PvP Stimulus Idea

HWS General Discussion
21

It is not a bad solution for pvpers. But would need to be on some playfields, not everyone. Didn’t GG have rp collection before?

But, my biggest concern with this idea, is that you wont get any “new” pvp players, but just the same old fighting between them self again.

What i don’t understand is the need for pvp all the time. It is there, ok, that is just cool, and a part of the game.
But why go pure pvp in a game that is inn no way made for pvp?
I have plenty of pvp action in games, that are more made for it.
I understand the fun in pvp, and love it where it works, but in a game like empy, i would never focus my playstyle on the pvp part, simply because it doesn’t work :smirk:

1 Like
22

Increased PvP activity gives PvErs a chance to sell resources to the PvPers. And yes, the reward would only be for one or two key playfields.

Also, causing more fighting between the vets makes it easier for newer players to mine in PvP in peace :wink:

And if you make the reward on two playfields

  1. A lower RP value one for newer players to fight on.
  2. A higher tier planet where vets will fight on.
23

No need to generalize. The last battle on GG showed that WE can protect our BA from your attacks. But you can’t protect your BA from our attacks.
I’ll remind you. This was when there were 7 of us and 10-12 of you, + 4-5 LEA + 4 RED. And we’ve gone through about 10-15 tank drops.
And your bases fell from our second drop.
I understand that it is a little offensive, after total superiority in the PVP zone, to get in the ears. It would seem on planets that are already native. You will be helped, as I said in another topic, by creative mode and building skills.

24

We had a great conversation about this on discord today, despite a bit of tempers here and there. You guys did fantastically defending 8 versus 15, including the 5 tank drops we did (not 10 - 15 - although I can imagine it felt like it for how long it went on lol.) and I massively respect you for it. I really am trying to avoid hostility on all platforms and have an open debate, because i think it is needed, without finger pointing.

I’ve not made my point well above. I don’t have an issue with tank drops in base assaults, those can be defended against, as you showed there, and we have infact defended multiple tank drops from you guys also when we are defending, that works both ways. When bases are manned they are incredibly hard to take down.

My issue with tank drops is when they are done to fast forward taking down a base that isn’t defended. There is a reason you recycled your bases and left after the fight, its just the smart move to make. They would have been cleared easily enough when you didn’t have numbers to defend them, exactly the same as our bases have been cleared when we don’t have numbers to defend them.

My understanding of bases in HWS design is to provide a ‘hardpoint’ that can hold and defend itself, and needs significant work to take down. Being able to strip base turrets in 2 - 3 mins, via a tank drop seems counter-intuitive to that model.

That said, please feel free to prove me wrong, but some bases down on GG, HW, wherever really - and see how long they last. Again, my issue isn’t with tank drops as part of a base assault, against manned defenders. While it annoys me (and so do the HV defenses tbh - i would like to not have them as well) I don’t think it is game breaking. It becomes game breaking when it allows someone to clear a base in a timescale that isn’t realistic for people to be able to respond to.

A lot of people have said its about ‘small factions versus large factions.’ That is not my intention at all. I would like to see tank drops out of the game, so that we can then actually balance bases properly to be able to be taken down in a fair and fun manner. The issue is you can’t balance when you have such an unbalancing factor as automated HVs, on both the defensive and offensive side. Hopefully I’m making myself better understood.

Again, Great fight and well done, you guys fully deserved your victory, and we will be back. I would take a 100 of those fights, win or lose, over seeing a proxy log, logging in, and finding base is stripped of turrets and being de-cored before loading screen is finished, any day.

25

From the experience of other online games, I can affirmatively say that any base (fortress, territory) falls from an attack in offline mode. I think you will agree with me that it is unacceptable to create conditions in which some bases will become impregnable. No one needs it. We need to achieve a balance of HV with BA. The question is how to do it?

26

Absolutely - I do not want to make bases stronger - that is not my intention. I would like bases to be balanced in a way that makes them a challenge, but not impossible, as I think that is the niche they should sit in. Bases should never be invulnerable, and I think that they got far to close to being invulnerable with the massive base clusters and HV defences. I would happily do without both HV defences and Tank Drops, make it about players playing the game, not automated drops.

The issue I have with a tank drop is it allows you to do ‘free’ damage to base turrets, because the AI targetting is directed away from you. This is what allows clearing a base of turrets, and basically making it pointless in 2 mins. Rex suggested elsewhere that a solution he would like to discuss with Eleon would be making AI Turrets prioritize Manned structures over unmanned. I think that would go a long way to solving the current issue.

27

@englishlad It won’t do anything. I personally will sit in the thickest tank with a bunch of decoy devices. Which will live for 5-7 minutes under fire. It will not have a shield, it will have a speed of 5. I will put it in front, and I will put 5-6 tanks without pilots in the back. Profit.

28

True true. Which is why I always circle back to auto fire from unmanned structures being the problem.

29

@englishlad Here, then, you need to include both BA and CV. In terms of automatic fire. There is no player - no turrets? As for me, it is not quite playable.

30

I would put bases as the only unmanned auto-fire. Keep autofire in manned HVS and CVs, it gives bases some strength to make them worthwhile.

Thats pretty much my preference, and goes back to last season, not recent events. I asked Eleon whether it would be possible for a device to only do AI fire if someone is in a cockpit, and they said they would have to add an extra check for it, but it wouldn’t be very difficult.

I’d keep Miniguns as point defense Turrets for raiding, defending against NPCs etc, and have all other turrets only work if the check for a pilot was true.

1 Like
31

So, tank drops aside.

Can we talk about this idea more? Flesh it out more? Add more thoughts. Can’t help feeling this thread got a bit derailed.

32

Sorry Ranzeth my fault. Yes, I agree that there are two ways to make it more likely people will put bases in PVP. One is to make them more survivable, the other is to make the reward worth the risk of losing the base every other day. This seems like a good suggestion if it drives people to want to actually put a base in PVP and take on some risk for their investment.

Risk = Reward is a pretty good basic concept.

1 Like