everyone's favorite cat to help you visualize this,
http://i.imgur.com/fnaa7RI.png
EDIT: It came to my attention that a mod may mistake me for a Cat Merc alt. Obviously this is not the case, he simply helped me in collaboration of this idea over skype.

Each battle would happen on the same mega terrain, but would use different maps and moods as you are moving to different portions of the district (perhaps rotating moods between matches to give the illusion of a day/night cycle). After each map, players will be returned to the warbarge where they wait about 5 minutes for the next stage of the battle to happen. If players leave, new players queued for FW will replace them. Bonus rewards for players who stick from the beginning of the battle to the end if successful. This would also help solve the case of EVE players ping-ponging across the warzone, as they would spend more time sticking around the planet then flying several jumps to the next one.

Additionally, imagine you take all the districts that the Amarr and Minmatar fight over for example and string them together to form this circular track such that one district leads to the next nearby district and so on and so forth until the last district leads back to the first district. Now imagine you are on a GÇ£trainGÇ¥ following this track. Once the district you are fighting on gets GÇ£locked,GÇ¥ you advanced along the track to the next district. This will give an even deeper sense of progression for the Dust players as well as further help in keeping the EVE players localized. To accomodate for the large player base, new GÇ£trainsGÇ¥ will be created to follow this same track but be evenly spaced out. Also in this case, the district wouldnGÇÖt actually need to be GÇ£locked,GÇ¥ instead it simply wouldnGÇÖt be attacked again until the next GÇ£trainGÇ¥ arrives.

And even better, CCP wouldnGÇÖt have to create anything new as this uses entirely existing resources.

An amarrian came up with this? How?

I support this.

An interesting wrinkle (but I don't want to derail the thread), but maybe Eve militias can spend LP to start one of these "trains" in a desired system/planet or increase the rewards for players that are heavily involved in taking a particular planet.

Top stuff, evenly matched teams could pit themselves for hours in nail biting seesaw battles over a district, meanwhile eve pilots can remain over one planet and fight for dominance of the connection point (whatever it's called). Very glad a CPM has spotted this one already

Exactly! If you get two evenly matched teams, then this process will drag on a bit thus drawing a lot of attention to EVE players to help give one side the edge it needs to win, creating some epic battles in the space just above!

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.

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.

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.

maybe put together a new fit for a situational issue

Actually, that is an amazing point in favor of having these breaks. In this scenario, you're going to be playing against relatively the same people each match. So why not give you an opportunity to make fits based on what you learned about the enemy?

precisely, you get a few minutes to discuss how the previous round went, decide on tactics now that you have a feel for your opposition, eat little segments of oranges your mum sent.......oh sorry wrong game! lol

you get my drift

I don't actually "laugh out loud" often when reading, but this cracked me up.

I am going to get the addresses of all my regular squad mates and order them nicely packed orange slices for the breaks!

The exciting thing about this idea is that there is not a lot of new stuff that CCP would need to get into the game, it feels like it could be achieved relatively easily, this is of course said from a position of extreme ignorance when it comes to games programming!

I wouldn't have the cycle fully reset but maybe back down a notch so it becomes a tug of war. Overall cool idea until we get more game modes in.

Yes, that was exactly the foundation for my brainstorming: "How can CCP make Dust FW infinitely better without needing to actually create anything new?"

Well, if it's better to have breaks in between matches, then fine by me. I just threw in my suggestion to see if others like it.

Well, if it's better to have breaks in between matches, then fine by me. I just threw in my suggestion to see if others like it.

Also just thought about a small issue to work around: What if the trains crash? Like say one train the defenders keep winning the initial Ambush and catch up to another train? I think in this case you could probably just reset the train in a new location as if it were a new train being added.

And I'm not going to keep putting quotes around "train." I think everybody understands I am speaking figuratively, these are not really trains zooming around New Eden.

Great idea +1

It's also good to see something like these kinds of threads from time to time other than the usual whining, b!tches threatening to leave but end up staying because nobody cared, and the constant "look at me i have this! i do this!" threads.

I hope they'll implement this..

A contested district would have to be marked as either about to start, indicating the overall fight hasn't started yet or contested, medicating that the match is somewhere in progress, or even better mark them according to stages. This way people would be able to organize going into matches with squads better, allowing for some more organist ion. All we need added to this now is to be able to select the district we want to start on specifically.

How long will the district be locked for?

Faction Warfare right now has some flaws and CCP is addressing some flaws with the recent changes, mainly adding rewards. But even after these changes, faction warfare will still lack a sense of progression and EVE players trying to give support to their Dust players will still end up getting ping-ponged across New Eden. So why not knock out two birds with one stone?

Part of the progression issue is that it seems odd that a 15 minute skirmish is all that decides the outcome of a district. Instead of making the battles longer, I propose the following.

Say the Imperial Guard is attacking a district owned by the Republic Command. The battle will proceed as follows:

1. Ambush. The attackers are trying to gain a foothold in the district. If the defenders win, then the district is successfully defended and temporarily locked up. If the attackers win, proceed to case (2).
2. Ambush OMS. The attackers gained some ground and opened up the battlefield to off map support. If the defenders win, return to case (1). If the attackers win, proceed to case (3).
3. Skirmish. The attackers have made their presence known and are trying to seize as much territory as possible. If the defenders win, return to case (2). If the attackers win, proceed to case (4).
4. Domination. The attackers are going in for the finishing blow on the critical objective. If the defenders win, return to case (3). If the attackers win, the district is successfully captured and temporarily locked up.

Here is a flow chart by everyone's favorite cat to help you visualize this,
http://i.imgur.com/fnaa7RI.png
EDIT: It came to my attention that a mod may mistake me for a Cat Merc alt. Obviously this is not the case, he simply helped me in collaboration of this idea over skype.

Each battle would happen on the same mega terrain, but would use different maps and moods as you are moving to different portions of the district (perhaps rotating moods between matches to give the illusion of a day/night cycle). After each map, players will be returned to the warbarge where they wait about 5 minutes for the next stage of the battle to happen. If players leave, new players queued for FW will replace them. Bonus rewards for players who stick from the beginning of the battle to the end if successful. This would also help solve the case of EVE players ping-ponging across the warzone, as they would spend more time sticking around the planet then flying several jumps to the next one.

Additionally, imagine you take all the districts that the Amarr and Minmatar fight over for example and string them together to form this circular track such that one district leads to the next nearby district and so on and so forth until the last district leads back to the first district. Now imagine you are on a GÇ£trainGÇ¥ following this track. Once the district you are fighting on gets GÇ£locked,GÇ¥ you advanced along the track to the next district. This will give an even deeper sense of progression for the Dust players as well as further help in keeping the EVE players localized. To accomodate for the large player base, new GÇ£trainsGÇ¥ will be created to follow this same track but be evenly spaced out. Also in this case, the district wouldnGÇÖt actually need to be GÇ£locked,GÇ¥ instead it simply wouldnGÇÖt be attacked again until the next GÇ£trainGÇ¥ arrives.

And even better, CCP wouldnGÇÖt have to create anything new as this uses entirely existing resources.

Zion

Who is Zion?

Domination is a god awful game mode and should not ever be used for anything official under any circumstances.

It is the single most ridiculous meat grinder this game has to offer and there is zero strategy whatsoever.

Yeah dude, not cool.

Domination is a god awful game mode and should not ever be used for anything official under any circumstances.

It is the single most ridiculous meat grinder this game has to offer and there is zero strategy whatsoever.

If you really want you could add an ambush in their somewhere, but what I think you should do is turn these 3 stages almost into 1 large battle!

Break each bit up as normal but give every merc in the previous battle, the chance to renew their contract to automatically take part in the next stage!

Ah ha. I think I will do some research into just who you are Aero Yassavi. I think I have you previous character finally figured out!

That is already what's happening. It's one large battle, but there's breaks in between as usual and if you don't leave you automatically get placed in the next stage.

Don't ignore me Aero, I'm getting close I know it!

I'll give you a hint: Sometime this week you did acquire a key bit of info to help you on your path, but it was not today.

Well IWS, the "tug of war" thing is actually how I described this, or tried to describe it at least. You keep going through this cycle until one team satisfies the winning conditions, then you repeat the cycle on the next district on the train track.

And would we really need to wait until more game modes are in? Wouldn't it be possible to implement this with the current game modes, then as new game modes are added CCP can simply append them into the tug of war?

This week had to have meant yesterday, but we only played a single match together....

But are you forgetting this would encourage more EVE support, then people could actually take advantage of the EVE EMP support to destroy all the uplnks that get littered around Domination.

An interesting wrinkle (but I don't want to derail the thread), but maybe Eve militias can spend LP to start one of these "trains" in a desired system/planet or increase the rewards for players that are heavily involved in taking a particular planet.

The idea in the OP of players getting larger rewards for following through with a sequence of these battles seems like a interesting incentive as well since there is a larger time commitment required.

+0.5

Well the biggest flaw in the OP plan is using Ambush and Ambush OMS lol Domination I could deal with but not any form of Ambush. In my opinion they are not objective based game modes and have no place in Dus...I mean Faction Warfare.

Love the multi-stage idea (a lot like Killzone Warzone which is the best FPS mode ever IMO). Just need some new modes for it. Some kind of Breach mode combined with a Demolition type mode would be ideal.

I dream of the day a corporation can attack a District and move through a couple of stages of defense...hack and capture a space elevator and take that baby to the top...fight our way through a space station....overload the reactor and set it to blow...steal a ship....and then escape back to the planet.

Can you deal with that?!

The way I see it, though, implementing this would essentially turn Ambush and OMS, at least in FW, into an objective based mode. The objective being win to gain/maintain control of the district.

But are you forgetting this would encourage more EVE support, then people could actually take advantage of the EVE EMP support to destroy all the uplnks that get littered around Domination.

Sounds good

Flowchart shows that if you lose a Skirmish you get sent back to fight the ambush OMS, is this to give a feeling and to show that the defenders are pushing out the attackers and off ther district?

Exactly, yes. Defenders win through Ambush, like they are pushing the attackers off their land. Attackers win by Domination, like they are taking over the critical infrastructure. It tug-of-wars back and forth between the modes.

Irrelevant.

I can have multiple forge gunners trained on the terminal the moment after it is hacked, all from different angles, all spread out over several hundred meters. If we are set up right, you will never kill us all in a coordinated fashion. We can also make use of thales snipers, which you will likely never find. If you did, it will have taken far more effort than is justifiable to turn the tide of a single game.

And even if a map is set up with an interior terminal that can't be sniped, it still creates a ridiculously one dimensional bottleneck with grenade spam.


Winning domination on a meta-level does not mean sitting around the terminal. It means capping it then running as far away as humanly possible and one shotting anything that approaches the area. It is a bad game mode, period.

Get ready for games which last hours

You must of missed the part where all individual battles are still the normal length and there's a 5 minute warbarge intermission between stages of the overall mission.

Still hours for one district if it goes back and forth

This is a good thing, you can leave during beaks if you need to and take the LP you have earned to that point I would presume

You should go ask people in FW Channels and get their opinions too. Just don't make the same mistake I did Aero.

Otherwise you'll have idiots thinking that player owned corps should have territory in FW.

Player corps do somewhat have territory in FW, they base out of certain systems, which effectively become home systems, I don't see why Dusters cannot make use of Militia constructed facilities in those systems.

But Aero's point stands, its using in game content in a new way, to make the battles much more dynamic.

The only issue I see with it is who will stay for 3+ Matches when they are redlining to opposite team every time.

This is definitely an interesting idea that is worth exploring. +1

I really like the idea of progression on this "train" across a planet and maybe even from system to system. It would help give players an idea of how the different areas in New Eden are connected together.

The only problem I see with this set-up is the time involved. IT could take hours and hours to finish a set of matches....OR days if that's what separates the battles. I would stick with just 3 total battles as opposed to 4. Otherwise great concept, but I would still prefer skirmish 1.0....which apparently won't ever happen again cause its "old tech"

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.

Player corps do somewhat have territory in FW, they base out of certain systems, which effectively become home systems, I don't see why Dusters cannot make use of Militia constructed facilities in those systems.

But Aero's point stands, its using in game content in a new way, to make the battles much more dynamic.

The only issue I see with it is who will stay for 3+ Matches when they are redlining to opposite team every time.

Faction Warfare right now has some flaws and CCP is addressing some flaws with the recent changes, mainly adding rewards. But even after these changes, faction warfare will still lack a sense of progression and EVE players trying to give support to their Dust players will still end up getting ping-ponged across New Eden. So why not knock out two birds with one stone?

Part of the progression issue is that it seems odd that a 15 minute skirmish is all that decides the outcome of a district. Instead of making the battles longer, I propose the following.

Say the Imperial Guard is attacking a district owned by the Republic Command. The battle will proceed as follows:

1. Ambush. The attackers are trying to gain a foothold in the district. If the defenders win, then the district is successfully defended and temporarily locked up. If the attackers win, proceed to case (2).
2. Ambush OMS. The attackers gained some ground and opened up the battlefield to off map support. If the defenders win, return to case (1). If the attackers win, proceed to case (3).
3. Skirmish. The attackers have made their presence known and are trying to seize as much territory as possible. If the defenders win, return to case (2). If the attackers win, proceed to case (4).
4. Domination. The attackers are going in for the finishing blow on the critical objective. If the defenders win, return to case (3). If the attackers win, the district is successfully captured and temporarily locked up.

Here is a flow chart by everyone's favorite cat to help you visualize this,
http://i.imgur.com/fnaa7RI.png
EDIT: It came to my attention that a mod may mistake me for a Cat Merc alt. Obviously this is not the case, he simply helped me in collaboration of this idea over skype.

Each battle would happen on the same mega terrain, but would use different maps and moods as you are moving to different portions of the district (perhaps rotating moods between matches to give the illusion of a day/night cycle). After each map, players will be returned to the warbarge where they wait about 5 minutes for the next stage of the battle to happen. If players leave, new players queued for FW will replace them. Bonus rewards for players who stick from the beginning of the battle to the end if successful. This would also help solve the case of EVE players ping-ponging across the warzone, as they would spend more time sticking around the planet then flying several jumps to the next one.

Additionally, imagine you take all the districts that the Amarr and Minmatar fight over for example and string them together to form this circular track such that one district leads to the next nearby district and so on and so forth until the last district leads back to the first district. Now imagine you are on a GÇ£trainGÇ¥ following this track. Once the district you are fighting on gets GÇ£locked,GÇ¥ you advanced along the track to the next district. This will give an even deeper sense of progression for the Dust players as well as further help in keeping the EVE players localized. To accomodate for the large player base, new GÇ£trainsGÇ¥ will be created to follow this same track but be evenly spaced out. Also in this case, the district wouldnGÇÖt actually need to be GÇ£locked,GÇ¥ instead it simply wouldnGÇÖt be attacked again until the next GÇ£trainGÇ¥ arrives.

And even better, CCP wouldnGÇÖt have to create anything new as this uses entirely existing resources.

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.

Good, good, because this is the completely wrong cookie crumb you'd need to follow to discover my identity before Aero Yassavi. Though I'm not saying it'd be impossible for you to figure out, the resources are actually there for you, but this is, again, the wrong cookie crumb.

Player corps do somewhat have territory in FW, they base out of certain systems, which effectively become home systems, I don't see why Dusters cannot make use of Militia constructed facilities in those systems.

But Aero's point stands, its using in game content in a new way, to make the battles much more dynamic.

The only issue I see with it is who will stay for 3+ Matches when they are redlining to opposite team every time.

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.

Good, good, because this is the completely wrong cookie crumb you'd need to follow to discover my identity before Aero Yassavi. Though I'm not saying it'd be impossible for you to figure out, the resources are actually there for you, but this is, again, the wrong cookie crumb.

I'm not as married to the specific progression of game modes as I am having there be a geographic progression that players can understand is going on. Hans made a good point last night in the Faction Warfare Skype channel that a progressive battles system may be a piece of the puzzle that needs to be laid in after CCP has those first set of features in place.

With the introduction of LP a lot of the current feel for participation may go out the window.

Some of the tools to give a sense of progression seem to be coming with the updates of the End Of Match screen in Faction Warfare ( http://i.imgur.com/bXpUa5s.jpg ), but the big picture question I want players be able to answer is "How does this battle tie into the next one?"

I also find a player having a story of "We helped take Planet X!" much more compelling than "We had a series of good fights!"

Not bad, Not bad!

A few tweaks/suggestions if I may?
I like the train idea but not necessarily the match types! If you want to make it feel more inclusive try

1) skirmish 1.0 (renamed "ground war") Enemy has to move mcc succesfully to point for win condition
2) standard skirmish, they are approaching the district null cannon
3) domination

If you really want you could add an ambush in their somewhere.

Also to make it a little fairer on the defenders, if at any point during stages 1 + 2 the attackers mcc is destroyed, they loose period!

+0.5

Well the biggest flaw in the OP plan is using Ambush and Ambush OMS lol Domination I could deal with but not any form of Ambush. In my opinion they are not objective based game modes and have no place in Dus...I mean Faction Warfare.

Love the multi-stage idea (a lot like Killzone Warzone which is the best FPS mode ever IMO). Just need some new modes for it. Some kind of Breach mode combined with a Demolition type mode would be ideal.

I dream of the day a corporation can attack a District and move through a couple of stages of defense...hack and capture a space elevator and take that baby to the top...fight our way through a space station....overload the reactor and set it to blow...steal a ship....and then escape back to the planet.

Can you deal with that?!

The only problem I see with this set-up is the time involved. IT could take hours and hours to finish a set of matches....OR days if that's what separates the battles. I would stick with just 3 total battles as opposed to 4. Otherwise great concept, but I would still prefer skirmish 1.0....which apparently won't ever happen again cause its "old tech"

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.

I donGÇÖt see a problem with a battle for a district taking hours or even days, as long as the individual matches are the normal length. Players can rotate in and out of the conflict as their time allows. You could wake up the next day and check your star map to see how the battle went after you logged off.

The battle for a planet might take days or even weeks. With that train idea, once a district is conquered the battle moves to the adjacent district, and then the next until that planet is taken, but if the attackers are pushed out of the next district, than it goes back to the previous district and the side that lost it the first time become the attackers.

If a full planet is taken it should be locked until some condition is met, possibly in EVE, causing the side that lost the planet to counter attack. Meanwhile the same thing would be happening on other planets.

It would be a real never ending war, with each battle having a meaningful impact in both games

What I would like to see implemented with this style of persistence is the ability to not only target a planet or jump into a targeted district that is chosen for us by the Battlefinder and Scotty, rather having Players be more of an active and determining component in the strategic process of designing the battle plan and implementing the invasion.

This would allow for the expansion of these ideas to allow a multi-concerted attack (i.e., hitting several districts at once). EX: district 5 is a production facility along with district 8 (all part of a 12 district planet). Initiating the attack on both would make more sense. But for those pushes to work, it would also make sense to initiate ambushes on Districts 3, 2, 9, &10 since they are all storage facilities. This would spread the forces holding the planet thinly, making the effort on the two production facilities easier and less organized on the side of the defenders.

The attacks on the storage facilities don't have to actually win, they just have to dwindle down the the clone counts and work as a distraction, on that is large enough and successful enough that it divert energy and resources to it.

Again, a meta-game approach to FW.

Aero, by far one of the better discussion I have had the recent pleasure of being involved with on here in a long while. Thanks.

Hey guys,

I just wanted to let you know that we have been reading this thread and staying on top of it. The discussion is really very good. Right now though we are focused on getting the current iteration of factional contracts out the door, iterating on it after launch, and then a laundry list of other things we need to get done.

We have been have serious discussion internally however about how we slow down the flipping of districts and this thread along with what you guys have been talking about has come up often. So please keep the discussion going and I apologize for the lack of dev response, as I said we are just trying to stay focused on our current goals. :)

I think this is possibly where FW could go. AeroGÇÖs idea is something that can be implemented with what we have today, but would also fit very well into any number of advanced scenarios that could be developed later.

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.

Hey guys,

I just wanted to let you know that we have been reading this thread and staying on top of it. The discussion is really very good. Right now though we are focused on getting the current iteration of factional contracts out the door, iterating on it after launch, and then a laundry list of other things we need to get done.

We have been have serious discussion internally however about how we slow down the flipping of districts and this thread along with what you guys have been talking about has come up often. So please keep the discussion going and I apologize for the lack of dev response, as I said we are just trying to stay focused on our current goals. :)

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.

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!!!

Hey guys,

I just wanted to let you know that we have been reading this thread and staying on top of it. The discussion is really very good. Right now though we are focused on getting the current iteration of factional contracts out the door, iterating on it after launch, and then a laundry list of other things we need to get done.

We have been have serious discussion internally however about how we slow down the flipping of districts and this thread along with what you guys have been talking about has come up often. So please keep the discussion going and I apologize for the lack of dev response, as I said we are just trying to stay focused on our current goals. :)

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.

appreciate the acknowledgement, nice to know the idea has been noticed

As a matter of interest, do you have any idea how technically difficult/easy such a system of play would be to instigate in-game?

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.).

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?

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?

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!!!

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.

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

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.

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.

***snip***

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.

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.

+1

corporate and factional warfare should be the core of this game

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.

also i could give the chance after each battle for the defenders to deploy instalations, but this is just a wild idea

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.

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.

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.).

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.

Yup, we actually discussed this in the skype channel shortly after I posted that and I agree.

What if, instead of the LP cost to deploy, described above in my previous post, was used to purchase a finite number of clones that would be used to fight or perhaps augment the number of clones spawned to fight the matches?

This would add a finite number of clones to the battle, represent EVE FW 'investment' into the battles and enhance the Eve/Dust link.

Ambush is the beach-head. The landing in an enemy district. Trying to get a foothold.

Although it might work better if the Attackers had a limited number of clones, and the defenders had a limited amount of time. Basically it would be the Attackers trying to hold ground long enough for a CRU to be delivered, which would result in the Ambush OMS match to follow. If the Defenders can clone out the attackers they can prevent the Attackers from setting up a CRU and getting a foothold.

Fox I am liking where that idea is going. If you start out an Ambush match with both a 15 minute timer for the defenders to clone the attackers and the attackers having the equivalent of 8 full squad complements of clones (which turns out to be 48 clones, so the current number of 50 is a good base) and the objective to either last till the timer runs out or they, themselves, take over one of the defender's CRU's, eliminate the defending troop element, or push past a certain geographic marker with minimal contact to place a beacon for the friendly force's CRU, that could be a good beach head assault.

But then the question comes in whether or not the vehicles (specifically I am thinking of an air assault operation using multiple dropships, which would work better in skirmish 1.0 - ground war) should be allowed and what are we to do about the redline? Personally I think the redline in FW should be removed and some lateral movement should be allowed for the sake of simulating a more accurate and functional military operation. But this brings to question; what is the purpose of this particular beachhead assault? Is it to harass the enemy into shifting their forces to open gaps in other districts, is it an attempt at logistical disruption, or is it blitzkrieg? If it is the last, why would it start in assault, when en-mass zergs would throw everything they have at the enemy?

This seems to point towards strategic operational planning which means the player should have a functional and accurate map int he war barge. Without a basic understanding of the terrain of the district, mind you no the exact placement of installations rather the sockets and buildings, would allow for the commanders of the ground operation to choose between a couple of modes per-say: hit&run harassment, logistical disruption (sabotage), or full-scale military operational push (i.e., taking the district). This I feel would add to the complexity of the meta game.

We could apply this to PC too

1. Ambush - like one guy previously mentioned, it should have a tight redline around the map, kind of like back on Chromosome.
2. Ambush OMS - ok
3. Skirmish - ok
4. Domination - Remove this mode and add Skrimish 1.0, in the previous battle the defender's MCC was destroyed so now the attackers can push all the way in the district with their MCC.

Now if only there were proper balance changes for the infantry...

1. Ambush - like one guy previously mentioned, it should have a tight redline around the map, kind of like back on Chromosome.
2. Ambush OMS - ok
3. Skirmish - ok
4. Domination - Remove this mode and add Skrimish 1.0, in the previous battle the defender's MCC was destroyed so now the attackers can push all the way in the district with their MCC.

Now if only there were proper balance changes for the infantry...

Did not read entire thread but brilliant idea, well thought out, and exposes FW players to all game modes.

of course! Eve FW corps could buy and transport clones to where they wanted them used then put out merc contracts for the districts required, maybe your available clone count is dependent on how many are bought?

I'm barely keeping up with it myself, lots of people commenting! Very glad people are liking this, and some people have come up with some great ideas to expand upon this.

Best post I have seen in 2 months 70 plus likes hopefully something real close to this gets implemented

At first I was thinking: "what the fu..."
but after reading a little more I was like "nvm, genious!"
+1

1. Ambush - like one guy previously mentioned, it should have a tight redline around the map, kind of like back on Chromosome.
2. Ambush OMS - ok
3. Skirmish - ok
4. Domination - Remove this mode and add Skrimish 1.0, in the previous battle the defender's MCC was destroyed so now the attackers can push all the way in the district with their MCC.

Now if only there were proper balance changes for the infantry...

Faction Warfare right now has some flaws and CCP is addressing some flaws with the recent changes, mainly adding rewards. But even after these changes, faction warfare will still lack a sense of progression and EVE players trying to give support to their Dust players will still end up getting ping-ponged across New Eden. So why not knock out two birds with one stone?

Part of the progression issue is that it seems odd that a 15 minute skirmish is all that decides the outcome of a district. Instead of making the battles longer, I propose the following.

Say the Imperial Guard is attacking a district owned by the Republic Command. The battle will proceed as follows:

1. Ambush. The attackers are trying to gain a foothold in the district. If the defenders win, then the district is successfully defended and temporarily locked up. If the attackers win, proceed to case (2).
2. Ambush OMS. The attackers gained some ground and opened up the battlefield to off map support. If the defenders win, return to case (1). If the attackers win, proceed to case (3).
3. Skirmish. The attackers have made their presence known and are trying to seize as much territory as possible. If the defenders win, return to case (2). If the attackers win, proceed to case (4).
4. Domination. The attackers are going in for the finishing blow on the critical objective. If the defenders win, return to case (3). If the attackers win, the district is successfully captured and temporarily locked up.

Here is a flow chart by everyone's favorite cat to help you visualize this,
http://i.imgur.com/fnaa7RI.png
EDIT: It came to my attention that a mod may mistake me for a Cat Merc alt. Obviously this is not the case, he simply helped me in collaboration of this idea over skype.

Each battle would happen on the same mega terrain, but would use different maps and moods as you are moving to different portions of the district (perhaps rotating moods between matches to give the illusion of a day/night cycle). After each map, players will be returned to the warbarge where they wait about 5 minutes for the next stage of the battle to happen. If players leave, new players queued for FW will replace them. Bonus rewards for players who stick from the beginning of the battle to the end if successful. This would also help solve the case of EVE players ping-ponging across the warzone, as they would spend more time sticking around the planet then flying several jumps to the next one.

Additionally, imagine you take all the districts that the Amarr and Minmatar fight over for example and string them together to form this circular track such that one district leads to the next nearby district and so on and so forth until the last district leads back to the first district. Now imagine you are on a GÇ£trainGÇ¥ following this track. Once the district you are fighting on gets GÇ£locked,GÇ¥ you advanced along the track to the next district. This will give an even deeper sense of progression for the Dust players as well as further help in keeping the EVE players localized. To accomodate for the large player base, new GÇ£trainsGÇ¥ will be created to follow this same track but be evenly spaced out. Also in this case, the district wouldnGÇÖt actually need to be GÇ£locked,GÇ¥ instead it simply wouldnGÇÖt be attacked again until the next GÇ£trainGÇ¥ arrives.

And even better, CCP wouldnGÇÖt have to create anything new as this uses entirely existing resources.

I cannot see anyone investing in clones for matches they cannot directly trust to achieve the goal. No way would EVE based FW corps buy us clones.

Cazaderon, you're missing the point. The idea is that CCP wouldn't have to develop anything new. Obviously game modes can be swapped for new ones later, but the point is this could be done using existing stuff.

Also people want taking a district to last longer, but not individual matches to last longer.

Fox I am liking where that idea is going. If you start out an Ambush match with both a 15 minute timer for the defenders to clone the attackers and the attackers having the equivalent of 8 full squad complements of clones (which turns out to be 48 clones, so the current number of 50 is a good base) and the objective to either last till the timer runs out or they, themselves, take over one of the defender's CRU's, eliminate the defending troop element, or push past a certain geographic marker with minimal contact to place a beacon for the friendly force's CRU, that could be a good beach head assault.

But then the question comes in whether or not the vehicles (specifically I am thinking of an air assault operation using multiple dropships, which would work better in skirmish 1.0 - ground war) should be allowed and what are we to do about the redline? Personally I think the redline in FW should be removed and some lateral movement should be allowed for the sake of simulating a more accurate and functional military operation. But this brings to question; what is the purpose of this particular beachhead assault? Is it to harass the enemy into shifting their forces to open gaps in other districts, is it an attempt at logistical disruption, or is it blitzkrieg? If it is the last, why would it start in assault, when en-mass zergs would throw everything they have at the enemy?

This seems to point towards strategic operational planning which means the player should have a functional and accurate map int he war barge. Without a basic understanding of the terrain of the district, mind you no the exact placement of installations rather the sockets and buildings, would allow for the commanders of the ground operation to choose between a couple of modes per-say: hit&run harassment, logistical disruption (sabotage), or full-scale military operational push (i.e., taking the district). This I feel would add to the complexity of the meta game.

Why not simply have a rush style game called Beach head.... Ground war could be the escorting of the MCC when it gets locked to the district, to the main combat zone, then Skirmish, we the combat over the outlying points is fought, and then to domination where the central command structure of the district is fought over.

Individual matches in dust are quite short when you think of it. If they seem long it's only due to most games being boring out of lack of activity \ enemy dropping the ball.

Overall, i'd love to know what makes you so sure people dont want longer matches as in longer action packed fights. On the contrary, i tend to think there is a tremendous wait for a bigger game mode, with larger player count, and a more attack\defense feel.

You know... That conquest game mode we hear about now and then since the last 2 years.

Bottom line. I wouldnt want to play more FW if i had to be forced to play an ambush game mode, then an OMS , then a skirmish and then a domination. In the end, such a process would probably take 1 hour and a half. And i'm being gentle with all the loadings, lobbies, server starting that would require.

I'd rather see a game mode that lasts 30+ minutes in general. that features a real conquest feeling with different stage (defense relay to multi hack, unlocks access to the main outpost, hack central mainframe, game over.) with several fail safe (defense relay not took after 15 minutes = loss / tickets exhausted = Loss).

With installations dropping etc. Oh but Wait... Aint that skirmish 1.0 with minor changes ? Could it be the answer was here all along ?


Or let's be totally crazy. Why not a game mode that lasts VERY long. Something you could jump in and out when you want knowing the fight will keep on going. People would still benefit from participating without seeing the end (time relative ISK and SP). That would feel like conquest ! You could be sending message during the fight to get people you know because a squad had to leave the fight.

The longer the game also, the better the chance to see Capsuleers jump in and provide orbital strikes as the event will have more visibility in EVE where the moment to moment gameplay is very much slower.

Not fan of the idea as it's using game modes that are broken. I'd rather see a brand new staged game mode being developped to have longer battles with a real feeling of "conquest". WHy ? because Dust desperately needs such a game mode. And because such a pattern of different rounds for the same battle, with difference game modes poses the issues of going from lobby to lobby, server to server, etc..

I'd rather have one game mode that lasts around 30-40 minutes with fail safe in case of major redlining\crushing.

Individual matches in dust are quite short when you think of it. If they seem long it's only due to most games being boring out of lack of activity \ enemy dropping the ball.

Overall, i'd love to know what makes you so sure people dont want longer matches as in longer action packed fights. On the contrary, i tend to think there is a tremendous wait for a bigger game mode, with larger player count, and a more attack\defense feel.

You know... That conquest game mode we hear about now and then since the last 2 years.

Bottom line. I wouldnt want to play more FW if i had to be forced to play an ambush game mode, then an OMS , then a skirmish and then a domination. In the end, such a process would probably take 1 hour and a half. And i'm being gentle with all the loadings, lobbies, server starting that would require.

I'd rather see a game mode that lasts 30+ minutes in general. that features a real conquest feeling with different stage (defense relay to multi hack, unlocks access to the main outpost, hack central mainframe, game over.) with several fail safe (defense relay not took after 15 minutes = loss / tickets exhausted = Loss).

With installations dropping etc. Oh but Wait... Aint that skirmish 1.0 with minor changes ? Could it be the answer was here all along ?

Or let's be totally crazy. Why not a game mode that lasts VERY long. Something you could jump in and out when you want knowing the fight will keep on going. People would still benefit from participating without seeing the end (time relative ISK and SP). That would feel like conquest ! You could be sending message during the fight to get people you know because a squad had to leave the fight.

The longer the game also, the better the chance to see Capsuleers jump in and provide orbital strikes as the event will have more visibility in EVE where the moment to moment gameplay is very much slower.

In the Skype chat people were saying 24 hours which I believe is too long, and then they lowered it to 12 hours which could work. I also think as low as one hour could work. Basically you just want to keep it locked long enough to give the EVE players a proper window of opportunity to take advantage of the plexing bonus.

Do note though that if we also include the "train" idea then locking districts would not need to happen at all.

You'd also want to know when the battle would start - the Eve pilots need time to organize and get into position - maybe like an hour? Not sure if this was mentioned yet or not (still reading thread - on page 2 so far - reading threads at work is slow).

This is a fantastic idea. Would add a real sense of progression.

Just gonna add a few ideas here. Not sure if already mentioned but I have not read through all the pages yet.

-Why not at the end of the train of districts there be some kind of planetary control center/ fortress. Basically it would require a new game mode but would culminate in a huge final battle utilizing much of the district. It decides who controls the planet. Defenders have the advantage

-Not sure if already mentioned but in addition to the main track leading to control of the planet there could be additional districts that would grant bonuses or off map support to the faction who controls it.

Not fan of the idea as it's using game modes that are broken. I'd rather see a brand new staged game mode being developped to have longer battles with a real feeling of "conquest". WHy ? because Dust desperately needs such a game mode. And because such a pattern of different rounds for the same battle, with difference game modes poses the issues of going from lobby to lobby, server to server, etc..

I'd rather have one game mode that lasts around 30-40 minutes with fail safe in case of major redlining\crushing.

15 minutes is neither long nor short, it's a perfect length. Ideally you'd want Dust to be something you can pick up an play a quick match if that's all you have time for, but at the same time you want battles to be longer and more "epic." With my original suggestion, you get the best of both worlds. The overall battle for a district will be grand and lengthy, giving that visceral feeling to taking over a district and letting EVE players more time to find where the battles are happening and help out, but at the same time there are convenient opportunities for players to drop out and still get their ISK and SP.

What makes me so sure that people don't want individual matches to be longer is the fact that I have spent an extensive amount of time talking to a bunch of different Dust players - whether it's here on the forums, in the IRC, through the Dust Skype channels, or the random players that join my squad in game. I talk to them all about nearly everything Dust to get an idea for what the player base is thinking, and when it comes to battle length, overall there is an astounding "NO!" to making them any longer than they currently are.

P.S. I agree players want a larger player count in battles and a more attack/defense feel, but this has nothing to do with match duration.

Ambush is the beach-head. The landing in an enemy district. Trying to get a foothold.

Although it might work better if the Attackers had a limited number of clones, and the defenders had a limited amount of time. Basically it would be the Attackers trying to hold ground long enough for a CRU to be delivered, which would result in the Ambush OMS match to follow. If the Defenders can clone out the attackers they can prevent the Attackers from setting up a CRU and getting a foothold.

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.

15 minutes is not near long enough for most eve pilots to get to the district unless you have extended warbarge time between battles. You likely would not even get a orbital strike in....which we don't have metrics yet for exactly "how long" the beacon has to be held to earn one.

Valid concern about farming.

For the attackers to win, there would have to be at least 4 battles on that district (Ambush, Ambush OMS, Skrimish, Domination). Now lets say for argument that there's a little bit of back and forth between the teams, so about 6 battles per district. Even though each one is only 15 minutes, the length of time that you are fighting on the district is much longer. And then once you finish attacking that district, you either move onto another district on that same planet or the next nearest planet if you already went through all districts on that specific planet. The EVE pilots would have plenty of time to provide orbital support. The only thing extending the warbarge timer would do is provider longer delays where EVE pilots cannot provide orbital support.

Lies I can make it from Amarr to anywhere in Devoid and Bleaklands in 15 mins.

That's exactly my point, and when you get there you'll have plenty of time to support the battle and it would be very easy to follow the battle as the move to new districts.

Not that EVE players could remain in orbit for long without a fleet to support them. That's perhaps one downside of this....how many fleets are willing to sit in space while they could be plexing or hunt down enemies?

Not that EVE players could remain in orbit for long without a fleet to support them. That's perhaps one downside of this....how many fleets are willing to sit in space while they could be plexing or hunt down enemies?

That's actually a good point to which I have an answer (maybe).

You don't need a single fleet. If something big starts going down, Eve pilots will start showing up - maybe in the one's or twos - as news spreads of the fight even more will show up. Eventually a roaming fleet will get involved. Just look at some of the recent battles - I Titan mistakenly jumps to low sec and thousands upon thousands of pilots from around New Eden show up to fight whoever they can target.

Also, if this is managed like incursions, and there is a way to find them like incursions, and there is notice when they begin a new train - well hundreds of pilots respond to those every day events as well.

Have Eve side people, I think, may work itself out. In fact, if you are within x jumps of the train, perhaps you automatically get put into a channel Eve side like with incursions? Fleets form up, and these notices to go people in high and low sec. They don't have to be in FW to fight, after all, just to be able to connect to the planet.

There are some flaws, but I'm sure with all the good feedback someone can iron them out for me.

15 minutes is not near long enough for most eve pilots to get to the district unless you have extended warbarge time between battles. You likely would not even get a orbital strike in....which we don't have metrics yet for exactly "how long" the beacon has to be held to earn one.

But isn't that what CCP wants? Full fleets actually caring about Dust? And then fleet battles occurring over Dust districts? As for why they would want to, that's for CCP to figure out. I'm sure throwing LP at them can solve some of it. In fact, don't most EVE players only plex for LP? So yeah, just give them enough LP to make it worthwhile.

What gets me excited is that if this idea actually happens, and then you get into a situation where your team and the enemy team are evenly pitted creating a slight stalemate thus drawing potentially hundreds of ships to the system . . .
I mean, you can go on youtube, watch the EVE battle, and say, "Yeah, that happened (partially) because of me and my squad on the ground."