| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 |
441. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Imp Smash wrote: Kain Spero wrote: danthrax martin wrote: Landowners are who you want to initiate raids? BS. All I need is some guys and a clone pack to initiate PC. I'm fine with cp+isk+(clones?)(warbarge?) But the idea to require land...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.02.04 20:51:00
|
442. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Kain Spero wrote: I think probably the easiest way to address the issue is to ensure that the raiders have to bring something to the table that they can lose. Exactly what I'm saying and proposed various ideas to address.
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.02.04 19:56:00
|
443. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Radar R4D-47 wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: You're idea limits hits per district, my idea limits hits based on indvidual daily success. To-mae-to,To-mah-toe Why are you trying to limit a gamemode? This reduces activity server wide. Since Warlo...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.02.04 19:53:00
|
444. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Well, at least admit you see that it was funny. C'mon, it's funny!
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.02.01 07:33:00
|
445. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
The irony in your posting on this topic and at this time cannot be understated however, Terry.
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.02.01 07:14:00
|
446. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Breakin Stuff wrote: I should also mention, I proposed raid mechanics that would restrict a corp from raiding the same district more than once per day. I already took into account your "unlimited raids" argument. That one is a simple fix. The ...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.02.01 07:08:00
|
447. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Terry Webber wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Terry Webber wrote: I don't know if what I'm going to ask about was already covered but have you ever considered adding a new feature for selling districts, Rattati? It would add another alte...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.02.01 07:03:00
|
448. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Adipem Nothi wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: If you enter PC at any level you should be ready accept the risks of PC at any level. Smells like troll. Reward potential of raids will be limited; risk exposure will have to follow suit. I'm ha...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.02.01 07:01:00
|
449. AV feedback - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Haven't read the full thread, I will eventually but have to add: PLC is best AV. But if you want to buff it's damage profile I'm ok with that. I'm also ok with not buffing the damage but buffing the knockaround instead, vs HAVs too. That'd be ...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.02.01 01:06:00
|
450. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Hell, I did a 7v12 last night. Got my ass kicked. Didn't quit, didn't redlinecamp, didn't QQ about it.
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.02.01 00:52:00
|
451. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
danthrax martin wrote: Do I have this right? Large pc corps are afraid of the larger non-pc player base and want more restrictios than pc has? I see an uprising of stompees given the ability to exact revenge... and I love the idea. LOL M...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.02.01 00:47:00
|
452. WARLORD patchnotes... - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
...are a welcome sight and the Feb. 3rd deployment date is encouraging as well. While containing several fixes for various things like framerate lag and match exploits there's no mention of a fix for whatever it is that is not allowing us to call ...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.01.31 22:31:00
|
453. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Radar R4D-47 wrote: Lavallois Nash wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: some sort of mechanism to whoop a raiders' ass enough that they can't raid for a while. Just like a fat hole in the side of a classical pirate's ship OR lengthy prison t...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.01.31 21:04:00
|
454. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Terry Webber wrote: I don't know if what I'm going to ask about was already covered but have you ever considered adding a new feature for selling districts, Rattati? It would add another alternative to fighting for the district and allo...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.01.31 20:01:00
|
455. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Breakin Stuff wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: While an individual raid's effect may be temporary the cumulative effect will be effectively permanent. Constant raiding will mean the districts never replenish, which will lead to no one holding dis...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.01.31 19:57:00
|
456. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Lavallois Nash wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Raiding, like just about any other activity in PC, FW or Pubs, WILL be a negotiable service commodity regardless of it's structure. This is DUST after all, derivative of EVE, where Player Created C...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.01.30 23:11:00
|
457. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Breakin Stuff wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Maybe a week was harsh. My point was it can't be risk free. Then again getting spanked and losing gear is still a loss. And if the big boys are worried about raids it means ...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.01.30 23:01:00
|
458. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Breakin Stuff wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Operator, until DUST is open world creating a lopsided engagement is of no value. 8v8, 12v12 or 16v16. Raiders should not have to face more stiff losses than someone who invad...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.01.30 22:43:00
|
459. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
steadyhand amarr wrote: Maybe a week was harsh. My point was it can't be risk free. Then again getting spanked and losing gear is still a loss. And if the big boys are worried about raids it means it's working as intented. Fair points tbh ...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.01.30 22:36:00
|
460. Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited - in Feedback/Requests [original thread]
Breakin Stuff wrote: Operator, until DUST is open world creating a lopsided engagement is of no value. 8v8, 12v12 or 16v16. Raiders should not have to face more stiff losses than someone who invades to conquer land. Good raiders will utilize...
- by el OPERATOR - at 2015.01.30 22:28:00
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |