Technically speaking, there are six simultaneous Strike Force vs. Strike Force encounters ongoing. However, each has interdependent goals. These are things you’d expect. For example, if one Strike Force is out to take down a generator and they succeed, it might power down the automatic base weapons in the other five instances.
Harris was still not ready to share victory conditions and specific scenarios, but at a basic level, the same rules apply here as elsewhere: the winning Agency takes it over.
These bases and other Agency controlled territories will be clearly flagged to the owner (banner overlays for the owner) and have lots of things that people can spend money on to help their side.
;)
“At a high level there are ways to upgrade the production output and have certain epic consumables (additional items) that will be in that area that help with either defense or that an attacking team can bring to take those down,” he explained.
In essence, he’s talking about the science-fiction equivalent to guild base siege warfare.
All of this territory control ropes into the larger meta-game. Players will be able to look at the map and see the pods of territory controlled by each Agency and each Alliance. Those alliances, on the other hand, can shift based on the whims of the players involved. It’ll be a giant chess match fought out with bouts of intense FPS action.
Harris hopes to create a dynamic snake pit of political action with this system. Teams will be regularly working to overthrow their enemies, bribe members of opposing alliances to switch side and eventually “win” that particular map for their side. He wasn’t yet too clear on what victory meant, but he did say that a victory would just move the conflict forward or backward into another map.
They also have The Commonwealth, which is their NPC faction and a foil for players to fight, but taking them out is not the brunt of the conflict.
;)
So, will this crazy alliance system be as off the wall as EVE tends to be? Harris hedged here somewhat. He does believe that if it can be accomplished within the rules of the game, they’re all for it, but they also want to make sure things are fair and don’t seem prone to take that ideology as far as CCP has when they allowed people to disband entire alliances or rob player run banks.
“We do certainly want a little bit of that, certainly the shifting alliances, deals and trading,” he said. “We’re working to make sure that the mechanics are in there to minimize things like fraud.”
Global Agenda is in a phased Beta test where they power up on some weekends for players to take on specific mechanics. The territory control campaign mode we talked to Harris about will be a focus of Closed Beta Test 2.
