Generator

[Gogita]

I have been thinking lately how to generator drops a more interesting tactic and less of a fast I-WIN-button tactic.

What if...
When you destroy the generator, the base will switch to emergency power power. This will prevent the base the base from shutting down completely, but only for a short amount of time, like 5 minutes. (this of course can be tested in beta)
After 5 minutes, the gen will go down completely and it will have the same effect as a gen drop currently has.

The defending team has to try to repair the gen within the timer to prevent the base from going down and maybe losing the base.
The attacking team has to defend the generator to prevent the defending team from repairing the generator.


Also some alternative effects of having a base running on alternative power is for example that you cannot get vehicles anymore, because it takes too much power. With this, gen dropping a base can still make the enemy empire having problems getting armor, but still make it possible for them to spawn there.

What do you guys think? Don't be too harsh please...:(

[klu]

not a bad idea, you could accomplish about the same effect with multiple generators also. i personally hope the bases and towers become much more complicated, in layout, and with more 'capture points' (multiple generators and cc's, or something new)

[Wrath]

I dont see the issue with gen drops there only able to be used on a handful of bases due to gens being in basements in a lot

[Firefly]

Firstly, a generator drop is not the I-WIN button. Generator drops can successfully be countered, thereby resecuring the generator. It's not foolproof, mind you, and you can't just zergtard it to death.

I tend to believe that generators were poorly implemented from the get-go and I'm hoping it's one aspect of the game's mechanics that someone looked at and said "We need an engineer!"

The generator needs a number of defensive measures. It's a critical point in a base defense. It's a critical point in attacks. It should be better defended. What those defenses might be, I don't really know. I've never stopped to analyze it.

[basti]

You and one of another of your crazy ideas again? OUT! :D


Seriously: bad idea, really bad idea. The problem with gendropping isnt the dropping, its the idiots that dont understand that a gen needs to be protected as well. And it is easy to protect: If you have all base entrances and the main lobby/cc under control, just pass the gen every few minutes to check for possible cloakers. You will be fine that way.
If you loose a base entrance, check more often for cloakers while making sure the enemy zerg cant push to the gen.
If you loose main lobby/CC, defend the gen at all time with a few guys. Just make sure no AV max can run throu the open doors (door virus/CC hack) and kill the gen alone.

And bang, you are fine. No need for another system that makes the valid tactic of blowing the gen by yourself impossible. Guard your stuff, or loose it, it is that simple.


and about the i-win button thingy: a few days ago, on esamir, VS had Dagon, Jarl and the Dropship. Vs had to defend Dagur mostly, because of a ongoing NC vehicle push. Jarl was CEd up, but almost completly empty.
Renegade Legion, a NC outfit, tried SEVERAL times to galdrop and genhold Jarl. Every time they tried, the VS fought at Dagur and only a few at Jarl, not enough to have a chance against the NC. EVERY time the NC tried, the VS managed to kill themself at Dagur, spawn over to Jarl (bound there), and grab gear to counter the NC, and that in the time it took to discover the Galdrop-NC kill gen, mostly just half a minute.
Every time, we managed to attack the NC at the gen level before they could even kill and evacuate the gen. Every time we killed a few before they got ready to fully defend. Every time we forced the to hold inside the gen, and every time we managed to remove them and fix the gen within 3 minutes of the gen going down.
Dont get me Wrong, Renegade Legion isnt a bad outfit. They had quite a bunch of people, and they know how to do stuff, but they had no chance against the VS zerg that always appeared when they hit Jarl. It was at least a 2-1 ratio.
And you tell me a Gen Kill is a I-WIN button? It is not, and never was. And just because you fail to counter it doesnt mean there needs to be a system to help you. Just start learing to adapt to situations rather than starting to cry.

[kaffis]

Honestly, this is another "problem" that goes away if you make defending bases that aren't already the target of an organized attack fun for players and/or worthwhile in their assessment of things to do.

Reward patrolling and defense, and generator problems go away, as the generator's one of the things to be defended.

The problem is, there's never been an incentive to defend something that wasn't already swarming with enemies to kill.

[Tremadog]

The problem is, there's never been an incentive to defend something that wasn't already swarming with enemies to kill.

That's a very good point. I hope that gets addressed. Perhaps getting a small incentive for spotting a new enemy target could help?

[basti]

That's a very good point. I hope that gets addressed. Perhaps getting a small incentive for spotting a new enemy target could help?

I have a better idea: you understand that you dont need LOLXP for every damn thing you do, including breathing, and learn that keeping the gen alive is more important than farming 950325 kills and 2389075628965 bep.

Because i really love to see you BEP and killwhores being punished for your stupidity every damn time. Keep farming the guys while i kill your gen, im happy with that.

[Firefly]

The problem is, there's never been an incentive to defend something that wasn't already swarming with enemies to kill.
Um, yes there is. It's called, not getting your generator ganked. A blown generator, if overlooked, is like an STD - if you don't treat it, it becomes a real problem.

Fail to protect your generator. It will fuck you in the ass.

That's your incentive. Problem solved, next?

[DviddLeff]

In the upgrade project I have the following system:

Generators: When a generator is destroyed it is no longer as much of an immediate crippling blow for the defenders. Once the generator is destroyed the bases systems go off-line one after another every 10 seconds in the following sequence.

Any lattice or module benefits - Door locks - Turrets - Vehicle bays - Equipment terminals - spawn tubes

This gives the defenders a minute to get the generator repaired or at least prepare before they lose all the facilities power.

[Grimster]

In the upgrade project I have the following system:

Generators: When a generator is destroyed it is no longer as much of an immediate crippling blow for the defenders. Once the generator is destroyed the bases systems go off-line one after another every 10 seconds in the following sequence.

Any lattice or module benefits - Door locks - Turrets - Vehicle bays - Equipment terminals - spawn tubes

This gives the defenders a minute to get the generator repaired or at least prepare before they lose all the facilities power.


Nice idea but isn't one minute cutting it a bit short?

I think 3-5 minutes would be a better way to go. :)

[basti]

Nice idea but isn't one minute cutting it a bit short?

I think 3-5 minutes would be a better way to go. :)

No, it should be a maximum of 10 secs before the tubes go out. There should NEVER be a system that allows you to slack of and ignore gen defense. And even 10 secs would make it extremly easy to get the gen up again...

[Timantium]

I agree the time needs to be less than 1 minute. That would be like announcing a system alert when a hacker starts hacking the CC. They already get an announcement like this when the gen is under attack. Defenders already have the advantage, there is absolutely no need to buff the defense.

Good defenders will beat back a great assault.

[wildcat140679]

I have been thinking lately how to generator drops a more interesting tactic and less of a fast I-WIN-button tactic.

What if...
When you destroy the generator, the base will switch to emergency power power. This will prevent the base the base from shutting down completely, but only for a short amount of time, like 5 minutes. (this of course can be tested in beta)...





Drats, some one already posted pretty much the exact same idea that I've been walking around with in my head today at work.

The only difference to the idea I had spinning in my head today was, that I was thinking about actually adding a 2nd backup generator or UPS room.

One close to or under the spawning room, that would be much easier to defend, preventing it from getting destroyed as well.

This backup emergency generator (UPS) would only be supplying power to the spawning room and equipment terminals in that room, all other base device and defense would be powerless.

When the generator now goes down in planetside, it's very rarely that the base defenders recover from it and most of the time the battle is lost.

With this backup generator having only a limited supply of power, defenders need to shift defense in to offense to re-secure the generator room and repair it, this shift in defense/offense might be just enough for the enemy to push through to the CC.

[kaffis]

I have a better idea: you understand that you dont need LOLXP for every damn thing you do, including breathing, and learn that keeping the gen alive is more important than farming 950325 kills and 2389075628965 bep.

Because i really love to see you BEP and killwhores being punished for your stupidity every damn time. Keep farming the guys while i kill your gen, im happy with that.
But any massive game that requires teamwork will always have an element of herding cats.

The idea, then, is to make it so the cats will want to do productive things. Sure *I* have no problem defending a quiet base. But my squad might. And defending something alone is so boring and unproductive that even I can't stomach it.

It also, however, doesn't reward the commander who can actually convince a squad of people to defend before the enemy zerg arrives for doing so. I think we can agree that it's (potentially) a productive use of his time and leadership, but his chance of ever getting recognized for it is zero, while platoons of uncoordinated, leaderless people are pumping CEP into 3 guys just for following the zerg around.

[GoldDragon]

But any massive game that requires teamwork will always have an element of herding cats.

The idea, then, is to make it so the cats will want to do productive things. Sure *I* have no problem defending a quiet base. But my squad might. And defending something alone is so boring and unproductive that even I can't stomach it.

It also, however, doesn't reward the commander who can actually convince a squad of people to defend before the enemy zerg arrives for doing so. I think we can agree that it's (potentially) a productive use of his time and leadership, but his chance of ever getting recognized for it is zero, while platoons of uncoordinated, leaderless people are pumping CEP into 3 guys just for following the zerg around.

Amen. One of the things my outfit does is all the work that the zerg will ignore. If we see a link that an enemy can exploit, we will do our best to set up a defense (usually large amounts of CE as a babysitter so we can continue trying to help people make progress...) before it becomes a problem. Often we've been in the middle of setting up defenses when people arrive and we've been able to call for help.

That said help usually just ignores us until we get screwed over by the 20+ incoming against our 5-10.

Anyway, I have to say I like the potential ideas behind a delayed shutdown. That aside, if you pull the plug then no lights for you. As much as these delayed shutdowns and secondary generators might simulate more realistic set ups, I'm not sure they have a place in PlanetSide. Initially reading through I would have agreed with the thought but after seeing the counter arguments I am inclined to disagree.

As it has been said several times you either defend your assets or lose them. However I recognize the validity of needing an incentive to defend. While tactical players see the incentive as not losing stuff, the people who play for experience (for "fun"... to each their own) do not and are perfectly happy leaving it to the strategists and older players (I know several who's twitch reflex isn't at its best who do things such as ANTs and Defenses etc). My suggestion here would be SOI / Asset XP Bonuses. That is to say if you are the only person within your base or near an important asset, you should gain extra experience for defending it. I feel this applies to attackers as well so there is more reason to use tactical strikes and not just rushing the next base on the list.

This is just another take on the situation. It's impossible to make everyone happy, that's just how things are, so lets hope in all of these suggestions (pray that SOE actually pays attention...) we get something that works well enough we can enjoy it.

[CutterJohn]

Its strange how the drudge work falls on the shoulders of vets who no longer need nor benefit from xp rewards. It was an awesome day when I finally maxed out, as I could do what I felt like, regardless of its rewards, without feeling guilt that I was playing non optimally. I could go an entire evening with only a handful of kills, doing things that were important to the fight, but not in any way trackable or rewardable by a computer.

One thing I'm pretty sure could be done is an exp reward for guarding a hack. Tack on a 50% bonus for being their the whole 15 minutes.


As for the generators.. I don't mind the idea, but I think it should be expanded on. More generators, more stuff that can be blown or hacked in the process of taking a base. Links that sever you from cont benefits, breach points that can be blown to provide an additional avenue for invasion, more spawn areas, allowing for capture of partial areas of the base.

Still, I do think it was a tad too OP, and the remaining players in the base should have some ability to macguyver temporary fixes in. Like a terminal where a MAX unit could plug his suit in, and power a respawn tube or equipment terminal. Except he takes damage each spawn(and ofc no other maxs could spawn).

[DviddLeff]

Yeah, while people are willing to do stuff for no XP gain, when doing the tactical thing does not earn the most experience, you know something is wrong with the system.

Examples:

Guarding a base hack when everyone else leaves
Not letting the enemy hack your base as a commander
Ending a base fight by pushing the enemy out of the SOI
Killing the spawn tubes of a beseiged base.
Contributing to a kill, even if you dont get the kill shot

[Firefly]

Yeah but the thing is, you're basically saying "I want some sort of XP for something that might not happen". Which involves predictions and Miss Cleo and shit. If I were a PS dev and you suggested to me that you get XP for hanging around the generator room for guard duty, I'd tell you to pound sand. There's no fucking way to predict what Joe Q. Account-holder is going to do. Sorry. You get XP for other support roles. If they did that, you'd cry about not getting XP when they don't show, or bitch about the amount of XP you DID get when one random jackass with a boomer collection showed up. Your "reward" for guarding the generator room is called "not getting fucked in the ass and losing your base". The end.

[GoldDragon]

Examples:

Guarding a base hack when everyone else leaves
Not letting the enemy hack your base as a commander
Ending a base fight by pushing the enemy out of the SOI
Killing the spawn tubes of a besieged base.
Contributing to a kill, even if you don't get the kill shot


What's interesting about this is that if they address these issues then the whole game changes. PlanetSide in it's prime was a fun, reasonably good game. This kind of change (which applies to generator defense and attack as well) is one of the things that would really set PlanetSide apart from other MMO's in the industry. It would not only be the one true MMOFPS but it would reward players for being tactical and thinking through their action and not just kill whoring their entire PS career.

Edit: In note of Firefly's comments I don't think bonus experience or rewards should be applied if nothing is happening, more along the lines of if something happens and you're there to defend against it then you get the bonus. Also the XP for support roles would be nice too, my outfit has a dedicated med who will gladly give up shooting someone to heal a friendly. That kind of support deserves experience.

[Firefly]

I don't think bonus experience or rewards should be applied if nothing is happening, more along the lines of if something happens and you're there to defend against it then you get the bonus.
They have this. It's called, you get XP for killing tangos. Guy walks into your generator, you kill him. You get XP. Where is the issue?

Also the XP for support roles would be nice too, my outfit has a dedicated med who will gladly give up shooting someone to heal a friendly. That kind of support deserves experience.
Did they remove SEP/Support XP? Is that no longer in the game?

[GoldDragon]

They have this. It's called, you get XP for killing tangos. Guy walks into your generator, you kill him. You get XP. Where is the issue?

Technically there isn't one. Though being the person who is usually away from the large fight taking care of towers, bases, etc, I wish there was more gratification experience wise for taking that initiative. Not necessarily a set bonus mind, I made a comment earlier about an X% bonus depending on the number of friendlies within a certain proximity. This system unrefined has it's flaws but it's something that could be investigated.

Did they remove SEP/Support XP? Is that no longer in the game?

No it's definitely there, but I'm not sure what the ratio of SEP / BEP is. That is to say you generally get more XP for killing than support. Not saying that's wrong but something that could be revisited even if nothing is ultimately changed.

[Firefly]

This system unrefined has it's flaws but it's something that could be investigated.
I'm sure it is, I just can't see any immediate benefits to it. Not to say you're wrong, or I'm right, I'm just not understanding what the issue is. Sure you may not get an XP reward, but you gain a reward by virtue of having prevented the enemy from taking your base that easily.

No it's definitely there, but I'm not sure what the ratio of SEP / BEP is. That is to say you generally get more XP for killing than support. Not saying that's wrong but something that could be revisited even if nothing is ultimately changed.
To be fair, I know a lot of people like to be engineers and medics. Back in the day, there simply weren't enough people doing this. So there was always a need for one of each in a squad, plus a hacker. And the Support XP was decent, if I recall. Now with everyone having the ability to be a Swiss Army Knife, it's not a big part of the game.

Plus, being a medic or an engineer is its own reward. You keep your squad effective. A squad which remains in the field longer gets more XP as a whole. When you lose people to the respawn, that's time away from the fight. Your XP gets diminished and your troop strength isn't at max, so you run the risk of being overrun. Having those support roles there is its own reward, being that support role is its own reward. The XP should be proportionate - they're earning shared XP by being in the zone with their squad and engaging targets on their own. They're also getting support XP from doing their medic/engineer job. I don't see why they should get more than combatants.

[kaffis]

Yeah but the thing is, you're basically saying "I want some sort of XP for something that might not happen". Which involves predictions and Miss Cleo and shit. If I were a PS dev and you suggested to me that you get XP for hanging around the generator room for guard duty, I'd tell you to pound sand. There's no fucking way to predict what Joe Q. Account-holder is going to do. Sorry. You get XP for other support roles. If they did that, you'd cry about not getting XP when they don't show, or bitch about the amount of XP you DID get when one random jackass with a boomer collection showed up. Your "reward" for guarding the generator room is called "not getting fucked in the ass and losing your base". The end.
I've never advocated xp for doing nothing, or for being "present," as it were, when nothing is happening.

Instead, what I'd like to see is that when you make a prediction of future action, and move to counter it -- when that action does show up, you're rewarded more (because you took the gamble and risked wasting your time if it didn't show up) than if you had shown up after the action arrived.

I wouldn't give xp for patrolling an empty SOI. I'd give a 200% xp bonus for the first 1, maybe 2 minutes of kills within the SOI after a long lull. The bonus goes away after the first interior door is crossed through, or whatever (so if you are first on the scene, but after the attackers have penetrated the outer defenses, you don't get the bonus).

That stacks with a 35% bonus to BEP for defensive kills (remember, attackers get hack xp in addition to kill xp), and commanders get CEP at a rate of 10% per kill while in a friendly SOI, as well as a "resecure" xp bonus of 10% of the capture CEP bonus as a reward for stopping a hack.

Once the hack has been made, the bonuses reverse -- the people guarding the hack get the 35% bonus to BEP.

This incentivizes "good" empire-based play habits that are not rewarded by the current system, and are thus ignored by most players. So often and consistently ignored, at some points in the game's history, that zergs of people would swarm around a continent on pure offense, with only token defenses, capturing bases in circles as they willingly gave up ones behind them. Or commanders would allow bases to be hacked and captured, so they could immediately retake them because defending the base in the first place wasn't worth CEP.

[Firefly]

See kaffis, now you're thinking and putting those ideas out there in a more concrete form. That's what I like, instead of vague abstract ideas - it makes the debate more fleshed out.

Instead, what I'd like to see is that when you make a prediction of future action, and move to counter it -- when that action does show up, you're rewarded more (because you took the gamble and risked wasting your time if it didn't show up) than if you had shown up after the action arrived.
Again, this goes back to my earlier statement. You're asking a developer to code in some sort of prediction. I'm not about to stop and answer a multiple-choice questionnaire in mid-combat.

"Greetings Player! Did you:

A) predict this would happen?
B) happen to get lucky?

Please select an answer so we can determine your XP"

There's no way a video game developer can implement a system that correctly deduces that you predicted something and responded appropriately, that I know of - I'd love to be proven wrong on that, honestly. A guy walks into the gen room and you shoot him or he shoots you. Either you get the XP or he gets the XP. That's about as much as we can predict. Anything else involves hypotheticals and predicting the future. If you know a way to do that, I'm all ears.

[CutterJohn]

Your "reward" for guarding the generator room is called "not getting fucked in the ass and losing your base". The end.

Considering there is no gain when defending the base, they may not care. Plenty of people don't actually give a shit about the conquest, they just want to kill stuff. The base trading gives an interesting backdrop to killing stuff, and adds some short term purpose for why you are killing shit here, and not there, but don't pretend everyone cares about that, or at least cares all the time.

If you want people that don't care to do an unrewarding activity, you're going to be waiting a while. You can either reward them for the activity, or not care when they don't do it and do it yourself.



There's no way a video game developer can implement a system that correctly deduces that you predicted something and responded appropriately, that I know of - I'd love to be proven wrong on that, honestly. A guy walks into the gen room and you shoot him or he shoots you. Either you get the XP or he gets the XP. That's about as much as we can predict. Anything else involves hypotheticals and predicting the future. If you know a way to do that, I'm all ears.


Give a 500% reward for killing someone in a contested bases generator if nobody has been killed in there for the past 5 minutes. There. You've successfully rewarded guarding the gen by offering an hefty incentive for killing baddies in there. If you want to reward the guarding action, you can get a reward if he kills you, since your death means people are alerted, or that you will alert them(which if you care enough to be in the gen, you would).

[Firefly]

Considering there is no gain when defending the base, they may not care.
Right, pretty much every person that ever defended a base totally did it for some OTHER reason and not for the sake of not letting the "bad guys" roll over them. =/ :rolleyes:

[CutterJohn]

some people != pretty much every person. Nice try though.

And yes, there were people that were fighting there because thats where the fight was. If the fight moves elsewhere, they will follow. Not because they are defending anything, but because thats where the action is.

[GoldDragon]

The psychology of why people fight were they do isn't in question. Most people play to kill things. I think that's going to happen no matter what. This discussion has become more of a "How should we reward the players who think about the strategy and tactics behind generator defense, CC defense, etc." The zerg is more than likely going to exist no matter how hard you try to implement a tactics-based system. As I try to figure out why this is important...

Who wants cookies? :D

[Firefly]

This discussion has become more of a "How should we reward the players who think about the strategy and tactics behind generator defense, CC defense, etc."
I think it's more of a "I want XP for predicting that the generator was going to be attacked" thread.

And about as realistically as possible, it's already in-game. It's called, TR guy guards the generator. NC guy shows up with a Decimator. TR guy caps him in the face. TR guy gets XP.

[kaffis]

I think it's more of a "I want XP for predicting that the generator was going to be attacked" thread.

And about as realistically as possible, it's already in-game. It's called, TR guy guards the generator. NC guy shows up with a Decimator. TR guy caps him in the face. TR guy gets XP.
But if the TR guy cares about XP (and thus, it's an appropriate reward), he would have gotten twenty times as much by following the zerg around and letting the NC guy cap the quiet base instead of sitting around, guarding the generator.

I can understand if you consider this an acceptable pattern of behavior, and believe that zergs wandering around until they clash yields a fun game. However, to claim that the one kill's worth of xp is a reward for defending a generator, which probably entails staring at an empty generator room (or swinging by an empty generator room every minute in your patrol loop of an empty base) for, say, an hour?

Wow, that's time well spent, man, this reward makes me feel so validated for doing it.

[CutterJohn]

One other thing I brought up elsewhere.. If squads had an option to just have a blanket equal sharing of all XP, regardless of position, it would help out with the untraceable non combat roles. The squads would have to police themselves, ofc, but people probably wouldn't mind sitting in the generator when asked by their SL if they saw a healthy flow of exp tics from the rest of the squad.

[Traak]

Or better yet, make it so bases have no generators and people can pre-choose what they spawn with, so they can spawn anywhere in the SOI like people do in the AMS SOI, and do away with tubes. THEN people would have to kill enemies, not gens or bases.

[Firefly]

But if the TR guy cares about XP (and thus, it's an appropriate reward), he would have gotten twenty times as much by following the zerg around and letting the NC guy cap the quiet base instead of sitting around, guarding the generator.

I can understand if you consider this an acceptable pattern of behavior, and believe that zergs wandering around until they clash yields a fun game. However, to claim that the one kill's worth of xp is a reward for defending a generator, which probably entails staring at an empty generator room (or swinging by an empty generator room every minute in your patrol loop of an empty base) for, say, an hour?

Wow, that's time well spent, man, this reward makes me feel so validated for doing it.
Nobody's forcing you to do anything. But when you can come up with a suitable algorithm and coding method for predicting a living player's actions and detecting the brainwaves of those who predicted said actions and thus can aptly reward them, to say nothing of predicting hundreds or thousands of them, then you sir will win at the internets. Until then, just play the game Sally. :rolleyes:

Or better yet, make it so bases have no generators and people can pre-choose what they spawn with, so they can spawn anywhere in the SOI like people do in the AMS SOI, and do away with tubes. THEN people would have to kill enemies, not gens or bases.
Yes let's make this game like every other e-sports shooter with their 10-15min matches, 32-man maps, and mindless run-and-gun grindfest.

[The Desert Fox]

I agree that you should get some amount of xp for doing the tactical thing as opposed to the zerg thing. I spent 45 mins last night capping 2 vanu bases in the north of cyssor completely by myself. We had the entire north open to take almost the entire continent but no one would help me, and for that 45 mins of work i got 80xp. I'm not an xp whore but after that it just wasn't worth it so I joined the zerg in the south.

[TRex]

Whenever Ive been in a base defence , as soon as you see the ''generator under attack'' message , most non-retarded players I see quickly run to defend / repair said facility.As a bonus, theres a chance you get xp by killing said infiltrators , but even more of benefit is that you can carry on defending and gaining more xp as a result by keeping the base alive.
I agree with Firefly , wanting extra xp or reward by simply hanging around a generator on a whim is farcical . You might as well stand in a warpgate on a friendly locked continent and say you're defending this continent , wheres my reward.
A much better use of you time would be preventing said attackers from entering the base in the first place before they even entered the door.
I've lost count of the number of times I've been to fill an ant up only to just arrive at a base to find someone filling it up. Thats how it goes, same as the one getting the killing blow gets the xp from a kill , not the 2 before that died attempting said kill.
The counter to all this is teamwork , support benefits those in a squad /platoon and gives more people the benefit of most aspects of the game.
But just turning up and expecting a reward isn't on, maybe you could be doing something more pro-active , while keeping an eye on the chat log for incusions and being on voice-coms to react quicker in the first place.

[wildcat140679]

The topic has some what mutated in to experience rewards for defending strategic base object/location like the generator and get rewarded for doing so. This off topic discussion might be better of having it's thread of it's own.


As much as I might like receiving a reward for my time spend down in the generator room or sitting in the corridor with my gun trained on the back door, I don't believe it's the right thing to do. For some might be dedicated in defending it, but many might be out for some easy experience while the went afk for a smoke or what ever the do while afk.


Instead of rewarding experience points, how about if you would over time slowly accumulate an experience multiplier, that can only be cashed if a kill is scored within or within the vicinity of that key location you have been guarding in.

Based on strategic importance and on how frequent enemies will pass through that area an experience multiplier accumulation rate and a maximum can be set and based on. But other factors might also be useful to weight in like number of enemies with in the SOI


For example, back door guarding, over a period of 10 minutes you experience multiplier will increase to a maximum of 200%. killing an enemy after 5 minutes with in the vicinity of the back door would rewards you with 50% more onto op an usual kill reward. Enemies try to break to the back door quite frequently, so you often don't have to wait very long to cash in your guarding reward.

But guarding the generator on the other hand, isolated deep with in the base can be a long wait before enemy makes its way to it, that is, if the make it to the generator at all. After 10 minutes guarding your experience multiplier could be 800% maxing the next kill 8x its usual value, if an enemy does show up, it's a very rewarding kill.

Going out of this key location for to long will cause this multiplier to rapidly decay to zero or rest back to zero. But it should be long enough to run to the closest equipment terminal and back again, and have some time to spare.


Even if no one shows up, the thought of being rewarded if the enemy does show up, will be more appealing for "active" guarding players.

I'm assume afk experience multiplier harvester, will have a much harder time cashing this reward for you need to kill something and those active are more likely to land the killing blow.

[kaffis]

Wow. I think the reading comprehension in this thread is approaching some pretty epic levels of fail. That, or the strawmanning is just getting out of hand.

[Raymac]

Looks like this conversation has turned more into should there be xp rewards etc. and I really have no opinion on that other than the more complicated it gets, the less likely it will be in game.

Back to the original idea, I like the idea of a rolling blackout. The main reason is, just imagine the suspense it would create. We already have the "Generator is Under Attack" message to get us to scramble to defend it, so what if we took that same excitment and spread it out? As equipment and stuff start dropping around the base, the tension will rise.

It's alot like the cliche ticking clock we already get when a hack is put on a base. At 14:55 there's a little bit of tension, but at 0:59 it is a crap ton more intense. So it would stand to reason that for generators, a rolling blackout will make the tension build and build.

I like the idea, but I'm a fan of Hitchcock films too. There's alot to be said for building suspense.

[Hamma]

Man this is a great thread imo hehe.

While I agree there should be some incentive for defending the Generators I also agree with Firefly in that it's pretty much impossible to track.

There are some times in games where we just have to cut our losses and have people do the right thing because it needs to be done, not because there is something in it for them.

Someone mentioned 500% XP bonus for the first kill, but that is farrr to exploitable.

[CutterJohn]

Yes. I said that. It would work, but it would also be exploitable, as you say. But did bep ever really mean so much that people would honestly care a great deal about people exploiting?

At any rate, my other suggestion would be the best. Letting squads fully and equally share bep & sep regardless of location. As an option, of course. Now people who want to emphasize actual teamwork can. The guy sitting back guarding the hack is still getting BEP from his squad. The dude cloaking on top of the dropship center antenna calling out galaxies departing is getting his share too. If he's not pulling his weight, the SL will kick him, or people can leave the squad and get one that doesn't have the sharing option on, or one that does and is actually working together.

[Hamma]

I do want to know one thing.

Why do people get their panties in a wad about blowing up generators? If it is a good tactical move to eliminate the generator and get to the next base quicker and with less resistance why not blow it?

But anytime that happens all sorts of people get their panties in a wad that it just happened. There's plenty of XP to be had at the next base people..

[Bags]

Because I pay $15/mo to play the game, not to fight for five minutes and sit on a base for 15 minutes.

I'm all for eventually blowing a gen, but blowing it after a couple of minutes is just plain boring.

[Hamma]

Well I guess there is the difference.

I play to kick the shit out the other empires by any means necessary. If there is a tactical advantage to destroying the generators and saving a 5 hour waste of time just so players can pad their killstats.. I am going to opt for the tactical advantage.

[brinkdadrink]

I like the sharing xp across the squad option because then you wouldn't mind doing the task's asked of you by the SL or PL because your all getting the same thing. This includes sharing support xp and fighting xp so if your a well organized squad everyone will be making a lot but if your running around in a squad not working together then you might be dropped if your not doing anything.

On the topic at hand.
I like the rolling blackout. Just because you have a minute to still spawn doesn't me you will be effective. If you spawn and the terminals dont have power you will be running around in standard with a shit weapon. You can scavenge for a good weapon but your still not going to get the armor you want if you do.

The second backup generator idea for the spawn tubes could work but again would have the same effect that even though you can spawn you wont be able to get your equipment so most people knowing the main gen is down would spawn somewhere else anyway.

My personal opinion is that the rolling blackouts would be cool and at certain times would be useful and help defenders keep the base that most of the time is lost anyway.

Little off topic:
As far as a reward for defending the gen I thought bonus xp for killing someone in a friendly SOI after being inactive for some time would be good but could and probably would be abused.
The best way to have people defend those bases would be by making the lose of a base more significant. As it is now if you lose a base so what, eventually you will attack it to get it back and when attacking a base you will probably get more xp than defending which will drive a lot of people especially early in the game.
My only ideas to make the bases more significant are to implement some kind of winning condition or large scale objective type situations which are discussed in another thread.

[Bags]

Well I guess there is the difference.

I play to kick the shit out the other empires by any means necessary. If there is a tactical advantage to destroying the generators and saving a 5 hour waste of time just so players can pad their killstats.. I am going to opt for the tactical advantage.

Well, there's always a tactical advantage to blowing the gen. The only downside is you can't pull vehicles from terminals or weapons, but the defending empire generally destroys those.

And I don't support being farmed for five hours. Thirty minutes is about the max for me. I wait generally because I know if I was on the defending team I wouldn't want my gen blown as fast.

[Hamma]

Well yea, 30 minutes is one thing but it seems many times empires let it go on for well over a couple hours.

[Grimster]

Well I think its quite fine right now. But if they were to find a way to reward defending the generator that would be good.

One thing that should be easy to solve is that you should be rewarded for repairing the generator. I mean however does it plays a very pivotal role for the defense of the base.

[Vancha]

I think the "XP modifier" is way too convoluted, but there's certainly a problem that needs to be addressed.

Most people seemed to agree in the "reducing downtime" thread that sitting by A CC doing nothing for 15 minutes was something that needed to be changed to improve gameplay, and yet here people don't seem to have an issue with people potentially sitting doing nothing for 30 minutes+ to avoid losing the gen.

Doing nothing for 15 minutes to avoid losing the CC (more important) = bad.
Doing nothing for 30+ minutes to avoid losing the gen (less important) = fine?

I think it's been talked about before (in another thread), but what if gaining access to the generator was a bigger deal? My imagination's turning once again to thoughts of hacker vs hacker, fighting through the network, or having to overcome the base's AI in some hacker VR or mini-game...

Of course, simply picking better locations for the generator could also go some way to fixing the problem. Somewhere that isn't so completely out of the way that the only reason to go near it is to make sure it's not about to get boomered by some cloaker.

...But really. In all the offensive/defensive-style gameplay that's been dreamt up for various games over the years, is a regular ol' door hack and spamming decis/boomers really all that something as vital as a generator is deserving of?

[Traak]

Make it so an EE has to hack the lobby console to start a timer that allows gen blowage 30 minutes AFTER the hack. That way, if you can keep the lobby, you can keep the option to blow the gen counting down from 30 minutes. Or make it 15 minutes. In any case, if you can "defend the hack" at the control console thing in the lobby, then you can keep the option to open the gen doors available.

If you can't, well, you can't blow the gen.

A female voice with "Generator Destruction Available in T Minus 30 Minutes" that chimes in every five minutes then counts down from 30 would be frikkin' awesome! It would be the only female voice many players have heard for years!

[RR J]

I do like the idea of back-up power after the gen is blown. Back-up power could be based off the amount of NTU in the silo. Without the generator the silo would drain at an increased rate and when the silo is drained the lights go out.

It gives the defending team the opportunity to react. It also has a consequence for attacking teams that decide to go after the generator; they will need to secure an ANT for the base to become functional again.

[Jamini]

Quite honestly, I'd simply prefer more complex bases.

Towers with hallways (multple, wide enough for two maxes side-by-side and some extra room) that go directly into a base. Two, or even three spawn rooms each with an individual gen and control console. Perhaps each one requiring a seperate hack of 5 minutes to capture. Less wholly-emcompassing base walls, and more ways both out and in. Perhaps even an "inner courtyard" with lots of room, cover, and limited/no vehicle manuverability for folks who actually use Medium assault.

Really the flaw with bases is not the generator, it's unimaginative layouts that are designed to make fights last until a good max crash to the gen or the base goes green.

[p0intman]

I have been thinking lately how to generator drops a more interesting tactic and less of a fast I-WIN-button tactic.


learn to properly defend them instead?

if you currently have a pain module in it and the hacking upgrade, neither the gen or tubes are a viable solution until you hack the base.

ofc at that point, if the hack holds, you're sort of screwed either way.

[DviddLeff]

Well, unless you have more than a couple of guys going to blow the gen.

[p0intman]

Well, unless you have more than a couple of guys going to blow the gen.
and if they get there, are you not somewhat screwed anyway?

[Traak]

learn to properly defend them instead?

if you currently have a pain module in it and the hacking upgrade, neither the gen or tubes are a viable solution until you hack the base.

ofc at that point, if the hack holds, you're sort of screwed either way.

Unless the base is unoccupied. But this is about base assaults ending with gen blowage.

[p0intman]

Unless the base is unoccupied. But this is about base assaults ending with gen blowage.

Here is a question:

Do you legitimately believe killing the gen in a fight is an 'invalid' (morally, or otherwise) way to progress a battle on a continent?

[DviddLeff]

Recently a guy called VanBlood (VS) has been setting up routers which have allowed us to get into the gen of bases and take them out, even in a packed interlink fight.

This has allowed the VS to rapidly grab bases if the fight is going on for any length of time.

I see this as being a perfectly valid way to do things; we give the standard assault a go, and if it doesn't work we whack the gen and move the battle lines. Before I would have been annoyed that the fight is over, only resorting to taking the gen out after maybe only 30 minutes of interior fight.

[Traak]

Here is a question:

Do you legitimately believe killing the gen in a fight is an 'invalid' (morally, or otherwise) way to progress a battle on a continent?

No, not at all. It's killing the gen when the fight is just getting revved up, mainly, actually. Wow, we're in the Courty... oh. Gen down.

I'm the AMS guy, and a CR5, but I like our lower CR's to get something for a base capture. And killing the gen so early blows that to bits.

Problem is, how do you prevent the badly done gen stuff? And how do you make it so guarding some generator isn't necessary or someone will run around draining whole continents?

The only simple answer I can see is just make the gens invulnerable. It's not a great answer, only a simple one.

Problem is, an interminable indoor fight doesn't seem to teach anyone that teamwork DOES need to be employed. It's just mindless zerging on a smaller patch of space.

[p0intman]

A compromise I might make then is this, and this is just an idea that serves both ends of what gen blowing does and can do.

A new "reinforced" mode that happens after critical, and just before offline.

reinforced mode lasts 15 minutes, signifigantly drains base NTU, even more than critical mode does. it drains the NTU to give the generator and its console a hardened shell, nearly impervious to fire. after it comes out of reinforced mode, it can be freely killed and the spawns will die if it isnt immediately repaired.

at the same time, it releases any modules from their cradles to be picked up, it removes any power and lattice control going through it in order to keep spawns and equipment running, vehical aquisition would also be offline until the generator is repaired. base defense, would thus be limited entirely to the infantry spawning in it. no shields, no modules, no pain fields.

this way, you can still have your fights, and people like myself and my outfit who specialise in removal of bases from being factors can still do what we do. gen blowing then would still be valid, just not as detrimental to a fight without outright removing it as a valid tactic.

[Hamma]

Very interesting pointman I kind of like that idea. :D

[Effective]

Make it so only an adv. hacker can open the gen door (possibly even when the base is hacked). Up the generator armor roughly twice what is (keep it so that it's 6 boomers to kill the gen though).

This helps prevent the generator from going down from just any scrub with AV, while allowing cloakers to still potentially drop the gen behind a tough base defense.