Outfit Bases are a Long Term Goal - Page 3

Asp · 2012-03-06, 09:29 AM

Like anything, if there's no incentive to have/keep/guard any structure you build it becomes somewhat pointless.. As others have said, if they implement it properly it could be great; though it could also be a disaster if little thought goes into it..

As it stands now, we're going to fight as we always have to control the continents, though now we'll have resources to fight over.. I'm guessing the devs figure these are the kinds of things we'd build with those resources..

I can see Outfits building destructible structures with those resources, like bunkers, weapon emplacements, equipment terminals and other defenses around a particular area; say an outfit construction node that gives you a building area radius.. Allows outfits to build defensive or even offensive structures, and cuts down somewhat on random build spam (like planting 400 barricades along a road or bridge end just because you can).. Eventually even larger outfits with a lot of resources being able to build something as large or even semi-permanent as a tower..
The smaller "defensive bunker" style structures could be tough but destructible, and would power down and eventually decay if the construction node was destroyed. Outfit towers could be captured by the enemy, and deconstructed if held over a specified amount of time (giving the owners time to reclaim it, in that scenario), or held by the outfit who captured it..

Something I think would be interesting would be allowing Outfits to form functioning alliances in the game.. The resource pooling of multiple Outfits could allow for the creation of conquerable (non destructible) bases or outposts (smaller than a full scale base?) Then holding a structure like that would be the responsibility of multiple outfits not just one.. Some similar concept could be put forward to allow alliances to control actual existing bases on continents as well, if for nothing more than bragging rights..

I think the key to making something like that work is the incentive behind creating those kinds of structures, and holding on to them.. Current PS1 combat revolves more around hopping from base to base until you control everything.. This kind of player controlled/created base only matters if people will work to defend it.. So what bonuses does your alliance get for owning structures like this, and what consequences are there for losing them?

It's an interesting idea, and I'm curious to see if they actually implement it..

Maarvy · 2012-03-06, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by Ragotag

It would be interesting if Outfit bases could also be captured and/or destroyed.

whats the point if they cant

kubacheski · 2012-03-06, 11:27 AM

yea, no sense if it's just a permanant base.

How badass does your outfit have to be to maintain security for the base 24/7 and not let people overrun it. Think about it 3 shifts of decent leadership to protect base and run major offensives to capture more resources.

But what if it also provides some bonuses if you're in an certain range. Say for example, an outfit collects enough resources to create a base. they decide we really like this spot on the map cause it's easy to defend, it's strategically placed to allow access to the various types of bases we need on this continent to get the bonuses we like. Now that last one is a good one, cause if the area of effect is within range of the surrounding bases, then the outfit gets specific bonuses to assist in taking said bases. Maybe outfit gets good bonus and faction gets ok bonus. (nothing huge, but in line with certification bonuses). Now what opposing outfit doesn't want to demolish that base, put up their own and obtain same bonuses for their side.

Don't get me wrong, there's massive balance issues here. Noone wants to save resources for 3-6 months, only to have a day or 2 of fun with a base before it gets destroyed.

Or you even take it a step further as it's a long term goal - devs have mentioned expanding via space travel to other planets. Maybe the only place to create a ship to travel to another planet is via outfit bases. So you've got to have resources for an outfit base, resources for a ship, and you have to defend it for the specified time it takes to build a ship. Maybe it's something like it's own "mission" for other factions when one faction creates a "shipyard" - NC created shipyard, TR and VS go try to destroy. Think of it as a space race. First to the new planet, gets big headstart on resource collection. Plus it'd just be fun to knock down the base that an outfit just dumped a ton of resources on.

My problem with it is that it'll end up with 2-3 outfits per faction so that the resource pool can be huge. Think of how many zombie accounts will be in just to trickle in resources to the outfit. F2P makes this an even worse problem. but thats assuming it's work anything like this.

There's massive issues with implementing something like this.

Asp · 2012-03-06, 12:09 PM

Definitely there has to be some kind of bonus for an outfit to control (semi) permanent structures in the game, I'm sure there's all kinds of benefit bonuses that could be dreamed up. Different "types" of base structures for varied outfit wide bonuses while on continent.. Possibly once a player made base is controlled by the same owners long enough it's effects (whatever they may be) transfer out to neighboring continents and eventually planet wide.

Originally Posted by kubacheski

Don't get me wrong, there's massive balance issues here. Noone wants to save resources for 3-6 months, only to have a day or 2 of fun with a base before it gets destroyed.

It does throw a lot of potential balancing into the mix for a game that probably has a ton already.. That said, I think they idea of having Outfits able to form recognized alliances has the potential to keep the cost to achieve a structure as large as a base high, and have enough people available to defend it (after all multiple outfits will have pooled resources to make it in the first place)..

If the devs keep the requirements high for a massive structure like that it also prevents them from being spammed every 15 feet. Make the smaller cheaper/easier to construct structures destructible, but the larger ones conquerable. IMO for an outfit/alliance to create an actual base it should be a big deal.

Fenrys · 2012-03-06, 02:15 PM

I like the idea of construction zones where multiple outfits can place structures that the members of those outfits receive benefits/resources from. Multiple outfits could build bases next to eachother for mutual defense, and each base could have a bunker or two built by their neighbors. That way, if one base gets taken, the neighboring outfits have an incentive to help take it back.

Maarvy · 2012-03-06, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by Asp

Definitely there has to be some kind of bonus for an outfit to control (semi) permanent structures in the game, I'm sure there's all kinds of benefit bonuses that could be dreamed up. Different "types" of base structures for varied outfit wide bonuses while on continent.. Possibly once a player made base is controlled by the same owners long enough it's effects (whatever they may be) transfer out to neighboring continents and eventually planet wide.

It does throw a lot of potential balancing into the mix for a game that probably has a ton already.. That said, I think they idea of having Outfits able to form recognized alliances has the potential to keep the cost to achieve a structure as large as a base high, and have enough people available to defend it (after all multiple outfits will have pooled resources to make it in the first place)..

If the devs keep the requirements high for a massive structure like that it also prevents them from being spammed every 15 feet. Make the smaller cheaper/easier to construct structures destructible, but the larger ones conquerable. IMO for an outfit/alliance to create an actual base it should be a big deal.

Having player constructed buildings/towns in a open pvp conquest enviroment brings with it a lot of issues , coming from various conquest mmos I can tell you its opening a whole bag of worms .

Dont get me wrong I love it theres nothing more satisfying than taking a city that a group of players have worked to achive ... the harder they work the more satisfying it is

.

The fact is in a game like planetside having player built bases that cost time to build you either have them open to attack 24/7 which lends itself to all kinds of timezone play and things like that ( especialy if the game is free to play ) .For exaple I can have various guilds i know roll on EU while my guild rolls on NA for the sole purpose of takin player owned bases .

On the other hand you can have restricted time zone windows where the base becomes vunerable , even go as far as let the owners pick a window for it . But then your taking away from the open nature of the game .

I realise a lot of these problem's can and will rear there head from time to time , but its not the same loosing a handfull of game construct bases as is it loosing ones players have invested in so heavily (ofc speculating they will be difficult to build )