Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Malchome

It Is Not Travel In A Strategy Game It Is Logistics

Recommended Posts

I would like to not see teleporting, I feel it would ruin the territorial control a lot. 

Maybe if you needed 6 people to continually use their time to hold it activated, then I would be fine with it. (Since they would put a lot of resources to teleport players, but at the same time, if something were to go wrong, it should be devastating. (To the summoners as well as the players going through.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Teleportation costs victory points. Only way to truly make the cost meaningful.


Official "Bad Person" of Crowfall

"I think 1/3rd of my postcount is telling people that we aren't turning into a PvE / casual / broad audience game." -

Tully

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got a few ideas on that. 

 

1.) Player-built fast travel locations. Whether it's a sea dock, a flight tower, or a teleportation pond, let them be buildable by players, and destroyable by players. If you want to set up your destination just over the hill from the enemy encampment, you'd better be ready to defend it if your assault force hasn't shown up yet when they realize it's there.

 

Great Idea but i would go even further and allow ppl to chose to destroy or capture them, If the enemy captures your Teleportation pond they can take the portal in the oposite direction possibly right into the middle of your own base.

 

for flight towers / docks this shouldn't work tho but just link the tower/dock with your own towers/docks

Edited by Sephirothbe

...obstacles do not exist to be surrendered to, but only to be broken. "***** ******"
I am not afraid of an army of lions led by a sheep; I am afraid of an army of sheep led by a lion. "Alexander the Great"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flaws of ESO-like forward camps.

First I was comparing to EVE-Online setting up Player Owned Stations.

For Online/Spawn Time - Time when object is in game/destroyable before Shield is active.

Allow 15+ minutes for a small tower, 30+ minutes for a medium tower and 60+ minutes for a large tower.

That line was from EVE-University's wiki so just go here for in depth detail on a good process for setting up a "Forward Camp" orany player owned destroyable objects.

 

[link]http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/POS_Setup[/link]

 

 

1. One person may summon an army

The way ESO forward camps were made is that you only need 1 player to set up a forward camp (I'll abbreviate it to FC from now on) and once the FC was up a large number of players could have ported to it.

So you basically had one scout go deep in enemy territory, have him put a FC up and BOOM, instant warfare with 30 people sieging a keep.

It takes 1 person in a transport ship to deploy a station. That ship is essentially defenseless so having friends around is a good idea. So while 1 could technically stealth setup a FC, they are taking a lot of risk.

 

2. Only one forward camp may be up at time in a given area

ESO forward camps had a radius and inside that radius no other forward camp could be placed.

This lead to griefers (player playing for the opposite realm but with an alt in the other faction) put FC up far away from the heat of the battle (but so that the area was still covered by the edge of the forward camp radius), so the opponents couldn't put the forward camp into an ideal position and have them waste time after razzing to run the middle of the battle. Imagine that you are sieging a rep and the forward camp is put really far away front he keep that you want to siege, but close enough for not letting put you another FC into an ideal/more convenient spot. I hope you can understand, sorry for my poor english.

Yes there should be no restrictive bubble around the walls of a FC, the walls them selves should be the barrier which are destroyable.

 

3. Players could carry several forward camps with them and the forward camp set up time was only few seconds

This lead to spam onward camps as soon as one was destroyed, making the fights in ESO even more zeros vs zerg

See statement about size of object to deploy. The core/keystone for a FC should be large enough that only 1 can fit in an inventory of a Caravan/Wagon when implemented. Or take several parts where 1 part fills a players inventory. These parts could then be placed independently of one another like building a house/ship in ArchAge. Actually in AA, it required placement of a core item and then Trade Packs which required you to move at a snail's pace while carrying. That may be a good alternative.

 

4. Players could join any forward camp in the map regardless of their position

This in part reconnects to point 1 (just another aspect of the same issue) which led zergs actually "teleporting" from spot to spot nullifying and trivialising the territorial aspect of the game.

If a group takes time and effort to set up a FC like a mix of EVE and AA, and also have the items be destroyable then so what. They payed the time and effort to get said advantage. Time to suck it up and either destroy the FC or accept defeat.

 

 

Way to fix ESO-style forward camps

Mind that the suggestions below were hinted at ESO developers several times. It's still a mystery for me why even alter all the feedback we ended up with having that kind of awful FC...

 

A. More than one player is needed to set up a forward camp and you cannot respawn at a forward camp unless you have reached (and maybe activated it) by physical reaching it.

This will fix problem 1 and 4 together. No more one person can summon an army playstyle and no more mass teleporting through the map. If you want to siege a keep/castle you have to REACH it, activate the FC (the activation for you only and the activation process should be repeated by any single player that want to use it) and then you are allowed to respawn at the FC you selected until it gets destroyed (or sun out of spawns)

 

B. No limits on the number and position of forward camps, but you may be linked to one FC only and with a long cooldown before you can change it (even if your FC gets destroyed).

This will fix problem 2 (so briefers can not longer put forward camp into a strategical position to sabotage the battle) but at the same time makes destroying forwards camps meaningful, because if your FC gets destroyed you are prevented to relink to another one until your cool down is ended. So, even if we end up having 5 FC really close one to the other, as soon as yours is destroyed you are really at disadvantage and have to play more defensively (avoid dieting) until your coooldown is up again and you can link to a new one.

 

C. Forwards camps should take a while to set up and the materials needed for setting one up should be so much that it requires few players to bring all the materials to the selected place. 

This would protect from point 3 and the spammage of the FC.

 

 

Sorry for the long read, I hope you have find it insightful

 

TL;DR: ESO forward camps had several major flaws and if we end up having forward camps in Crowfall we should avoid the same mistakes ESO did and learn from it.

Actually if you have a large enough base and invest enough resources and can afford to build multiple FCs and then a secondary item to bridge/gate them together more power to them. It should just have an increasing price the more that is done.

Edited by Malchome

Crowfall Division Captain (The Older Gamers) <TOG> - http://www.theoldergamers.com/

Personal Website - http://www.mmo-report.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...