|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 69 post(s) |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
394
   |
Posted - 2013.02.26 21:37:00 -
[1] - Quote
General Tiberius1 wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:I DOUBLE POSTED! :D I feel initiated now. gbghg will feel so happy to have company 
feeling lonely in the pot? (okay i'll stop now), and it's my crappy wifi, there's a reason my ps3 has an ethernet cable in it |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
395
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 21:58:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:I should really finish that dev blog.
you really should, as you may have noticed the forums have lapsed into a loop of declaring stuff thats fine op and calling for nerfs |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
395
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 22:46:00 -
[3] - Quote
Telcontar Dunedain wrote:One thing -
Talking about districts is a failure.
It's either you own the whole planet or its nothing.
Having to fight 14 simultaneous districts at a time to take or hold a planet would be complete crap.
In other words there needs to be a battlefront such that you can only attack one district at a time and you lose the right to keep attacking at some point after losing 1-3x.
have you forgotten that we will be dropping from orbit, there is no reason why we can't hit multiple districts simultaneously, and it will make things vastly more interesting as some districts will fall and others will be held leading to a patchwork of control across a planet. It will also prevent corps from deploying their a-teams in every battle and ensure much wider participation of players in battles over planets. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
395
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 22:49:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Telcontar Dunedain wrote:One thing -
Talking about districts is a failure.
It's either you own the whole planet or its nothing.
Having to fight 14 simultaneous districts at a time to take or hold a planet would be complete crap.
In other words there needs to be a battlefront such that you can only attack one district at a time and you lose the right to keep attacking at some point after losing 1-3x. Why? We can look at planets as a unit or districts as a unit. Both are just units. Want to own a system own all the planets versus want to own a planet own all the districts. Six of one half a dozen of the other. Except if we do districts planets, solar systems, constellations, and regions are all bigger achievements. It really comes down to what do we want the first achievement to be, a district or a planet?
Actually when you think about it, you could get multiple small corps attacking the same planet in an effort to overwhelm a larger corp, the district system could be fantastic if implemented properly. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
395
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 22:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
Telcontar Dunedain wrote:gbghg wrote:Telcontar Dunedain wrote:One thing -
Talking about districts is a failure.
It's either you own the whole planet or its nothing.
Having to fight 14 simultaneous districts at a time to take or hold a planet would be complete crap.
In other words there needs to be a battlefront such that you can only attack one district at a time and you lose the right to keep attacking at some point after losing 1-3x. have you forgotten that we will be dropping from orbit, there is no reason why we can't hit multiple districts simultaneously, and it will make things vastly more interesting as some districts will fall and others will be held leading to a patchwork of control across a planet. It will also prevent corps from deploying their a-teams in every battle and ensure much wider participation of players in battles over planets. You sure you want this? 24players x14 districts....
It would force dust alliances to actually work together to hold territory, rather than having each corp trying to control it's own little empire, and imagine the scale things would reach if you tried to hit an entire system in one go, thinking about it gets me reaaly excited about what this game could become. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
395
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 22:56:00 -
[6] - Quote
Telcontar Dunedain wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Telcontar Dunedain wrote:gbghg wrote:Telcontar Dunedain wrote:One thing -
Talking about districts is a failure.
It's either you own the whole planet or its nothing.
Having to fight 14 simultaneous districts at a time to take or hold a planet would be complete crap.
In other words there needs to be a battlefront such that you can only attack one district at a time and you lose the right to keep attacking at some point after losing 1-3x. have you forgotten that we will be dropping from orbit, there is no reason why we can't hit multiple districts simultaneously, and it will make things vastly more interesting as some districts will fall and others will be held leading to a patchwork of control across a planet. It will also prevent corps from deploying their a-teams in every battle and ensure much wider participation of players in battles over planets. You sure you want this? 24players x14 districts.... Again though, if you just own planets owning 14 planets is the same as owning 14 districts instead. No, I meant that planets should be taken district by district until the entire planet is either owned or not. No income until the whole thing is owned. When the planet is attacked its at one point ie a "landing" point. Ideally as the fight progresses across the surface multiple maps might open for a fight at the same time (2-3?)....
But why would you be restricted to one landing point? why can't you drop multiple teams to try and establish several different beach heads on opposite sides of the planet simultaneously? because as far as I can see this would be a system that puts small corps at a disadvantage if they try to stand alone and would force them to band together so they would have the necessary numbers to hold a planet. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
397
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 23:14:00 -
[7] - Quote
Raze Minhaven wrote:Kain Spero wrote:Telcontar Dunedain wrote:
No, I meant that planets should be taken district by district until the entire planet is either owned or not. No income until the whole thing is owned.
When the planet is attacked its at one point ie a "landing" point. Ideally as the fight progresses across the surface multiple maps might open for a fight at the same time (2-3?)....
I think the progression idea is fine but only getting benefits if you own the entire planet doesn't work for me at all. This. If someone wants to take out America (without nukes) they would pick a landing zone or two on the same coast and hit them at the same time. They may take LAX and maybe PHX. They would gain the benifits fo the ports / harbors in LAX and well theres nothing to gain for PHX but you need to take it to move westward. You obviously cant drop right in on Dallas or Chicago and except to take the country from us silly well-armed Americans. There should be key districts that could be wealth / resource centers that net the holding faction some sort of bonus. The bonus could be actual bonus or a determinant bonus. Using the example above if someone takes out DC well the military might be in a bit of a disarray for a bit which may make it easier to take some of the other coast line cities. Bigger / more valuable planets would have more districts. You cant say every planet would have 14 districts, because that would assume every planet is the same and well nothing is the same in eve or in life. I think figuring out what benefits and district sizes is the start to really implementing them properly. After that progression is easy. my .02 isk
But what could stop an enemy from dropping troops behind enemy lines to cause confusion and weaken any response to the main landings, we need more than a couple of districts available to fight on at any time or we're just going to see the same names keep popping up battle after battle as each corp consistently sends its best players into the same matches, i personally think we should have at least 3-5 districts open to attack at any time, and that can apply to both sides, so while you might have just secured one district the enemy could retake another. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
397
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 23:48:00 -
[8] - Quote
Its a difficult system to balance because if you go too far one way you will see small corps with most if not all of their members getting into fights regularly while the larger corps will have large groups of people who only get in 1 or 2 battles while everyone else lazes about doing nothing. But if you go to the other extreme larger corps will just zerg the smaller ones meaning that we will end up with a system where the largest corp wins through numbers. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
397
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 00:00:00 -
[9] - Quote
Morathi III wrote:Telcontar Dunedain wrote:gbghg wrote:Its a difficult system to balance because if you go too far one way you will see small corps with most if not all of their members getting into fights regularly while the larger corps will have large groups of people who only get in 1 or 2 battles while everyone else lazes about doing nothing. But if you go to the other extreme larger corps will just zerg the smaller ones meaning that we will end up with a system where the largest corp wins through numbers. This is what is happening in Eve. Nullsec is a big zerg of idiots, making that same thing occur in Dust514 would be a really bad thing. How many skilled players would continue to play if they win every match yet lose the war because of a poorly designed mechanic? Like you said adapt or die.... Find more recruit , yes that bring your elitism a bit lower but if you want more you need to have more clone, and you dont need to be more than your opponent because your corp is the best, so whats your point hold anything in 3 month? Why playing then?
But if we go by that logic PRO will win everything because they have the numbers to throw at districts repeatedly until they finally take them over. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
397
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 00:37:00 -
[10] - Quote
Vance Alken wrote:gbghg wrote:Morathi III wrote:Telcontar Dunedain wrote:gbghg wrote:Its a difficult system to balance because if you go too far one way you will see small corps with most if not all of their members getting into fights regularly while the larger corps will have large groups of people who only get in 1 or 2 battles while everyone else lazes about doing nothing. But if you go to the other extreme larger corps will just zerg the smaller ones meaning that we will end up with a system where the largest corp wins through numbers. This is what is happening in Eve. Nullsec is a big zerg of idiots, making that same thing occur in Dust514 would be a really bad thing. How many skilled players would continue to play if they win every match yet lose the war because of a poorly designed mechanic? Like you said adapt or die.... Find more recruit , yes that bring your elitism a bit lower but if you want more you need to have more clone, and you dont need to be more than your opponent because your corp is the best, so whats your point hold anything in 3 month? Why playing then? But if we go by that logic PRO will win everything because they have the numbers to throw at districts repeatedly until they finally take them over. Red tides to win means resource cost. Most obviously in clones, if your 24 cheapo fit militia players are up against my 12 (2 squads) of prototype fit players, you're gonna be spending big on clones (our (implant-less) meatsacks all cost the same, but you have to have more to have a chance at winning). If we're also taking down your cheap equipment as soon as it lands and shooting down your cheap MCCs as soon as possible, you're gonna be fighting resource loss. Not to mention the home field advantage, knowing the good spots (say, a mass driver resupply-drop uplink-revive logi and a sniper/scanner fit scout on a roof locking down a primary chokepoint built in PI mode that your cheapo militia snipers can't even reach). Sure, one of my men is worth thousands of yours, but each one of them might go through multiple battles without even going into armor. If you field a full 336 man deployment to tackle all 14 of my districts at once, I can pick and choose what is most important (probably, in this case, clone and equipment stockpiles), defend that, and wait for reinforcements.
But i can see large corps like PRO mounting wave attacks if they have to. So if you successfully defend a district they can instantly field a new team and basically repeat the process until they finally take control. part of me worries that taking districts will just end up as a game of attrition. |
|
|
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
398
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 00:47:00 -
[11] - Quote
Baal Roo wrote:I see no reason why attrition shouldn't be a viable tactic. It's just important to make sure it's not the ONLY viable tactic.
That's what concerned me, because I can't really see any others at this point without knowing more about how CCP intends the system to work |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
416
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 19:52:00 -
[12] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:
This is good stuff to keep in mind. :)
We love seeing you around and answering posts Fox but aren't you up past your bedtime?
CCP FoxFour wrote:Just as a heads up guys I will be heading home and calling it an early night tonight. I stayed up way to late watching House of Cards last night. REALLY good show.
Please keep this discussion going though, really good stuff here. I will come back and give it a read tomorrow. :)
|
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
416
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 20:29:00 -
[13] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:gbghg wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:
This is good stuff to keep in mind. :)
We love seeing you around and answering posts Fox but aren't you up past your bedtime? CCP FoxFour wrote:Just as a heads up guys I will be heading home and calling it an early night tonight. I stayed up way to late watching House of Cards last night. REALLY good show.
Please keep this discussion going though, really good stuff here. I will come back and give it a read tomorrow. :) Got home, started painting Warhammer, waiting for a download to finish, couldn't stay away. :(
Know what you mean, these forums are a good way to kill time and relieve boredom. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S.
Legacy Rising
416
|
Posted - 2013.02.27 22:02:00 -
[14] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:iceyburnz wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:
Got home, started painting Warhammer, waiting for a download to finish, couldn't stay away. :(
What faction do you play? I love my Necrons and Dark Eldar. I also play Gray Knights because I love my inquisitor 28 models and Chaos SM. So many cool models, so little time :( While I would love to discuss this, I would rather keep (and it is tough to say this) keep this thread on topic. :)
c'mon who do you play tau? eldar? space marines, imperial guard?
and bones the gameplay isn't persistent you're right but the meta game is, and there's no reason why you shouldn't be able to go "hey lets hit this district tonight" and be able to attack it, if we went with your idea you could end up with a situation where you have enough players to attack the district now but you can't launch an attack for 12+ hours. the same is also true of the defending corp. |
|
|
| |
|