Planetside Idea Lab - Page 18

Hayoo · 2004-06-30, 10:11 PM

Hi guys, I wanted to run these concepts by you before settling on anything, because they have to do with Urban Outposts and I need this fleshed out before I release UOs on my site. Basically I've looked at Outfit Base Ownership and Outfit Credits, and worked over the trouble areas into something more widely acceptable.

Because continents are taken over too rapidly, the costs of owning a base are too high versus the losses. The solution then is to design something for Oufits that is meant to be temporary and can be transfered when needed.

Introducing Outfit Headquarters (OHQ).

An Oufit Leader (or a ranking member who has permission to do so) can look at the map and use Outfit Credits to remotely select a base, tower, or urban outpost as an Outfit Headquarters. No need to manually be there at the Main Terminal. This prevents TKing.
Bases cost the most, followed by urban outposts and then towers. There is no maintenance fee.
A facility, tower, or urban outpost can host more than one outfit at a time, up to 10 or more, depending.
By setting up an OHQ, Oufits gain access to Outfit Waypoints, the HQ as a Recall point, and as a Respawn point if you are on that continent.
In addition, each Outfit may purchase one upgrade for that HQ. Because most fights on a continent only take place in a few location (due to the lattice), this allows for multiple Outfits to select the same base and defend it better, with each Outfit selecting an upgrade to add to the others. Purchases have a small enable timer.
Outfits must choose wisely which upgrade they wish to use to defend a base or coordinate with other outfits to arrange the best setup.
As an added bonus, these upgrades are Oufit-Linked Upgrades. That is, if you are in an Alliance with another Oufit on the same continent, your upgrades will be added to their OHQ for free, and vice versa.
OHQ's can be removed from a location remotely or manually from the Main Terminal. A timer then begins before another location can be selected for the Outfit Headquarters.
Outfit decals are showed as banners along the location roof or walls. The first Outfit to have setup an OHQ at the location is listed on the map. They can 'promote' another outfit to this privelage by removing their HQ from the location or bumping them up in the same way you'd promote a squad member to squad leader.
There are also Command and Communications bonuses for setting up an OHQ, more on this later.

Facility Upgrades: One per Oufit (list incomplete):

Turret weapon upgrades
Spawn room-to-surface Teleporter
Generator terminal must be hacked to drop a shield before gen can be destroyed.
Longer IFF locks
Barricades and Laserwire on the base's perimeter
Personal Shield-type shielding on bunkers
Equipment Terminals in bunkers
Oufit Garage: ability to store vehicles (and future Empire Tech vehicles) at a Repair Silo and retrieve them from the Vehicle Terminal at any other latticed base or connected Urban Outpost.
Machine Guns at intervals along base walls
Surveillance Cameras in sensitive areas
Intruder proximity alerts for base.
Power Transfer from surrounding territories (if a Gen is blown, power is automatically transfered from adjacent urban outposts).

Urban Outpost Upgrades: One per Oufit (list incomplete):

Longer IFF locks
Barricades and Laserwire on the urban outposts perimeter.
Generator terminal must be hacked to drop a shield before gen can be destroyed.
Personal Shield-type shielding on nearby bunkers
Oufit Garage: ability to store vehicles (and future Empire Tech vehicles) at a Repair Silo and retrieve them from the Vehicle Terminal at any other latticed base or connected Urban Outpost.
Machine Guns at intervals along outpost perimeter
Surveillance Cameras in sensitive areas
Intruder proximity alerts for urban outpost.
Shielding over Supply Depot garage doors.
Power Transfer from surrounding territories (if a Gen is blown, power is automatically transfered from adjacent urban outpost or facility).

Tower Upgrades: One per Oufit (list incomplete):

Turret weapon upgrades
Spawn room-to-surface Teleporter
Longer IFF locks
Barricades and Laserwire on the tower's perimeter
Personal Shield-type shielding on nearby bunkers
Oufit Garage: ability to store vehicles (and future Empire Tech vehicles) at the Repair Silo and retrieve them from the Vehicle Terminal at any other latticed base or connected Urban Outpost.
Machine Guns at intervals along tower walls and perimeter
Intruder proximity alerts for tower.
Power Transfer from surrounding territories (if a Tower NTU silo is drained, power is automatically transfered from adjacent urban outposts. note: Tower's don't go neutral, only lose power).

For the Oufit benefits of Oufit Waypoints, Vehicle Garage, and Recall points to be more permenant, Outfits will need to purchase and maintain an Outfit Barrack in the Sanctuary...which will be covered in Part II later.

EarlyDawn · 2004-06-30, 10:15 PM

I like the general idea, but I need to see part two (ETA?) and how Outfit Barracks work before I can really say how I feel.

7ruth · 2004-06-30, 11:02 PM

Well I think the whole idea of OBO was to give Outfits something to fight for and deffend what is theirs. Having 10 outfits control 1 base, just takes that away.

I say that outfits can control 1 facility of their choice, but need the required Outfit credits to maintian their domain. The outfit can purchase upgrades at a set price, and each requires weekly maintenence fee.

So the more active and successful the outfit, the more upgrades they can maintain.

On the other end of the spectrum you could have more offense focused Outfit point expenditures, Orbital vehicle drops and such.

My main gripe is the 10 outfits thing each controling one thing for the base...

EarlyDawn · 2004-07-01, 12:12 AM

I agree. Multiple outfits per facility wouldn't be necessary if we're opening up outposts, bases AND towers for ownership..

I'm really interested to see how Outfit Barracks are going to work.

Additionally, how about a security center for each base to coordinate defense?

Hayoo · 2004-07-01, 03:35 AM

Originally Posted by 7ruth

Well I think the whole idea of OBO was to give Outfits something to fight for and deffend what is theirs. Having 10 outfits control 1 base, just takes that away.

It is my deliberate intention to take away the ability of a single outfit owning a continent base.

In my strong opinion, there is no pride or justification in claiming something like that which you have no way of holding 6 hours later. I also don�t want these continent facilities to become like permanent castles to raise a banner over. Imo, these are supposed to be temporary war camps, veraciously defended when threatened and easily discarded when the battle moves forward. OBO was flawed because the costs outweighed the gains in this war of temporary occupation. The problem is that everyone wants the Devs to make it so they can keep their own base longer, but let them take someone else�s quicker. Do you see what I mean? In order to make OBO actually worth the cost and time involved, a base needs to be defendable enough to completely stop an attack. But if all bases in the game can then do that, yours and theirs... I think the problem is clear.

To put it bluntly, to solve a lot of these controversial issues, I have moved actual "ownership" to sanctuary bases (called Outfit Barracks) where it makes more sense (Fort Bragg, USA anyone?), and replaced the continent version with a mobile option (OHQ) that better matches the fluid nature of Planetside gameplay and fosters a greater cooperative mindset among outfits. No more maintenance fees for something you can't really own. No coveting of another outfit�s base. No backstabbing or betrayals to steal that base. No Tking at the main terminal to grab a base first. No sense of wasting money on upgrades when you can't keep your outfit members online to defend them. No sense of OBO mainly being affordable for larger outfits (that privilege would belong to Outfit Barracks now). No unhealthy competition among outfits for better bases. No constant whining to buff base defense because players feel they deserve to keep a base they paid for, no matter what. Etc. etc.

These are just my opinions, but I believe by splitting ownership out it creates better options and satisfaction for a wider audience. I'm sorry if people had their heart set on utterly owning Zal or Faro, but that's just not realistic with how fast conts are taken these days.

Originally Posted by 7ruth

I say that outfits can control 1 facility of their choice, but need the required Outfit credits to maintian their domain. The outfit can purchase upgrades at a set price, and each requires weekly maintenence fee.

This is the exact same system that the Devs proposed and were forced to discard due to all the feedback and questions on lack of longer-term benefits to outfits versus the costs. They complained that you couldn�t keep a base for any appreciable length of time, so why bother? And the Devs were forced to agree and re-plan to split up the OBO benefits into other things.

Originally Posted by 7ruth

On the other end of the spectrum you could have more offense focused Outfit point expenditures, Orbital vehicle drops and such.

Vehicle drops are still purchasable with Outfit Credits, along with uniform accessories, barracks, barracks upgrades, outfit-specific vehicles and equipment, and outfit specialization, to name a few.

Originally Posted by 7ruth

My main gripe is the 10 outfits thing each controling one thing for the base...

Sharing and cooperation are good things to be encouraged in this game, aren't they? I know people would like to �own� bases like Gunuku, to say �It�s our home� or "we defended our base, Gunuku". But seriously, would that really mean anything in 6 months when you�ve had it and lost it off-and-on every 24 hours to the enemy or even your own Empire? In my system, each outfit can own their own permanent base in the sanctuary 24/7. The risk to it? Less success means less outfit points and possibly losing their safe barracks, their true home, in the sanctuary (which, unlike HQ�s do require maintenance fees). In both cases an outfit has something to fight for and defend. One for pride, the other for victory.

By being allowed to choose only one upgrade (two if I'm feeling generous when I post this on Idealab), anoutfit faces the same choice when choosing implants. Which one is best for this situation? So you choose. Another outfit shows up to help, and they choose an upgrade. Calls for aid produce more outfits, who purchase more affordable upgrades, even to smaller outfits (since they don't have to choose a bunch of upgrades just to defend a base properly).

Consider how many different outfits help defend a single base. With OHQs, in no time you'd have a base defended by not just numbers, but upgrades such as Generator protection, Power transfer, turret upgrades, longer IFF locks, Spawnroom to surface teleporters... In the old system a single outfit would have to pay for all of that and at a base that they think might become the frontline later in the day...hopefully when they're still online to defend it. With my system, that's not even an issue. If an oufit redeploys their HQ, only that outfit's upgrade is removed from the location, and the remaining outfits can shift their upgrades around to compensate.

Originally Posted by EarlyDawn

Multiple outfits per facility wouldn't be necessary if we're opening up outposts, bases AND towers for ownership.

It would be necessary because forces are concentrated in a limited number of places on a continent. Forcing one outfit per base would unnecessarily spread out the areas to defend along the front when the opposing side will just Zerg one or two locations anyway. It would also hamper upgrades, especially if one outfit had to buy all their own. By allowing multiple outfits to set up shop at a single base, and then transfer it as the battle moves forward or back, this allows other outfits to actually help for their own benefit.

Originally Posted by EarlyDawn

I'm really interested to see how Outfit Barracks are going to work.

It�s getting late so I can only provide a summary of part II.

Outfit Barracks can be purchased in Sanctuary in clusters called Camps.
Once bought, you must pay maintenance fees.
Unlike OHQ, which are temporary setups on continents, Barracks are persistent and provide constant access to Outfit Waypoints and a Sanc Recall point, among other outfit-specific benefits.
You can upgrade your Barracks with a Vehicle Garage (which lets you store Empire Tech vehicles and stolen tanks, and lets you retrieve them at any �supplied� friendly vehicle pad in the game), Training Rooms, Driving range, various terminals, war memorials, outfit ads, meeting halls, outfit locker, landing pads, repair silos, etc.

Outfits will assemble and equip at their Barracks, head to a continent, setup HQ at a base that needs defending or other base for whatever reason, choose an upgrade, and relocate the HQ when the battle moves on or turns bad.

Originally Posted by EarlyDawn

Additionally, how about a security center for each base to coordinate defense?

Yes, a new room such as this would be where outfits set up their HQ in bases and urban outposts (towers wouldn't have this room). This is where outfit leaders and unit leaders can gather to share a single battle map and view the SOI radar data in real time.

Well, that's how I see how OHQ and Barracks can successfully take the place of OBO and provide more fun and options for a wider range of players and their outfits, regardless of size or playing hours.

FatalLight · 2004-07-01, 09:21 AM

How bout for the bases where you could buy modules? Like 1000 ops for each?

Hayoo · 2004-07-01, 10:44 AM

Originally Posted by FatalLight

How bout for the bases where you could buy modules? Like 1000 ops for each?

I don't understand, Fatal. Do you mean allow buying of Core Combat modules?

EarlyDawn · 2004-07-01, 11:36 AM

I think the original plan was actually to have outfits get uncharged modules ("stasis boxes") from their OBOs, go down, get a module, and come back up.

Just some trivia there.

Hayoo · 2004-07-01, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by EarlyDawn

I think the original plan was actually to have outfits get uncharged modules ("stasis boxes") from their OBOs, go down, get a module, and come back up.

Just some trivia there.

Ah, interesting.

I can see how that could be fun (almost an 'outfit adventure', except...that it would require buying Core Combat for a base to be competitive with others. Probably another reason players protested OBO.

Gotta hit the road. Hopefully I'll have some graphics tonight/tomorrow to better explain OHQ and Barracks.

EarlyDawn · 2004-07-01, 11:59 AM

After consideration, I think my only major issue with the OHQ system is that there's not enough conherance between them, command squads, and emplacement firebases. Needs something meaningful to tie them all together.

FatalLight · 2004-07-01, 01:56 PM

Originally Posted by Hayoo

I don't understand, Fatal. Do you mean allow buying of Core Combat modules?

Yea... unpowered mods would be better tho...

Hayoo · 2004-07-01, 11:17 PM

Originally Posted by EarlyDawn

After consideration, I think my only major issue with the OHQ system is that there's not enough conherance between them, command squads, and emplacement firebases. Needs something meaningful to tie them all together.

You mean to tie outfits and command squads together?

Command Squads provide overall direction in a campaign. They point out the next targets and trouble spots, they give notices for ANTs and which bases need Outfit HQ benefits.

Outfit Headquarters provide a rallying point for outfit squads, allows the acquisition of outfit assets in the field (if they don't have a Barracks back home), and also gives some added benefits to base defense. An army squad alone can't do this, but an Outfit would logically have the resources to do so. OHQ's don't provide the actual unit-leading benefits that Command Squads, command vehicles, command posts, or command rooms provide. Outfit leaders can assemble in command rooms to manage parts of base defense or coordinate outfit assests (using Outfit waypoints, Outfit expeditures like vehicle drops, etc), but the actual combat stuff requires the command options previously mentioned. An outfit would still need a command post to communicate effectively in enemy territory. An outfit would still want to join other outfits in a Task Force to better coordinate their forces across the continent and even the entire globe (OHQ's can't do that).

Emplacements, such as the Command or Communications ones, provide unit leaders (whether they're in a task force, outfit, or not) helpful abilities to lead their troops in enemy territory or in compromised frienly territory.

Artillery Firebases are set up by players as usual. Either at the direction of the Command Squad or on the initiative of each unit. The CS might even organize a dedicated artillery squad with a mix of artillery emplacements and towed guns, place them in a central location, and then call out targets.

Basically, OHQ helps an outfit manage itself. Command Squads helps manage the entire war.

That might not have answered your concern, so feel free to elaborate.

Here's some updated maps I cooked up today. It gets kinda crowded at that zoom level, looks much better when seen close up. Still working on OHQ, Barracks, and Command Squad graphics.

Fig 1: Showing several facilities, towers, and urban outposts with OHQ's.

Fig 2: Showing all Task Force units.

I added in lattice lines, a new territory color scheme and appropriate map labels. It looks crowded now, but will look better if I can get these elements into flash so one can see how they're animated and toggled appropriately. I need to throw in the new grid system too. Too much to do.

[edit: I just noticed I'd accidentally deleted the lattice link between the southern warpgate and the tech plant. Sorry. Pretend there's a link there. LOL.

Hayoo · 2004-07-04, 07:50 PM

Here's a rough screen of a visible progress bar for hacking when you see a friendly use an REK. This would certainly prove useful for battlefield awareness.

Once I'm back at my own computer and screenshot files I'll make a better one, as well as the oft-asked-for color coded REK beams for hacking levels.

EarlyDawn · 2004-07-05, 02:29 AM

A nice common sense addition.

Sentrosi · 2004-07-05, 07:47 AM

Absolutely love the REK idea. So many times I have people come up to the CC and begin a hack when I'm halfway through it.

Also, perhaps a small little bar should show up on all friendly's HUD stating that the base or tower you're getting to is being hacked by a friendly, show the persons name and a progress bar shown. You don't have to make it large at all, just enough for the person's name and progress.