Background Image

Making Defense Feel Impactful/rewarding

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Rasako, Dec 2, 2013.

  1. Be'shan Chadney Subordinate

    IMO bases should be very dynamic and stick to real world defensive strategies. I think the design team should really do their homework on how defensive structures are created and what type of thought patterns go into creating a defensibly position. I think that it should be very rewarding for players to defend positions and continue to monitor areas that could be attacked (like constant garrisons for the hardcore gamer). I also think that attackers should be actively trying to scout defensive structures to estimate a garrisons strength and how the defenses are laid out. I also think that there should be all types of defensive structures from trenches to fortresses. The designers though should definitely take real world ques from past and present wars.
    Zhull likes this.
  2. I would like to understand what you mean by meaningful as well as what you mean by rewarding? Those both sound like something that could have a 1000 different meanings to 1000 different people. Can you bullet point N things you want in measurable terms? Like: I want to feel over powered. Or I want to be the special snowflake in a blizzard. etc.

    How much of what you are asking for is about Ego stroking or Emotional rewards?
  3. Etherion Etherion Subordinate

    But why make it a timer anyways? Nobody like sitting around waiting for a meter to fill. Like I said, make it so the base is captured once you kill the defenders. I mean, if the defenders are dead, who exactly are you attacking? I can understand it taking some time to convert the base, and reprogram systems and such, but an entire army sitting around wouldn't make that process faster or more interesting.
  4. I think maybe they should make special areas that give certain "buffs" to the faction controlling it.
    For example:There's a titan factory in the middle of Insertplanetnamehere and whoever controls that factory gets a bonus to (Just stealin this from PS2 for a moment) Vehicle Requisition and as long as they hold it, the requisition rate will increase, however, if it is taken from the enemy, such as the forces of chaos, then they would lose the buff.
  5. Rasczak Rasczak Subordinate

    The purpose of the timer is to give the defenders time to fall back and regroup at the next base, as well as give defenders time to react if an empty base comes under attack. Otherwise a zerg would just sweep across the map before any defense can be organized, gobbling up territory with no opposition.

    Personally though, I would do away with CPs and instead make capture based on population density within a defined capture zone. The zone would only cover the critical core of the territory, not the outskirts, but would still be fairly large. This means a smaller force would be able to hold out against or rout a larger force, so long as they can hold the core territory and force the enemy out.

    At a major Fortress for example, you'd pretty much have to get inside the walls to start capping. Though a small area around the walls (within their kill zone) might be made cappable, so that if you can get a large enough force and suppress the wall defenses long enough you can take the base through a simulated siege.

    I would also include a buffer where if the populations are very close, the cap doesn't go either way. It just stalls. So if either faction has a 3:2 advantage or more, the cap moves in their direction. If neither does, it stalls. The key to capturing territory becomes actually controlling that territory, getting your own people in and forcing the enemy to leave.

    If multiple factions contest the same zone, a faction would need to outnumber all the others 3:2 individually, not collectively. So if a zone is 33SM/22Ork/22Eldar/22CSM (yes, it only adds up to 99 because fractions), it would move towards SM. However, since they're right on the borderline any one of the losing factions could stall the cap if they manage to jump to 23 and bump the SMs down to 32.
    Bishop520 and luciasar00 like this.
  6. Etherion Etherion Subordinate

    Yes, but so what if the cap goes all the way in some direction or another? You (hopefully) can't spawn to the battle, so why would the defenders care if the bar fills for the attackers? Will they just be bounced out of the base? It matters in PS2 because once the base gets taken, defenders lose their safe zone and spawn point. But without safe zones and spawn points, what difference would it make?
  7. Rasczak Rasczak Subordinate

    The difference is that the next base back is now vulnerable to attack, not to mention that you lose the resources generated by that territory. They don't have to be arbitrarily bounced out, because the way to cap under that system would be to kill them out.

    Remember, besides the resources each territory is like a link in a chain, and hopefully we would have some kind of supply line system similar to lattice, though an interesting twist would be if the War Council could adjust just how those nodes link up. As long as you can keep a base friendly or neutral, the next base back is secure and you buy time to either regroup there or turn the fight around.

    Taking the base when you just barely have enough people to push the cap should be a fairly slow process, but the cap should also get a lot faster if the advantage is overwhelming. This means that people who stay behind and fight even when they're losing can at least buy time.

    Like I said, if the base just insta-flipped the instant someone hit 51%, zergs would be able to just roll across the map in minutes and organized defense would be impossible even with the best fortifications. If you had to hunt defenders down to the last man and then it insta-flipped, one guy hiding in some obscure, hard to reach corner (or glitched into geometry) would bring the game to a screeching halt, but if someone didn't do that zergs would still roll across the map practically ghost-capping.

    Adding a time component buys time (obviously) for people to get organized.
    Bishop520 likes this.
  8. Puddington Puddington Subordinate

    Could have it based off multiple objectives. Completing each will just make it more difficult for enemies to be in their own fortress so will force them out.
    • A warp portal or teleport beacon that must be destroyed to stop reinforcements.
    • Automated guns must be reprogrammed to target people who aren't your faction.
    • Communications array needs to be destroyed otherwise it send out a distress signal after a certain amount of time or a condition is met.
    • Also maybe have a few NPC guards as well as a tougher base commander or tech magos that needs to be put down (that's assuming they implement NPC defenders).
    • And of course killing the enemy players definately helps you achieve those other goals. It could also damage enemy morale so after 75% of the PC defenders have been killed (basing the initial number off the amount of defenders that were in the fortress when the attack began), their attacks don't hit as hard but they can run slightly faster (I swear I'm not running away commissar sir, I'm advancing in the other direction).

    Smaller outposts may only require 1 or 2 of these objectives to be met in order to take the place.
    MrRcNw and Bishop520 like this.
  9. Stmichael StMichael Subordinate

    Since people seem to like my ideas and points about fortresses, I've got one on how sieges and defense could work.

    When deciding where to attack, strike force leaders (or the war council, depending on how high up the chain these decisions ultimately go) can spend a variable amount of requisition to send a detachment to take the fortress. The more requisition they spend, the more resources the attackers will have available to them for ammunition, tanks, respawns etc. On the defenders side, supplies worth some amount of requisition (again, variable depending on how much players actually decide to put into it) are stored in the garrison, and munitions and reinforcements (respawns) draw from that pool. If the attackers run out of resources, they break off the siege and the defenders are victorious. If the defenders run out, they are whittled down and the fortress is taken.

    Nothing new per-se, but it allows for faction resources to play a part in the campaign at large.
    VeneratedTankred likes this.
  10. Bishop520 Active Member

    This actually reminds me of an idea I had: any turret emplacements on the strongholds are available to anyone. So if the attackers destroy them, drive the defenders away from that area, they can then fix the Turret and use it themselves. How does that sound?

Share This Page