Jump to content

Cw Attack-Lines/raids


2 replies to this topic

Poll: Supply-Lines/Raids (10 member(s) have cast votes)

Could Supply-Lines/Raids solve the "Numbers Game"?

  1. Yes (6 votes [60.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 60.00%

  2. No (1 votes [10.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 10.00%

  3. Maybe, but... (explain below) (3 votes [30.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 30.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Warchild Corsair

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Storm
  • Storm
  • 478 posts
  • LocationGER

Posted 29 December 2014 - 08:53 AM

Hi there,

having played CW from day 1, I have fought only for two so-called "underdog" factions, FRR and Liao. In these factions, the obvious numbers advantage from the enemy is depressingly high and that leads to a number of negative factors. Planets change hands often because the enemy is not (only) better, but has just an extreme high amount of players attacking (maybe even attacking someplace else, too).
Some restrictions placed by PGI (increase number of zones to 15, increase time for "empty base rushes" to 10 minutes) lead to different effects currently visible: while the time-increase is somewhat useful to prevent too many "empty base wins", the increase in zones had the opposite effect, since it allows the attacker to start even more games on that planet (reminder: only one game per zone at a given time is fixed) thus leading to an even greater defender's disadvantage.

Okay, that's the dilemma. Now how to solve it?

My solution is based on the idea that a coordinated defender with a smaller force should be able to limit the attacking numbers on a target planet. I call it "Supply Lines" or "Raid"-Missions. It is based on a number of ideas I will now detail.

Idea 1
An offensive needs supply and home bases. Dropships have to start someplace, ammunition and supplies are stored in warehouses, etc. Thus, 3 "Depot" planets are linked to an attackable planet (just draw a blue or green line from the three closest planets from the attacking faction).

Idea 2
A numerically limited defender would naturally guerilla-like try to attack these "Depots" instead of fighting a hopeless battle ("Raids"). There can only be one Raid at a time on a Depot and it has a cooldown of sorts (say, 1 hour). Gamemode could be Assault or a modifed Assault with a Spaceport Antenna to destroy or sth., it would fit.

Idea 2a
The defending faction would pay for such a Raid-Contract.

Idea 3
Guerilla warfare works best if you are on your own turf, thus limiting the Raid-Missions to planets formerly owned by your faction. This also prevents large factions to permanently shut down the ability to counter-attack their planets.

Idea 4
If a raid succeeds, the attackers lose some capability to attack the linked planet. That could be temporarily reducing the number of zones by 1/3 per raided Depot-Planet (= 3 successful Raids on all three Depots means no new attacks possible on the target planet) or some other limiting measure towards the attackers capability.

All ideas combined could make the game fun again, even if you are the underdog. It would require a greater deal of coordination and communication from the defenders.

I will try and provide some pics to my idea later on.

What do you think?

Edited by Warchild Corsair, 29 December 2014 - 08:54 AM.


#2 Firewuff

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 1,204 posts
  • LocationMelbourne

Posted 31 December 2014 - 07:03 PM

Because this could be used my a numerically larger group to the same effect.

Secondly the game will only launch 1 game per min so more zones dont mean more games etc in any case. It doesnt advantage larger groups. It was juat to slow down the velocity of changes.

Liao is doing ok so i wouldnt worry too much ;-)

#3 Spare Parts Bin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wild Dog
  • Wild Dog
  • 1,743 posts
  • LocationSearching alternate universes via temporal wormhole generator.

Posted 03 January 2015 - 06:08 PM

Anything that improves CW even by a minute fraction would be great.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users