Idea to make capturing/defending bases more worthwile!

mccannon04 · 2003-05-11, 02:09 PM

hey please check out this post i made in the planetside.com forums i think it could add to the game a lot

http://boards.station.sony.com/ubb/p...ML/008768.html

QuickStar · 2003-05-11, 02:16 PM

ya , agreed

Nekota · 2003-05-11, 02:21 PM

I like it. Would be cool to have bases be like xp farms. Periodically feeding the people who captured them xp. 20xp/min. for each base you participated in capturing.

Ultimatum · 2003-05-11, 02:29 PM

That's a great idea imo. Although as you mentioned, it hasn't been fully though out. I mean imagine this - a dropship center has been captured and is accumulating points. Using the points that the empire currently has, they build some serious defenses making this base A LOT more difficult to capture and they flood loads of their troops into the base to lock it down... making it virtually impossible for one of the other empires to capture the base.

And what happens to the defenses once the base has been capped by another empire? - The logical thing would be for them to remain but doesn't that make it a lot harder for the original empire or the 3rd empire to recapture the base?

My point is that if one empire starts to get ahead, you could easily end up with them dominating and unless the majority of players flooded over to the other two empires, you would end up with permanent domination. I mean they will be gaining more points every second/minute/30 minutes/hour and if they have many bases, all gaining these points, they will start to accumulate rather a lot of points. At which time, they can then capture another base and then flood it with upgrades because they have so many points to spend...

It would require *a lot* of work to prevent all these things happening. A long story short: A great initial idea but it would require a lot of detailed consideration.

Ultimatum.

SuperGlue · 2003-05-11, 02:32 PM

Great idea!
someone should post this in the beta forums

Nekota · 2003-05-11, 02:32 PM

Well the downside of too many base defenses would be an obvious drain on the NTU. Then of course you'd still have the obvious vulnerability of the generator itself. Then you always have Sunderers who can take out some of those defenses from range and squads of tanks of Reavers can cause massive damage. The prospect of forcing the one or more of the sides to band together and start working more as a unit attracts me much more then the mindless base hops we have now.

Ultimatum · 2003-05-11, 02:36 PM

...you do have a point Nekota

Demdadar · 2003-05-11, 02:37 PM

Sweet

I think bases are engough important right now but that would make them more ... And add more excitment to the game .

Tieom · 2003-05-11, 05:02 PM

I like that idea quite a bit, actually!
Would give an RTS-ish feel to it.

The only problem I see is that the defenses would only see temporary use - either the base will be overrun or the lines will move past it, making the upgrades useless.

I suggest that base upgrades recycle themselves back into the empire's point-count after 24 hours of not being hackable.

A bit more complex of a suggestion:
The flow for each empire is divided up between commanders, with each commander getting an amount of 'shares' equal to their CR squared (CR 5 gets 25 shares, CR 4 gets 16 shares, etc.).

Example: An empire earns 1000 points/minute, and has one CR 5, two CR 4s, three CR 3s and ten CR 1s. This is a total of (25+16+16+9+9+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1) 85 shares, so each share is 1.19 points/minute. The CR 5 gets 29.75 points/minute, the CR 4s each get 19.04 points/minute, etc.

There is a very high limit to how many points you can stockpile (say, 1000000) but it is unlikely you would get that many without being a hording CR5.
Upgrades that you buy would deduct from your account and then start costing regular per minute upkeep from YOUR ACCOUNT, not the total empire rate! Running out of points through having too much upkeep would result in the destruction or deactivation of your upgrades.

Example: Small Anti-aircraft Turret - 20000 points, 2 points/minute.

In addition to this, other command abilities (Orbital strikes, scans, etc.) cost points from your personal fund. There would be a much shorter between-uses timer (Say, 1 minute) and the limitation would be how many points you had stockpiled. This means that higher-level commanders can either use his abilites more or save for base upgrades.

Also, upgrades would feature the outfit logo of the peson who placed them, so outfits with quite a few high-ranking commanders could make a base 'theirs' through many upgrades.

Ultimatum · 2003-05-11, 05:36 PM

That sounds like an excellent improvement on the original idea Tieom. However, the PS Dev. team may view this in the same way that they eventually viewed the idea of garages and apartments and money - too complex and requires too much understanding on the part of the gamer.

I mean can you imagine the FAQ for something like that just to prevent the support team getting an e-mail every two seconds saying "How does XYZ work?"

JonnyK · 2003-05-11, 06:12 PM

Yeah, this is a very good idea, i think you should get Points per min. for holding bases. but it would have to only be in effect while you're in the SOI, and i don't think it should increase over time, otherwise someone could just sit in the center of a locked continent for hours racking up XP. it should be like 10 points/min or 1/2 min for like an hour or less, then it would stop giving xp untill an enemy was shot or an enemy shot someone in the SOI. you'd need something like that to control it a little bit.

mccannon04 · 2003-05-11, 06:32 PM

i guess i would still go with my original idea of the rate increases the longer you hold it because it promotes both the defense of the base AND the initiative for the enemy to capture the base and prevent you from gaining more points at a higher rate. On the Map on every base there could be a detail showing : Time Held: 2 hrs etc , that way, offensive squads would know which base would be the most important one to attack. This method helps add to the variety of bases because as of now they are all about the same, none of them stand out or anything.

one more thing is the rate would not increase that dramatically because you wouldnt want it to be better to hold one base for a very long time than it would be to hold 5 bases at once for a short period, but there would still have to be a considerable advantage to holding the base longer.

mccannon04 · 2003-05-11, 09:20 PM

bump

TekDragon · 2003-05-11, 09:45 PM

Id show my support if i wasnt ip banned from the Sony boards.

Salizar · 2003-05-11, 10:20 PM

I may have a solution to the "one empire becoming too powerful" issue. Add in the requirement to spend money or some type of resource to maintain your bases. Low level bases would not be very expensive to maintain, but as you upgrade bases maintenance becomes more expensive.

You could also extend this by limiting the number of high level bases. For example, maybe you only ugrade a single base to level 5 and at this level, the base would become the central base for your empire. Empires with a level 5 base could even receive a unique bonus. You could then be limited to say 2 level 4 bases, 3 level 3 bases and so on.