IIIlusionist [253384] —
Original article
RESPO updates have been rolling out for the past couple of months, from the new interactive city map to the more recent Medical 2.0 update. Company 2.0 is now rolling out and seems to be going smoothly so far, with developers aiming to update 5 new companies a week. However, with more than 15,926 players (approximately 94% of players) in factions, perhaps one of the more anticipated updates is Faction/Warring 2.0.
At the moment, players feelings about factions and warring are rather mixed. Some are excited for the upcoming changes to the war system and can't wait until it is implemented. On the other hand, other players hover over the "logout" button contemplating whether it will be for the last time. The current faction system seems to have been exhausted by many factions; the ranking system largely thought of as redundant or antiquated. In the current system, wars can last a mere few hours, and faction's respect keeps building up. However, there is some light at the end of the tunnel - Warring 2.0 IS under way. Although the finer details have not yet been revealed, this article provides a glimpse of the building blocks of Warring 2.0.
Let us begin with what we already know (from newsletters and announcements). Territory warring, or "King of the Hill" style of warring as described by developers, is the basic idea of Warring 2.0. The city map will be separated into around 3000 blocks for factions to fight over and holding territories will gain respect for the faction who holds it.
The plan is to split the map up into a number of sections/sectors, each with territories yielding different respect gains. Territories closer to the center of the map will give more respect than those in the outer sectors. Territories may also vary in size; larger territories giving higher respect gains. Once a faction reaches a certain number of "points", they will be able to claim that territory.
Taking over a territory will potentially be done in one of two ways:
The first method on the cards is that taking over a territory will cost a faction respect, and the cost to take over a territory will increase the more territories a faction holds.
The second method involves a new way in which factions will be 'assigning' respect. Discussions around a new type of specials system, involving "skill trees", has begun and may well be in development already. The idea is that factions will no longer spend respect as such, but rather assign respect to various branches in a skill tree to attain various skills. "Tiers" will have to be assigned respect to be unlocked and will be linked to certain specials, yet to be revealed. Unlocking more "Tiers" will open up new skill branches for the faction to obtain, each with specials linked to various parts of game play. There will be a branch for "Territory Capacity", which faction will assign respect too and in doing so unlock the ability to take over more territories. Therefore, territories may cost very little to take over, however, the cost to unlock the ability to hold more territories in the skill tree will increase in cost the more territories the faction wishes to hold.
The second option is the more likely of the two because it will hopefully discourage factions camping/settling in particular territories and being overly cautious of trying to take over territories.
The below diagram is a simplified first draft of a faction skill tree:
Chaining has been the key concept behind faction warring for almost a decade, and details of how claiming territories and chaining will be changed are still largely a mystery. However, Warring 2.0 could see the end of chaining as we see it today, and open the way for new revolutionized version of warfare.
As mentioned before, nothing is set in stone, and this is by no means a look into a definite future of what Warring 2.0 will look like. However, this hopefully gives a glimpse of what to expect, and something for players to look forward to and stick around to see implemented.
On a side note: Unofficial news has come to the forums that new missions "will soon be released". For those skeptical of the validity of this players claims, here is something a little more concrete:
"It'll start with just one agent: Duke. Who will give out around 50 mini-missions (contracts)."
Chedburn [1]
**Editors: Gholden [1786423]
At the moment, players feelings about factions and warring are rather mixed. Some are excited for the upcoming changes to the war system and can't wait until it is implemented. On the other hand, other players hover over the "logout" button contemplating whether it will be for the last time. The current faction system seems to have been exhausted by many factions; the ranking system largely thought of as redundant or antiquated. In the current system, wars can last a mere few hours, and faction's respect keeps building up. However, there is some light at the end of the tunnel - Warring 2.0 IS under way. Although the finer details have not yet been revealed, this article provides a glimpse of the building blocks of Warring 2.0.
Let us begin with what we already know (from newsletters and announcements). Territory warring, or "King of the Hill" style of warring as described by developers, is the basic idea of Warring 2.0. The city map will be separated into around 3000 blocks for factions to fight over and holding territories will gain respect for the faction who holds it.
The plan is to split the map up into a number of sections/sectors, each with territories yielding different respect gains. Territories closer to the center of the map will give more respect than those in the outer sectors. Territories may also vary in size; larger territories giving higher respect gains. Once a faction reaches a certain number of "points", they will be able to claim that territory.
Taking over a territory will potentially be done in one of two ways:
The first method on the cards is that taking over a territory will cost a faction respect, and the cost to take over a territory will increase the more territories a faction holds.
The second method involves a new way in which factions will be 'assigning' respect. Discussions around a new type of specials system, involving "skill trees", has begun and may well be in development already. The idea is that factions will no longer spend respect as such, but rather assign respect to various branches in a skill tree to attain various skills. "Tiers" will have to be assigned respect to be unlocked and will be linked to certain specials, yet to be revealed. Unlocking more "Tiers" will open up new skill branches for the faction to obtain, each with specials linked to various parts of game play. There will be a branch for "Territory Capacity", which faction will assign respect too and in doing so unlock the ability to take over more territories. Therefore, territories may cost very little to take over, however, the cost to unlock the ability to hold more territories in the skill tree will increase in cost the more territories the faction wishes to hold.
The second option is the more likely of the two because it will hopefully discourage factions camping/settling in particular territories and being overly cautious of trying to take over territories.
The below diagram is a simplified first draft of a faction skill tree:
Chaining has been the key concept behind faction warring for almost a decade, and details of how claiming territories and chaining will be changed are still largely a mystery. However, Warring 2.0 could see the end of chaining as we see it today, and open the way for new revolutionized version of warfare.
As mentioned before, nothing is set in stone, and this is by no means a look into a definite future of what Warring 2.0 will look like. However, this hopefully gives a glimpse of what to expect, and something for players to look forward to and stick around to see implemented.
On a side note: Unofficial news has come to the forums that new missions "will soon be released". For those skeptical of the validity of this players claims, here is something a little more concrete:
"It'll start with just one agent: Duke. Who will give out around 50 mini-missions (contracts)."
Chedburn [1]
**Editors: Gholden [1786423]
Original article
Comments
Post a Comment