As of now, the only strategic pathway we have is capturing. I'd like to suggest the addition of a logistics strategic pathway that requires no captures, but directly impacts capturing.
The idea is to provide an engagement experience different from the current capture matches, with the hope that it would encourage inherent advantageous(tactics, mechs, mech classes) that are different than those inherent in capture matches. Success in the logistic engagements would directly affect capture matches by impacting the available tonnage a player of the affected faction can bring to capture matches globally or locally within the vicinity of the logistics engagements.
Now you may notice I'm not using "matches" with respect to logistics...this is one key aspect intended to set it apart from capturing. Logistics wouldn't be a typical match, but instead an open and semi-persistent engagement. Planets along the war front(this could include actual contested planets under attack) would have either individual or regional logistic engagement maps. These maps would have a facility(s) that represents supply for its respective planet and/or region.
Player will need to protect or damage the facility in a protracted, open engagement...this means no start timers, no match end timers, no fixed spawn points. Damage done to the facility reduces the available drop tonnage the defending faction can us for the respective planet's or regional's capture matches. The facility would have a auto-repair feature that would require a sustained campaign on both sides to attack and defend. This can very well allow for this map to remain open 24hrs a day for as long as the frontline makes it relevant. As the front moves, old logistic engagements drop out and brand new ones with fully repaired facilities come up.
Now, depending on how many logistic maps are live for a planet and/or region, the amount of tonnage decrease per level of facility damage can be varied. I doubt there will need to be a max decrease cap, it should be easy enough to insure no faction could see a drop of more than 25-30% in tonnage decrease for the affected planet or region, even if every affecting facility was reduced indefinitely to 0%...which would be extremely difficult to do, and easily discouraged through game mechanics.
Edit: Facility damage can also increase the re-enforcemeat timer for the planet's and/or region's capture matches.
As an open engagement, all players(solo or teamed) can readily feel they are contributing toward their faction's CW goals. Now, it is important that entry, death and re-spawn be carefully considered. I'd like to see the number of players active on the map be reduced to 4v4 or 5v5. Mechs chosen for capture drops wouldn't be available for logistic drops. Entry spawns can have several locations and be protected to discourage spawn camping. You get one life, when you die a re-enforcement timer counts down to when a replacement player can drop in. No repairs, so if you are crippled after holding off multiple waves, it might be best to exit/retreat from the match so a replacement can fill your slot. No re-spawns, you can wait for a free slot to open on that map again, or go looking for another logistics map to join.
If the demand for these logistic engagements are high, there could be dozens of them opened for a planet or region. As demands ebbs and flows through out the day, the number of these maps open can increase or decrease as required. As more maps come on line, the impact of facility damage on drop tonnage would decrease.
Lastly, I'd like to see the diversity of waging war not end here. There is room to discuss supply interdiction through space lanes. Political/population manipulation to sew unrest or rally grassroots resistance as background game mechanics within a larger planetary population simulation that affects bonuses/de-buffs to certain aspects of planetary capture. Like rallying a population to your cause could grant your faction an extra capture token upon your first successful match win for the planet, etc, etc...but this is for another post...maybe even in this thread if deemed appropriate.
Edited by CocoaJin, 28 October 2014 - 05:26 PM.