Background Image

Making Defense Feel Impactful/rewarding

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

  1. Luciasar Luciasar Well-Known Member

    I'd agree that bases should be captured quickly if nobody comes to defend them once they are attacked. But I think that defenders should be given some time to reinforce. If a base isn't under threat, it doesn't seem realistic to me to expect players to sit around in it. They'd be better off moving on, and changing the battle elsewhere. If the base comes under threat again, they should get enough advance warning that they can set up a defense again and defend it (unless, by some mechanic, the attacking force is skilled enough that they prevent such an alarm).

    I don't mean to discourage player defense of vulnerable locations, far from it. But in a large scale warfare game you want to prevent small groups of unskilled players from achieving much by themselves. A very skilled outfit squad should have the opportunity to cause some havoc behind the lines, but you don't want to give every casual group that kind of power. It rewards poor sportsmanship and first-order strategy.

    While we've all been there, I think the word "pug" is fairly specific to players unaffiliated with an outfit or guild, and who do not communicate strategically. They aren't necessarily bad players, they just tend to act in their own best interest most of the time.
  2. Joram Joram Well-Known Member

    There is a problem with empty bases being captured quickly, population imbalance, we already know that close to half the population (don't start with ork boyz f2p, they are gonna be a minority) is gonna play SM, when a faction has such a huge population advantage that they can throw enough bodies to to pin down other factions in the defense of important facilities and they can afford to send a few squads to ghostcap the rest of the map (i saw this happening in PS2 Miller to many times). Nids are supposed to balance this, but they also will attack the low pop factions, it's gonna be a real pain to balance.
  3. Etherion Etherion Subordinate

    I still say there should be NPC guards, the number depending on how much requisition the faction is willing to sink into the base. That alone would stop solo players from hopping from base to base, taking half of the enemy territory (if not for very long) before getting caught. But small, organized groups of players should be able to launch quick an effective strikes at undefended bases. And keep in mind, it's no small feat to get past the frontline undetected. Considering most transportation will likely be by land, it would probably be tough to get past the main battle without anyone spotting you.
    And as I said, if strike forces and war councils have good communication, they should have plenty of time to reach a base. The faction could have a scouting strike force, they see a large enemy force building up, warn the war council and keep on eye on them. Enemy starts coming forward, scout force reports it in, war council sends in a fast strike force to slow them down . Once their objective is determined, war council sends a couple of strike forces to the base that is soon to be attacked. Enemy assaults the base, finds it well defended but keep at it for awhile. Defenders manage to hold out long enough for more strike forces to arrive, enemy ends up surrounded and killed outside of the base, and everyone just enjoyed an epic battle. This is what I mean when I say mechanics like this would require strategic thinking. When it takes time to prepare a zerg rush because you can't spawn straight to it, it gives whoever they are preparing to rush time to deal with it, if they move fast enough. If they don't, enemy reaches the base, and suddenly they are forced to defend themselves. It would be an interesting an dynamic system to see in action.

    That could be a problem, but I do not believe the answer is an arbitrary base cap timer. Like I said, NPCs can be added as defenses, but a base should be taken once there are no longer any defenders inside. So yes, an empty base could be easily taken. But at the same time, well defended bases could be a tough nut to crack.
    Bishop520 likes this.
  4. Wow, two of the threads I have been posting in have practically combined.
    http://forum.eternalcrusade.com/threads/npc-in-battle.3150/page-4#post-129293
    The npc thread and this is pretty much the conclusion that I reached with friendly NPCs. That if they are going to be used at all it should be for base defence. Hope this provides some input towards this thread. Personally I don't think NPC's should cost resources. It just doesn't seem very 40kish when human lives are supposed to be expendable. Also it means constantly checking that you have enough NPCs at every possible base all the time. They should just spawn when there are low numbers of players present.

    On another note. Progression through a base should be necessity driven. What about gates to prevent enemies from entering. Not like ps2 where you have to destroy the generator but heavy, gothic, adamantium doors. Also provides a nice focus for attackers and a kill zone for defenders. It would give defences their weak spot but not one so boring as a literal whole in the wall and not so weak as to let anybody wander in.
    It might be difficult to work out how defenders could get in and out. Maybe something as simple as a button (this would allow enemy infiltrators to open the gates) and hope it doesn't get abused.
  5. Zhull Zhull Well-Known Member

    way to miss the entire point of my entire post.
  6. Rasczak Rasczak Subordinate

    Of course, some bases should be more defensible than others. If every single fight was a long, drawn-out siege it would probably get old pretty fast.

    Small outposts that get overrun quickly would allow players to build momentum with a string of quick victories, and act as "trip-wires" to let the other side know that one of their major fortresses will be under attack soon ("Hey, we just lost outposts A, B, and C, it looks like the enemy is pushing towards our Bastion at D").

    Of course, we'd have to make sure to let people know (perhaps in the manual and tutorial) that you're not necessarily expected to defend every inch of ground: sometimes it might be smarter to leave a small outpost to the enemy, so you can rally a defense at the large fortress behind it while they're capping.
    GodEmperorTitus and luciasar00 like this.
  7. Etherion Etherion Subordinate

    What was your point then? Because it seemed like you were suggesting making a base nearly impossible to penetrate, except from a certain angle, then repeat for other layers of defense, basically forcing the players to do the same thing every time rather than making them think for themselves. If that wasn't your point, please explain what you actually meant. If that was your point, personally I would prefer a more dynamic siege, that could be done a little differently each time, and where multiple paths can be taken instead of railroading the players to a flag they need to sit on.
  8. Zhull Zhull Well-Known Member


    The bases should be designed like real life fortresses.
    Fortresses arent open from all sides cos it kinda defeats the purpose of them.
    I was thinking of a cluster of fortresses, 3 or 4 bunker/platform like structures, connected.
    The design should be in sucha way that the attackers can only come from 3 different directions max.
    I get your point, it shouldnt be a tunneled experience where attackers only have one route to chose from, however, it also shoudnt be completely open so that some smartass 'lone wolf' can take a long hike around and start capping behind the lines.
    I personally HATE that.
    So the difficulty lies in the leveldesign, the fortresses should have a limited amount of 'access' points, so the defenders really have the idea of actually defending a fortress with a limited number of weak spots to cover.
    It would also be cool ( in later patches) to have one access point per fortress that can only be opened by siegeclasses, or big cannons or orbital strikes or whatever.

    So to get back at my original point: a fortresscluster has let's say 3 points: A,B,C and there should be a natural route towards those points.
    You could opt to sneak towards point C while your factions main forces are at point A, but it should be relatively easy for the defenders to finish you off if they catch you there.
    So you have freedom of choice of where to begin, but you better be real goodif you wanna assault in an unorthodox manner.
    Yes it is somewhat limiting, but thats the entire purpose of a fortress!
    Bishop520 likes this.
  9. Zhull Zhull Well-Known Member

    Yes totally agreed!
    Perhaps different fortification classes?
    - outpost
    - firebase
    -fortress
    - citadel

    something like that?
    With citadel class being 'zomg bring in the titans' difficult.
    Bishop520 likes this.
  10. Puddington Puddington Subordinate

    I had an idea that I think would be a cool addition to objective capturing and such.
    Maybe have the hero characters give an advantage to capturing but it might depend on the base your going for. So if you are trying to capture a manufactorum then a techmarine or equivalent (warpsmith, bonesinger, bigmek) might make it a bit faster but only if they are standing at a console doing computer stuff which means people would have to defend them while they work. This would hopefully promote teamwork and proper use of the hero requisition currency stuff. Hopefully.
    Librarians, sorcerers, farseers, and weirdboyz might have to perform a ritual to cleanse a psychic nexus type area.
    Something like that anyway. But of course a base could be taken by anyone no matter their class or whatever but being the right hero at the right time would simply make it less difficult.

Share This Page