1
Proposal for the next stage of development for Faction Play and items that I would like to raise at the next round table discussion.
This post is also to tie in with several other suggestions to get a more complete picture of the possibilities.
Please also review the following posts:
Using our points as currency
Repairs, re-arm or Loot
Logistics
Looking at the Major issues:
WAIT TIMES
Spoiler
The reduction of buckets did significantly reduce wait times.
However with a smaller population of players spread out over multiple time zones it is inevitable that at different times it will take longer to get games or not be able to get one at all.
THE SOLUTION
At the moment the mode insists on being a 12 v 12 ‘capture the planet’. Let’s enable the mode to cater for 1 v 0 by allowing an attacking player to create a bucket by clicking on a planet, committing their drop deck and jumping into a scenario.
CHANGES NEEDED
If we allow a bucket to start with an attacking player or team, then each scenario needs to be heavily in favour of the defender. Static defences, AI opposition, a big map. There needs to be a significant challenge so that even in the event of a ghost drop taking the planet could only be managed by a large enough group with enough mechs. It needs to allow time for defending players to respond and join the battle but also provide some difficulty should no defending players mobilize therefore leaving the scenario akin to a ghost drop.
We also need to consider a problem that was evident in earlier iterations of Faction Play, large groups only going on the attack and therefore avoiding each other. By heavily stacking the scenario in favour of a defending force, any 'militia' force that gathers to defend it should be able to provide a bit more resistance to the invading force.
However, the real objective here is enabling players to get games as quickly as possible and having an open system resolves this instantly.
It is also a way of future proofing participation should the levels of players in game fluctuate. We already have enough fluctuation due to time zones, but if we consider the additional modes within MWO as well as other games that are becoming available, simply being able to play the game becomes very important. If we are stuck with needing the strict minimum of 12 players on each side instead of allowing each battle to grow naturally from a single player. we will have serious problems with wait times creating that perception of inability to play the game and therefore lose more players elsewhere.
The reduction of buckets did significantly reduce wait times.
However with a smaller population of players spread out over multiple time zones it is inevitable that at different times it will take longer to get games or not be able to get one at all.
THE SOLUTION
At the moment the mode insists on being a 12 v 12 ‘capture the planet’. Let’s enable the mode to cater for 1 v 0 by allowing an attacking player to create a bucket by clicking on a planet, committing their drop deck and jumping into a scenario.
CHANGES NEEDED
If we allow a bucket to start with an attacking player or team, then each scenario needs to be heavily in favour of the defender. Static defences, AI opposition, a big map. There needs to be a significant challenge so that even in the event of a ghost drop taking the planet could only be managed by a large enough group with enough mechs. It needs to allow time for defending players to respond and join the battle but also provide some difficulty should no defending players mobilize therefore leaving the scenario akin to a ghost drop.
We also need to consider a problem that was evident in earlier iterations of Faction Play, large groups only going on the attack and therefore avoiding each other. By heavily stacking the scenario in favour of a defending force, any 'militia' force that gathers to defend it should be able to provide a bit more resistance to the invading force.
However, the real objective here is enabling players to get games as quickly as possible and having an open system resolves this instantly.
It is also a way of future proofing participation should the levels of players in game fluctuate. We already have enough fluctuation due to time zones, but if we consider the additional modes within MWO as well as other games that are becoming available, simply being able to play the game becomes very important. If we are stuck with needing the strict minimum of 12 players on each side instead of allowing each battle to grow naturally from a single player. we will have serious problems with wait times creating that perception of inability to play the game and therefore lose more players elsewhere.
AN ENGAGING GAME MODE
Spoiler
Players want different things. We have seen Conquest become popular with drop decks as the objectives have meaning. We have veteran players wanting to take on heavily fortified positions as they are in Siege. The tug of war works to some extent but we have experienced a few drawbacks such as not being able to experience the different modes.
THE SOLUTION
Conquest has shown us that multiple objectives make the mode dynamic. Siege showed us that we need some tough fortified areas and an asymmetric mode with clear objectives for attacks and defenders. Scouting has shown us the fun of smaller engagements and a cat and mouse style of game. Let’s combine the modes in a single map. Lets make the maps bigger, expand the existing ones so we have more territory to fit all of these objectives in.
CHANGES NEEDED
If the Conquest resource points we hidden around the map, we could treat these as minor objectives to capture and get our resource points from. We fortify them with some walls, turrets and some AI so we can’t simply walk up and capture one. Instead of winning when we have collected X resource points, let’s use those points differently. ie. for Repairs, rearm or loot.
If the assets from Invasion, Assault and Domination... and let’s include Incursion as well... were also hidden around the map, we could treat these as major objectives. They don’t need a massive area around them, but we have the walls and gates controlled by generators. Turrets, towers, AI. Give them the significance they deserve and make them tough on their own. Change the control of them to provide a benefit to the team that controls them so there is a reason to defend, capture, counter attack... have a tug of war over those points.
By extending the objectives and the level of participation we also need to get rid of the timer. A bucket/scenario can be considered closed if all of the major objectives are held by one side and there no opposing players active or preparing to drop. Then we can use a small timer to close out the scenario but allows the battle to rage on as long as players are willing to deploy into it.
Players want different things. We have seen Conquest become popular with drop decks as the objectives have meaning. We have veteran players wanting to take on heavily fortified positions as they are in Siege. The tug of war works to some extent but we have experienced a few drawbacks such as not being able to experience the different modes.
THE SOLUTION
Conquest has shown us that multiple objectives make the mode dynamic. Siege showed us that we need some tough fortified areas and an asymmetric mode with clear objectives for attacks and defenders. Scouting has shown us the fun of smaller engagements and a cat and mouse style of game. Let’s combine the modes in a single map. Lets make the maps bigger, expand the existing ones so we have more territory to fit all of these objectives in.
CHANGES NEEDED
If the Conquest resource points we hidden around the map, we could treat these as minor objectives to capture and get our resource points from. We fortify them with some walls, turrets and some AI so we can’t simply walk up and capture one. Instead of winning when we have collected X resource points, let’s use those points differently. ie. for Repairs, rearm or loot.
If the assets from Invasion, Assault and Domination... and let’s include Incursion as well... were also hidden around the map, we could treat these as major objectives. They don’t need a massive area around them, but we have the walls and gates controlled by generators. Turrets, towers, AI. Give them the significance they deserve and make them tough on their own. Change the control of them to provide a benefit to the team that controls them so there is a reason to defend, capture, counter attack... have a tug of war over those points.
By extending the objectives and the level of participation we also need to get rid of the timer. A bucket/scenario can be considered closed if all of the major objectives are held by one side and there no opposing players active or preparing to drop. Then we can use a small timer to close out the scenario but allows the battle to rage on as long as players are willing to deploy into it.
SPAWN POINTS
Spoiler
Some of the maps and modes currently do not cater too well to having an extended battle with drop decks. Relying on the protected zones and the drop ships has been looked at, but there will always be ways around it.
The problem is that we have no choice, no alternative. We can swap from one lance to another but that just pushes someone else into the fire. As the modes only have a single objective, they do not have the room or even the necessity to cater for different spawn points.
THE SOLUTION
If we have multiple objectives and a big map we will want to be able to select our drop zone so we:
It also does not have to exclusively mean deploying by dropships. Let’s use the objectives and build a bit more structure into them so they can accommodate deploying via lifts as we have seen in the Steiner Coliseum.
We could also look at an option for a hot drop tied in with some other features such as different benefits from Intel Gathering/Points.
CHANGES NEEDED
The biggest part here is the size of the maps.
To make a selectable dropzone worth while, there needs to be enough distance between them.
If they are tied in to the Objectives then they can be captured and re-captured.
We also need to allow a retreat from battle using these locations, similar to what we have in Scouting.
This means building a bit of substance into the objective assets, that is, the resource collection points need to change from just being a drill to having some walls, the mech lifts, some turrets and walls etc. Give them a bit of structure to make them substantial. Same for the other objective assets.
It also requires the addition of a staging area so we have the time to plan and organise our next drop and make the decision to change where we will deploy. An adaption of the Battlegrid will work nicely here and will also tie in well with some 'Intel' features.
We can also look at the option to use some larger dropships such as the Union and Overlord. (As we have seen in that awesome preview for MW5.). Great option for an attacking team to spend some intel points on and land one of these bad boys as a base.
Selectable Drop Zones
Some of the maps and modes currently do not cater too well to having an extended battle with drop decks. Relying on the protected zones and the drop ships has been looked at, but there will always be ways around it.
The problem is that we have no choice, no alternative. We can swap from one lance to another but that just pushes someone else into the fire. As the modes only have a single objective, they do not have the room or even the necessity to cater for different spawn points.
THE SOLUTION
If we have multiple objectives and a big map we will want to be able to select our drop zone so we:
a.) Do not have to deploy into a drop zone that is overrun.
b.) Can get closer to the front lines faster
It also does not have to exclusively mean deploying by dropships. Let’s use the objectives and build a bit more structure into them so they can accommodate deploying via lifts as we have seen in the Steiner Coliseum.
We could also look at an option for a hot drop tied in with some other features such as different benefits from Intel Gathering/Points.
CHANGES NEEDED
The biggest part here is the size of the maps.
To make a selectable dropzone worth while, there needs to be enough distance between them.
If they are tied in to the Objectives then they can be captured and re-captured.
We also need to allow a retreat from battle using these locations, similar to what we have in Scouting.
This means building a bit of substance into the objective assets, that is, the resource collection points need to change from just being a drill to having some walls, the mech lifts, some turrets and walls etc. Give them a bit of structure to make them substantial. Same for the other objective assets.
It also requires the addition of a staging area so we have the time to plan and organise our next drop and make the decision to change where we will deploy. An adaption of the Battlegrid will work nicely here and will also tie in well with some 'Intel' features.
We can also look at the option to use some larger dropships such as the Union and Overlord. (As we have seen in that awesome preview for MW5.). Great option for an attacking team to spend some intel points on and land one of these bad boys as a base.
Selectable Drop Zones
IDENTIFYING THE CONTRIBUTION OF PLAYERS
Spoiler
Solo players and small groups tend to get swallowed up in the grander scheme of ‘Capturing the planet’ and it’s really only the big units that get recognised. This is not about rewards for tagging the planet, it’s about making each player able to contribute something. In an open system, because the level of player participation could vary from 1 to 12 (and I'm going to suggest up to 36/side when queued in waves), then the contribution of smaller numbers of players is really about preparing a scenario for greater participation.
However, given multiple objectives, the mode does not have to only be about capturing the planet. Why can't we raid for resources, or simply scout out some objectives?
THE SOLUTION
We need to recognise that scouting in a scenario can prepare that scenario for larger groups.
We need to recognise that capturing or raiding minor objectives for resource points can also prepare that scenario for greater participation.
CHANGES NEEDED
With an open system, we need to be able to view a scenario before we decide to commit our drop decks to it.
Let’s consider it a staging area where we can:
This also scales up for smaller groups. If they can capture one or more objectives, they create new drop zones for players to reinforce their group at. If resource points actually provide resources for players to use via their drop decks then a scenario that has one or more of these captured will naturally draw more players to that scenario.
We not only enable and can recognise the contribution of solo players and small groups, but we allow a single scenario to grow and potentially turn into a full blown invasion. However, we also need to accept that it does not need to escalate. There is nothing wrong with some border raids and skirmishes. We can make our own missions.
Solo players and small groups tend to get swallowed up in the grander scheme of ‘Capturing the planet’ and it’s really only the big units that get recognised. This is not about rewards for tagging the planet, it’s about making each player able to contribute something. In an open system, because the level of player participation could vary from 1 to 12 (and I'm going to suggest up to 36/side when queued in waves), then the contribution of smaller numbers of players is really about preparing a scenario for greater participation.
However, given multiple objectives, the mode does not have to only be about capturing the planet. Why can't we raid for resources, or simply scout out some objectives?
THE SOLUTION
We need to recognise that scouting in a scenario can prepare that scenario for larger groups.
We need to recognise that capturing or raiding minor objectives for resource points can also prepare that scenario for greater participation.
CHANGES NEEDED
With an open system, we need to be able to view a scenario before we decide to commit our drop decks to it.
Let’s consider it a staging area where we can:
- View the map
- See what objectives have been discovered or captured.
- See what players and units are already deployed or preparing to be deployed for our team (A more visible queue system)
- See Intel reports of enemies spotted and identified.
- Have a pool of Intel Reports from scouting actions that we can draw from when we drop.
This also scales up for smaller groups. If they can capture one or more objectives, they create new drop zones for players to reinforce their group at. If resource points actually provide resources for players to use via their drop decks then a scenario that has one or more of these captured will naturally draw more players to that scenario.
We not only enable and can recognise the contribution of solo players and small groups, but we allow a single scenario to grow and potentially turn into a full blown invasion. However, we also need to accept that it does not need to escalate. There is nothing wrong with some border raids and skirmishes. We can make our own missions.
GATING PLAYERS
Spoiler
We want to encourage players to become involved in Faction Play, but we also want players to recognise that the mode is a bigger game, can be more punishing and you need to be prepared for it. With an open system where we have multiple objectives and may drop in and out of the battle, we can allow veteran units to co-exist alongside smaller groups and solo players with a few additional changes. I don't believe we need to put in some hard limits such as 'must have X mastered mechs' or 'must be at least tier Y'. The one exception might be the use of trial mechs, however the mode is already pretty tough in that we must have 4 mechs to make a drop deck. Players who do not have 4 mechs to fit in the drop tonnage limit will default to using the trial mechs.
THE SOLUTION
In opening up the mode we can also remove some of these restrictions. An open system will mean there is an entirely different dynamic to how the battles play out and we should be able to enjoy it at both ends of the spectrum from casual play through to hard core.
To start, change the drop deck minimum limitations so that we can bring a single mech and there is no minimum tonnage limit. This will allow players who do not have much time, or do not have a full stable of mechs to participate a little easier. It also means that players can begin to participate a bit quicker and then we could impose some limitations such as 'no trial mechs'.
We can also look outside of hard limits such as this and introduce some new features such as a Logisitics Cost just to join the battle. An up front cost to take your mechs into battle provides a visible economic risk to players. It is a soft limitation that does not stop players, but may give us pause before rushing in.
CHANGES NEEDED
We can rethink 'gating' as a requirement if the restrictions on the mode are relaxed.
In an open system where a varying level of player participation is possible, a player that brings a single mech can still deploy into a scenario and enjoy the mode contributing as much as they can in the time that they have.Large groups can also look at utilizing lances for specific roles where they might want only light mechs to be actively engaged in scouting the entire time.
If we have larger maps and more objectives, then it’s entirely possible that new players may be involved in minor actions on the other side of them map, contributing in their own way. At the same time, veteran units and groups can be engaged in high level battles over major objectives and getting the challenge and co-ordination they want.
There are two sides to the argument under the current system. Casual players who would like to enjoy the mode but not be forced to face large pre-made teams, and the pre-made teams that get frustrated with casual players not bringing fully mastered, optimized mechs and not working as a team.
We don't need to split the two.
We don't even need a match maker.
We just need options and the ability to look before we leap.
Ultimately, if we expand the game my removing some restrictions and the ‘capture the planet’ necessity, having newer players participating should be less of a concern. By using a staging area to provide more visibility we also let players make that choice on whether they want to mix groups or the level of conflict they would like to engage in.
The Call to Arms could also be directed at the appropriate players according to the threat. Solo drops on a planet might only warrant a call to arms going out to free lancers for example. But drop as a group and there is a call to loyalist units and mercenaries currently in the region. We don't need a 12 man pre-made dropping against a solo freelancer using the call to arms. Let's use that feature a little better.
We want to encourage players to become involved in Faction Play, but we also want players to recognise that the mode is a bigger game, can be more punishing and you need to be prepared for it. With an open system where we have multiple objectives and may drop in and out of the battle, we can allow veteran units to co-exist alongside smaller groups and solo players with a few additional changes. I don't believe we need to put in some hard limits such as 'must have X mastered mechs' or 'must be at least tier Y'. The one exception might be the use of trial mechs, however the mode is already pretty tough in that we must have 4 mechs to make a drop deck. Players who do not have 4 mechs to fit in the drop tonnage limit will default to using the trial mechs.
THE SOLUTION
In opening up the mode we can also remove some of these restrictions. An open system will mean there is an entirely different dynamic to how the battles play out and we should be able to enjoy it at both ends of the spectrum from casual play through to hard core.
To start, change the drop deck minimum limitations so that we can bring a single mech and there is no minimum tonnage limit. This will allow players who do not have much time, or do not have a full stable of mechs to participate a little easier. It also means that players can begin to participate a bit quicker and then we could impose some limitations such as 'no trial mechs'.
We can also look outside of hard limits such as this and introduce some new features such as a Logisitics Cost just to join the battle. An up front cost to take your mechs into battle provides a visible economic risk to players. It is a soft limitation that does not stop players, but may give us pause before rushing in.
CHANGES NEEDED
We can rethink 'gating' as a requirement if the restrictions on the mode are relaxed.
In an open system where a varying level of player participation is possible, a player that brings a single mech can still deploy into a scenario and enjoy the mode contributing as much as they can in the time that they have.Large groups can also look at utilizing lances for specific roles where they might want only light mechs to be actively engaged in scouting the entire time.
If we have larger maps and more objectives, then it’s entirely possible that new players may be involved in minor actions on the other side of them map, contributing in their own way. At the same time, veteran units and groups can be engaged in high level battles over major objectives and getting the challenge and co-ordination they want.
There are two sides to the argument under the current system. Casual players who would like to enjoy the mode but not be forced to face large pre-made teams, and the pre-made teams that get frustrated with casual players not bringing fully mastered, optimized mechs and not working as a team.
We don't need to split the two.
We don't even need a match maker.
We just need options and the ability to look before we leap.
Ultimately, if we expand the game my removing some restrictions and the ‘capture the planet’ necessity, having newer players participating should be less of a concern. By using a staging area to provide more visibility we also let players make that choice on whether they want to mix groups or the level of conflict they would like to engage in.
The Call to Arms could also be directed at the appropriate players according to the threat. Solo drops on a planet might only warrant a call to arms going out to free lancers for example. But drop as a group and there is a call to loyalist units and mercenaries currently in the region. We don't need a 12 man pre-made dropping against a solo freelancer using the call to arms. Let's use that feature a little better.
Edited by 50 50, 26 June 2017 - 02:55 AM.
