Jason Pearson
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
1265
   |
Posted - 2013.05.22 10:25:00 -
[1] - Quote
Creating a proper Saboteur Role within DUST.
As we know, AWOXing (The use of GÇ£spiesGÇ¥ within the enemy team to turn and use the friendly fire function to deplete clones and become a massive hindrance to the team) has become more and more noticed within Planetary Conquest. Some will claim that it has no place within DUST 514, some claim itGÇÖs exactly what we need.
What we can agree on, is this current way of becoming a GÇ£spyGÇ¥ is not a good feature, it requires little effort and there is no way to combat it (unless you just kill them repeatedly), but removing it completely means this shooter becomes a SCI FI version of every other shooter out there. Like it or not, we are in New Eden, and we should be embracing the idea where weGÇÖre not safe, we canGÇÖt control everything in a game and if someone wants to smash you, they will try it.
I firmly believe, any fix that CCP will implement like a white list or VTK/Kick Role is a bad idea and will not help develop the game any further than it being just a SCI FI shooter, now I do believe we need a plaster for the current issue, but if we did go down this route, we need to make sure it is a temporary fix, it cannot be treated as a permanent fix.
To fix this permanently, we need to embrace the role instead of casting it out. Yes we need a way to control it, and yes we need a way to kick players from the battle but it shouldnGÇÖt be instant, below IGÇÖll try and give the idea as to how to fix the problem. This idea is not an instant fix, and would require other things in operation, that will take time.
The Ground Commander
The Ground Commander (AKA MCC Commander) is a role given out by the CEO, if there is a Ground Commander in the game, only he can use the MCC in PC. This serves as the ability to block spies from becoming the MCC Commander in the future but also allows them to do it if the team is not organised and the corp has dropped the ball.
Now, assuming the MCC Commander is present (Or the MCC commander is not a traitor) he should have the ability to strip friendlies of their roles. These players will appear Corpless and become Yellow (Neutral). It is possible a spy can create massive disruption should he become the MCC commander, but itGÇÖs all part of our lovely New Eden universe.
Team Yellow
When stripped of your roles by the Commander, you become yellow, a neutral, everyone will see you as a yellow player. Any other players on the opposite or same team that is kicked will also become yellow. As a Yellow, you will have no clones as once you die, your consciousness will not be reactivated into a clone on the battlefield.
By doing this, we allow players to kick their traitors, but only if they can kill them. And should the commander role be fully integrated into the game where they can deny vehicles to players, the traitors will be at a severe disadvantage.
Except.. the traitors can still hack and cause mayhem, and should be rewarded as such.
Team Yellow Installations.
CRUs
A suggestion a while back, was about giving CRUs their own clone count, we could actually do this, but give them to Team Yellow. As stated above, when you are designated as a traitor, you lose your access to your teams clones, this makes it GÇ£HardcoreGÇ¥ mode so to speak, die, and youGÇÖre gone from the game, immediately kicked so that your place is free for other to join. Should you hack a CRU in as a yellow, it will show a counter.
This counter could be randomized between 1-10, every CRU that is yellow, you can use, providing its counter is not 0. Make sense? This allows Traitors to utilise the installations effectively, meaning you must control them, or destroy them if you donGÇÖt want to risk the use of traitors.
Supply Depots and Turrets
These can be utilised Neutrals, Turrets are not automated but can be accessed.
Null Cannons.
Neutrals effectively turn them off. Should you hack the Null Cannon, it ceases to fire until rehacked.
I believe that adding to the ability to turn traitor is something we should look at positively as itGÇÖs what sets aside from the cookie cutter FPS games, we need something different, something that makes our CEOs and Directors fearful when they log off for the night and makes them want to rush home tomorrow to check on their dear corporation.
As I said previously, the above suggestion is not a short term fix, CCP wonGÇÖt be able to implement this in a dayGÇÖs time, but it could be a viable solution. A short term fix would be allowing the CEO/Director to kick from the battle, as a TEMPORARY solution, this would mean youGÇÖd still need people in vital roles to actually remove traitors from the battle. If none are on? YouGÇÖre screwed.
So please, thoughts and feedback? Anything youGÇÖd add that would be viable or just tell me what you dislike about it.
|
Jason Pearson
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
1286
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 10:54:00 -
[5] - Quote
Nova Knife wrote:The idea of clone count being directly tied into CRU intrigues me..
It opens the possibility of the 'installations' tab in 'off map support' to potentially provide 'back-up' clones for those crucial times, as well as just being able to steal clones by taking the CRU's in question. (Which also provides incentives to actually hack & hold the CRU as opposed to just farming kills on it)
That is actually an amazing idea in and of itself. Gold star.
As for the rest of the post :
"Yellow" isn't a viable short-term fix... But the suggestion (and simililar "clone denial" or 'Mark red' ideas across the forums) is compelling as something for the long term.
Yours is the first I've seen to address the "What happens to the clones" question, though. And I am satisfied with the answer you have come up it. Your idea nicely adresses the problem of "Why should people just lie down and take it" with a possible solution that creates chaos and mayhem, yet is easily managed by a determined team unless the saboteur is equally determined and resourceful.
Also : What happens at the end of the match? Do they get paid by 'the system' along with their team? Based on hacks/Assets destroyed? Based on WP? Not at all?
Things to consider.
Though, just to play devil's advocate : Why should both teams see a player as yellow? While this creates opportunities to fool an enemy into thinking "Don't shoot him, he's messing with their team!" at the same time... I feel that if you are on the enemy 'team' in the roster, you should still be red to the hostile force, and yellow to your 'friends'.
Edit: Jason Pearson, you know I will post in your threads any day. If by some fluke I miss your thread, spam my inbox ingame to summon me!
Thanks for the response Nova, thought I was invisible to the entire forums heh.
I do not believe you should be paid for being a traitor, if the team you're a traitor on wins, they shouldn't be losing a portion of their winnings to the guy trying to kill them the entire match. Whilst it does not sound rewarding, when we eventually have the ability to transfer ISK easily between ourselves (Which we need, desperately, the ability for DUST mercs to give eachother money) then I believe this will be a very lucrative option to take up.
It is possible to do exactly as you say, have the team you've betrayed see you as red. That said, what about the installations? Would they appear red or yellow? And then we also have to address two different teams of traitors, which is a nuisance.
Terry Webber wrote:Your idea seems pretty good, Jason. I would love to experience these moments that happen in EVE Online.
Thanks for the response Terry :) I do think this would make things more enjoyable for the traitors and "easier" on the team that's been betrayed. |