15 replies to this topic

[Dracsis]

So, from what I've read, the current plan is to have the different factions take territory, and that territory gives everyone o ntheir side bonuses of some kind(feel free to correct me if this is erroneous).

my question is, how is this going to work? is it going to be one match per planet(I think that seems just a lil too pat, I would prefer to see it requiring a couple different missions, maybe each linking to a final one and the previous ones, if successful by either defenders or invaders, increase the tonnage available to the deciding side in the final match or something).

Just thought i'd ask, im sure the game will be damn fun either way, but I like being able to plan things out strategically too.

[Thorn Hallis]

We don't know yet. And there is no word on a territory bonus so far.

[Stickjock]

Unknown until they (the Devs) give us more information that what they have so far... as far as I know...

[C E Dwyer]

This aspect of M.W.O, is what is going to make or break the title, if its great, this M.M.O will have legs, if its bad, I think it'll struggle to last 12 months

[Undercover Brother]

I'm hoping for a four-battle, tug-of-war system:

Three simultaneous attacks, 3 seperate games, one planet.

In each match, one-lance attacks/one defends. If no attacking lance succeeds, there is no round two (in which defenders get free ammo and repairs).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In round two (if any of the attacking units succeed in round one), the successful attacking units from round one are repaired (the losing mechs are not repaired) and re-armed with only half their ammo (because the attackers are invaders, they have minimal logistics support, and no extra mechs or weapons).

The successful defenders from round one are re-armed and repaired (losing mech only get 50% repaired) and are allowed to change mechs and weapons (N/A for losing defenders) , AND to vote/select their initial deployment point on map they are fighing on (this allows the defenders an advantage that would ONLY fall to the defending team in a real-world scenario).

If no unit succeeds in attacks in the second round, they can vote to return back to round one, or halt the invasion (in which the defenders get free ammo and repairs).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In round three, all mechs are brought together in one match. 12 vs 12. Defenders still have the logistical advantage. If the attackers lose at this phase, they can vote to revert back to round one or halt the invasion. If the defenders lose, the attackers get free ammunition and free repairs once the invasion is over.

[Wocka Flocka]

The only blatant issue with your idea is the half ammo thing, take a moment to consider that lasers dont use ammo. Ignoring that I would probably not be interested in 4v4s and I'm sure there would be balancing issues (lets all take atlai and laugh as they have someone drop as a light).

I like the round idea, mainly because of the ability for the defenders to pick their ground, but the ammo issue and the 4v4s just don't seem like they would hold up for long :/

edited for spelling/readability

Edited by Wocka Flocka, 11 August 2012 - 10:05 AM.

[Kumakichi]

Dracsis, on 11 August 2012 - 08:56 AM, said:

my question is, how is this going to work?

We dont know. But should be exciting. Also sounds complex.

[Tarl Cabot]

Here are some examples of what planetary capture was to look like til the company from Israel furbar it. This was over 10 years but does give it some depth other than watching only the numbers change on the planetary map.

Spoiler

This is what was thrown together to get MPBT 3025 running

Spoiler

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 11 August 2012 - 10:21 AM.

[KBob]

I still don't see how this would work considering real life time zones etc. I could be in PST attacking by my midnight some EST clan, or I could be EST clan attacking by 6-7 am some PST guys .. guess how many enemies I'll face ?

[C E Dwyer]

KBob, on 11 August 2012 - 10:23 AM, said:

I still don't see how this would work considering real life time zones etc. I could be in PST attacking by my midnight some EST clan, or I could be EST clan attacking by 6-7 am some PST guys .. guess how many enemies I'll face ?

This is what happend in warhammer online..you'd go to sleep, with everything half won, and then log on next day, to dicover that while you slept, your capital city had been seiged

for all its disadvantages, its still been the best fairest, way of adding strategy, to what is basically a tactical game

[vikingatlarge]

I would imagine they would assign credit values or whatever to strategic points on a world. The longer your clan or faction or whatever holds em, the more prestige or credits or whatever you would receive...I would imagine it being pretty hard to control worlds not in or near your factions space...

[GHQCommander]

I only paid £80 because this game was meant to have territory control.

So far not a hint of what that actually means and I'm not hanging about. Not even playing beta and eyeing up other games. Simply because I know when to call it quits.

The fans will try to stomp on my mechs head when I say this. But these developers are struggling. The signs are there, well hidden but they can't ever be THAT hidden. These guys promoted a game that technically still does not exist yet and look how many of us paid up!!!

It means we invested to help keep things going but if any player can't see that won't be enough then they have their pink tinted gamers glasses on. Those glasses gamers put on to get more buzz out of the idea than what they will eventually get out of the game.

Screw that!

[Kyone Akashi]

Ikka-san compiled the information from a recent PC Gamer article over at the Kurita forums. As you gaijin will not have access to our secure communication channels, I will (with the ISF's permission) quote it for your pleasure:

Quote

Endless Space
Over 3,000 planets will make up MWO's version of the Inner Sphere, 10% of which will be open for conquest. This galaxy forms the game's persistent metagame map. A separate instance of the galaxy map will exist on each MWO server region.

A Slice of the Pie
The ownership of fringe worlds is determined by points accumulated over time by members of factions. Border worlds, on the other hand, are battled on only by mercs. Acting on the behalf of factions, MWO automatically sets bounties on border planets.

Outsourcing
As a border planet's bounty approaches its expiration date, mercenary corps place monetary bids on these contracts in C-bills, MWO's non-cash in-game currency. The lowest bid earns the right to battle for the planet.

Fight!
The mercenary corp competes in a single or series of scheduled matches against another merc corp representing the planet's owner. Piranha is still determining how match scheduling will be handled.

Conquest!
The winning merc corp gains or retains occupation rights to the world, and earns the benefit of a C-bill allowance, salvage, and other minor bonuses for controlling the planet. The faction that employs them now owns the world.

Groups:

• Mercenary Corps: Independent player-run groups.
  
• Factions: Canon groups like House Kurita and the Draconis Combine. Populated by players. Their initial strategy/leadership in CW will be guided by developers, then eventually handed off to elected players.
  
• Clans: Biding their time; invading summer 2013. Certain to have an impact on CW when they do.

Planets

• Core: Canon planets, untouchable by players, controlled by the developers.
  
• Border: Merc vs Merc battlegrounds. Mercenary corps bid for the right to fight for border worlds on behalf of factions.
  
• Fringe: Faction vs Faction battlegrounds. Fought over exclusively by faction players (not mercenary corps).

From the main article

Interestingly, Piranha will be the ones plotting the plans of the game's factions, at least at first: "We're going to manage those units from a strategy point of view. We're going to say, 'House Kurita goes here, they're going to take over these planets, and these are the things they're interested in.' Our ultimate goal is to slowly give that power to the users, so that they can actually rank up and level up and gain enough loyalty points where they can elect a group of people to manage their House. Then that group will choose the targets for planetary control. That is the goal."
- Bryan Ekman, creative director.

Alongside factions are mercenary corps: player-run, independent groups. Mercenary leaders will be able to set their own structure, rules, ranking, and currency payout systems. "I use the analogy of a fishing boat captain up in Alaska, " says Ekman. "The captain might get 25 percent of the share. The deckhand gets 15. And then the greenhorn, he gets like two percent or something. It's truly up to the players how they want to share that and reward their membership."

So, the already-mentioned difference between "active" mercenary companies and "passive" faction players would seem to be that merc gameplay is dominated by "guild vs guild" scheduled matches, whereas faction gameplay is somewhat more casual, with thousands upon thousands of House warriors just dropping right into the action at their own leisure, and if they manage to shift planetary control level from defender to attacker, the targeted world will switch ownership. I expect this would work similar to, for example, naval battles in Pirates of the Burning Sea putting zones into contention.

I do not believe merc players will be "stuck" with just scheduled matches, but perhaps individual merc players may only "lone wolf" it by randomly reinforcing some PUG rather than being able to choose who or what they fight for. Similarly, the original Community Warfare Q&A had Bryan mention that PGI would be looking into the possibility of player-run House units post-launch, which I would assume would work similar to the mercenary units (-> scheduled matches for Border Worlds) and possibly be a direct counter/mirror to them, just that they would maybe bid loyalty points rather than c-bills, and "garrison" a planet rather than "owning" it?
Potential conflicts with the canon regarding House units should be easily avoidable by restricting player-run units to sub-groups within established NPC-controlled regiments, so that players could, for example, form a specific company within a canon regiment, giving it a custom nickname that would be combined with the regiment's own ID.
Pure speculation, though!

I am certainly eager to hear more about Community Warfare as well.

Edited by Kyone Akashi, 12 October 2012 - 07:23 PM.

[Red Rock]

I would love to see planet/terrritory control, how they had in the warhammer series. where planets had specific territories that offered bonuses whether it was NPC controled units, repair bases, or other resources that would aid in conquering the overall planet, via turn based style per territory. Win enouogh territories, when the planet.

http://http://http://

[Axelian]

GHQCommander, on 12 October 2012 - 05:41 PM, said:

I only paid £80 because this game was meant to have territory control.

It means we invested to help keep things going but if any player can't see that won't be enough then they have their pink tinted gamers glasses on. Those glasses gamers put on to get more buzz out of the idea than what they will eventually get out of the game.

Screw that!

This is why my cash stays firmly in my pocket now after seeing so many titles get thrown to the dogs. My favourite genres and franchises just hacked to pieces so they can get console money from console idiots.

It didn't matter that I took out my money and paid highest prices for them only to be disappointed by how they had been lobotomised when ported to console controls, I was far outnumbered by the console gamers doing the same thing and not even noticing how inferior their product was.

How about a limited number of locations that are a percentage proportion to the number of ranked companies/lances that are registered in the ladder so that its like a game of musical chairs with new and hungry players trying to oust victorious players from their trophy. A trophy that contains only a local terrain advantage.

So like 100 teams 80 locations that are ranked by status and that makes 20 teams hungry for a trophy location to 'OWN' the 'best' location is the grand final trophy and owning it means you win.

A group can then say... we are blah blah blah and we own this place we are badasses... other teams say we are rah rah rah and we are young and hungry and we're going to take your trohpy location off you... prepare to defend. Make it like best out of 3 or something

[Axelian]

I'm going to go on to say....

I think its locations that really make things different and interesting. So you don't have people fighting for control of this or that place and going... OH HEY.. same old same old map that I know backwards.

To make this game lasting and fun its the locations that are going to be like 99% of the work to keep making new environments over and over and testing them because no mater what else you put into the game without those new locations its ALL GOING TO BE THE SAME.

Making a new location back in the day was simple. All you had to do was rearrange the map sheets place concrete areas shuffle up some buildings and bam new location with new challenges. Without some awesome terrain generator that's impossible to do digitally.

So.. that's my bit. Spend your time making locations and due to the expense and time put into creating them and the flavour they add, make them the trophies.