Generator - Page 2

GoldDragon · 2011-02-23, 04:17 PM

Originally Posted by kaffis

But any massive game that requires teamwork will always have an element of herding cats.

The idea, then, is to make it so the cats will want to do productive things. Sure *I* have no problem defending a quiet base. But my squad might. And defending something alone is so boring and unproductive that even I can't stomach it.

It also, however, doesn't reward the commander who can actually convince a squad of people to defend before the enemy zerg arrives for doing so. I think we can agree that it's (potentially) a productive use of his time and leadership, but his chance of ever getting recognized for it is zero, while platoons of uncoordinated, leaderless people are pumping CEP into 3 guys just for following the zerg around.

Amen. One of the things my outfit does is all the work that the zerg will ignore. If we see a link that an enemy can exploit, we will do our best to set up a defense (usually large amounts of CE as a babysitter so we can continue trying to help people make progress...) before it becomes a problem. Often we've been in the middle of setting up defenses when people arrive and we've been able to call for help.

That said help usually just ignores us until we get screwed over by the 20+ incoming against our 5-10.

Anyway, I have to say I like the potential ideas behind a delayed shutdown. That aside, if you pull the plug then no lights for you. As much as these delayed shutdowns and secondary generators might simulate more realistic set ups, I'm not sure they have a place in PlanetSide. Initially reading through I would have agreed with the thought but after seeing the counter arguments I am inclined to disagree.

As it has been said several times you either defend your assets or lose them. However I recognize the validity of needing an incentive to defend. While tactical players see the incentive as not losing stuff, the people who play for experience (for "fun"... to each their own) do not and are perfectly happy leaving it to the strategists and older players (I know several who's twitch reflex isn't at its best who do things such as ANTs and Defenses etc). My suggestion here would be SOI / Asset XP Bonuses. That is to say if you are the only person within your base or near an important asset, you should gain extra experience for defending it. I feel this applies to attackers as well so there is more reason to use tactical strikes and not just rushing the next base on the list.

This is just another take on the situation. It's impossible to make everyone happy, that's just how things are, so lets hope in all of these suggestions (pray that SOE actually pays attention...) we get something that works well enough we can enjoy it.

CutterJohn · 2011-02-23, 04:38 PM

Its strange how the drudge work falls on the shoulders of vets who no longer need nor benefit from xp rewards. It was an awesome day when I finally maxed out, as I could do what I felt like, regardless of its rewards, without feeling guilt that I was playing non optimally. I could go an entire evening with only a handful of kills, doing things that were important to the fight, but not in any way trackable or rewardable by a computer.

One thing I'm pretty sure could be done is an exp reward for guarding a hack. Tack on a 50% bonus for being their the whole 15 minutes.

As for the generators.. I don't mind the idea, but I think it should be expanded on. More generators, more stuff that can be blown or hacked in the process of taking a base. Links that sever you from cont benefits, breach points that can be blown to provide an additional avenue for invasion, more spawn areas, allowing for capture of partial areas of the base.

Still, I do think it was a tad too OP, and the remaining players in the base should have some ability to macguyver temporary fixes in. Like a terminal where a MAX unit could plug his suit in, and power a respawn tube or equipment terminal. Except he takes damage each spawn(and ofc no other maxs could spawn).

DviddLeff · 2011-02-23, 05:12 PM

Yeah, while people are willing to do stuff for no XP gain, when doing the tactical thing does not earn the most experience, you know something is wrong with the system.

Examples:

Guarding a base hack when everyone else leaves
Not letting the enemy hack your base as a commander
Ending a base fight by pushing the enemy out of the SOI
Killing the spawn tubes of a beseiged base.
Contributing to a kill, even if you dont get the kill shot

Firefly · 2011-02-23, 05:22 PM

Yeah but the thing is, you're basically saying "I want some sort of XP for something that might not happen". Which involves predictions and Miss Cleo and shit. If I were a PS dev and you suggested to me that you get XP for hanging around the generator room for guard duty, I'd tell you to pound sand. There's no fucking way to predict what Joe Q. Account-holder is going to do. Sorry. You get XP for other support roles. If they did that, you'd cry about not getting XP when they don't show, or bitch about the amount of XP you DID get when one random jackass with a boomer collection showed up. Your "reward" for guarding the generator room is called "not getting fucked in the ass and losing your base". The end.

GoldDragon · 2011-02-23, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by DviddLeff

Examples:

Guarding a base hack when everyone else leaves
Not letting the enemy hack your base as a commander
Ending a base fight by pushing the enemy out of the SOI
Killing the spawn tubes of a besieged base.
Contributing to a kill, even if you don't get the kill shot

What's interesting about this is that if they address these issues then the whole game changes. PlanetSide in it's prime was a fun, reasonably good game. This kind of change (which applies to generator defense and attack as well) is one of the things that would really set PlanetSide apart from other MMO's in the industry. It would not only be the one true MMOFPS but it would reward players for being tactical and thinking through their action and not just kill whoring their entire PS career.

Edit: In note of Firefly's comments I don't think bonus experience or rewards should be applied if nothing is happening, more along the lines of if something happens and you're there to defend against it then you get the bonus. Also the XP for support roles would be nice too, my outfit has a dedicated med who will gladly give up shooting someone to heal a friendly. That kind of support deserves experience.

Firefly · 2011-02-23, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by GoldDragon

I don't think bonus experience or rewards should be applied if nothing is happening, more along the lines of if something happens and you're there to defend against it then you get the bonus.

They have this. It's called, you get XP for killing tangos. Guy walks into your generator, you kill him. You get XP. Where is the issue?

Originally Posted by GoldDragon

Also the XP for support roles would be nice too, my outfit has a dedicated med who will gladly give up shooting someone to heal a friendly. That kind of support deserves experience.

Did they remove SEP/Support XP? Is that no longer in the game?

GoldDragon · 2011-02-23, 05:40 PM

Originally Posted by Firefly

They have this. It's called, you get XP for killing tangos. Guy walks into your generator, you kill him. You get XP. Where is the issue?

Technically there isn't one. Though being the person who is usually away from the large fight taking care of towers, bases, etc, I wish there was more gratification experience wise for taking that initiative. Not necessarily a set bonus mind, I made a comment earlier about an X% bonus depending on the number of friendlies within a certain proximity. This system unrefined has it's flaws but it's something that could be investigated.

Originally Posted by Firefly

Did they remove SEP/Support XP? Is that no longer in the game?

No it's definitely there, but I'm not sure what the ratio of SEP / BEP is. That is to say you generally get more XP for killing than support. Not saying that's wrong but something that could be revisited even if nothing is ultimately changed.

Firefly · 2011-02-23, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by GoldDragon

This system unrefined has it's flaws but it's something that could be investigated.

I'm sure it is, I just can't see any immediate benefits to it. Not to say you're wrong, or I'm right, I'm just not understanding what the issue is. Sure you may not get an XP reward, but you gain a reward by virtue of having prevented the enemy from taking your base that easily.

Originally Posted by GoldDragon

No it's definitely there, but I'm not sure what the ratio of SEP / BEP is. That is to say you generally get more XP for killing than support. Not saying that's wrong but something that could be revisited even if nothing is ultimately changed.

To be fair, I know a lot of people like to be engineers and medics. Back in the day, there simply weren't enough people doing this. So there was always a need for one of each in a squad, plus a hacker. And the Support XP was decent, if I recall. Now with everyone having the ability to be a Swiss Army Knife, it's not a big part of the game.

Plus, being a medic or an engineer is its own reward. You keep your squad effective. A squad which remains in the field longer gets more XP as a whole. When you lose people to the respawn, that's time away from the fight. Your XP gets diminished and your troop strength isn't at max, so you run the risk of being overrun. Having those support roles there is its own reward, being that support role is its own reward. The XP should be proportionate - they're earning shared XP by being in the zone with their squad and engaging targets on their own. They're also getting support XP from doing their medic/engineer job. I don't see why they should get more than combatants.

kaffis · 2011-02-23, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by Firefly

Yeah but the thing is, you're basically saying "I want some sort of XP for something that might not happen". Which involves predictions and Miss Cleo and shit. If I were a PS dev and you suggested to me that you get XP for hanging around the generator room for guard duty, I'd tell you to pound sand. There's no fucking way to predict what Joe Q. Account-holder is going to do. Sorry. You get XP for other support roles. If they did that, you'd cry about not getting XP when they don't show, or bitch about the amount of XP you DID get when one random jackass with a boomer collection showed up. Your "reward" for guarding the generator room is called "not getting fucked in the ass and losing your base". The end.

I've never advocated xp for doing nothing, or for being "present," as it were, when nothing is happening.

Instead, what I'd like to see is that when you make a prediction of future action, and move to counter it -- when that action does show up, you're rewarded more (because you took the gamble and risked wasting your time if it didn't show up) than if you had shown up after the action arrived.

I wouldn't give xp for patrolling an empty SOI. I'd give a 200% xp bonus for the first 1, maybe 2 minutes of kills within the SOI after a long lull. The bonus goes away after the first interior door is crossed through, or whatever (so if you are first on the scene, but after the attackers have penetrated the outer defenses, you don't get the bonus).

That stacks with a 35% bonus to BEP for defensive kills (remember, attackers get hack xp in addition to kill xp), and commanders get CEP at a rate of 10% per kill while in a friendly SOI, as well as a "resecure" xp bonus of 10% of the capture CEP bonus as a reward for stopping a hack.

Once the hack has been made, the bonuses reverse -- the people guarding the hack get the 35% bonus to BEP.

This incentivizes "good" empire-based play habits that are not rewarded by the current system, and are thus ignored by most players. So often and consistently ignored, at some points in the game's history, that zergs of people would swarm around a continent on pure offense, with only token defenses, capturing bases in circles as they willingly gave up ones behind them. Or commanders would allow bases to be hacked and captured, so they could immediately retake them because defending the base in the first place wasn't worth CEP.

Firefly · 2011-02-23, 05:53 PM

See kaffis, now you're thinking and putting those ideas out there in a more concrete form. That's what I like, instead of vague abstract ideas - it makes the debate more fleshed out.

Originally Posted by kaffis

Instead, what I'd like to see is that when you make a prediction of future action, and move to counter it -- when that action does show up, you're rewarded more (because you took the gamble and risked wasting your time if it didn't show up) than if you had shown up after the action arrived.

Again, this goes back to my earlier statement. You're asking a developer to code in some sort of prediction. I'm not about to stop and answer a multiple-choice questionnaire in mid-combat.

"Greetings Player! Did you:

A) predict this would happen?
B) happen to get lucky?

Please select an answer so we can determine your XP"

There's no way a video game developer can implement a system that correctly deduces that you predicted something and responded appropriately, that I know of - I'd love to be proven wrong on that, honestly. A guy walks into the gen room and you shoot him or he shoots you. Either you get the XP or he gets the XP. That's about as much as we can predict. Anything else involves hypotheticals and predicting the future. If you know a way to do that, I'm all ears.

CutterJohn · 2011-02-23, 06:04 PM

Originally Posted by Firefly

Your "reward" for guarding the generator room is called "not getting fucked in the ass and losing your base". The end.

Considering there is no gain when defending the base, they may not care. Plenty of people don't actually give a shit about the conquest, they just want to kill stuff. The base trading gives an interesting backdrop to killing stuff, and adds some short term purpose for why you are killing shit here, and not there, but don't pretend everyone cares about that, or at least cares all the time.

If you want people that don't care to do an unrewarding activity, you're going to be waiting a while. You can either reward them for the activity, or not care when they don't do it and do it yourself.

Originally Posted by Firefly

There's no way a video game developer can implement a system that correctly deduces that you predicted something and responded appropriately, that I know of - I'd love to be proven wrong on that, honestly. A guy walks into the gen room and you shoot him or he shoots you. Either you get the XP or he gets the XP. That's about as much as we can predict. Anything else involves hypotheticals and predicting the future. If you know a way to do that, I'm all ears.

Give a 500% reward for killing someone in a contested bases generator if nobody has been killed in there for the past 5 minutes. There. You've successfully rewarded guarding the gen by offering an hefty incentive for killing baddies in there. If you want to reward the guarding action, you can get a reward if he kills you, since your death means people are alerted, or that you will alert them(which if you care enough to be in the gen, you would).

Firefly · 2011-02-23, 06:07 PM

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

Considering there is no gain when defending the base, they may not care.

Right, pretty much every person that ever defended a base totally did it for some OTHER reason and not for the sake of not letting the "bad guys" roll over them. =/

CutterJohn · 2011-02-23, 06:27 PM

some people != pretty much every person. Nice try though.

And yes, there were people that were fighting there because thats where the fight was. If the fight moves elsewhere, they will follow. Not because they are defending anything, but because thats where the action is.

GoldDragon · 2011-02-23, 06:42 PM

The psychology of why people fight were they do isn't in question. Most people play to kill things. I think that's going to happen no matter what. This discussion has become more of a "How should we reward the players who think about the strategy and tactics behind generator defense, CC defense, etc." The zerg is more than likely going to exist no matter how hard you try to implement a tactics-based system. As I try to figure out why this is important...

Who wants cookies?

Firefly · 2011-02-23, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by GoldDragon

This discussion has become more of a "How should we reward the players who think about the strategy and tactics behind generator defense, CC defense, etc."

I think it's more of a "I want XP for predicting that the generator was going to be attacked" thread.

And about as realistically as possible, it's already in-game. It's called, TR guy guards the generator. NC guy shows up with a Decimator. TR guy caps him in the face. TR guy gets XP.