Background Image

Making Defense Feel Impactful/rewarding

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

  1. captured bases should have advantages to the faction
    less costs for spawning vehicle or grenades have bigger explosions or maybe other types of grenades and what else
    and
    the longer the base is captured the bigger the advantage (maybe 3 phases each taking 3 hours)
    equali the defensive options of the base increase (more sentury guns, more cover)
    also the bases should have up to 3 defensive rings (dont know if this is the right word for it :D) depending on the base size
    each ring have different spawnpoints so if the first ring is breached and the enemy managed to capture the first ring (maybe the biggest ring have 3 capture points) the defenders spawn at the 2nd ring spawnpoints
    (gates or other things will protect the points which can be destroyed)
    maybe think of it like a chivalry objective mode if you guys know this game ^^

    also if the base is able to spawn vehicles and the ring with the ability is captured/destroyed, no vehicles can be spawned

    then if the enemy managed to breach the last ring and captured the whole base then they get the advantage
    but its weaker if the base got damaged to much, maybe here we can get 3 different grades of destruction
    damage grade 3: no advantage
    grade 2: 33% advantage
    grade 1: 66% advantage
    each damage grade will take 1 hour to repair itself

    they mentioned that we are able to cut supply lines
    so if the supply line of a base is cut then respawntime increases and refilling your ammo is reduced by half and can run out if to many do it
  2. Rasako Rasako Well-Known Member

    I like that idea and while I understand you don't mean rings as in LITERALLY a bunch of circles, I like the idea of having lines of defense the enemy has to go through that works as a tier equivalent progressional take-0ver system instead of just rushing into the base and standing on point A, B, and C.
  3. Defenders should get the same xp or other currency per kill that attackers get. The only difference - maybe to make base-sitting more inviting - would be xp/currency enhancements based on the nature of the kill. For example: the closer an enemy is to completing an attack objective, the more the kill is worth. Things like that would make defense worth doing.

    Then again... maybe it shouldn't get any added reward. Defense is part of winning... winning is its own reward.
  4. Rasako Rasako Well-Known Member

    Winning may be a reward, but one of the major things I'm worried about is the vast majority of gamers these days who want immediate rewards and they want MEANINGFUL rewards, and waiting months to see who wins a campaign doesn't have much effect on your personal gain. I know it sounds selfish but that seems to be the general shift of the gaming community.

    I myself am actually in favor of your argument as I believe winning is its own reward and victory is what we should strive for, but "victory" is a subjective term that is different for each individual.
    Arminius likes this.

  5. Players like that will contribute little the overall war effort. In fact, the more players like that a particular faction has, the less likely that faction is to win.

    So... let 'em have it. I am confident that the majority of the loyalist community will understand that strategy and organization are necessary to achieve victory - and will conduct themselves accordingly.

    Those that don't are more than welcome to catch bullets for those of us that are dedicated to winning.
    Bishop520 and ThisHermitGuy like this.
  6. Rasako Rasako Well-Known Member

    well sadly we need that cannon fodder to keep the game running and the meat grinder churning.

  7. Absolutely right. And that's ok with me. Given that the loyalists are likely to the most numerous faction, or a close second to the F2P Orks, we don't need ALL. As long as the majority of the dedicated Strikeforces and Squads focus on completing objectives, that will be enough to secure victory.

    As you said, there will be cannon fodder... no doubt. That's fine. Bullet catchers.
    highs2lows likes this.
  8. AK40K AK40k Curator

    Pardon for me not understanding..... are you refering to defending a base that is under attack or deffending one that isn't facing an immediate threat (not under attack by a player faction)?

    If the former, I would say that it indeed will be it's own reward, as you get to fight and this recieve the benefits of such.

    If the latter, I think if they gave a garrison duty 'bonus' to players at undermanned positions (req points over) it would encourage people to go there for awhile just to soak up some req. Also I would think the nids will be designed to push into neglected territory, making defense necessary and profitable.
  9. Rasako Rasako Well-Known Member

    I'm trying to cover all aspects of defense so we can come up with some ideas honestly, I haven't played planetside 2 in forever and was hoping we could avoid a lot of their initial mistakes, and I've just felt that almost all PvP mmos do a poor job of rewarding the defenders in base defenses (like WAR and its terrible handling of loot distribution in keep sieges for the defenders)
  10. AK40K AK40k Curator

    I haven't played Planetside at all so I don't know how they do it. I think if they give req/xp at an apropriate rate that would atract people to the area. Likewise if a nid attack on a neglected area that provides decent req/xp would be a good reason defend the area (beyond being a team player).

Share This Page