That damn Matrixing idea.

[Headrattle]

Since this forum tends to be a little, uh, more mature then the OF.

What do you guys think of the Matrixing idea that gets tossed around?

I don't think it will work. But then that is my idea.

It gets rid of stratigic elements. If he bases had more Benifits then you would try and take out the ones that aren't well defended and help them out the most. And people would be more likely to defend said bases. Forming a front line and knowing that most of the combat will occure there will cut down on stratigic ideas, and increase the level of complexity for everyone.
"what! I can't take this base! Why? It is undefended!"
"Because it isn't the front lines."
"But if we get rid of it, we can take the base that is being defended more easily"
"tough"

[Airlift]

I have always been against it because it restricts player activity and will cause worse problems with overcrowding. I think the problems that the Base Matrix attempt to address could be better handled by minor tweaks to the reward system.

[Headrattle]

Ahh yes, overcrowding. That is another problem. If there is a front like you might start to see 250 of 250 battles. Is that a good thing?

[PR24]

Originally posted by Airlift
I have always been against it because it restricts player activity and will cause worse problems with overcrowding. I think the problems that the Base Matrix attempt to address could be better handled by minor tweaks to the reward system.

I agree.

A frontline system with towers closer to a base that people can man would be a better idea. this is of course after they add the BEP for defending a base

[Cyanide]

I'd give you an argument if i knew WTF this "matirxing" thing is.

[Feign]

All they need to do is tweak the reward system for defending and holding bases and it will eliminate all of the capture, leave, repeat syndrome going around and create more solid front lines as people will begin working to defend all bases already captured.

[QuickStar]

aye wat is matrixing

[TheSHiFT]

i think the matrix system has some good points, but it does, as you say limit stratigy. But is the cap tower A, cap base A, leave cap tower/base B, meanwhile A gets hacked, go recap A system as it is better, where is the stratgy in that? I wouldnt play for more then a few months if it stays like it does.

Perhaps if you could hack a non-ajar base/tower, but for say 5x time lenght for tower and 2x time for base, that way u incorparat startegy, by opening another front to flank or whatever. And to all who say u would lose the 'trill' of going behide enemy lines.

[Headrattle]

Matrixing is a system that some of the players came up with because people are wondering from base to base capturing them. While another group from the opposing empire goes back and captures the ones you just got.

Instead you are forced to start off at a few Bases, and move to the Bases it is "connected" to. Think of the way warp gates are. Notice that all of the continents are connected. Now pretend the continents are bases, and the lines are connections that allow you to hack the next base it is connected to.

This will create a "front line" and force people to attack and defend. Because you can't just hack what ever base you want to. You have to wait till you own the base that allow you to hack the base that you want.

Example.
You can always hack base A.
Base a is needed to hack Base B and C
Base B is needed to hack Base D, E and F
Base C is needed to hack Base G, H and I

Understand?

[Headrattle]

I think there are only a few things needed to stop wondering base hackers.

Bases with clear benifits. (detection range, detection sensitivity, increased hacking time. All stackable.)
Bases with enemy detection at a certain range depending on what other bases you own. It would detect and be able to send a broadcast of how many Vehicles (or people if certain bases are also owned) to everyone on the Continent.
Increased BEP for defending or stopping a hack.
Interior base turrets, or the ability to plant them inside.

These things will create a stratagy.

"Dude, if we take tha Interlink facility their bases won't be able to detect INF. Then we can take the AMP facility and their bases won't have any range! So, lets attack the dropship facilty with a large group, then drop off and make it only a few guys while the rest attack the Interlink facility. Once we do that we can get the others more easily."

[Venoxile]

Originally posted by Airlift
I have always been against it because it restricts player activity and will cause worse problems with overcrowding. I think the problems that the Base Matrix attempt to address could be better handled by minor tweaks to the reward system.

It would only be overcrowded at first. If you looked at zoolooman's website, it shows that multiple front lines will open up due to multiple strategies that are able to be used to hack bases that aren't connected to the original front line.
One idea is sieging a base, meaning to get past the original front line one way or another and then surrounding a base until it runs out of power, then is able to be hacked, and then a new front opens up for both sides.

[TheRegurgitator]

that would suck because you could just defend the base they need first

[Duffman]

ok first of all website for matrix ideas .

I am a total fan of the matrix idea. It gives a point to taking a base and defending it. The sieging method of gaining bases would be a new strat for gettign past the front lines. you would destroy the spawn facilitys adn wait for the power to go down then take it over creating a new front line.

I also like the Hard Lock idea but i dont think it would work with matrixing since the point of it is to stop phatom hackers form taking a base far from a battle.

[�io]

While the matrix idea is more or less a bad idea they do need to change the system IMHO. Right now all bases are on equal footing so instead of duking it out with 50 TRs a VS squad can simply fly around them, go 2 or 3 bases farther and attack a base defended only by 5 or 6 people. Sure they get less BEPs but very little.

They should either make each base have a specific advantage (lots of information to add to lag issues there though) or increase the BEP difference so that an unmaned base would be say 2500 to 3000 BEPs while a manned base would be anywhere from 4500 to 6000 or something like that.

[Duffman]

well i think if they dont use teh matrix idea which i dont think they will(to far along to add all that coding) then they should definently cut down the number of bases from the 10-15 they have in each continent to liek 4-6 making it so that each base has a real importance and if they do this then make each base mean something since taking down the number of bases will cut down on lag alot already.