The Meta Game Discussion - Page 3

DukeTerror · 2012-07-16, 02:04 PM

I would not be surprised that somewhere on the "Expansion Pack Ideas" whiteboard there is a line that says Player Build-able Bases. It seemed like one of the interviews hinted at the possibility on the long-term plans.

I see a new continent with basic bases (core building only) spread across them, but as factions take control, they (mostly outfits) can use resources customize and expand the bases with more walls, towers, turret placements, shielding, backup generators, etc in fairly general fixed locations (basically the same custom hand-crafted base like the ones they are making now, but you have to buy each component with a few alternative options thrown in the mix). Complaining that bases are too open and not enough walls - grab your outfit's checkbook and problem solved! All these new parts have bomb points that the enemy could destroy forcing you to defend your resources spent, or have the pleasure of destroying others.

It seems like down the road once you buy a lot of the weapons and upgrades you want, you may just end up with surplus resources stockpiling. This would be a great metagame resource sink to coordinate how to spend those resources. There's a whole lot of design gaps that'll have to be worked out well before anything like this could happen however, but I can't be the only one whose spun this off the top of my head.

Sardus · 2012-07-16, 03:28 PM

Originally Posted by WildVS

Me as well but look at what CoD and BF do and how much they are wanting to attract that crowd.

Also what is that mechanic Matt was referring to with the dynamic weighting of zones as empire incentives? That sounds fun but if it all just stays on a single continent impact then you still have issue of stalemates but just shifting it around temporarily. I hope that isn't something they are banking on as a long term meta game solution. Long term there simply needs to be more of a globally focused meta game and I believe that will happen. But for the first few several months of this game we are just going to have to grin and bear it.

I like the idea of the "heat map" showing you where your needed and giving more exp and rewards for going there - to help break up the zerg. I just hope that it will be player controlled and not AI controlled. Example in point: getting insta actioned to an empty tower because of one hotspot

And I believe this game needs to offer more than just COD and BF3 if it wants to be on the next level. That means PS2 needs some sort of metagame, and SOE is aware of this. They're doing everything right as far as I'm concerned.

Originally Posted by DukeTerror

I would not be surprised that somewhere on the "Expansion Pack Ideas" whiteboard there is a line that says Player Build-able Bases. It seemed like one of the interviews hinted at the possibility on the long-term plans.

I see a new continent with basic bases (core building only) spread across them, but as factions take control, they (mostly outfits) can use resources customize and expand the bases with more walls, towers, turret placements, shielding, backup generators, etc in fairly general fixed locations (basically the same custom hand-crafted base like the ones they are making now, but you have to buy each component with a few alternative options thrown in the mix). Complaining that bases are too open and not enough walls - grab your outfit's checkbook and problem solved! All these new parts have bomb points that the enemy could destroy forcing you to defend your resources spent, or have the pleasure of destroying others.

It seems like down the road once you buy a lot of the weapons and upgrades you want, you may just end up with surplus resources stockpiling. This would be a great metagame resource sink to coordinate how to spend those resources. There's a whole lot of design gaps that'll have to be worked out well before anything like this could happen however, but I can't be the only one whose spun this off the top of my head.

Base building, resource gathering and things of that nature are great ideas for future expansions. That's basically what Global Agenda tried to do. It's a great idea- just takes a lot of time to do it right.

fvdham · 2012-07-16, 04:03 PM

Originally Posted by WildVS

Long term there simply needs to be more of a globally focused meta game and I believe that will happen. But for the first few several months of this game we are just going to have to grin and bear it.

Indeed.

-----------------------------------------------

"meta game" is used for different things in this tread.

2 links:

grand strategy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_strategy

emergence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence

DviddLeff · 2012-07-16, 04:55 PM

As you guys have said there are multiple changes in PS2 that will enhance the continental strategy - global strategy will have to wait it appears. Higby does keep saying that beta will see a lot changing, we need to make sure that the changes are the right ones.

Xyntech · 2012-07-16, 08:37 PM

I'm just glad that the developers have finally released enough information where there are no longer as many people saying there will absolutely be no metagame or grand strategy of any kind, whatsoever.

I can't wait to get into beta to experience playing the game for myself, but I understand that it's all about testing the game, especially early on. But at the same time, I know that the beta testers will how front row seats to seeing the earliest elements of Planetside 2's metagame start taking shape, and we'll all have an opportunity to directly help lay that foundation. That's the true privilege of being in beta.

**Malorn** · 2012-07-16, 08:50 PM

Originally Posted by Xyntech

I'm just glad that the developers have finally released enough information where there are no longer as many people saying there will absolutely be no metagame or grand strategy of any kind, whatsoever.

There won't be in the context of PS1 and as far as grand strategy...not really, no. But there will be depth at the continental level. It will just be confined to the continental level, as opposed to the continental and the global level of PS1.

When it comes down to this discussion the two things people talk about is

1) Ownership

People like the idea of ownership in a persistent world. The idea that we've captured something and it will be ours for a while. Or the idea that we can decide that something is always ours (home continents, for example), and choose to defend those more than anything else. It allows us to be territorial and adds quite an awesome aspect to the game. People like this. It's fun, and it's unique to an MMOFPS - there is no real ownership in a session shooter. It's something distinct to a true MMOFPS.

2) Sense of Conquest

Conquest is another distinct MMOFPS thing. The idea that not only can we capture something and make it ours, but we can build on successes and move across to new territory. It shows visual progress and provides natural achievement. When you have only the continental level the sense of conquest isn't nearly as profound. When all 3 empires are always present, it greatly diminishes conquest.

That's what I've distilled out of the metagame disappointment threads. People like ownership, and people like conquest. Not too surprising, but it is something that they can only get out of PlanetSide 2 and not having it there is a missed opportunity. I'm sure it will eventually make its way back in, and hopefully with clever guidance and careful planning.

It's still a rather large gap in the game. It's a non-essential gap, but a gap nonetheless. And a huge opportunity and product differentiator. I hope to see a return of a more large scale conquest and ownership aspect to PS2. Continents are OK, and territories within continents are OK, but it's just not the same.

Crator · 2012-07-16, 09:02 PM

Very well said Malorn. Spot on imo, for me!

p0intman · 2012-07-16, 09:47 PM

ONE TERM:

INTERCONTINENTAL TACTICS

Meaning... BEING ABLE TO FULLY CAPTURE CONTS AND HAVE IT MEAN SOMETHING.

Originally Posted by Xyntech

I'm just glad that the developers have finally released enough information where there are no longer as many people saying there will absolutely be no metagame or grand strategy of any kind, whatsoever.

I can't wait to get into beta to experience playing the game for myself, but I understand that it's all about testing the game, especially early on. But at the same time, I know that the beta testers will how front row seats to seeing the earliest elements of Planetside 2's metagame start taking shape, and we'll all have an opportunity to directly help lay that foundation. That's the true privilege of being in beta.

When its continental only, its meaningless and as effective as capturing flags in BF3. Big fucking deal.

PoisonTaco · 2012-07-17, 02:20 AM

I'd like to have the meta-game tie into the release of new content. For example SOE is working on a new Nanite Systems vehicle. Instead of releasing it in a patch they could tie it into a sort of progression for players.

Capturing and holding x type of facility/resources would net your faction resources which they funnel to NS. After your faction has enough Nanite Systems gives the plans of that vehicle to that empire. The other factions would still be able to get it, but there would be a time where one or two of them have it exclusively. Think about it, you're sitting at your base and you see the enemy rolling up with brand new vehicles, ones you don't have yet. Or better yet, when you have it and it's enough to get a good jump on the enemy.

Then how about when they release new continents? It would be cool if they had an event prior to releasing the continent and the winning faction could get there before the other two. Think of it as them arriving first before everyone else. Like an hour or less of a head start. You'd have a rush of players going in to take as much territory as they can, then once it opens up for the other factions you'd have this massive invasion.

SixShooter · 2012-07-17, 03:00 AM

Originally Posted by p0intman

ONE TERM:

INTERCONTINENTAL TACTICS

Meaning... BEING ABLE TO FULLY CAPTURE CONTS AND HAVE IT MEAN SOMETHING.

When its continental only, its meaningless and as effective as capturing flags in BF3. Big fucking deal.

It did not mean anything in PS1 until continental benefits were introduced. Those things were not there at launch and the meta game changed greatly over the years as different elements were introduced as will happen with PS2. Since you've obviously made your mind up that it will suck then I won't try to convince you but I know that the meta game will be there and I'm not worried.

Xyntech · 2012-07-17, 03:25 AM

I agree about the intercontinental strategy being lacking at the moment, but I'm not worried just yet. We've been concerned about even just continental level strategy in the past, but it seems to me that their heading down the right path.

Just like with the rest of the metagame discussion, it's important that they build from the ground up. Making sure that the game has good moment to moment gameplay first, with things like improved gunplay and flight physics, then work on making continental strategy more rich and dynamic. As everything takes shape in beta, I think there will be plenty of room to start adding intercontinental strategy. We've already got a lot of good ideas on these forums for simple changes to the game which would add global strategy, some of which would even work with just the initial 3 continents.

In the end, all gameplay is pretty meaningless. Even if you capture the entire world, it's really just one big flag you took. One big round. I understand that psychology is an important part of game design, and that capturing one big global flag really is 1000x more awesome than capturing lesser flags, but as Malorn says, it's really not an essential gameplay element.

The depth of the game, the metagame, and global strategy are much more important to the longevity of the game than they are to the day to day gameplay. I do believe that the game will suffer the longer it has no global strategy, but I just don't see this stage of development as being the time where it's essential that it get finished ASAP. Hopefully the devs aren't paying global strategy zero attention in their current design ideas, but it really is something that can wait until the other core gameplay elements are solidified. Just look at how many PS1 staples were added shortly after launch.

The metagame is mostly up to the community, and the rest is up to the devs to support what emerges from the community. The best we can do is make sure to elevate global strategies importance at the right times during beta.

Marinealver · 2012-07-17, 09:37 AM

The metagame change between Planetside and Planetside 2 will be as drastic as the metagame change between Starcraft and Starcraft 2. Air units no longer dominate both air and ground battles, wall of towers/cannons are no longer effective defences, more focus on micro of units and less superpowerful units.

Planetside 2, Kills will be faster, travel distances will be greater, terrain will be easier to tranverse, there will be less multi person vehicles, and less spash damage spam. There will be more focus on getting to the battle faster and less on bringing the right tools to the battle.