Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Reno Pechieu
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2013.07.14 22:38:00 -
[1] - Quote
One thing I have noticed is how hard a recovery match can be, but this might add an interesting twist to the defeated.
Maps should have assets, things companies have sent the mercenaries in to capture and hold, other than the defensive installations like Null-cannons. These would not offer any tactical advantage to any team during combat and would not hackable in the same sense as Null-cannons, turrets, clone vats and supply depot are.
Instead, they are tallied after the match. The winning team gains points based on how many are intact, while the losing team gains points based on how much they managed to destroy. While the loss should never be so much that itGÇÖs not worth winning, it should a loss of potential top billing.
The assets should also be difficult to destroy, so a losing team has to put some effort into wrecking stuff, their health should be comparable with clone-vats and supply depots. Another way to destroy them could be to hack something three times to cause a critical malfunction, letting non-explosive users be able to cause some sabotage.
This then becomes a gamble, as a losing team can gain victory because the other team became to occupied with protecting assets that they lose the match, only to find out they loss a major bonus because themself destroyed valuable property.
My only concern with this idea is the griefing possibility, other than that this could add an interesting element and also could lead into a different mission type. |
BL4CKST4R
WarRavens League of Infamy
805
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 00:44:00 -
[2] - Quote
Reno Pechieu wrote:One thing I have noticed is how hard a recovery match can be, but this might add an interesting twist to the defeated.
Maps should have assets, things companies have sent the mercenaries in to capture and hold, other than the defensive installations like Null-cannons. These would not offer any tactical advantage to any team during combat and would not hackable in the same sense as Null-cannons, turrets, clone vats and supply depot are.
Instead, they are tallied after the match. The winning team gains points based on how many are intact, while the losing team gains points based on how much they managed to destroy. While the loss should never be so much that itGÇÖs not worth winning, it should a loss of potential top billing.
The assets should also be difficult to destroy, so a losing team has to put some effort into wrecking stuff, their health should be comparable with clone-vats and supply depots. Another way to destroy them could be to hack something three times to cause a critical malfunction, letting non-explosive users be able to cause some sabotage.
This then becomes a gamble, as a losing team can gain victory because the other team became to occupied with protecting assets that they lose the match, only to find out they loss a major bonus because themself destroyed valuable property.
My only concern with this idea is the griefing possibility, other than that this could add an interesting element and also could lead into a different mission type.
Scorched earth = destruction of CRU and supply units. |
Zat Earthshatter
Ghosts Of Ourselves
343
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 01:08:00 -
[3] - Quote
To filter it down, OP calls for "neutral" assets and mini-objectives that are valuable to whoever holds the territory. As the winning team now owns the territory, they want as many installations intact as possible The losing team no longer owns the territory, so they want to deny as much ISK as possible to the victors.
IMO, to really reflect "scorched earth" policy, the match ISK reward should get a bonus based on these conditions. Victors get extra ISK to the match pool for intact structures, then the total is divided up as normal. Losers get the bonus for destroyed structures, and divided up like normal. Of course, a given player should be able to hack the structure to their ownership, which would put all of the structure's ISK bonus into the thief's wallet if intact at the end. If spotted, player becomes Suspect Flagged, which in my vision makes the player TKable until the match ends.
Taking either OP's suggestion pure or adding my changes, the idea adds a little sandbox to our shooter, which currently feels like a Battlefield copy with skill training. |
Reno Pechieu
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2013.07.15 13:54:00 -
[4] - Quote
Zat Earthshatter wrote:To filter it down, OP calls for "neutral" assets and mini-objectives that are valuable to whoever holds the territory. As the winning team now owns the territory, they want as many installations intact as possible The losing team no longer owns the territory, so they want to deny as much ISK as possible to the victors.
IMO, to really reflect "scorched earth" policy, the match ISK reward should get a bonus based on these conditions. Victors get extra ISK to the match pool for intact structures, then the total is divided up as normal. Losers get the bonus for destroyed structures, and divided up like normal. Of course, a given player should be able to hack the structure to their ownership, which would put all of the structure's ISK bonus into the thief's wallet if intact at the end. If spotted, player becomes Suspect Flagged, which in my vision makes the player TKable until the match ends.
Taking either OP's suggestion pure or adding my changes, the idea adds a little sandbox to our shooter, which currently feels like a Battlefield copy with skill training. Thanks, I did ramble on a bit.
Although; letting someone hack-steal it to their own ownership would be kinda odd and open floodgates to abuse. Assets could be like the silos on some of the maps, and it would impossible to steal them with a hack.
Also, if it was an option, they could just then hack stuff and either AFK in MCC or use free gear the rest of the map, still coming up on top.
So I still hold on the sabotage option. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |