DUST Search - A series of radical thoughts : Making Installations matter

Nova Knife wrote:

Credit to Jason Pearson for first sparking this idea.

What if installations like CRU and Supply Depots meant more to the battle than just free points for someone with a vehicle or AV weapon + nanohive?

What if CRU's actually held a certain amount of clones, which changed ownership to the other team when hacked, or were destroyed entirely from the clone count if the CRU was destroyed?

What if supply depot ownership affected loot drop for a team at the end of the match? (Or contained supplies used to spawn?

What if, using the existing "drop in' mechanic for installations, Eve players could then drop these installations instead of an orbital strike when a team earns orbtial support?

What do these changes accomplish;

For CRU's - This would create an instant reason to hack a CRU, rather than farm kills off people spawning at it. For PC battles, the transfer of clone ownership within a match speaks for itself. The ability to steal clones and 'clone out' your opponent easier as a result would have serious impact on the flow of battles. Fighting over CRU's would be intense, probably more so than objectives themselves.

Being able to drop additional clones via orbital support as instant reinforcements provides an obvious boon as well.

For supply depots, this gets a bit tricky. I'm sure someone could think of a better reason, although the mindset already is to generally hack & camp near these, so the incentive to holding them is mostly there already

Now the big one : The Eve Connection - This could effectively be a much more meaningful link than orbital strikes alone - Because this involves the economic aspect of creating an installation to then sell/provide to eve players, who then drop them back on dust players or re-sell them. Coupled with the intended changes to how orbital support is carried out, something like this twould have massive potential and would be the first step towards "Creating a fight that can go on nonstop for days, if they can keep their logistics steady" That CCP envisioned at fanfest.

Thoughts?

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Nova Knife Seituoda Taskforce Command Caldari State 1217	Posted - 2013.07.25 00:01:00 - [1] - Quote Credit to Jason Pearson for first sparking this idea. What if installations like CRU and Supply Depots meant more to the battle than just free points for someone with a vehicle or AV weapon + nanohive? What if CRU's actually held a certain amount of clones, which changed ownership to the other team when hacked, or were destroyed entirely from the clone count if the CRU was destroyed? What if supply depot ownership affected loot drop for a team at the end of the match? (Or contained supplies used to spawn? What if, using the existing "drop in' mechanic for installations, Eve players could then drop these installations instead of an orbital strike when a team earns orbtial support? What do these changes accomplish; For CRU's - This would create an instant reason to hack a CRU, rather than farm kills off people spawning at it. For PC battles, the transfer of clone ownership within a match speaks for itself. The ability to steal clones and 'clone out' your opponent easier as a result would have serious impact on the flow of battles. Fighting over CRU's would be intense, probably more so than objectives themselves. Being able to drop additional clones via orbital support as instant reinforcements provides an obvious boon as well. For supply depots, this gets a bit tricky. I'm sure someone could think of a better reason, although the mindset already is to generally hack & camp near these, so the incentive to holding them is mostly there already Now the big one : The Eve Connection - This could effectively be a much more meaningful link than orbital strikes alone - Because this involves the economic aspect of creating an installation to then sell/provide to eve players, who then drop them back on dust players or re-sell them. Coupled with the intended changes to how orbital support is carried out, something like this twould have massive potential and would be the first step towards "Creating a fight that can go on nonstop for days, if they can keep their logistics steady" That CCP envisioned at fanfest. Thoughts?
DiGreatDestroyer Conspiratus Immortalis Covert Intervention 2	Posted - 2013.07.25 03:00:00 - [2] - Quote I really liked the CRU one. HEY MY MIND JUST GOT AN IDEA how about this mode where you have CRU all over the place and the goal is to capture all of them to win Or what about this big ass map where you would have pairs of CRUs ( ripping off rush mode from batlefield) so if you got a pair, the red zone would change to allow you to push the next pair. A team attacks and a team defends, and in the last push, you have to activate a null canon that is just below the enemy MCC to blow it up ( just hacking it would do, or maybe 5 shots, i dont know) This gamemode would fit really well for PC batles and all, might be worth creating its own topic??? Sorry for going off topic LOL, but that idea came to me while writing this xD Like i was saying, i really liked the CRU one xD
Garth Mandra The Southern Legion 51	Posted - 2013.07.25 03:19:00 - [3] - Quote I'm a fan of this idea. Way down the track CCP could introduce another resource on top of clone "nanite goop" that is used to make the equipment, armour and vehicles. Supply Depots and CRUs could be reservoirs of that perhaps.
Azri Sarum BurgezzE.T.F 66	Posted - 2013.07.25 06:46:00 - [4] - Quote I like the ideas, some interesting concepts. I do agree that the current installations are not important enough. One part of your proposal though I have issue with. Nova Knife wrote: Fighting over CRU's would be intense, probably more so than objectives themselves. Do we really want installations on the map that are more important than the objectives? It would be a little odd, and i think potentially difficult for a new player to figure out. If a skirmish match stopped being about the points and became a clone race i think it sort of defeats the purpose of that game mode. So more important, yea that would be nice. But it should still be balanced around the game mode. I think it would be a great fit for ambush, thats already about clones. Skirmish, probably not, that one is about controlling the points. Dominion, thats a hard one. Perhaps not the best fit but it could allow the non dominant team an alternate win strategy. But new game modes designed around these... awesome.
Bendtner92 Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 796	Posted - 2013.07.25 07:15:00 - [5] - Quote Azri Sarum wrote: Do we really want installations on the map that are more important than the objectives? It would be a little odd, and i think potentially difficult for a new player to figure out. If a skirmish match stopped being about the points and became a clone race i think it sort of defeats the purpose of that game mode. I don't know. In Domination in MAG you were better of taking down the enemy bunkers before you attacked the burn-off towers. This was somewhat confusing for some players, but that was mostly because the default squad order was on the burn-off towers. So if you had no squad leader to change that, a lot of players would go for the burn-off towers just to get farmed because they didn't take down the bunkers. Also you still need to take the objectives to win, so I don't see how anything else would be more important over a whole match. CRUs and Supply Depots just have to hold strategic value otherwise they might as well be removed, since currently they pretty much only exist as a WP source only. Also a lot of this is partly due to the widespread Drop Uplink spam, which means you have no need for the CRU. When they actually make the Assault worth skilling into over the Logi, we'll probably see less Drop Uplinks, but Drop Uplinks will still need a way higher spawntime. Drop Uplinks should in no way have the same or lower spawntime than CRUs. Prototype Drop Uplinks should be almost the same I think, but still a little higher. Then there must be more CRUs present on the battlefield to use, and objective spawning should be removed. Nova, if you haven't seen this thread, maybe you can take a look at it? https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=881177#post881177. It's about making CRUs and mCRUs matter more as well.
Gaelon Thrace DUST University Ivy League 73	Posted - 2013.07.25 09:46:00 - [6] - Quote +1 Great ideas.
Django Quik R.I.f.t 1052	Posted - 2013.07.25 09:49:00 - [7] - Quote I like it - although also not sure about the supply depots but the CRUs are a great idea. We could make it a slightly separate game mode to skirmish though, just so there are plain and simple ones and other more interesting ones to join if you understand.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 5124	Posted - 2013.07.25 09:58:00 - [8] - Quote I very much like the CRU idea, I made a thread on it before, but I can't seem to find it. I'm neutral on the supply depot thing. I think installations should be in the hands of squad leaders who buy the installations themselves. I would rather see EVE players send down stuff like orbital scans to reveal enemy locations, and other stuff like that.
SponkSponkSponk The Southern Legion 106	Posted - 2013.07.25 11:09:00 - [9] - Quote I would really, really like a bonus cache of clones to whoever controls the CRU.
The-Errorist BetaMax Beta CRONOS. 73	Posted - 2013.07.27 08:48:00 - [10] - Quote +1

Leovarian L Lavitz 3dge of D4rkness SoulWing Alliance 353	Posted - 2013.07.27 08:55:00 - [11] - Quote Make people pay for their MCCs. 120,000,000 isk. If the battle starts going south, a director can use the withdraw option to leave the battle, saving the mcc but at a cost of x% of the remaining clones.
calvin b Molon Labe. League of Infamy 143	Posted - 2013.07.27 08:56:00 - [12] - Quote +1
The-Errorist BetaMax Beta CRONOS. 73	Posted - 2013.07.27 08:59:00 - [13] - Quote Leovarian L Lavitz wrote: Make people pay for their MCCs. 120,000,000 isk. If the battle starts going south, a director can use the withdraw option to leave the battle, saving the mcc but at a cost of x% of the remaining clones. They should just face the same penalty as getting an MCC blown up, a loss of 100 clones (or 150).
Leovarian L Lavitz 3dge of D4rkness SoulWing Alliance 354	Posted - 2013.07.27 09:07:00 - [14] - Quote The-Errorist wrote: Leovarian L Lavitz wrote: Make people pay for their MCCs. 120,000,000 isk. If the battle starts going south, a director can use the withdraw option to leave the battle, saving the mcc but at a cost of x% of the remaining clones. They should just face the same penalty as getting an MCC blown up, a loss of 100 clones (or 150). All options are on the table.
DeeJay One BetaMax. CRONOS. 71	Posted - 2013.07.27 09:20:00 - [15] - Quote +1 for most ;) As for EVE connection I'd like to see some more information from CCP with regard to item locations (AFAIR currently all items are stored in a players home station) Dropping installations from orbit would be an awesome idea and before starting to make a full blown manufacturing chain in EVE CCP could just provide these items like skill books from NPC corps. This would still allow for market prices to change depending on how far you're willing to haul cargo without compromising pricing too much.
Shattered Mirage The Enclave Syndicate Dark Taboo 13	Posted - 2013.07.27 09:48:00 - [16] - Quote Nova Knife wrote: Credit to Jason Pearson for first sparking this idea. What if installations like CRU and Supply Depots meant more to the battle than just free points for someone with a vehicle or AV weapon + nanohive? What if CRU's actually held a certain amount of clones, which changed ownership to the other team when hacked, or were destroyed entirely from the clone count if the CRU was destroyed? What if supply depot ownership affected loot drop for a team at the end of the match? (Or contained supplies used to spawn? What if, using the existing "drop in' mechanic for installations, Eve players could then drop these installations instead of an orbital strike when a team earns orbtial support? What do these changes accomplish; For CRU's - This would create an instant reason to hack a CRU, rather than farm kills off people spawning at it. For PC battles, the transfer of clone ownership within a match speaks for itself. The ability to steal clones and 'clone out' your opponent easier as a result would have serious impact on the flow of battles. Fighting over CRU's would be intense, probably more so than objectives themselves. Being able to drop additional clones via orbital support as instant reinforcements provides an obvious boon as well. For supply depots, this gets a bit tricky. I'm sure someone could think of a better reason, although the mindset already is to generally hack & camp near these, so the incentive to holding them is mostly there already Now the big one : The Eve Connection - This could effectively be a much more meaningful link than orbital strikes alone - Because this involves the economic aspect of creating an installation to then sell/provide to eve players, who then drop them back on dust players or re-sell them. Coupled with the intended changes to how orbital support is carried out, something like this twould have massive potential and would be the first step towards "Creating a fight that can go on nonstop for days, if they can keep their logistics steady" That CCP envisioned at fanfest. Thoughts? You have some... Interesting ideas at times Nova... I'm inclined to agree with you on this.
Killar-12 Intrepidus XI EoN. 344	Posted - 2013.07.27 19:50:00 - [17] - Quote +1
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 5211	Posted - 2013.07.31 08:42:00 - [18] - Quote Still awesome
Shattered Mirage The Enclave Syndicate Dark Taboo 27	Posted - 2013.07.31 08:43:00 - [19] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Still awesome I though bumps not from the OP are not allowed...
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 6025	Posted - 2013.09.18 16:19:00 - [20] - Quote Shattered Mirage wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Still awesome I though bumps not from the OP are not allowed... Not a bump, just stating an opinion. This post is tooootally not a bump either.

Cody Sietz Bullet Cluster 995	Posted - 2013.09.18 16:42:00 - [21] - Quote I like it, I'd also like to be able to "steal" CRUs with a large air vehicle.
Severus Smith Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 339	Posted - 2013.09.18 17:57:00 - [22] - Quote I actually had a crazy idea that maybe our Equipment can be tied to the Installations. Where your Drop Uplink allows clones to "teleport" from the CRU to that location, but is only active within a certain radius of a friendly CRU. Same with Nanohives, they work within a certain radius of a friendly Depot. This would make control of those assets very important as losing one could mean losing all your uplinks / hives in an area. It also would make new types of equipment such as uplinks with 2-3 uses but really long ranges to uplinks with 20 uses but really short ranges. (Same with hives). Dunno if this is a good idea, just something I thought up in passive that would help curb some of the equipment spam and make Installations more strategically important.
The-Errorist Mannar Focused Warfare Gallente Federation 211	Posted - 2013.09.18 19:25:00 - [23] - Quote Cody Sietz wrote: I like it, I'd also like to be able to "steal" CRUs with a large air vehicle. Would be cool.
Temba Fusrodah Ganksters Inc Drake Ashigaru 65	Posted - 2013.09.18 19:29:00 - [24] - Quote Nova Knife wrote: Credit to Jason Pearson for first sparking this idea. What if installations like CRU and Supply Depots meant more to the battle than just free points for someone with a vehicle or AV weapon + nanohive? What if CRU's actually held a certain amount of clones, which changed ownership to the other team when hacked, or were destroyed entirely from the clone count if the CRU was destroyed? What if supply depot ownership affected loot drop for a team at the end of the match? (Or contained supplies used to spawn? What if, using the existing "drop in' mechanic for installations, Eve players could then drop these installations instead of an orbital strike when a team earns orbtial support? What do these changes accomplish; For CRU's - This would create an instant reason to hack a CRU, rather than farm kills off people spawning at it. For PC battles, the transfer of clone ownership within a match speaks for itself. The ability to steal clones and 'clone out' your opponent easier as a result would have serious impact on the flow of battles. Fighting over CRU's would be intense, probably more so than objectives themselves. Being able to drop additional clones via orbital support as instant reinforcements provides an obvious boon as well. For supply depots, this gets a bit tricky. I'm sure someone could think of a better reason, although the mindset already is to generally hack & camp near these, so the incentive to holding them is mostly there already Now the big one : The Eve Connection - This could effectively be a much more meaningful link than orbital strikes alone - Because this involves the economic aspect of creating an installation to then sell/provide to eve players, who then drop them back on dust players or re-sell them. Coupled with the intended changes to how orbital support is carried out, something like this twould have massive potential and would be the first step towards "Creating a fight that can go on nonstop for days, if they can keep their logistics steady" That CCP envisioned at fanfest. Thoughts? I am extremely enthusiastic about your last point, the ability to extend planetary combat thru off planet support from EVE is a cool and well needed enhancement that could indeed fuel massive long lasting battles that could rage on until one side just could no longer afford the financial drain, or keep a supply of fresh fighters flowing to the planet. Orbital logistic strikes from EVE FW pilots in system to restore shields and armor on the MCC could be called in, in lieu of blasting targets on the ground, logi strikes could be earned in a similar fashion to orbital strikes points, but instead be based on controlling and maintaining specific numbers of CRU's and supply depots for a cumulative period of time to extend combat. Some of the best fights I have ever been a member of always seem to end too soon, using EVE players, and revalued installation control to extend this would be very very worthwhile. In my humble opinion.
Temba Fusrodah Ganksters Inc Drake Ashigaru 65	Posted - 2013.09.18 20:01:00 - [25] - Quote An additional thought or three on adding value to installations, how about a zone around every supply depot that preserves a specific percentage of all the equipment lost by both teams, but awarded to the team that held control of it when the match ends. This could prove incentivizing to maintain vigorous fights without players dropping from matches even as their MCC erodes towards destruction. Player impact on salvage recovery is an essential needed element to enhance another level of game play. Interrupting an enemy viral hack in progress should yield more points than hacking it back after they have gained complete control. I can not tell you how many times I have observed players allow the hack to fully conclude before entering a hack themselves to farm greater points often to the detriment of a team victory. Kills of enemies within close proximity to controlled installations should also yield greater points because the player is actively repelling an attack upon a valued battlefield asset, like the guardian points assigned to logi bros in combat, or the points assigned to medics who revive fallen clones.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 6069	Posted - 2013.09.20 14:42:00 - [26] - Quote Pew pew! make the coolness happen
Skihids Bullet Cluster 2142	Posted - 2013.09.20 16:09:00 - [27] - Quote I've suggested CRUs actually contain clones, but you have to eliminate drop uplinks at the same time to make it work. CRUs increase the risk due to the possibility of loss. It's smarter to just spawn on uplinks as they are risk free. The enemy can't use them to steal or kill clones. So when it comes time for commanders to place installations the won't place any CRU outside their red zone.
Llast 326 An Arkhos 108	Posted - 2013.09.20 16:28:00 - [28] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: I very much like the CRU idea, I made a thread on it before, but I can't seem to find it. I'm neutral on the supply depot thing. I think installations should be in the hands of squad leaders who buy the installations themselves. I would rather see EVE players send down stuff like orbital scans to reveal enemy locations, and other stuff like that. EDIT: Also TacNet jamming, prevents the enemy team from being able to see health bars, minimap, overview map, temporarily. What about adding a scan installation that could be hacked, EVE pilots could drop those as well. Having a decent scan profile, and radius would make for a strategic drop. I like the ideas coming out here. It would be nice if the EVE drops had different WP values for calling them in, while keeping orbital strike as an option. One concern I have though is redline drops.... dropping assets behind ones own redline could just prove to be a mining resource. In a new game mode it would be easy to have no redline overlap to eliminate the problem, but then spawning become a real gamble.
The-Errorist Mannar Focused Warfare Gallente Federation 216	Posted - 2013.09.20 21:58:00 - [29] - Quote Llast 326 wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: I very much like the CRU idea, I made a thread on it before, but I can't seem to find it. I'm neutral on the supply depot thing. I think installations should be in the hands of squad leaders who buy the installations themselves. I would rather see EVE players send down stuff like orbital scans to reveal enemy locations, and other stuff like that. EDIT: Also TacNet jamming, prevents the enemy team from being able to see health bars, minimap, overview map, temporarily. What about adding a scan installation that could be hacked, EVE pilots could drop those as well. Having a decent scan profile, and radius would make for a strategic drop. I like the ideas coming out here. It would be nice if the EVE drops had different WP values for calling them in, while keeping orbital strike as an option. One concern I have though is redline drops.... dropping assets behind ones own redline could just prove to be a mining resource. In a new game mode it would be easy to have no redline overlap to eliminate the problem, but then spawning become a real gamble. That reminds me a little of the Section 8 scanner installation.
Jaysyn Larrisen OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 81	Posted - 2013.09.20 22:12:00 - [30] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: I very much like the CRU idea, I made a thread on it before, but I can't seem to find it. I'm neutral on the supply depot thing. I think installations should be in the hands of squad leaders who buy the installations themselves. I would rather see EVE players send down stuff like orbital scans to reveal enemy locations, and other stuff like that. EDIT: Also TacNet jamming, prevents the enemy team from being able to see health bars, minimap, overview map, temporarily. +1 to this and the OP. Great idea on using existing components of the game to add tactical complexity. CRU, Supply depots idea is great...the orbital ECM / EW support is very sharp.

Llast 326 An Arkhos 108	Posted - 2013.09.21 00:03:00 - [31] - Quote The-Errorist wrote: Llast 326 wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: I very much like the CRU idea, I made a thread on it before, but I can't seem to find it. I'm neutral on the supply depot thing. I think installations should be in the hands of squad leaders who buy the installations themselves. I would rather see EVE players send down stuff like orbital scans to reveal enemy locations, and other stuff like that. EDIT: Also TacNet jamming, prevents the enemy team from being able to see health bars, minimap, overview map, temporarily. What about adding a scan installation that could be hacked, EVE pilots could drop those as well. Having a decent scan profile, and radius would make for a strategic drop. I like the ideas coming out here. It would be nice if the EVE drops had different WP values for calling them in, while keeping orbital strike as an option. One concern I have though is redline drops.... dropping assets behind ones own redline could just prove to be a mining resource. In a new game mode it would be easy to have no redline overlap to eliminate the problem, but then spawning become a real gamble. That reminds me a little of the Section 8 scanner installation. Never played the game, did this work out alright in that game?
Temba Fusrodah Ganksters Inc Drake Ashigaru 65	Posted - 2013.09.21 00:41:00 - [32] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: I very much like the CRU idea, I made a thread on it before, but I can't seem to find it. I'm neutral on the supply depot thing. I think installations should be in the hands of squad leaders who buy the installations themselves. I would rather see EVE players send down stuff like orbital scans to reveal enemy locations, and other stuff like that. EDIT: Also TacNet jamming, prevents the enemy team from being able to see health bars, minimap, overview map, temporarily. Jamming would add a new dimension, as in jamming voice coms and target marking of the squads of the team that is pub stomping you temporarily! The fog of war, ECM, and ECCM can add another layer or two of tactics.


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]