DUST Search - Game modes as a priority

All Channels

General Discussions

Game modes as a priority

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10789	Posted - 2014.05.16 02:22:00 - [1] - Quote When I first played Dust 514 two years ago in closed beta, there were many things severely wrong with the game, but one thing I immediately loved was the original Skirmish mode (AKA Skirmish 1.0); it was an attack/defend mode with multiple successive stages that made me feel at home as a MAG player. As Dust development went on, instead of fixing the problems with Skirmish 1.0, it was simply replaced with a dumbed down Skirmish 2.0 that we currently have today. Legion is a new start, and a chance to get game modes right, use the opportunity. I don't care how pretty your graphics are, I'm not playing the same few simple boring game modes. Make interesting and complex game modes a priority. I'm not going to wait for 2 years after Legion is out waiting for compelling game modes like I did for Dust in vain, they better be there by release. From what I have seen and read about legion, there is some bit of hope: I noticed in the Fanfest gameplay presentation that the description of Domination says the objective point cycle to different spots on the map; something I have asked for on multiple occasions. I also noticed mention of a sandbox mode against both drones and other players, which I think sounds refreshing (always wanted PVPVE). These are both good starts, but not nearly far enough; at minmum there has to be an attack/defend game mode with multiple stages, similar to Skirmish 1.0, Battlefield's "rush" mode, or MAG's modes (example). Stuff I would like: [IMPORTANT] An attack/defend game mode with multiple stages similar to Skirmish 1.0. Battles with 3 or more sides. Example; Ambush could be replaced with squad-Ambush where every squad in the battle is its own side. A 3 way Skirmish would also be nice. Confrontation: Stage 1 - Defense Relay: Neutral (no attacker/defender). Both teams fight over a defense relay which gives winning team control of the installations and outpost in the next stage. Holding the defense relay fills a bar, and the first team to fills their bar first wins the first stage. This is akin to Domination since there is only one neutral objective. There could also be variations where there more than one defense relay. Stage 2 - Oupost Control: Attack/defend. Stage 1 winners become the defenders of the outpost, and their clone reserves increase by 100 because of the clone stored in the outpost. Attackers must breach the outpost and must plant charges to destroy the bulk clone storage sites (and decrease defender clones by 100) to win; 5 sites each containing 25 clones for example. Defenders can win by depleting the attacker clones. Losing stage 2 for defenders means the extra 100 clones is destroyed. Stage 3 - Ambush: Neutral. We all know how Ambush works. Ambush is the logical continuation of Outpost control; in Outpost Control both teams try to take out the other's clones, the attackers do it by blowing up clone storage sites, and the defenders do it by just killing the attackers. Once the clone storage sites are destroyed, it only makes sense that it would just be Ambush. Scan and Destroy: Starts with 2 teams, each team has an MCC. The MCCs are shooting each other. Each team has 3 to 5 cloaked hidden missile defense arrays (MDA) that shoots down (preferably with a kickass laser) incoming missiles from the enemy MCC. There are 3 neutral objectives. These objectives are massive scanner installations. If you hack 2/3 of the scanner installations, they will scan and locate 1 of enemy's MDAs. Once your scanner installation locates and decloaks an MDA, the MDA will be marked on your team's HUD/map, and it will be destructible by hacking, or by damaging. Until it is scanned, MDAs will be cloaked and indestructible. There will be a few minutes for the "attackers" to destroy the spotted MDA before it cloaks again, and becomes indestructible. After a spotted MDA is destroyed, control of the scanner installations reset back to being neutral. The goal is to gain control of the scanner installations in order to locate and decloak your enemy's MDAs (missile defense arrays), and then destroy them. Destroying MDAs will allow more of your MCC's missiles to successfully hit your enemy's MCC, thus allowing your MCC to destroy the enemy one. In the various Legion Fanfest presentations, there was no one present talking about game modes, nor any mention of game modes. As of right now, I would assume game modes aren't even a priority, and the plan for Legion game modes is to basically do a tweaked version of Dust's boring modes. Please prove me wrong, or share some plans in the comments regarding what you (CCP) have planned for game modes. Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
Ayures II Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 648	Posted - 2014.05.16 02:43:00 - [2] - Quote No "game modes." Only open world. PC Master Race
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10789	Posted - 2014.05.16 02:52:00 - [3] - Quote Ayures II wrote: No "game modes." Only open world. False There will be an open world sandbox mode with both PVP and PVE, but as you should have seen in the Fanfest gameplay demo there is still gamemodes; they showed Domination mode (I even linked a picture, here it is again). Even if somehow all battles are completely open world, there has to be mechanisms of that determine who wins; without rules and mechanisms, how do you know who wins a battle? Such rules and mechanisms constitute a game mode. Without such rules, everyone is just running around shooting each other with no goal or end, no victory, no defeat. So yeah, there are game modes. Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
Godin Thekiller shadows of 514 2292	Posted - 2014.05.16 02:53:00 - [4] - Quote I'd rather we go away from the lobby shooter, and start being more open (which we were promised). Arenas are fine, but just straight up gamemodes? No. However, I say that things like PC or FW should have some sort of structure akin to a gamemode, but not be a gamemode (gamemode implies that you can't just come in out of the blue, and that it's a quick 15 minutes and it's over, which is quite silly for what is at stake). click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10789	Posted - 2014.05.16 02:59:00 - [5] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: I'd rather we go away from the lobby shooter, and start being more open (which we were promised). Arenas are fine, but just straight up gamemodes? No. However, I say that things like PC or FW should have some sort of structure akin to a gamemode, but not be a gamemode (gamemode implies that you can't just come in out of the blue, and that it's a quick 15 minutes and it's over, which is quite silly for what is at stake). We are mercenaries. We are hired by people to fight on their behalf and take land in their behalf; there has to be rules and mechanisms to decide when the job is done so we can get paid, or who wins the battle, those rule constitute a game mode. Game modes and open world are not mutually exclusive; Planetside 2 for example has a specific mechanism of how one side takes a piece of territory within that open world, i cold those rules and mechanisms as constituting a game mode. You can have different rules which constitute a game mode for different areas within a single open world, so an open world game can still have multiple game modes. I don't see why having areas to aimlessly fight and explore should exclude also having battles with rules of how to win. Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
Ayures II Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 648	Posted - 2014.05.16 03:00:00 - [6] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Ayures II wrote: No "game modes." Only open world. False There will be an open world sandbox mode with both PVP and PVE, but as you should have seen in the Fanfest gameplay demo there is still gamemodes; they showed Domination mode (I even linked a picture, here it is again). Even if somehow all battles are completely open world, there has to be mechanisms of that determine who wins; without rules and mechanisms, how do you know who wins a battle? Such rules and mechanisms constitute a game mode. Without such rules, everyone is just running around shooting each other with no goal or end, no victory, no defeat. So yeah, there are game modes. I'm saying we should get rid of game modes. Battles are won when they're decidedly won. Are you getting stomped? Retreat so you and your corpmates don't lose more isk. Out of clones? Looks like you're not spawning there anymore. Sov structure reinforced/destroyed? Fall back for now and come back later. Start thinking outside the "game mode" box. Sure, they might be ok for some mindless "instant action" arena-style fights and maybe some PvE contracts, but CCP can make the game much more. [edit] Since you're worried about contract resolution, just put the objective in the contract; Clone the enemy, destroy their infrastructure, kill X of their clones, etc. Or just abandon the idea of official ingame contracts for fights. Work out your own deal. A corp burns you on payment? Well, you should've asked for payment up front. A corp gets burned after paying up front? Well, they wont hire you again and will probably put a bounty out on you. PC Master Race
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10789	Posted - 2014.05.16 03:07:00 - [7] - Quote Ayures II wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Ayures II wrote: No "game modes." Only open world. False There will be an open world sandbox mode with both PVP and PVE, but as you should have seen in the Fanfest gameplay demo there is still gamemodes; they showed Domination mode (I even linked a picture, here it is again). Even if somehow all battles are completely open world, there has to be mechanisms of that determine who wins; without rules and mechanisms, how do you know who wins a battle? Such rules and mechanisms constitute a game mode. Without such rules, everyone is just running around shooting each other with no goal or end, no victory, no defeat. So yeah, there are game modes. I'm saying we should get rid of game modes. Battles are won when they're decidedly won. Are you getting stomped? Retreat so you and your corpmates don't lose more isk. Out of clones? Looks like you're not spawning there anymore. Sov structure reinforced/destroyed? Fall back for now and come back later. Start thinking outside the "game mode" box. Sure, they might be ok for some mindless "instant action" arena-style fights and maybe some PvE contracts, but CCP can make the game much more. The "battles won they are decidedly won" philosophy can apply for faction warfare and planetary conquest, but I don't see why it would have to apply to every single thing. Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
Godin Thekiller shadows of 514 2292	Posted - 2014.05.16 03:12:00 - [8] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: I'd rather we go away from the lobby shooter, and start being more open (which we were promised). Arenas are fine, but just straight up gamemodes? No. However, I say that things like PC or FW should have some sort of structure akin to a gamemode, but not be a gamemode (gamemode implies that you can't just come in out of the blue, and that it's a quick 15 minutes and it's over, which is quite silly for what is at stake). We are mercenaries. We are hired by people to fight on their behalf and take land in their behalf; there has to be rules and mechanisms to decide when the job is done so we can get paid, or who wins the battle, those rule constitute a game mode. Game modes and open world are not mutually exclusive; Planetside 2 for example has a specific mechanism of how one side takes a piece of territory within that open world, i cold those rules and mechanisms as constituting a game mode. You can have different rules which constitute a game mode for different areas within a single open world, so an open world game can still have multiple game modes. 1:We are mercenaries by lore, not by fact, just like the valkries are pirates by lore, not by fact, and the Caps are Military brats by lore, not by fact. Therefore, I don't have to fight for anyone but myself and my commrades, together under one single banner. False. 2: A gamemode implies a match, which implies a- a set number for teams (usually) b- the exact path you have to take to victory That is what I'm saying is bad, and why we should move away from that, and why I said something akin to a gamemode. Of course we would need mechanics to explain how the outcome of a match goes, but I don't want to be restricted on the legit ways that we could get to that victory. Say for example PC became a war on numbers. At the start of a reinforcement timer, a force from any alliance, corp, or otherwise can go to a district and attack it. Whoever is left with the most stuff on the field by the time the window is closed (say a hour or two), then that person wins. Stuff is defined as any dropsuit, or vehicle present, and each thing would be weighed differently (a MCC is worth more than a HAV, which is worth more than a heavy). ^this although a unpolished and probably horrible system is what I'm looking for. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Godin Thekiller shadows of 514 2292	Posted - 2014.05.16 03:14:00 - [9] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Ayures II wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Ayures II wrote: No "game modes." Only open world. False There will be an open world sandbox mode with both PVP and PVE, but as you should have seen in the Fanfest gameplay demo there is still gamemodes; they showed Domination mode (I even linked a picture, here it is again). Even if somehow all battles are completely open world, there has to be mechanisms of that determine who wins; without rules and mechanisms, how do you know who wins a battle? Such rules and mechanisms constitute a game mode. Without such rules, everyone is just running around shooting each other with no goal or end, no victory, no defeat. So yeah, there are game modes. I'm saying we should get rid of game modes. Battles are won when they're decidedly won. Are you getting stomped? Retreat so you and your corpmates don't lose more isk. Out of clones? Looks like you're not spawning there anymore. Sov structure reinforced/destroyed? Fall back for now and come back later. Start thinking outside the "game mode" box. Sure, they might be ok for some mindless "instant action" arena-style fights and maybe some PvE contracts, but CCP can make the game much more. The "battles won they are decidedly won" philosophy can apply for faction warfare and planetary conquest, but I don't see why it would have to apply to every single thing. These Hisec contracts don't even make any sense. We're quite literally nuking highly populated planets, daily. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Ayures II Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 649	Posted - 2014.05.16 03:19:00 - [10] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: The "battles won they are decidedly won" philosophy can apply for faction warfare and planetary conquest, but I don't see why it would have to apply to every single thing. The only other things I can think of would be lowsec/NPC nullsec shenanigans and PvE. I don't see anything wrong with open-world PvE. Lowsec and NPC nullsec would basically be PvE along with patrolling (and scanning) for enemies. Like I say, maybe some kind of "instant action" NPC contract thing could be implemented for some short-attention-span fun, but it shouldn't be the core of the game. I don't know where these contracts would take place, though. PC Master Race

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10792	Posted - 2014.05.16 03:19:00 - [11] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: I'd rather we go away from the lobby shooter, and start being more open (which we were promised). Arenas are fine, but just straight up gamemodes? No. However, I say that things like PC or FW should have some sort of structure akin to a gamemode, but not be a gamemode (gamemode implies that you can't just come in out of the blue, and that it's a quick 15 minutes and it's over, which is quite silly for what is at stake). We are mercenaries. We are hired by people to fight on their behalf and take land in their behalf; there has to be rules and mechanisms to decide when the job is done so we can get paid, or who wins the battle, those rule constitute a game mode. Game modes and open world are not mutually exclusive; Planetside 2 for example has a specific mechanism of how one side takes a piece of territory within that open world, i cold those rules and mechanisms as constituting a game mode. You can have different rules which constitute a game mode for different areas within a single open world, so an open world game can still have multiple game modes. 1:We are mercenaries by lore, not by fact, just like the valkries are pirates by lore, not by fact, and the Caps are Military brats by lore, not by fact. Therefore, I don't have to fight for anyone but myself and my commrades, together under one single banner. False. 2: A gamemode implies a match, which implies a- a set number for teams (usually) b- the exact path you have to take to victory That is what I'm saying is bad, and why we should move away from that, and why I said something akin to a gamemode. Of course we would need mechanics to explain how the outcome of a match goes, but I don't want to be restricted on the legit ways that we could get to that victory. Say for example PC became a war on numbers. At the start of a reinforcement timer, a force from any alliance, corp, or otherwise can go to a district and attack it. Whoever is left with the most stuff on the field by the time the window is closed (say a hour or two), then that person wins. Stuff is defined as any dropsuit, or vehicle present, and each thing would be weighed differently (a MCC is worth more than a HAV, which is worth more than a heavy). ^this although a unpolished and probably horrible system is what I'm looking for. Our definitions of game mode aside. I said before, and I will say it again, planetary conquest and faction warfare can be completely open world, but I don't see the point in every single thing being open world. Also I hate the idea of time limits, battles should end when one side logically can no longer fight on. Example; one side runs out of clones, and they can no longer spawn. Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
Godin Thekiller shadows of 514 2294	Posted - 2014.05.16 03:22:00 - [12] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: I'd rather we go away from the lobby shooter, and start being more open (which we were promised). Arenas are fine, but just straight up gamemodes? No. However, I say that things like PC or FW should have some sort of structure akin to a gamemode, but not be a gamemode (gamemode implies that you can't just come in out of the blue, and that it's a quick 15 minutes and it's over, which is quite silly for what is at stake). We are mercenaries. We are hired by people to fight on their behalf and take land in their behalf; there has to be rules and mechanisms to decide when the job is done so we can get paid, or who wins the battle, those rule constitute a game mode. Game modes and open world are not mutually exclusive; Planetside 2 for example has a specific mechanism of how one side takes a piece of territory within that open world, i cold those rules and mechanisms as constituting a game mode. You can have different rules which constitute a game mode for different areas within a single open world, so an open world game can still have multiple game modes. 1:We are mercenaries by lore, not by fact, just like the valkries are pirates by lore, not by fact, and the Caps are Military brats by lore, not by fact. Therefore, I don't have to fight for anyone but myself and my commrades, together under one single banner. False. 2: A gamemode implies a match, which implies a- a set number for teams (usually) b- the exact path you have to take to victory That is what I'm saying is bad, and why we should move away from that, and why I said something akin to a gamemode. Of course we would need mechanics to explain how the outcome of a match goes, but I don't want to be restricted on the legit ways that we could get to that victory. Say for example PC became a war on numbers. At the start of a reinforcement timer, a force from any alliance, corp, or otherwise can go to a district and attack it. Whoever is left with the most stuff on the field by the time the window is closed (say a hour or two), then that person wins. Stuff is defined as any dropsuit, or vehicle present, and each thing would be weighed differently (a MCC is worth more than a HAV, which is worth more than a heavy). ^this although a unpolished and probably horrible system is what I'm looking for. Our definitions of game mode aside. I said before, and I will say it again, planetary conquest and faction warfare can be completely open world, but I don't see the point in every single thing being open world. Also I hate the idea of time limits, battles should end when one side logically can no longer fight on. Example; one side runs out of clones, and they can no longer spawn. timers keep people from losing progress that they have created for months due to not being able to field at least 200+ every minute of the day, and thus quitting/raging/doing something real goddamn stupid. Even EVE has reinforcement timers. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10792	Posted - 2014.05.16 03:27:00 - [13] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: I'd rather we go away from the lobby shooter, and start being more open (which we were promised). Arenas are fine, but just straight up gamemodes? No. However, I say that things like PC or FW should have some sort of structure akin to a gamemode, but not be a gamemode (gamemode implies that you can't just come in out of the blue, and that it's a quick 15 minutes and it's over, which is quite silly for what is at stake). We are mercenaries. We are hired by people to fight on their behalf and take land in their behalf; there has to be rules and mechanisms to decide when the job is done so we can get paid, or who wins the battle, those rule constitute a game mode. Game modes and open world are not mutually exclusive; Planetside 2 for example has a specific mechanism of how one side takes a piece of territory within that open world, i cold those rules and mechanisms as constituting a game mode. You can have different rules which constitute a game mode for different areas within a single open world, so an open world game can still have multiple game modes. 1:We are mercenaries by lore, not by fact, just like the valkries are pirates by lore, not by fact, and the Caps are Military brats by lore, not by fact. Therefore, I don't have to fight for anyone but myself and my commrades, together under one single banner. False. 2: A gamemode implies a match, which implies a- a set number for teams (usually) b- the exact path you have to take to victory That is what I'm saying is bad, and why we should move away from that, and why I said something akin to a gamemode. Of course we would need mechanics to explain how the outcome of a match goes, but I don't want to be restricted on the legit ways that we could get to that victory. Say for example PC became a war on numbers. At the start of a reinforcement timer, a force from any alliance, corp, or otherwise can go to a district and attack it. Whoever is left with the most stuff on the field by the time the window is closed (say a hour or two), then that person wins. Stuff is defined as any dropsuit, or vehicle present, and each thing would be weighed differently (a MCC is worth more than a HAV, which is worth more than a heavy). ^this although a unpolished and probably horrible system is what I'm looking for. Our definitions of game mode aside. I said before, and I will say it again, planetary conquest and faction warfare can be completely open world, but I don't see the point in every single thing being open world. Also I hate the idea of time limits, battles should end when one side logically can no longer fight on. Example; one side runs out of clones, and they can no longer spawn. timers keep people from losing progress that they have created for months due to not being able to field at least 200+ every minute of the day, and thus quitting/raging/doing something real goddamn stupid. Even EVE has reinforcement timers. I was talking about the timers to end the battle, NOT the "when you can attack" timers. In an open world mode, battle should end when one team can no longer spawn, or they retreat because they ran out of resources, or retreat because they just know its hopeless. Timers to decide when the battle ends defeats the whole point of an open world mode. Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10792	Posted - 2014.05.16 03:30:00 - [14] - Quote Ayures II wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: The "battles won they are decidedly won" philosophy can apply for faction warfare and planetary conquest, but I don't see why it would have to apply to every single thing. The only other things I can think of would be lowsec/NPC nullsec shenanigans and PvE. I don't see anything wrong with open-world PvE. Lowsec and NPC nullsec would basically be PvE along with patrolling (and scanning) for enemies. Like I say, maybe some kind of "instant action" NPC contract thing could be implemented for some short-attention-span fun, but it shouldn't be the core of the game. I don't know where these contracts would take place, though. The bulk of the gameplay will never take place in PC and FW, the bulk of the gameplay for the vast majority of players will be the instant-action quick battles, so it does not make sense to deliberately make them boring. Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
Mobius Wyvern Ahrendee Mercenaries 5274	Posted - 2014.05.16 03:33:00 - [15] - Quote Look, the Public Contract "match" system is simply an alternate means of playing the game. Believe it or not, part of what was killing Planetside 2 was the "eternal three-way". In other words, you were ALWAYS on this massive battlefield with tons of **** going on or out in the middle of nowhere with nothing to do. Sometimes you just want to hop in a more controlled scenario and play in a more "balanced" environment just to throw a little variety in, and I see no issue with that. As everyone is so fond of saying, this isn't EVE. EVE may be 100% sandbox all the time, but that's part of why there are less of us than there are players of other MMOs. Not everyone wants to be in the sandbox constantly, and there's a reason why most of us who play EVE also play other games that aren't sandboxes. Having "Matches" and "Game Modes" available as a way to play means that you can take a break from the sandbox now and then without having to switch to another game. I think the more ways there are to play Legion, the better.
Godin Thekiller shadows of 514 2294	Posted - 2014.05.16 03:33:00 - [16] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: I was talking about the timers to end the battle, NOT the "when you can attack" timers. In an open world mode, battle should end when one team can no longer spawn, or they retreat because they ran out of resources, or retreat because they just know its hopeless. Timers to decide when the battle ends defeats the whole point of an open world mode. If that's the case, a battle could last for hours, if not days (considering that a current district is a good 1k km or so, give or take), and I don't know about you, but I have a life. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10792	Posted - 2014.05.16 03:37:00 - [17] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: I was talking about the timers to end the battle, NOT the "when you can attack" timers. In an open world mode, battle should end when one team can no longer spawn, or they retreat because they ran out of resources, or retreat because they just know its hopeless. Timers to decide when the battle ends defeats the whole point of an open world mode. If that's the case, a battle could last for hours, if not days (considering that a current district is a good 1k km or so, give or take), and I don't know about you, but I have a life. Theoretically, but only if both sides have an innnnssaaaaaaaannneeeee amount of clones. At one point I assume one team will be dominating so much that the enemy will retreat because they know its pointless. Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
Godin Thekiller shadows of 514 2294	Posted - 2014.05.16 03:46:00 - [18] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: I was talking about the timers to end the battle, NOT the "when you can attack" timers. In an open world mode, battle should end when one team can no longer spawn, or they retreat because they ran out of resources, or retreat because they just know its hopeless. Timers to decide when the battle ends defeats the whole point of an open world mode. If that's the case, a battle could last for hours, if not days (considering that a current district is a good 1k km or so, give or take), and I don't know about you, but I have a life. Theoretically, but only if both sides have an innnnssaaaaaaaannneeeee amount of clones. At one point I assume one team will be dominating so much that the enemy will retreat because they know its pointless. Unless clones cost a lot (80k is chump change), there will be clones a plently. FI I sold off my new Myrmidon, I could fund over 3k clones alone. And that's just one ship, from me, playing EVE solo, not even counting how many I could restock that every couple minutes, as well as having a sizable bank still, again just by myself. Think of how much a well organized team vs. another well organized team will have. That's my point this would turn into a pissing contest that wouldn't end for a bit, and that's entirely unnecessary. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
Karl Koekwaus 231	Posted - 2014.05.16 12:54:00 - [19] - Quote In my imaginary perfect Legion world everything would be tied into Planetary Interaction on the EVE side. fighting for facilities, different types of PVE, open world stuff. It can all happen with PI facilities as starting point Micheal Jackson died for my sins
SickJ D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 135	Posted - 2014.05.16 23:18:00 - [20] - Quote Ayures II wrote: [ Are you getting stomped? Retreat so you and your corpmates don't lose more isk. This is something we need. Either a team leader to make the call or a system where squad leaders can vote on whether to keep fighting. Because redlining is miserable for the losers and boring for the winners. Green = Good \| Red = Bad \| Yellow = Mine

Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 1988	Posted - 2014.05.17 00:33:00 - [21] - Quote I could back the existence of "game modes" if they were restricted to Arena style battles on Arena style maps. Add betting and spectator mode and I'd even +1 the idea. Arzadu Akbar Motherfuckers!!!! Closed Beta Bittervet Bomber
Godin Thekiller shadows of 514 2308	Posted - 2014.05.17 00:49:00 - [22] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: I could back the existence of "game modes" if they were restricted to Arena style battles on Arena style maps. Add betting and spectator mode and I'd even +1 the idea. Then people could specialize as a pure sport player, a different style than being in the field tbh. That was my point ( I'm horrible at saying what I mean), thanks for saying that. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10798	Posted - 2014.05.17 00:56:00 - [23] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: I could back the existence of "game modes" if they were restricted to Arena style battles on Arena style maps. Add betting and spectator mode and I'd even +1 the idea. Then people could specialize as a pure sport player, a different style than being in the field tbh. That was my point ( I'm horrible at saying what I mean), thanks for saying that. Do you people want or expect the vast majority of the battles to be exactly? Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 1988	Posted - 2014.05.17 01:18:00 - [24] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: I could back the existence of "game modes" if they were restricted to Arena style battles on Arena style maps. Add betting and spectator mode and I'd even +1 the idea. Then people could specialize as a pure sport player, a different style than being in the field tbh. That was my point ( I'm horrible at saying what I mean), thanks for saying that. Do you people want or expect the vast majority of the battles to be exactly? Well, what would you consider the vast majority of the battles in Eve to be exactly? There doesn't need to be some form of structure for pixelated violence to occur. Stop trying to make pixelated violence live in a nice little box and let it run wild and free like it should. Arzadu Akbar Motherfuckers!!!! Closed Beta Bittervet Bomber
Godin Thekiller shadows of 514 2310	Posted - 2014.05.17 01:19:00 - [25] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: I could back the existence of "game modes" if they were restricted to Arena style battles on Arena style maps. Add betting and spectator mode and I'd even +1 the idea. Then people could specialize as a pure sport player, a different style than being in the field tbh. That was my point ( I'm horrible at saying what I mean), thanks for saying that. Do you people want or expect the vast majority of the battles to be exactly? Depends on what the player wishes to do in New Eden. There should be a verity of choices to choose from, some without even combat to do possibly. Whatever the person chooses is what kind of experience they will have. The mentality of "Everything is a match" needs to go. Lobby shooter doesn't make sense in New Eden. click me Blup Blub Bloop. Translation: Die -_-
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10798	Posted - 2014.05.17 01:38:00 - [26] - Quote Godin Thekiller wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: I could back the existence of "game modes" if they were restricted to Arena style battles on Arena style maps. Add betting and spectator mode and I'd even +1 the idea. Then people could specialize as a pure sport player, a different style than being in the field tbh. That was my point ( I'm horrible at saying what I mean), thanks for saying that. Do you people want or expect the vast majority of the battles to be exactly? Depends on what the player wishes to do in New Eden. There should be a verity of choices to choose from, some without even combat to do possibly. Whatever the person chooses is what kind of experience they will have. The mentality of "Everything is a match" needs to go. Lobby shooter doesn't make sense in New Eden. That's not exactly an answer. I get the feeling that you guys want the vast majority of the battles to just be open world endless battles, which doesn't really make outside of persistent sandbox modes like planetary conquest and faction warfare. Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 1988	Posted - 2014.05.17 01:41:00 - [27] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: I could back the existence of "game modes" if they were restricted to Arena style battles on Arena style maps. Add betting and spectator mode and I'd even +1 the idea. Then people could specialize as a pure sport player, a different style than being in the field tbh. That was my point ( I'm horrible at saying what I mean), thanks for saying that. Do you people want or expect the vast majority of the battles to be exactly? Depends on what the player wishes to do in New Eden. There should be a verity of choices to choose from, some without even combat to do possibly. Whatever the person chooses is what kind of experience they will have. The mentality of "Everything is a match" needs to go. Lobby shooter doesn't make sense in New Eden. That's not exactly an answer. I get the feeling that you guys want the vast majority of the battles to just be open world endless battles, which doesn't really make outside of persistent sandbox modes like planetary conquest and faction warfare. Which is why we can include Arena battles for the "e-sports superstars" Arzadu Akbar Motherfuckers!!!! Closed Beta Bittervet Bomber
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Dominion of the Supreme Emperor God-King KAGEHOSHI 10798	Posted - 2014.05.17 02:26:00 - [28] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Godin Thekiller wrote: Then people could specialize as a pure sport player, a different style than being in the field tbh. That was my point ( I'm horrible at saying what I mean), thanks for saying that. Do you people want or expect the vast majority of the battles to be exactly? Depends on what the player wishes to do in New Eden. There should be a verity of choices to choose from, some without even combat to do possibly. Whatever the person chooses is what kind of experience they will have. The mentality of "Everything is a match" needs to go. Lobby shooter doesn't make sense in New Eden. That's not exactly an answer. I get the feeling that you guys want the vast majority of the battles to just be open world endless battles, which doesn't really make outside of persistent sandbox modes like planetary conquest and faction warfare. Which is why we can include Arena battles for the "e-sports superstars" I'm not asking for silly modes like capture the flag, I'm asking for stuff that makes sense in context to war in the universe and our job as mercenaries as modes. Things like planetary conquest and faction warfare however should be completely open world. Regular public battles where we carry out jobs for NPC corporations should be game modes that make sense in context to war and our job as mercenaries should be game modes separate from sports. Gû¦Supreme emperor god-kingpÇÉKAGEH¦PSHIpÇæ// Lord of threads // Forum altGû+
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 1990	Posted - 2014.05.17 03:18:00 - [29] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: I'm not asking for silly modes like capture the flag, I'm asking for stuff that makes sense in context to war in the universe and our job as mercenaries as modes. Things like planetary conquest and faction warfare however should be completely open world. Regular public battles where we carry out jobs for NPC corporations should be game modes that make sense in context to war and our job as mercenaries should be game modes separate from sports. See, when you describe it like that, that makes me think Mission Running. Goto X, Deliver/Destroy/Kill Y, Goto Z->Collect Reward I would hope that these would be worked into the Open World Sandbox and could be stumbled upon by other Legionnaires. If we have to scan down the anomalous signature, so be it, though I would hope that if there was a 100% safe "game mode" that could be played with zero outside interference it would be solely in the Arena (if even there). I could see there being PvP missions too, One and Only pops to mind. Seize control of a item and deliver it back to one of multiple factions who each have a vested interest in said item ("ohnoes/yay that Imperial Armageddon went down over Matar, let's sent out people to recover the sensitive things from onboard/murder the crew and salvage the wreck!!"). They could be fun, but typical Lobby Shooter, join a queue, wait, load into redlined map, get roflstomped/quit/turn the tide of battle rinse and repeat needs to die for Legion to flourish. Arzadu Akbar Motherfuckers!!!! Closed Beta Bittervet Bomber
Joel II X Dah Gods O Bacon 2582	Posted - 2014.05.17 03:26:00 - [30] - Quote I want a Capture the Flag and a Hunter game-mode (one dude has plenty of perks, but is against everyone else. He who kills the hunter, becomes it).



Pages: [1] 2 3 :: 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.