18 replies to this topic

[Max Grayson]

• Faction Worlds – Are fought over by Faction players. These planets buffer core and border worlds, and do not play a significant role in major historical events. Rewards for controlling these planets are directly linked to global bonuses and abilities associated with a player’s Faction.

• Community Warfare – The ability to let the players take part in epic combat for territorial control.

Bryan Ekman, on 03 May 2012 - 01:38 PM, said:




Yes!

Faction Player - Passive Participation
Merc Player - Active Participation




Ok I believe i understand on how merc companies are going to work, but based on the above information. Who or what game mechanics determines which house players gets to fight for their house in House Territorial battles?

Or will house vs house battles for territory be determine by a bunch of PUG battles and the side with the most "points" after so many battles wins the planet?

Edited by Max Grayson, 18 May 2012 - 08:05 AM.

[Tannhauser Gate]

The devs havent covered this yet.

[Max Grayson]

LakeDaemon, on 18 May 2012 - 09:03 AM, said:

The devs havent covered this yet.

Anyone have an speculations on how this would work?

[Tannhauser Gate]

Speculation wouldnt answer your question, create misinformation, and it would cause the thread to be locked anyway.

[Max Grayson]

LakeDaemon, on 18 May 2012 - 09:10 AM, said:

Speculation wouldnt answer your question, create misinformation, and it would cause the thread to be locked anyway.

while your posts are over 547 you must be new here! what else do we have to do on these forums other then speculate and wait for answers

Edited by Max Grayson, 18 May 2012 - 09:12 AM.

[Tannhauser Gate]

Max Grayson, on 18 May 2012 - 09:12 AM, said:

while your posts are over 547 you must be new here! what else do we have to do on these forums other then speculate and wait for answers

ok well, clearly you just didnt like my reply to your thread and decided to troll me. Whatever, I wish well.

[Xaks]

Max Grayson, on 18 May 2012 - 09:12 AM, said:

while your posts are over 547 you must be new here! what else do we have to do on these forums other then speculate and wait for answers

Ponder the deep philosophical nuances of how many Atlases are needed to create a Lyran scout lance?

[Skylarr]

Xaks, on 18 May 2012 - 09:16 AM, said:

Ponder the deep philosophical nuances of how many Atlases are needed to create a Lyran scout lance?

FOOL! They do put a Banshees on point.

Edited by Skylarr, 18 May 2012 - 09:23 AM.

[Toothman]

If you survive a one on one with the mighty sarlaac then make the kessel run in under 1.1 parsecs then your faction gets a +1

[Sassori]

The point he's trying to make is nowhere in that announcement/tweat/whatever from Bryan is it saying Faction = Passive and Merc = Active.

All it's saying is that Core worlds are very valuable, and that the system is designed to be inclusive to all players.

That's... pretty much it.

[Redshift2k5]

I would imagine it's probably every battle by every player that tallies score towards a Faction's control or loss of a contested world. If you're in a House, then it's already clear where the fruits of your labours are going.

The merc groups will pick up a contract sponsored by one of the Houses, and their performance will accrue progress for that House, and their next match will accrue progress for the House who pays the next contract.

[SteelJaws]

Skylarr, on 18 May 2012 - 09:18 AM, said:

FOOL! They do put a Banshees on point.

No, the Banshee is on 2nd Base, its the Stalker thats on First.

[SquareSphere]

SteelJaws, on 18 May 2012 - 09:29 AM, said:

No, the Banshee is on 2nd Base, its the Stalker thats on First.

Seriously? Stalker on First? Every high born Lyran knows it's ALWAYS a Zeus on First.

[Gun Bear]

The following is speculation

I would think that with houses and house units the players can choose to join matches for control of a planet, or just regular matches.

[Pheonixwolf]

kinda makes me wonder about the Merc bidding system and how the Devs will deal with the likelyhood that there won't be enough Planets for every unit to have a contract, as well as the variables related to that system, but i am content to wait and see.

[Morashtak]

From the dev blogs and answers we can glean a few things;

A planet will be fought over many times in a given time frame, maybe 24 hours but not said in detail. The results will be tallied and the winner is decided by which faction had a better win-lose ratio.

A group of House players can join as a group so we will see pre-made House teams going up against each other from time to time.

So it is implied that a player or group of players can determine the ownership of a planet.

What is not said is how one can choose which planets are being fought over.

Speculation can range from picking it from a list to it being the "Battle Planet of the Day" or somewhere in the middle, a mix, etc.

[Redshift2k5]

Pheonixwolf, on 18 May 2012 - 10:54 AM, said:

kinda makes me wonder about the Merc bidding system and how the Devs will deal with the likelyhood that there won't be enough Planets for every unit to have a contract, as well as the variables related to that system, but i am content to wait and see.

Gaining a plant will probably take a lot more than one match, and I don't think merc corps will ever hold a planet; They will show up to fight for a house that paid them to, then move on to the next mercenary battle.

[Sleeping Bear]

My guess is that Merc contract planets will be near periphery borders while house faction planets will be on house borders, with the more coreward worlds holding higher faction value/rewards. This would fall in with battletech lore. Since periphery border worlds were more often then not defended by mercenaries with weaker or undefined house allegiance while the more important house border planets were invariably defended or attacked by house units or mercenary units with exemplary house loyalties. My guess also about important story worlds would be planets that have specific historical events occuring on them, such as Tharkad, New Avalon, and Tukkayid to name a few.

[FrostPaw]

In 5 minutes of thinking it through...

I imagine it will not be a single match that decides the fate of a planet. If that were the case entire galaxies could be conquered in a day.

I imagine a planet is chosen by the devs for each faction to "fight over" then the two factions capable of fighting for that planet are tallied up over a weeks play say for example faction A and faction B fight over a planet on the border between their worlds.

At the end of the week the scores are added up from all the players of each faction and compared to see who gains control of said planet.

It doesn't matter so much if they fight against their opposing faction or another faction not in the planetary conflict, the fact they are fighting counts. (I think this because spending a week fighting on one map for one planet seems a bit dull, they could have multiple maps for multiple planets I suppose but that would make the planets less individual, it's also possible Faction A simply can't find enough faction B enemies to get points from so that shouldn't be the fault of faction A).

By "scores" it could be points, kills, wins, whatever, however in the interest of balance I think a percentage would have to be calculated rather than a number because one faction may have significantly more players playing matches which on numbers alone would skew the result. A percentage has a better chance of giving a factional average.

The Victor has the highest ranking players of that faction hold a vote for the target of the next attack. Until players reach those higher ranks the planets are chosen by devs.

Edited by FrostPaw, 18 May 2012 - 01:12 PM.