Failure Scenario

Jun 30, 2017
5
10
3
#1
Screenshot_20180711-135806_Discord.jpg
Torgue got me thinking...
What if the players DO actually fail to defend their final outpost against the kaiju? It got me thinking about the End of an Era cinematic from FFXIV - which actually has an amazing story behind it if you weren't around for the first release of FFXIV (not ARR). Short version: the game was unplayable on launch and Squenix didn't try to sweep the failure under the rug, they kept the "reset" in lore. This cinematic is the last thing players saw before servers shut down on the original release, and subsequently the opening cinematic when ARR launched some time later.


Not that I anticipate any catastrophic failure on the game's part, but the scenario that players could be completely overwhelmed by the Tsihu is perfectly plausible and the game should support this outcome in some way, I feel. Not in the sense that you have no other option but to switch servers and start from scratch, there should be some underlying system that carries over some but not all progress in the event that the players lose the war. Also a title and a nice little cinematic to go with it, maybe. :)

What are your thoughts? How do you think the failure scenario should play out in terms of the gameplay experience moving forward for servers that lose the war?
 

EvilKitten

Gatestrider
Base Commander
Jul 26, 2016
572
969
93
#2
I think the intention is we can loose all but the starter area, which is so heavily fortified that the tsi-hu can't overwhelm it or something.
 
Jun 30, 2017
5
10
3
#3
There has been some suggestion as to an orbital station that acts as our fallback - this would be a good solution to the catastrophic failure of all Gatestrider defenses.
When a server is overrun, the players should be forced to recall to the station. At that point players from other servers should be alerted and have the option to drop in with the next wave and help spearhead a new ground zero. It would be cool if each server was treated as a different location on the surface and you could see progress from all servers from the orbital station, and even look down at their little pocket of land and watch battles from orbit. I think that would be a good way to encourage the community side of things and still have total failure be an interesting part of the game, and give lost ground more meaming.
 
Jul 26, 2016
865
1,007
93
37
#4
What are your thoughts? How do you think the failure scenario should play out in terms of the gameplay experience moving forward for servers that lose the war?
so sort of like making a multi-player version of a rogue like game?
Players will lose a ton of stuff on that type of loss but if they had the foresight to store enough resources at base camp their next version of a toon or base will be upgraded in some way So that they aren't just starting from scratch?
 
Likes: Pandagnome

Pandagnome

Well-Known Member
Happy Kaiju
Jul 27, 2016
2,666
2,224
113
Island of Tofu
#5
I think there should be the most amount of explosions managable to please torgue followed by errie music a flash back of all the npc's you have encountered and mechs also the first mineral your commrad got looking smug and a real fast flash of navel before you see yourself in a chamber being reconstructed bilogcially from stem cells or mechanical parts as a cyborg!

Depending on how badly you failed
After all the explosion your crawling out of your mech and a kaiju grabs you for its twisted use turning you into a mutant from their evil experiments mindless and controlled to attack whatever the kaiju orders ;O
 
Last edited:

Degiance

Deepscanner
Jul 5, 2017
866
1,412
93
Finland
degiance.deviantart.com
#6
I'd imagine there being a planet wide evac order given and the last base was the only way to get off the rock. Then amount of NPC's and stuff gotten off Em-8er would determine how well the game will restart, i mean resources are scarce before so. *shrugs*
Then players would be tasked of holding the line untill everyone can safely evacuate with few stragglers here and there that players need to rescue while the full force of enemy forces are headed to that single base.
Followed by the weapon's free order where all types of heavy weapons and possibly even WMD's would be released for free use just to keep those wabbits at bay.
Was the music i had playing on the background while imagining all that..

I wouldn't mind having a proper last stand scenario...
 

Maven

Boss Boss
Max Kahuna
Jul 26, 2016
52
150
33
#7
A failure to defend the last remaining outpost/starting area should come with a loss of access to all available tech upgrades. After all, the cost of losing one world tier is a loss of access to the tech upgrades associated with that tier. A reclamation of zones would then mean simply re-activating all researched upgrades. The overall impact to the game experience would come from the time it would take to re-access all the tech upgrades/dependence on lower grade tech.


The last stand, in the event of a massive invasion (presumably (hopefully) accompanied by a Class 6(?) Kaiju), as suggested in previous posts, would be a holdout to ensure that all civilians are safely transferred to the gatestrider mothership preparing to return to high orbit. The win condition would be the successful defense of the base and the local terraforming stations


In the event that players fail to defend the outpost (letting the last terraforming platform fall), the game could also enforce a condition where players are allowed to save only two of their frames. This does not mean complete destruction of the frames that are not saved, instead players are forced to leave the other frames behind and are not allowed access to these until the base has been fully recaptured. An inconvenience at most, but there should be some personal cost to complete and utter failure.


After evacuation to high orbit over the planet, the recapture phase begins. Players are deployed via drop-pods to the planet surface in omniframes that have maximum shields enforced to protect against the adverse weather conditions. This would also mean all other omniframe systems are adjusted accordingly to maintain the shields.


Post landing, the first task would be to re-power the base and then the terraforming stations while defending against the tsi-hu attracted by activity at the base. This would be a far easier battle as they had just expended a lot of energy(?)/resources during the previous invasion event, thus making failure an impossibility.

The period from landing on the surface to the point where all terraforming stations are powered and running would be the phase where players are not allowed to access the frames they left behind. Resources are limited after all, and priority would be re-establishing the base over any else. Any loss of omniframe/player defeat during this phase would require the player repair his omniframe at the base or request a replacement from the mothership in orbit, which would take longer than the usual replacement process.


This honestly was what I had hoped the failure scenario for Firefall would have been. Something similar with a beach landing followed by launching melding repulsors and a battle to retake copacabana. Works well enough in this case too.
 
Last edited:

zdoofop

Terraformer
Jul 26, 2016
201
188
43
#8
A failure to defend the last remaining outpost/starting area should come with a loss of access to all available tech upgrades. After all, the cost of losing one world tier is a loss of access to the tech upgrades associated with that tier. A reclamation of zones would then mean simply re-activating all researched upgrades. The overall impact to the game experience would come from the time it would take to re-access all the tech upgrades/dependence on lower grade tech.


The last stand, in the event of a massive invasion (presumably (hopefully) accompanied by a Class 6(?) Kaiju), as suggested in previous posts, would be a holdout to ensure that all civilians are safely transferred to the gatestrider mothership preparing to return to high orbit. The win condition would be the successful defense of the base and the local terraforming stations


In the event that players fail to defend the outpost (letting the last terraforming platform fall), the game could also enforce a condition where players are allowed to save only two of their frames. This does not mean complete destruction of the frames that are not saved, instead players are forced to leave the other frames behind and are not allowed access to these until the base has been fully recaptured. An inconvenience at most, but there should be some personal cost to complete and utter failure.


After evacuation to high orbit over the planet, the recapture phase begins. Players are deployed via drop-pods to the planet surface in omniframes that have maximum shields enforced to protect against the adverse weather conditions. This would also mean all other omniframe systems are adjusted accordingly to maintain the shields.


Post landing, the first task would be to re-power the base and then the terraforming stations while defending against the tsi-hu attracted by activity at the base. This would be a far easier battle as they had just expended a lot of energy(?)/resources during the previous invasion event, thus making failure an impossibility.

The period from landing on the surface to the point where all terraforming stations are powered and running would be the phase where players are not allowed to access the frames they left behind. Resources are limited after all, and priority would be re-establishing the base over any else. Any loss of omniframe/player defeat during this phase would require the player repair his omniframe at the base or request a replacement from the mothership in orbit, which would take longer than the usual replacement process.


This honestly was what I had hoped the failure scenario for Firefall would have been. Something similar with a beach landing followed by launching melding repulsors and a battle to retake copacabana. Works well enough in this case too.
I like this idea. It's a perfect combo mechanic for my moon base idea.
 
Dec 27, 2016
46
64
18
LV-426
#9
Gonna throw some general concepts in here regarding the topic.
Thumbs up for the devs. if they can model and implement a system to pull this off:

- Create a 'failure' scenario that could evolve into a desirable opportunity. (for ex.: a 'ravaged' landscape is a good place to get X 'resource', even if players had to deal with 'lower tech available' or some limitation of that sort at that time). 'Failing' shouldn't mean 'instant server transfer for me 100% of the times'. Some players in need of 'X' will be alert when such opportunity presents itself and drop as reinforcements to the compromised area prioritizing it over other activities if that suits their needs at the time (shouldn't be an 'always must' neither).

It's important to have the info available in game, in some immersive fashion: monitoring the war effort from IN-GAME, either by being at 'command centers' if you're chilling off or simply setting personal alerts sent to the player's frame from HQ if you're 'on duty'. Better than doing it via cold chat. Customizable and the like.

- Players CAN'T 'fight to lose' to force a 'failure'. It should feel natural and not orchestrated. I imagine this would imply some level of 'activity' detection (so the AI isn't fooled into thinking it has more opposition than there actually exists... looking at AFKers and the like). Most complex point, I know.

If the war effort feels dynamically realistic, cohesive and immersive, this game would have achieved a lot. If they somewhat ditch the 'superheroes' cliche and let the AI be more unpredictable and surprising (but not 100% of the time in 'bulldozer mode')... I'm dreaming but I'd like the 'war is hell' feel from time to time, occasionally by surprise (not just 'go Y zone or do W thing if you want the bad guys to be extra tough').
If there's a way to make the game do this while not shoving a forced 'hardcore' mentality on all players all the time and also 'reality check' parameters are respected (game performance and dev's work)... I'd love it! My technical knowledge is extremely limited, I just know what I'd like but I still believe this is possible to some extent, if it fits the creator's vision, that is.

Failure IS an option. Delicate matter but the rewards in terms of gamplay (in every sense) could make all the difference. Central concept, IMHO. Worth working out. Could be one of the game strong points: to go beyond the 'binary' win/lose mentality, while respecting player freedom and do it in an immersive fashion (this is important too).
The last base shouldn't be taken by the enemy in any way, goes w.o saying.