Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register |
PSU Social
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
PSU: Seen In Fortune Cookies
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register |
PSU Social
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
[Ignore Me] #121 | |||
Contributor PlanetSide 2
Game Designer |
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #122 | ||
Corporal
|
Because of the title of the thread I looked at it strictly from that direction, "how to keep the the Rich in resources from increasing exponentially while crushing a continent."
Taxing/DRing their resources basically slows their rate of gain since when you take a larger force and attack a small area (in this case an area around a non-capturable), you will inevitably lose a lot of hardware through deaths. Similar to how many times you would die while attempting to take a base or recap a tower. Rushing those doors is brutal! So it's possible that in that event you could remain steady or even lose depending on your "participation". However, it wouldn't be enough by itself. As Malorn as said by looking at it from the opposite view, How do you convince someone to fight in a bad situation? The answer I think lies in the +experience gain. Also from one of the Higby quotes, there was something about fewer people equals a bigger slice of the resource pie. 1000 units split 10 ways vs 10,000 units split 50 ways isn't quite as daunting as "they get 10x more resources", when they would actually be getting only 2x more. I think it will end up being a combination of things. I am discouraged by the fact that you only gain resources from the continent you are fighting on. I really think it should be opened up world wide and some kind of faction contribution system put in. (perhaps it already does?) Simply to eliminate afkers from sucking up resources. Could be something as easy as gathering the mean "score" (in PS1 terms: experience) over whatever time period and dishing out the rewards accordingly. I also foresee a potential problem with the split resources. Outfits are going to jump out of large area fights to start their own (a lot harder to do with only 3 continents) to try to get away from those that will just ride the coattails. Although it seems that coordinated hotdrops behind enemy lines is being discouraged by the adjacency system and since there are no benefits to be denied by doing so. Not liking the "30min hack on something that hasn't been actively defended in 3 hours because the battle line moved". Spec Ops = Heavy coordinated attack now? |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #123 | ||
Private
|
For the underdog/locked out empire on a continent:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #124 | |||
Staff Sergeant
|
Population changes at "end of day" log-offs could be also mitigated by not limiting people to their regional server(s). Just saying. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #125 | ||
.
So....we're building a resource-based game....where once you start "winning" and acquiring more territory...you begin to be penalized....whilist inferior Empire(s) are essentially "rewarded" ? Really ? Maybe, all we need is a "back-up" plan (w/the Devs). Play the game without any drastic changes or Nerfs...and if the "Rich-Get-Richer" model ends up to be a major issue.....then the Devs need a solution "in-pocket"....one they can implement ASAP - pehaps overnight (or almost immediately). WHAT would that be ? DEFENSIVE CAPABILITY....just short of being a Sanctuary. When an Empire gets under 10%/10% (or somewhere 'round there) POP/RESOURCES.....it gains the ability to construct certain DEFENSIVE capabilities....where if facing overwheliming odds it would still have a decent chance of holding the last 5 or 10 sq km of it's meager Global territory. What's to prevent the other two Empires from Double-Teaming an EMpire on the verge of extinction ? Well, ONE....if it's real estate was very very small.....2 Empires just couldn't squeeze all their toons to 3 or 4 backdoors......especially, if the almost-defeated EMpire had bonus DEFENDER (Elimination) capabilities....fox holes, ROF, additional walls & cover...just very very "defensable" positions....perhaps depoloyable EvP ones......turrets that auto-return fire....and are very very hearty. THese EvP turrets turn their kills into resource flow....which over time helps the Empire fighting for survival to begin to slowly regain offensive capability. The Empire in Super-DEFENSE mode gains nothing lasting....just the temporary ability to stave off Total Elimination, exit the near End Game licking its wounds, and perhaps do so with some DEFENSE-accumulated resources to give it a decent chance to fight back towards becoming a Global force/presence. For NC with 70% of the POP (and 70% of the resources)...to finish off the TR with 10%/10%....might take weeks and weeks...with NC dieing 5-15 X faster than they could manage kills......meanwhile...the VS (with 20%/20%)...would be free to backhack and capture NC resources pretty much anywhere they choose. Once NC move 20% to stop the VS....the NC will be doomed to "lose" their 50% VS 10% battle vs the TR....in the sense that TR DEFENSE Capabilities will allow them to push the front forward enough to begin acquiring resources that eventually allow them to begin Offenive manuevers again. Not quite an End Game.....but enough of a "We rubbed-your-face-in-it" for the Dominate Empire to feel victorious. Not a complete End-Game KO....but a moral victory via TKO. . . Last edited by Chaff; 2012-03-25 at 11:24 AM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #126 | |||
Colonel
|
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
[Ignore Me] #128 | |||
Contributor PlanetSide 2
Game Designer |
Resource caps don't matter because you always have things to spend them on. All the resource cap does is make you continually want resources so they remain relevant and important to the individual player. Once you reach that cap you aren't going to stop getting resources. What you will do is spend them on things. Some things in the cash shop can be purchased with resources OR station cash, so that's one sink. You could spend it on implants or better implants than the ones you have. You could spend it on bypassing the cert tree to skill up faster. There will be plenty of sinks. As to it not lasting - why do you think it wouldn't last? If I were the rich empire I'm sitting on all the resources I could need, so why not milk it for all it is worth? Its the perfect situation for player advancement. 1) sitting on resources, 2) defending is easy, 3) opponent is under-resourced. If I want to maximize resource input and maximize my K ![]() While it might not seem like it, the above is actually a good thing. The attackers want to stick around and defend their stuff not just take off to the next continent like they would in PS2. ALl that really remains is to give the resourceless empire tools to be able to effectively fight a well-resourced enemy and (such as big discounts on vehicles and some upgrades). And also entice them to fight with bigger resource bonuses for capping. And also make it so defending isn't so easy. Make the rich empire work to keep its resource gravy train. The important thing is to keep everyone on-continent and keep the battle fun. If it isn't fun people will leave or log-off, and that is no bueno for PS2. There's another issue of spreading out so everyone isn't in one place so the server doesn't get crushed by the lag. That's another reason making it easier to capture the territories behind the front as an empire gets bigger and bigger makes sense. It gives the low-resource empire more targets that are spread out on the continent and forces the high-resource empire to split off and defend them which lowers the concentration of forces around the warpgates. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
[Ignore Me] #129 | ||||||
Contributor PlanetSide 2
Game Designer |
|
||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #130 | ||
Leave it all open to the players. All different scenarios are useful/prudent in different situations. Leave it up to players/empires to decide on their on as the time comes. Variations makes variation. It's a good thing.
Also, you don't learn strategy unless you have to use it. Automating it or simplifying it goes against the point of a strategy game. It literally ruins it in every sense. It removes both the potential and the means to reach it. Natural strategy is naturally balanced to begin with. Leave it up to the people/players action and you will get x. Leave it up to the government/controlled situation you will always get y. Always go with X. The widest variation and versatility are always your friend. Leave it to people to choose to simplify it by their own actions. Never hard code it into the game. Natural strategy. There are always ways to unbalance a resource heavy monster! etc etc. Last edited by Ait'al; 2012-03-26 at 03:59 PM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
[Ignore Me] #131 | |||
Contributor PlanetSide 2
Game Designer |
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #132 | ||
Private
|
First off, I am not a ps1 vet so my ideas are based off of what I have read and seen. Also all times referenced would be realtime, not gametime. My primary inspiration for the idea is the buying of additional territory hexes in Civ 5 where each territory has a "pricetag."
I was thinking of something where there is an immediate resource bonus upon capture of a hex. A "bounty" if you will on territories. Based on what resources the territory produces, this will fluctuate, and increase up to a maximum cap based on how long the territory has been held by a faction. The bounty cap would also decrease based on how many hexes it is from the front, up to 4 or so hexes. This would make rapid expansion very profitable in the short run. A Hex would take 8 hours or so to change status so that a breakthrough results in a high return. However these new acquisitions would not start generating steady resources until a long timer is completed, say 4 days. During this time they do not provide anything, explained by a rebuilding of infrastructure and forming supply lines. This would help to prevent empires from becoming the dominant empire overnight. The off-peak hours would now be very profitable raiding times but would be harder to hold come peak hours. This would also make ganging up on an empire a prolonged affair, and a major effort would have to be made by the 2 empires to avoid having things become business as usual. A hex would also begin to drop in status if it has not seen an attack in 24 hours or so. This serves a dual purpose, stopping empire team ups, and making sure battles are fought across the entire front. It would be the counter measure to empires ganging up against the remaining empire because by the time the newly captured squares become resource generators, the rear uncontested borders would have a large bounty. Because the 2 empires are fighting across half of the territory, their resource incomes would be much smaller than fighting both empires. When the profit of empire cooperation starts to become meagre and its harder to keep up the assault, the plump back borders of the allied empire will start to grow in appeal. I also believe that the encouraged shifting of battlegrounds will make all areas see combat, keeping the variety and make breakthroughs more common, increasing the tension in game play over all as players rush to defend the weak spots. All these times are guesses and estimations but I think that the ratio should remain similar. Also it may be a good idea to insert a defense bonus after a hard fought battle where some resources can be earned by holding territory from enemy and harvesting the wreckage. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #133 | ||
If they are talking about build up of materials. I'm saying leave it up to players to undo it. Just add more mechanics(not ones that restrict actions but give more of them) or if there is enough in the environment they will eventually widdle out of it. It gives people something to do. following natural logic and just letting the game simply exist over trying to incentivise or over control will fix the problem. Just letting people openly deal with it will fix it.... It's a part of strategy to begin with. If they made the game well enough there will be ways to undo it. If they can't then they just need to develop more which should add options not restrict them. I guess you could say if you can give more ways to engage the enemy it will resolve itself.... Not sure how to put it.
I'm saying don't worry about it. Last edited by Ait'al; 2012-03-26 at 10:32 PM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
[Ignore Me] #134 | ||
Second Lieutenant
|
"It gives people something to do. following natural logic and just letting the game simply exist over trying to incentivise or over control will fix the problem. Just letting people openly deal with it will fix it"
Thumbs up for free-markets! ![]() |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|