Hypothesis: The Workgroup Missions

19 Replies
Gul Vega
1 August, 2016, 5:04 PM UTC

Well, this is a my very, very, very, etc. personal opinion and It refers to Soldiers Inc running on Plarium.com side. (so, it is not necessarily be of interest to other running implementations of this war real simulator):

I have observe the fact that this war game is designed, since its conception, to be the theater of war of immense military engagements, and not to small skirmishes. 

The problem is that the human microcosm that populates the Zandia seems reluctant toward epic battles. 

Perhaps, the limit of 150 associates for single combine may be a sort of bottleneck. Furthermore, even if this involves an enormous engineering work, could be very useful new "storyline", like project torchlight / syndicate contracts...but on workgroup-basis.

Make a stupid example:   

For access to new missions, need 10 associated members. When 10 members have formed a assault or defence group, [under a "team leader" or without, the mission start. Any new level of mission, need new troops from the 10 members to start and go at up level. A sort of "workgroup", to increase interest in the game.

This hypotesis work also very well for the six partnership in join ops center. Six players in partnership work together to completate new contracts (ideal for creating cross-cutting interests among players of different combines).

If it comes up with a farfetched, do not be surprised: it's too hot in this accursed desert and the air conditioners are surplus of the colonial era! AHAHAH (for spanish: JAJAJA)

"Glory to the Bomb and his Divine destructive Cloud"
UTC +0:00
Omar Smith
1 August, 2016, 10:37 PM UTC
I like this idea. Sort of like a combine attack but for various tasks.
This is Commander Smith of AREA 597. You are now in the custody of the most lethal F.O.B. on Zandian soil. Refusal to cooperate will be met with the appropriate level of force. You don't have the right to remain silent.
UTC +4:00
Alyona Kolomiitseva
Community Manager
3 August, 2016, 8:58 AM UTC
Let's discuss this idea. Maybe it can grow into something bigger. What kind of Missions could be assigned to such teams? Why can't we use a simple Combine attack for that, etc.
Plarium Community Manager. Please note that I will be unable to respond to your private messages, review your tickets, or check your account information. All technical issues should be directed to our Support Team at plrm.me/Support_Plarium
UTC +2:00
Gul Vega
3 August, 2016, 4:24 PM UTC

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


Let's discuss this idea. Maybe it can grow into something bigger. What kind of Missions could be assigned to such teams? Why can't we use a simple Combine attack for that, etc.

Try to discuss this idea:  i've noticed that a combine attack can not be composed of more than 3 members.
Need a workgroup of more members for various reasons, I theorize some:

- often the members are not likely to flow their entire military force

- thus, a group of 6 or 10 players can have a good army force without necessarily forcing all players to deploy their entire army corps.

- a workgroup based on partnership allows the aggregation of players from different combinest and / or non-aligned players (* see note below)

-  currently an combine attack not be used for defensive operations (if I'm wrong I apologize). For current depot operation, i've noticed that: when click on red button for occupy/attack, is possible plan a combinated attack with other players)...but, when i click on green button for reinforce/defence, not exist a combinated defence with other players.


About what kind of Missions, the classic scheme attack & defense is good (my opinion), but not necessarily two specific sets. 

If we talk about the storyline, there are potentially hundreds, I myself could easily write dozens. I expose a example of (my opinion) workgroup missions, as a possible topic for discussion

WorkGroup Mission: operation "Wily Dromedary"

set on 10 multilevel mission, based on this demo storyline:

The evil son of Emilio Tessinger try to avenge his father's death. Has become an important Zeng Shi commander and controls the most vital structures into the zandian capital,

Mission 1: offence, create a breach in the defensive belt around the entire capital.
Mission 2: offence: take control of zandia state radio building, to prevent it being given the general alarm
Mission 3: defence: avoid losing control of the national radio building, from the enemy counter-offensive
Mission 4: offence: tale control of internation airport to prevent Tessinger's son escape
Mission 5: defence: repel the enemy attempt to regain the international airport
Mission 6: defence: liberate from Zeng Shi jail, the political dissidents
Mission 7: offence: take control of parliament building, to show that "we are good" at world opinion
Mission 8: defence: defend yourself from the elite divisions, commanded by the son of Tessinger
Mission 9: offence: caputre the son of Tessinger
Mission 10: defence: reject the attempt of the ZHG presidential forces, sent by Zhang Wei Chen, groped to liberate Tessinger's son

this is just a my fantasy, but perhaps by some element of reflection.


(*) It is my humble opinion, to try to take advantage of the six partnerships in Join Op Center. This is to create something that makes players work together, regardless of the combine of belonging (or not in combine). 

"Glory to the Bomb and his Divine destructive Cloud"
UTC +0:00
Omar Smith
3 August, 2016, 4:36 PM UTC
Similarly to the combine attack, maybe an allied forces attack? Where partners team up and deploy a force from the leaders base.
This is Commander Smith of AREA 597. You are now in the custody of the most lethal F.O.B. on Zandian soil. Refusal to cooperate will be met with the appropriate level of force. You don't have the right to remain silent.
UTC +4:00
RobertShatz
Moderator
3 August, 2016, 11:19 PM UTC
Gul Vega said:

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


Let's discuss this idea. Maybe it can grow into something bigger. What kind of Missions could be assigned to such teams? Why can't we use a simple Combine attack for that, etc.

Try to discuss this idea:  i've noticed that a combine attack can not be composed of more than 3 members.
Need a workgroup of more members for various reasons, I theorize some:

- often the members are not likely to flow their entire military force

- thus, a group of 6 or 10 players can have a good army force without necessarily forcing all players to deploy their entire army corps.

- a workgroup based on partnership allows the aggregation of players from different combinest and / or non-aligned players (* see note below)

-  currently an combine attack not be used for defensive operations (if I'm wrong I apologize). For current depot operation, i've noticed that: when click on red button for occupy/attack, is possible plan a combinated attack with other players)...but, when i click on green button for reinforce/defence, not exist a combinated defence with other players.


About what kind of Missions, the classic scheme attack & defense is good (my opinion), but not necessarily two specific sets. 

If we talk about the storyline, there are potentially hundreds, I myself could easily write dozens. I expose a example of (my opinion) workgroup missions, as a possible topic for discussion

WorkGroup Mission: operation "Wily Dromedary"

set on 10 multilevel mission, based on this demo storyline:

The evil son of Emilio Tessinger try to avenge his father's death. Has become an important Zeng Shi commander and controls the most vital structures into the zandian capital,

Mission 1: offence, create a breach in the defensive belt around the entire capital.
Mission 2: offence: take control of zandia state radio building, to prevent it being given the general alarm
Mission 3: defence: avoid losing control of the national radio building, from the enemy counter-offensive
Mission 4: offence: tale control of internation airport to prevent Tessinger's son escape
Mission 5: defence: repel the enemy attempt to regain the international airport
Mission 6: defence: liberate from Zeng Shi jail, the political dissidents
Mission 7: offence: take control of parliament building, to show that "we are good" at world opinion
Mission 8: defence: defend yourself from the elite divisions, commanded by the son of Tessinger
Mission 9: offence: caputre the son of Tessinger
Mission 10: defence: reject the attempt of the ZHG presidential forces, sent by Zhang Wei Chen, groped to liberate Tessinger's son

this is just a my fantasy, but perhaps by some element of reflection.


(*) It is my humble opinion, to try to take advantage of the six partnerships in Join Op Center. This is to create something that makes players work together, regardless of the combine of belonging (or not in combine). 

Commander..Indeed this sounds very interesting..I like this idea, if our developers can work it into the game without disturbing the "balance...Very Good Sir!!
Robert Shatz
UTC +0:00
Alyona Kolomiitseva
Community Manager
4 August, 2016, 9:47 AM UTC
As for the 3 players limit... We have set it to keep our game balance. If we give an opportunity to send much more Offense in a single strike, there can be situations when the overwhelming Offense destroys all Defense without any losses. Not good.
Plarium Community Manager. Please note that I will be unable to respond to your private messages, review your tickets, or check your account information. All technical issues should be directed to our Support Team at plrm.me/Support_Plarium
UTC +2:00
Gul Vega
4 August, 2016, 12:05 PM UTC

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


As for the 3 players limit... 

This limit has reason to exist, when we speak of clashes between human players. (PvP. MC Repository Depot operations. etc.)
Obviously, in such case, is evident the risk of "overwhelming".

But my discourse (workgroup missions) as the comparison against computer generated forces. (may be dinamically generated on ratio proportion and not on fixed numbers by game engine).

It might be interesting to discuss how should form a workgroup. I like the Join Op Center partnership concept, but the way to costituite a workgropu may be others. Eg. an open group, freely accessible to any player, until the number players already envisaged for the workgroup.

"Glory to the Bomb and his Divine destructive Cloud"
UTC +0:00
Gul Vega
8 August, 2016, 4:02 PM UTC

well, i've think more, about the workgroup missions concept.

EXAMPLE MODE:

starting from the assumption that a "workgroup" to be formed by 10 players, each player who joined the workgroup must send a clear and specific quantity of force points (for example: 1 milion offence force points and 1 milion defence force points [with a tollerance of 1~2% for software engineering questions].

In this way, when the workgroup begin the multilevel missions set, start with 10 milions offence points and 10 milions defence points.

Also, any player associated to workgroup, part on a par with everyone else, without disparities (at the start, of course. Battles change the numbers).

At the end of each completed mission, players can send to the workgroup a certain percentage of additional troops.  

Any next level mission start automatically after congruous xx:yy time, so need  that the participating players must keep focus on the evolving of the workgroup situation.

It could also be interesting to add at a prepackaged missions set, in a completely random and not premeditated way, some bonus and some special missions (aka "Fil Rouge" [*] )

a key factor: the troops engaged in a workgroup can not be recalled to base until the completion of the missions set or the early termination of workgroup (all participants vote to renounce at continuing the workgroup or.... simply all workgroup troup are killed in missions! zero troops no more workgroup in action AHAHAH).

if a "team leader" is expected, he may prematurely close the workgroup. (I advise against the presence of a teamleader).

it is vital that the whole is much attractive to the players (especially the new players and those who return after long absence)!


[*] "Fil Rouge": some aged european players will remember a old european tv show with workgroup missions and some special team missions named "Fil Rouge".

"Glory to the Bomb and his Divine destructive Cloud"
UTC +0:00
Omar Smith
9 August, 2016, 12:56 AM UTC
I'd have to disagree with he 1m minimum limit. Most players wouldn't get to use this option. If this can be used as an attempt to keep players in the game making them wait to use it won't be an effective strategy.
This is Commander Smith of AREA 597. You are now in the custody of the most lethal F.O.B. on Zandian soil. Refusal to cooperate will be met with the appropriate level of force. You don't have the right to remain silent.
UTC +4:00
Gul Vega
9 August, 2016, 7:37 AM UTC

Omar Smith said:


I'd have to disagree with he 1m minimum limit. Most players wouldn't get to use this option. If this can be used as an attempt to keep players in the game making them wait to use it won't be an effective strategy.

on the paper (in theory) it is much more complex. The amount of force points which I mentioned, is purely a mathematical value and not a point of discussion. If at 1 milion force points you replace the xyz force points value  (where xyz is a value equal for all members of the workgroup (1 ~ 2% tollerance) at starting missions) you've a clearer overview.

Each new implementation (event) obviously has a significant impact on the pre-existing game mechanics. And certain that The Syndicate has a proper range of alpha and beta testers, to check any attempt to make more palatable the game itself.

So it does not bother me in the least, how much and how. Indeed, always hypothetically, the engineers of The Syndicate may also set the formation of workgroups based on ranking level and much more.

The real question on the table is money, more players in action, more chances it enters money into coffers of The Syndicate. Same thing, try to bring into play those who have departed from. [HG Classified Information: Furthermore this software (Soldiers Inc.) has some implications are impossible to understand, if not grasping some aspects and socio-cultural mindset of those who are behind] Furthermore this software (Soldiers Inc.) seems designed to be a platform with intergenerational timeframes. an aspect that immediately caught my attention from the beginning.

If we hypothesize that a workgroup is a concept applicable to hundreds of events and possible scenarios, it is clear that it potentially opens up a whole new world of interest.

"Glory to the Bomb and his Divine destructive Cloud"
UTC +0:00
Alyona Kolomiitseva
Community Manager
9 August, 2016, 12:25 PM UTC
I've passed one suggestion of our Stormfall players - to make something similar to Locations, but make them available for Combine attacks. How do you think, could them be used as workgroup missions?
Plarium Community Manager. Please note that I will be unable to respond to your private messages, review your tickets, or check your account information. All technical issues should be directed to our Support Team at plrm.me/Support_Plarium
UTC +2:00
Omar Smith
10 August, 2016, 12:05 AM UTC
Gul Vega said:

Omar Smith said:


I'd have to disagree with he 1m minimum limit. Most players wouldn't get to use this option. If this can be used as an attempt to keep players in the game making them wait to use it won't be an effective strategy.

on the paper (in theory) it is much more complex. The amount of force points which I mentioned, is purely a mathematical value and not a point of discussion.

Well it is your idea, not my call to make.
This is Commander Smith of AREA 597. You are now in the custody of the most lethal F.O.B. on Zandian soil. Refusal to cooperate will be met with the appropriate level of force. You don't have the right to remain silent.
UTC +4:00
Gul Vega
10 August, 2016, 7:21 PM UTC

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:


I've passed one suggestion of our Stormfall players - to make something similar to Locations, but make them available for Combine attacks. How do you think, could them be used as workgroup missions?

unfortunately - mea culpa - I do not play Stormfall (due to lack of time), so I can only express my opinion without careful evaluation. I can only think that keeping the concepts of the "combine" and "workgroup" separate and independent, can give more versatility. This my personal opinion is also based on the fact that (theoretically) to a workgroup could (and should) also be able to join the players from different combines.



Omar Smith said:

Well it is your idea, not my call to make.

The reason is very simple: software engineers of The Syndicate go on their way and they have their ideas. The only way to get their attention is to express concepts. This is the reason why I try to avoid the use of numbers (if not for pure exposure, without any real value).

"Glory to the Bomb and his Divine destructive Cloud"
UTC +0:00
Kallisi
11 August, 2016, 5:13 AM UTC
Alyona Kolomiitseva said:

I've passed one suggestion of our Stormfall players - to make something similar to Locations, but make them available for Combine attacks. How do you think, could them be used as workgroup missions?
Maybe something like an ally attack where you could work with friends outside of you're own league.
UTC +0:00
Alyona Kolomiitseva
Community Manager
11 August, 2016, 8:50 AM UTC
Kallisi said:

Alyona Kolomiitseva said:

I've passed one suggestion of our Stormfall players - to make something similar to Locations, but make them available for Combine attacks. How do you think, could them be used as workgroup missions?
Maybe something like an ally attack where you could work with friends outside of you're own league.
We already have mechanics for Combine attack, but ally attack - it's totally different. Not sure if our devs agree to implement that.
Plarium Community Manager. Please note that I will be unable to respond to your private messages, review your tickets, or check your account information. All technical issues should be directed to our Support Team at plrm.me/Support_Plarium
UTC +2:00
Gul Vega
11 August, 2016, 1:57 PM UTC

@Alyona Kolomiitseva and @Kallisi


I agree with the words of Alyona. An "ally attack" it makes no sense if it is implemented as a "players aggregates attack" to operate against others players (mc,hq,depot, and similar).  The only way, is my humble opinion, is when an "players aggregates attack" (and players aggregates defence) operate against computer generated forces (eg. ZHG and similar). Eg. for time based events or special set of multiplayer missions.




"Glory to the Bomb and his Divine destructive Cloud"
UTC +0:00
besticio
18 August, 2016, 2:52 PM UTC

Io dico che progettare missioni  diverse da zhg  esempio un classico cattura la bandiera  da farsi in squadre  di attacco combinato non di 3 persone ma  almeno 6-8 persone in  ATTACCO DI COALIZIONE SU OBBIETTIVI DIVERSI per dare piu' spirito anche a chi non possiede MC o non potra' mai avere MC  per stimolare la loro  voglia di conquiste ( qua' sta nella bravura del TEAM SVILUPPO  del gioco.)

Con Premi ragionevoli e invitanti.

 I say that designing different missions ZHG as a classic capture the flag to be done in teams of combined attack not 3 persons but at least 6-8 people in ATTACK OF COALITION ON DIFFERENT GOALS to give more 'spirit also to those who do not possess or MC not 'never get MC to stimulate their desire for conquests (here' is the skill of the DEVELOPMENT TEAM game.)

Awards with reasonable and inviting.

  Among other things I think that if the game in total had a review of its use in diamonds would encourage even the least likely to spend, to invest in the game creating more 'subjects can animate that part of simple inactive players.

M
UTC +0:00
besticio
18 August, 2016, 3:03 PM UTC

Tra altro    in linea  con idea  del tipo GIOCO FPS    formare 2 squadre una  attacco e una  difesa   con squadre comprese da 6 o 10 giocatori  i quali contro una base  zhg possono decidere di prendervi parte   creando una stanza nel gioco che mette in attesa  gruppi da 6   a 10 persone  con la possibilita a chiunque di crare questa stanza dove all'interno  come obbiettivo ci sia una base zhg          una squadra    attacco e una squadra difesa.

 con possibilita di reinvio truppe       e fino a volonta del giocatore. allo scopo di  prendere o imperdirne la presa dalla squadra avversaria.

ovviamente la base non avra' truppe   bot . ma solo truppe dei giocatori   delle 2 squadre  una attacco  e una difesa composte da 6-  10 persone.

E Da solo idea. ovviamente con premi aggiuntivi  per ripagare le  perdite, o in maggior parte almeno


M
UTC +0:00
Gul Vega
19 August, 2016, 10:43 AM UTC

@Besticio

Please, write strictly in English. (you are in a international section of this forum). For your tips, although i do not fully share your conceptual vision - of course - i fully agree with your words: «Awards with reasonable and inviting».

"Glory to the Bomb and his Divine destructive Cloud"
UTC +0:00
1663467 users registered; 33854 topics; 252814 posts; our newest member:sdasa