DUST Search - [Uprising] Planetary Conquest

Goric Rumis wrote:

This is a worthwhile set of objectives, but in the context of the original conversation I'm not sure it helps PC. We want to encourage attackers to fight to the end, and if you penalize them for not bailing out then battles will frequently end in withdrawal at the last minute.

My advice for now would be for withdrawal to have the same effect as MCC destruction, so that the only perk to bailing out early is that you get to keep half of the clones you would have lost if you had stuck around (with the disadvantage that the defender also gets to keep more clones). We can discuss whether there would be some other difference between losing and withdrawing, but I don't think you'll gain much traction with the suggestion that people should be penalized for losing instead of withdrawing. Withdrawal should be a stop-loss measure, not something you have to do every time it looks like you're going to lose.

I would also say the withdrawing team should have to get all players behind their own redline in order to withdraw. That way at least it requires some coordination and isn't a last-second bailout.

CCP_FoxFour wrote:

From the previous design of Planetary Conquest as a defender if you won you would get 20% of the remaining clones that the attacker sent. We are changing the way this works and also expanding it to the attacker if they win. :D More reason to go out and attack. :D (more smiley faces? :P)


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 26 post(s)
S Park Finner BetaMax. CRONOS. 117	Posted - 2013.03.29 02:42:00 - [1] - Quote I don't think this is a much of a re-work as it might seem at first blush. If I understand correctly, the idea is to make attacking more rewarding if you win and riskier if you loose. Same for defending. What's more, make the time to turn a district over shorter so the whole system is more intense. Additionally, I'd also like to see it make more sense GÇô I think the existing back story is too arbitrary. Right now an attacker can not transport less than 150 clones and first time attackers can not buy fewer than 150 clones. Attackers can transport more than 150 clones if they have them. What if they could also purchase transport for more clones than they are actually taking. Why would they do that? Because they might want to bring some extra clones back with them. If attacker's win they could take back as many clones as they have room for up to the sum of the clones the district would produce (if it is producing in this round) and half the defender clones remaining. The fiction would be that the attackers could get all the clones they could carry but the GÇ£activeGÇ¥ clones in the district are in less vulnerable storage than the one's being built and aren't so easy to haul off. That would mean if an attacker brought 200 clones and bought room for an additional 100 clones and GÇô during the fight GÇô they lost 100 clones then they would have room to bring back 200 clones. I suggest the attackers could loose by destruction of their MCC GÇô in which case they would loose all the clones they brought and the defenders would get the ones that were not used up at the time the MCC was destroyed by loss of all their clones GÇô in which case the defenders would not get any additional clones by withdrawal GÇô in which case the defenders would get half the clones remaining GÇô some had to be left behind in the retreat. In all cases, the additional biomass the district acquires from the dead clones would boost it's production during the next cycle. Knobs and dials... Purchasing extra space could deplete the defenders more rapidly GÇô but at a cost. Small corporations could trade the number of clones they send for the number they bring back GÇô hoping a small strong force could win big. How accessible this would be to small corporations would be a function of the cost of transport space. Similarly, sending more clones would raise the risk not only of loosing them in the battle but of reinforcing the district more rapidly after a big fight. The amount of boost would be another parameter that could be adjusted. In the case of withdrawal, the proportion of clones that can not be pulled out is a further adjustment.
S Park Finner BetaMax. CRONOS. 118	Posted - 2013.03.29 13:44:00 - [2] - Quote Goric Rumis wrote: S Park Finner wrote: I suggest the attackers could loose by destruction of their MCC GÇô in which case they would loose all the clones they brought and the defenders would get the ones that were not used up at the time the MCC was destroyed by loss of all their clones GÇô in which case the defenders would not get any additional clones by withdrawal GÇô in which case the defenders would get half the clones remaining GÇô some had to be left behind in the retreat. In all cases, the additional biomass the district acquires from the dead clones would boost it's production during the next cycle. Logistical problem with this: Attackers would just withdraw as soon as it was apparent they were going to lose. Unless the attackers simply forget to withdraw, or the match really is that close, you're going to end up with exactly the same results FoxFour has proposed: defenders get half the remaining clones, provided any are left. My goals for withdrawal as an option are Give players more options Keep mechanisms that need programming to a minimum Give designers the greatest flexibility to manage risk / reward over the broadest number of dimensions by adjusting game parameters rather than re-design Have the design plausible within the game world I believe withdrawal does that Players get to leave the battle under controlled circumstances if they think the situation warrants it. It is a player controlled button to initiate an action (battle shutdown) that already exists in the game -- a minimum programming change from that point of view Designers can vary the cost of withdrawal along multiple dimensions - Change the proportion of clones lost - Change the proportion of clones given to the defenders - Charge an extra cost in ISK to pull out (transport workers' union demands a bonus for jumping into the hot LZ) - Dis-allow re-attack option if the attacker withdrawals - Change the bonus to the next production period from left over biomass It makes sense. One option we don't have in DUST 514 now is to leave a battle as a team. It is a legitimate option. There are positive benefits for future play. Other game modes could use the withdrawal mechanism If players eventually transport clones it lays the groundwork for pricing and options. The meta-game
S Park Finner BetaMax. CRONOS. 118	Posted - 2013.03.29 19:52:00 - [3] - Quote Goric Rumis wrote: This is a worthwhile set of objectives, but in the context of the original conversation I'm not sure it helps PC. We want to encourage attackers to fight to the end, and if you penalize them for not bailing out then battles will frequently end in withdrawal at the last minute. My advice for now would be for withdrawal to have the same effect as MCC destruction, so that the only perk to bailing out early is that you get to keep half of the clones you would have lost if you had stuck around (with the disadvantage that the defender also gets to keep more clones). We can discuss whether there would be some other difference between losing and withdrawing, but I don't think you'll gain much traction with the suggestion that people should be penalized for losing instead of withdrawing. Withdrawal should be a stop-loss measure, not something you have to do every time it looks like you're going to lose. I would also say the withdrawing team should have to get all players behind their own redline in order to withdraw. That way at least it requires some coordination and isn't a last-second bailout. I really like that idea of moving your team to an evacuation area in order to pull them out. Shades of X-COM I didn't get the impression, though, that the changes CCP was advocating were necessarily served by driving the attackers to completely expend their resources. Rather, I thought it was to make PC move faster in a variety of ways. CCP_FoxFour wrote: From the previous design of Planetary Conquest as a defender if you won you would get 20% of the remaining clones that the attacker sent. We are changing the way this works and also expanding it to the attacker if they win. :D More reason to go out and attack. :D (more smiley faces? :P) I was trying to restate that in both my original post and this followup. At any rate, I don't know how asking an attacker to fight to the bitter end serves the original goals. In fact, if the attacker has the option to withdraw they might be able to recover faster and get back in the fight sooner.