New thoughts about combat flow and strategy - Page 2

Timealude · 2012-10-08, 11:53 AM

You know Higby was talking in a recent stream about adding base benefits back into the game which i think would really help with the motivation to capture certain bases. Which is sorta like a lattice if you think about it and it gives more incentive to cut your enemy's base off.

Gonefshn · 2012-10-08, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by Ohaunlaim

I pretty much agree with everyone here in that I ignore the resource system because it literally has no impact on my game play until my empire gets zero-based. Then it only serves to keep me zero-based.

I feel that ALL territories should provide Auraxium and only Auraxium. People would be forced to choose between spamming their favorite vehicle or saving to unlock nifty stuff.

Paying customers would probably have less mental angst due to having lots of Auraxium at hand, but would be no more powerful because everything "should" be side-grade rated. They may also still be limited by having to first cert stuff with points earned in game.

I wouldn't drop the resource system completely though. Instead I would make each territory grant points towards awarding certain boosts to either aircraft, vehicles, or infantry. These might be hitpoint boosts, timer reductions, top speed boosts, Auraxium cost reductions, etc.

The points from each territory grant nothing until a threshold is reached at which point you gain the entire boost (ie. not gradually). For example to gain a 5% infantry hitpoint boost you would need 25 points from research centers or some such. Less than 25 you loose the boost, more than 25 and you still only have 5% boost to hitpoints.

To make it interesting there would only be 60 (or so) total points available on the map per type meaning two empires maximum could gain any one boost. Suddenly strategy matters on an empire wide basis, and zero basing doesn't give the winning team any overwhelming advantage.

**Auraxium is still a problem when zero-based though. Solve this by making vehicles half price or free when an empire is pushed to their warpgate.

giving actual boosts to performance would be no better than the current system all it does is make the winners more powerful in a different way.

Also having Auraxium be the only resource would be terrible. Same issues as currently. If I want to drive tanks all day and enjoy my favorite playstyle I suffer at a loss of currency to purchase new items.

I seriously haven't had huge issues with the current resource system other than the cap being 750. If you could bank more resources your options would be so much greater.

sylphaen · 2012-10-08, 04:02 PM

Originally Posted by Gonefshn

I seriously haven't had huge issues with the current resource system other than the cap being 750. If you could bank more resources your options would be so much greater.

If they increase the resource quota per player, there will be even less pressure to capture territory with resources (since you have a greater piggy bank). It would be like the invasions of Russia: you would get tired before the russians run out of land.

Low quotas: very frustrating situations can happen to players of sanc-locked empires. Double-whammy for losing.
High quotas: the higher the personal resource quota, the less pressure there is on players to care about recapping those non-Auraxium territories. People will go straight for Auraxium and let others deal with retaking territory giving resources after they log off.

I say quotas but it's the same problem when they play around with resource acquisition rates and equipment resource prices. As a matter of fact, I think quotas were put in place because winners could stock up on too many resources, weren't they ? (if anyone knows or remembers why, please, let me know).

With the resource system, you either feel starved or you don't. It's always the loser who will get starved.

FYI, I consider Auraxium as a money-equivalent, not a resource. Yes, it is currently acquired in-game through the resource system but it could also be modeled differently.

In PS1, the BEP system provided both the weapon unlocks and the character progression unlocks. In PS2, certs provide the character progression, Auraxium provides the weapons. We currently get points through actions (healing, repairing, fragging,...), why not give Auraxium as rewards (e.g. CEP/BEP bonus on facility captures in PS1) ?

When talking about the resource system, Higby often cited the cool "embargo" strategy that would be possible. What I am trying to highlight is that:
- tying strategy to resources or hoping combat will structure itself out of the current resource system is a false hope.
- It's a nightmare to fix and balance.
- PS2 needs better mecanisms than one carrot (Auraxium) and sticks (resource starvation) to direct gameplay over the map.

________

I felt I had to develop on that topic but I do agree with the rest of your post.

Whiteagle · 2012-10-08, 05:15 PM

Originally Posted by sylphaen

Eagle, your best option would to make a post about your idea on the Idea Vault forum. I see one large flaw in undestructable flying mobile spawn points is that there would always be a bias in hotdropping the way the flying fortress is moving (since it provides a spawn advantage) while the defenders have the same incentive to go on offense. You would get a nice merry-go round to cap resources unless the flying fortresses move towards each other.

The good news is that we might get those flying fortresses in the future (ala BF2142 titans).

In any case, I think titans could be a fun addition but it won't solve the problems I'm trying to address. PS2 would still suffer from a irrelevent resource system and no adequate system to structure the game's action.

True enough, which is why I figured there would be multiple ships per Faction, at least two sets flying in opposite directions at the upper and lower portions of the maps, as well as grouping Resource distribution to various parts of the map.
This would provide constant "friction", forcing the Factions to compete not only with those retreating in front of or advancing behind them, but also the possibility of oncoming ones swooping in.

Gameplay would only become MORE dynamic if non-parallel orbits are then introduced, especially if it provides temporary windows for assaulting other Sanctuaries and sabotaging their Resource gathering abilities.

Still, this is a zero sum game and, unlike other smaller counterparts where individuals skill can greatly alter the experience, its size means the Law of Averages ultimately prevails and everything will become "normalized"...

This is why I'm begining to think static Warp Gates are going to be more of a detriment then anything else...

...Still, enough of my rambling.
Really looking at it, I believe this problem stems from Auraxium being treated as just "another Resource" despite the fact it is used for Individual Weapon Unlocks as a Currency instead of the "Raw Material" for Consumables and Vehicles like the rest.

You are right, there is only incentive for the Individual Player to fight for Auraxium Hexes, the rest are just supplementary because they make it easier.

While your "Auraxium as a reward for Individual Effort" idea has merit, I think I've come up with something better...

Instead of Major Facilities just GIVING you a set sum of Auraxium for your Faction owning them, why not have their output determined by the amount of a certain Resource your side is bringing in?

Let's just claim that your Faction needs those places in order to process the "Raw Material" into something more useful; Tech Plants require Alloys to "build stuff", Bio Domes need Polymers to "synthesize proteins", and Amp Stations need Catalyst to... "catalyze things" (Seriously, what do they do at the Amp Stations, the place is set up like it's some sort of refinery but of what I don't know...); thus Auraxium is rewarded Players as a means of "spreading the prosperity around" and as an enticement for Soldiers to fight in the first place.

sylphaen · 2012-10-08, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

While your "Auraxium as a reward for Individual Effort" idea has merit, I think I've come up with something better...

Just to nuance that sentence, I only mentioned Auraxium being used as a reward (since it's meant to be the carrot). While the reward Auraxium reward is indeed given to individuals (for their individual effort), capturing a base is rarely solely the effort of an individual.

The BEP/CEP SOI reward for base captures in PS1 was a decent system to reward everyone's participation in a team effort. FYI, the amount were proportional to the amount of time spent fighting over a base along with the intensity of the fight.

It rewarded fighting and did not promote ghost hacking. The resource system borderline forces you to go ghost hack outlying bases no one cares about (or you get punished by resource starvation).

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

Instead of Major Facilities just GIVING you a set sum of Auraxium for your Faction owning them, why not have their output determined by the amount of a certain Resource your side is bringing in?

It would indeed force the people who own the Auraxium base to go capture surrounding territories but only because of the leverage effect on their auraxium income.

If there were multipliers instead of resources, the effect would be the same.

Winners would just take more care of their surrounding territories but they usually have it anyways and it would not solve the issue of winner takes all.

Trying to fix people's behavior through the resource system or, said differently, seeing the game through the resource system layer is an illusion. It's just a layer over a map empty of structuring mechanics (exception made of Auraxium base capture mechanics). Resources only decide if you play at a disadvantage and make it worse if you do.

Maybe there is a way to make it work but I am human and unable to see it yet. I think other gameplay mechanics could give better results with far less efforts and complexity.
e.g. improved maps, improved bases, better command/alert systems, etc...

Most of those ideas did not come from me yet I think they will be more fruitful than obstinating in fixing the resource system. The core interest of PS2 should not be resource collection or auraxium farming, it should be epic combats. There will always be way to insert auraxium and payment models once epicness is in.

sylphaen · 2012-10-08, 06:02 PM

One thought I just had:
maybe people get their priorities confused because of the two progression trees (Auraxium vs. certs) ?

People mentioned the constant base flipping: you get points popping up when you flip a capture point/outpost. You are rewarded instantly for your action. It's the cert system that pops in your face.

Resources only flow in tick by tick. It feels much less rewarding and important (unless it's Auraxium - and I still do not consider Auraxium a true resouce).

I still do not think rewarding resources for captures would make it a valid system but at least, it would gain some psychological importance.

There was an old post about a topic similar to this when a resource system was mentionned. There were good exchanges about it.

Found the thread: http://www.planetside-universe.com/s...ad.php?t=39921
This was the idea I was reminded of: http://www.planetside-universe.com/s...page=4&post=48

A lot of theorycrafting in that before we even got a chance to touch the game ! PSU at its best !

CrankyTRex · 2012-10-08, 07:05 PM

As a new person to PS, I find that I am usually just frustrated by the resource mechanic even if I liked it in theory.

When I'm playing alone, I want to fly. That generally means pulling the same vehicle over and over again, which means using the same resource and potentially standing around waiting for a timer to finish depending on how committed I am to not having to do something else.

In theory, not allowing people to spam a given vehicle is a good limiting factor that requires some thought ahead of time and forces teamwork etc. Problem is, it doesn't succeed in doing anything but getting half a team to stand around doing nothing for five minutes waiting to play how they want to play.

When I envisioned an MMOFPS, I always figured the limiting factor to spamming stuff would be that you could only launch vehicles from certain facilities and not resources. That way you'd start making "airports" and "factories" incredibly strategic bases to cap/destroy/defend.

I'd like to seem them try tossing the resources and the timers in favor of that form of limitation. Take a power station, and you shut down the power to the nearby bases. Take a radar tower, and you can see all enemy movements in an area. Etc.

It would also help with variety of things to cap. It seems like there are three, maybe four, actual structures with minor differences in appearance and virtually zero differences in game play.

Whiteagle · 2012-10-08, 07:27 PM

Originally Posted by sylphaen

Just to nuance that sentence, I only mentioned Auraxium being used as a reward (since it's meant to be the carrot). While the reward Auraxium reward is indeed given to individuals (for their individual effort), capturing a base is rarely solely the effort of an individual.

The BEP/CEP SOI reward for base captures in PS1 was a decent system to reward everyone's participation in a team effort. FYI, the amount were proportional to the amount of time spent fighting over a base along with the intensity of the fight.

Ah, I see...
I don't know if that would work alongside Experience gain, but perhaps something like the current "Medal" system could work, where after completing a set quota for an action you'd be rewarded with some Auraxium.

Originally Posted by sylphaen

It rewarded fighting and did not promote ghost hacking. The resource system borderline forces you to go ghost hack outlying bases no one cares about (or you get punished by resource starvation).

Eh, I actually like ghost hacking as a Resource Denial and Distraction strategy.
I mean, if it pulls a fraction of the Zerg away from the front, that's a fraction less my Faction has to push against.

Originally Posted by sylphaen

It would indeed force the people who own the Auraxium base to go capture surrounding territories but only because of the leverage effect on their auraxium income.

Exactly!
This would require them to spread their Forces out, thus weakening their overall defensive front.

Originally Posted by sylphaen

If there were multipliers instead of resources, the effect would be the same.

Uhhh... I really don't know about this...
I see the Resources as the "Raw Materials" your War-machine needs to run.
Their acquisition, defense, and denial should be a major component of the Meta-game, just like it would be in a real war.

Originally Posted by sylphaen

Winners would just take more care of their surrounding territories but they usually have it anyways and it would not solve the issue of winner takes all.

This really seems like less of a symptom of the Resource system itself then of the "momentum" able to be built up with static Warp Gates...

Remember, this is suppose to be an engineered "Zero-Sum" game, where in the end no one can hold their advantage long enough for it to truly disadvantage their opponent.
Problems arise, however, when a Faction's push is able to build enough "critical momentum" to force another into their stationary Warp-gate.
It allows them to effectively neutralize one of only two sources of opposition with a minimal amount of force, creating a territory vacuum quickly filled by the remaining factions.

This is further compounded if the locking Faction has even more momentum then the critical amount needed to push to a single Warp-Gate, as it will simply snowball until they've locked BOTH opponents out.

Originally Posted by sylphaen

Trying to fix people's behavior through the resource system or, said differently, seeing the game through the resource system layer is an illusion. It's just a layer over a map empty of structuring mechanics (exception made of Auraxium base capture mechanics). Resources only decide if you play at a disadvantage and make it worse if you do.

Maybe there is a way to make it work but I am human and unable to see it yet. I think other gameplay mechanics could give better results with far less efforts and complexity.
e.g. improved maps, improved bases, better command/alert systems, etc...

Yes, it is sad that the current layout isn't good, but I don't think the Resource mechanics are at fault...
Really, there is a lack of stimulation or agitation in the field.
I think the Devs expect this to happen organically through Faction interaction, but as stated before the Law of Averages just normalizes everything.
That creates a dull trudge to capture the same Outpost and Facilities over and over and OVER again...

Originally Posted by sylphaen

Most of those ideas did not come from me yet I think they will be more fruitful than obstinating in fixing the resource system. The core interest of PS2 should not be resource collection or auraxium farming, it should be epic combats. There will always be way to insert auraxium and payment models once epicness is in.

Well as I said before, I like Resources as part of the Meta-game, but you are probably right; they aren't something that drives most players and they can't be a source of conflict in their current state.

Originally Posted by sylphaen

One thought I just had:
maybe people get their priorities confused because of the two progression trees (Auraxium vs. certs) ?

People mentioned the constant base flipping: you get points popping up when you flip a capture point/outpost. You are rewarded instantly for your action.

Resources only flow in tick by tick. It feels much less rewarding and important.

I still do not think rewarding resources for captures would make it a valid system but at least, it would gain some psychological importance.

Well I think you do get a small bonus in whatever Resource the particular base you're fighting for provides... but that just reinforces the importance of Major Facilities as Auraxium mines...
This is often why Outfits will hold one long after they've been cut off from the Warp-Gate, they are still getting Auraxium for it!

Originally Posted by CrankyTRex

As a new person to PS, I find that I am usually just frustrated by the resource mechanic even if I liked it in theory.

When I'm playing alone, I want to fly. That generally means pulling the same vehicle over and over again, which means using the same resource and potentially standing around waiting for a timer to finish depending on how committed I am to not having to do something else.

In theory, not allowing people to spam a given vehicle is a good limiting factor that requires some thought ahead of time and forces teamwork etc. Problem is, it doesn't succeed in doing anything but getting half a team to stand around doing nothing for five minutes waiting to play how they want to play.

When I envisioned an MMOFPS, I always figured the limiting factor to spamming stuff would be that you could only launch vehicles from certain facilities and not resources. That way you'd start making "airports" and "factories" incredibly strategic bases to cap/destroy/defend.

I'd like to seem them try tossing the resources and the timers in favor of that form of limitation. Take a power station, and you shut down the power to the nearby bases. Take a radar tower, and you can see all enemy movements in an area. Etc.

I think that would be the Lattice system from the Original Planetside, but I'm also rather new so don't quote me on that...

Originally Posted by CrankyTRex

It would also help with variety of things to cap. It seems like there are three, maybe four, actual structures with minor differences in appearance and virtually zero differences in game play.

Yeah, the Cookie-cutter design is certainly getting old...
It doesn't help that all the Esamir Facilities are carbon-copies of their Indar Counterparts, with maybe one or two variations...

I mean, I can get the "Prefab" aesthetic from a Lore perspective (Everything is like that because they are using pre-programmed Nanite Construction templates), but you want me to believe that there aren't any NON-Template structures of human design on Auraxis?!?!

CrankyTRex · 2012-10-08, 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

I think that would be the Lattice system from the Original Planetside, but I'm also rather new so don't quote me on that...

I didn't play it either, so I don't know for certain, but from what I've gathered the Lattice system was more akin to Unreal Tournament's node system wherein you have to take certain ones before you could move forward.

I was thinking a less restrictive thing, more that the different bases have very specific, important functions and are interconnected in some ways. If a tower was an airbase, and only an airbase, it would be different than capping say a tank factory or a barracks. We also have all these power plants/amp stations on this planet...but to what do they actually supply power? If you take one, it has no real bearing on the overall map. If taking one gave you control over the power to other facilities, it would be worth assaulting.

It also makes for more interesting game play decisions. For example, if you don't have the raw force to cap a whole area, you can go for the power plant and just turn it off. Maybe even give Sunderer's another cert to act as a mobile generator that can power some limited defenses if that happens.

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

Yeah, the Cookie-cutter design is certainly getting old...
It doesn't help that all the Esamir Facilities are carbon-copies of their Indar Counterparts, with maybe one or two variations...

I mean, I can get the "Prefab" aesthetic from a Lore perspective (Everything is like that because they are using pre-programmed Nanite Construction templates), but you want me to believe that there aren't any NON-Template structures of human design on Auraxis?!?!

Well, the question is, who did the pre-fabs? I would've expected that facilities that start in a given faction's original area of influence would be built/modified by them, and thus have a different look and feel just as the individual units do. It would certainly help it feel like progress has been made if you go from taking facilities that look like yours to facilities that look like the enemy's.

Whiteagle · 2012-10-08, 09:23 PM

Originally Posted by CrankyTRex

I didn't play it either, so I don't know for certain, but from what I've gathered the Lattice system was more akin to Unreal Tournament's node system wherein you have to take certain ones before you could move forward.

I was thinking a less restrictive thing, more that the different bases have very specific, important functions and are interconnected in some ways. If a tower was an airbase, and only an airbase, it would be different than capping say a tank factory or a barracks. We also have all these power plants/amp stations on this planet...but to what do they actually supply power? If you take one, it has no real bearing on the overall map. If taking one gave you control over the power to other facilities, it would be worth assaulting.

It also makes for more interesting game play decisions. For example, if you don't have the raw force to cap a whole area, you can go for the power plant and just turn it off. Maybe even give Sunderer's another cert to act as a mobile generator that can power some limited defenses if that happens.

Again, the Original Planetside supposedly had that...

Originally Posted by CrankyTRex

Well, the question is, who did the pre-fabs? I would've expected that facilities that start in a given faction's original area of influence would be built/modified by them, and thus have a different look and feel just as the individual units do. It would certainly help it feel like progress has been made if you go from taking facilities that look like yours to facilities that look like the enemy's.

Nanite Systems, but yeah, it is weird...
Then again I'm starting to question permanent footholds on Continents...

Gonefshn · 2012-10-08, 10:00 PM

How do you think it would affect everything if Auraxium was gained through another means and all the Main large facilities gave you a different Resource in a large quantity, making them matter greatly for earning field equipment.

Whiteagle · 2012-10-08, 10:09 PM

Originally Posted by Gonefshn

How do you think it would affect everything if Auraxium was gained through another means and all the Main large facilities gave you a different Resource in a large quantity, making them matter greatly for earning field equipment.

Well a little ways back I tried to suggest that each kind of Major Facility would produce Auraxium depending on how much of a certain Resource your Faction was bringing in, but I don't know how many "other" means there would be for gaining it...

That's sort of the problem, Auraxium is one of the Currencies with which Character Advancement is bought with, the other being Certification Points, which combined provide the only incentive to continue playing the game...

Gonefshn · 2012-10-08, 10:14 PM

I'd love for auraxium to be earned the way certs are currently. And for certs to be changed to a system that lets you earn them specifically for each vehicle, weapon, and class based on using that wep/class/vech.

Ohaunlaim · 2012-10-08, 10:29 PM

Originally Posted by Gonefshn

giving actual boosts to performance would be no better than the current system all it does is make the winners more powerful in a different way.

Also having Auraxium be the only resource would be terrible. Same issues as currently. If I want to drive tanks all day and enjoy my favorite playstyle I suffer at a loss of currency to purchase new items.

I seriously haven't had huge issues with the current resource system other than the cap being 750. If you could bank more resources your options would be so much greater.

Actual boosts as I listed would indeed be better than the current system. As it is now when zero-based you get a mere pittance of resources and eventually your empire simply runs out of resources to pull vehicles. On the other hand the enemy cant spend their resources fast enough. This is because winners get more, more, more while losers get less, less, less.

Minor boosts (ie a 5% hp boost) that are on/off don't have that same innate problem. An empire could have the entire map and would still only have their hp boosted by 5%. Yes, they would also have speed boosted, timers reduced, cost reduced, or whatever but each at a mere 5%. Those are not insurmountable advantages for the loosing side. Challenging, but not impossible.

Auraxium as the only resource is actually a great idea (skip to ** for the reasons why). Currently there is no thought given to resources until, suddenly, they are gone and you can't get your favorite vehicle.

Then you have to leave your current fight to go hack empty territories that provide the resource you need. But most people wont do that. Instead they just rage about the system and how it sucks, and quietly hope someone else captures territories for them.

Of course you have all those other resources that you never use. The ones that are constantly capped at 750 and useless to you and your play style.

** But if EVERY territory provided the resource you needed to play the way you wanted and there was no cap to that resource because you need to save it up to unlock gear, well, then you would end up usually only having to worry about timers. Really the only time you would have to worry about not having the resources for your vehicles would be immediately after making an expensive purchase for a new gun/camo pattern/etc.

But this would then make all the territories equally necessary, dull, and lacking in strategic value. Unless there was some other benefit to them... thus the proposed boost system.

Whiteagle · 2012-10-09, 12:19 AM

Or if Resource gathering was a means of Auraxium production in conjunction with Major Facilities...