Outfit Bases are a Long Term Goal

[Hamma]

I did not see this posted anywhere..
outfit bases, ability to deploy and defend your own bases are one of our long term (post-launch) goals!

https://twitter.com/#!/mhigby/status/175695482906099712

Thoughts?

[RavenUSC3]

They did say that in PS1 beta too, so....

I like the idea. Anything they can do to allow outfits more personalization and a sense of ownership over something is a good thing in my opinion.

[Mastachief]

Awesome sauce.

Though it will be interesting on how big and easy they are to defend, also the level of outfit you'd need to deploy one.

[UnknownDT]

No one will touch our outfit base. No one.

[WiteBeam]

It's something that I could really see working in PS2 as long as there will be thousands of players on the map. Outfit logos on bases and making them somehow a HQ or hang out for that outfit would be cool.
I could also see how it could be blown and pointless if not done correctly.

[Knocky]

They did say that in PS1 beta too, so....


Yep, that was the first thing that popped in my mind.

And I thought that Higgs said that we were down to Outfit Outposts that we could build in the future, not an entire base?

[Zhane]

Daddy likes.

[Xaine]

Xaine's flying death castle.

Lock up your women.

[Hmr85]

I could see deploy-able outfit bases becoming a real mess. Could you imagine 50 or 60 of these things scattered out across a continent. Stick with the outfit ships imo. It cuts back on the cluster @#$@ that would be everywhere.

[SuperMorto]

I did not see this posted anywhere..


https://twitter.com/#!/mhigby/status/175695482906099712

Thoughts?

So what if it was posted else where, "its your site Hamma!" :)

And I like the idea "alot" a lot, but pulling it off :eek: is another thing. I can imagine it would be hard to do. But of they can do it, it could be a massive benefit to the outfits.

[Alduron]

I think Outfit bases are a grand idea. It gives you a larger stake in your facility because it's not just gathering resources, it has your name on it. :)

A concern I would have is what happens when the outfit is offline? Can they be captured? Are they instanced (i hope not)? We'll need more info for sure.

[Ragotag]

It would be interesting if Outfit bases could also be captured and/or destroyed.

[Canaris]

Interesting concept, as someone said earlier it was supposed to be in PS1 but they never got around to it.

So would there be a special "frontier" continent for deployment of Outfit bases, first come first served with the necessary resources or just special areas in regular continents where you can place them?

Would they be destructible?

We had these in SWG as faction bases around player cities the only problem was people sneaking on late at night and blowing them up with them claiming to have gotten one over on their enemy, so it was switched to having to be attack at a specific peak time hour.

There's so many great sandbox ideas for having them and unfortunately just as many ways to exploit them.

Needs to have a major brain storming session over them.

[ringring]

No one will touch our outfit base. No one.
You gotta be kidding ....

:cool:

[SgtMAD]

Ht always wanted Wele as an Outfit Base,that was back around the first time SOE said Outfit Bases were a long term goal.

[RedKnights]

Haha, we need an "Old Guard" region for VS East :p

[sylphaen]

While it can sound exciting, I am not sure if it's a good idea to implement. It will really depend on how PS2 gameplay will be/evolve.

Making a good large-scale, fun and balanced FPS is enough of a goal for PS2.

Adding mechanics that will improve the game (rather than stroke egos) is a good thing.

Adding stuff for the sake of adding things people fantasize about is one step towards EQ angel and demon wings on your characters.

BFRs were a cool idea yet many consider it to have been a disasted for PS.

Outfit bases/outposts ? Sounds cool but I do not think it is a good idea. It could very well break empire effort and turn it into empire in-fighting.

Now room for barracks in the empire safe-zones or isolated instanced sanctuaries to chill-out, why not.


EDIT: maybe a system where any outfit can proclaim itself defender of a base in exchange for special benefits while the base is controlled by your empire, why not either. It's as good as saying it's your base.

[UnknownDT]

Mekala all the way.

[Garem]

There are big problems, especially with geography and terraforming to take into account... this would take a lot longer than a much cooler idea- outfit AIRSHIPS.

Making a poll now.

[Ragotag]

Interesting concept... Outfit bases, first come first served with the necessary resources... Would they be destructible?

What if Outfit bases required resources to maintain or else they go into disrepair and eventually nano-disolve? The larger the outfit the more resources that are required to maintain the Outfit base. The resources could then come from the Outfit members (players), sort of like a resource tax. Outfits that do not succeed or can't maintain an active membership would eventually be unable to maintain a deployed base.

[Sirisian]

I'd need to see how they'd be implemented. Planetside's battles will presumably be moving across the map so regions of the map might not be touched for a while. If someone "deployed" an outfit base it sounds like they'd be forced to defend it so they'd probably only be deployed in the middle of battle in specific areas a faction controls.

Not really a fan of the idea overall. Sounds almost as bad as the outfit housing (http://www.planetside-universe.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37201) idea Graywolves made.

However, if they mean like deploying small bunkers or wall emplacements then go for it. That kind of stuff would be cool to see on the battlefield assuming it's destructible. Not sure if anyone has played the game Savage 1 or 2, but it was an FPS/RPG mix where players could build. (Kind of like Sony's new Starhawk game).

Would be nice if it was class based system for RTS type construction where each class has things they can spend outfit resources on (if they are granted that ability by their outfit). For instance, if engineers could build a bunker or k-rail facing a certain direction to use as cover. Then have for instance a sniper perch for an infiltrator to use (small tower with a ladder). Then let medics call in healing pads on the battlefield. (for instance behind an engineers bunker). Lot of ideas there rather than focusing on a large base. That is you could build a base from smaller parts to defend an area.

// edit basically they should focus on things to build a front line to defend or push. Not some static huge cost base which gets deserted as soon as the battle moves on. Ideally anything built could be deconstructed in an instant if it's at full health for part or all of the resources back.

[DviddLeff]

I hope that its as awesome as Hayoo's concept:

http://www.planetside-idealab.com/obconcepts.htm

[Mirror]

No one will touch our outfit base. No one.

You mean Dagda? :groovy:

[Warborn]

As long as outfit bases are separate from actual bases on the continents people routinely fight over it'd be fine. It's always the case that, as in games that Mythic did, having ownership tied to territory which changes hands several times a day in most cases is a wasted effort. There's really very little sense of actual ownership when the base you've laid claim to will invariably be taken from your control, without your outfit being able to do much about it, within a day or two at best.

[Firefly]

Would much rather have an Outfit HART. Considering how there aren't any Sanctuaries.

[Graywolves]

I'm a little indifferent.

[BuzzCutPsycho]

As much as I like the idea of the outfit bases I don't see them fitting into the game.

[UnknownDT]

No reason to discuss this until after the game is out IMO.

Also the only thing I see working is some sort of "sanctuary" like space station you can port to and meet up and HART from it, but that's about it.

[ringring]

TBH, I don't see the point and never have ....

So you have to spend time and resources building these and then they're destructable?

What's to stop them being destroyed when you're not around? Perhaps they're instances for pre-arranged matches? In that case, I'm not in favour. I didn't like the max factory concept that was developed for ps1.

[IronMole]

No one will touch our outfit base. No one.
Is that because you won't have one? ;)

[Asp]

Like anything, if there's no incentive to have/keep/guard any structure you build it becomes somewhat pointless.. As others have said, if they implement it properly it could be great; though it could also be a disaster if little thought goes into it..

As it stands now, we're going to fight as we always have to control the continents, though now we'll have resources to fight over.. I'm guessing the devs figure these are the kinds of things we'd build with those resources..

I can see Outfits building destructible structures with those resources, like bunkers, weapon emplacements, equipment terminals and other defenses around a particular area; say an outfit construction node that gives you a building area radius.. Allows outfits to build defensive or even offensive structures, and cuts down somewhat on random build spam (like planting 400 barricades along a road or bridge end just because you can).. Eventually even larger outfits with a lot of resources being able to build something as large or even semi-permanent as a tower..
The smaller "defensive bunker" style structures could be tough but destructible, and would power down and eventually decay if the construction node was destroyed. Outfit towers could be captured by the enemy, and deconstructed if held over a specified amount of time (giving the owners time to reclaim it, in that scenario), or held by the outfit who captured it..

Something I think would be interesting would be allowing Outfits to form functioning alliances in the game.. The resource pooling of multiple Outfits could allow for the creation of conquerable (non destructible) bases or outposts (smaller than a full scale base?) Then holding a structure like that would be the responsibility of multiple outfits not just one.. Some similar concept could be put forward to allow alliances to control actual existing bases on continents as well, if for nothing more than bragging rights..

I think the key to making something like that work is the incentive behind creating those kinds of structures, and holding on to them.. Current PS1 combat revolves more around hopping from base to base until you control everything.. This kind of player controlled/created base only matters if people will work to defend it.. So what bonuses does your alliance get for owning structures like this, and what consequences are there for losing them?

It's an interesting idea, and I'm curious to see if they actually implement it..

[Maarvy]

It would be interesting if Outfit bases could also be captured and/or destroyed.

whats the point if they cant

[kubacheski]

yea, no sense if it's just a permanant base.

How badass does your outfit have to be to maintain security for the base 24/7 and not let people overrun it. Think about it 3 shifts of decent leadership to protect base and run major offensives to capture more resources.

But what if it also provides some bonuses if you're in an certain range. Say for example, an outfit collects enough resources to create a base. they decide we really like this spot on the map cause it's easy to defend, it's strategically placed to allow access to the various types of bases we need on this continent to get the bonuses we like. Now that last one is a good one, cause if the area of effect is within range of the surrounding bases, then the outfit gets specific bonuses to assist in taking said bases. Maybe outfit gets good bonus and faction gets ok bonus. (nothing huge, but in line with certification bonuses). Now what opposing outfit doesn't want to demolish that base, put up their own and obtain same bonuses for their side.

Don't get me wrong, there's massive balance issues here. Noone wants to save resources for 3-6 months, only to have a day or 2 of fun with a base before it gets destroyed.

Or you even take it a step further as it's a long term goal - devs have mentioned expanding via space travel to other planets. Maybe the only place to create a ship to travel to another planet is via outfit bases. So you've got to have resources for an outfit base, resources for a ship, and you have to defend it for the specified time it takes to build a ship. Maybe it's something like it's own "mission" for other factions when one faction creates a "shipyard" - NC created shipyard, TR and VS go try to destroy. Think of it as a space race. First to the new planet, gets big headstart on resource collection. Plus it'd just be fun to knock down the base that an outfit just dumped a ton of resources on.

My problem with it is that it'll end up with 2-3 outfits per faction so that the resource pool can be huge. Think of how many zombie accounts will be in just to trickle in resources to the outfit. F2P makes this an even worse problem. but thats assuming it's work anything like this.

There's massive issues with implementing something like this.

[Asp]

Definitely there has to be some kind of bonus for an outfit to control (semi) permanent structures in the game, I'm sure there's all kinds of benefit bonuses that could be dreamed up. Different "types" of base structures for varied outfit wide bonuses while on continent.. Possibly once a player made base is controlled by the same owners long enough it's effects (whatever they may be) transfer out to neighboring continents and eventually planet wide.


Don't get me wrong, there's massive balance issues here. Noone wants to save resources for 3-6 months, only to have a day or 2 of fun with a base before it gets destroyed.

It does throw a lot of potential balancing into the mix for a game that probably has a ton already.. That said, I think they idea of having Outfits able to form recognized alliances has the potential to keep the cost to achieve a structure as large as a base high, and have enough people available to defend it (after all multiple outfits will have pooled resources to make it in the first place)..

If the devs keep the requirements high for a massive structure like that it also prevents them from being spammed every 15 feet. Make the smaller cheaper/easier to construct structures destructible, but the larger ones conquerable. IMO for an outfit/alliance to create an actual base it should be a big deal.

[Fenrys]

I like the idea of construction zones where multiple outfits can place structures that the members of those outfits receive benefits/resources from. Multiple outfits could build bases next to eachother for mutual defense, and each base could have a bunker or two built by their neighbors. That way, if one base gets taken, the neighboring outfits have an incentive to help take it back.

[Maarvy]

Definitely there has to be some kind of bonus for an outfit to control (semi) permanent structures in the game, I'm sure there's all kinds of benefit bonuses that could be dreamed up. Different "types" of base structures for varied outfit wide bonuses while on continent.. Possibly once a player made base is controlled by the same owners long enough it's effects (whatever they may be) transfer out to neighboring continents and eventually planet wide.



It does throw a lot of potential balancing into the mix for a game that probably has a ton already.. That said, I think they idea of having Outfits able to form recognized alliances has the potential to keep the cost to achieve a structure as large as a base high, and have enough people available to defend it (after all multiple outfits will have pooled resources to make it in the first place)..

If the devs keep the requirements high for a massive structure like that it also prevents them from being spammed every 15 feet. Make the smaller cheaper/easier to construct structures destructible, but the larger ones conquerable. IMO for an outfit/alliance to create an actual base it should be a big deal.

Having player constructed buildings/towns in a open pvp conquest enviroment brings with it a lot of issues , coming from various conquest mmos I can tell you its opening a whole bag of worms .

Dont get me wrong I love it theres nothing more satisfying than taking a city that a group of players have worked to achive ... the harder they work the more satisfying it is :evil: .

The fact is in a game like planetside having player built bases that cost time to build you either have them open to attack 24/7 which lends itself to all kinds of timezone play and things like that ( especialy if the game is free to play ) .For exaple I can have various guilds i know roll on EU while my guild rolls on NA for the sole purpose of takin player owned bases .

On the other hand you can have restricted time zone windows where the base becomes vunerable , even go as far as let the owners pick a window for it . But then your taking away from the open nature of the game .

I realise a lot of these problem's can and will rear there head from time to time , but its not the same loosing a handfull of game construct bases as is it loosing ones players have invested in so heavily (ofc speculating they will be difficult to build )