Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 15 post(s) |
Jadd Hatchen
KILL-EM-QUICK
750
|
Posted - 2015.01.06 17:03:00 -
[241] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:I agree. I think War Barges should eventually become an asset that EVE players can interact with in various (and sometimes splodey) ways. However there is a need for a workable system in Dust to properly fix PC, and it is more important that we worry about making that work before linking it to EVE directly. The key of course is to make sure that the system is actually capable of being worked into EVE integration, even if the actual implementation is later down the road.
And doing it separate is the wrong way to do it. If you make it a separate system from the start and then later try to cobble it together with something else later on down the road, you will only doom yourself to failure or lots of hardships. This is the reason that sooo many things in both EVE and DUST are full of bugs and problems. They never had the foresight to look at how things would be implemented later and just kicked that can further down the road for someone else to deal with. That is WRONG! Make the ties ins now, or at least make placeholders for the ties ins now. If not, then you are doing it wrong.
But that is all besides the point. The real point is that DUST is slowing migrating AWAY from EVE to make room for Legion which will be the "real" FPS for the EVE universe going forward unfortunately.
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
4286
|
Posted - 2015.01.06 19:27:00 -
[242] - Quote
Jadd Hatchen wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:I agree. I think War Barges should eventually become an asset that EVE players can interact with in various (and sometimes splodey) ways. However there is a need for a workable system in Dust to properly fix PC, and it is more important that we worry about making that work before linking it to EVE directly. The key of course is to make sure that the system is actually capable of being worked into EVE integration, even if the actual implementation is later down the road. And doing it separate is the wrong way to do it. If you make it a separate system from the start and then later try to cobble it together with something else later on down the road, you will only doom yourself to failure or lots of hardships. This is the reason that sooo many things in both EVE and DUST are full of bugs and problems. They never had the foresight to look at how things would be implemented later and just kicked that can further down the road for someone else to deal with. That is WRONG! Make the ties ins now, or at least make placeholders for the ties ins now. If not, then you are doing it wrong. But that is all besides the point. The real point is that DUST is slowing migrating AWAY from EVE to make room for Legion which will be the "real" FPS for the EVE universe going forward unfortunately.
I'll use an example from my work. I work in Civil Engineering and we do a lot of residential design work, so designing water supply lines is pretty common. It's also common to build residential developments in phases, rather than all at once. So what happens is that you'll build the water pipe running into Phase 1, and you'll build Phase 1. However we know where Phase 2 is and where the water line for Phase 2 will be. So we'll construct what is commondly reffered to as a "stub" coming off of the Phase 1 water line. It's short, maybe 2-4 feet, and it just has a cap on the end. It doesn't go anywhere, it doesn't connect to anything. However, what that allows us to do when we construct Phase 2, is we can then easily connect to that stub, rather than trying to tap into the existing line after the fact, tearing up roads, ect.
It's much easier, faster, and less expensive to do it this way because 1. Its better to build in phases due to resource allocation and profitability, and 2. By planning ahead and knowing *where* you're going to connect Phase 2 to Phase 1, you can install this stub which can very easily be tapped into rather that making a mess trying to connect to the existing pipe after the fact.
The tl;dr of what I'm getting at is, it's fine to build the game in phases, as long you plan ahead and know how later phases will connect to earlier phases. That way you can just latch the EVE part onto whatever "stub" you've designed and the whole process is very smooth and efficient. So it's fine if there isn't a War Barge EVE connection right away, as long as they have a pretty solid idea of how to impliment it at a later time.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
John Demonsbane
Unorganized Ninja Infantry Tactics
5044
|
Posted - 2015.01.06 19:30:00 -
[243] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Jadd Hatchen wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:I agree. I think War Barges should eventually become an asset that EVE players can interact with in various (and sometimes splodey) ways. However there is a need for a workable system in Dust to properly fix PC, and it is more important that we worry about making that work before linking it to EVE directly. The key of course is to make sure that the system is actually capable of being worked into EVE integration, even if the actual implementation is later down the road. And doing it separate is the wrong way to do it. If you make it a separate system from the start and then later try to cobble it together with something else later on down the road, you will only doom yourself to failure or lots of hardships. This is the reason that sooo many things in both EVE and DUST are full of bugs and problems. They never had the foresight to look at how things would be implemented later and just kicked that can further down the road for someone else to deal with. That is WRONG! Make the ties ins now, or at least make placeholders for the ties ins now. If not, then you are doing it wrong. But that is all besides the point. The real point is that DUST is slowing migrating AWAY from EVE to make room for Legion which will be the "real" FPS for the EVE universe going forward unfortunately. I'll use an example from my work. I work in Civil Engineering and we do a lot of residential design work, so designing water supply lines is pretty common. It's also common to build residential developments in phases, rather than all at once. So what happens is that you'll build the water pipe running into Phase 1, and you'll build Phase 1. However we know where Phase 2 is and where the water line for Phase 2 will be. So we'll construct what is commondly reffered to as a "stub" coming off of the Phase 1 water line. It's short, maybe 2-4 feet, and it just has a cap on the end. It doesn't go anywhere, it doesn't connect to anything. However, what that allows us to do when we construct Phase 2, is we can then easily connect to that stub, rather than trying to tap into the existing line after the fact, tearing up roads, ect. It's much easier, faster, and less expensive to do it this way because 1. Its better to build in phases due to resource allocation and profitability, and 2. By planning ahead and knowing *where* you're going to connect Phase 2 to Phase 1, you can install this stub which can very easily be tapped into rather that making a mess trying to connect to the existing pipe after the fact. The tl;dr of what I'm getting at is, it's fine to build the game in phases, as long you plan ahead and know how later phases will connect to earlier phases. That way you can just latch the EVE part onto whatever "stub" you've designed and the whole process is very smooth and efficient. So it's fine if there isn't a War Barge EVE connection right away, as long as they have a pretty solid idea of how to impliment it at a later time.
Just gonna put this out there, Pokey. That does assume a fair amount about CCP's planning.... Just sayin'.
(The godfather of tactical logistics)
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
4286
|
Posted - 2015.01.06 19:48:00 -
[244] - Quote
Oh I'm not saying they're great at planning. But Rattati is several degrees less ******** than the Dev team that got us into this mess. So...who knows, it might actually happen this time around.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Soraya Xel
Abandoned Privilege Top Men.
5237
|
Posted - 2015.01.06 22:51:00 -
[245] - Quote
I don't think CCP is anywhere near looking at that on the roadmap, in honesty, noted by the company's clear direction they've spoken about in blogs and media things to focus on making games great individually. But I see the war barge as it's being in developed in DUST right now to be not contradictory to making it appear in EVE later, or any of the ways I would consider it ideal to link DUST and EVE gameplay-wise.
CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
4292
|
Posted - 2015.01.06 22:56:00 -
[246] - Quote
To be fair though, I dislike the existence of the Warbarge Strikes in FacWar. I think they should be a Pub Only mechanic.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
Darth-Carbonite GIO
Random Gunz RISE of LEGION
1391
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 01:15:00 -
[247] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:To be fair though, I dislike the existence of the Warbarge Strikes in FacWar. I think they should be a Pub Only mechanic.
This. I was under the impression that the ability to drop orbitals without an Eve pilot was an unintended glitch. Regardless of whether it was truly a mistake or not, it should go back to the way it was.
The more reasons for dust bunnies to interact with capsuleers the better.
GIMMIE MY PINK LAZOR
|
Pokey Dravon
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
4305
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 02:40:00 -
[248] - Quote
Darth-Carbonite GIO wrote:Pokey Dravon wrote:To be fair though, I dislike the existence of the Warbarge Strikes in FacWar. I think they should be a Pub Only mechanic. This. I was under the impression that the ability to drop orbitals without an Eve pilot was an unintended glitch. Regardless of whether it was truly a mistake or not, it should go back to the way it was. The more reasons for dust bunnies to interact with capsuleers the better.
Indeed. I doubt it was intentionally done but it does need to be fixed.
"That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032
Dust514 // Podcast
www.biomassed.net
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P C C P Alliance
14252
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 07:57:00 -
[249] - Quote
I just want to confirm the sentinment in these last few pages. The Warbarge is not just a "PC" gameplay feature. It is meant to be the foundation, or hub of operations. The first foundation is the infrastructure to build on further. We have talked about warbarges existing in space, for eve to kill, and installations that exist in 3d on planets, that could be connected to PI as well. These have fallen through because of the intense complexity of such a feature.
I will post a Warbarge feedback thread imminently where we can discuss that outside of the general Roadmap 2015.
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P C C P Alliance
14252
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 08:01:00 -
[250] - Quote
A little update on the roadmap.
We have been arranging some features, as gameplay was deprioritized for the sake of infrastructure development, mainly cloud hosting of battleservers and preparation of increased salvage, and salvage based rewards in all ToW (theatres of war, PC, FW and Pub).
We have not sat idly, however, and have created a boatload of content, but as that is not "development", it is not demonstrated on the roadmap.
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2206
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 08:56:00 -
[251] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:I just want to confirm the sentinment in these last few pages. The Warbarge is not just a "PC" gameplay feature. It is meant to be the foundation, or hub of operations. The first foundation is the infrastructure to build on further. We have talked about warbarges existing in space, for eve to kill, and installations that exist in 3d on planets, that could be connected to PI as well. These have fallen through because of the intense complexity of such a feature.
I will post a Warbarge feedback thread imminently where we can discuss that outside of the general Roadmap 2015.
Echoing this I would have to say that I wasn't keen or understanding as to the Warbarge concept when Rattati brought it to the CPMs attention. But as the benefits of them in terms of their use as foundations for more infrastructure became clear, especially as not just a 'PC' asset, I've been sold in them. I'm really looking forward to the feedback thread when Rattati posts it.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
John Psi
Vacuum Cleaner. LLC Steel Balls Alliance
1120
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 09:06:00 -
[252] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:mainly cloud hosting of battleservers very curious - what it means?
Please support fair play!
|
Ripley Riley
Incorruptibles
6226
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 11:47:00 -
[253] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:I just want to confirm the sentinment in these last few pages. The Warbarge is not just a "PC" gameplay feature. It is meant to be the foundation, or hub of operations. The first foundation is the infrastructure to build on further. We have talked about warbarges existing in space, for eve to kill, and installations that exist in 3d on planets, that could be connected to PI as well. These have fallen through because of the intense complexity of such a feature.
I will post a Warbarge feedback thread imminently where we can discuss that outside of the general Roadmap 2015. Rattati, I am intensely interested in warbarges now. Before this post I was under the impression that warbarges were purely a PC-corp toy; I have a small desire to dip my toe in PC after Not Uprising 1.0, but not enough to pursue a warbarge. Now I feel like it will be a valuable form of progression. Like Kevell, I can't wait for the feedback thread.
Just call me Ripple. Ripple Riley.
@Ripley_Riley
|
steadyhand amarr
shadows of 514
3451
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 13:26:00 -
[254] - Quote
As a general item like your "home" makes this a lot more intresting and might finally give a sense of ownership that dust players don't get experience compared to EvE Gÿ¦
You can never have to many chaples
-Templar True adamance
|
Piercing Serenity
PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies
817
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 14:08:00 -
[255] - Quote
Just a quick thought that I had concerning Warbarges and battling.
Clone Storage:
I think it would be interesting for warbarges to hold the purchasable clone packs "within" the asset. Initially, warbarges would only be able to hold 150 clones within the barge. This, of course, could be upgraded through modules. I think that this would add immersion to the game, and leads into the next idea
Transit Mode:
Currently, to my knowledge, a corp can buy a clone pack and use it to launch an attack wherever they'd like. It's not a great method of attack because 150 clones isn't enough to do much, but it destroys the idea of "location matters". Instead of launching a long range attack via clone pack (the current system), corporations would have to move their warbarge within range of a long distance planet to attack the districts on the planet.
Transit mode can be planned out through the star map, where a director could choose the route that the warbarge would take, how many jumps the barge would need to make, how much fuel the trip would cost, etc. The director could then initiate the trip, and watch the progress of the journey through the starmap (with the current interplanetary district line, or planet, highlighted).
Transit mode could be initiated for as many warbarges as the corporation owns, so that large corps or alliances can launch many long ranged attacks if they would like.
Inter-Transit Interactions (Districts, and Warbarge Battling):
Long-distance travel will use fuel, and possibly deal wear and tear damage to the warbage. After every jump between planets, the director would receive a notification of the fuel use and damage done to the barge. These problems could be fixed by docking with a planet/district and refueling and repairing the warbarge. Of course, "Warbarge Repair Station" and "Warbarge Refueling Station" could be installations that districts place on them, such that some corporations could focus on something other than war. Refueling or Repairing the barge would make the barge vulnerable for as long as the operation was active. During this time the warbarge could initiate an attack on the district, or the district could initiate an attack on the warbarge (Requires the "Warbarge Map" that Rattati talked about) to claim it. This would emphasize the "This is New Eden" feeling of DUST, where you aren't ever safe - even when you're refueling
Additionally, during a warbarge's journey, you might come within range of another warbarge that is also traveling the same route. If two warbarges will be within range, a notification will be sent to the directors of both barges, and a timer will pop up that represents when the two barges are "within range" to launch an attack - calling up a "Warbarge v. Warbarge Map". In this battle, the attacking warbarge would use its equipped weapons to deal damage to the enemy warbarge while also trying to clone out the other team. There would be no objectives in this map. Warbarges could have modules (or hulls) that are designed for warbarge battling (Large cannons that deal more damage over time), or avoiding battles (Dampeners that prevents warbarges from picking up your own.
Personally, this would be a ton of fun for someone like me
Closed Beta Vet (E3 Build), Former PFBHz
Best Corps Battled (Personally): Imperfects, TeamPlayers, Hellstorm
|
Soldner VonKuechle
SAM-MIK General Tso's Alliance
1185
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 16:16:00 -
[256] - Quote
John Psi wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:mainly cloud hosting of battleservers very curious - what it means?
if i understand it correctly, CoD style lobbies, and LAG SWITCHING. mwah hahahaha oh the irony!
or ive missed it completely and this is DUST trying to salvage the 'brain in a box' idea from EVE.
not sure, coffee hasnt kicked in yet
Why are all of you so intellectually inept?
|
el OPERATOR
Capital Acquisitions LLC Bad Intention
700
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 19:56:00 -
[257] - Quote
John Psi wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:mainly cloud hosting of battleservers very curious - what it means?
Lag, and an avenue of plausible deniability for CCP.
Open-Beta Vet.
Drunk Night Tree Burner.
This is my Main and Original.
DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
|
el OPERATOR
Capital Acquisitions LLC Bad Intention
701
|
Posted - 2015.01.07 20:26:00 -
[258] - Quote
That being said, I've been reading this thread and see some nice ideas.
1. PC battles being composed of more than basically a skirm. 2. Corps having a physical asset that they need to maintain and improve. 3. Said asset providing the fundamental features long missing and requested: training ranges, social walkaround spaces, physical location continuity between corpmates between matches etc. 4. PC district ownership gleaning some sort of commodity reward, whether generating raw manufacturing materials or perhaps allowing for some space asset EVE side to be enabled once the surface is held. Just something besides generating clones to attack districts to generate clones to lather/rinse/repeat 5. Said commodity being available as an incentive/reward for successful PC battles, district flipping not required. (Becomes the means to "Reaver" without being an "Empiricist" as well as creates a second reward for successful "Corp Battles")
I see that PC timers are getting some discussion, idk how I feel about what I see suggested. " Fixed" timers definitely seem like they would lend themselves to locking, "Variable" timers won't allow for any stability of holdings and "No" timers won't allow for holdings at all.
Maybe a solution could be created through creating new district reinforcement infrastructure, basically " auto-defenses" that would eliminate any enemy fleet as it enters low orbit (auto-kills the barge) , maybe in 4hour blocks, so a corp could (potentially, and for substantial expense) "lock" a critical district for 24 hours but leave less critical regions "open" for 12 hours and leave others completely un-auto-defended and available for attack at any time. So, still sort of timered but with a financial element that limits any corp from possessing huge swathes of real estate without that property costing anything. Hell, maybe 5 hour blocks so to "lock" the overlap of time = isk wasted, but to not lock means a 5(!) hour window attacks can be staged in.
Open-Beta Vet.
Drunk Night Tree Burner.
This is my Main and Original.
DUST514 is WARFARE, not WAR-FAIR.
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
10694
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 04:14:00 -
[259] - Quote
John Psi wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:mainly cloud hosting of battleservers very curious - what it means?
I'm curious about how that works as well.
On Twitter: @HilmarVeigar #greenlightlegion #dust514 players are waiting.
|
John Psi
Vacuum Cleaner. LLC Steel Balls Alliance
1126
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 04:25:00 -
[260] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote:John Psi wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:mainly cloud hosting of battleservers very curious - what it means? I'm curious about how that works as well.
I imagine that such a cloud storage, but what is the cloud battleserver? because it must be powerful machine with stable channel...
Please support fair play!
|
|
steadyhand amarr
shadows of 514
3455
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 06:56:00 -
[261] - Quote
Likely in the same method as the xbox live cloud. Which for me at least works freakishly well.... but I can't see how ccp can cloud up ps3s because building their own one would defeat the point =ƒÿå
You can never have to many chaples
-Templar True adamance
|
Lady MDK
Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire
244
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 07:37:00 -
[262] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:....and preparation of increased salvage, and salvage based rewards in all ToW (theatres of war, PC, FW and Pub).
I'm curious Ratti, does the above+the presence of a salvager role on the roadmap potentially imply some new salvage gameplay mechanic? Like actually having people salvage the battlefield following or during a battle are you thinking along similar lines as the current strongbox feature by simple adding to an existing feature?
Anyone getting annoyed by reading of the above post should consider the following.
I don't care so neither should you :)
|
Syeven Reed
T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K
1151
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 09:47:00 -
[263] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:A little update on the roadmap.
We have been arranging some features, as gameplay was deprioritized for the sake of infrastructure development, mainly cloud hosting of battleservers and preparation of increased salvage, and salvage based rewards in all ToW (theatres of war, PC, FW and Pub).
We have not sat idly, however, and have created a boatload of content, but as that is not "development", it is not demonstrated on the roadmap.
You sir have my attention and I am egerly awaiting a dev-blog sometime February! :)
SCAN ATTEMPT PREVENTED
EvE - 21 Day Trial
|
Stefan Stahl
Seituoda Taskforce Command
897
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 10:08:00 -
[264] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:We have been arranging some features, as gameplay was deprioritized for the sake of infrastructure development While you're on the topic of infrastructure: Is there any way for you to influence the amount of time it takes to load the team-chat? Every time I spawn into a match and start looking for a squad to join it takes a good 10-15 seconds until I can actually see which squads are on my team.
Please excuse my interruption if by the term "infrastructure" you are referring to completely unrelated concepts. This just my latest pet-peeve and I felt like mentioning it. |
Fox Gaden
Immortal Guides Learning Alliance
5683
|
Posted - 2015.01.08 20:04:00 -
[265] - Quote
Multistage Approach to taking Districts in PC
I would like to propose a Planetary Conquest winning condition revamp to make Clones a secondary wining condition rather than the primary winning condition as they are in PC now. This is based on a well known proposal for FW made over a year ago.
Multi Stage Approach:
- Phase 1 (Beachhead): Modified Ambush match to take a beachhead. 15 minute notification to the defenders (No timer). 8 v 8 battle, with 50 clones available (Possibly give the defenders 60 or 70 clones) After 5 minutes a CRU is dropped. The attacking team needs to hack the CRU and hold it for 3 minutes, or clone the defenders to win. If the attackers win, then the 24 hour timber is started. If the defenders win, there are no further battles.
- Phase 2 (Take down the Defense Network): If the Attackers win the Beachhead, then after a timer there will be a Domination style match, where the attackers are trying to take out the defender's District Defense Computer. 16 v 16 with 180 clones. Only the Attackers have an MCC. The defenders hold the point at the start of the match, and the Null cannons fire at the attacker's MCC as long as the Defenders control the point. When the Attackers hack the objective the Null cannons stop firing and after 5 minutes the virus will take out the District Defense Computer. So attackers need to hold the point for 5 minutes to win. Defenders need to destroy the attacker's MCC to win. If the attackers win, a timer for Phase 3 begins. If the defenders win the match is followed by a 16 v 16 Ambush match 5 minutes later where the defenders have to drive out the last holdouts from the attacking force. If the attackers win the Ambush match, then it spawns a new Domination match after 5 minutes.
- Phase 3 (Final Push): Once the District Defense Network is down, control of the Null cannons revert to the local terminals, and the Defenders have to stage from an MCC. So you have a standard Skirmish match. If the attackers win they get the District. If the Defenders win, they can reboot their District Defense Network, and 5 minutes later a Phase 2 Domination match begins.
- Summery: To take a district you must win an Ambush, timer, Domination, timer, Skirmish. To defend a district you must drive them back in revers order and win the final Ambush. Battle progression happens over 3 days. First Ambush is immediate, then Dom after a timber, then Skirm after a timber. There is only 5 minutes between battles when the Defenders win and the progression goes back a step.
Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.
|
DJINN Jecture
BurgezzE.T.F General Tso's Alliance
185
|
Posted - 2015.01.10 19:32:00 -
[266] - Quote
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Awesome!!!!!!!!!!!! IMO market should be a priority, with all items listed in the topic, great plan guys!
How long til this hits PC?
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
812
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 22:18:00 -
[267] - Quote
Fox Gaden wrote:Multistage Approach to taking Districts in PC I would like to propose a Planetary Conquest winning condition revamp to make Clones a secondary wining condition rather than the primary winning condition as they are in PC now. This is based on Aero Yassavi's well known proposal for Multi Stage Faction Warfare Battles. Multi Stage Approach: - Phase 1 (Beachhead): Modified Ambush match to take a beachhead. 15 minute notification to the defenders (No timer). 8 v 8 battle, with 50 clones available to the attackers and 70 available to the defenders. The attacking Warbarge drops a CRU from orbit which provides 50 clones for the attackers to take a Beachhead in the district. After 5 minutes the Warbarge drops a Field Command Center (FCC) (Supply Depot art asset). The Attackers must hack the FCC to activate it, and protect it for 3 minutes until it comes fully online. When the FCC comes fully online it activates a powerful shield (attackers red line), begins to jam the Districts defense radar and broadcasting a homing signal, so that the attackers can safely bring in their MCC. This starts the timer for the next phase. The defenders can win by destroying the FCC, cloning the attackers, or by hacking/destroying the CRU and destroying all Uplinks to deny the attackers access to the District (drive them off the beach). - Phase 2 (Take down the Defense Network): If the Attackers win the Beachhead, then after a timer there will be a Domination style match, where the attackers are trying to take out the defender's District Defense Network. 16 v 16 with 180 clones. Only the Attackers have an MCC. The defenders hold the point at the start of the match, and the Null cannons fire at the attacker's MCC as long as the Defenders control the point. When the Attackers hack the objective the Null cannons stop firing and after 5 minutes the virus will take out the District Defense Network. So attackers need to hold the point for 5 minutes to win. Defenders need to destroy the attacker's MCC to win. If the attackers win, a timer for Phase 3 begins. If the defenders win the match is followed by a 16 v 16 Ambush match 5 minutes later where the defenders have to drive out the last holdouts from the attacking force. If the attackers win the Ambush match, then it spawns a new Domination match after 5 minutes. - Phase 3 (Final Push): Once the District Defense Network is down, control of the Null cannons revert to the local terminals, and the Defenders have to stage from an MCC. So you have a standard Skirmish match. If the attackers win they get the District. If the Defenders win, they can reboot their District Defense Network, and 5 minutes later a Phase 2 Domination match begins. - Summery: To take a district you must win an Ambush, timer, Domination, timer, Skirmish. To defend a district you must drive them back in revers order and win the final Ambush. Battle progression happens over 3 days. First Ambush is immediate, then Dom after a timber, then Skirm after a timber. There is only 5 minutes between battles when the Defenders win and the progression goes back a step. The timer only comes into play when the attackers have pushed the attack into the next phase. - Narrative: To take a district you have to win a Beachhead, Take down the District Defense Computer, and Push the defenders out of the District. MCC Attrition: The Attackers need an MCC for Phase 2 and Phase 3. If the Attackers lose Phase 2 or Phase 3 they lose a Warbarge, but as long as they have a replacement Warbarge, and have not been pushed off the Beachhead, they can continue to press the attack. However, if they run out of MCC's the attack is over. Defenders only need 1 MCC to defend a district as it is only used in Phase 3, and if they lose Phase 3 they lose the district. If the Defenders do not have an MCC the Attackers capture the District when they win Phase 2. A player owned MCC carries up to 180 clones (as apposed to 150 for the MCC used in Public matches) as participants in Planetary Conquest are generally more efficient at killing clones, and we don't want cloning to be the primary strategy for wining Phase 2 and Phase 3 matches. If there are less than 180 clones remaining on the Warbarge, or in the District, then the MCC will hold all remaining clones. When an MCC blows up all remaining clones are destroyed, but biomass may be salvageable. Clone Attrition: While clone attrition would not be the primary wining condition of PC matches anymore, if the attackers or defenders do run out of clones, they lose. Clone Attrition will become a factor if a district is not adequately stocked with clones, or if both the attackers and defenders are winning battles and it goes back and forth a few time, resulting in more than the minimum 3 matches required to take a district. Each match uses a limited amount of clones, but those clones come out of the total clone count for the District. Surviving clones are returned to the District or Warbarge at the end of the match, with the exception of a successful raid where the surviving defender clones go to the Raiders. Edit: Rewrote this in my PC proposal thread, so I copied the new version here as well.
I put this in the Planetary Conquest Thread, bits and pieces of it
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
Sequal's Back
Intara Direct Action Caldari State
203
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:54:00 -
[268] - Quote
Wait wait wait.. Is it real or am I dreaming? Did I just see "New GameMode(s)" for 1.1?
Rise? That's what they used to call me. Sequal Rise. That was my name.
Now I come Back to you, at the turn of the tide.
|
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
453
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 20:34:00 -
[269] - Quote
Rattati, is there a trello board for the bugs in the game and their priorities? Making threads with bug reports in bugs section is proving very unfruitful so far. Support tickets are being replied to with instructions to make threads in the bug reports section. |
Talos Vagheitan
Ancient Exiles.
877
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 02:47:00 -
[270] - Quote
The roadmap looks great.
The biggest question I have is related to the aging hardware Dust is played on. I understand production of the PS3 is set to stop in the near future. CCP has been very quiet about this since Legion was 'announced'. I think development of Dust suffers by being limited to a near decade old technology.
Dust already has a reputation of being somewhat unstable, I worry that adding more and more and more content will only make that worse. Eventually we have to talk about where this game is going.
In a different post I mentioned how I'd still like to see CCP resolve the legal issues with microsoft and make Legion the first cross-platform game on the next (current) gen consoles. Legion on the PC would be a huge improvement, but I think it would still remain a fairly 'underground' game.
Porting to both current gen consoles would at least double the player base right off the bat, assuming the XBOX community is roughly the same size as the PS community. And upon that happening, no doubt droves of previous Dust players would come back. From there the playerbase growth could accelerate even further. Tapping into the consoles for an FPS certainly reaches to a much larger audience.
From that point, you've got a larger player base (more money) and better tech to develop on, allowing much more rapid improvement on the game, which then draws more players.
BAM.
Who cares what some sniper has to say
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |