DUST Search - SUGGESTION: The (possible) Infinite Battle

Hagintora wrote:

Okay, I've been thinking about this, and I think I've think I've come up with something: BPO's.

So we all start off the the game with Starter Fits, and one Specialty Fit (Arbiter, Sentinal, ect.). Lore wise it can be explained that the NPC Corps tht we belong to when we start the game are providing this equipment for us. If we want to use anything better than these item, we have to pay for, and maintain them, ourselves. So what if we did the same thing for Player run Corps?

When Corps start off, their early members would lose the access to Starter Fits (meaning that they would still be able to use them, but would now have to pay to maintain them), but keep the Specialty Fit. These Specialty Fits would be what Corps would pay for when Mercs die. FW, and Event Contracts could then have bonuses to them in the way of BPO Suits (much like they do now, but with Corps as the owners, not individual players), say for acheiving specific goals during the match. These suits could then be added to the list of things that Corp members could have access to (kinda like a Corp armoury), but that Corps would have to pay for when Mercs died.

Since all the BPO Suits are basically STD Variants, it would encourage players to join Player run Corps so they could have access to higher baseline equipment, as well as place some of the financial burden of funding a Planetary War on the Corps themselves. Corps could then choose, before deployment into the battlefield, up to 5 different fits that they beieive would be the most beneficial for the up the upcoming fight. The same could also be used for vehicles as well, with Corps supply access to up 3 different Militia Level vehicles. They would be free to players, but would be added to the cost that the Corp must pay when they are destoyed.

This, I think anyway, should balance the dilemma of personally owned equipment, with the economic aspect of war that we're trying to achieve with tis idea. Corps would then stock up on clones (by purchasing BioMass) before the mission started, thereby deciding how many clones they're willing to bring the fight, and they would have to pay for any and all equipment lost that was supplied directly from their armoury during the fight. All of this would add up to a growing bill that Corps would have to keep an eye, because at some point it just isn't worth it, economically, to conitu


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Lonnar KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1	Posted - 2013.03.05 16:46:00 - [1] - Quote NOTE: This idea is credited to Hagintora. He posted an excellent idea to a thread and I felt it needed a place of it's own. Also note, this is more an idea for a future release as content. I'm well aware of the fact there are more important things to worry about. But if CCP get's wind of this and decides to put it on the list then this thread will have served its purpose. The idea is this: What if there was no immediate term of victory in a battle? Let's say there's a major land grab by two large player corps. One of them really wants a section of space controlled by another, and the defending corp is not willing to give it up, at all. So both sides fight until one of them decides to give up. Now think about this for a sec. This is a fight for a section of space. How much are you and your corp willing to loose (in terms of ISK) in order to keep your pocket of space your own? All of it? So much you actually go into debt? How it would work would be something like this. There would be one or two Commander type players who don't directly participate in the battle. Instead they direct troops and review the current stats of the battle. How much ISK the battle's cost them so far, how many clones have been killed and vehicles destroyed on the enemy side and various other bits of vital information that would help the Commander decide if they should withdraw or stand and fight some more. Only the Commander can make the withdraw order, so the power to win/loose the game is in the hands of a single pair of players, and it's a matter of finding out who will give in first. A Player-determined victory means a battle can last for hours, even days! And for some reason, the whole idea just fits in perfectly with New Eden imo because think of EvE for a second. In a battle with over 1000 ships, how long do you think that battle would take? It would certainly take one good chunk of time to destroy every single one of those ships, so why can't we have something similar in DUST? A battle that can rage for as long as we have the resources and manpower to fight it. Let me know what you all think. P.S: I just woke up and wrote this ... so if there are gaps in the explanation then I don't mind answering questions. Feedback, both negative and positive is welcome ...
Lonnar KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1	Posted - 2013.03.05 17:04:00 - [2] - Quote I'm not exactly the best person to ask when it comes to technical aspects of a daily downtime for servers and how to circumvent it. I'm not exactly tech savy. Suggesting to halt the down time is of course, not likely going to happen. For now I guess this can pose an omnipresent risk to drawing a battle out for that long? In the event of the downtime disconnecting everyone, there should be at least some sort of fail-safe. I don't think there'd be a way to replace lost ISK, but perhaps the battle could be declared Invalid? Neither side wins and the battle must be reinitialized in order to continue the campaign. I know this isn't much of a suggestion. Perhaps someone with more knowledge on how these things work can suggest a better idea?
Lonnar KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 3	Posted - 2013.03.06 05:35:00 - [3] - Quote That's a rather roundabout way of saying this idea is over the top Iron Wolf ... mind telling us what exactly you wanted to prove with these stats? That there's already more than enough for the New Eden universe to process without having to work a battle that can last several hours? If that's the case, why is DUST 514 even here at all =_=.
Lonnar KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 5	Posted - 2013.03.06 19:24:00 - [4] - Quote Some of the bigger player owned Corps, like KEQ (Kill-Em-Quick) have measures in place to refund lost vehicles when we loose one during a corp match. For example. I'm a dropship pilot for my corp KEQ. If I'm part of a corp battle and my team leader orders me to call in my bird so I can fly people around, then I will. If over the course of the battle, my dropship is destroyed, I'm given the 400k I currently need to replace the ship I lost. That 400k comes, naturally, from the Corp funds (since there really isn't any other way to transfer ISK on DUST at the moment) Now imagine a corp battle lasting several hours, for the sake of conquering a planet. With the large number of us playing, there's obviously going to be several vehicles destroyed in the process. So it's going to cost a fair bit from the corp wallet. Now what if a system like that went further? What if, the corps fighting were charged a percentage of the cost of everything destroyed? It would make using proto suits and high priced/high leveled gear even more worthwhile because even thought you yourself are loosing money, it's costing the other team as well. However in this regard, the fights might turn into a contest of who can deplete the other corp's wallet faster, and those with a massive wallet can outlast anyone. Personally, I don't know. Besides the cost needed to take the contract, I am unsure of any other way to hit the corp wallets so that this idea can actually come to fruition. But isn't that the whole idea of threads like this? To bounce ideas off eachother untill we come up with something viable? And then hopefully, the devs will see this idea, and log it in somewhere with all of our compiled ideas plus some ideas of thier own.
Lonnar KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 7	Posted - 2013.03.06 22:19:00 - [5] - Quote Jathniel wrote: Attrition warfare... Another person mentioned a similar idea to this. There has to be a way to balance and set grounds for the fight BEFORE we start talking about its economic effects. Besides server downtime, there are other questions that must be answered first. How many players would be allowed in? How many vehicles will be allowed? Simply put, what are the parameters for the infinite battle, and if there are none, how do you implement boundless combat on a very limited system like the PS3? Attrition warfare, imho, means corps bringing in nearly every available combatant, AND their allies to a fight, in order to wear down their enemies. That is possible in EVE, but currently not possible with Dust. We have caps on manpower, and caps on deployable resources. Caps which are not present in Eve. I don't want a war of attrition where I cannot utilize any and all resources I deem necessary. Furthermore, many of the restrictions we have in Dust are in place because of the PS3's limited capacity... Hardware-wise it's a 5-year old gaming laptop. We have to circumvent these issues first, before we can get to the ideal free-form combat that we all want. I love the idea, but I don't think it can be implemented right now. Your post has been liked. Thanks for the like! =) I have a few answers to some of your questions. However I'd like to point out that in the onset of my OP, I indicated that this would be something to develop at a later time. There are more pressing issues to deal with before thinking about a battle on such a large scale. I can understand that the PS3 has limitations to it's processing capabilities compared to that of a computer with the minimum requirements to play EvE. However, the PS3 is still a relatively powerful system, and I don't think it should be underestimated. To begin with, the PS3 has already been proven to handle battles with 500+ mercs at one time. (I don't exactly remember where I heard this, so forgive me if I'm wrong ... I might have actually been from last year's Fan Fest) The reason why we have such limited fighting power presently, is because CCP doesn't want to overwhelm the system before all the major kinks are worked out. Soon we're going to get bigger squads (6-man) and thus bigger battles (32v32 instead of 16v16) Eventually, it's been speculated that we'll be having matches of 128v128. IMHO, 128v128 is more than enough people to wage a war on a massive scale. Although maybe it might be better to even it off at 130v130 ... or 150v150, or even 200v200. Only the really big corps of at least 200 members+ could even partake in a battle of that magnitude. As for the vehicles, well ... I actually don't know what the current limit for vehicles is for either Ambush or Skirmish ... or even if they have different limits. Either way, I would think that it would be appropriate to maintain the ratio of Max Player/Max Vehicle limit there currently is. You also have to keep in mind that not everyone will have given SP into a particular vehicle, so even in a full blown 200v200 corp battle, I doubt the max limit of vehicles that will actually persist on the field will be reached. The free LAVs get blown up often enough anyways so I don't think that's a problem. Naturally ... I can understand that this wouldn't exactly be a proper war of attrition, but we just might have to settle for it purely because of the PS3's limits. Figuring out how to bypass these limits, or find creative ways to use these limits to our advantage is not my job. Nor is it the job of us players as a community, it's CCP's job. Our only duty here on this thread, is to come up with creative ways to work with this, to add to it, or even change some things for the better. Heck we can even try to balance it if we wanted to. My point is, let the techs and devs deal with the hardware problems, and let us as a community help the devs and techs with ideas on how to make this game as awesome as any other.
Lonnar KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 8	Posted - 2013.03.07 01:32:00 - [6] - Quote Jathniel wrote: SickJ wrote: Jathniel wrote: Attrition warfare... How many players would be allowed in? How many vehicles will be allowed? Simply put, what are the parameters for the infinite battle, and if there are none, how do you implement boundless combat on a very limited system like the PS3? Attrition warfare, imho, means corps bringing in nearly every available combatant, AND their allies to a fight, in order to wear down their enemies. That is possible in EVE, but currently not possible with Dust. We have caps on manpower, and caps on deployable resources. Caps which are not present in Eve. I don't want a war of attrition where I cannot utilize any and all resources I deem necessary. Furthermore, many of the restrictions we have in Dust are in place because of the PS3's limited capacity... Hardware-wise it's a 5-year old gaming laptop. All those players don't necessarily have to be on the same map. In this game you could have a hundred players spread out across different districts on the planet you're fighting over, with events in district A affecting what happens in district B. Taking an objective in one area could keep enemies from calling in vehicles, orbital strikes, etc. It's pretty much confirmed that EVE ships can shoot at us and we'll be able to shoot back once we have those installations That's an idea too. I thought of that as well. Free-form movement between districts would be vital. Circumstances, where a squad is trying to load into a new district, and getting dc'd, would be game breaking, and I see a lot of that happening, IF we try to push the infinite battle concept on the PS3 platform, though. Currently, so many things go wrong just when we try to load into a single match or load up a fitting. Much less, literally go from one battle district to another, mid-game... Don't get me wrong. I really want to see this implemented into the game. I don't see a game mode where all districts are open coming til PS4, though. We COULD simply NOT allow players to run on foot between districts... but that would mean the gameplay experience won't be much different from what we have now. Take a look at this link here. Scroll down past the two videos and listen to the Beyond! Podcast. Starting at 36 minutes, there's an interview with CCP about DUST. They mention during the interview that DUST does NOT INTEND TO PORT ON TO THE PS4 UNTIL WELL AFTER IT'S RELEASE. This means that DUST will forever be a PS3 game ... or at least it will stay that way for a very long time. Moving on to the idea posted above. The thought of having multiple battles on the same planet, just in different districts is already a reality. Think about this for a second. Right now, us Dusters only fight on Temperate Class planets scattered throughout the New Eden Universe. Out of all those planets, there's 7000+ (I think the exact number is close to something like 7,200) which are of Temperate class. Meaning at any given time, we're fighting on one of these planets in a district. However, there are so many current DUST players on board, that a simple 16v16 on a single planet can't accomodate us all. We are already fighting several battles on the same planet just in different districts. Now as for the idea of the battles being interlinked, that's a nifty idea. The idea that battles can affect what's going on in other districts? I can actually see that happening in the near future. The scale of the effects though shouldn't be excessive. Blocking all access to calling in vehicles seems a bit excessive. Now LIMITING the calling in of vehicles seems more adequate. Say you trigger an event that reduces the number of vehicles you can have on the field at one time or perhaps you cause a bigger time delay, making the vehicle's owner wait around longer for his ride. Events like this would have to be either reversible, or temporary. If something like this happens in a perpetual fight, it could become irritating for the players. Jumping between districts ... that I'm not too sure about. Unless this option was strictly limited to Corp battles, I see more than just connection problems happening here. What if the district you're going to is already full? What if the battle is almost done and there's no time to help your team out in your original battle? When the battle finishes, what then? Do you go back to your original district and keep fighting despite the handicap? Or do you end the battle with the rest of them and then are forced to leave your team stranded with one less guy? Here's another problem I see coming up. Communication. How are we going to be able to communicate between districts? Perhaps a new Corp position that lets someone simply watch the planet? Someone who can see the big picture of things and help in directing troops to various districts and points in order to turn the tide in their favor. Given something like that though, would that kind of power be able to be given to an EvE pilot? Seeing as they're always up in space.
Lonnar KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 9	Posted - 2013.03.07 02:41:00 - [7] - Quote Hagintora wrote: Okay, I've been thinking about this, and I think I've think I've come up with something: BPO's. So we all start off the the game with Starter Fits, and one Specialty Fit (Arbiter, Sentinal, ect.). Lore wise it can be explained that the NPC Corps tht we belong to when we start the game are providing this equipment for us. If we want to use anything better than these item, we have to pay for, and maintain them, ourselves. So what if we did the same thing for Player run Corps? When Corps start off, their early members would lose the access to Starter Fits (meaning that they would still be able to use them, but would now have to pay to maintain them), but keep the Specialty Fit. These Specialty Fits would be what Corps would pay for when Mercs die. FW, and Event Contracts could then have bonuses to them in the way of BPO Suits (much like they do now, but with Corps as the owners, not individual players), say for acheiving specific goals during the match. These suits could then be added to the list of things that Corp members could have access to (kinda like a Corp armoury), but that Corps would have to pay for when Mercs died. Since all the BPO Suits are basically STD Variants, it would encourage players to join Player run Corps so they could have access to higher baseline equipment, as well as place some of the financial burden of funding a Planetary War on the Corps themselves. Corps could then choose, before deployment into the battlefield, up to 5 different fits that they beieive would be the most beneficial for the up the upcoming fight. The same could also be used for vehicles as well, with Corps supply access to up 3 different Militia Level vehicles. They would be free to players, but would be added to the cost that the Corp must pay when they are destoyed. This, I think anyway, should balance the dilemma of personally owned equipment, with the economic aspect of war that we're trying to achieve with tis idea. Corps would then stock up on clones (by purchasing BioMass) before the mission started, thereby deciding how many clones they're willing to bring the fight, and they would have to pay for any and all equipment lost that was supplied directly from their armoury during the fight. All of this would add up to a growing bill that Corps would have to keep an eye, because at some point it just isn't worth it, economically, to conitu This my friend ... is a solid plan. However it does pose a question. What's going to happen to the current stock of player-owned BPOs? Will they be assimilated into the Corp Armory? And what about for your average Pub match where people don't want to loose any ISK? Will you force them to stay with a standard, low level suit in that regard? Something like making BOPs Corp battle exclusive might pose a problem, and might cause a re-balancing act in terms of at least ISK reward in pub matches. I know a number of people who switch over to a BPO suit if it looks like they're going to loose, or if they've died a certain number of times. This ensures that they make some profit off of the rewards at the end of the battle even after they've restocked their fits. By removing all BPOs except for the Starter fit, you're essentially forcing players to make a choice. Do they loose ISK until they can't even afford a single suit? Or do they stick to a low level suit and risk getting trounced by the power gap? What SHOULD happen in this case, is to disable the use of BPO suits in large scale corp battles. All current BPOs currently owned by all the participating players combined, become available for use by the Team Leader. During the preparation phase, the Leader can take the time he needs to look at all the BPOs he has gathered from his team, and, as you suggested, build a number of fits to suit as many situations as he think's they'll need. What's interesting about this idea, is that with the right kind of planning, you can easily set up fire teams to tackle certain objectives on the map. For example, let's say the enemy team is relying heavily on Fat Suits in order to overwhelm positions. The Team leader and designate one or two squads to make use of the nearest supply depot and switch over to either Sniper or Mass Driver gear (or any other long range weaponry that works well against Heavies) The Fire Team then suits up, in the BPO sets, and proceeds to lock down the objective by systematically wiping out the Heavies that are running the position. Another example would be something to take out vehicles. One squad takes out a Swarm Launcher BPO kit and another takes out a Forge Gun kit. Both fire teams coordinate movements in order to corner the vehicles and blast them sky-high. Using your described method ... that's the kind of thing I'd expect to see.
Lonnar KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 13	Posted - 2013.03.07 19:34:00 - [8] - Quote I'm going to shamelessly bump this ... and move on with my life =)