Should there be anything else to PS other than capping bases?

[Yenni]

I posted an idea in the Idea lab sub-forum (go fig ;)

I was/am trying to think of a way to give players something else to shoot for as far as objectives are concerned.

PS1 was: Attack, Capture Base, Defend, Lose base, repeat.

There really wasn't any way to call a winner...because that's impossible right?

Sort of...Obviously we can't name winners for the entire war. That would be silly.

I want to give players a goals dependent on how they did over a period of time instead of just base to base (or match to match as in other modern shooters)

Example (Fake mmorpg.com update):

Sony just released news on the next campaign to take place in Planetside 2, "the Battle of the Bulge".

This comes right after news of the Terran Republic's victory in the last campaign, "Bad moon rising" in which Auraxis was plunged into darkness by a planetary eclipse, blocking the sun's rays and forcing players to fight in near-complete darkness. Here are the details of the campaign released so far.

-For the next two weeks all of Auraxis will be plagued with low cloud cover and a decrease in the cost of each empires Maint Battle Tank (MBT).

-In addition, the cost of aircraft has increased due to a lower than projected yield of the metals needed to build the sturdy but light metalloids used by all factions.

-And it's snowing ;)

Yeah...something like that.

The responses I got were helpful but didn't exactly support my idea. In fact they said they were content with the tried and true method of
logging on ==> killing ==> Getting loot/XP ==> and logging off without and concern to their long term affect on how the "War" is going.

Is this even a topic/concern/idea yall are interested in?

Speak now, because I have to goto sleep soon.

[SKYeXile]

I suggested awhile ago that they could use Guild wars 2 system, tie it to resources perhaps. pretty much every resource your empire earns would be converted into points, obviously since this is based off land you hold it would be an accurate measure of who hold the most or most valuable land over a period of time.

[Stardouser]

I always want to see special ops behind the lines missions. Destroying something that's deep behind the lines and disrupting the enemy even if you cannot capture whatever you're disrupting, that kind of thing.

[Zulthus]

Of course not, that's the beauty of the game!

[SKYeXile]

I always want to see special ops behind the lines missions. Destroying something that's deep behind the lines and disrupting the enemy even if you cannot capture whatever you're disrupting, that kind of thing.

Galaxys can only be spawned at tech or outposts, if there isnt many other spawn points available, cutting of the enemys supply of galaxys could be a good tactic.

[Rbstr]

I'm quite alright with "winnable" events like this "Battle of the Bulge" thing where the winning empire gets some small reward for being best at the event.

But it was to remain in the context of the unwinnable/unending war for the whole persistent world. Anything which "resets" in a manner that presents a discontinuity in the persistence of the world should not be allowed.
Otherwise, yeah I'd rather play 300v300 BF.

Also: These are terrible poll options.

[Red Beard]

I'd go with the, "I like it the way it is" option, except you set it up that I'd have to agree to play BF3, lol.

[Zhane]

I would like there to be a meta-war, with an eventual victor. Make each war last a month perhaps, the winning faction getting some kind of prestige, and the losers getting some small buff going into the next war.

But, I don't think they'll do that, and there's a lot of people who just want the single never-ending conflict. I think fans of having any sort of metagame are in the minority. But I'd love to be wrong.

[raidyr]

What a loaded poll question.

[The Kush]

This topic sucks you clearly have never played PS1 and you won't understand the fun until you play PS2.

[SKYeXile]

What a loaded poll question.

yea i only just read them... people laugh at me when i talk about biased polls here, this is a very clear example of one.

[Bags]

I do not want any end game.

[The Kush]

yea i only just read them... people laugh at me when i talk about biased polls here, this is a very clear example of one.

True we should close this

[Red Beard]

^^What he said.

Edit: 2 up rather! :lol:

[captainkapautz]

I do not want any end game.

I don't want any game end.

[Toppopia]

The only thing we need to 'end' (I say end not as an ending to the game and the whole thing resets back to we owning nothing) the game is mini events, like the space race or events that run along side the main game (capturing hexes and killing eachother).

[Lonehunter]

Capturing bases isn't why I want to play Planetside 2. My Outfit is why I want to play. Working with people who know how to operate as a team of 3 10man squads, especially when you've gamed with them for years, is the highlight of my expectations.

[Toppopia]

Capturing bases isn't why I want to play Planetside 2. My Outfit is why I want to play. Working with people who know how to operate as a team of 3 10man squads, especially when you've gamed with them for years, is the highlight of my expectations.

This is very true, one of the only reasons i like playing BF3 is to be with friends. And other reason but they arn't important.

[The Kush]

Capturing bases isn't why I want to play Planetside 2. My Outfit is why I want to play. Working with people who know how to operate as a team of 3 10man squads, especially when you've gamed with them for years, is the highlight of my expectations.

Preach it brotha preach it

[Toppopia]

We could have events that happen yearly or something.

I could also imagine something like at Christmas for a few days, randomly occurring attacks on our bases/towers etc from the mystical figure known only as... Santa, he has come to the planet to kill everyone (for a reason i can't think of without it sounding stupid), and has brought his entire elf army to fight us.

I think it would be something along the lines of elves with swords and bows, reindeer that carry 2 elves or have a trailer that carry 10 elves (These reindeer fly so they are the air vehicles.) And as their heavy hitting ground unit is a giant snow man/beast.

This idea comes from 1 awesome episode of American Dad: For whom the sleigh bells toll.

Here is a picture.
http://i057.radikal.ru/1012/a1/d47e98980c7f.jpg

Now change the plane to a base and it would be pretty cool.

[SKYeXile]

Capturing bases isn't why I want to play Planetside 2. My Outfit is why I want to play. Working with people who know how to operate as a team of 3 10man squads, especially when you've gamed with them for years, is the highlight of my expectations.

Yea i cant think of anything more boring than going around capping basing all day, makes me yawn, id much rather a good fight or just simply killing bitches.

[headphase]

I could also imagine something like at Christmas for a few days, randomly occurring attacks on our bases/towers etc from the mystical figure known only as... Santa, he has come to the planet to kill everyone (for a reason i can't think of without it sounding stupid), and has brought his entire elf army to fight us.

I think it would be something along the lines of elves with swords and bows, reindeer that carry 2 elves or have a trailer that carry 10 elves (These reindeer fly so they are the air vehicles.) And as their heavy hitting ground unit is a giant snow man/beast.

Not sure if trolling...

[Toppopia]

Not sure if trolling...

Go watch that episode and you will see what i am talking about. Then its no so crazy :p

[Mezorin]

Forgelight messing with the weather patterns in the game could also add some spice to the game, as imagine a pitch black eclipse night for a few days, or a huge dust storm kicks up on Indar for a week. Or one hex grid in the middle of the continent suddenly spawns a huge number of all resources, or awards victory points for every hour held and you get a huge King of the Hill scrum going for it. Speaking of resources, maybe those could get scrambled every once in a while to keep things fresh too.

As for rewards for special events rather than enemy equipment unlocks, the new unlocks of the month could be doled out a couple days early to the winning empire in an event, as Nanite Systems rewards the winning team in a contest, or a Vanu tech cache is discovered that gives the victor an edge.

Hopefully, the new engine allows these fun goodies on the fly and the developers can screw with us a bit with theme events. AI critters might not be too bad of an idea if done well, yes I know there's a hate on for PVE here but think of the possibilities. Imagine if the real Vanu turned up as god like entities/behemoths and wanted their stuff back and TR and NC temporarily needed to enter an alliance of humanity to deal with a newly empowered VS and their masters. Or what ever wiped out the Vanu originally decided to wake up and make us their next meal? Do the three empires team up against this new threat? Or back stab each other while fighting the new bad guys (spoiler alert: probably the back stabbing :) ). Or hell, even a zombie apocalypse where every player death creates a nanite zombie. Imagine the chaos a typical zerg fest would be if one of them got bit mid way through it, and now both sides of a battle are dealing with zombie hordes.

[Ohaunlaim]

Events are key here. Not only events for events sake, but events that.... grant a winning empire a weeks early access to a new weapon or vehicle.... or grant the winning empire members a chance to vote and chose the location of their empire's foothold on a new continent.... or other such 'rewards' that are ultimately meaningless in the vast scheme of things but still provide a sense of ownership to players.

[Novacane]

The beauty of the game is that everyone is on an equal ground. So gettting early or exclusive access to something that can't be taken away from you through effort is not a good thing.

If your in a good outfit or alliance of outfits you will be making your own events. Operations to hold a continent for a day or blitzkrieg through as many as possible in a weekend or something like that.

What would be cool is if there were SOE appointed community war correspondents that would post news articles on significant organized movements. One per side to report on what each side did for that week.

Having the game or devs generate pre-planned events kinda defeats the purpose of current conventional war. This isn't the 17th century where we all agree to meet up on a field, get in lines and see who has the most luck.

[Gogita]

Sigh, here we go again!

My question for all the people that think that PS2 needs to have end-game is:

What was the reward for you when you won a match in any other FPS you played before?

[SniperSteve]

Not a good poll.

[Furber]

This topic sucks you clearly have never played PS1 and you won't understand the fun until you play PS2.

Exactly what I was thinking

[Stardouser]

Sigh, here we go again!

My question for all the people that think that PS2 needs to have end-game is:

What was the reward for you when you won a match in any other FPS you played before?

Nothing meaningful, because you can't have a meaningful reward with 64 or less players and a non-persistent world. With a persistent world, you can. And this is, except for WW 2 Online, virtually uncharted territory. No one has really tried to have an MMOFPS with a victory condition because there are hardly any MMOFPS to begin with, let alone dozens of MMOFPS companies out there trying to innovate a solution.

Also, don't anyone bother using the word "persistent" as a defense, because you know what I mean. Persistent doesn't mean we have to have to take it robotically literal and never ever have a reset. Although, if the game world were big enough(it isn't right now), they could implement certain victory conditions that are designed to take on average weeks or months to accomplish.

The biggest defense against victory conditions is the 3AM Marauders defense. People who don't work can stay up til 3AM and wipe out your day's gains and if all your empire's players are employed, you can't do anything about it. Now, you might object to that saying "well, other people will log in during the night and keep the fight going fairly", but not so much; because on a U.S. server it's going to get pretty quiet at night, not enough EU players will log in to justify that argument. And vice versa.

So unless someone knows how to resolve the 3AM Marauder problem, the only fair way to have victory conditions is by having 48 hour weekend war events. I'd like to see that idea explored more, too.

[Canaris]

I want them to add fishing....... with grenades!:blowup:

[Baneblade]

This poll seems subjective.

[Gelgoog]

I agree with certain winnable events. Perhaps the devs could create an undiscovered alien fortress, and whichever faction was able to hold onto it for 24 hours straight would get a new decal or skin. Nothing that imbalances the game, but more as a prestige item.

Just imagine all three factions fighting for control of one fortress and how epic those battles would be if there was a time limit for control of it.

[KuCooKaChu]

How about some type of downtime game, or games when you are a little bored of fighting. Like a card game that you could play inside your faction's foothold. Or something of that nature.

[Shlomoshun]

Moving past the poll and the direction of this thread, which is generlly poor, I think the issue here is this:

PS1 was great for dedicated players, because the core mechanic that they loved was outfit cooperative play.
Speaking personally, I'm a casual gamer, I have a family, so my gaming time is not regular, nor is it for long periods of time. I was in on the ground floor of PS1, but burned out pretty quick (Pre-Core Combat) as soon as I realized the only game for me was capping bases and fighting. Once I had tried out most specs, picked my favorites, adn played them for a while, it got old quick. It was great, but it definitely got repetitive.

Clearly, they are making PS2 more accessible to the masses, and I' would think one of the reasons is to try to keep population high enough to support the game. One of the ways they can do that is by making the world dynamic enough to be interesting and new each time a person logs in. For the hardcores who will have their outfit, it's not like it would hurt the game....and for the casuals, it really might make it new and exciting for them in a way that PS1 never was.

Althought I'm not for 'endgame' perse, I do like the idea that things will change in the game AND, you could make it so that the best faction gets to select the change. In line with the OP's example about a dust-storm or a snowstorm, or an endless night. Each month, the faction that 'won' (held the most territory for that month, collected the most resources, whatever the Dev's determine a 'win' to be) would get a couple days to log in and 'vote' on the next months effect.
These could be the snowstorm, rainstorm, duststorm, endless night, endless day, types of effects, or something about resources or even playstyle effects (certain vehicles costs lowered for the month, etc..). The effect would apply to all factions equally, so no faction would gain any advantage, but the one that got to vote would feel a sense of accomplishment that their effort over the last month had allowed them to affect the world in some way...
Thoughts.

[Stardouser]

Accessibility is one of the most misused concepts in gaming. Devs use it to put in skill-gap compensators that nullify to one extent or another the skill or situational awareness ability of players over others. It shouldn't be that way though, accessibility should be directly limited to the game not being difficult to figure out how to play when other players are not involved(ie, learning how to fire the weapons, drive around, etc). Just no to skill gap compensators.

[PlaceboCyanide]

Moving past the poll and the direction of this thread, which is generlly poor, I think the issue here is this:

PS1 was great for dedicated players, because the core mechanic that they loved was outfit cooperative play.
Speaking personally, I'm a casual gamer, I have a family, so my gaming time is not regular, nor is it for long periods of time. I was in on the ground floor of PS1, but burned out pretty quick (Pre-Core Combat) as soon as I realized the only game for me was capping bases and fighting. Once I had tried out most specs, picked my favorites, adn played them for a while, it got old quick. It was great, but it definitely got repetitive.

Clearly, they are making PS2 more accessible to the masses, and I' would think one of the reasons is to try to keep population high enough to support the game. One of the ways they can do that is by making the world dynamic enough to be interesting and new each time a person logs in. For the hardcores who will have their outfit, it's not like it would hurt the game....and for the casuals, it really might make it new and exciting for them in a way that PS1 never was.

Althought I'm not for 'endgame' perse, I do like the idea that things will change in the game AND, you could make it so that the best faction gets to select the change. In line with the OP's example about a dust-storm or a snowstorm, or an endless night. Each month, the faction that 'won' (held the most territory for that month, collected the most resources, whatever the Dev's determine a 'win' to be) would get a couple days to log in and 'vote' on the next months effect.
These could be the snowstorm, rainstorm, duststorm, endless night, endless day, types of effects, or something about resources or even playstyle effects (certain vehicles costs lowered for the month, etc..). The effect would apply to all factions equally, so no faction would gain any advantage, but the one that got to vote would feel a sense of accomplishment that their effort over the last month had allowed them to affect the world in some way...
Thoughts.

:stupid: I would also add that whenever a faction wins, and/or succeeds in a (pseudo)continent lock they could also gain access to select sidegrades or skins which would only be available for purchase after said "win" conditions are met for that faction.

Free to play games make their $$ from customizations and skins. League of Legends has shown this. The demand is there. With the right implementation, using that demand and exclusive purchases would ensure the players always have something tangible to fight for.

ie. lets say in June 2013, whichever empire "wins" or succeeds in holding a continent will unlock an exclusive cash shop item for purchase: Ice Cream Truck Sunderer. Said purchase will not be available for regular purchase until August 2013 (if ever?)

[lolroflroflcake]

I demand a silly, out-of-place, ATV racing mini-game with absurd power ups in addition to normal gameplay. Perhaps have an inter-empire championship and the winners empire gets the continent. Would that change up gameplay enough to keep you occupied?

[Xyntech]

I demand a silly, out-of-place, ATV racing mini-game with absurd power ups in addition to normal gameplay. Perhaps have an inter-empire championship and the winners empire gets the continent. Would that change up gameplay enough to keep you occupied?

Bring back the ANT, bring back ANT races!

[captainkapautz]

Bring back the ANT, bring back ANT races!

ANT Theft Auto.

Steal ANT from enemy base and drive it to yours before the enemy does.
Capture the ANT really.

[SgtMAD]

I always want to see special ops behind the lines missions. Destroying something that's deep behind the lines and disrupting the enemy even if you cannot capture whatever you're disrupting, that kind of thing.

we did that kind of stuff all the time in PS,we would pick out which back base was most important to the enemy and take the tower next that base then blow the gen to draw in the players that wanted to pull tech vehs/interlink/cave benny's and turn that backbase tower into a hell of a fight(farm) so the NC could take bases easier,you could drive the enemy empire CR5's crazy pulling that shit.

that shit was always a blast,whoring towers and taking bases

[Soothsayer]

We could have events that happen yearly or something.

I could also imagine something like at Christmas for a few days, randomly occurring attacks on our bases/towers etc from the mystical figure known only as... Santa, he has come to the planet to kill everyone (for a reason i can't think of without it sounding stupid), and has brought his entire elf army to fight us.

I think it would be something along the lines of elves with swords and bows, reindeer that carry 2 elves or have a trailer that carry 10 elves (These reindeer fly so they are the air vehicles.) And as their heavy hitting ground unit is a giant snow man/beast.

This idea comes from 1 awesome episode of American Dad: For whom the sleigh bells toll.

Here is a picture.
http://i057.radikal.ru/1012/a1/d47e98980c7f.jpg

Now change the plane to a base and it would be pretty cool.


/Humbug

[Warborn]

There is nothing at all to lose by making the game deeper. Some of the people here who want literally PS1 with a new paint job will bawl and whine at the idea of a deeper game, but that's to be expected. Making there more to it than simply capping the same bases over and over again can only help diversify the experience.

[Baneblade]

ANT Theft Auto.

Steal ANT from enemy base and drive it to yours before the enemy does.
Capture the ANT really.

Well, but we all know how this turns out. Some Combat Engineer somewhere leaves the continent and his high_explosive_mine frags the ANT and crashes the server.

[captainkapautz]

Well, but we all know how this turns out. Some Combat Engineer somewhere leaves the continent and his high_explosive_mine frags the ANT and crashes the server.

Oh! I got it!

How about an event where all bases on a continent are neutral and only the 2 bases next to each factions foothold are hackable, you have to hack both to be able to hack the next 2 till you reach the other side of the continent and win.

Let's call that one "Warzone: Dash".

Totally never been done before, I swear!

[Baneblade]

Oh OH! And we can put lines in between them to show you where you have to go! Granted 62% of the mouth breathers will still jump ahead and wonder why they can't hack the control console.

[duck]

I think the OP has a valid point. It would be really cool if SOE would release universal missions for each faction, which would lead all in each of the empires tobe involved and large scale battles can occur.

[Furber]

It saddens me that so many people fail to see the beauty and genius behind the persistence in Planetside. Once they get their hands on the game, I guarantee they'll understand. If the only thing that can bring some people joy is a Victory screen, then they'll probably just go back to CoD BF.

[Toppopia]

It saddens me that so many people fail to see the beauty and genius behind the persistence in Planetside. Once they get their hands on the game, I guarantee they'll understand. If the only thing that can bring some people joy is a Victory screen, then they'll probably just go back to CoD BF.

I doubt many people here are looking for a victory screen, most are looking for side 'objectives' or 'events' that contribute to the game, but not having to fight the whole time. Or something like that.

[Yenni]

Thanks for all the input everyone!

Also, I'm just as glad to hear everyones thoughts on the subject as I am to hear supporters of my orginal Idea.

First, I'd like to apologise for the poll options. It was right after I got off work and the USO was about to close. I'll be less biased in the future.

I'd like to go ahead and try and divulge into the more compelling arguments for/against the idea of a "Campaign" (which will have to be a place holder for a better name)

I suggested awhile ago that they could use Guild wars 2 system, tie it to resources perhaps. pretty much every resource your empire earns would be converted into points, obviously since this is based off land you hold it would be an accurate measure of who hold the most or most valuable land over a period of time.

This was a really great response and, probably without him knowing, explained the basic concept of what a "Campaign" would be.

Simply put, Campaigns would be another way to measure your achievements, by way of identifying with your faction through tangible victories and defeats.

The only thing we need to 'end' (I say end not as an ending to the game and the whole thing resets back to we owning nothing) the game is mini events, like the space race or events that run along side the main game (capturing hexes and killing eachother).

I'm likeing the space race idea. Maybe the frist one to capture and resource X amount of resource Y would get lowered cool downs for orbital strikes for a week (Obviously nothing game breaking, also I'm not sure that OS's have been confirmed)

I think some may have believed I was suggesting "Campaigns" would end up with either wiping an entire faction from a continent, or at the very least resetting it.

I, like many of you, am not a fan of 'resets' because it removes the eternal war aspect from the game. "Campaigns" would only end after a set amount of time or when a certain objective(s) were completed.

Events are key here. Not only events for events sake, but events that grant a winning empire a weeks early access to a new weapon or vehicle...

...'rewards' that are ultimately meaningless in the vast scheme of things but still provide a sense of ownership to players.

^^ This!

The beauty of the game is that everyone is on an equal ground. So gettting early or exclusive access to something that can't be taken away from you through effort is not a good thing.

Good point. As I'd like to see TR be only one's with BFR's for a week...

...On second thought, scratch that. Not worth bringing those damnable things back.


What would be cool is if there were SOE appointed community war correspondents that would post news articles on significant organized movements. One per side to report on what each side did for that week.

And what would they report about? CAMPAIGNS OF COURSE!
Imagine it, "News from the front..."

Thanks for the input everyone! I read everyones comments. I'm sorry I wasn't able to quote/pvt msg everyone. A lot of you seemed to be on the same page as far the general outline of how a "Campaign" would work.

I'm aware there aren't any quoted comments saying anything negative about the Idea. Don't fret! I heard your concerns. I was just unable to find a person to quote who I thought got what I was explaining. I'll be more thorough in the future.

These have been some really great ideas! Keep'em coming! I plan on posting in the Idea lab, a more structured form of how a "Campaign" would come about as soon as my laptop arrives and I have more down time.

Before I end this wall-o-text, I'm afraid I have to single one guy out. The forum was trying to have a discussion and it seems he didn't want to play.

This topic sucks you clearly have never played PS1 and you won't understand the fun until you play PS2.

I have in fact played PS1. I understand his viewpoint. He's trying to make me nostalgic of all the bases I conqured and defended till the last man.
Next time


Deuces!

[SKYeXile]

^ Yea i agree with what you're saying, its pretty hard sometime to see a clear winner in planetside the way the game goes, somebody could lockdown the world one day, but have no land the next, using GW2's system i think would be a good way to determine who that winner was over a prolonged period of time.

[duomaxwl]

Oh OH! And we can put lines in between them to show you where you have to go! Granted 62% of the mouth breathers will still jump ahead and wonder why they can't hack the control console.

:rofl: