Steven clarified the way map rotations for campaigns are 'planned' to work here: http://forum.eternalcrusade.com/threads/the-world-itself.2923/page-3#post-113699 Essentially captured assets are intend to be meaningful/valueable and aren't a trivial affair to capture. Additionally, accomplishments in one campaign can give you advantages in the next. This is great. I just wanted to see the community's thoughts on Persistent changes you as a player/faction can cause. So far it seems that a map will fully reset when a campaign is over. When you cycle back to that map, it will be like brand new. So my question to you is, do you want lasting changes that remain present beyond the duration of a campaign? If so what would you like to see? I've given extreme examples in my poll! But you get the idea
Ultimately and ideally, the first option. But realistically, fair play might have to be required if there isn't an even playing field (or some semblance of an even playing field) in terms of numbers of players in each faction.
I think the faction needs to use resources to rebuild. Things just don't magically repair, unless it's an ancient fort from the Dark Age of Technology that auto repairs itself... but that was destroyed by Perturabo. The capturing forces should have to use resources to repair damage sustained during the attack. And it should be really expensive to promote the value of keeping facilities in operation. In PS2 everyone destroys all the guns because you can just quickly repair them. I would rather it take hours of time and resources to put thing that are destroyed back in operation. This way... you don't destroy things that you will want to be using in the near future.
I'd like more battlefield persistence if they really can keep up with a 3 month campaign rotation on different continents. It would be great if the war council can designate structures for destruction, that are then capable of being destroyed. Make it a strategic option instead of leaving it up to the players to destroy stuff for "Teh Lulz". If player heavy weapons can destroy buildings easy enough I can just see player vehicle zergs just levelling the battlefield to make it one big bland dirt bowl. Takes away alot of the tactical play when its just one big open field, ruins some of the balance, and scenery variety. So say there is comm station that is really deep in enemy territory that you have slim chances of conquering/holding your best bet would be to destroy that sucker so no one can have it. That said a War Council would designate the target and then mini objectives become active missions such: Hold the tower long enough to designate it for orbital strike Guard someone with a special weapon pack full of demolitions towards the objective and as they place the demo on structural support to bring it down Guard a convoy of artillery vehicles as it gets just in range, while a separate force gets near the obj and designate it for strike. Stuff like that ^ ...make it into missions that are tools for commanders to use to deny the enemy of assets and make for a "living" battlefield.
I use all the fire bombs from a hidden missile batteries hidden in the hills to destroy the forest ork warbands are hiding in. The forest is completely gone now that kind of persistent.
IMO, during a campaign, buildings and such need to be rebuilt if destroyed. The permanence is within the campaign period. Once it is over and reset, it is a full reset. Everyone should be on equal footing for the next campaign. I also believe there shouldn't be permanent bonuses to characters for it and instead buffs that can be earned within a campaign and lost upon death.
Destructible terrain in general appeals to me; due to the way a battle can change because of it. Ex. Chaos Marines hiding out in a tower, why not find a way to bring it down?
this game is becoming MMO hybrid of Shooter-RPG-RTS, just one word: AWSOME Now we need another thread to define EC genre :3
I personally like persistence and destruction of buildings etc, so long as we can do this with artillery. No Player Verse Door stuff if they can avoid it (though in truth if a game is good people wouldn't care about that I think, although seems out of place in a Sci-fi game). Perhaps Massive Multiplayer Strategic Role Playing? MMSRP.
