Continent Locking.

[NewSith]

Are you sure you know what you are voting for?

http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/march-continent-locking.82996/

In order to start laying the foundation for a proper metagame, we've been putting a lot of thought into continent locking. There are a lot of little snags and details still to work out, but the basic idea at the moment looks something like this:

Add the ability to capture a Warpgate.

This is accomplished by taking over all adjacent territory.
You won't be able tor take over an Empire's final Warpgate. This restriction would go away if we ever pursue adding Sanctuaries.

Once a single Empire controls all territory on a continent, the continent enters a "locked" state:

All enemy units are removed from the continent and spawn in at an available Warpgate.
The continent can not be entered/attacked by enemy units for a period of time.




My response:
Vote: DOWN
Priority: Inadequate (needs to go up)


Feedback:
I took a more distinct look into this, and tell you what - I now dislike the idea.


Instead, here's mine:
Why can't you just connect the warpgates between continents and make it a base instead?

Add the ability to capture a Warpgate.

Taking over all adjacent territory removes the shield around the warpgate.
Capture Points activate inside the warpgate.
Empire enters the "Last Stand Defense"
You won't be able tor take over an Empire's final Warpgate. This restriction would go away if we ever pursue adding Sanctuaries.

Once a single Empire controls all territory on a continent, the continent enters a "captured" state:

Every satellite base on any base changes ownership to the victorious empire.
Any enemy hacks currently in progress are reset.
The continent can be entered/attacked by enemy only via a linked wargate

Warpgates have a pair and these are connetcted between continents.

Capturing a warpgate on one continent, flips the warpgate on another one.



Blatantly "locking" a continent is in fact a very VERY bad Idea.


"Locking" a continent as opposed to "winning" a continent adds nothing to the metagame, since you don't need to defend it...

[Phantomdestiny]

actually both are not mutually exclusive because can for example lock the continent for 1 hour and half enough to get you make a defense perimeter around the just captured "twin" warpgate on the linked continent and then remake it capable

[ringring]

You're right newsith.

[Crator]

I agree with the OP. There shouldn't be a timer on the locked continent. What happens when all the conts are locked at the same time? Map resets? How the hell will that work? No thanks....

I agree with cont locking, but not putting a timer on it...

[Ghoest9]

I think you are right Newsith

[Rothnang]

Continent conquest sucks as long as you can just zerg a continent and take it over in an hour.

Owning a continent should be based on a domination system like the base capture, except it shouldn't be a tug of war, but measure cumulative influence that the factions have over the continent until one of them has accumulated enough influence to claim the continent. Doing that should take at least a day though, so it isn't just the efforts of one zerg that can take a continent, but the entire faction has to work on it for a prolonged period of time.

What makes the metagame so meaningless currently is just the fact that I know for a fact that if I log off for even just an hour and I come back nothing I did still impacts the world, the borders have been redrawn already, entire continents have switched hands... Nothing has any lasting impact, and nothing takes so long to do that you really get the sense that it's an effort by a global force of players.

[Palerion]

Very impressive NewSith.

Loving your posts lately xD

[p0intman]

i upvoted it, i agree that a timer is not ideal, but to be completely honest, with how the game CURRENTLY FUNCTIONS, there are few other alternatives, minus a direct lattice to other connected conts. this function gives time for the capturing empire to clean up, regroup and move on to the next cont.

upvote it, for the time being, im sure we can convince higby and co. to later on review the timer and its necessity.

[Rolfski]

I kinda like this "last stand defense at the Warp gate " idea, sounds epic to me. For that to be viable the Warp gates should be made way more defensible though.

[NewSith]

There's one problem with this system, that I just figured out by modelling: It may cause alot of headaches if devs intend to keep 3 warpgates per continent.

4 Conts (http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o287/NewSith/Conts2_zps8d535337.jpg)
5 Conts (http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o287/NewSith/Conts3_zps943c63ed.jpg)
6 conts (http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o287/NewSith/Conts4_zps8199cf50.jpg)
7 Conts (http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o287/NewSith/Conts5_zps93e04e38.jpg)


As you can see there're WAAAAAY to many flaws :(

[p0intman]

it scales badly with fewer conts, but works when there are 9-13 conts, works better with more. at the low end, ill agree with you.

take what you drew up to 12 or 13 conts.

[NewSith]

it scales badly with fewer conts, but works when there are 9-13 conts, works better with more. at the low end, ill agree with you.

take what you drew up to 12 or 13 conts.

I just did and I saw a pattern...


There's an immediate solution to that problem: They simply need to add 4th warpgates onto "homeconts", with one peculiarity - they should be active with 4 conts, and inactive (just another capturable territory) with 5. After that they can twist the warpgate count all they like...

[typhaon]

They need to figure something out...

As much time as I've put into this game - the "go grind XP at the BioLab/wherever"-endgame is getting pretty tiresome.

[p0intman]

I just did and I saw a pattern...


There's an immediate solution to that problem: They simply need to add 4th warpgates onto "homeconts", with one peculiarity - they should be active with 4 conts, and inactive (just another capturable territory) with 5. After that they can twist the warpgate count all they like...
or sancs, but not likely.

[AThreatToYou]

broadcast warpgates

they don't all have to be broadcast. could possibly link their broadcasting to ownership of an interlink.

[thegreekboy]

Agreed 100 percent newsith

[Figment]

There's one problem with this system, that I just figured out by modelling: It may cause alot of headaches if devs intend to keep 3 warpgates per continent.

4 Conts (http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o287/NewSith/Conts2_zps8d535337.jpg)
5 Conts (http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o287/NewSith/Conts3_zps943c63ed.jpg)
6 conts (http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o287/NewSith/Conts4_zps8199cf50.jpg)
7 Conts (http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o287/NewSith/Conts5_zps93e04e38.jpg)


As you can see there're WAAAAAY to many flaws :(

4 conts is possible with two sancs each, with three shared home continents (sancs "link" to one another) and one link to the middle continent.

I've personally explored more the single sanc home continent idea. Note: assuming all have THREE warpgates. It's better if they make continents with four warpgates.

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb180/HanSime/PlanetSide%20Map%20Concepts/Startup_InterContLattices01.jpg
http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb180/HanSime/PlanetSide%20Map%20Concepts/Startup_InterContLattices02.jpg

[GLaDOS]

If I understand the OP correctly, you're saying that the last warpgate an empire holds is it's foothold, no matter which one, right? Basically, there would be no "home" warpgate. I like this idea, at least until we get more continents. It seems a hell of a lot better than enemies being completely locked off the continent for a "period of time."

Once we have 5 or 6 continents, though, we should probably use one of Figment's setups, with each empire having a "home" continent with their foothold. Those warpgates would basically be identical to sanctuaries, except not on a different landmass. That would also help justify the imbalanced warpgate placement, too. The north warpgate on Indar would be one empire's sanc, the south on Esamir another's, and the the south on Amerish the last's.

Sorry if that was a little hard to read. It wasn't very important, and I'm tired.

[Stanis]

So "interlink facility".
Supposing it was literally that - a base that contained the warpgate.

Capital style shield drops at both ends of the link when either continent lock status is lost.
Then, without a shield any empire can use the warpgate.



The current resource model for fighting across continents is useless.
It'll be very hard to push out on a continent where you can grab maybe 3 vehicles before your resource pool is diminished and the enemy has an entire continent lock refilling their resources at 5 minute intervals.

[Boomzor]

I like the general direction this is heading but there is a slight problem with the ownership on one side being controlled by what happens at the other end.

At some point, you run the the risk of two empires controlling one side each at the opposite end of a continental link simultaneously and both would then inherit the other side respectively.

Voila - A loop of conflicting conditions.

I'm toying with the idea of controlling one side would only activate the link for your empire, but you need to establish domination (all adjacent territories) on both ends to get the coloured shield barrier, active vehicle spawners, tubes and all that jazz.

Though you have to make head room for people loading into the continent, so some form of no-fire safe zone has to be implemented in the immediate warp area if you allow two empires in the same warp gate. Which is prone to camping if not done right. No easy beef.