| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Leither Yiltron
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
1065
   |
Posted - 2015.01.02 10:20:00 -
[1] - Quote
So community members are furiously masturbating collaborating on fundamental PC design. Here's an idea that I came up with that seems to have gone over well.
- Districts no longer hold clones, they hold MCC's. Control of a district is lost when the defender has no more MCC's remaining
- Defenders lose an MCC if they lose a battle on the district
- Attackers require an MCC and a "Clone block" (basically a single unit of an additional resource) to attack
- Attacks happen through a system other than direct clone movement; this is a full rework of part of the logistics subsystem that needs to be discussed
- Clone destruction is no longer the primary payoff determiner; this involves a full rework of the rewards subsystem that needs to be fleshed out and discussed
- In-game clone count for both teams is set at a reasonably high default. 150-180+ has been on the table for discussion.
The quick list of reasons:
- Simplification of attacking, defending, and attrition - The granularity of clone movements is an over complication that doesn't add much tactical value. Attrition rates are crazy hard-to-intuit calculations, and again don't add much tactical value. The new system is much simpler: You can attack a district, or you can't. You have defenses left on a district, or you don't.
- Removal of "unwinnable" games - Gameplay value is detracted when one team or another has to play a match with a critically low number of clones under the current system
- Separation of battle win-conditions and sovereignty/logistics in general. The intertwining of these systems makes balance a lot harder.
This theme of degranularization of PC resources is extensible, and should be applied throughout the redesign wherever possible. Complication for the sake of complication isn't necessarily more "tactical" or "strategic", and comes with its own share of pitfalls.
Long term roadmap by Aeon Amadi
Have a pony
|
Kain Spero
Goonfeet
4131
|
Posted - 2015.01.03 09:07:00 -
[2] - Quote
Leither Yiltron wrote:
[list]
Simplification of attacking, defending, and attrition - The granularity of clone movements is an over complication that doesn't add much tactical value. Attrition rates are crazy hard-to-intuit calculations, and again don't add much tactical value. The new system is much simpler: You can attack a district, or you can't. You have defenses left on a district, or you don't.
Probably my favorite aspect of this idea. Also, if anyone has ever picked clones from a district you know it's not a fun experience.
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
|
Zaria Min Deir
0uter.Heaven
988
|
Posted - 2015.01.03 12:18:00 -
[3] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Leither Yiltron wrote:
[list]
Simplification of attacking, defending, and attrition - The granularity of clone movements is an over complication that doesn't add much tactical value. Attrition rates are crazy hard-to-intuit calculations, and again don't add much tactical value. The new system is much simpler: You can attack a district, or you can't. You have defenses left on a district, or you don't.
Probably my favorite aspect of this idea. Also, if anyone has ever picked clones from a district you know it's not a fun experience.
What do you mean? I thought the interface for doing so is easy and enjoyable to use... 
Have you considered installing the improved keyboard?
"Go Go Power Rangers!"
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |