fodev.net
Other => FOnline:2238 Forum => Archives => General Game Discussion => Topic started by: Ghosthack on October 06, 2011, 02:57:48 pm
-
Town Control - the feature everyone loves, hates or at least probably has an opinion about.
We've been discussing this a bit internally, but we want to ask the community as well and see what you all think about the TC system.
So, we're unsure what to do with it for the next session, and with domination mode not making it until then, there's not going to be an alternative for TC yet (mechanics wise).
-
Ah shit i dont know, i been so much away from game last months..
But i think most will agree on that militia should be removed, for number of reasons not even worth writing about.
Also main reason why militia came in was cause of chosen soldiers and they're multiple bluesuit capture, but that got fixed with the timezone system, i dont know why militia wasnt removed then and there..
But anyway for next season i would like to see timewindows again, maybe not 1 each day for 1 timezone, but maybe couple of times, 3 intervals or whatever.. my opinon
-
I think that mercs introduced in militia is not good, because can be exploited having merc leader alts, and reinforce the militia in like 10 seconds (i know this by heart, having wiped all the militia and suddenly BOOM 10 mercs transform in militia with lsw miniguns rocket launchers etc +400 hp each)
But militia should be changed, because when u buy some times get all shitty militia with knifes spears etc, and sometimes you get powerfull ones, and u have to kill the weak ones for having more slot for buying more.
I proposs that militia should have a organizated spawn rate. Lets say, when u buy militia you have more options:
Buy militia Sergeant (Max 4 ). U get RLauncher, Minigun, or LSW)
Buy militia Corporal (Max 4 ). U get Sniper rifle, Laser rifle, or Gauss pistol
Buy militia Private (Max 8 ). U get Smg, assault rifle, pk90)
The buying time should remain the same.
And MAYBE some option named "Reinforcement", that allow you fill "private" ranks with militia with shotguns or magnuns or wathever tier 1 shitty weapons. But this option can be only used 1 time per 2 hour.
Max militia total: 16
And no melee ones, because they are very very very bad. Taking out mercs, and adding a little more stronger militia it whould be better for defenders for having more options for buying, and not abusable by adding in no time 10-15 militia again with rocker launchers etc.
-
My thoughts about TC is that it's classic and fits to the fonline nicely you just have to adapt it correctly and people will not hate it or get bored by playing it.
First of all you could decrease the timer it's really not fun to fight the timer and gangs don't need so much time to actually reach the city and start a fight , then again new TC zones in cities wouldn't hurt , it would force players to adapt new tactics at least some change to the current TC system. Decrease the strength of militia in overall and especially nerf merc militia almost to the ground , just a simple principle when a faction gathers to take a city , they expect to fight players not npc's and come on it's not fun to do 2 one hex bursts in a militia and it doesn't die , wheres the common sense in that. I could talk about militia all day long but i guess this will do.
I can't give opinion about timewindows i don't really know what it is due to i wasn't playing at the time , didn't know the game at all :) so if someone could enlighten me i would appreciate it very much.
I have nothing else on my mind right now , if something pops up i will edit post.
-
I would be all in for timewindows, seperated in 3. When it's the time when there's the lowest amount of players online (4-7 AM gmt+1), only Klamath and Modoc should be available to capture. When it's the primetime with the most players online (around 8-10 PM gmt+1), All towns including the two biggest ones (Broken Hills & Redding) would available. Rest of the times there would be 4 (Klamath, Modoc, Gecko, Den) available ones for taking.
Militia is another problem, adding mercs (and slaves) with big variety of weapons and insane amount of health has to go away.
I wouldn't like to see militia removed completely, but it can't stay as it is now. Two of the bigger towns should have the availability for good experienced militia (with lots of hp, metal / combat armors, good guns), maybe a low chance for getting a good militiant when buying them.
Gecko and Den ("tier 2 towns") should have leather armor with not-that-bad guns and metal armor ones with a bit less good guns (something like shotguns, assault rifles and such, 200-300hp).
Klamath and Modoc should have militia, but only some weak unexperienced peasants (~100hp, leather jacket, pistols, melee weapons, sawed-off shotguns).
The militia amount in the cities is also a problem, 20 is too many. Maybe put 5 to Tier 1 towns, 8 to tier 2 towns, and 12-15 to tier 3 towns.
There would also have to be a way to avoid "easy militia killing" (camping in a small house with only one entrance, drastically slowing the rate of militia's assault for attackers.)
-
There would also have to be a way to avoid "easy militia killing" (camping in a small house with only one entrance, drastically slowing the rate of militia's assault for attackers.)
I pretty much agree to Nexxos , some very nice ideas.
Militia should remember hostile players for a short time period for example 15 minutes , it would make it a hell of a lot harder to suicide burst militia to the last one and it just makes sense.
By the way i like how people vote for tc to be removed but don't give any explanation why , i think those votes should be ignored :)
-
What about let the militia system as it is while the town is not possible to be taken and remove militia while town is in a timewindows. That way TC will happen without PVE but factions handling the town can still organize events or whatever RP outside from the timewindows without the need of 10 BAs players to protect the town. There is also bugs to solve like militia killing each other and adding militia while timer is on.
-
1 - fix militia bug - u can add militia when ur taking city when the timer is on - fix it
2 - disable possibilty to add mercs to militia
3 - nerf militia -> total ammount up to 6, without that sick crit chance/dmg output, 200hp max, leather armors, no gaus/pulse/sniper/RL/avenger/lsw/g11/bozar etc <-> the purpose of militia should be just to take out some trolls during holding the city for some longer time - not to be even a factor in PvP overall
4 - add timewindows like Nexxos propose
5 - delete/hard nerf mercs
about those silly people who'r voting for -> "remove tc", ur mad rp maniacs wanna to kill this game even more ?, without PvP oriented players this server gona be antoher TLA like ghostown without real interaction with other players - u wanna pve ? play F1/F2
Im surprised that devs are even considering such options in poll....
-
I like more the nexxos suggestion. Tumbs up
-
my suggestion is a mix of what you guys said already:
1 - disable mercs/slaves militia
2 - nerf militia according to Nexxos' suggestion, make them smarter and less numbered, TC is about pvp after all, not pve
3 - add time windows (1 hour every 3 hours)
4 - reduce the timer, from 15 to 10 minutes
5 - radio-militia, when the town is under attack (if militia is alive) the militia calls for help in the official gang radio channel
// edit
ah, didn't write the "whys"... well:
1 - it can lead to the possibility to have merc leaders waiting in world map to add militia as soon as the attacking gang manages to kill the militia
2 - a more balanced and less numbered militia will make things easier for the attacker and less time consuming
3 - that way all the pvp oriented players will concentrate to do TC only during some times of the day, which won't result in "attacking the timer"
4 - 15 minutes are way too much, 10 minutes should be enough to gather players and attack
5 - another feature that would help the gang to better protect their town
-
TC time for every town
no militia at all
Thanks
-
I voted for "other", because my reasons are many. My opinions and reasonings will be stated underneath,
in the catagories A-a, B-b, C-c and so forth.
Captial Letters A: = Opinion.
Normal Letters a: = Reason.
A: I think town control should be moved to small areas outside the towns, like an outpost, power plants or fields, as an exsample, but not the current places which already exsist, but new small areas, which are well built and defendable, naturally dependt upon the nieghbouring towns resources and income, so a lower town income, would give a worse bunker,power plant, jet fields and so forth, while one with a higher town income, would have alot more benefits.
a: What you earn from a town normally has to be scavenged from somewhere or planted and harvested or in some cases feed, doing this will make the towns more safer, for the lower level players and role players, and the town controll players would not loose anything at all, except a new change of scenery. :)
B: Mercenaries and Guards, should have lower tier weapons as the higher tier weapons are harder to scavenge, and make. Their price should also be lowered then.
b: Well if they have lower tier weapons, people would not be so dependent upon them, also if you wish to invest the time(As a player.) to give and make them better weapons and amour you(As the player.) should do that, this will also give the crafting characters more work.
Signed Roin.
-
current tc system is begins to remind me "old mariage". we all have lost moments of delight and fun, long time ago. time for radical changes, or maybe even divorce ;)
at present time, the biggest problem is definitely militia. they are just simple to powerful, we need to gather really large number of people to handle them without any fails. this is one of many things which _MUST_ to be changed. we can remove militia, that will also remoeve problem of militians as a pk tool. of course there is some gangs who actaully trying to care about their town, milita can be really useful in right hands, but they definitely need some nerfs.
few suggestions:
- reduce maximum number of milita to [6-8], [4] after obtaining control.
- fix of bug with adding mercenaries to militia during timer.
- fix in 'gear check' - i can bet, every gang had a lot of problems with taking control with RL's and LSW's.
- changes in 'tc-zones' old are just simple to schematic (especialy when other teams cant invent something new, and they are just coping other gangs :). that will be a playing tc on new-old maps.
- TC WINDOWS ! - till we dont have any other ideas for TC, its only one solution for the 'timezones' problem
some time ago, we was speaking aobut it with other gang leaders. everyone agreed - tc windows are really needed. dont want to discriminate other timezones then european GMT+1 but we need to find some compromise. so i sguestin something like that:
- 'biggests , most importants' cities like Broken Hills, Redding and maybe DEN should be able to capture once per day,
for example. (time in GMT+1)
Den 19:00-20:00
Broken Hills 20:00-21:00
Den 21:00-22:00
other cites like Gecko, Modoc and Klamath should be able to control 2-3 times per day
of course thats create some problems with reward, which is very important aspect of TC. that should be changed but not that much. reward cant give too much advantage over other players who dont give a shit about TC and cant force them for doing TC
at the moment, nobody cares about reward but its very important thing after 1-3 weeks after start of the new season, any ideas ?
probably thats all for now, i will write something more if discusion deve;ops in good direction, ahh and sorry for my english.
____________________________
A: I think town control should be moved to small areas outside the towns, like an outpost, power plants or fields, as an exsample, but not the current places which already exsist, but new small areas, which are well built and defendable, naturally dependt upon the nieghbouring towns resources and income, so a lower town income, would give a worse bunker,power plant, jet fields and so forth, while one with a higher town income, would have alot more benefits.
i would really like to see this in fonline. controling some places like - stables for drugs, mariposa for energy weapons/mfc and sierra for ammo and totaly changed TC - workbenches should be availble only in towns and you will get money for every % of crafted items. you can pick to sides - bad and eas - shoot everyone on side, block wasteland technological developnet or good and harder path - protect the town and get some profits ;)
-
How to fix current TC a bit:
1. Balance militia. Max 4-6 of them, 160-250 HP, without crazy critical hit rate, _without_ weapons like: all unarmed/melee, gauss pistol, pulse pistol. Also disable merc/slave adding.
2. Keep the old timer. Some people don't remember but there was long discussion long ago about it, when the timer was 20mins long. 10mins is minimum, longer than 15mins is boring.
3. Taking towns the second day after server update is totally imbalanced, as was proved one year ago; so make TC disabled at least during first week.
4. Timewindows suck deeply if they happen once per 24h, let's say 1h long. It's just about who gathers bigger swarm over the town for a short time, then the town can be left totally unguarded. Also, some people will be unable to participate in it: work, school, another timezone or sth. If anything, time windows should happen every 6 or 8 hours, 1-1.5 hour long. Also it would be nice if they were overlapping.
5. Fix gear check; not accepting Rocket Launchers or Light Support Weapons is stupid, as mentioned.
___________________________
Now I'll post a bit different approach to TC, similar to what was in 2nd session but improved.
1. Remove TC timer.
2. A faction can take the town anytime (gear/number check applies), but the control is changed to "None" after they leave the town. For example: 6 people needed to capture the town, but if at any given time there will be less than 2 of them present in the town, the control is lost. The check for faction members could happen each minute, not a big deal I guess;
3. When there is no controlling faction, the militia acts like typical NPCs in the town (hostile only if attacked). Militia doesn't attack the team that wants to capture the town.
4. The reward is given more frequently (let's say, 15 or 30 minutes) but only when the town is controlled by a faction.
5. Remove TC zones. So, if some gang would be smart enough to capture the town and hide in a small room while waiting for the reward, you could come with your team and take the town back from them.
This way, we would have following issues fixed:
- the need of time windows, completely;
- small-squad runs taking all towns while other teams are sleeping; it would give them absolutely nothing;
- taking the town only for pipboy status and locker reward, as you would have to actually be present in the town;
- towns that are controlled by a faction but no one stays there;
- partially swarms; well, you could always swarm the controlling team, but remember that hardly anyone can keep a swarm present in the town for a longer time (as opposed to TC time windows);
- probably easier to implement, test and balance.
In my opinion it's stupid that the town can be controlled with no gang member present in the town, showing up only occasionally for the reward and when somebody starts pvp beacon (capturing).
-
____________________________
i would really like to see this in fonline. controling some places like - stables for drugs, mariposa for energy weapons/mfc and sierra for ammo and totaly changed TC - workbenches should be availble only in towns and you will get money for every % of crafted items. you can pick to sides - bad and eas - shoot everyone on side, block wasteland technological developnet or good and harder path - protect the town and get some profits ;)
Precisly... ;) Though I am a little bit wary, if all the current small areas, like the mines would be conquerable. Then it would be a really harsh wasteland to live in. :)
Though if some of them where conquerable like the Mordino stables, and the Sierra army depot, and the Energy plants. Like you said Maszrum, it would be good. To put it in a short term all minor areas, except the already guarded mines. ;)
-
Id go with 2 TC windows each day for every city, separated by at least 8 hours and maintained by the city owner (city owner decides what time is the most appropriate for them). Other than that, I agree with balio, with having militia in the town that can be or doesnt have to nerfed.
If you want to preserve battle militia, I suggest no mercs, no instabuying after capture and reduce maximum limit.
Fix equip requirement for taking the town.
Change the reward to ammo, drugs, weapons, recieving only when some members are in the city.
Also I almost forgot, it wouldnt hurt to have city-wide TC zones.
EDIT: 3. Taking towns the second day after server update is totally imbalanced, as was proved one year ago; so make TC disabled at least during first week.
This is an interesting idea, while I agree it gives huge advantage to the taker, I think it might be part of the game. We all know that Rogues are very good at "recovering" from wipe quickly and thus I assume it as a part of those players´ skills.
Anyway, I wouldnt mind if there was a week period just for the sake of fair play.
-
If you want to preserve battle militia, I suggest no mercs, no instabuying after capture and reduce maximum limit.
Also crit chances and max. HP reduce
-
For me,
#town control
#before control
Have to kill militia : Too much for a group even 2-3 times larger than required. We success to kill them because they are not smart. (go in our trap militia!)
It's nice to have this lapse of time for people to exit town or for defender to try make something
#launch and during control
Mayor to start control : Ok
counter 10 to 15 minutes : Ok (boring when nothing happen but defender need time to prepare when warned, when timer is 10 minutes we don't have times if base is too far)
Minimal number of guys : Ok
Blue zone : Ok
Minimal stuff : Need to add some weapon (rocket launcher and lsw are the most needed I think)
Preview desatived : Ok
#After
Mayor dialog <Add militian> :
Need a limit less than 20 militias, maybe between 5 and 10 militias.
Need to remove walking militian, unarmed/melee militian, burster/roquet/grenade militian or hero militian (gauss, pulse pistol, ..). (Need militia, not army nor gecko hunter)
Need to remove their ability to make major critic
Chest/reward : Limit increase of reward after some days
Add Mercenary/Slave : Remove this possibility.
------
#Others
Settings of militia : Before we got option to set militia to attack robber, to warn people who don't control town to draw their weapon etc, don't remember if it's worked but can be nice if we can set some law in town for player.
I like the idea of radio warning : Maybe if a militian attack something and still attack after 5 seconds, send an alert, when end send the stop of alert. (faction radio or custom radio on choice?)
Number of town for one team : Limit number of town a team can control? 3-4 max? Big team have to choose what town they want (or don't want ..).
Allow NPC faction's player to control a town : we don't really success to do it but maybe it's possible? but we have to know, it can be nice.
TC window : Yeah i like idea of only some city which can be take in 'time windows' and other which can be take all the time
/me love color
-
This is an interesting idea, while I agree it gives huge advantage to the taker, I think it might be part of the game. We all know that Rogues are very good at "recovering" from wipe quickly and thus I assume it as a part of those players´ skills.
Anyway, I wouldnt mind if there was a week period just for the sake of fair play.
Not really. We took all towns the second day and received no action at all for two following weeks. Can't see anything fun in that, though the flow of caps was strong.
Number of town for one team : Limit number of town a team can control? 3-4 max? Big team have to choose what town they want (or don't want ..)
It won't work, you can have multiple chars added to different bases and take all towns with your "additional" faction names.
-
2. A faction can take the town anytime (gear/number check applies), but the control is changed to "None" after they leave the town. For example: 6 people needed to capture the town, but if at any given time there will be less than 2 of them present in the town, the control is lost. The check for faction members could happen each minute, not a big deal I guess;
3. When there is no controlling faction, the militia acts like typical NPCs in the town (hostile only if attacked). Militia doesn't attack the team that wants to capture the town.
This I love.
5. Remove TC zones. So, if some gang would be smart enough to capture the town and hide in a small room while waiting for the reward, you could come with your team and take the town back from them.
I see something... Bad in it, idea is good, TC zones could be removed, but in some town (for example Redding, Klamath) people will just camp inside Sheriff/Mayor building.
-
In my opinion it's stupid that the town can be controlled with no gang member present in the town, showing up only occasionally for the reward and when somebody starts pvp beacon (capturing).
Have some imagination they took and control the city the inhabitants are loyal because they are " protected " by players and militia that is under player command so they don't give up the their loyalty any second until some other team shows up and holds the city for a while , imagine the tc timer as a period you have to hold the city to gain the people trust in order to actually claim the city , why would the inhabitants give up the protection to anyone who enters the city ?
Still it would make sense if the timer would appear to only the faction witch is controlling the city , imagine some civilian or mayor contacting your faction and notifying you :)
-
Now I'll post a bit different approach to TC, similar to what was in 2nd session but improved.
1. Remove TC timer.
2. A faction can take the town anytime (gear/number check applies), but the control is changed to "None" after they leave the town. For example: 6 people needed to capture the town, but if at any given time there will be less than 2 of them present in the town, the control is lost. The check for faction members could happen each minute, not a big deal I guess;
3. When there is no controlling faction, the militia acts like typical NPCs in the town (hostile only if attacked). Militia doesn't attack the team that wants to capture the town.
4. The reward is given more frequently (let's say, 15 or 30 minutes) but only when the town is controlled by a faction.
5. Remove TC zones. So, if some gang would be smart enough to capture the town and hide in a small room while waiting for the reward, you could come with your team and take the town back from them.
This way, we would have following issues fixed:
- the need of time windows, completely;
- small-squad runs taking all towns while other teams are sleeping; it would give them absolutely nothing;
- taking the town only for pipboy status and locker reward, as you would have to actually be present in the town;
- towns that are controlled by a faction but no one stays there;
- partially swarms; well, you could always swarm the controlling team, but remember that hardly anyone can keep a swarm present in the town for a longer time (as opposed to TC time windows);
- probably easier to implement, test and balance.
In my opinion it's stupid that the town can be controlled with no gang member present in the town, showing up only occasionally for the reward and when somebody starts pvp beacon (capturing).
THIS. One hundred times THIS. Also, it'd make those gay 15 person+ swarms go away and actually reward skillful play instead of skillful IRC diplomacy.
-
How to fix current TC a bit:
On Requiem, as you probably know, TC works like this and would work fine here.
The thing I dont like is that any gang could retake the town instantly. I think there should be a time zone and TC time lets say 1 or 2 minutes. Defending team should have a chance to interupt the taking if they patrol the city, not just camp sherrifs house.
But in general, with this we would see 2nd era back, but better!
Hmm, second era, better...Who could not love that?
-
Well I'm not TCer, but after hearing about "they came at night and captured town because we were sleeping" and "they came at day and captured town because we were at work" and "you can't even come to fight players and doing only PvE" etc.
I said some days ago how to fix it there: http://fodev.net/forum/index.php?topic=18590.msg155947#msg155947
Kilgore said this:
A faction can take the town anytime (gear/number check applies), but the control is changed to "None" after they leave the town.
And that's enough, other paragraphs can be removed. Of course I said about players total in town, not faction members only.
And to make people stand in town I said there: http://fodev.net/forum/index.php?topic=18690.msg154489#msg154489
But further I've been told that I'm not TCer and words about "removing TC is good" are really silly, while there were no word about TC at all, so I don't know what they commented, may be they read something else.
So all you need to make TC better is create a reason for players to stay at town without leaving it + income from controling town based on alive players in town and/or alive faction members in town. No players = no income, no faction member = no control.
The thing I dont like is that any gang could retake the town instantly.
Forget about sheriffs office, who cares about sheriffs office. Noone need to talk to sheriff, if you want to capture town, go and kill all faction members in location, when they are dead, controling faction = none, then well.... then go to sheriffs office ;p and take control. If you'll just come to sheriffs office, it'll be useless until atleast one (or 2 or 3 or whatever number) of faction members of controling faction are alive and in town. So they (controling faction) don't need to live in sheriffs office.
-
Wrong
Forget about sheriffs office, who cares about sheriffs office.
You are wrong there.
If three players hide in Redding somewhere, its much easier to retake the town through sherrif. Same goes for lot of other towns.
If we want to keep current system of rewards increasing in time, which would be great for such system, we should keep little timer.
-
somewhere
Then they not only need to be in town location but in "alive" part of town, a TC zone that covers all used buildings (traders, prof teachers, etc.) and land near and between those buildings, so if some faction member will hide in toilet or mine or behind rocks at border of screen, he'll be counted as he left town. Because it's a bit hard to control and hold town sitting in toilet on edge of town.
-
I vote for remove.
-
So here`s one penny from me:
militia - should be removed from the game at all (mercs too);
area zone - remove;
time zone - never;
Taking the control of a city should be like 3-5 hours and the gang has not to be inside it. For retaking it should be like gang can come and talk to sherif about taking control, then the owning gang must arive to city in about for example 20 minutes and say `we are still owners`;P(of course they could do that after win the gang tries take it). One gang can try take city once per 3-5 hours. That can make situation that nobody will take city, but it`s good replacement for militia. Of course system like that is something very new and different so it needs to think about it for make it working usable. In my opinion with system like this could be lots of PVP.
-
I think it should not be redone, but there definitely needs to be more emphasis on player faction as well as much less involvement of NPCs.
Also it would probably make sense if cooperation was double sided, like NPCs protecting towns would have full personas, accept different kind of equipment, including armor and weaponry, and the town could be possibly victim of NPC attack.
Rewards from doing TC would be then related to various NPCs working in the town (eg. no uranium if mutant miners keep biting dust).
In other words, player like to destruct and kill that is right, but they want to construct much as that. Control should not be question of presence, but of care - think of those zillion web games.
-
Well I'm not TCer
Neither I am.
Because it's a bit hard to control and hold town sitting in toilet on edge of town.
Toilet Control? :>
By town actually controlled by faction X I'd like to see something like it was in Redding - apes guarding streets, citizens wandering around, miners coming in and out. City was alive, people were gathering together, travelling to their hideouts and coming back, city was alive. This was pretty unique, last time something similiar was in Broken Hills.
But regular Tree Control looks and means, that bunch of d00dz swarms at city being ... erm ... "ultimate battlefield" or "solid warzone" to shoot militia and/or another swarm, making "Fallout" nothing more than just a word in game's name. Cheaters are welcomed, as more = better. Funny thing is that factions actually able to participate are like 5? 10?
So if it has to stay like this - remove plox, as many other features were gone due to constant abusing (bank interest, caravan TB traps or mutant mercs for example - thank you, PvP apes for such great improvements).
-
Wichura play setlers or some other economic game.
-
THIS. One hundred times THIS. Also, it'd make those gay 15 person+ swarms go away and actually reward skillful play instead of skillful IRC diplomacy.
This is kinda awkward , do you realize you just called most of the server players gay because they like pvp in large groups ?
Another thing , you clearly don't know anything about " skill " if that's what you call it , why the fuck do you even post here if you don't participate in TC enough so that someone could actually believe you have a viable point why TC should be changed like that , " gay 15+ person swarms " is not a reason , it's a miserable cry.
Friendly advice , shut up garbage.
Now there's a chance you gonna suck up my given information or try to be even more useless in this discussion.
Neither I am.Toilet Control? :>
But regular Tree Control looks and means, that bunch of d00dz swarms at city being ... erm ... "ultimate battlefield" or "solid warzone" to shoot militia and/or another swarm, making "Fallout" nothing more than just a word in game's name. Cheaters are welcomed, as more = better. Funny thing is that factions actually able to participate are like 5? 10?
Do you really think your clever if you quote me ?
The funny thing war , battlefields , warzones etc. etc. is a part of fallout , hence " war , war never changes " do i really have to repeat myself in all the discussions , like fallout tactics pure combat or you gonna start mumbling that " it isn't original fallout " then you should really go stick your head in a toilet , flush it and control the stream.
Is it so hard to realize that not everyone is into roleplaying and there are other aspects of the game that may seem not so important to you but like half of the server or even more players play fonline2238 because of it's unique feature to actually battle others in this fonline2238 world like requiem has most of the players hardcore pvp'ers.Then again some may like fallout for it's unique roleplay aspect and the story itself or a good mix of both like tttla is a major fighting party in the wasteland with roleplay touch and don't start giving me crap about how good their RP is , they like it and enjoy it.
About proxies heh , when devs make a game that doesn't promote cheating , well you won't see cheaters anymore.
Talking about the version of TC when you actually don't control it unless you have some men sitting in the town , are you all blind or what ? I just imagine how people will leave fully armed powerbuilds in the city sitting all day on a proxy , what's the point that will just make the game unnecessary annoying and " cheaters " benefit.
The idea about timewindows still stay the most viable option right now.
Like those windows should be at least 2 hours long and there shouldn't be a cap how much times you can take the city , just 2 hours of pure action and no restrictions.
-
This is kinda awkward , do you realize you just called most of the server players gay because they like pvp in large groups ?
Another thing , you clearly don't know anything about " skill " if that's what you call it , why the fuck do you even post here if you don't participate in TC enough so that someone could actually believe you have a viable point why TC should be changed like that , " gay 15+ person swarms " is not a reason , it's a miserable cry.
Friendly advice , shut up garbage.
Now there's a chance you gonna suck up my given information or try to be even more useless in this discussion.
You're being aggressive for no reason. Small PvP (let's say below 10v10) is more demanding in terms of skill than swarm battles which are too often resolved on IRC even before they start. Small scale PvP gives you more action due to simpler logistics etc. so arguably you get more bang for your buck. Besides, I never said large scale PvP is not enjoyable (heck, NA vs DA was fun while it lasted), but it involves a lot of waiting and when the numbers are close the luck factor is just too large. Anyone with some experience will tell you just that. And in terms of skill... well, my gang totally dominated the wastes back in 2009 which resulted in the first large alliance ever being formed just to counter us and I was in the team that won the Ares tournament (didn't see you around back then, lol) and I've been playing PvP with just a few months of break since then, so I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about when I mention "skill". You're free to think otherwise, but you're going to sound funny when you put it like that.
-
Yawn.
Dear T-888, unfortunately it seems that you have never seen any other TC setting (there were several of them) so all your smartness isn't based on anything else than current TC setting. Speaking about leaving powerbuild guarding the town, haha, are you able to handle playing 2 powerbuilds simultaneously without getting killed every fucking time? I doubt it, to be honest I saw such action only once and it was still far from being effective enough.
If you played before, you would know that any possible pvp action happened always in the last few minutes of each TC window, not 2 hours, and it's based on gameplay experience from 3rd session and not mine or your imagination. Speaking about 2 hours of pure action is ridiculous for anyone who played more than one session. Speaking about Nice Boat's TC experience you're still missing critically, as he participated in much more TC fights than you, my dear. So before you continue your theorycrafting, maybe let post those people who are/were playing this game more than you :>
-
What about let the militia system as it is while the town is not possible to be taken and remove militia while town is in a timewindows. That way TC will happen without PVE but factions handling the town can still organize events or whatever RP outside from the timewindows without the need of 10 BAs players to protect the town. There is also bugs to solve like militia killing each other and adding militia while timer is on.
I agree with that guy. Milicians are mercenaries employed by the faction controling the town. When the job is done, milicians come back home.
So let's say the town stay secured and untakable for 1 day when controled by a faction. When the time is over, the town become neutral and the milicians go away. So the faction will have to defend the town by itself.
When the timer is running, milicians protect the town and become secured as NCR is for now (so people can come in town to mine and trade). I think that will offer some good battles for PvP and other players will enjoy to come safely in northern cities.
So everyone is happy ;D
-
You're being aggressive for no reason. Small PvP (let's say below 10v10) is more demanding in terms of skill than swarm battles which are too often resolved on IRC even before they start.Small scale PvP gives you more action due to simpler logistics etc. so arguably you get more bang for your buck. Besides, I never said large scale PvP is not enjoyable (heck, NA vs DA was fun while it lasted), but it involves a lot of waiting and when the numbers are close the luck factor is just too large.
Small scale pvp is no way more skill demanding than large scale , the same principles apply in large scale pvp , i have had a lot pvp since i started to play this game and i can say this by observation , i can make mistakes in small scale pvp and get away with them not get vaporized in a second due to a simple fact that i face less opponents and my mistakes are not so costly as in large scale pvp.
In big battles , just one mistake , just one bad decision where are you standing , gonna stand , run or shoot every single bit counts whether you survive and it is more intensive due to less chance of survival as an individual not as a team if i think about it it's almost the same. I have experienced this many times , the difference itself.
Anyone with some experience will tell you just that. And in terms of skill... well, my gang totally dominated the wastes back in 2009 which led to the first large alliance and I was in the team that won the Ares tournament (didn't see you around back then, lol) and I've been playing PvP with just a few months of break since then, so I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about when I mention "skill". You're free to think otherwise, but you're going to sound funny when you put it like that.
That was in 2009 each season pvp changes in this server , different principles apply.
Yawn.
Dear T-888, unfortunately it seems that you have never seen any other TC setting (there were several of them) so all your smartness isn't based on anything else than current TC setting. Speaking about leaving powerbuild guarding the town, haha, are you able to handle playing 2 powerbuilds simultaneously without getting killed every fucking time? I doubt it, to be honest I saw such action only once and it was still far from being effective enough.
You didn't get the point , you leave a powerbuild in the city just to control it and be ready to defend it when someone comes ASAP , you don't need to control 2 powerbuilds simultaneously , just one in case someone comes. Get it now ?
Well you are right i haven't experienced other tc settings , but it doesn't answer my argument.
If you played before, you would know that any possible pvp action happened always in the last few minutes of each TC window, not 2 hours, and it's based on gameplay experience from 3rd session and not mine or your imagination. Speaking about 2 hours of pure action is ridiculous for anyone who played more than one session.
I think my idea is a bit different didn't point that out , for 2 hours you can take or retake the city countless times.
ehmm.... Yawn
btw my " smartness " is based on logic too not only some flat facts.
and i don't care how much you have played the game if i don't see any strong arguments from your side , you can change my mind if you actually tell me something other than " i have been here longer than you "
-
Small scale pvp is no way more skill demanding than large scale , the same principles apply in large scale pvp , i have had a lot pvp since i started to play this game and i can say this by observation , i can make mistakes in small scale pvp and get away with them not get vaporized in a second due to a simple fact that i face less opponents and my mistakes are not so costly as in large scale pvp.
In big battles , just one mistake , just one bad decision where are you standing , gonna stand , run or shoot every single bit counts whether you survive and it is more intensive due to less chance of survival as an individual not as a team if i think about it it's almost the same. I have experienced this many times , the difference itself.
In large scale PvP there are situations when you face odds that you can't overcome no matter how well you play. In small scale PvP when you die, it's entirely your fault. That's why I said small scale PvP demands more skill and allows for more tactical finesse (no matter how well the commander does his job, you can't maneuvre with 20 people as well as you can with 5). And if you say you can make mistakes in small scale PvP you obviously haven't seen too many well executed room takedowns or flanking moves. Combat used to be more lethal before all the damage nerfs, but it still is pretty hardcore even when you're fighting 2v2.
That was in 2009 each season pvp changes in this server , different principles apply.
Not really, no. You still use the same techniques for movement and engagement you used back in 2009, the only "new" thing was the introduction of formations like sniper lines or BG lines which became necessary when you fought 20 vs 20, but that was way back in 2010. I'd say I still have way more experience than you - it's just a fact, nothing to get angry about. Besides how can you compare the current TC with what was in 2009 if you haven't even played back in 2009?
-
Remove millita.
Domination mode.
As mazrum said, 15 - 30 minutes for reward.
Make more TC-able places.
Game is fun once more :)
-
In large scale PvP there are situations when you face odds that you can't overcome no matter how well you play. In small scale PvP when you die, it's entirely your fault.
If you face odds you can't overcome it is you made a mistake or the team made a mistake. In small scale pvp when you die it's entirely your fault and in big battles you make excuse " oh noes they were more than me " right ? I mean man your so wrong off the track.
That's why I said small scale PvP demands more skill and allows for more tactical finesse (no matter how well the commander does his job, you can't maneuvre with 20 people as well as you can with 5).
It's actually a challenge to maneuver with 20 people as good as 5 people that's why it takes more skill , goddammit. I think you haven't played with msh.
And if you say you can make mistakes in small scale PvP you obviously haven't seen too many well executed room takedowns or flanking moves. Combat used to be more lethal before all the damage nerfs, but it still is pretty hardcore even when you're fighting 2v2.
I haven't seen what ? You know you haven't seen me 1 vs 4 guys , i'm basicly starting to talk like you. None of that is a viable argument.
Not really, no. You still use the same techniques for movement and engagement you used back in 2009, the only "new" thing was the introduction of formations like sniper lines or BG lines which became necessary when you fought 20 vs 20, but that was way back in 2010. I'd say I still have way more experience than you - it's just a fact, nothing to get angry about.
Combat used to be more lethal before all the damage nerfs, but it still is pretty hardcore even when you're fighting 2v2.
I quoted you to answer you. The same techniques for movement and engagement , the pvp was different overall people had a completly different experience , your are in denial with your own arguments man.
btw i watched some very old videos of pvp the whole pvp was so weird and allien to what it is now. I remember some screenshots of powerbuilds in 2009/2010 , like every build was some kind of tank , how can the same techniques apply ?
Still i don't see any strong arguments , don't care man how experienced you are then.
-
but it involves a lot of waiting
So go find another game. This is no "hurr durr I click you first, me better!!1!!" (no offense, but the combat itself is rather simple). There is much more possibilities with every new player included, if you can imagine only that the more they are, the better they can rush, it's a little sad. On contrary with just few people around it's more about random generator, regrouping from respawn, etc. Clearly artificial limitations and not "skill". Though would you really butcher the game combat system to make it faster? It's almost unique to have game where combat is based on positioning and not egos.
Anyway it's not just about the quality of optimal matchup. TC should more importantly think about server population. I don't think it's cool if every guy can get few friends and go TC, but it shouldn't just result in everyone working together to gain massive advantages.
I think that optimally there should be artificially balanced (somewhat helping to eliminate gear/manpower advantage) warzones yielding nice enough rewards, while Town controls being relatively long term and more social/minigame based. Taking over a town should then be result of long preparations and every one of them being memorable event. This should make sure that there is enough of ego action going on as well, because more people will use those warzones than attempt to TC. This should be good, if you ever want town control to play some social role. Though there should be some way to eliminate or reduce the profit from TC that would make rich richer.
Still, there is a need to discourage players from banding all together to completely outtake minorities from the system. This will probably work good by making several cities easier to take over, and more rewarding for "weaker" groups.
Right now if some small force gets Klamath, they either get facerolled by bored people, or they will lose it in matter of very few days - essentially killing any economic and social profit from the control.
I would really like to see the control being longer term status, and social part of it being more important than economic boost. But nothing to be achieved without other massive changes, as there is little to do than to kill or craft, and it's much more profitable to just kill everyone you can.
Remember this is just my opinion, so you might not agree with it. But just say, why would you really play just TC if there was more balanced and more complicated (like announced landmines and stuff), while also not killing of social part of the game, even though most of pvpers do not care about it anymore.
-
I agree with that guy. Milicians are mercenaries employed by the faction controling the town. When the job is done, milicians come back home.
So let's say the town stay secured and untakable for 1 day when controled by a faction. When the time is over, the town become neutral and the milicians go away. So the faction will have to defend the town by itself.
When the timer is running, milicians protect the town and become secured as NCR is for now (so people can come in town to mine and trade). I think that will offer some good battles for PvP and other players will enjoy to come safely in northern cities.
So everyone is happy ;D
NO PLEASE NOOOO!!! I don`t want happy talkers, they can happy talk on irc. No militia! North is north.
-
If you face odds you can't overcome it is you made a mistake or the team made a mistake. In small scale pvp when you die it's entirely your fault and in big battles you make excuse " oh noes they were more than me " right ? I mean man your so wrong off the track.
That's bullshit and you know it. Every frontal assault with swarms is a gamble. Every. Single. One. You don't need mad skills to run up to the enemy, spend your AP and if you're alive heal and do that again. There's a multitude of scenarios like that and every single thing that demands player skills in large battle is an element that comes from small battles. The only thing large battles add is formations (which are bullshit and encourage camping) and that random factor I was talking about (lots and lots of frontal clashes that are won by people who have more luck in terms of damage).
It's actually a challenge to maneuver with 20 people as good as 5 people that's why it takes more skill , goddammit. I think you haven't played with msh.
I think msh would be amused if he heard that. Also msh doesn't really like swarms, just ask him why.
I haven't seen what ? You know you haven't seen me 1 vs 4 guys , i'm basicly starting to talk like you. None of that is a viable argument.
You're sounding like a little kid that feels threatened somebody just might take those swarms away. Newsflash, there's hardly a player that really likes this style of play, you're a (very vocal I admit) minority.
I quoted you to answer you. The same techniques for movement and engagement , the pvp was different overall people had a completly different experience , your are in denial with your own arguments man.
And you know how it was and felt because...?
Still i don't see any strong arguments , don't care man how experienced you are then.
To be honest the results of that poll you can see at the top of this page are a pretty strong argument.
So go find another game. This is no "hurr durr I click you first, me better!!1!!" (no offense, but the combat itself is rather simple). There is much more possibilities with every new player included, if you can imagine only that the more they are, the better they can rush, it's a little sad. On contrary with just few people around it's more about random generator, regrouping from respawn, etc. Clearly artificial limitations and not "skill". Though would you really butcher the game combat system to make it faster? It's almost unique to have game where combat is based on positioning and not egos.
Combat is not simple, it's pretty realistic when you think about it in terms of lethality and the very real impact of morale and coordination on the outcome. Heck, I talked about it with the lieutenant in the armed forces and he said it emulates every single facet of the real thing (scouting, logistics, mopping up, communications, procedures, even how the engagement flows). The problem is that what is lethal for single players is not enough to stop a swarm. That's why in small scale PvP you get modern tactics (delicious and pretty friggin' complicated) and in large scale PvP you get musket-era tactics with them sniper rifles being muskets and bazookas being some hilariously underpowered grenades. Besides the maps are what they are and while they can accomodate complicated maneuvres executed by two squads of 5-10 people, they become a "little" crowded when we're talking 20-30ish. That's why with swarm battles you more often than not end up with two masses of people mindlessly bashing at each other until one of them is dead or flees. I don't really understand your hurr-durring about combat being based on positioning and not egos, nobody's calling for making it more like Quake 3, it's just that very large swarms don't really work that well in gameplay terms for reasons outlined above. If we had better anti-crowd weapons (like C4 or those Avengers from session 2 that could kill 4 people in 2 bursts) it wouldn't be as bad as it is right now, but I don't think the devs like having weapons that lethal around.
-
Here's my idea.
Have every town have a safe period for an in-game week after being captured, during which militia will respawn every five minutes or so and the town control clock will be longer if you decide to take it during the safe period, because folks just don't appreciate so many people wrestling for control of their town.
After said safe period the militia will no longer respawn and the TC clock will be normal again, the only benefit of the lessened security is increasingly better rewards the longer you manage to hold the town.
For fans of roleplay I suggest a town tolerance system. Simply put, the town will compare the amount of players killed by gang members without provocation to the amount of players who trade, talk to NPCs, and just generally hang out.
If the amount of players killed by gang members without provocation is higher than the amount of players allowed to go about their business then the town will become unhappy, and the town control counter will be shortened for the next gang that decides to take the town, perhaps the militia will receive penalties due to the unhappy town.
A happy town however, (Frequent player activity and less unprovoked deaths) will have a somewhat extended TC counter and the Militia will do their jobs better.
I am assuming that militia will be nerfed severely and not drop loot, otherwise this suggestion is foolish.
Anyways I'm sure we can take my idea and everyone else's and come up with something exciting, but less overpowered.
-
That's bullshit and you know it. Every frontal assault with swarms is a gamble. Every. Single. One. You don't need mad skills to run up to the enemy, spend your AP and if you're alive heal and do that again. There's a multitude of scenarios like that and every single thing that demands player skills in large battle is an element that comes from small battles. The only thing large battles add is formations (which are bullshit and encourage camping) and that random factor I was talking about (lots and lots of frontal clashes that are won by people who have more luck in terms of damage).
It's not a gamble always if your know what your doing it's always considered how much the risk is of a frontal assault your speaking like you have never town controled maybe you haven't long enough so that you dont remember , large battles are more than just wasting AP and taking cover you don't want to see the teamplay aspect in big battles that is more complicated and intesnive than in small and again i repeat myself do you actually listen ? So your the narrow-minded child man :) big battles have everything that small battles have to offer and more , you just can't accept it.
I think msh would be amused if he heard that. Also msh doesn't really like swarms, just ask him why.
Yes he would be amused , but since he likes challenges i think he would agree maybe he will add his 2 cents. Btw were talking about 10-20 people it's not really a swarm for me just usual TC , such amount of players is possible to control and make tactics and all if the leader is good and if most of the players know what they have to do , but hey there is where the actual skill comes and is needed , i think you don't understand that too.
You're sounding like a little kid that feels threatened somebody just might take those swarms away. Newsflash, there's hardly a player that really likes this style of play, you're a (very vocal I admit) minority.
You ignore many of my arguments , newsflash with people like you it's actually impossible to discuss anything. There are plenty of people that likes big battles , like everyone who participates in them and hey i think it's almost half the server if not more still i told this before but yeah you ignored that and start to talk in circles.
And you know how it was and felt because...?
To be honest the results of that poll you can see at the top of this page are a pretty strong argument.
Now you don't make any sense man , you will most probably start talking complete garbage now ;D
-
If you played before, you would know that any possible pvp action happened always in the last few minutes of each TC window, not 2 hours, and it's based on gameplay experience from 3rd session and not mine or your imagination. Speaking about 2 hours of pure action is ridiculous for anyone who played more than one session.
This is true and it could be fixed by few adjustments:
-if someone starts the timer and defend it, the TC window will end
-if attackers are killed while defending, the town owners can expect more attacks until the end of TC window
Problem was mostly with taking town and going on world map, which shouldnt be problem anymore. With the former mechanic, it was common to see that timer stretched even an hour after the end of TC window due to constant retaking of the city.
-
It's not a gamble always if your know what your doing it's always considered how much the risk is of a frontal assault your speaking like you have never town controled maybe you haven't long enough so that you dont remember , large battles are more than just wasting AP and taking cover you don't want to see the teamplay aspect in big battles that is more complicated than in small , so your the narrow-minded child man :) big battles have everything that small battles have to offer and more , you just can't accept it.
Why am I talking to you again? You compare stuff you don't know anything about to stuff you know very little about, you keep calling people who don't share your ridiculous point of view names and you seem to believe you're the new incarnation of Napoleon with an understanding of tactics so deep the poor plebeians like me can't even begin to scratch the surface. The truth, however, is that you don't know brahmin shit about how good and tactical this game can get and prefer to keep your simplistic swarm crap in it despite the fact that the game obviously can't accomodate this number of people fighting on a single map.
Here, maneuver this:
(http://i56.tinypic.com/2enyn48.png)
... and there are two spheres this large on a single map. And the maps are often flat, without a lot of terrain to break the LOS. And you can't coordinate a lot of people as well as you could coordinate a few people, so the spheres are sluggish and are mostly incapable of complicated and/or immediate movement. And the movement is restricted because don't stand near grids lol. So you basically end up with boring, repetitive crap that's determined by who scores better hits and who brings more people to the party unless someone does something brilliant and the remaining 19 people don't mess it up, which happens like 2 times out of 50. If you compare it with how demanding and dynamic small scale combat is... there really is no comparison.
-
You are wasting time trying to explain simple things to some random pawn of a swarm. Totally pointless, whatever you say he keeps answering "this is not a strong argument for me", while he doesn't supply this thread with anything useful.
For me, swarm battles (or "large group battles" (c) T-888 hehe) are shitty because they happen not very frequently and there is too much of waiting involved: gathering people, planning, regrouping just for few minutes of fight (there were rarely battles that lasted more than several minutes). Small team pvp is always better because there is more action and it doesn't get boring after a couple of days.
Remember that whatever changes are made to TC, swarms will always have better chances (and it's logical), but there is absolutely no reason to support them any further (by making time windows, for example).
-
Scrap all Town Control mechanics, everything: militia, TC NPC, magic loot box, TC pipboys statuses, all of it.
It's not about real controlling town anyway in most cases.
Bring crafting features back to unguarded towns. Scrap external farming locations like waterworks and factories in bases.
External locations make sense if they are interesting. Farming chem components in waterworks isn't.
It's not really dangerous either. It's just nuisance.
Factories in bases are good for bots and boring. Only utility stuff like waterpipes and workbenches should be kept.
-
Here is my point of wiev about actual TC :
- Nerf militia
few suggestions:
- reduce maximum number of milita to [6-8], [4] after obtaining control.
- fix of bug with adding mercenaries to militia during timer.
- fix in 'gear check' - i can bet, every gang had a lot of problems with taking control with RL's and LSW's.
- TC timer to 10-15 min
- Reward every 30 min
- please no time window to take town, something like that seems cool :
How to fix current TC a bit:
1. Remove TC timer.
2. A faction can take the town anytime (gear/number check applies), but the control is changed to "None" after they leave the town. For example: 6 people needed to capture the town, but if at any given time there will be less than 2 of them present in the town, the control is lost. The check for faction members could happen each minute, not a big deal I guess;
3. When there is no controlling faction, the militia acts like typical NPCs in the town (hostile only if attacked). Militia doesn't attack the team that wants to capture the town,
if they don't attack NPC and have karma to enter the town
4. The reward is given more frequently (let's say, 15 or 30 minutes) but only when the town is controlled by a faction.
5. Remove TC zones. So, if some gang would be smart enough to capture the town and hide in a small room while waiting for the reward, you could come with your team and take the town back from them.
- TC zone only for TC timer, when faction control the city they can hide/RP everywhere in the city but they have to be at least minimum reqierement number of player/gear to keep control/rewards according to the requierement of cities.
- Make a no capture time after faction control the city, for example if the faction keep town 30min (15min timer + 30 min in the city) they have a no capture time of 15-30 min for the next time they will take the city. With a maximum no capture time of 45 min. During no capture time militia act just like normal npc (if u have bad karma they attack u, if you have good karma they protect you), after that no capture time militia won't protect players and just act like normals npc.
- Increasing rewards
Seems good to me ! Because :
How to fix current TC a bit:
This way, we would have following issues fixed:
- the need of time windows, completely;
- small-squad runs taking all towns while other teams are sleeping; it would give them absolutely nothing;
- taking the town only for pipboy status and locker reward, as you would have to actually be present in the town;
- towns that are controlled by a faction but no one stays there;
- partially swarms; well, you could always swarm the controlling team, but remember that hardly anyone can keep a swarm present in the town for a longer time (as opposed to TC time windows);
- probably easier to implement, test and balance.
In my opinion it's stupid that the town can be controlled with no gang member present in the town, showing up only occasionally for the reward and when somebody starts pvp beacon (capturing).
Holy shit let's do this !
-
how about diplomacy, a speech char(or alt) must convince some people to join there couse to reduce the timer to maxumum 20 min(25 min from start) and if that pearson will think over it(otehr faction will come with speech char to talk) the timer will be increased and if the timer reaches back to 25 min the TC will be over and the past gang will still have the city
so, important NPCs will have to decide what they think of the new gang(3 choises: no opinion, for the atackers agains the atackers) and if they thing against the atackers, they can't have an opinion change, so it will be +0, -1min, +1 min
killing someone with lesser than TC gear rec outside TC zone will increas the timer by 1 min and killing someonhe with gear that is in the faction defending allready the town it will decreas the timer by 1 min
so if an atacking faction will atack the city, they need about 5 min to take it,
now if the defending faction do not send someone inside the TC zone, the town will be under no controll(the defenders don't come means they are not worthy for defending) and they can't controll it for 3 rl days
also if an atacking faction fails to take the town, they can't TC that town for 3 rl days
-
i think this session is most balanced
we know how in BH kill ALL militia by 2 players
timer is necessary to protect the city from other gang, at least for try in this
about adding mercs\slaves - it's most expensive but very effective method to weed good militia from bad
about TC some towns in certain time - usa and russia is big country with big amount of timezones instead france(for example)
about TC with 8 militia - it's a chanсe for 3 people to take a town(with speacher of course)
-
Now I'll post a bit different approach to TC, similar to what was in 2nd session but improved.
1. Remove TC timer.
2. A faction can take the town anytime (gear/number check applies), but the control is changed to "None" after they leave the town. For example: 6 people needed to capture the town, but if at any given time there will be less than 2 of them present in the town, the control is lost. The check for faction members could happen each minute, not a big deal I guess;
3. When there is no controlling faction, the militia acts like typical NPCs in the town (hostile only if attacked). Militia doesn't attack the team that wants to capture the town.
4. The reward is given more frequently (let's say, 15 or 30 minutes) but only when the town is controlled by a faction.
5. Remove TC zones. So, if some gang would be smart enough to capture the town and hide in a small room while waiting for the reward, you could come with your team and take the town back from them.
we still have beta testing phease and its seems not that hard to implement and nobody proposed anything better.. so why not?
i dont really like the "no timer idea" for two resons - attackers will have huge advantage and most of the gangs are not that active to refreshing pipboy all day long. some of players are in game some others doing their shit, when timer starting eveyrone is loging into the game. will be nice to have some notification, maybe even by radio (local scouts ;)
another probem is reward. every gang is risking loss of equipment, so i sugest some small refund if gang succesed. i realize some players dont like the magical tcbox and stuff apearing form the sky but comeon its a comouter game ;) that need to be funny and worth of risk.
maybe such model?
- growing number of caps in every city
- growing number of random ammo, depends of city [klamath - tier1, BH for tier3 for example]
- growing number of drugs, depends of city
- random item/s - i would like to see even a gauss pistol, but chances to get that pistol shoul be very small.
about timer. nobody like waits, especaily large gangs
5 players = 10minutes
with each additional player time decreases for example -30sec. smallest possible value - 5minutes
-
another probem is reward. every gang is risking loss of equipment, so i sugest some small refund if gang succesed. i realize some players dont like the magical tcbox and stuff apearing form the sky but comeon its a comouter game ;) that need to be funny and worth of risk.
maybe such model?
- growing number of caps in every city
- growing number of random ammo, depends of city [klamath - tier1, BH for tier3 for example]
- growing number of drugs, depends of city
- random item/s - i would like to see even a gauss pistol, but chances to get that pistol shoul be very small.
Yes we need to see more "rare" stuff ! Bored to use sniper/avenger/lsw/rocket for 2 years !
-
You are wasting time trying to explain simple things to some random pawn of a swarm. Totally pointless, whatever you say he keeps answering "this is not a strong argument for me", while he doesn't supply this thread with anything useful.
For me, swarm battles (or "large group battles" (c) T-888 hehe) are shitty because they happen not very frequently and there is too much of waiting involved: gathering people, planning, regrouping just for few minutes of fight (there were rarely battles that lasted more than several minutes). Small team pvp is always better because there is more action and it doesn't get boring after a couple of days.
Remember that whatever changes are made to TC, swarms will always have better chances (and it's logical), but there is absolutely no reason to support them any further (by making time windows, for example).
So you think i should just blindly believe in your knowledge of the game if you don't actually tell me something that will change my mind ? It's a simple principle you don't understand :)
Small scale pvp has more action ? I think you forgot. See pic below.
The truth, however, is that you don't know brahmin shit about how good and tactical this game can get and prefer to keep your simplistic swarm crap in it despite the fact that the game obviously can't accomodate this number of people fighting on a single map.
Here, maneuver this:
Okay btw it's only killing militia but it takes some tactic to do it , especially when the town is guarded by enemy forces you think it's so simple always right ? You forget about some things like mercs spawning , reentering in a different town part to flank the enemy , splitting your team and then attacking , scouting , formations , much of that just doesn't exist in small scale pvp.
(http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/3500/battleqv.jpg) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/543/battleqv.jpg/)
I guess you haven't been in reno in a while witch is like the only place to get small scale pvp and that is just simple fast skirmishes , that usually ends much more faster than big battles or most of the battle few survivers of both team's are buthuging a wall to wait for reinforcements that actually happens quite a lot in big battles , nothing more your trying to convince me of something that actually doesn't exist , you may theory craft the shit you want if it doesn't really happen in game.
You are talking to me because you have ignored much of what i have said.
... and there are two spheres this large on a single map. And the maps are often flat, without a lot of terrain to break the LOS. And you can't coordinate a lot of people as well as you could coordinate a few people, so the spheres are sluggish and are mostly incapable of complicated and/or immediate movement. And the movement is restricted because don't stand near grids lol. So you basically end up with boring, repetitive crap that's determined by who scores better hits and who brings more people to the party unless someone does something brilliant and the remaining 19 people don't mess it up, which happens like 2 times out of 50. If you compare it with how demanding and dynamic small scale combat is... there really is no comparison.
Why do you pull out scenarios ? We were actually talking in general didn't you notice that ?
And you can't coordinate a lot of people as well as you could coordinate a few people
We were talking about actual skill required and i told you that you can coordinate 20 as good as 5 people , that's why it is much much harder and takes skill but ofcourse you ignored that , so i will ignore your thoughts too :)
Man if you would actually read and answer me not only start talking about a different point of view of the same shit. Can you stop over exaggerating the complexity of small scale pvp , it's simple skirmishes omg.
Now i'm starting to talk in circles , it means you don't listen to me , pointless to discuss anything with you.
-
I agree with the general approach of Killgore.
I am for a week without TC like Killgore, Sakin and others.
Otherwise, this is my approach that would, i think promote the RP without killing the TC, help those who wanna make something in the city after the TC time (I agree with Xaern among others) and those who are a little bit fan of diplomacy.
Timezone:
I am against it because it removes all suspense and it allows those who took control of the city from being present only for short periods during which they know they will be attacked. I'm also against it because we will also have to choose times zones during wich there will be more players online and those time zones are also the time that prefer those who would like to do some RP. And systematically, there will be battles...
Timer:
Dont suppress it but...
- I joined Berko on the idea of adding weapons. Is a 223 pistol more impressive than a rocket launcher?
- If the sheriff is not impressed by the players who want to take control of the town, he attacks with the militia the players trying to take control of the town.
Keeping control of the town:
- I agree with the fact that a minimum number of players should be presents in the city during a minimum of time and daily to keep the control.
Advantages:
- The maximum number of town which could be controlled by a team would be directly dependent of the number of players in that team
- It would encourage teams to recruit players
- It would avoids the empty cities (I take control of the city, I forget it, but I empty the chest). It is not normal that a player who starts the game and goes in a city never meet a player from the team that controls it).
Militia. General idea: you want a good militia ? There's a price and you've got to protect/help it
- The militia uses the stuff put in the chest by the team that control the city
- The militia is paid with the caps present in the chest
- When a militien is killed, it can be looted
- The longer a militian remains alive, the longer he fights without dying, the more experienced he is but the more expensive he is. His incomes are growing with him.
- If there is no caps in the chest when it's time to pay the militia, the militia resigns
Advantages
- The type of militia that spawns depends on what's in the chest (you want a gauss militian ?)
Other:
- I like the idea of Berko for the functions of the militia (attack the thieves, warn the victim, draw weapon and radio warning of the players having the control of the city)
Awards. General idea: the more the city is prosperous and secure, the more the team controling it receives gifts
The incomes and the number of volunteers for the militia could depend of:
- The time spend in the city by players of the team having the control
- The number of NPCs killed (bankers, doctors, sheriff, children, etc.).
- The number of players killed in the city
- The amount of purchases and sales with the NPC merchants
- The number of interactions with the characters involve in quests
Others:
- GMs could provide additional rewards if the team controlling the city organizes events in the city to attract people (melee fightings, public auctions, etc.)
- Contents of boxes suitable for cities and quantity depending on what is happening. Example: Redding / BH, high quality minerals/irons but the number depends on the number of deaths in the mine. If the mine is unsafe, the NPCs do not exploit it (or less) and there is nothing (less) in the chest. It will encourage those who control the city to protect the mine.
General effects on TC and on the game:
- If one team takes the control and leaves, quickly, there is no more money in the chest, no more militia, and those who wish to take the control of the city and wish to do something in it will do it easily. It joins the idea of RavenousRat.
- If the players are still in the city after taking the control of it, but kill everyone, same result.
- Players who are involved in diplomacy and get a peace treaty for their city will be rewarded
Other ideas:
- If the city incomes go below a certain level (lack of activity, too many deaths, etc.) for several days, the people could rebell and attack the team controlling the city and the team could lose the control (status none or a new rebel status). The next team who will try to take control of the city could have a bonus.
- The longer a team is controlling a city, the more the NPC and the militia are loyal, and the more difficult it is to take control of the town.
-
I guess you haven't been in reno in a while witch is like the only place to get small scale pvp and that is just simple fast skirmishes , that usually ends much more faster than big battles or most of the battle few survivers of both team's are buthuging a wall to wait for reinforcements that actually happens quite a lot in big battles , nothing more your trying to convince me of something that actually doesn't exist , you may theory craft the shit you want if it doesn't really happen in game.
Reno is different and always was like that due to lack of rewards and incentive for remaining inside and the mostly featureless terrain. You don't know what does or does not happen in the game with small scale TC because you're a newbie and you never played that. Your conceptions are unrealistic and wrong.
Why do you pull out scenarios ? We were actually talking in general didn't you notice that ?
And you can't coordinate a lot of people as well as you could coordinate a few people
And the space a swarm occupies is a general thing. The evidence is irrefutable, you can't maneuver with more than 15 people because there's not enough space on the F2 maps to do that. Even when you detach a squad for a specific task it often is impossible to surprise the enemy because the LOS of a swarm spans almost the entire length of the map. That's why practically every single swarm battle looks pretty much the same. It's like trying to play chess on a 4x4 board. To be honest I wouldn't have that much against swarms if those battles were to be fought on some new, much larger maps designed with that specific purpose in mind... I don't know, maybe the devs would consider making a domination mode map or two for 20-30 people per side? The only map that's big enough in terms of size seems to be Klamath, but it somehow still devolves into a frontal slugfest at trapper town due to the placement of its capture zone and some bottlenecks that make fighting there easier for the defenders.
We were talking about actual skill required and i told you that you can coordinate 20 as good as 5 people , that's why it is much much harder and takes skill but ofcourse you ignored that , so i will ignore your thoughts too :)
That just goes to show that you don't know anything about commanding people aside from "msh does it and he does it well". Well guess what, msh would be even better with commanding 5 or 8 people and would probably be absolutely stellar if he didn't have to deal with inexperienced arrogant people like you. Go ahead and ask him what he likes better... oh wait, you won't because you know you wouldn't like the answer and it would make you look stupid. Oh, and I know that because I did command teams of various sizes, from 5 to 35-45. All in all you're the one who is theorycrafting and even worse, your theories are all wrong.
Man if you would actually read and answer me not only start talking about a different point of view of the same shit.\
Now i'm starting to talk in circles , it means you don't listen to me , pointless to discuss anything with you.
Your point of view is simply wrong. I proved it wrong using a friggin' picture, among other things. There's no reason for anyone to listen to you and take you seriously if you ignore the most important arguments of your opponents in the discussion, really.
-
nice_boat, kilgore, t-888, dskpnk this is a topic for suggestions then stop fu..ing flooding it and shut your mouth. Nobody wants to read about your personal experience. Let the other people speak. Stop dominating it and favorite few ideas.
-
nice_boat, kilgore, t-888, dskpnk this is a topic for suggestions then stop fu..ing flooding it and shut your mouth. Nobody wants to read about your personal experience. Let the other people speak. Stop dominating it and favorite few ideas.
What's wrong with supporting your ideas with evidence, even anecdotal? Any discussion that tests people's views is better and more helpful than a bunch of random, unconnected suggestions being thrown around. Ghosthack wanted to know if people would like to change the current TC, it seems that a majority wants just that so the question is "how?" - that's what this discussion is all about.
-
You see? You are very easy to provoke. Maybe you are right but your were talking about who play longer this game like it makes any matter. After it I don`t know what your were talk about cuz I`ve stopped reading your posts. Do you think GMs wants to read it? That should be short, clear suggestion not huge discuss about shit. Don`t reply we need to avoid trolling ;).
-
....
Well, the more complicated idea is, less chance that devs will implement it and even lesser that it won't be bugged heavily. I'd vote for something simple so it won't be abused during next session - and we know that even small things introduced into the game resulted often in a major abuse (killing town controller with militia, adding mercs to militia etc., bluesuit runs through all of the towns).
-
My two cents i guess :)
First of all, i would say it depends what developers what to achive with the game. Do they want northen towns to be all out pvp towns or do they want northen towns to be a place which people get bounded to, create their own little goverment and so politics (WWP, BHH, TSAR).
Current Militia Overview
The militia current strenght is acually a counter of their stupidness i would say. 20 merc militia? 2 Minigunners and 3 bluesuits can kill 20 militia using the room trick in between 30-60 minutes.
With bombers, it can be killed pretty quick aswell, especially if they are grouping in one place (there are militia positions that makes militia to group up to 6-7 militias, 3-4 bombs can take them all out).
This can be effectivly countered by having players inside town 24/7, which is impossible for non-international gangs. Players who point militia who to shot (the enemy bluesuits who block the doors for exemple) and keep buying new militia.
Face to face fight, 15-20 players have a chance to kill whole militia with good positioning, and maybe few extra sets of stuff to quickly return.
Having in mind that merc militia is expensive, town earnings are pretty much 0 in the end (exept after 2 weeks+). One good militia cost around 30-40 000 caps, not counting the times when you have to replace them if the luck is not on your side. In time of one week, each day avarage one have to replace 2-6 militias. Becouse of various reasons, some explained above, and others like bugs when militia kills eachother off.
What can be done better with militia?
Again, depends on what developers want to achive. If they want pvp focus, then militia should be removed simply. If you want to make the towns more faction personal. Then the militia should be made more smarter and then they can be reduced in strenght. Some points which can be adjusted:
* Reduce their HP by 50%
* 16 militia is enough? Maybe could vary depending on town, maybe the number of militia should grow more slowely, 4 hours until 10 militias, then it goes each 6 hours to get another one up to 16.
* Allow players to choose what they want the mercs to aim at, allow players to decide what kind of perks should they focus on while gaining levels (I want you to focus on speed / critts / bursting ability / first aid / chance to hit).
* Allow players to choose Militia positioning in an specified area. / Remove the Militia grouping spots.
* Have diffrent settings for militia in general, agressive (Shot all faction enemies on sight inside a specific zone, Shot all that faction player triggers), neutral (Shot all faction enemies in side a specific zone if player shots them, dont help faction member attacking a neutral player unless the neutral player has stole/attack someone/attack militia/attack npc/exploded in last 60 minutes), friendly (Dont support faction players unless enemy or neutral attacks them or militia.). Those 3 modes could be changed with some cooldown. And could be represented with a color of town on world map (Red/Yellow/Green). Aswell as town income could be either boosted (with friendly) or reduced (with agressive).
* Give them memory, a dude explodes in front of them with a bomb? Then he should be attacked on sight for 60 minutes, same with suicide bursters. Attacking militia should be remembered no?
Think thats all for now, i will move to next subject
Town Control
I think a way to make town control more intresting is to make towns more faction based, for exemple, a faction decides that this town is our home land, and then they fight for it. It gives at least a reason to fight other then just to fight when players/factions can indentify themselfs with the "flags".
To support this way of thinking, 15 minutes is way to short time to throw out a faction that sees the town as their home. However, 15 minutes is aswell more then enough time to stand and wait for enemy to show up... So it is a problem in both ways. I would suggest something i suggested long time ago, that the towns would be split into 3 capture zones each. The third is the final zone, The zone that can be only reached by capturing the first 2, it must be done by steps. After the first capture the zone remains open for capture for 30 minutes, so the faction defending has an oportunity to strike back. Also once the first timer started, it also sets the time zone for the next day with 3 hours forward and back. For exemple: If a zone is taken at 00:00 GMT+1 and held for this 30 minutes, then next day, any faction can make another attempt at time frame 21:00 to 3:00 am. If it is the defending faction that takes it between 00:00-00:59 the time zone stays the same, if it takes it between 21:00-23:59 then the time zone is moved back 1 hour (20:00-2:00), if after 1:00 am then moved forward one hour. so to fully take over a town you need 3 days and you have to win 3 battles straight victories. Together with this remove TC from 3 AM to 10 AM and you got dynamic TC time frames.
I think there should also be diffrent ways of town control avalible to players. I mean, not everybody want to use those towns for pure pvp. Allow the pvp players to do their pvp and allow the rp players to do their rp. If a faction wants only to raid the town, they allow them to do so, with rewards. This could go outside of TC, meaning no timers need to be started, militia needs to be killed totally, and then treatning traders to give the faction caps aswell as sherrif, the total caps of gained/rewards gained will be reduced from the TC box aswell as future income, the faction in control will be in other words in dept to the town.
There should be possibilities for factions to invest in town other then militia aswell, like funding a shop, buildings, more bramhins in the pens. Which would pay back in diffrent ways (new reward in TC box? Need to fund something to get anything in the box overally?). I mean, not everybody in the wasteland are roleplaying raiders, some people are roleplaying settlers aswell. What puprose does the raiders have if there are no settlers? I suggest to remove all crafting workbenches from bases and put them into town aswell. To make towns useful.
Also reputation should be invovled in this, without faction reputation towards other factions both NPCs and player factions, there are limitations.
Life in a Ghost Town
Is harsh. There is little things that help people into roleplay. Acually the only interactive part is brahmin pens? In Redding, The malamute saloon doesint even have beer! Casino is just scenery together with most things. The molerat mambo not mentioning the field of view errors while looking from one side to another over it, is locked and cannot be used.
-------------------------------------------------
But yeah, like i said, it all depends on how developers see the game. If its pure pvp that you aim, then militia should be gone completely but without adding the "roleplaying sparks" in the enviroment the Roleplay will die, as pvp did kind of with militia.
-
nice_boat, kilgore, t-888, dskpnk this is a topic for suggestions then stop fu..ing flooding it and shut your mouth. Nobody wants to read about your personal experience. Let the other people speak. Stop dominating it and favorite few ideas.
Wtf with this guys ? We all purpose things and discuss about different point of view (according that our strange community have a particular way to debate), i posted twice here to support my vote as asked by dev ! And sorry for our presonals experiences but BBS/Rogues plays since the begining of the beta and i play since 2 years so i think our differents experiences are good, and you anonym stranger, who are you ?
So if you have nothing more to tell than shut up please go away this topic is for harsh debate and purposals no free troll !
-
I play from more then 2 years mostly TC. I`ve got much experience but I don`t blaber about how nice could be if we decrease the timer by 5 minutes.
-
Combat is not simple, (...)
I don't disagree, but I was actually talking about the significance of the very input of player when attacking. The truth is that this game is very much based on positioning, while there is nearly no skill involved in the combat itself (dealing and receiving damage that is). I agree that maps can support only limited number of players, but until optimal number of players increase the skill involved (usually leadership and discipline, but of course there are factors beyond those).
Well, the more complicated idea is, less chance that devs will implement it and even lesser that it won't be bugged heavily. I'd vote for something simple so it won't be abused during next session - and we know that even small things introduced into the game resulted often in a major abuse (killing town controller with militia, adding mercs to militia etc., bluesuit runs through all of the towns).
If separate "battlegrounds" (call it whatever you like) perhaps even with artificial limiting functions (like allowing only certain number of participants) were the main focus of PvP, you would be probably given superior quality of entertainment.
HOWEVER, this is really theme-park concept that might as well hurt the game (for example, if it is accepted that the game take care of balance, you might as well see players demanding more features from the game taking care of things that are now completely on players), on other hand some people have only fun from grieving others or only from winning, and will not be stopped by any ethic or morale issue unless the software itself manages them.
But it is questionable whether or not should be manpower deciding factor in PvP.
-
Do they want northen towns to be all out pvp towns or do they want northen towns to be a place which people get bounded to, create their own little goverment and so politics (WWP, BHH, TSAR).
I agree that we can split TC feature in 2 categories :
a) "beaconing" action - short term
b) Establishing - middle-long term
Its still not very clear in my mind, but this could work like that (brief description) :
When taking town, you could have the 2 options.
Option a) "Raiding Town". You have to stay in town, as it has been suggested on other post, and you have good reward every 15 minutes or so. Weak militia support. When you leave, city turn to "none" and NPC Neutral.
Option b) "Anexing Town". You choose to establish in town and you start a timer like today (15 minutes if no speacher char). You dont have to have members left in town after timer. Militia would be stronger but bad reward every 1H or so. Town couldnt be takeable for some time.
-
Reno is different and always was like that due to lack of rewards and incentive for remaining inside and the mostly featureless terrain. You don't know what does or does not happen in the game with small scale TC because you're a newbie and you never played that. Your conceptions are unrealistic and wrong.
No reno is not different that's the ultimate place for small scale pvp right now and will be it's the best example , don't start talking about some rewards looting enemy bodies is enough , featureless terrain ? Reno has so many buildings and entrance point's it's i just can't believe you say it's featurless terrain. Your out of this world man.
And the space a swarm occupies is a general thing. The evidence is irrefutable, you can't maneuver with more than 15 people because there's not enough space on the F2 maps to do that. Even when you detach a squad for a specific task it often is impossible to surprise the enemy because the LOS of a swarm spans almost the entire length of the map. That's why practically every single swarm battle looks pretty much the same. It's like trying to play chess on a 4x4 board. To be honest I wouldn't have that much against swarms if those battles were to be fought on some new, much larger maps designed with that specific purpose in mind... I don't know, maybe the devs would consider making a domination mode map or two for 20-30 people per side? The only map that's big enough in terms of size seems to be Klamath, but it somehow still devolves into a frontal slugfest at trapper town due to the placement of its capture zone and some bottlenecks that make fighting there easier for the defenders.
Yes you can maneuver with 15 people , look how coordinated both sides are they don't do random shit , it's all about strategy , positioning and timing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdUi8hxOzBI
Look how long the battle is and how they get wiped out slowly wasn't that simple to pull off a frontal assault , they don't even take up a quarter of all the map about what space are you talking about , some of the fallout maps are really big don't start pulling out some certain scenarios again.
Most of the battles are won because we suprise the enemy by flanking them , reentering or attacking from 2 sides , not every battle is just one big rush.
I really want to know from witch faction are you so i could actually determine your " experience " ;D
That just goes to show that you don't know anything about commanding people aside from "msh does it and he does it well". Well guess what, msh would be even better with commanding 5 or 8 people and would probably be absolutely stellar if he didn't have to deal with inexperienced arrogant people like you. Go ahead and ask him what he likes better... oh wait, you won't because you know you wouldn't like the answer and it would make you look stupid. Oh, and I know that because I did command teams of various sizes, from 5 to 35-45. All in all you're the one who is theorycrafting and even worse, your theories are all wrong.
Your point of view is simply wrong. I proved it wrong using a friggin' picture, among other things. There's no reason for anyone to listen to you and take you seriously if you ignore the most important arguments of your opponents in the discussion, really.
I bet you were the one loosing the battles. You don't know how i play or how i even got into rogues what gives you the right to judge my gameplay experience , ask msh ... oh wait you barely have talked with him ever ! Nobody cares about your dumb and worthless theories man if you don't actually play the game enough , my " theories " are actually not theories those are observations of my experience , my opinion is based how have i played till now with rogues. I don't lie and i don't need to , your not listening to me , your ignoring my arguments so we talk in circles because of you.
I see that you have problems with comprehension so i don't think it's worth to continue this madness with you.
Friggin lunatic.
-
No reno is not different that's the ultimate place for small scale pvp right now and will be it's the best example , don't start talking about some rewards looting enemy bodies is enough , featureless terrain ? Reno has so many buildings and entrance point's it's i just can't believe you say it's featurless terrain. Your out of this world man.
Hahah oh wow. Yeah, especially the streets. And no, it's not the best example because contrary to TC situations there's no reason to stay inside the town.
Yes you can maneuver with 15 people , look how coordinated both sides are they don't do random shit , it's all about strategy , positioning and timing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdUi8hxOzBI
Look how long the battle is and how they get wiped out slowly wasn't that simple to pull off a frontal assault , they don't even take up a quarter of all the map about what space are you talking about , some of the fallout maps are really big don't start pulling out some certain scenarios again.
Yeah, and the fact that the fighting happens in that particular spot all the combat in Den happens at reinforces your theory... oh wait, it actually doesn't. That clip was just a few minutes of camping and would be hard to watch if not for the music... glorious swarm tactics indeed.
Most of the battles are won because we suprise the enemy by flanking them , reentering or attacking from 2 sides , not every battle is just one big rush.
I really want to know from witch faction are you so i could actually determine your " experience " ;D
BBS/Rogues. And what you said about flanking is just not true, it doesn't happen all that often especially since a lot of new players aren't dependable enough to execute stuff like that right unless you babysit them... but I digress and it's not the point here.
I bet you were the one loosing the battles. You don't know how i play or how i even got into rogues what gives you the right to judge my gameplay experience , ask msh ... oh wait you barely have talked with him ever ! Nobody cares about your dumb and worthless theories man if you don't actually play the game enough , my " theories " are actually not theories those are observations of my experience , my opinion is based how have i played till now with rogues. I don't lie and i don't need to , your not listening to me , your ignoring my arguments so we talk in circles because of you.
So yeah, I've played with msh in one gang since before he even got to know the Rogues and I've played with him all the time when BBS started playing with the Rogues. Yeah, you obviously know him much better than I do. Hilarious. And yeah, obviously me and msh were the ones loosing all the battles. Get out.
I see that you have problems with comprehension so i don't think it's worth to continue this madness with you.
Friggin lunatic.
That's nice because you quite obviously fail at logical thinking and talking with you amounts to having to deal with a steady stream of unwarranted verbal abuse and wild theories that have nothing to do with the reality of the game.
-
I agree that we can split TC feature in 2 categories :
a) "beaconing" action - short term
b) Establishing - middle-long term
Its still not very clear in my mind, but this could work like that (brief description) :
When taking town, you could have the 2 options.
Option a) "Raiding Town". You have to stay in town, as it has been suggested on other post, and you have good reward every 15 minutes or so. Weak militia support. When you leave, city turn to "none" and NPC Neutral.
Option b) "Anexing Town". You choose to establish in town and you start a timer like today (15 minutes if no speacher char). You dont have to have members left in town after timer. Militia would be stronger but bad reward every 1H or so. Town couldnt be takeable for some time.
Developing the idea of 2 choices for TC feature.
Annexing Town :
So lets say a faction called RP-Faction want to "Annex Town". They wait until end of timer like today. 6 random militians automatically starts to go out Mayor Office. Every hour, a new random milita is automatically added. Every hour, RP-Faction will loot little in chest. If they want, they can add mercs, by killing and replacing as today. Militia cap should be betwen 16 and 20.
The timer for "Annexing Town" should be longer. 40mn maybe. Then city cannot be annexed for 72H. But city can be Raided.
Raiding Town :
Lets say a faction call Raiders want to Raid the city Annexed by RP-Faction (or None). The Raiders must kill militia then start their Raid talking to Mayor. The Raid is on until they have a couple of players inside. They loot every 15mn good treasure in chest. They may have 4 randoms militia automatically added then can buy new one every 15mn. Max 8. No mercs adding possibility.
When Raid is over (got killed or left city), city status is again "Annexed by RP-Faction". 6 random militans appears 15mn after the Raid. Every hour a new random militian is automaticaly added. This will allow city to be a bit safe and city will grow again without necessecity organising "operation" of TC.
Note: dont forget adding mercs in militia is available since begining of session. It was never a problem until now. The problem is that in the ending session, people has millions caps. But in middle stage, buying mercs for milita is very expensive.
Edit: numbers are wip
-
Cha, i very much like your ideas on this, but I see a couple flaws.
1. Why would any faction (except very rare, and usually not very dedicated rp factions) annex a town when they know it'll take soooo much longer then just taking town, and give much less pay off. For example... annexing town we already have basically, but it's 15 minutes long. If it moved up to 40 minutes I just highly doubt any faction would manage to make it. Other factions having so much longer to attack and such, they'll likely be beaten down before 20 minutes is up making it very undesirable option no matter what the intentions.
2. Another thing about annexation compared to raiding. Likely, when you annex town, at night someone is going to kill all militia (like already) and take town while everyone is sleeping... wasting 40 minutes of their time and whatever else they put into it even worse than now. (Unless windows are added of course, but i feel it's kind of unfair for other players of other timezones) With Raiding you only need to stick around 15 minutes for initial pay-off and get to have at least 8 militia, and you don't have to worry about protecting it after you leave since you already got your treasure and such, however the militia for raiding leads me to my next comment...
3. After raiding town, and getting militia, what happens to militia after you leave? Do they disappear, remain militia as (unknown) which I suppose would kind of work itself out.... but doesn't make sense since if you came back and this same militia that was on your side during raid it's not very logical you have to kill them to continue raiding. Also, the militia in town while raiding it while under annexation of another faction, after you leave, do these militia automatically come under their control? And why no merc adding possibility? I would say you can "Temporarily" add militia to town for raid as long as they return to regular status and begin re-following you through dialogue "Alright guys time to leave this shit hole, pack it up!"
I might have a few more later, but this is it for now.
-
That should not be militia at all, if you want to do any rpg project then guard the city by your own instead of hiding behind the militia. This is bad idea cuz you gonna kill your imagined enemy and them imagined enemy could do nothing until they got a swarm. About TC like i said before, i have big experence cuz i play this game just for TC and the thing like tactic, logistic, etc. is a small piece, there is only few simple rules you cannot do for not being lame and mostly win the side with bigger swarm or luckier snipers, etc. Usually in city is lots of sneakers so surprise attack does not exist, both sides always get info about the enemy`s move. So I don`t know what game are you people talking about but it`s definitely not FOnline 2238.
-
You cannot defend town only by players 24/24 waiting raiders to show up and strike.
I understand that people dont want PVE and get crits shots by bots etc... The idea is that militia should be nerfed like this :
Lets say that we nerf militia - that without an organized squad of defenders - a gang of 8 players can kill it without any problems. This will help players inside with low hp, scrappy builds noobs etc.. survive a bit against little raids.
About your questions Mickael i dont know yet. But main iea is there : 2 TC options.
-
TC has two functions today: a) PvP beacon b) roleplay background. Should these two functions be together like current TC, or should they be separated or mixed in some other entertain variation?
Few ideas of mine:
1) Add (or replace) other city or city location into TC city family. I.e. Hub City could be new TC city, or Necropolis. I understand that "no-pvp-apez" would be negative, but i think that this "small" change could bring something new next era, because PvP players knows every current pvp locations as they know their own shoes.
2) TC capturing time windows are good. It guarantee "real life players" time, they know they can go online, join game and fight. It is better than current concept..(be online for many hours and hope that someone will fight with you).
But TC time windows have their own effects: a) TC windows supports massive fights, 2 alliances, because everyone is focused on one location. It is not negative effect, but the concept of small groups fight should be supported too.
3) My "TC variation"
a) time windows
b) gang can own only one city
c) after succesfull TC capture, winning gang would get SINGLE supply of stuff (weapon, armor, ... random things but it should be usable in PvP), the new time window could be opened next day
d) possesor of TC city could set 2 different militia types: 1/ miltia would kill everyone with high tier weapons (even members of winning gang, who possses TC city). So not tier max PvP could be in cities. Militia would be almost indestructible, it would not be controlable by possesors gang members and it would only prevent using current powerbuilds in city. So possesor gang and their friends should guard the city themselfs, but with no fear of spawn of dozens powerbuild with best stuff
or 2/ militia could be controlable by possesor players (like now in TC, by marking players with shots,..), but you have to buy it, no stuff restrictions.
e) Every RL hour after TC was captured, there would be spawned some stuff in random NPCs in the city. This would be only CONTINUAL income from TC city. BUT! everyone should be able to get that staff (simple quest), even enemy gang players, no gang players, everyone. The point is, that you have to personally check the NPCs, if they have spawned stuff. So possesors gang players would have to stay in city, check NPCs, they can prevent enemy players by killing them, or they can manage some rules for "no-pvp-apez" and with helping them to gather spawned stuff.
With combination with point d) 1/ or 2/ it could bring new kind of PvP style outside of TC capturing windows.
f) memebers of possesor gang would get double bonus to crafting items in city workbench
-
TC capturing time windows suck, it will lead to swarms and less players online when you can't TC. I realise that people have work or school but it's not my concern. If a player will play 16 hour per day shouldn't be punished because another player can only play 3-4, actually, he should be rewarded, he is playing the game. If I had to follow time windows logic, we should only level a character 1 hour per day and have cooldown after beucause there are players out there that have to work and they can't play as much. So to be fair to them, you can only level characters one hour so your leveling time can be matched by others. That is just stupid, free town controll every day, every hour, every minute.
LE: Delete militia totally, they are way to strong and provide material for trolls and exploiters. Bigger rewards in chests, you are controlling a town not controlling a Geko Caravan. The gear lost by only one player is matched by chest reward in hours, so that is not fair.
-
I also think that "TC capturing time windows sucks !". In real life, if you can attack your ennemy while he's sleeping, you do it, you dont think "Oh no my god ! It's not fair !".
Wasteland is suppose to be worst than real life.
So if it's just a new rule to please those who fail to realize their projetcs, it's bullshit. If you want to keep a town 24/7 during months just for you, it's a real project which need a lot of players. If you don't have them, just forget your "idea" or try something who fit to the size of your team/alliance.
If it's a rule to please those who don't like fights and to limit the time of fight in game.... There is enough cities and places in which there is no fight at all.
If you just wanna fight, you don't care if someone else take the control of "your city" while you're sleeping. You just know that if it's happened, you'll have fun the day after...
And some new/small teams/groups use to attack at 6am and after at 11am (i'm often connected at that time) and I really don't see why they could not enjoy/test TC while the big "GMT+1" teams are sleeping/working/studying. It gives also fun to the few guys of the "GMT+1 teams" who are not living in the GMT+1 zone and who defend the cities at that moment so... NO !!! :) (I travel a lot.... ;) )
-
4 me, tcs have to be. The Redding should be like it was, before set there ncrs. When u lead the city, npcs shouldnt atack u even if u got minus carma with them, cos u lead the city.
-
TC capturing time windows is good for players with real life. Look at the situation. It is evening, i just came back home from work, school, and i know, that there will be pvp fight at certain hour. So i can prepare for it (ingame and in real life) and i am not disgusted from long hours waiting for nothing. This is amount of time i dont have (and same sort of players with real life duties).
On other way, TC windows needs some other alternative, because TC windows leads to alliances wars. So there should be some other PvP minigame that is aimed for small groups of players. I suggested this before.
To SUPPORT ROLEPLAY in cities, i suggest that city workbenches could grants some benefit for users. It could be multiplied the output from crafting, workbench could add special perk to item, or working on city workbench could reduce the cooldowns for crafting. So players would more stay in cities because of crafting. Also the possesors of TC could more interact with crafters, set them rules, take some percantage from them..
-
TC capturing time windows is good for players with real life...(and same sort of players with real life duties).
Just to let you know that I have a real life, and also duties. The hours of my duties are changing all the time. And like "some" other players, I'm not living in your "Time Windows". So you will surely enjoy it, we will never, just because we are not working at the same hours than you and/or living in your country... Very nice !!!
-
I also think that "TC capturing time windows sucks !". In real life, if you can attack your ennemy while he's sleeping, you do it, you dont think "Oh no my god ! It's not fair !".
Wasteland is suppose to be worst than real life.
I have not read that pathetic excuse in ages. I'm sorry, but just disregarding any ideas just because you can't have it, without offering any meaningful alternative...
-
TC capturing time windows is good for players with real life.
Lets say I have no real life... You are a better man then me and you are acomplished, having a real life and all. If I play whole day Fonline and you, having a real life, you only play 2 hours, why should you be compensated for your 2 hours and me be punished for a whole day. If you don't have time to play it's not my fault, so i shouldn't suffer. I am a full FOnliner and you are a casual. Why should the game compensate you in my loss? I had no ideea that TC is made for players with REAL LIFE, i thought is for gamers... If I can play more, I am suposed to win more.
-
Lets say I have no real life... You are a better man then me and you are acomplished, having a real life and all. If I play whole day Fonline and you, having a real life, you only play 2 hours, why should you be compensated for your 2 hours and me be punished for a whole day. If you don't have time to play it's not my fault, so i shouldn't suffer. I am a full FOnliner and you are a casual. Why should the game compensate you in my loss? I had no ideea that TC is made for players with REAL LIFE, i thought is for gamers... If I can play more, I am suposed to win more.
Because they want to have their cake, and eat it too. Like new players, who want to play online with others but don't want anyone to be mean to them, and when their expectations are not met they cry and whine for someone to "do something" about it.
Town Control is just fine the way it is. All the sandy vagina's in the room don't really want it to be 'fair' (meaning all things equal, both positives and negatives, for everyone), they want what is best for them. As it stands right now, it is fair. Anyone can take a town at any time of day or night, and anyone can lose that town on those same terms.
Everyone can make all the convoluted arguments that they want, but it all boils down to one thing in the end; instead of finding their own solution, they want the GM's or Devs to wipe their bottoms for them, and protect "their" towns while they are AFK.
-
Town control is absolutely not good as it is. Militia should turn hostile toward anyone who attacks them and should remember him/her till all town militia is killed off. Players should choose what weapon militia will have but not the exact type so if someone choose bg for the guard he/she will get a mini, rocket, m60 or flamer. Militia should be made from locals therefore adding mercenaries or slaves should go. There should be way to hire extra guards but it should be by giving the money to the Mayor of the city and he will contact mercenaries these would be random guys and wouldn't be part of the Militia and their loyalty will lie in the hand of the Faction that have the city. Meaning if ruling faction start killing locals the hired guns will not attack them while militia would.
Towns control should be zoned up for timezones with 8 hours of capture time windows needed because not everyone lives in the same time zone and all should have a chance to have a TC fight with players and not with npcs. If we have timezones like City xy can be captured form 6:00-14:00 then everyone who wish to have the place can prepare for it. Madoc should be up for 24 hour fun, and depending on the Klamath mine Klamath should be guarded or unguarded city right now the situation that Klamath isn't guarded while the mine is guarded makes it look weird.
Also if town controllers have chars that have - reputation with the city guarding it depending on the number of + reputation guards it should be possible that militia rebel.
Example player A, B, C and D guarding Den
A has rep -450, B has -300, C has 0, D has 250. The end rep of the guards are -500 therefore if someone group tries to attack there should be a random chance that Militia will side with the attackers considering them liberators instead of enemy, this side changing should be for each Militia personally so not all of them will change sides.
The last one is probably real hard to code so it may be best to disregard it for now however I think it would make TC more way more then it is now sure it would be pain for those who go and shoot all but each char is able to leave at least one group out of the shoot them list and have at least neutral reputation with one town.
-
TC capturing time windows is good for players with real life.
I wouldnt agree with that. As i remember i couldnt play TC because windows was like 12.00(GMT+1) Gecko(school/work) 15.00 Redding(school/work) Den 20.00(gf) and BH 21.00(gf)... Klamath and Modoc? Who cares... :D My fav hours for play is 22pm-1am and im sure there will be no TC window on that hour :)
-
Towns control should be zoned up for timezones with 8 hours of capture time windows needed because not everyone lives in the same time zone and all should have a chance to have a TC fight with players and not with npcs. If we have timezones like City xy can be captured form 6:00-14:00 then everyone who wish to have the place can prepare for it. Madoc should be up for 24 hour fun, and depending on the Klamath mine Klamath should be guarded or unguarded city right now the situation that Klamath isn't guarded while the mine is guarded makes it look weird.
How's that cake taste?
-
why not a mix? Window but 4 window each day for each city (for different time zone or different lifestyle)
Gecko (0.00 - 1.00 ) (6.00 - 7.00) (12.00 - 13.00) (18.00 - 19.00)
Modoc (1.00 - 2.00) (7.00 - 8.00) (13.00 - 14.00) (19.00 - 20.00)
Den (2.00 - 3.00) (8.00 - 9.00) (14.00 - 15.00) (20.00 - 21.00)
B Hill (3.00 - 4.00) (9.00 - 10.00) (15.00 - 16.00) (21.00 - 22.00)
Klamath (4.00 - 5.00) (10.00 - 11.00) (16.00 - 17.00) (22.00 - 23.00)
Redding (5.00 - 6.00) (11.00 - 12.00) (17.00 - 18.00) (23.00 - 24.00)
So Tc any time but only 4 window to each city
-
I still don't understand... Why should 66% of the players, who like TC, would not be able to enjoy it 84% of the time.... Anybody should be able to enjoy the game but with your solution...
Moreover, with your planning, most of the french people would never be able to take Gecko or Modoc, except the week-end maybe. Same problem in the other time zones (with other cities). And the worst is that each hour, only one city could be attacked... No suspense at all... All the teams at the same place at the same moment... Absolutly no hope for the small teams... No more tactic... It will be stab, backstab, new backstab... Some big teams will surely camp the city before the beginning of the Window... All the looters of the wasteland will have a good planning: "Ok it's 8PM let's go to Den with my sneak+ratpack"...
And if a big team/alliance born (or if an old and big team come back...), it will be simple: they will dominate the Wasteland and have a very simple planning to follow to keep the control...
IMHO, it's not realistic, unfair, etc... A pure bullshit !
Still IMHO:
- you play when you can (& when you can you play ;) )
- you attack when your friends are ready and when your enemies are here.
- you attack your enemies where they are, and even the server says "TC mode OFF for that city" (we call that PVP).
- you try a TC when you feel like doing that, not when the server says "TC mode ON".
So for me:
- TC windows=more TC & better TC => Wrong
- TC windows=more security & RP => Wrong (Redding this week...)
- TC windows=boredom & less fun or no fun, even for the non-PVP players who would not stress anymore
And still IMHO:
- if you suppress the timer and the militia: longer fights & more fights
- if you suppress the militia: cities more unsafe & cities attacked more often (and even if there is no TC mechanism)
- if you suppress the chest: more insecurity inside & outside the cities
The majority of PVP players enjoy to fight and do not to take control of the cities for the chest/for their ego/their e-penis or whatever. They also, most of the time, don't care if the battle take place in that city or in this one: the PVP players roam over the cities to find an enemy to fight. When the enemy is suppose to control a city, of course they go in that city.
The chest is just a goal. The interresting thing is not to reach it but how you reach it.
So if you suppress/limit the TC with the TC Windows, it will not suppress the gangs, the PVP, the PKers and transform the Wasteland in Disneyland... It will be worst...
And the non-PVP "apes" will quite never meet the PVP "apes"... But it's maybe the goal, split the community in 2 boxes...
-
Lets say I have no real life... You are a better man then me and you are acomplished, having a real life and all. If I play whole day Fonline and you, having a real life, you only play 2 hours, why should you be compensated for your 2 hours and me be punished for a whole day. If you don't have time to play it's not my fault, so i shouldn't suffer. I am a full FOnliner and you are a casual. Why should the game compensate you in my loss? I had no ideea that TC is made for players with REAL LIFE, i thought is for gamers... If I can play more, I am suposed to win more.
Youre talking like TC is the only thing you can do in Fonline. You still have to gather equipment for those fights, deal with politics and do other related stuff. Heck, I dont even recall Section 8 as a major player in TC.
The rest of you who are complaining about TC windows, realize that you can PvP even without them. Moreover, were trying to find here a compromise and seems like lots of people who experienced TC windows before would like to bring them back with minor adjustmens, so that people from different time zones wont be restricted.
-
Timezone are bad and so unrealistic ! Killgore gives a rly nice suggestion at the begining of the thread !
-
What people do in FOnline is not your problem. And if people enjoy to do only TC, it's still not your problem but you should enjoy to be surounded by happy people. If we prefer TC to classical PVP it's also our problem. And I think that all players can give their opinions even if there are not major players... Just because they are part of the majority...
Anyway, you say that WE are trying to find a compromise ? Who ask a compromise ? A compromise between what and what ?
66% of the players enjoy TC in 5 cities and PVP in New Reno. They CAN NOT enjoy it in the other places !
The others enjoy what they want in 8 cities and numerous small places. They CAN ALSO come in the TC cities but yes, it is dangereous. With the help of the TC "apes" they can even enjoy what they want under protection in the TC cities.
But it seems that it's definitly not enough to organize the world championship of hand-to-hand fight...
Anyway if we would be fair, we should give 66% of ALL THE PLACES AND CITIES to the 66% of the players who enjoy TC and PVP...
But no, those TC/PVP monkeys should let each TC city 20 hours daily to the 33% of players who dont care about TC, and enjoy the TC cities only 4 hours per day ? And only WHEN the others agree ?
It is that a compromise ? Are you kidding ??
So let's also setup a RP window in the 8 other cities and the RP players will only be allowed to enjoy their game play 4 times 1 hour per day in each city and let's see what they will say.... And in each of those 8 cities the TC players will play 20 hours per day...
-
My suggestion was a try for a comprimise between 2 different position of member of TC gangs (Lordus and Keigore)
but I admit I dont do TC so probably my idea was not right, would be better if HOW do TC were discussed by the gangs
(but in what give as prize for TC probably there is a little conflict of interest )
If the the gangs need more battlefield I suggest to create a new tribal village (if the map is a problem use the chosen one tribe) , maybe some square away from the chosen one tribe, with another name (I suppose there were other tribe around)
e g : stupid rock village ( with no militia, or only tribal one)
Necropolis too would be a interesting choice (so the bunker base could be more useful to gangs)
-
-Players should remain inside the town map, otherwise control would be changed to None.
-No time window: a "safe" time sounds a bit unfair to me, especially if a faction takes a town just before "the window closes". Also, since the faction would need people inside the map to control the town, time windows would probably be rather useless.
-The town "economy" (TC loot box) depends on what is going on in there: TC loot will decrease if many NPCs and/or players die (factions might not go happy trigger in the towns they control, and they might keep their militia instead of killing them to get better NPCs) and it could ever drop to no loot at all if there is a terrible and long war in there - this includes NPCs and players dying during Town Control fights. I think it'd work against factions' concentration on a single town: if there is too much mess in Redding because all factions want it, there'll be no reward until those factions start fighting over some other town while waiting for the Redding "economy" to get better.
If a faction is able to keep a town for a long time and there aren't many deaths there, the TC loot will increase. Wouldn't be too much because as said they'll always need to have people connected and staying inside the map, so someone else will take the town eventually.
-Accepted gear should match the gear used by factions during TC.
-No "faction X is taking town Y" server message: the only people that will know about the attack would be the attackers themselves, and the defenders (members of the ruling faction will be in the town as already said, so they'll always know if they're being attacked) - other people won't know about the attack unless they are informed by one of the groups which participate in the fight.
-Pip Boy statistics: I used to think the Pip-Boy shouldn't tell you who's controlling each town, but players need to know it from some ingame feature somehow, so it shouldn't be changed. With statistics, if you want to meet members of certain town and you can see they are controlling town X, you'll be able to travel to town X and meet members of that faction.
-About militia and TC zones: I honestly prefer not to give a real suggestion about these, because I am sure they wouldn't be really good ones. I would to see militia with items like Metal Armor and Assault Rifle, Scoped Hunting Rifle, Improved Flamer, M60 as top gear, but like I said I am not sure my suggestions about these elements would be good for gameplay.
-
I support the ideas about encouring players to stay inside towns to get the reward from tc box.
Kilgore's idea of capturing town without timer is okay. It's basically like farming: you go to a place, spend time there risking your equipment and lives and receive a prize. The cycle of tc box resupplies would be something like 10-15 minutes and if it's Redding you get like 30 nuka, cigs, jet and 5000 caps. When the gang thinks it has enough supplies, it simply leaves the town like Kilgore said.
What's problematic here is that this gang would probably just shoot everyone and everything they don't know when they are "guarding" town. Instead of fending off, tc should attract people inside.
So when tc is on, the local merchants could for example start selling high tier mats and weapons that can be only bought with cash via dialogue. When random players buy them, the tc gang gets bonus cash in their locker.
-
-The town "economy" (TC loot box) depends on what is going on in there: TC loot will decrease if many NPCs and/or players die (factions might not go happy trigger in the towns they control, and they might keep their militia instead of killing them to get better NPCs) and it could ever drop to no loot at all if there is a terrible and long war in there - this includes NPCs and players dying during Town Control fights. I think it'd work against factions' concentration on a single town: if there is too much mess in Redding because all factions want it, there'll be no reward until those factions start fighting over some other town while waiting for the Redding "economy" to get better.
Oh great, so TC exists so that people can fight each other so let's make TC set up the way that if people fight each other it becomes totally pointless in economic terms. Way to go, you've just broken a game mechanism.
If a faction is able to keep a town for a long time and there aren't many deaths there, the TC loot will increase. Wouldn't be too much because as said they'll always need to have people connected and staying inside the map, so someone else will take the town eventually.
Oh, so it wouldn't even be too much? So yeah, why bother about the box at all... let's go back to the time when nobody cared about the TC loot and people focused on the loot from fighting instead. Oh wait, everyone admitted this shit was totally broken and needed to go.
-No "faction X is taking town Y" server message: the only people that will know about the attack would be the attackers themselves, and the defenders (members of the ruling faction will be in the town as already said, so they'll always know if they're being attacked) - other people won't know about the attack unless they are informed by one of the groups which participate in the fight.
Right, it's better to have them poor PvP monkeys constantly checking pipboy because streamlined interface is for pussies and no fun allowed, especially since:
-Pip Boy statistics: I used to think the Pip-Boy shouldn't tell you who's controlling each town, but players need to know it from some ingame feature somehow, so it shouldn't be changed. With statistics, if you want to meet members of certain town and you can see they are controlling town X, you'll be able to travel to town X and meet members of that faction.
So yeah, there you go, nothing really changes except... where the hell did the timer go? My telephone's alarm clock you say? Yeah, that's right, because streamlined interface is for pussies.
Christ, there should be a giant "think twice before you post" banner on every board accepting input from players because posting obviously broken stuff like that is just outrageous... Same with TC capture windows - they used to be in the game, they made the majority of the PvP crowd cringe and everyone more or less agreed at some point that they have to go. Shouldn't we just move on and forget this WM-camping-based, swarm-infested wait-an-hour-play-15-minutes nightmare?
-
It is the developers vision to decide if they want the game to be 95% pvp or 95% RP or 95% PVE. Best is a mix of those. But right now, mostly PVP players are supported (Thats why we have mostly pvp players on the server), to make some RP one has to deal with a lot of game system problems (or lack of avaliblity of interactive enviroment). Not saying that pvp cannot be together with rp, it can but rp needs more support.
There should be way of winning wars(Really...), supported by game mechanics, maybe have a terminal function "Declare War" then in battles, both factions will be given same amount of manpower (this could be somehow diffrent for those two factions dependible on how many players they got?) both factions will have to put in money into terminal (same amount for their own war efforts) then the factions fight eachother in the wasteland, every player of faction A killed by the faction B player (two factions that are at war) is one less Manpower point for the faction in this war, the faction that wins, wins all the pot (All the money that both sides put into war effort terminal). Activity would also be important, winning a town could give a small boost to manpower, if no town is taken during 24/7 it could mean some people deserting (and so loose of manpower). The hours of activity should be mostly rewarded by taking town at most server busy hours, and most less rewarding (or not rewarded at all) by taking cities when most people are sleeping.
Alliances should also be supported by terminal, and so implemented functions into game system. Like town take overs, wars and so on.
If a faction holds the town for 10 days, and losses it. Then the income from TC box should not instantly drop to zero. It should drop by some each hour (maybe 2 times more then when it grows).
Karma and faction reputation towards both other factions and npc factions is also important i think.
Town control is absolutely not good as it is. Militia should turn hostile toward anyone who attacks them and should remember him/her till all town militia is killed off.
I agree, acually i think this is obvious thing to do. Then this crazy militia would not be needed. Like i say, if nobody is online, then 20 average merc militias (400+ hp) can be killed by 4 enemies... (The door blocking part should also be fixed together with this in my opinion)
-
This debate goes wrong. Nobody answers of basic question. What should TC be? Developers support of organized PvP or it should be background for roleplaying?
If you want to support roleplay, you need measures, that brings AND HOLD players in the cities. If you want to support organized PvP, you need to announce to PvP gangs that somewhere will somebody for some reason fight.
Current TC combines both and it is a wrong way with wrong features. Why? If you want to create roleplay (secure unguard city, invite players, give them roles, chat, organize pve or pvp from that location,...), you have to capture city. But when you capture city, you alarm every PvP chars in wasteland and they arrive and destroy your roleplay (=wrong way). Because of this, militia was implemented and overpowered, so in fact, small or even regular pvp gangs could not capture city (because of alarm), or even take it later, because of overpowered militia and one militia marker player. (= wrong features). They can capture city only at night hours (if they find militia camping place and have time to get back), so WITHOUT ANY player vs. player interaction.. (=wrong way). Players who wants engage other players only, have to kill militia first, so if enemy players (in full strenght) stay in city, there is no chance to kill them. Even there is chance, you have to kill NPCs, if you want to play multiplayer game.. (=wrong way).
So again same question.. should players be motivated to stay longer in cities or should they be motivated to come, fight and go away.
IF the game concept would be so briliant and it will hold a lot of players in at least ONE city (unguarded), then ok, lets focus on concept where gang could hold cities and players will be still there. I will know, that after i log my char, i can pvp or whatever into certain city, meet there people, kill player raiders etc.
BUT I DONT BELIEVE it, because of recent year experience. Players are not so excited from Fonline like years before. So this game needs stimulations even for PvP. How? Time windows for TC is one example. Or invent different. But idea is still same: give players possibility to join pvp fight of certain quality in certain time, where enemy and ally will be online and ready. DONT offer hours of waiting for pvp, searching in cities ... .
Kilgores idea, to stay in city for some time, get reward and leave will cause, that after every gang will have every stuff it needs (cca 2-3 months), they will not need to stay in city for economical reason. So they will stay in cities only as tagets. So the game concept will return to current nothing to do, everything is empty.
The only existing concept that was succesfull and was not benefit from excitement of Fallout Online! was time windows concept. You knew, that for some time (6-11 gmt plus 1 hour) was some action.
If there are a lot of canadian french players (argentinian, USA,..), write number of you and suggest time you are obviously online. Dont forget, that you can first PvP, then craft, PvE.. So i think we are able to find ideal window for capturing.
-
...
I actually really like your "declare war" suggestion. It would be like implementing a cool feature that gives more meaning to something that's already happening and probably wouldn't even be that hard to code. It would be more or less like gambling on the outcome of your TC battles and would give the winner some awesome boasting rights ;D
-
The only existing concept that was succesfull and was not benefit from excitement of Fallout Online! was time windows concept. You knew, that for some time (6-11 gmt plus 1 hour) was some action.
Nice strawman argument there, but time windows have nothing to do with economic viability. The same "don't stay inside and be a target" logic applies to time window based TC; in fact, that's exactly what happened and why when those time windows were implemented we had a very nasty case of "fighting on the worldmap"; in the end the only reason people fought was prestige and that motivation is not going to disappear in unrestricted TC (as demonstrated by every session since the 2238 project was launched). Kilgore's idea at least gives you some incentive to actually stay inside to get anything valuable, so if the rewards amounted to caps, ammo and drugs it would be perfectly reasonable to get those resources even months after the session started from the TC box instead of crafting or farming simply because unlike weapons and armors they get depleted really fast even when you're on a long winning streak.
Edit:
Damn, didn't notice I was multiposting, sorry about that. I'd be eternally grateful if some mod could merge these two posts :P
-
After reading most of the posts within this topic i'll try to sum up some things, which have been said, including my own opinion (please forgive me if i missed someone/something important). I will try to not go into detail too much, what counts is the big picture of all ideas:
Militia
- the majority of players want to remove or at least make them less powerful (number, HP, equipment) for certain reasons (balancing, swarm reducing, abusing etc.)
- if militia will stay in one or the other way there could be a difference in number, power of them and the equipment they use according to the city itself (like suggested by Nexxos (http://fodev.net/forum/index.php?topic=18860.msg156252#msg156252))
- also, if they stay, some major points have to be looked over again:
1. the possibillity to add mercs to the militia maybe should be removed
2. some solution for the "easy killing" problem (miltia trap)
3. more functions: control features for patrol routes/guarding a certain spot, friend or foe features ...
4. should militia increase their power (manpower, HP, equipment) when a gang holds the town for a certain time?
At the time they were implemented they seem to be a good idea and i still think, that there are some few good things about them. But all in all i agree to the point to (at least) lower their numbers and their power. Depending on how the system will work in the future they also could be removed completely.
TC Windows (suggested by several people)
- some point which was discussed a lot because there's a big controversy about it...
- some pros and cons about them (including new ideas of some people here):
- gangs know exactly when to take town, players can prepare for some certain time(s) per day when they are able to play the game
- between the windows there is a chance for "RP" and/or (in general) players who populate the city (assuming that the faction, who holds the city allows this)
- since there is(are) only a certain time(s) when a city can be taken, gangs can prepare for this well and the winner dont have to fear, that some gang is taking it back for a certain period
- some players wont be able to take part in TC anymore (work, timezones)
- the point above could lead to an imbalanced situation in gang fights
- that game system "dictates" gangs/players a certain time to take a town is seen as restrictment to their freedom by some people
- some guys proposed to have more then only one time a day a city is takeable (ranging from two up to five windows and more a day)
For me, TC windows were not a bad idea but to have them back feels a bit like to fall back into some older system instead of coming up with something new. Beside this i don't think that adding more windows a day will solve all problems (and adding more and more windows for TC a day makes also no sense ofc). The only thing which would make them a TC system of my choice would be the idea of populated cities between the windows but this isn't something you can count on and is strongly binded to the reaction of the gang, who holds a city.
New TC system ideas:
"Hold the Hill" (suggested by Kilgore (http://fodev.net/forum/index.php?topic=18860.msg156276#msg156276))
- timer to take a town will be removed or at least lowered
- the town can't be taken anymore but instead it can be hold by a gang
- as long as there is a minimum amount of players of a certain gang who stays within the town (or a defined area of it) it is officially in their hands
- rewards will be given out every 10 to 15 minutes (for example)
- when the gang leaves the city or gets ambushed and killed by another gang (aka amount of players < min amount to hold it) it switches back to a neutral town, leaving the opportunity for other gangs to take it in their hands
I hope i summed up the main points here. Personally i think, that this idea is simply good for several reasons. First of all it's much more realistic, to have the force, which protects a city or a part of it, around at least, then to have some kind of auto-control over it. Also i think this system can be implemented more easily then some others. But the biggest potential i see in it is the fact, that it could be combined with some other ideas to "round" it up a bit:
(some ideas)
- - after the gang leaves the town there could be some "out time" before another gang can take it (not much though, maybe around 1 ingame hour or even less)
- - instead of having windows when a town can be taken (yes i know this system was suggested as no-windows-at-all-system :)) there could be a small time window each day where it can't be taken (for trading/mining/whatever)
- - a town which has been held for some time period could become untakeable for some time (also not much, maybe 1 ingame day), rewards will be adjusted to only 1 time each 2 hours then but will raise a bit in amount
Dynamic windows and zones (suggested by KTTdestroyer (http://fodev.net/forum/index.php?topic=18860.msg156402#msg156402))
I'm not sure if i got this right in all points, so i'll quote destroyer here:
To support this way of thinking, 15 minutes is way to short time to throw out a faction that sees the town as their home. However, 15 minutes is aswell more then enough time to stand and wait for enemy to show up... So it is a problem in both ways. I would suggest something i suggested long time ago, that the towns would be split into 3 capture zones each. The third is the final zone, The zone that can be only reached by capturing the first 2, it must be done by steps. After the first capture the zone remains open for capture for 30 minutes, so the faction defending has an oportunity to strike back. Also once the first timer started, it also sets the time zone for the next day with 3 hours forward and back. For exemple: If a zone is taken at 00:00 GMT+1 and held for this 30 minutes, then next day, any faction can make another attempt at time frame 21:00 to 3:00 am. If it is the defending faction that takes it between 00:00-00:59 the time zone stays the same, if it takes it between 21:00-23:59 then the time zone is moved back 1 hour (20:00-2:00), if after 1:00 am then moved forward one hour. so to fully take over a town you need 3 days and you have to win 3 battles straight victories. Together with this remove TC from 3 AM to 10 AM and you got dynamic TC time frames.
- towns will be separated into 3 capture zones, which all have to be taken (step by step) to be in charge of the whole town in the end
- each captured zone can be retaken by another gang within a certain time window after it was successfully taken in first place
- once a zone is taken it automatically sets a new time window (depending on the time it was taken at) for the next zone (? <-- not sure at this point)
I see some advantages in this idea but also some main problems. What i really like is the idea of dynamic windows but at the same time this may also be the worst part of it. As opposing gang you need to have to observe your enemies progress very well to know when to attack them while they take the next zone. This could be simplyfied by implementing some sort of visible timer in the pip boy (which shows the times a new strike is possible) but all in all it still sounds like it could be a bit too confusing. Also, 3 days to take a town may be a bit too harsh all in all and could lead to frustrating situations when a team almost won a town and then gets drawed back by the enemy just some minutes before it reaches this goal. Still some adjustments of this system could work:
- up to 3 zones have to be taken before a town is in charge of a gang ("up to" means adjustments to smaller towns; Den/Klamath remain at 1 zone, Gecko/Modoc have 2, Redding/BH 3)
- After one zone is taken the gang may choose if they continue on the next instantly (means they may gain some more loot at the end) or to lock the counter for a max time of 1 hour maybe. Within this time another gang can try to take the already taken zone, if they succeed both teams control 1 zone and the fight will continue on zone 2; the winner of that battle holds 2 zones all in all then. The team controlling no zones at all can try to regain the first zone after this fight but will have to defeat the enemy again in zone 2 after this.
- The point above again sounds too confusing i have to admit but actually this zone thing could work out well when there were some rules each team has to obey and some point system (for example 3 wins in whatever zone, in a row means automatically to rule the town and all TC will be locked for a certain time, in addition 2 losses in a row means, that the loser can't try again for some time)
TC and Raid - Split it up! (suggested by Cha (http://fodev.net/forum/index.php?topic=18860.msg156409#msg156409))
- the system of TC will be split up in 2 possibilities to gain control over a town
- 1 long term "Annexation" and 1 short term "Raid"
- Annexation provides the status of the ownership a gang has over the town, no matter if there is some "Raid" during this time and would also provide better loot in the end. After a successful annexation there is a time period during which no other gang can annexate it.
- During annexation another gang (smaller team for example) can try to ambush and raid the city to gain some quick loot. This wont change the ownership of the gang who holds the city (it will fall back in their hands when the raid is over) and also won't provide only a small amount of loot (compared to the annexation).
In my opinion this isn't much of a change to the actual system (not meaning that small changes are bad ;)). Annexation mode would be (at least in cha's vision) some kind of stretch up of the normal TC, like it is now. It would be a bit harder to get the town but if you are successful you can lay back a bit and enjoy your fruits while others still can do little raids. And that's actually the part of this system which is kinda new here. Generally speaking you would have
--> Dat TC (and this system could still be changed as long as it is some type of long term control of a town -> for example see 3 zones idea)
and a more faster way to get some loot,
--> the Raid (also this could be another system --> for example see Hold the Hill )
Cha didn't go much into detail here but thats not that important. The main idea has some attraction because it provides some chance for a smaller team to gain some reward and to do some PvP/PvE. Though, this must be implemented very well to work i think and it probably wont work right in the first place (or at least there's much beta-beta-testing necessary :)) which could lead to bigger frustration by all sides. At least i still like the big picture of it. Having some opportunity to do smaller raids instead of always spending hours on a big TC would be a nice thingy.
Some side idea as i would call it is this one:
"Lets meet in the desert, punks!" (suggested by KTTdestroyer (http://fodev.net/forum/index.php?topic=18860.msg156671#msg156671))
- With the faction terminal there could come some feature along to arrange gang fights.
- Both sides put in some amount of caps and meet somewhere in the desert (aka special fight area like hinkley) to fight each other.
- The winner gets the caps and maybe some additional loot
- With a special TC terminal this could work for Town Control too. This time its not (or not only about caps) but its about the reward to hold a town.
- Each fight would be done by equal numbers of players (or some other ratio if chosen and accepted by both sides)
I know i generalized your idea a bit here destroyer (sorry for that ;), its about the big picture again; everyone can read the details on his own at your post). For me one of the most important things would be to see northern towns populated a bit more again. (I know , i know ;)..."Leave northern towns to apes!"..."99% of player are PvPler, live with it!" ..."ROAWWR!" and so on :D. I won't comment on this and it wouldn't lead to anything really for the actual discussion. So just skip this out for now and try to imagine a system were both could actually be possible.)
This system would have a chance to provide this, i think. Also there could be regular gang fights as well as there could be fights for TC (here some minimum gear and amount of players each site should be necessary). And finally the teams would be equal, the winner won, the loser lost...
Finally there are some
General suggestions (suggested by several people)
- fix minimum requirements of a team to take a town --> LSW, RL should count as High Tier too
- increasing rewards and/or TC timer when a gang holds a town for some time --> Awards in general, also see BlackKeys Post (http://fodev.net/forum/index.php?topic=18860.msg156394#msg156394)
- one gang one town rule
- bringing more life into a town --> faction holding a town could have the possibility to improve it a bit (instead of adding militia only as protection they could add certain traders or special chars too like Gunsmiths or Armorers, Brahmin dealers whatever)
-
- one gang one town rule
Remove it, as it's impossible to know if "other gang" is not alt-gang of a gang that already controls a town, so one gang can hold more than 1 town by different names, so why not just leave ability for gang to control more than 1 town at a time.
-
Remove it, as it's impossible to know if "other gang" is not alt-gang of a gang that already controls a town, so one gang can hold more than 1 town by different names, so why not just leave ability for gang to control more than 1 town at a time.
Maybe there is some misunderstanding here. These "General Suggestion" were made by several people here. Those are not mine, i just didn't comment them any further.
-
Maybe there is some misunderstanding here. These "General Suggestion" were made by several people here. Those are not mine, i just didn't comment them any further.
Well then you can comment it as it's useless as this suggested rule can be avoided. Or just forget about this and previous post... it's not important anyway.
-
I agree with the economical concept, the faction reputation (great idea ! Should inpact on the difficulty to take control of the town - realistic) and to increase the responsability of the TC teams and blablabla...
But I just would like to speak about RP and security now because, when I read your posts, it seems that the main reasons to modify the TC system turn around that. Protect RP and players when they come in TC cities.
The first problem you have (the only ?) is not TC, it's the players !
When you come in "a town" and when you ask "Where are you from ?" you don't heard "from Sf" or "from New Reno"... And when you start to play your role... People don't play their char most of the time. It's not because of TC. It's not because of the devs. You see Players speaking to Players, not Chars speaking to Chars... Most of them don't even thought about their story. Even when you play a PVP char, you can have a story...
Other problem: some RP players have decided to play their roles in unguarded city... Why ??? There is more guarded city than unguarded. If you want security, go in secured towns ! But don't say that you can't play your role in unguarded city because of TC. Say that you can't play your role in guarded city because there's nobody, because the NPCs don't punish the assholes who bored you all the time, exploit bugs, but please, don't blaim TC !
But you are right, this debate goes wrong. When I read that to play your role you have to control and stay in a city, yes, I think we have a problem... You don't need that. Even when my enemies control Redding I come in downtown with some unknown alts and I play my role... But I don't come with a char who is enemy. You have to assume what you have done and your choices... If you want to play your role in unguarded cities, it's because you want to have the militia and/or to be allowed to kill the people you don't like ! And most of the time, you are the first to blame your enemies when they do that... If so, ask the devs to remove the guards in protected cities. If not, just explain me why you prefer to RP in unguarded cities than into guarded cities...
The last problem I think is that some of you are looners, and have decided to survive alone in the Wasteland, and you would like to rule the world alone... You don't like gangs/teams... But it's like that, and it's realistic, 10 fighters will always win vs 1 player... So don't cry when you are killed alone in a TC city... Especially when you are enemy...
Anyway, if RP players absolutly want an unguarded town in which TC is not possible, AND without militia, so OK, let's do that with one of the 8 towns in which it's already not possible to TC and open a new "NEW RENO"... After this week and the Redding story, I just can't understand why you're asking that...
About the system in which each teams should put money in the terminal: do you remember the Vietnam and the Afghanistan ? Poor countries vs rich countries ? Who won ? The richs or the poors ??? Unrealistic...
And speaking about the declarations of war and alliances we all know how it works... You fuck me, ok it's war... You fuck my friend, ok it's war... You can set what you want into the pipboy, if tomorow our allies fuck us, we will fight surely them before setting something in the pipboy and except if you disable the friendly fire, it will change absolutly nothing !
To finish, if we are waiting at the moment, for RP or PVP, it's certainly because a lot of players are waiting for the wipe... A lot don't even play and just come on mumble... Nobody wants to launch a new project which could be ended by a reset... So we just enjoy the fight... Sometimes... So, it's not because we all feel bored waiting for the wipe that everything should be burned or modified...
And definitively... A TC Windows to protect players while they are mining or playing their roles ??? Fuck ! Do you remember this week in Redding ??? Even if you suppress the TC windows there will be gangs and PKers in Redding... You will never protect you from fights with a TC Window...
-
When I look at that whole crap I`m getting only one thought: GMs don`t take players opinion under your minds! This is your duty to think it up, players are not able to do it.
About RP project: gangs like TTTLA thinks that they could make a fortress which nobody could win and they gonna stay there forever. After 2 days of bluesuit swarm standing on downtown and talking about holy shit everyone will get bored but the fortress will be still impossible to take by other gang. If you want RP do it in ncr but fuck off of north. I can understand protecting the mine for miners but protecting downtown?
-
When I look at that whole crap I`m getting only one thought: GMs don`t take players opinion under your minds
!
But the players here have underlined pretty good points already. Nerf militia, remove timer, remove increasing tc loot, add enemies of faction in KoS list for militia etc.
If you want RP do it in ncr but fuck off of north. I can understand protecting the mine for miners but protecting downtown?
When done right, players can do in tc towns what they would normally do in ncr but without thieves and bombers. Some get bored of talking but that's because the towns lack activities. There's nothing profitable or interesting to do in the end. It's much more profitable to go hunt unity than stand in downtown but when someone is hunting unity, he's basically invisible to everyone else, almost like he was on worldmap. Players in unsafe towns is good for gameplay no matter what they are doing.
-
When I look at that whole crap I`m getting only one thought: GMs don`t take players opinion under your minds! This is your duty to think it up, players are not able to do it.
About RP project: gangs like TTTLA thinks that they could make a fortress which nobody could win and they gonna stay there forever. After 2 days of bluesuit swarm standing on downtown and talking about holy shit everyone will get bored but the fortress will be still impossible to take by other gang. If you want RP do it in ncr but fuck off of north. I can understand protecting the mine for miners but protecting downtown?
What an interesting statement....
Man, keeping Redding to make it a fortress was not the point of our project, it was to make the town as lively and entertaining as possible. Cause FOnline is based on a famous C-RPG called Fallout.
Cause you probably don't know, but some players like to do other things than PvP in this game. I even know few guys who never play PvP at all.
Sorry for off-topic.
Kilgore's suggestion is a good basis, simple and effective.
-
My opinion about Kilgores idea:
One thing is how you set rules and options of TC system, and other thing is how gang (members) behaviour would be affected. So if i try imagine gang behaviour, gangs would often (temporary) occupied city locations because of income from city. Than they would move to another city or they would be attacked by hostile team.
Problem i see is: if you want to eliminate timer, you will also eliminate beacon. With no beacon, there should exists two very different situations. First, the pvp activity would be lower then current, because no beacon would mean, that if you want pvp, you have to check every possible location for enemy. In your suggestion, Kilgore, you expect that players could hide somewhere (no TC zones). Ok, but this will also reduce the chance to meet the enemy.
On other way, removing beacon could result into situation, that more and more players often visit city and do TC, because of no fear from instant enemy attack. So you can meet more players in cities and that means even more PvP. Maybe.
Problem of this is economical importance of staying in city. If you can get generic stuff from this risky Town Controling, i doubt that many players will risk it. But, if you can give something extra, players will come.
That leads into situation, if TControling team should get something unnecesary (hides you can hunt elsewhere, cigaretts, you can craft elsewhere,..), or he should harvest, craft this stuff (pvp drugs, tier max weapons, armors) only in those locations, nowhere else. (Like domination mode neverending idea).
You can admit, that if you can "craft(mine) and go", teams would not stay many time in cities. So why not this: Town controling gang would get equal amount of mined resources, caps from quests, harvested stuff that is mined, harvested, traded... in city during their town control. This would force gangs TO NOT BEHAVE LIKE IDIOTS, but it will grant more interaction among players. I.e. controling gangs could give players share from their income, or they can create some event from anothr source of caps. Or controling gang will prevent other players to bring their own booze, but they can free buy it from city NPC trader,... .
But this requires, that you shouldnt be able to get very same stuff more easily somewhere else.
PvP element should be supported too. The caps, items... from TC should be spawned in box (again) after certain time, but that box can be locked by players, doors too, location could be mined(OMG, MINES!!!), trapped or baricade by sand boxes. Because the interest (from gangs) high number of players (and their activities) in city, mines would not be used in killing "innocent" players, but to protect city controling activities.
-
What an interesting statement....
Man, keeping Redding to make it a fortress was not the point of our project, it was to make the town as lively and entertaining as possible. Cause FOnline is based on a famous C-RPG called Fallout.
Cause you probably don't know, but some players like to do other things than PvP in this game. I even know few guys who never play PvP at all.
Sorry for off-topic.
Kilgore's suggestion is a good basis, simple and effective.
But if there wont be militia players will not be forced to join swarms. And other small gangs could enter the city cuz nobody can stay in town for 24 hours. There will be not situations like one guy throwing rock to everything and PKing by militia. Thrust me I like do something different then PVP.
-
If Tree Control revolution is about to come, why not try this (http://fodev.net/forum/index.php?topic=7384.0) to implement?
-
So why not this: Town controling gang would get equal amount of mined resources, caps from quests, harvested stuff that is mined, harvested, traded... in city during their town control. This would force gangs TO NOT BEHAVE LIKE IDIOTS, but it will grant more interaction among players. I.e. controling gangs could give players share from their income, or they can create some event from anothr source of caps. Or controling gang will prevent other players to bring their own booze, but they can free buy it from city NPC trader,... .
This is it. Defending gang gets bonus tc loot when players do quests and participate in activities in-town.
The thing is: there's hardly any meaningful quests and activities in towns. Nobody showels shit, hauls caravan boxes, gathers low tier stuff or does those npc quests in late-game. After a while everyone has alts with profesions so nobody buys profesions anymore. Towns simply need more activities that are meaningful, fun and profitable. HQ mines and drugstores are basically the only things that attract random people in tc towns.
-
Avv: Because you can loot enclave vs. brotherhood corpses and sell that broken crap stuff to every NPCs with caps. NPCs should buy only 0 det. without any repair done. This will force people to more craft, more stay in cities, if it would make crafting more easier (bonus for crafting in city workbench, bonus from mining in gecko, broken hills or redding mine, if your gang controls that city, ... ).
City locations should generate stuff or should ease to get stuff you need to pvp in that location. So i.e. Modoc (Klamath) is almost long range, it should be easier to get there long rifles (hunting rigle, sniper rifle,...), ... .
-
all thoes sugestions will change nothing in tc/pvp. sometimes i have feeling we playing totaly different game. dont understand why everyone want to support small factions, for what? that supose be harsh wasteland where only the strongest survive. strongest = more numberous factions, strentht = number. we will be have swarms, alliances anyway.. ist that really bad? its fucking MMO game.
keep going lordus, never give up! ;)
-
If Tree Control revolution is about to come, why not try this (http://fodev.net/forum/index.php?topic=7384.0) to implement?
It is some solution.
-
Most of the current TC features i don't have a problem with, but i do have three things i'd suggest.
A: The militia all respawns instantly if someone starts the TC timer.
B: The militia remembers people who attacked them and they are added to a list of blacklisted players controllable at the sheriff.
C: Any mercs or slaves added to the militia gain no bonus HP or skills, you shouldn't get an uber army just because you told some normal mercs to guard your holy city (Redding comes to mind) that you just captured.
-Ulrek-
-
Maybe it was mentioned here already, but how about add TC to Necropolis (which is dead anyway) and remove it from Klamath (which is dead anyway)? Just to see what's gonna happen. It's beta, you know.
-
Maybe it was mentioned here already, but how about add TC to Necropolis (which is dead anyway) and remove it from Klamath (which is dead anyway)? Just to see what's gonna happen. It's beta, you know.
Nothing?
-
Just to see what's gonna happen.
More fuel spent, SEC price increase a bit.
Another question?
-
Necropolis has 3 maps, it 's be fun to have a new battlefield but it would have to be modified to fit with the TC requirements.
-
Well Klamath definitely needs a change either making it guarded or scrap the guards from its mine its weird now.
About Necropolis well it would be nice to give some life to the place right now not many action happens there making it a tc city would be nice and I have to say it looks more believable then Klamath (I mean Klamath is the home of trappers they should be able to protect the place on the other hand Necropolis is pretty much dead the residents can't really arm themselves so it would be valid that they would accept outsiders as ruling military force in they city)
-
It's now all a lot of caps. When every caps will need to earn your hands - you will think thrice whether to put the next militia.
-
masz: it is not my war, honestly, i dont believe in good TC implementation.
Heckler: I am for Necropolis. It has sewers, it consist of 3 main maps. I think that new TC quality could be bad or good, but adding (or replacing) TC city with new location will 100 percent grant new gameplay. Question is for how long, but still this could be major and only change after wipe in TC.
Jotisz: Adding the guards will not affect the safetyness, look at NCR. It is more dangerous place in wasteland today (thiefs, suicide bombors, lvl 1 one hex bursters,...)
-
If Tree Control revolution is about to come, why not try this (http://fodev.net/forum/index.php?topic=7384.0) to implement?
+1
Would be good to actually try TC with low tier guns and armors
-
Jotisz: Adding the guards will not affect the safetyness, look at NCR. It is more dangerous place in wasteland today (thiefs, suicide bombors, lvl 1 one hex bursters,...)
Its not really about safety since I would be happy if the mine would became unguarded too.
My problem is that the city and the mine is in different state and it somehow feels wrong.
-
You need to join gang with will be loyal to you and vice versa. Then the game will get much more fun. Try it;). (I`m warning you it`s PVP game, that means you will not be able to stand on redding`s downtown;). That`s it folk;)
-
Well finding people isn't so hard and getting in a group isn't bad however rolling with 1-2 guy or 10 is quite the same if you can have fun with each then its totally the same except that small groups even if they have a base can't TC sadly there is no place for the little fishes in the aquarium of sharks...
I`m warning you it`s PVP game
I beg to differ here. Fonline is based on Fallout 1-2 which are role playing games its true that PvP is here but its still an RPG not a PvP game even if the RP content is smaller at the moment but it won't be the case at least I hope so.
-
Thanks for all the feedback and ideas.
Here's a little sneak peak on how "TC v3" will be.
It's still WIP, but it will be implemented for the next session and it'll be modified based on how it turns out then, again based on your feedback.
I've been reading trough this thread and other linked threads from the suggestion board, trying to gather all different ideas into something coherent, and based on what we've tried before, what I feel have worked (based on my own limit experience as PvP player) and We've decided to go in the direction of the "Hold the Hill", but slightly modified.
Factions will now no longer be taking towns, instead they automatically gain influence in the towns which they are in. This influence increases all the time as long as the faction stays in there and fills the minimum equipment and level requirements demanded by the specific town. As soon as they leave the town, they no longer gain influence. If there's no one in town from any faction, no factions influence is affected, but whenever some other faction is gaining influence, the influences of other factions will decrease by a small amount while they are in town. What's influence used for? Everything that could be done in the older versions now needs certain amount of influence for each action.
If you've only got a little influence, you'll be able to only gain small rewards, and hiring militia requires even more influence.
If you stick around in a town long enough, you'll be able to change it drastically, like enact new laws (enforced by militia), or close down the local mine.
Who has control?
The faction with largest amount of influence at anytime. This can change fast if two factions are on about the same amount.
What happens if two or more factions are present?
Then no one will gain influence until the other faction(s) present force have been eliminated or scared away.
Why should a faction stick around a get higher influence?
* Can enact laws if high enough
* Get rewards from the town
* Hire militia
* Make important town decisions (not implemented yet)
Why is TC being changed in such a dramatic fashion?
The thinking here is that TC will be the "open PvP" while domination (yet to be implemented) will be the more fast-paced "event PvP" with maps especially designed for both small and large scale PvP.
Is there anything else that affects influence?
Yes, killing town people will negatively influence it.
Possibly encouraging trade and movement of non-faction people, but how to safeguard such a system from abuse is not clear. If you have any ideas, put them forth.
Does this mean TC will never be removed/changed again?
No, we don't believe in final frontiers. If something doesn't work, we'll change it again. :)
How has rewards been changed?
Rewards have been increased, it's scaled based on "town difficulty", contains ammo rewards and is based on influence to gain larger rewards.
-
Two questions:
1. Only ammo rewards ?
2. Would number of faction members and place where they stand (TC zones or whole map ?) matter ? (
-
Hah, sounds very interesting. Will require some hardass testing for sure.
Anything to encourage gangs not to shoot random towngoing players?
Yes, killing town people will negatively influence it.
This can be abused. Trolls can take cover behind townsfolk and do everything to get the faction to accidentally shoot the npcs. They might for example aggro the whole town in a big flock and lead it in middle of combat, causing lots of accidental deaths.
In addition, current npc agroing system is awful, if you accidentally kill someone they will chase you forever until they kill you. And if you're 2x toughness tank some beggar will never manage to punch you to death. That should be looked into.
-
1. Only ammo rewards ?
No, it's added, there will still be caps, nuka cola, cigarettes, and special rewards based on town (like gecko pelts).
2. Would number of faction members and place where they stand (TC zones or whole map ?) matter ? (
Higher number and better equipment increases how fast influence is gained.
Whole map is used, not TC zones.
This can be abused. Trolls can take cover behind townsfolk and do everything to get the faction to accidentally shoot the npcs. They might for example aggro the whole town in a big flock and lead it in middle of combat, causing lots of accidental deaths.
If the penalty is small enough, it might not be worth to troll, but yes, this is a big problem.
In addition, current npc agroing system is awful, if you accidentally kill someone they will chase you forever until they kill you. And if you're 2x toughness tank some beggar will never manage to punch you to death. That should be looked into.
This should be cleared every x hour in TC towns, will have to investigate why it doesn't work.
-
Good news, seems we're a bit going on the road away from "bloodbath TC".
I personnaly think TC should be about controlling a location near town, but that gives advantage inside the town. For example, Faction controlling Sierra is gaining influence in New Reno. This way, everyone's happy, including NPCs :) But that's another story... New version of TC will be better than the one we got at the moment, indeed!
-
Good news, seems we're a bit going on the road away from "bloodbath TC".
Not necessarily if there's no encouragement to not to shoot random towncomers. One reason why tc is so scorned by random non-members is that they get always shot when entering unsafe towns guarded by tc factions. Even antipk factions shoot everyone they don't know during tc timer, it's common practice.
Tc is surely about fighting but it's also gangs taking over places and upholding their own rules. It hurts the gameplay that randoms are just encouraged to stay away from unsafe towns.
-
Well, the whole concept surely sounds good! Only thing that might afraid me: teams leaving AFK people hidden in bathroom to gain influence.
-
Well, the whole concept surely sounds good! Only thing that might afraid me: teams leaving AFK people hidden in bathroom to gain influence.
Yeah, I've thought about this too, if you have any good ideas on how to counter it, do tell.
The toilet campers would still need to meet the required number of people and equipment, so anyone that is not AFK and finds them can kill them.
-
Well, the whole concept surely sounds good! Only thing that might afraid me: teams leaving AFK people hidden in bathroom to gain influence.
I see it as positive side, as it gives another reason to stay in town - toilet patrol, you can do it even alone (if they're really afk), and as it was said, they will need to have equipment, it means you'll get loot, the problem is gaining xN more influence than supposed, as you can be not-afk with your friends just stay and kill players on sight, while proxy alts will fill whole building that you're guarding wearing minimum required items, this way noone will enter building. The only fun thing will be seeing bluesuiters running in building and suicidal exploding with everyone inside, but still they need to run to building alive 1st, as non-afkers will protected proxy-afkers.
-
Well, the whole concept surely sounds good! Only thing that might afraid me: teams leaving AFK people hidden in bathroom to gain influence.
Someone realizes my thought at last. Faction proxies hip hip huraaaa ! The most lagful bloodbath of them all.
Okay enough with troll.
Ghosthack what about the beacon ?
You do realize bigger gangs will still have a proxy in each city and that's not good , for scouting purposes not to gain influence in the case if beacons are removed.
-
Yeah, I've thought about this too, if you have any good ideas on how to counter it, do tell.
The toilet campers would still need to meet the required number of people and equipment, so anyone that is not AFK and finds them can kill them.
You could use influence zones, like tc zones. Influence zones would border buildings so that no influence will be given if the character is inside a building.
Possibly encouraging trade and movement of non-faction people, but how to safeguard such a system from abuse is not clear. If you have any ideas, put them forth.
About this one.
Random people could provide bonuses when participating in activities while tc gang is intown.
There aren't many profitable activities, shopping and buying profesions are the most popular things.
Problem with shops is that they sell good stuff and utter crap that players haul there. So no gang would like to protect someone who comes and buys all 223 ammo with radios from the local store. Shops simply need an adjustment regarding on that matter.
Guess the tc gang could get some influence for each profesion bought when they are around, but not more than actually having a gangmember inside or they will just relog to non-members and start buying profesions. Biomedgel, beer and dialogue trades could count aswell. Repeatable quests too, like shitshovelling, caravan packing and grishams bag quest but they are pretty non-profitable, players hardly do them. It'd be great if towns had repeatable quests that can be accomplished solely inside the town.
-
Looks interesting...
but about this point:
Yes, killing town people will negatively influence it.
What does it mean ?
If thats about NPS - biggunners etc. will alwaus kill them...
If about real players: Many guarded cities and low PvP LVL is one of the reasons why people leave FO... It evident that needed more PvP-PK action (not safeguarded zones or city-outside zones for TC)
-
If thats about NPS - biggunners etc. will alwaus kill them...
This only applies to current controlling faction (with most influence).
You could use influence zones, like tc zones. Influence zones would border buildings so that no influence will be given if the character is inside a building.
Maybe, if it doesn't work in any other way. Remember that if two or more factions are present, no one gains any loyality from camping, but it's true that the current controller does stand a bit more to gain by keeping status quo.
-
Another solution : After 2 minutes of inactivity, you get disconnected from the game. ;D
-
Possibly encouraging trade and movement of non-faction people, but how to safeguard such a system from abuse is not clear. If you have any ideas, put them forth.
When a player not belonging to the faction does some task in town AND leaves it safely town influence of controlling faction increases. Only AFTER the player leaves the town alive. Tasks - mining, using workbench to craft good items (not some crap like knuckles), shoveling, doing quests, selling good items CRAFTED IN TOWN, buing bases, buing mercenaries, buing professions.
For example - a player comes to town, mines 10 ores (+10 pre-influece), shovels 5 shits (+1 pre-influence ), does shovel quest ( +10 pre-influence ), crafts 4 rifles (+20 pre-influence) and sells them to town merchant (+40 pre-influence). If the player leaves the town without dying, the faction in town gains 81 influence points. But if the player dies, all the pre-influence he/she collected is lost.
You have to be careful to choose tasks that can't be farmed easily. Like trading back and forth is not good, so I propose only selling items you crafted in the town (without earning pre-influence for buying them back and selling again). Also buying things via dialog, like beer/nuka cola would be good, if only it didn't add caps to bartender inventory (it does).
This should be generally small gain / player, so you would need many people to come to town to notice positive effect.
-
no tc zone + stoping gaining "influecne" by defeding faction in situation when another faction goes inside a town = ridiculous situation
"defending faction" gonna need infact to attack "attacking" faction - couse attacers could just hide their asses inside some building or other almost non-attackable place and just sit there and spoil gaining influence. So u just gona twist roles and atacers gona have big upperhand especially in tactics -> I could hide 5 BG in building "defenders" need to attack them so I can keep rest on worldmap and backstubb "defenders" while theyr attacking my 5 biggunners hidden inside the building.
-
When a player not belonging to the faction does some task in town AND leaves it safely town influence of controlling faction increases. Only AFTER the player leaves the town alive.
This would be good, if it can be done.
You have to be careful to choose tasks that can't be farmed easily.
Not really if the bonus won't be that massive. A customer could be equal to a gangmember in terms of influence gain.
no tc zone + stoping gaining "influecne" by defeding faction in situation when another faction goes inside a town = ridiculous situation
"defending faction" gonna need infact to attack "attacking" faction - couse attacers could just hide their asses inside some building or other almost non-attackable place and just sit there and spoil gaining influence. So u just gona twist roles and atacers gona have big upperhand especially in tactics -> I could hide 5 BG in building "defenders" need to attack them so I can keep rest on worldmap and backstubb "defenders" while theyr attacking my 5 biggunners hidden inside the building.
The influence blockers could also need to be inside the influence zone to block it. Like described, the influence zone should be general streets and areas, not some toilet or building with one entrance. If someone wants to hide in those buiding and harass the defenders, surely they can be smoked out, leaving the influence zone for small moment should be allowed.
For example Klamath influence zone could look like this: http://img542.imageshack.us/img542/5627/rofluence.jpg (http://img542.imageshack.us/img542/5627/rofluence.jpg) (slaughterhouse is not influence zone either, didn't just remember to outline it)
-
Influence zone is problematic. Camping at the end of the map can be pretty much like camping in a building.
The other problem is that it will lead to alliance ending up in same faction in order to increase influence faster/easier, which is kinda sad with the new awesome faction system. Allowing allied factions to mix up their influence maybe? (at least that an allied faction don't prevent you to gain influence).
-
Influence zone is problematic. Camping at the end of the map can be pretty much like camping in a building.
The other problem is that it will lead to alliance ending up in same faction in order to increase influence faster/easier, which is kinda sad with the new awesome faction system. Allowing allied factions to mix up their influence maybe? (at least that an allied faction don't prevent you to gain influence).
Alliance would be good, but it needs reworking of some internal faction stuff and the TC script, so it won't happen this wipe, maybe as an update later. For now an alliance will have to split different towns between them.
-
How is that going to allow players to run a town without having to shoot everyone?
And is there any way to address faction identification?
-
no1 want spies/bombers/looters/suicide bursters inside controlled town so all those ideas to decrease "influence" for shooting "bluesuits" are just out of space
-
So if I get it right, if two gangs are present in the city, influence for both gangs ceases to grow. Numbers wont matter ? So even one or few guys with acceptable equip can stop influence of a swarm of 40 people ? Wouldnt be better to just reduce influence gain (so with 1:1 forces ratio, thats when it should cease) ?
How will the gang know that the influence is rising ? Will we see a influence bar in interface or somewhere ?
Also I see problem with influence gaining during the night, which might be a bit fixed if the influence wouldnt grow so fast.
-
So if I get it right, if two gangs are present in the city, influence for both gangs ceases to grow. Numbers wont matter ? So even one or few guys with acceptable equip can stop influence of a swarm of 40 people ? Wouldnt be better to just reduce influence gain (so with 1:1 forces ratio, thats when it should cease) ?
Maybe, will think about it.
How will the gang know that the influence is rising ? Will we see a influence bar in interface or somewhere ?
Some text when active, like with TC. You can also type a command to see what your faction's influence is in the town.
Also I see problem with influence gaining during the night, which might be a bit fixed if the influence wouldnt grow so fast.
"Night" depends on timezones, it's the same problem that was with time windows.
How is that going to allow players to run a town without having to shoot everyone?
And is there any way to address faction identification?
Not sure who you are addressing but the point is to try to penalize controllers as little as possible (it opens up to abuse most of the time) and instead focus on how to give incentives (see Jovanka's post) to behave good towards people that aren't involved in TC.
-
Just as a side note.
In addition to the boost for letting people do things in town, there should also be a "limit" on how much of a boost they could give per day, such as only letting a single non-gang member boost influence up to set amount, or have it scale so that the actions only give 10% of what it normally gives after a while, to prevent auto clickers and proxies from exploiting, but still giving a reason for them to let people in.
-Ulrek-
-
Izual:
Inactivity of 2 minutes => autoclicker. But i dont see this as a problem. Searching for inactive alts could boost "small pvp actions". Problem i see is INACTIVE PLATOON of sneakers :))
Influence (zones):
I am agaisnt zones (in general), because zones in past two eras leads to situation, that most pvp actions in cities are in same, well known parts of cities. Without zones, players and their tactics will be more free.
Problem i see are hotel rooms. Hotel room filled of afk platoon of players to raise influence..
"Roleplay":
Problem i see in roleplay activities of major gangs (TTTLA, Samaritans,BHH,...). They caputre the city and try to roleplay there (invite players, organize small pvp actions, pve trips,..) that are different from shoot in sight kind of "roleplay". But this will be no more, because EVERY player of 2238 is soon or later gang player (because he soon or later buy base). So this idea of influences will be purely against any roleplay i described, because every neutral, friendly, unnamed, newbie (with base),.. would be considered as hostile (by influence mechanism) and by controling team (because he will eliminate or lower their raise of influence), so this influential system will support only player killing, rather then other interactive activity with players. :/
-
no1 want spies/bombers/looters/suicide bursters inside controlled town so all those ideas to decrease "influence" for shooting "bluesuits" are just out of space
Nobody's talking about decreasing influence per killed bluesuit. Point was that random towngoers could give additional influence to the tc gang if they were allowed to do their bussiness in peace. It's easy to learn who is troll and who is not by simply not shooting them on the sight immediately.
Also I see problem with influence gaining during the night, which might be a bit fixed if the influence wouldnt grow so fast.
This could be fixed by getting more influence depending on how many players are online globally. The server checks the peak player ammount, currently about 200 players in the evening. Then it checks the bottom ammount, which is about 70 players in the night and morning. If some abusers like to do tc at night/early moring they get less influence because the danger of attack is smaller due to less players online globally.
-
i really like the concept of new version of TC. however im slight worried about whole new way of abuse like camping buildings, EXIT grids.. but from other hand, its finaly something new. cant wait next year for implement! ;)
-
"Roleplay":
Problem i see in roleplay activities of major gangs (TTTLA, Samaritans,BHH,...). They caputre the city and try to roleplay there (invite players, organize small pvp actions, pve trips,..) that are different from shoot in sight kind of "roleplay". But this will be no more, because EVERY player of 2238 is soon or later gang player (because he soon or later buy base). So this idea of influences will be purely against any roleplay i described, because every neutral, friendly, unnamed, newbie (with base),.. would be considered as hostile (by influence mechanism) and by controling team (because he will eliminate or lower their raise of influence), so this influential system will support only player killing, rather then other interactive activity with players. :/
Yeah; that's kinda problematic if you end up killing everyone with tier 2+ stuff to be sure you won't loose any influence. Maybe add a command or option in faction terminal to determine if you do want to gain influence (and prevent other to gain it) in each towns, if yes you are automatically red tagged for controlling faction, or they receive a message in their log with the names concerned?
-
In addition to the boost for letting people do things in town, there should also be a "limit" on how much of a boost they could give per day, such as only letting a single non-gang member boost influence up to set amount, or have it scale so that the actions only give 10% of what it normally gives after a while, to prevent auto clickers and proxies from exploiting, but still giving a reason for them to let people in.
Yes, good thinking.
Inactivity of 2 minutes => autoclicker. But i dont see this as a problem. Searching for inactive alts could boost "small pvp actions". Problem i see is INACTIVE PLATOON of sneakers :))
Sneakers are not counted.
Problem i see are hotel rooms. Hotel room filled of afk platoon of players to raise influence..
Those rooms (like in Klamath) will have to be excluded.
This could be fixed by getting more influence depending on how many players are online globally. The server checks the peak player ammount, currently about 200 players in the evening. Then it checks the bottom ammount, which is about 70 players in the night and morning. If some abusers like to do tc at night/early moring they get less influence because the danger of attack is smaller due to less players online globally.
Could be a viable option, but if it's going to work, it has to be only a slight difference, or else people might start trying to manipulate global character count with bots etc, which is really bad.
Yeah; that's kinda problematic if you end up killing everyone with tier 2+ stuff to be sure you won't loose any influence. Maybe add a command or option in faction terminal to determine if you do want to gain influence (and prevent other to gain it) in each towns, if yes you are automatically red tagged for controlling faction, or they receive a message in their log with the names concerned?
Sounds good.
-
Crazy, that sounds crazy, writing command in faction terminal, if i dont want to "raise influence" in cities. Practical problems: one member wants to influence, one not (wants to roleplay). Or even you can set it individualy, you will have to come back to base to turn off this option every time, you want to visit friends in city for small ingame chat? Well, that is very "populating city" idea.
Basic players or gangs (= players and gangs that dont want to raise influence in city) should not do anything. In comparsion with real life, they only visited city, nothing more. They dont "scare locals" for some black money, or ciggarets gifts. Also practical reasons.. after wipe, there will be much more players playing (i hope). So you will need to talk to every player who does not know about influencing and you will have to force them to "turn off" their influence. So basicly, you will kill them. (Imagine situation where you have incomming one new player per minute in city (because of basic set of quests) and you need "explain" everyone to get back on base and turn off influence...).
So my idea: Influence will raise only if you have special item (dog tag,...) in your inventory = 1/0 condition.
Or different idea, something related to playability, .. influence will raise only if you will have radio with local (city) radiochannel tuned in your inventory. There should also exist some mechanism to detect if you have radio tuned, maybe that basic message sended via that radio channel will always show up on over the player.
Or invent something different, but players who wants to visit city without hostility to current city influence owners should not do anything to prevent eliminating former gang raising their influence.
-
So my idea: Influence will raise only if you have special item (dog tag,...) in your inventory = 1/0 condition.
+1
Also, this will solve alliances problems. Any faction that is allied with the faction that is gaining influence can come and aid without the tags, this way the influence level won't be afected.
My question is how the faction that is gaining influence will know who is just visiting the town and who is there for town control.
-
My question is how the faction that is gaining influence will know who is just visiting the town and who is there for town control.
If you have dogtag, your name will have special color. Color1 for your gang members and Color2 for any other gang member, if you're not in a gang, then probably you won't see it at all to make life for 1st lvl bluesuit spies a bit harder.
-
Influence zones could exist but so that they cover the downtown sectors so that gang desiring influence can't camp the corners of the map where they can form strongest positions. Downtown areas in general are in the center of map and accessible from many directions, making it hard to form solid defenses. In addition, like shown in that klamath pic, you couldn't receive or block influence when inside buildings.
If you have dogtag, your name will have special color. Color1 for your gang members and Color2 for any other gang member, if you're not in a gang, then probably you won't see it at all to make life for 1st lvl bluesuit spies a bit harder.
Colouring is a good idea. But it won't affect those spies, they know who they are looking for.
-
If you have dogtag, your name will have special color. Color1 for your gang members and Color2 for any other gang member, if you're not in a gang, then probably you won't see it at all to make life for 1st lvl bluesuit spies a bit harder.
Well, another problem solved. Now let's hope the devs can implement it.
-
This could be fixed by getting more influence depending on how many players are online globally. The server checks the peak player ammount, currently about 200 players in the evening. Then it checks the bottom ammount, which is about 70 players in the night and morning. If some abusers like to do tc at night/early moring they get less influence because the danger of attack is smaller due to less players online globally.
I really do like your idea , but people with different time zones will still suffer , for example " Grim reapers " spanish faction that is active when most of the server is sleeping , so if they will want to gain influence and take control of a town they will have a huge disadvantage over other players.
We need a different approach.
-
I really do like your idea , but people with different time zones will still suffer , for example " Grim reapers " spanish faction that is active when most of the server is sleeping , so if they will want to gain influence and take control of a town they will have a huge disadvantage over other players.
It's not huge disadvantage because they hardly encounter any resistance. Only if they were some uber kickass gang that would defeat everyone anyway it'd be a disadvantage.
-
It's not huge disadvantage because they hardly encounter any resistance. Only if they were some uber kickass gang that would defeat everyone anyway it'd be a disadvantage.
Hardly any resistance is bad for them because they don't control towns for RP reasons but to get a fight , it doesn't matter if their good or bad , they will still get less influence and pretty much no fight.
Maybe the influence gain should be constant all the time.
-
Hardly any resistance is bad for them because they don't control towns for RP reasons but to get a fight , it doesn't matter if their good or bad , they will still get less influence and pretty much no fight.
Maybe the influence gain should be constant all the time.
So we should move to country closer to them? Let them fight?
-
I fully agree with avv (on the matter of gaining influence during night), its a perfect idea and makes sense.
On the other hand, I dont like the idea with dog tags, just another item you must not forget to bring on fight, making soldier´s life a little bit more complicated. Id prefer a switch maybe, with a certain cooldown (30m?)
-
Dog tag would be another item that would just lie around after death so as Sarakin said a switch sounds better though I'm unsure how it could be made in a way it doesn't shows on non faction characters and not dialog starts it since the latter could be abused by killing the guy that needs to be asked.
-
This is just getting more and more complicated.. ;D
-
On the other hand, I dont like the idea with dog tags, just another item you must not forget to bring on fight, making soldier´s life a little bit more complicated. Id prefer a switch maybe, with a certain cooldown (30m?)
Just a switch with cooldown of 30sec-1min. 30min is too much because you might go to another town where you don't want to have influence.
-
Just a switch with cooldown of 30sec-1min. 30min is too much because you might go to another town where you don't want to have influence.
But if you can switch it at any time, you can troll poor APK guys who aren't killing non-influence visitors.
Example:
Gang A controling town, they don't want to kill wastelanders who is visiting town to trade/shovel shit/RP or doing other useless crap.
I'm a member of gang B. I'm visiting town, smiling and saying that I'm poor wastelander who don't want to get any influence, and want everyone be happy, while have metal and LSW in inventory (or whatever min. requirements to get influence).
Then I'm going into some toilet, wearing metal and LSW and switching to get influence and silently laughing.
Gang A: "wtf someone is here, need to find and kill him!"
Then in 30 seconds I switching back, removing armor and LSW, walking on street and smiling and saying that I haven't seen any players in metal and with LSWs! Then I staring to shovel shit and then I asking my friend who is on other part of town to do the same and then we're doing it again and again and they don't get any influence, while we're getting fun playing Mafia-online in FOnline, APK guys become angry and start to kill everyone on sight and then towns just become arenas where everyone kill anyone whom they don't know, because they can be members of gang, who can enter some toilet and wear min. required items and if someone could see them, switch back, items can be hidden in those toilets or behind barrels incase if they start kill you on entering town, so they wouldn't know who to kill and who not to kill after seeing that you don't carry any items.
While dogtags can be removed from game after log off/death/drop, and can be get only from faction terminal. So if you enter town with dogtag, you're already known enemy, if you die/log off or drop it, you'll need to return to faction again. Also dogtags can be used in othe interaction like if you have a dogtag and loot someone's dogtag and he's not from your gang, thier gang will lose some influence, of course you won't get anything, as benefit can be abused, while penalty not, if only you're mazohist. To prevent droping dogtags before death, you'll get even more penalty to influence if you drop it in town. Again, dogtags will simply disappear if droped or looted, also disappear after log off and body disappearing.
Or switching should be possible only on special conditions to prevent switching on/off when noone looks to prevent controling faction gain influence.
-
Toilets shouldn't be influence zone. And trust me, apk players have experience how to track down people who are against them. They may have a sneaker looking for troll like that and once that troll is caught, he pretty much has to make a new char. Besides, that's what life of "not shooting everyone on sight" player is like, being target of trolling and dealing with it. They don't go batshit and start a massacre but if they do, well that's when they lose influence by not allowing people to participate in activities intown. Choices and consequences.
Dog tags wouldn't be that bad either, depending on how hard they were to get. If you could make for example 10 dog tags from one junk without any skill requirements, it wouldn't be that much of an issue honestly. People will forget proper tc gear, their drugs or ammo much more often than the dog tags.
-
Just a switch with cooldown of 30sec-1min. 30min is too much because you might go to another town where you don't want to have influence.
3 minutes i think should be optimal or 5 minutes and for gangs to influence the town , i don't know if it was mentioned or not it would be wise to implement at least 3 faction members at town from one faction to gain influence at all.
-
Hmm... I see the problem of faction players who want to gain control and other people coming into the town just for visit. Maybe include some things, like:
Who is the first one that begins to earn influence? Like gang A enters town with 7 people, gang B enters the town with 5 people a bit later. The gang B must kill gang A to stop them gaining the inluence and to start gaining influence themselves. That will make it clear who is defender and who is attacker. Aswell as Gang A people inside dont have to worry that 5 visitors would all of the sudden remove the reputation gain...
Alliances would help a lot in this i think ;P Factions set to enemy could be reducing eachother influence grow if in same town at the same time, neutrals could just stay neutral without damaging eachother, but not gaining both at same time still. Alliances could have one joint reputation, beggining with a middle reputation of both gangs (one gang got 500 in Den, second got -500, final = 0), and the alliance could have a name on their own.
How will random players know who controls the town btw? If the "fixed" control is changed to more dynamic, how will random people know that Faction B holds the town? Will it still apear on statistics? My suggestion is to make it appear in statistics after militia is present maybe? I mean, i assume only 1 faction can be the one who gains the militia level of reputation at one given time.
I think it looks intresting the whole thing :)
One more addition idea: What about making special workbenches in central areas of towns, that after a specific amount of reputation gained can be used to craft some uniqe things :) Like a better version of FN FAL, or Assault rifle mk2. Maybe tier 3 stuff aswell, a BA with +2% resistence. Then, this item could be given faction name in description. Maybe the faction with high Reputation would need to work a lot to extend the workbench facilities in the town, and the reward would be this uniqe item? Well, an idea :)
-
You are trying to adjust to your own gameplay style.
I think it is better to make more opportunities and freedom of action. Not trying to standardize the TC.
As the proposal. Faction that currently controls the city to give the opportunity to buy entertainment. Local arena like Hinkly. Directly in the place where you can not shoot. and where do pvp from such "transfer" of boxes. Or open a new store, with NPC-trader, who will sell what they would give him the price of his skill.
But when another group takes gotod. All complemented by entertainment - disappear.
-
No millitia and decent rewards. Pre-calculated rewards for all the people staying in towns, so people won't think that doing something else elsewhere will give them higher material reward than staying in town. (I can craft 5 miniguns or so which value 5000$ while I'm staying in town for 500$ for same time; people in that case won't waste time in towns, i hope you understand) Town control which balances economy, rewards players for their time spent there, and no millitia guards, only players.
-
Hello, "DEV"-s and wastelanders!
"DEV"-s:
I think if you need lot of active players, you need delete all militia, becouse the players can't go inside to towns, becouse one shot and militia kill they... -.-' It's very shit. Only we can play single PvP in Reno... Not enought city for PvP. Before ~1,5-2 years you dont made the militia and:
(http://kepfeltoltes.hu/091221/bar_ts_gos_kl_nok_a_harcban._www.kepfeltoltes.hu_.png)
And Now? NObody in Modoc, BH, Redding (only whos controling the towns).
And what about the towns sence? If you take the town the population give you mony and 1-2 little drugs? Fakin' nice... And the ppls go to take the town whit BA (15k), Avenger (11k), Durgs (~2k), ammos (~1k)(=25K+). And if they win they get ~600caps/hour and other low stuffs... Why not QH ores? 5k/hour? Lot of man have mare million caps, becouse you broke this whit FLC.... Who had brain get out before you froze the banks. They now go whit mecs around San F. and kill the players who cant play from mercers... Its not enought! They can lvling the mercs! 255 HP! Not bad! 1 man can kill 7-8 in RT encounter... Ohh other problem! PROXY!!!!!! They use always proxy! Not one 2-3 proxy alt. Little math: 3x1 character= 15 MERC! 3 fakin' character!! They sand distress and If we go inside the trap and if we can kill the mercs he coming whit his proxyS and kill us whit other 10 merc OR he stand all character inside the trap. 1 trap whit 15 mercs who have 15 rocket launcher... Great job DEVs! Watch the status checker! 220 players! GOOOD!?!? No, 220 character... this game is dead! And you cant heal, BUT you can make some things what good the players!
Example: Delete all militia! Concern somebody when time you do the militia system? NO! Delete and do what need the players, they pay your server or not? Have deleterious effect? NO! Hmm... and what effect have? Good effects:
The players can go anyone town to play PvP whitout Controlling.
On requiem where you saw militia? And what fights there? Watch This video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRNR0tFMFFk&feature=related In RT you cant use proxy, exept, if you are very hardcore :)
And here? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9yH0O7mBd4&feature=related We need 40 player and mercs to kill the militia and ~8-14 enemy player? Where you find other 60 vs 60 video from 2238? Haha, not anywhere... It is good for you for us? NO!
Make something or the players going to go other servers (example Req. or !!Desert Europe, yes come here, we know what need the players :P!!)!
Can you give me back my banned characters? PredoPedo93 and Predator93 ^^ I got lot of year banns... Correct!! Thanks Voland! You are the best! All players like you! Keep It Up! One day you will DEV! But, you can't bann anyone, becouse the server will empty.... HAHA-HA!
Thats all "DEV"-s! Cogitethe this suggestions, and do something! This server need little changes, what need the players and they will come back to play FOnline:2238!!!
-
Archon93 what are you trying to say exactly?
Militia best not disappear entirely. That's because it encourages players to stay inside the town. If you want player interaction in towns, there has to be npcs doing the guard duty, no player gang will uphold a garrison of 10 players all the time. Militia creates a feeling of relative safety so that when only some gangmembers are online, they dare to enter the city and hang around.
If there was no militia at all, small number of gangmembers would never enter the city because they would be good bait for enemy gang. Attacking is generally more effective in fonline pvp because they get the advantage of surprise.
What needs to be done to militia is to be made sure that it's never stronger than the gang that upholds the town. Currently a gang of 5 can cap a town and raise incredibly strong militia that can devastate a swarm of players in open ground combat.
What comes to players using militia as pk tool, well that's because they are not encouraged not to shoot random towngoers. A guy who wants to mine, shop or buy a profesion is no use to the guys who control the town.
-
On the other hand, I dont like the idea with dog tags, just another item you must not forget to bring on fight, making soldier´s life a little bit more complicated. Id prefer a switch maybe, with a certain cooldown (30m?)
Switch means, that "switch" place will be the guarded place and most of fights will be around this place. So again, instead of using whole maps, players will fight in the same locations again and again. Boring aproach :P
But if you dont like dog tag idea, because od another useless stuff that players would forget to take, i have different idea.
Influence will raise only if you have weapon in active hand. That means, that you can simply tell newbies or other players to hide your weapons. Also so called roleplayers will need to protect players with hidden weapons, if they dont want to loose their influence. Also it is very real life related idea. You can scare people with weapons in your hand, not without it.