Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register |
PSU Social
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
PSU: Where no fan has gone before
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register |
PSU Social
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #16 | |||
Sergeant
|
Too many unknowns about territory resources, gonna wait for the reveal. ![]() |
|||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #17 | ||
Major
|
As was said above, i'm fairly certain that when you gain 1x unit of whatever - a set amount will go to you, your outfit and your empire.
Anything else would seem abit strange. The whole new meta-game of resources excites me a lot. Being able to starve X faction of using X tank or weapon but cutting off their resources seems like a much more interesting way to make war, ontop of the territory control. ![]() |
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #18 | ||
Corporal
|
back hacking areas with vital resources will be the new gen hold. I'm looking forward to it personally. The economy in PS2 is needed since SOE is trying to make this huge. Having resources to worry about collecting is just another carrot in front you that you will keep grabbing at. People chasing after carrots don't un-sub.
__________________
RideInMyWhip of the TR Originally from Emerald Major General in KDL |
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #19 | |||
Colonel
|
|
|||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #20 | |||
Major
|
But why would I work with them if I or my outfit needs a different resource right? An sure they can play how they want. Nice to know they will be eating our Empires population cap though an not really helping the push. Unless SOE are miracle workers this time an there are no caps then I really wont care. |
|||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #21 | ||||
Colonel
|
Feeling resentful towards those players when you are completely disregarding their choices is just arrogance. |
||||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #22 | |||
First Sergeant
|
![]()
__________________
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #23 | ||
They'll be taxed by the empire regardless, so as long as they're capping territory there will be some net gain, plus by capping that land they're denying resources to the enemy.
I think that you've raised a point about personal vs empire use resources here. A common complaint in PS1 was about people not supporting tactically sound objectives. If you feel that the zerg is not working towards the right goal, being able to limit the amount of resources you send their way via the empire resource common pool would be like a vote of confidence for their actions. If you feel that supporting the empire's resource pool will pay off tactically, then you can send more resources that way, if its just going to be squandered you can keep a bigger cut for yourself/your outfit. |
|||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #24 | |||
Colonel
|
If people think they should be listened too, they can put up their resources to reward those others for listening too them. Or talk to them and convince them of it. Last edited by CutterJohn; 2011-07-16 at 09:57 AM. |
|||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #25 | ||
As far as I'm concerned, the work you've put in to securing resources should entitle to you decide (to an extent) the use of those resources.
I just had an idea which I believe would mitigate the problem of selfishness vs altruism. Say an empire is running short on a certain resource, Thorium for example. The automatic mission generator puts out a message that says "The Terran Republic needs Thorium, if you accept this mission the next source of Thorium you capture will go directly to the empire pool. Once 1000 units of Thorium have been successfully harvested you will get a 25% bonus to XP for the next two hours while fighting on this continent." Exact mission parameters are up for debate, but this would address shortages by rewarding people who are pitching in. Last edited by Soothsayer; 2011-07-16 at 10:21 AM. Reason: two hour qualifier, element confusion |
|||
![]() |
|
![]() ![]() |
[Ignore Me] #26 | |||
Contributor PlanetSide 2
Game Designer |
Both accrual and consumption are unknown at this time. I have my suspicions that resource accural depends on the scale of the conflict (otherwise you could just sit on a continent you own and rake in territory, or fighting on a low-pop continent and ghost-hacking would be highly profitable). Additionally I think there are 3 separate pools of resources that are generated when you gain resources. 1) Self - split amongst the participants on the continent, we know this much 2) Outfit - probably a proportion of the resources gained by the player..might be a tax-like mechanic that outfits can set. 3) Empire - the empire It could be one resource amount that is divided. Example, Suppose 1000 resourcs are gained by a capture. The empire's cut might be 500 The remainder is split among the 20 participants, with the outfit taking a 20% cut. So result, if I had a 10 man squad among the participants all in the same outfit, then: - Empire gains 500 resources - Each player gains 20 resources - Outfits gain 5 resources * number of players present I suspect "empire" resources are shared amongst the players on the continent, which means that if I pull a tank it grabs those resources from the empire's pool. If the empire can't afford it I have the option to take it from my personal pool. I also suspect that certain upgrades must come from the personal pool and not the empire's pool. Like if I pull an upgraded vanguard the resource cost of the vanguard might come from the empire's pool, but the upgrades might come from my pool. I can see a system like that working out fairly well. If you can dump resources into skill learning that would also be interesting. |
|||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #27 | ||
It has been said that some kind of resource will go towards skilling up... This is why I want to be able to hold back some of my resources.
I'd like a system where I can assess the benefits of holding back resources vs giving them to the empire and act accordingly. I want a fair cut to the people doing the work, I want a fair cut for my own advancement. There's definitely benefit to restricted and public access pools for upgrades to weapons and vehicles vs base model weapons/veh. If they are making the territory/resource system the main driver of content, there needs to be significant linkage between all the systems they have in place. This will be the core of the meta game. |
|||
![]() |
|
![]() ![]() |
[Ignore Me] #28 | ||
Contributor PlanetSide 2
Game Designer |
Without more details I don't see how we can really sort out whether we think there's an issue here. It could be implemented in many different ways, but I think overall its' got a lot of potential.
Spending resources on certs may not be permanent, but if it is then I see the conflict of interest between spending those resources on upgrades vs spending them on certs. Spending in on certs may also be a temporary thing, it might have a cooldown, or some other mechanic limiting its use. Point being it may not be a resource-dump. Certs might help you in the long run, but not getting upgrades may impair your ability to conquer a territory which could mean you are at a net loss because you didn't use your best gear. Lots of ways to look at it but we need more information. |
||
![]() |
|
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #29 | ||
First Sergeant
|
My concern with resources is more to do with the general zerg mentality .
By that I wonder if theres any cap system on factions percentage and resulting balancing? In times past I've seen one side with 40/50% of global population , and if they are controlling the vast majority of the map and therefore resources it perpetuates the game twofold : The side with lowest resources and population struggles to have enough to maintain its own advancement via certs etc . This results in the second : Zergites leave the lower populated side and join the side with most resources to be able to advance their character . This worries me even further since theres talk of maybe a ftp model /cash shop, and having tried a few myself my conclusion is that a zerg we will definately be having . If theres chance of getting extra points towards a pink fluffy bunny suit , they would kill their own granny to aquire it. |
||
![]() |
|
![]() ![]() |
[Ignore Me] #30 | |||
Contributor PlanetSide 2
Game Designer |
This was brought up and they recognized that as a problem but also listed a few ways it might not be a problem.
1) Distributed system means lower pop => each person gets larger portion of resources 2) Static & dynamic resources means if they see an empire is low on pop they could spawn some dynamic resources as a handicap to help compensate. 3) The mission system can help spread out the populations to begin with so it's not all one big zerg blob moving from continent to continent. 4) They could base resource amount on amount of conflict in the area, so that might discourage completely overwhelming the enemy as you won't get much of a fight and as a result, won't get much resources for the capture. They have a lot of tools, and as T-Ray said in my sig...if it doesn't work they'll fix it. This specific problem is actually the context in which T-Ray said that statement. |
|||
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Bookmarks |
Tags |
death and taxes, economy, resources, territory |
|
|