Senor XIII
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
   |
Posted - 2013.02.28 03:14:00 -
[1] - Quote
First time, long time...
My shot in the dark at workable timers in a FPS:
Based on the size or resourcefulness of a district, there is a certain number of "loyalty points" that must be earned to control it. Defender and Attacker must supply some sort of bounty for passive defence (I am not going to touch this yet).
An attacking corporation begins to erode the defender's loyalty points. Based on the success of the attack or successive attacks, the attackers gain passive loyalty point reduction.
The defending team once attacked can fight either (1) a battle to win back loyalty points or (2) a battle to stop the passive reduction gained by the attacker (ambush v skirmish?). Each battle has a minimum loyalty point pledge (set by some mechanic on the defenders side) and a maximum loyalty point pledge (set by attacker mechanic).
Defending team controls the amount of loyalty points pledged between the two limits. A good idea would be to allow the minimum and maximum pledged loyalty points be set by the amount of notice given to the opposing side.
If the defenders have the loyalty points to do a couple of minimum loyalty point practice rounds on Friday night and plan for an all out slog on Saturday, great! Let the internal dynamics of the corporation dictate how they choose to defend. Casual players can use their one hour available to go all in.
If the attacker meets the defender in battle the match minimum is increased and the passive reduction is greatly increased/decreased.
If this has already been discussed I apologize.
---
I'll take any response off-air. |
Senor XIII
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.01 17:17:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:
While that can certainly be justified I do believe that a limit should be placed on the length of time the district can be protected while the corp is offline. Mainly because you may end up with a situation where a new corp comes in claims a district, actively defends it for awhile, and then doesn't log on for weeks or months or more effectively taking that district off the market permanently.
Problem with Timers
A defending corp needs to have the advantage of choosing when they want to defend while allowing the attacker some ability to overcome that advantage.
The problem with timers in EVE is that the defender's only defense in owning the space is in setting the time the station is vulnerable (within a certain range). But the aggressor can simply "claim the field" hours before and the defender then must become the aggressor to dislodge the attacker from their own territory. Its stupid. I still remember when the goons hellcamped 6VDT for a week straight (it was fun on my end because I helped with the camping but it must of sucked for IT who had owned the space for a while and essentially was locked in their own bedroom closet). The impact of timers in DUST are not presently known but I imagine that it will become as formulaic as it has become in EVE.
I posted my solution a few pages back that dealt with districts having a point system that must be eroded by the attacker. However, any system designed by CCP should do several things:
1) Initially benefit the defender. Timers do this but in reality they merely break the defense into several static predictable battles. Attacking then becomes formulaic. Attackers will aggress on Thursday night in their timezone and plan for the timers over the weekend. Attacks will follow the same procedure every time as it does in EVE.
2) Encourage Defender and attacker to fight. Obviously
3) Spread the defense over a period of time.
4) Ultimately benefit the better team.
A hypothetical solution/scenario:
Team UD's (a U.S. based Defender) district is attacked by AA (Australian attacker. In EVE, U.S. and Australian timezones have the hardest compatibility, I assume DUST will suffer the same problems).
UD's district has 100,000 points. Based on the proximity of the district to UD's corp hangar (I assume these will exist in some form), and adjoining owned territory there is maximum amount of LP that AA can claim in a single battle.
UD has also had to funded 100 million ISK into their merc coffer.
AA decides to attack the district at their most favorable time. They post the time they plan on engaging their assault (they choose either an ambush that reduces LP or a skirmish that increases passive LP gain). Based on the amount of notice, the maximum amount of LP they can earn is increased. However, in this case they give no notice and schedule it for a half hour out and just want to shoot people.
Since UD doesnt show up for the fight, mercs fight the battle for them receiving the contracted amount from the merc coffer the UD already funded. (I assume that they will be able to select the quality of mercs at some point, so they arent paying blood money to noobs)
AA is incredibly successful agains the hired mercs, they go 17 for 20. Each battle has awarded them the maximum LP (although not that much because there was no real notice), however, their consecutive successes has added to their passive reduction to the total LP.
UD receives a notification of the battles posted by AA and realizes that if AA keeps up their tempo the districts total LP will be reduced within 36 hours.
UD can only get together as a corp for two hours in the next day and realize that if they are unable to make any headway during those two hours, they will lose just based on the passive reduction.
They post 5 battles each right after each other giving 24 hour notice to AA. Notice that far in advance allows for the stakes to be as high as possible. If AA doesnt show, UD might win and be able to reclaim a significant portion of the lost LP. However, there is an upper limit that they can reclaim based on the notice given, and proximity of AA's corp hangar and AA's owned adjoining territories.
AA shows up. UD now has a minimum LP and maximum LP that might be waged in the 5 battles. UD uses the minimum in the first two battles to feel out AA. They go 1 for 1. They then divide the remaining LP over the remaining 3 battles.
Result:
UD has been able to choose the defense of their space on their terms and encouraged the attacker and defender to meet in open battle as it resolves the conflict quicker.
Alternate Scenario:
1. UD is on a honeymoon for 3 weeks. AA fights mercs for several days and depletes the merc coffers funded by the UD and eventually win all the LP. Its their territory.
2. AA attacks and then gets sidetracked and never finishes the assault. UD grinds back the remaining LP against AA's mercs winning back a limited amount of LP in each battle with that amount increasing based on the notice given to AA.
3. AA owns the entire planet and UD is an island. This would mean that the potential gain and passive LP reduction of AA is greatly enhanced. However, UD is superior in organization and skills. UD has a significant disadvantage but if they continue to win they continue to hold the district. So long as they meet AA at the scheduled attacks and win, they remain an island.
4. AA attacks UD at the same time that OG (other guy, original gangster) attacks UD. Makes no difference. Whoever has all the LP at the end owns the district. OG can win some LP and AA can win the rest and then turn to the OG to finally seize the territory.
Bonus points for allowing defenders and attackers to upgrade districts to affect passive LP reduction. |