Optimization is first, make sure everything can run for the largest possible or highest paying demographic. You can have all the gameplay, functions, factions, lore, physics, play styles, and variety but if a majority of players aren't able to play this game will get a permanent scar to it's reputation which will turn new players away from the game no matter how much it has been optimized afterwards. Another thing is CONTENT, and CONTENT TESTING. Every few months or so should be a release of a content bundle with the devs teasing about it in weekly or monthly roadmap videos. Content should be released in bundles to prevent all players from trying the new "shiny" thing on release at the same time, so if a chainfist is released add something else in there so every player isn't running around with the same loadout, or make it something players will work towards to unlock. ~On that note, design the game on the (difficult) balance between having just enough spendable points, purchasable things, and cost. Players should always be looking to purchase something, and never run into the veteran status of stockpiling points because there's nothing else to purchase, while at the same time the game shouldn't be a point blender. Gameplay, balance, and progression should go hand-in-hand. Having endless conquest mode will bore players quickly. Zerg/One-sided battles, meaningless titles and ranks. Imbalance. As I've played planetside 2 since the closed beta the thing I really care about is: DEFENSE One thing planetside 2 never fixed was the defence mechanic. Bases were swept over in a tide of heavily unbalanced populations as well as terribly designed bases and player mentality. Players spawned out of mobile spawns like clown cars and there was more incentive to farm/kill each other for points than to take or defend an objective. You would have the "grunts" who actually tried to play the objective, and then the experienced "pro" players that would kill the grunt players on mass. EC's defenders need to have an environmental advantage as well as rewards for defending equal or greater than attacking. Defending should feel like cinematic warhammer battles instead of chaotic player farming sandbox where you have a bunch of player grunts being sniped by a veteran player on a hill, enemies should spawn in waves to create periods for defenders to set up defences, whilst keeping a large wave amount of enemies approaching instead of a light trickle of attacking players. Defenders should usually be outnumbered, and have a higher respawn time than attackers, but at the same time they should be able to defend. Have PVE, don't make players feel like the bottom of the ladder, and don't make it feel like K/D is actually something anyone cares about. If this game gets the mlg-pro willy flopping mentality from try-hard players, a certain play style will emerge and EC will slowly die. EC should establish mechanics and a mentality that rewards players for "playing their role" so to speak within the battle. Not so much as the Anti-Tank player should kill tanks, but more to the feeling of a large battle, you have players up at the front. Dissuade players from hiding in enemy spawns or behind enemy lines getting easy "farm" kills. A perfect example would be a defence instance where 20 player space marines must defend against 30-40 player orcs. The defenders would have the environmental advantage such as cover or height, as well as fixed turrets and some Imperial guard NPCs. The defenders would have long respawn times and would respawn instantly as their timers were over. The Attackers would spawn in waves, and would have the advantage of more players and a lower respawn timer. It should be incentivized that the attackers will get a lot of points or exp for the objectives, and should face PVE elements such as entrenched guardsmen. Battle win conditions should never be black and white. If the defenders "win" after a certain amount of time, drop in player reinforcements, if the attackers win, give defenders a "last stand" bonus or an extraction/escape bonus for continuing to fight. If the attackers can't push up for a certain amount of time but have captured some objectives they should receive reinforcements and a reward. One thing I also agree heavily with Zoran the furry is that NPCs should inflate your ego and divulge information about the battle's current situation as well as what near-by players are doing, and would make an amazing set-piece in a battle (as long as it's varied enough.)
A good strategic metagame. I miss when RTS commander overhead stuff used to get discussed on these forums. There's a perfect opportunity to channel how asymmetric the 40k classes and factions are with a good command hierarchy and RTS orders system, but I'm afraid it isn't going to get capitalized on because its just not "high priority".
"Sumshine's Dream list" Stuff that's confirmed to not happen: fast paced free flow directional melee combat like in Mount & Blade. Blocking. jump button. Stuff that I expect to happen: Interesting campaign storylines where victories and losses determine the outcomes. An interesting strategy layer involving the warlords/generals A good progression system A good item/economy system The Ellison to protect Noah Ward da Fixer to fix things Ivan to come back and troll us some more Continent dance The loadout system to be somewhat balanced The game to be fun in all parts No grinding for the sake of grinding dual golden autocannons Stuff that may or may not happen: Guild cruisers and guild vs guild matches lots of player skill and squad based strategy in the gameplay Stuff that probably won't happen but I hope for it anyway GW to make this setting "canon"
