Anyone want to design a new MMOFPS?

[DviddLeff]

PS is lacking any new content for the past few months, and there are NO MMOFPS's that look any good on the horizon.

Anyone want to at the very least help me design a new one?

Im not imagining it would ever get built, but Id like to at least design the systems and story.

[myrtar]

needs:
win condition,
large capacity,
CSHD,
robust group control and social interaction (irc integration?)
real-world interfaces,
character specialization,

(actually i don't have time to make this list right now, very long)

[DviddLeff]

Good ideas martyr, look forward to the rest of them.

What kind of thing do you mean by real-world interfaces? Was reading a preview of the Star Trek Online game, and they seem to think they can set missions via mobile/cell phones?

Id love to get TS integrated into the game.
Id rather have 2 sides only, maybe with different "factions" on each side, but 2 sides overall three ways mostly suck, and are only good very rarely.
I want to create groups of players as soon as they enter the game, so they can train with those guys, then enter the combat zone as a unit.
Very different sides, some equipment that is wholy unique to one side, not just the equivalent of each other.
Much reduced roles compared to Planetside, you can simply do too much in PS, you should be pushed to team up to get the full range of abilities. However, each role would be deeper, alowing you to excel at certain things.
Fame; if your good at what you do, you should be recognised for it.
Dynamic leadership system, if you lead you lead, and you must sacrifice other abilities to do so.
Much more customisable and interactive clan group system.
No 3rd person for infantry or red names above enemies.
Compared to PS, much less TTK for infantry MA style weapons, if I land 10 shots into an enemy, they shouldnt be able to fight back, rather than turn around and instagib me with HA.

Hmm, better stop for now, getting into too much detail.

[minignu]

I agree that you should have a large degree of customisation. Maybe a purchasable clan barracks that you can build up as you and your clan develops (maybe with private quarters?). Or maybe slightly customisable uniforms? Or even the ability for engineers to slightly tweak weaponry to suit particular tastes?

Also would there be a money system???

[DviddLeff]

No money, just things like supplies (food/fuel) perhaps.

[minignu]

Cool. Keeps things simpler. Any idea on different combat roles? Perhaps you could have resource gathering in there as well as the usual medic/engy/spec-ops types we see in Battlefield, Enemy Territory and PS... Oh and would it be future tech or modern tech?

Just chucking out some ideas. Tell me if I should shut up ;). Why not look through the past posts in the idea lab? They have brilliant ideas in there :)

[minignu]

robust group control and social interaction (irc integration?)


I know it's silly but it would be cool if you could log in to in game consoles in order to chat over IRC....it would mean you could chat to other base commanders over that without clogging up command chat. You could even have certain commands that could only be done over the console (which could have access to security cameras) such as commanding base turrets or setting WPs for squads that have signed up to defend the base. It would mean that we would have commanders who would not be in a full time combat role but would be sitting in a command centre working with his officers to co-ordinate a defence.

Sorry for the huge gush but i've had a load of PS ideas that would never be considered or would not fit in with the game.

[DviddLeff]

Dont worry mini, we've all had them over the years :p

The trouble with resource gathering is that it simply wouldnt be very fun, especially when youd get picked on by kill whores.

[minignu]

The trouble with resource gathering is that it simply wouldnt be very fun, especially when youd get picked on by kill whores.

Hmmm....although people may dislike it, you COULD make them AI controlled (with VERY small fire arms to slow down enemy attacks) so that troopers on side A could see convoy movements for side B if they scout properly. Commanders would be able to set convoy routes and would be able to see their status. That way the commander would be able to tell their nearby squads if a convoy needed help as it's been assaulted.

[DviddLeff]

Hmm good idea, just have the vehicles follow the roads...

Make it so they go from base to base, following the roads, stopping if there is an obstacle their way.

If they get attacked then they can send out a distress signal.

[minignu]

Hmm good idea, just have the vehicles follow the roads...

Make it so they go from base to base, following the roads, stopping if there is an obstacle their way.

Brilliant! We would need to buff their armour if they were around for long enough for reinforcemnts to arrive....OR the other side could capture the vehicles and manually drive them to their bases in order to reap the benefis. You could say the vehicle could be tracked by commanders so they can be retaken. Maybe some convoys are more valuable than others so if someone was able to find out info on an important convoy they could raid it and nick everything

[DviddLeff]

I imagine they would be big armoured beasts of vehicles, so they couldnt be taken out in less than a minute.

Or perhaps just have a big convoy of weaker vehicles.

Then it would be the players jobs to protect/ambush convoys, which is fun.

[minignu]

Excellent.

Sorry to ask again but is this future technology? Just so i can formulate more ideas...

[minignu]

I was bored today so I have thought of a few crazy ideas that may be interesting:

Report system:

The report system is simply a way for commanders to know what is going on in the battlefield by being told by their troops. Essentially there would be a context sensititve "report" key that would send information to commanders. It would take a few seconds for the spotter to send the report and if he is killed the report is not sent:


Pressing it while looking at an enemy soldier would tell the comander that all of the men in that squad were in a particular area. Basically when a commander looked at a map on his console he would see the approximate number of enemy troops spotted in each area. This number will go down when those troops leave the area or are killed. Already spotted troops will not make this number rise if reported again.
Pressing it while looking at artillary would tell the commander were those artillary pieces are located on the map. They could then set a way point to his troops to take it out.
Pressing it after defeating an enemy will remove that enemy from the number of spotted troops in an area.
Pressing it on enemy traps or base defences warns commanders of their existence by showing it on a map.
Pressing it after stealing enemy information (see below) sends it to the commander.


The commander would have to be at a command console to see this. Anything detected by cameras/motion sensors/turrets or whatever are automatically sent to the commander. As reports must be sent by troops who can see the reported thing this means that killing off someone before they see you has advantages...

Idea for combat role: Sabotuer

A sabotuer would be a difficult to spot infantry man with a light weapon and some heavy explosives. His jobs would be to sabotage vehicles by destroying them, placing mines around them or even messing up their engine. He would also have to destory enemy equipment and supplies by sneaking into a base and trashing them with his explosives. He gains points for doing these things with more points gained for importance of the destroyed object or extra points for doing it without being reported or for having a "streak".

Idea for combat role: Infiltrator

The infiltrator would be another difficult to detect unit which is armed mainly with light weapons and an extremely versatile knife. He can decide to get a variety of equipment which would allow him to hack consoles in order to use them for his own purposes. For example he can:


Hack into the enemy communications.
Reprogram turrets to fire on enemies instead of allies.
Find locations of convoys.
Higher levels can hack enemy radars to report all enemies in the area.

His knife would be deadly if you could back stab the enemy. Like the saboteur he would get extra points for not being detected and for consecutive succesful objectives.

Idea for combat role: Special ops

These would combine elements of the saboteur and infiltrator but to a lesser extent. They would carry accurate light weapons that require the element of suprise, as well as small explosives and lmited hacking devices. They would be easier to see than the previous two types and would be very vulnerable to enemy fire. They report instantly (without delay) and would be very flexible if unfocused.

[DviddLeff]

Just to confirm: Yes I want it to be in the future. (Basically I want things like jump packs, walkers, active cameoflage, etc)

Ill read your big post later on, far too tired from paintballing, and I need some food.

[minignu]

...... Still no response?

No one <3s me :(

[DviddLeff]

sorry man, forgot all about this post.

Ok, heres my thoughts:

"Communication Specialists" would be able to report on enemy numbers to themselves, higher ups and their squad leaders, Im tempted to make it a passive ability, allowing them to lase targets and drop beacons to call in artillery strikes and bombing runs. These guys would also be able to break into enemy communications, but only with the help from "Computer Hackers", who can break into enemy radios (taken off corpses and enemy vehicles) and enemy comm relays in facilities. Computer Hackers would also be able to do the things you suggested, like revealing enemies spawned at that base, controlling enemy turrets and disabling enemy facility equipment. they would also be able to steal enemy files, then carry them back to friendly bases so that enemy equipment can be used, enemy locations revealled, etc.

Your Saboteurs I just call Demo-men in my notepad, who can lay all manner of booby trabs, C4 and mines, as well as disabling components of enemy vehicles.

Armours would be broken up into the following areas:

Dress Uniform (no protection, looks snazzy)
Pilot Armour (slight protection, allows you to drive vehicles)
Stealth Armour (predator style invisibility, light protection)
Jump Armour (light protection, allows you to leap 20 feet in the air)
Medium Armour (Average protection, basic grunt armour, able to use deployable weapons)
Heavy Armour (Good protection, very slow movement, ability to use heavy weapons)
Super Heavy armour (very good protection, able to use light vehicle weapons, unable to enter vehicles)

[minignu]

Dress Uniform (no protection, looks snazzy)


:D

How about:

Idea for a battlefield role: Engineer

This unit would be able to do pretty much all the emplacements and things you can see in Hayoos concepts and would also be able to fix and/or upgrade base defences. He would require supplies from some kind of depot so this could be another tactical target. He would be able to repair vehicles but not armour. They would gain points for kills made by people within a certain range of the engineer's fortification (something VERY small like a metre or two) as well as kills from automated defences and from kills of repaired vehicles.

Deployables could include:

Sandbags
Blast shields
Heavy M gun (usable by infantry)
Outdoor automated turret
Several types of mines
Demo charges

Idea for a battlefield role: Technician

This unit is very much like an Engineer but he has several differences. Firstly he has (very) limited hacking abilities and he repairs armour but not vehicles. Additionaly the technitian can modify weaponry. This would mean he could boost certain stats for his or his team mate's weapons at the expense of other stats. For example he might buff the rate of fire but the power would go down. The technician can deploy several items:

Cameras to feed information to COs
Small radars (motion detectors)
Small indoor automated turret



Whaddya think? Made 'em up as I typed ^^

[AJsarge]

see: WWW.EVE-online.com
Turn that from space combat and such, to ground.
Map is the actual Earth, with real-world terrain.
I can go into pages and pages of ranting about it, so I won't.

[minignu]

see: WWW.EVE-online.com
Turn that from space combat and such, to ground.
Map is the actual Earth, with real-world terrain.
I can go into pages and pages of ranting about it, so I won't.


In my honest opinion i wouldn't really wanna fight on earth...it would be more fun if you had a completely new planet on which to explore.

My $0.02

[Cyborgmatt]

testing forum h4xs.

[Tiletron|Hyncharas]

If there was ever a chance to work on a new PS MMO-sequel, I would...

Death to the BFRs for starters, they were poorly implemented and reinventing the wheel might make it worse.