WIP: Meta game proposal: Outfit Base Capture Expansion - Page 2

MrMak · 2013-10-21, 12:02 PM

THe main problem i see with this entire mechanic is...how is an outfit even uspoose to hold a base for any menaingfull leanght of time? You capture a base you upgrade it then after everyone goes to sleep some little shit ghost caps it in the middle of the nigh. I seriosuly hope you dont think outfits would post people on nightshift guard duty.

If anything the owning outfit shoudl have some limited way to modify the base's defences like upgrading or replacing the phalanx turrets. For instance replace an Anti infantry phlanx with an AV or AA one and vice versa for a resource cost (and having them revert back to their default configuration after a certain time has passed after its destroyed and not repaired). Perhaps add empire specific phalanx variants like a quad autocannon for TR a railguin for NC and plasma cannon for VS.

Maybe allow some limited resource and power managment. like diverting power from one generator to another shield thus disableing thefirst shield but forcing the attackers to overload them both in order to breach the second one (there should be some indication if this is done though). Or overclocking a gate gen to make the shield stop infantry as well as vehicles but causing damage over time and making it much faster to overload (thus requireing someone to maintain and protect it).

Resources could be done with what was manetioned abput the new resource system where resources would be bound to bases rather than players and it would allow the controling outfit to adjust certain parameters. For instance disable MBT spawning but reducing the cost of other vehicles. Or vice verse allow the spawnign of MBTs in bases that cant do that (be it lack of tech plant or simply a "sunderer" spawner) but significantly increase the resource drain. Enable and disable auto reapirs on turrets and generators etc.

GeoGnome · 2013-10-21, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by Blynd

In ps1 it was referwd to as the " gen hold " where a group would get into enemy territory say a tech plant. We would hack a vterm and get an ams then blow the spawns and hack as much as possible beforre blowing the gen then it would be a case of sitting tight to hold our position for as long as possible so a small 6 man team could drag a full platoon or 2 to ge the tech plant back online giving our empire an advantage. You don't need timers or anything like that because the players if they leave then the base deserves to go straight back online. but you do need a way of disabling the spawns so it makes it more interesting to be able to hold a gen room. I've been in gen holds for over 30 minutes of firefights and they are my favourite thing from ps1

I think we Do need something that will push multiple people there, because otherwise, because this is a different generation of gamers, will try and do it by themselves. You can see that from the problems that were had with ghost capping and whatnot. I would also say that the payout on XP should be delayed until after the gen/terminal/whatever explodes... so you don't get people just starting the cap and leaving (Which we saw happening with people prior to the changes to what can be overloaded on the lattice).

Originally Posted by MrMak

THe main problem i see with this entire mechanic is...how is an outfit even uspoose to hled a base for any menaingfull leanght of time? Yo ucapture a base you upgrade it then after everyone goes to sleep some little shit ghost caps it in the middle of the nigh. I seriosuly hope you dont think outfits would post people on nightshift guard duty.

Oh god no I don't think people should do guard duty. As I said elsewhere, I think up these kinds of things from the perspective of a small outfit doing it, because I am part of a small outfit and I look at it as: "How could the people I run with, do this, and not get a headache." My thought on it, is that the outfit can sell the outpost off after a time, fully upgraded. That is one of the points of contention I am trying to hammer out through this thread and others, how will this exchange of bases happen.

The bare bones explanation is that an outpost is taken by one outfit (Or rewarded to one outfit after the base is captured by multiple groups) according to the base capture equation that SOE is working up to determine who was the greatest contributor. The base can then be Sold on open auction if the person who gets the base doesn't want to deal with it (Which is something that will most assuredly be a possibility, as holding the base will mean a lot of managerial work). After the base goes up for auction, it can be purchased (I am thinking by means of pooled resources of the squad, those resources being dolled out equally to the group who captured the base or were rewarded the base). The base when in the hands of whoever wants to manage it, will be in their hands to be upgraded and used until such a time that they want to get rid of it. They then sell the base off (Presumably to profit) or the base goes up for auction after they all log off and the base has been inactive for a period of time.

MrMak · 2013-10-21, 12:30 PM

But why bother with managing a base at all in the long run? Doesnt matter if you can sell it to another outfit. Why owudl they buy it? Even if the the outfit is active for the entire day they woill msot likelyl oose their investment due to ghotst capers or outfits from other time zones (I heard somewhere Asian outfits become activeo n European servers at night?)

The benefits should be imediate. Perhaps give the outfit some form of outift XP or resource increasing with the time they hold on to it but it needs to be somethig that pays off within the span of 2 or 3 hours.

Any form of managment should be limited to defending it or assaulting nearby territory.

Here is an idea. Make it so a capturedfacility could have some sort of destroyable artielry piece built that can be used to bomb nearby territory much like you would use an orbital strike. there would of course be a cooldown (though no where near the kind of restrictions necessary for a full on orbital strike) it owuld require a significant investment of the base's resources to build and would have to be rebuilt form scratch if destroyed.

GeoGnome · 2013-10-21, 01:02 PM

Originally Posted by MrMak

But why bother with managing a base at all in the long run? Doesn't matter if you can sell it to another outfit. Why would they buy it? Even if the the outfit is active for the entire day they will most likely loose their investment due to ghost capers or outfits from other time zones (I heard somewhere Asian outfits become active on European servers at night?)

The benefits should be immediate. Perhaps give the outfit some form of outift XP or resource increasing with the time they hold on to it but it needs to be something that pays off within the span of 2 or 3 hours.

Any form of management should be limited to defending it or assaulting nearby territory.

Here is an idea. Make it so a captured facility could have some sort of destroyable artielry piece built that can be used to bomb nearby territory much like you would use an orbital strike. there would of course be a cooldown (though no where near the kind of restrictions necessary for a full on orbital strike) it would require a significant investment of the base's resources to build and would have to be rebuilt form scratch if destroyed.

The immediate benefits are something I don't disagree with one some bases, but the reason for the long term benefits, are to give the outfit/group/faction a reason to hold onto the base. There is 0 reason for defense as is, because you aren't loosing anything; but it should be that after you have held something for a lot of time, put resources into it, you should care if you loose it, because that was a lot of time, effort, and hopefully benefit that you got from that holding. You are infact Gaining the chance to get more XP, the only driving force for anything in the game at this time. The room for abuse here is insane. If you are getting some long term boost to the entire faction from that base, you might be more invested in the base remaining in your faction.

Furthermore, the bases having some kind of system by which you advance them is about advancement. If you loose a holding in a game, 15 minutes after you gain it, it might suck a little bit, but you bounce back quickly enough because you weren't invested in it. In PS2, if I hold a base for 3 hours, it matters the same to me, as to if I held it for 3 seconds, because there is nothing there that makes that base accumulate value over time (Except for WDS scores, but that is a long term thing, not a short term thing). Now, if your outfit has invested 2 hours in a base, they have really tried to make it defensible and everything... you will care if then it is flipped and all your work goes away. And all your work should pay out in some form... so you get paid out in more resources, Real world tangible benefits for ownership, and possibly even things at your disposal (The artillery piece idea being a GREAT example) that you and your faction will want to use.

So it is a risk vs. reward thing, where if the base is held and improved upon, you Can risk loosing it to an aggressor, or getting disrupted by a commando group... But, at the same time if you prevent all that, you are gifting you and yours something that they can use.

So, to clarify a bit, this is kind of the working list, as to what I am thinking about for bonuses gained from base capture. This is early draft, this is subject to change and objects are not final. Add to this list, or take away from this list as you see fit.

Implant Construction and implantation
Artillery pieces
Radar sophistication for friendly territory (Seeing Everything in your own territory)
EMP Blast
Tank usage beyond Warpgate
ESF and Lib usage beyond warpgate
Deploying of supply crates
Dropping of forces (Less than 24) from space Without beacon (One shot thing where people who are to be dropped group up, and are dropped; not all the time)
Orbital Strike
Bringing in vehicles from other continents
Creating new (Temporary) lattice links to adjacent hexes
Creating Warp points
Pulling resources in from other continents for resource injection
Powering resource nodes to enhance extraction for a limited time
Redirecting resource source for attacking forces
Blocking sensors along a path

Blynd · 2013-10-21, 02:38 PM

Your still over complicating it. Make it simple and SOE may use it make it uber conplicated and they won't.

Eg tech plant you get the empire benefit of being able to pull mbt's from bases and towers but if you held 2 tech plants the empire can pull them from every base and if you hold all 3 on indar you get a 10% reduction in cost of all vehicles.

That is a simple way to make the bases worth keeping hold of and defending the benefit for the empire cause ATM it doesn't matter.

GeoGnome · 2013-10-21, 05:33 PM

Originally Posted by Blynd

Your still over complicating it. Make it simple and SOE may use it make it uber conplicated and they won't.

Eg tech plant you get the empire benefit of being able to pull mbt's from bases and towers but if you held 2 tech plants the empire can pull them from every base and if you hold all 3 on indar you get a 10% reduction in cost of all vehicles.

That is a simple way to make the bases worth keeping hold of and defending the benefit for the empire cause ATM it doesn't matter.

Well yes and no.

What parts are you seeing as overcomplicated, specifically?

The basic idea of what I am doing here, is exactly what you describe: capture a base, get a thing. The complication comes in when you start trying to balance and justify this. If you just straight add bonuses for every base, then you start running into a situation where the system will be just as much of a mess as it is now: your getting all kinds of stuff for taking a base, but there is still no need to really pay attention to any of it. Further, if you don't let people loose these bonuses any way but by more base capture you are Really missing an opportunity to allow for commandos and spec ops kinds of gameplay, which appeals to a lot of people. If you tie outfits and the playerbase into having reason to look after all of these things, if you make the benefits something that can be lost and/or made better over time... then you get people happier, but you have to work harder to balance it out because, what happens if an outfit logs off, or doesn't want to do that?

Blynd · 2013-10-22, 04:24 AM

In ps1 it was simple your over thinking and trying to give too many benefits. The facilities give a set benefit but your adding more to it jushave the benefit at a level that it actually is worth while and ,ales a difference and then the more of that type you get on the cont the benefit is increased so it gives you s reason to hold the biolab that's under attack cause you will loose some bonus to the benefit ie squad spawn and spawn beacon timer reduction or something like that.

Remember when you would get s call to go and resecure some base on another cont because it effected oiy empire even though you were not getting that benefit as you were on another cont but we did it because there was meaning to it. Those late night ghost hacks where countered constantly by those online but ATM no one cares and that's the problem we need to care about ownership

And the commando spec ops benefit denyal of ps1 is what made ps1 for me and I'd love nothing more then to see it in this game a it was one of the biggest dissappintments of this game

MrMak · 2013-10-22, 09:20 AM

So how bout this. Facilities provide banefirs to the ocntient as they do now (with the Amp staion nad biolab ones FINALY geting an overhaul so somebody gives a shit). However capturiong multiple facilities of the same type would cause a stacking effect.

Lets take the Tech Plan for insteance.

1 - Gives oyu MBTs in large bases. - 2 give you lightnings at terminals that normaly only spawn sunderers and Harassers. - 3 give you MBTs at every base and Galaxies at all facilities not just tech plants. Havign all 3 also gives a slight global bonus like a resource cost reduction for ground vehicles much liekthe curent piss poor continental bonuses which also is amplified if you hapen to control the continent.

Simple yet effective and gives you a tangible benefit.

Then on an entirely different layer the outfit capture mechanic that allows the utfit to manage the base in several ways but mostly related to defence and supporting nearby territories like i wrote before. The owning outfit and to a lesser degree other outfits that activaly help in defence recieve some sort of outfit XP or resource that culd be used for stuff......that would be discussed in a diferent thread (possibilities range form cosmetic crap through orbital strikes to the frigin Bastion).

Minor bases would only have the outfit control benefits and would be generaly only meant as obsticles/staging grounds for assaults on facilities and they owudl give lesser outfit XP/Res benefits.

Facilities nd perhaps certain large bases like the crown perhaps would also get a "building pad" which would allow the onng outfit to build a destroyable support structure that has an impact on the surrounding territory. This would include some of the things previously mentioned like my artilery gun (poor man's orbital strike), radars sensor jammers maybe aless lame version of the shield domes there are deffinatly possibilaties. And sicne they owudl be relitavely few in a large area and they would be either passive or reliant on player imput (again the artielry gun) they should nt cause mush of a strain on the server.

The managment itself owuld be donte from a command station in the spawn (importent: Person maning the station should be immune to friendly fire due to jackassery)

Why give this base managment to outfits only you may ask? Non outfit players have rights too! Well lets just say a leader of an outfit is less likely to replace all the turrets in the amp station with Anti infantry ones or call an artilery strike on a friendly tank column than xXxLittleTimmyMLGPr0xXx.

Blynd · 2013-10-22, 10:13 AM

I agree to a point we can't have the mbts and gals from too many places otherwise it makes a cont that's capped by an empire almost an imposibility to gain ground on, as the lines of supply are far too short atm and with this they would be insanly short. So for balance sake I would suggest that the benefit is just that mbts become available and with each tech plant additional to the first gains a reduction in cost but only on the continent. Cont locks provide a global bonus not facilities.

GeoGnome · 2013-10-22, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by Blynd

In ps1 it was simple your over thinking and trying to give too many benefits. The facilities give a set benefit but your adding more to it jushave the benefit at a level that it actually is worth while and ,ales a difference and then the more of that type you get on the cont the benefit is increased so it gives you s reason to hold the biolab that's under attack cause you will loose some bonus to the benefit ie squad spawn and spawn beacon timer reduction or something like that.

Remember when you would get s call to go and resecure some base on another cont because it effected oiy empire even though you were not getting that benefit as you were on another cont but we did it because there was meaning to it. Those late night ghost hacks where countered constantly by those online but ATM no one cares and that's the problem we need to care about ownership

And the commando spec ops benefit denyal of ps1 is what made ps1 for me and I'd love nothing more then to see it in this game a it was one of the biggest dissappintments of this game

And that is why I am trying to add in the ability to disrupt those rewards. Part of the complication comes though in How you let those things be disrupted. I mean, say for example the whole tech plant bonus: How do you reduce that? Do you take out a special generator? Do you take out the C&C station? If we go full C&C station, where do you put it? This is why some of this complication is there.

I am getting what you and Mak are saying though, and I think I can reduce some of the bits and pieces of this, maybe rolling the real benefits back to large bases and facilities, while small bases become the support structures for the large bases.

Originally Posted by MrMak

So how bout this. Facilities provide banefirs to the ocntient as they do now (with the Amp staion nad biolab ones FINALY geting an overhaul so somebody gives a shit). However capturiong multiple facilities of the same type would cause a stacking effect.

Lets take the Tech Plan for insteance.

1 - Gives oyu MBTs in large bases. - 2 give you lightnings at terminals that normaly only spawn sunderers and Harassers. - 3 give you MBTs at every base and Galaxies at all facilities not just tech plants. Havign all 3 also gives a slight global bonus like a resource cost reduction for ground vehicles much liekthe curent piss poor continental bonuses which also is amplified if you hapen to control the continent.

Simple yet effective and gives you a tangible benefit.

Then on an entirely different layer the outfit capture mechanic that allows the utfit to manage the base in several ways but mostly related to defence and supporting nearby territories like i wrote before. The owning outfit and to a lesser degree other outfits that activaly help in defence recieve some sort of outfit XP or resource that culd be used for stuff......that would be discussed in a diferent thread (possibilities range form cosmetic crap through orbital strikes to the frigin Bastion).

Minor bases would only have the outfit control benefits and would be generaly only meant as obsticles/staging grounds for assaults on facilities and they owudl give lesser outfit XP/Res benefits.

Facilities nd perhaps certain large bases like the crown perhaps would also get a "building pad" which would allow the onng outfit to build a destroyable support structure that has an impact on the surrounding territory. This would include some of the things previously mentioned like my artilery gun (poor man's orbital strike), radars sensor jammers maybe aless lame version of the shield domes there are deffinatly possibilaties. And sicne they owudl be relitavely few in a large area and they would be either passive or reliant on player imput (again the artielry gun) they should nt cause mush of a strain on the server.

That isn't a bad idea as to how to implement the bulidings. I would still say that some kind of upgrade path would be nice. Simply put, the whole point here is to make people get really invested in these bases. If you make it so that you have added a large Cannon to a base, and you start upgrading it so that it can either become an EMP cannon or a Atomic Cannon, you are going to be more invested in it's defense.

The currency of all of this, I would say that should be resources. That way you are exchanging things for IG currency. Trading it should just be a matter of holding the currency... so if you have a sundy full of resources that counts to your holdings. Transport it to the person you are buying things from, and you pay them.

Saying that small bases are just staging points really misses an opportunity here I think.

With the list I showed up there, the benefit from the bases are all things you can use. You could simply push some of the lesser benefits into the lesser bases. So: Powering resource nodes, and extending the reducing the resource load the bases require to operate (Power station), those are small base benefits. Constructing of things like an artillery gun that is a large base thing. Pinging friendly territory to find enemies, orbital strikes, and tank generation... that is a facility thing. But maybe facilities Also have 1 slot they can build on as well. So you have small bases that provide smaller but useful bonuses, large bases that provide you with an option to build something that will help, and facilities that provide the largest bonuses.

I like the whole: capturing multiple facilities means better bonuses too.

Originally Posted by MrMak

The managment itself owuld be donte from a command station in the spawn (importent: Person maning the station should be immune to friendly fire due to jackassery)

Why give this base managment to outfits only you may ask? Non outfit players have rights too! Well lets just say a leader of an outfit is less likely to replace all the turrets in the amp station with Anti infantry ones or call an artilery strike on a friendly tank column than xXxLittleTimmyMLGPr0xXx.

Okay, this I disagree on to an extent. If a C&C panel is going to be the key way to interact with the base, there needs to be some way to disrupt the thing (IE, Commando raids) so it can't go in spawn. And non-outfits owning the base, I still kind of think that, if you can make a squad and get the resources you can opt in, but only if you buy it from an outfit.

Also I am sticking with squad leads, because making it outfit leads only, is bad limiting.

kubacheski · 2013-10-22, 11:50 AM

I keep thinking that outfit is the incorrect level on this one. A system such as this, that gives outfit level benefits, would inherently breed competition inside of a faction for bases. You would probably end up having outfits "camp" the bases with good benefits and small outfits would only have a chance at getting outlying poor benefit bases.

The focus of benefits granted upon base control would have to be faction wide (limited to continent). I can envision outfits not assisting in a base capture because they won't end up with the base benefit. That is not going to help the faction and as such doesn't promote faction loyalty.

Now that being said, if they ever get to a system of space travel and sandbox planet(s). I could see the landmass having destructable bases that would have to be rebuilt when overtaken by a faction (think repairing a turret on a base scale) using, say, faction level resources supplemented by outfit level resources (to speed construction). When you overtake a construction point (ruined base), you choose your plan and build the structures you want, but then the opposing faction can come in and capture it (where some structures are left intact in something like a surgical strike) or completely demolish it with a "shock and awe" bombardment and then capture the point and have to rebuild the structures from the ground up (consuming more resources). Something like that would promote resource management and strategy in base capture.

Or even once there are more conts, you have a tiered approach to vehicle deployment. Higher function vehicles or vehicle modules can only be gotten at specific locations. e.g. Gals can only be gotten at a home cont/warpgate or you can get them on specific bases on continents where you have a certain combination of base types under your control. You then have to go to a controlled continent and get your "better" vehicle and drive/fly it to the cont you want to use it on. This would promote the value in having a continental lock as well as breaking an opponents cont lock to force the deployment of important vehicles back further from the front lines.

Oooh the possibilities of future development.....if only SOE will listen.

MrMak · 2013-10-23, 05:36 PM

This oculd be aleviated by implenting an "outfit alliance" system. Essentialy your outfit could hsare managemnt and/or resources form your base with other selected outfits. That way outfits cooperating with eachother owuld gain an extrabbefnefit for doing so. It has to require input form the owner as to with whom to share the benefits for 2 reasons.

1. "Slacker" outfits that have no interest in cooperation and had nothing to dowith the base's capture would get the same benefits as those who took the base or are regualry cooperatign wioth those who did.

2. For managmet. xXxLittleTimmyMLGPr0xXx and his friend XBobby1337360n0sc0peX could make an outfit and do everything i mentioned earlier.

Competition might exist with this system but it would lsimply be more benefitial to make friends.