Conquest Iteration

Thanks for all the feedback on Conquest so far.

We've just completed a second iteration of the scoring and win condition based on feedback.

• Scoring and Win Condition overhaul
  • The goal is to reach 15,000 points
  • Kills still award 1 point
  • Points from bases are calculated every 10 minutes
    • Facilities (Amp Stations, Biolabs, Tech Plants) = 500
    • Large Outposts (bases connected to the lattice) = 150
    • Small Outposts (bases not connected to the lattice) = 10
  • Initial territory ownership has been modified to be balanced
• We've reenabled redeploying, but have limited the spawn options
• Fix to the zone shutting down in a timely manner, so the next match will start quicker
• Fix to the alert not shutting down correctly which was causing the extra point earn

We will get this up to PTS this week, so jump in and let us know what you think.

And MAX units are normal price, right?

I saw there was a tweet about that, but I don't see that anywhere in this iteration. Was it already on Test?

Rather than have Small bases give a pretty small score would allowing them to function as a modifier be possible / better ?

Ie: Each small base you own adds +1% ( example amount ) to your score income from other means.

1. Luke for gods sake will you do something about the ghost capping? Thats the first thing I saw people doing on this new game mode and is the same problem we had on Hex 2 years ago. They flip the point and immediately fly off out to the next one, and the next.

The solution is simple!!! When a Point is flipped and the counter goes to No Enemy in the hex, have the flag revert back to whoever owns the base. That will kill ghost capping stone dead with zero negative effect elsewhere. Nobody would bother as it makes people have to stay in the hex, which is what they should be doing anyway.


2. Im still incredibly disappointed how this is being designed as a members first feature with limited numbers. This flies in the face of the 'big battle' philosophy Planetside 2 is supposed to be about. We are fricken CRYING OUT for a new battle mode on main and all you guys want to do is invest a crapton of time in a limited feature that you made based on an agenda you arent sharing with us.

Im a member now and if this is going to end up a BS way of making a members only playground then ill be unsubbing, that would be quite a mean way of manipulating the players dont you think? I came here to play with EVERYONE not a few hundred sub selected as those who can pay to get around the queue.

Maxes should cost full price.
You should always be able to redeploy to your Facilities.
Small outposts should give you nothing but additional spawn option on them.

As much as these changes are good........


I really hope this mode is just a test bed for bigger gameplay changes. Since this Mode will impact the games population one way or another.

All of these changes are great.

these are all my suggestions, please read it!
https://forums.daybreakgames.com/ps...external-big-outposts-little-outposts.216246/

Kills should not award points.

You're saying that camping a sunderer or farming a tower defense are more valuable than holding small outposts... in a conquest game mode.

MAXes are full price.

Here is a screenshot of the territory changes. Keep in mind the warpgates rotate between matches.

Changes are two small outposts in the north are no longer cap'able and Crossroads Watchtower is now given to the faction starting at the Easter Warpgate. This balances out the number of region types per faction.

It really makes you think how many small bases could have there spawn rooms removed & there Hex's merged into other bases HEX's.

Fix, the damn ghost capping. Just remove the problem. That is priority #1.

I don't like Redeploy being enabled again, personally. The more we use Troop Transports the better, imo. If it has to be enabled, then limit it to Facilities.

I really hope you guys don't intend on keeping this as a "Game Mode" and are instead using this "mode" as a test bed for a total game overhaul, because this is imo, the direction Live needs to go in along with the rest of the freaking Resource system!

Kills should not grant ANY points at all, that only encourages camping and farming, this behavior is bad enough already. You should be doing everything in your power to discourage that mentality.

The only thing about indar is that whoever owns top will probably win.

Good changes but I don't like to see Redeploy back. I hope it can only teleport to warpgate and closest base.

Of course if it just remains a separate instance with capped population then it's just crap and I don't even want to waste my time with that.

Of course, imo the Lattice Lines seem rather redundant unless your able to lock a Faction out of the Continent by keeping them locked in their Warp Gate for X amount of time. Once the Continent "resets" after the Lock ends, they get reset too like the others. Unlike everyone else I like Continent locking. Even more so if you can get kicked out of it. Gives more reason to not ignore a Continent.

Well, my first thought was/is that Aircrafts will be OP in this Gamemode.
(Not that they're not OP at the live servers, but nevermind...)

There are huge distances between the latticed bases and aircrafts fly fast.
There are points for kills and aircrafts are known forngenerating a high K/D
and kills per minute. Also for farming vehicles without giving them a chance to defend themselves or retread.
That all while they can easily retread and come back after a repair.
And since vehicles will have a long way from base to base, they are f'd.

Here is my set of suggestions and concerns:

Prices
By lowering the prices of all tanks and aircraft, you can practically mass produce them.
I understand you reduce them so that people can easily use it for transport. But transport and logistics do not require a buff! On the other hand, there are already too many vehicles on live. Killing them is inconsequential, because you can respam more.
My suggeston: Increase nanite pool (e.g. 1000) and revert, or even further increase the prices of all vehicles.
This way a "burst" of vehicles is more accessible, but if you continually use and lose them, you will be out of resources for longer period of time.

Redeployment
Flying between friendly bases doing nothing is boring. Redeploying multiple times to reach the base you want to go is annoying. On the other hand, redeploying whole platoon to the front base to save it in the last minute is gamebraking to the enemy. You cannot really plan ahead and predict enemy movements.
Previous approach to remove the redeploy button didn't really work because you could still kill yourself.
Having redeployment constraints can be annoying for the reasons stated above, but it won't actually fix it!
Base under attack?

• Normal mode: redeploy... redeploy... MAX crash FTW!
• Conquest mode: redeploy... redeploy... redeploy... redeploy.... redeploy... MAX crash FTW!

My suggeston:

• Permit redeployment to every uncontested friendly base.
• Prevent redeployment to a contested base (you can still respawn within the contested base, if you are already in it)

Alternatively: permit/prevent redeployment depending on enemy having an uncontested adjacency to the base.

The first point avoids long transports in friendly territory. You don't have to pull that scythe or flash just to get 2 hexes away...
The second point however "kills" redeployside. You want to save a base? You have to get there - or be there before enemy arrived. That requires a minute or two. That allows enemy to prepare for your approach from outside.
If enemy zerg is approaching, you don't stop it with last minute effort. You stop it at the next base, by simply waiting for them. They will either hit you or the zerg will dissipate elsewhere.

Ghostcapping
Lattice puts a lot of constraints on where you can fight. I see this contest mode to be a small step away, giving a bit more freedom to players on where they want to go. But the old hex ghostcapping problem reemerges: you fly in, flip the point, go to the next base. This creates a boring chacing the mouse problem.
My suggeston: Two influence ranges around the point.

• Close range, as it is now, allows you to flip the point.
• 2x (or 3x) range to keep the point flipped. If your faction is not within the long range, it slowly flips back to whoever owns the base, even if the defenders are not actually there. Sitting at long range is not enough to prevent close range flips.

As a result, it requires you to stay at the base you are capturing, but possibly not in the most vulnerable spot of it. If a defender manages to hunt you down, he doesn't have to sit on the point anymore. Alternatively, he can just sit on the point to force you into the close range of it.

Can we actually get in now? Maybe I'll try again this weekend.

And ghost capping, I really don't get it. If you don't like it can't you go and fight instead of complaining on forums.
That is the whole point of doing it. Everyone that looks at the map can see it.
*blink* *blink* *blink* PSA: COME FIGHT ME FOR IT!
If you can't be bothered, then don't complain.

Sorry Guys, looks like the patch wont make it this week.

A few changes i think that could help the ghost capping and avoiding fights that the hex system provides

The hybrid lattice system changes: you can only capture so many small bases through the hex system before you have to capture another latice linked facility.
So say you own a lattice linked facility you have a set number of bases that can be captured through the hex system that is connected to the lattice linked facility you own before you have to capture another lattice linked facility.

Along with that, having an influence feature like in the old hex system to capture the lattice linked facilities.
So say you can attack a lattice linked facility because you have a connected lattice but you don't own any adjacent bases to that latice. Having an influence system it would take longer than if you had 1 or more bases connected through hex to that lattice linked base. (I don't know if that is already implemented or not)