How the hex based capturing system may work

DviddLeff · 2011-08-16, 04:59 AM

Had a think about this over the past few days.

The devs have said that the more enemy territory around a region there is the longer it will take to capture, going from around 30 seconds up to 30 minutes.

Now there has to be some kind of equation to calculate how this works, rather than a random time amount, so here is how it could work:

0 enemy hexes adjacent - 1 minute capture time
1 enemy hexes adjacent - 2 minute capture time
2 enemy hexes adjacent - 3 minute capture time
3 enemy hexes adjacent - 4 minute capture time
4 enemy hexes adjacent - 5 minute capture time
5 enemy hexes adjacent - 6 minute capture time
6 enemy hexes adjacent - 7 minute capture time

Now this is pretty quick, but if you increase these times if there is a enemy fortification in them, we can get some more realistic capture times:

Bunker x2 capture time
Outpost x3 capture time
Facility x4 capture time

Now this means that territory can be captured quickly if it is isolated (a surrounded facility would only take 4 minutes) whereas attempting to take a facility behind enemy lines would take a while (28 minutes) similar to draining a facility currently.

It also means that keeping lines of defence solid is an important strategy, as it will give you more time to respond to enemy advances. It also means that any advances that are made should be across multiple adjacent regions to make sure that the enemy does not cut you off or quickly recapture the territory.

**Malorn** · 2011-08-16, 05:31 AM

The numbers he gave lean me towards a non-linear function. Remember they also mentioned influence as a factor, sort of like culture from Civ 5.

(I have a complete list of all the territory-related quotes in this post)

If you ever saw some of the EVE territory maps, it could be something like that where facilities and towers exert a certain amount of influence over nearby hexes and individual hexes themselves can be captured via occupation.

I'm thinking of a domination game type from modern shooters like the BF series where you go near an objective and it slowly captures over time. More people = faster capture. In this case it might be simply presence in a hex triggers capture of a territory using a variety of factors such as nearby structure influence and nearby hexes. The 'influence' bit they talk about might be automatic capture mechanism as if you had players there. So the only way to hold territory is either be physically present or take away the influence generators. Of course not every territory may have those. If they plan on having outfits place towers then that would mean the landscape is rather sparsely populated with towers to leave room for that.

That would give a lot of value for an outfit to place a tower in a certain area to exert control over it (and its resources), not just from the spawn point and possible vehicle capabilities, but also the influence it generates.

They mentioned vehicles might capture certain types of territories without leaving the vehicle, which tells me right there that they have some sort of domination style capture mechanism, though that doesn't mean everything operates that way.

Rate of capture is likely some function of adjacent hexes and nearby structural influence. Capturing a hex itself could also give influence and therefore it makes everything influence-based with different capture mechanisms.

Surge72 · 2011-08-16, 06:04 AM

From all of the information we have, I don't think we'll be capturing each individual hex. They have said that each bunker/facility will control varying numbers of hexes, so capturing different facilities could take different times based on how many hexes that facility controls.

I don't believe the capture system will be automatic like in the Battlefield series. I also hope that is not the case. I imagine to capture any territory, one is going to have to hack a console just like capturing a facility now in PS1.

The comment about never having to leave the vehicle I believe was just in terms of fighting for the territory. That is to say, the area would be very open, and the control console wouldn't be in a large facility where one had to fight their way inside, but rather just fight for control of the surrounding area with vehicles before beginning the hack (on foot).

**Malorn** · 2011-08-16, 06:36 AM

Domination style could still work quite well without a control console. For example, one reason tanks might be suitable to control certain territory is becomes it has a lot of open fields with not a lot of cover. It might have some underground bunkers or something for vertical gameplay but if the capture point is above ground in the middle of an open field there would be very good reason why tanks were the preferred method of capture - they're the best way to do it because infantry would just get cut down.

In all I'd like to see a variety of options - some stuff like random open territory in the middle of nowhere capturable by domination, with some hexes being dominated strongly by nearby structures.

If they do both then that would allow you to say go and occupy a specific hex next to a base that provides a valuable resource. While the base might be right there if you have you are physically dominating it then it makes sense for you to control the resource. Having the base would make it a lot easier for logistical reasons and perhaps the base has a very small capture presence (meaning if you leave the hex after a while the base will reclaim it slowly over time...could be minutes or hours).

Additionally if each hex has its own influence contribution then one way to make a base capture easier might be to take over all or most of the hexes around it, even though you don't have the base hex itself you are still asserting control over the area - why not reward you with its resources? THe base provides its own benefits in terms of a defensible position, respawn, regroup, and vehicle production services. Add in a little territorial influence and that seems like plenty of reason to want to take a base.

If they anchor it solely on bases and towers though then it becomes the same progression as Planetside with people moving from base-to-base and avoiding the good open terrain fights. Matt stressed fighting over every inch of territory, if influence is too strong and too linked to structures them you won't be fighting over every inch or a ridge - you'll be fighting over the tower that controls the ridge as opposed to physically occupying the ridge itself.

Domination mechanics might also be hex-wide, meaning as long as you have any presence at all in an area you are working towards capture. That would give support playstyles more value too, like the engineer mining up an area and setting up defenses, the sniper that's keeping infantry at bay, the AV guy standing watch for tanks, etc. As opposed to only favoring the guys that can get to and protect a terminal.

Presence also makes capture benefits easier to calculate since it woudl be easy to calculate a given player's contribution to the capture of a territory based on how long they were there, enemy presence, etc. You dont' need to get into kills or support xp or anything like that. If you want capture xp/resources, be part of the capture. Simple as that.

There's alot of directions they could go but it seems promising to me, and variety is good.

DviddLeff · 2011-08-16, 08:58 AM

With influence you could have outposts and facilities providing multipliers more than a hex away, say dropping a unit from a outpost or facility each hex you are away.

Agree that a domination style capture system would work well for hexes without bunkers, outposts or facilities in them; making you fight over everything on the map as we want.

I would like to see the hack system return, at least for facilities; outposts could also be hacked, while bunkers perhaps captured like towers currently.

exLupo · 2011-08-17, 01:41 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

If they anchor it solely on bases and towers though then it becomes the same progression as Planetside with people moving from base-to-base and avoiding the good open terrain fights. Matt stressed fighting over every inch of territory, if influence is too strong and too linked to structures them you won't be fighting over every inch or a ridge - you'll be fighting over the tower that controls the ridge as opposed to physically occupying the ridge itself.

This is just my interpretation but the impression I got from the dev panel interview was that hexes will be super granular. Like, 1 hex - 10ft across. Control spreads like a fungus so capturing a remote hex, if you have enough influence, may be possible. Matt discussed controlling the terrain around a hard-cap structure dropping the cap time from [spitball numbers?] 30min to 30sec. Players would essentially go base-tower-base-tower but they'd want to get proper region control first. Ghost hacks would still be possible but you'd be left with a base that would flip almost instantly if they kicked you out, even if you did complete your 30min hack.

It may be somewhat like the current PS1 visibility influence system is but instead of just seeing who is where, it can be used to area control. There's a lot more speculation in my head on this thing but I don't want to go into it just yet.