Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
mr roadkill
Mystery Incorporated
20
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 13:20:00 -
[1] - Quote
Some suggestions from the DUST forums.... for the EVE DEVS.....
Factional Warefare
Currently Eve pilots flip the system ownership by running small PVE sites and having to stay in range of a marker for a certain length of time. The more sites that are run the more dust battles are spawned in that system (as I understand it) and the more dust battles that are won by your faction the quicker the sites the EVE players run flip the ownership...
This seems to have a nice symbiosis to it but if the system is going to flip eventually anyway why would the eve pilot care?
Now Imagine if owning planets was really the key to system ownership.
Imagine layers of space superiority around each conquerable planet in an FW system.... each planet contributing to the system ownership.
Deep space Engagement - In EvE the pilots must declare their intent to capture a system by engaging the enemy fleets spread throughout the system (as they are now). There are only a few of these that spawn at any one time and are simply used to contest that system rather than flip it the way they are now.
Space Superiority - PVE sites. These are similar to the standard EVE sites that appear in an FW system maybe higher end that need a bigger ship/more ships. Instead of appearing all over the place they are grouped about planets. Imagine its the systems owners deploying their fleet to engage attackers. If the enemy wins enough of these they have space superiority around a particular planet. They do not own the system however. When a site is being run it appears on the overview for anyone in the system just as it does now to announce a PVP opportunity to the enemy.
If a faction gains space superiority the world is flagged to all EVE FW pilots as being contested, and Battles for mercs begin to spawn on that world or worlds (attacking multiple planets if superiority is gained over more than one world?.)
Orbital Superiority - The district Satellites. when a battle begins on the planet the district satellite activates and people can warp to it to support their faction on the ground. The existing mechanic in eve is that you stay around the satellite for a period of time to connect to it then the mercs can call in a OB. This gives an advantage to the mercs fighting on the same side as the pilots with orbital superiority.
Planetside Superiority (excuse the poor choice of words)
The dust mercs have won (or lost) with the aid or hindrance of their EVE buddies. The world has been captured and the system Ownership slides towards (or stays with) the winning side.
The above smacks a little of where eve goes dust mercs follow. However I think Dust mercs should be able to raid a planet owned by the opposition to say hack its communications grid. Upon a successful raid all their allies are notified of a particular planets vulnerability (EVE and mercs alike) and must fight to get into the system while the enemy try to lock the system down. The attackers must then try to gain space and orbital superiority as above.
Or something, lol.....
Other Ideas to expand DUST/Legion integration without changing the DUST Client.
On top of my Factional warefare post earlier....
Another way to make EVE players need mercs players would be to allow more regions to take part in PC.
And begin testing for possible SOV changes in EVE by allowing PC contracts in NPC owned nullsec so that an alliance or corp can be overseer of worlds in that space.. Well the reason for the MERC group is obvious they get paid?
For the EVE group that put out the contract maybe because they own the world(s) they receive resources from the planet(s) into the corp HQ of the alliances holding corp at a rate per day that they own the planet (or if its just a corp that put out the contract resources direct into the Corp HQ hanger.
What is this planetary resource? Don't know, that's up to the Dev's - Maybe the materials to make Player Owned Star-Gates (Since that appears to be where eve is currently heading. CCP Seagull, make it so lol). Does DUST need a client change to implement any of these?
I wouldn't have thought so? There is already an area in the battle finder for corp contracts and other contracts these requests from EVE could just appear in these areas. Sure the fights are the same old fights we have always fought, but it gives extra opportunities for us to talk to EVE players, get support from EVE players and they will NEED us in order to dominate other EVE players.
Maybe start utilizing some of the other types of planet, I know this is a bit lame but we have a volcano mood - use this for fighting on a LAVA planet, The snow theme for an Ice world. temperate is the more lush of the current themes and the truly rocky one for Barren.... to allow more planets in EVE to be conquerable.
Honestly CCP this game seems so much more expandable and (maybe) without even touching the DUST client itself. Its set in New Eden just enable the extra content that side.... New content doesn't necessarily mean weapons and maps.
I realize the mechanics chosen were to minimize damage to EVE should DUST (or Merc game play) Fail. But DUST has been running for 2 years or there abouts now and the thing that bugs quite a few players is how shallowly the game play affects EVE to the point that EVE pilots dont actually need Mercs. This is turn is one of the reasons DUST was seen to fail in my opinion the solid feeling of one community//one universe//one war just isn't there. Take a risk and just codet he mechanics so they they are easily reverted if everything goes pearshaped. Even if DUSt is replaced in the long run the mechanics for integration need testing... why not do it now. |
mr roadkill
Mystery Incorporated
20
|
Posted - 2014.08.16 13:22:00 -
[2] - Quote
I almost added rather than letting another game fail to the end of that sentence...
sure DUST doesnt have 40,000 players on simultaniously (it only has around 4000 at the best of times currently but I wouldnt call a 2 year old game that held a steady player count for the last 18 months a terrible failure)..
All of these changes i believe can be made by only changing things EVE side or on the DB itself hence I am posting them here as well as in the dust forums.. Maybe someone can tell me if i'm wrong.
So come on CCP what do you say.....? |
Neutral Haulermeister
The Corporate Raiders Top Men.
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 08:24:00 -
[3] - Quote
DUST is dead, Legion is Vaporware, and EVE is not bad.
Give FW pilots a way to know where battles are happening, it allows for infantry to get more support, for more fights to be had and makes sense that the factions would tell their pilots what is going on with the ground war. |
mr roadkill
Mystery Incorporated
20
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 08:36:00 -
[4] - Quote
Neutral Haulermeister wrote:DUST is dead, Legion is Vaporware, and EVE is not bad.
Give FW pilots a way to know where battles are happening, it allows for infantry to get more support, for more fights to be had and makes sense that the factions would tell their pilots what is going on with the ground war.
Now thats optimism for you . No one said EVE was bad.
CCP should add your idea to the list though, Show eve pilots where the battles are taking place once underway. |
Neutral Haulermeister
The Corporate Raiders Top Men.
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 20:43:00 -
[5] - Quote
mr roadkill wrote:Neutral Haulermeister wrote:DUST is dead, Legion is Vaporware, and EVE is not bad.
Give FW pilots a way to know where battles are happening, it allows for infantry to get more support, for more fights to be had and makes sense that the factions would tell their pilots what is going on with the ground war. Now thats optimism for you . No one said EVE was bad. CCP should add your idea to the list though, Show eve pilots where the battles are taking place once underway. meh, played DUST a little, and it hurts to see one's work go down the drain like that, I mean DUST's problems were simple, Too Little/Crappy Dev Power, No Link to EVE, and to a lesser degree the platform. |
mr roadkill
Mystery Incorporated
20
|
Posted - 2014.08.17 21:03:00 -
[6] - Quote
Neutral Haulermeister wrote: meh, played DUST a little, and it hurts to see one's work go down the drain like that, I mean DUST's problems were simple, Too Little/Crappy Dev Power, No Link to EVE, and to a lesser degree the platform.
I agree I play now and then. Mainly EVE however (or another space game that will remain nameless but i love my cobra mk3 damnit).
Caution for damaging EVE was always going to play against the EVE/DUST link and the remaining mechanics left in the playing field for dust were negligible mainly social tools (shared chat, in game mail and voice). The affects of DUST upon EVE were merely granting a bonus here and there rather than providing the depth of immersion we were sold on.
If CCP are serious about this or the 'vapourware' successor on PC the integration must be done right. Just because CCP are looking to use PC doesn't mean the community will feel more integrated its still FPS players and MMO Players and a cross-section of each that play both.
We are now at a point in DUSTs lifespan were CCP are not making updated to the DUST client itself rather then numbers behind balance. Presumably updating the client has a cost behind that CCP are at this time (or any time in the future perhaps) unwilling to make.
Which is why I am suggesting mechanics behind eve that could change to provide some of the original scope to DUST which will not be anything more than it is without them. In some cases i am actually suggesting an enhancement to the mechanics of eve (in my opinion anyway lol). There could be no news reports of how a merc corp was bribed to hand this system of planets over to an alliances foes and changed the course of history. And is that because no one plays DUST? No its because DUST has no affect on EVE and the communities really don't need each other - I have suggested several ways in which this could happen.
If any game with a future connection to EVE is to succeed CCP will need to plan its mechanics carefully yes, but make the communities actually need to connect as if it were the same game... But have a back out plan should it go wrong, rather than appearing to have no plan at all. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |