|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD
1081
   |
Posted - 2013.10.13 14:33:00 -
[1] - Quote
+1 Fox.
I agree and made the same points when PC was a week old. CCP has managed to completely short-circuit any game design they might have done on PC by implementing clone packs in their current form.
I do think that it's only a placeholder mechanic, but it is a destructive placeholder mechanic - It's war without terrain, and it makes PC so uninteresting that i can't force myself to be interested and don't want to take part.
And connecting PC to geopolitics and the resource wars, which i am constantly pointing out is the only way to make DUST relevant and worthwhile, won't help. It would be adding a cash incentive to something fundamentally distasteful.
The cross-region magic clone teleport game mechanic is bad. It can't be prettied up or glossed over. It needs to go.
|
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD
1090
|
Posted - 2013.10.13 23:56:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:gbghg wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:It was one of our initial design goals but I agree it is lacking right now.
Fortunately we are working out plans for Planetary Conquest 2.0 which has some new mechanics to make location more relevant. scrap the current clone packs, the original proposal was much more interesting, it made SI relevant as a research center lowered clone loss over distance and it gave certain systems strategic value as some systems distance from each other gave them a defensive/offensive advantage. Yeah that was obviously the idea, the location you generated the clones at was super important, and moving them came at a cost / risk. Clone packs are the broken element in the current design though and we're going to fix that. We're not going to go into too much detail on all that yet, but everyone will get a chance to offer feedback before we do any changes.
I though you original attrition mechanic was pretty good. iirc it was meant to model probable losses from clones being transported in EVE.
I suppose that if we were trying to model what the clone packs are doing right now in PC, it would mean a jump-capable ship in EVE. In fact, since there is no failure mechanic associated with genpacks atm, we're prolly talking a black-ops jump/covert cyno. Pehaps a current ship model with clones/support infrastructure in the cargohold, or a current ship with a clone transport rig/module, or a specialized black ops clone transport ship or some/all of the above.
Considering what would have to be put on the line in EVE for something like that covert jump to happen, i'd think transportation fees alone would be significant.
At any rate, looking forward to see what you peeps have cooked up for PC 2.0
|
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD
1090
|
Posted - 2013.10.13 23:59:00 -
[3] - Quote
Operative 1171 Aajli wrote:Bu, bu, but I thought spamming droplinks, grenades and roof FGs only to run around like a herd of wild animals dancing to the redline was strategy? No?
+1. I'm still laughing. |
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD
1090
|
Posted - 2013.10.14 00:08:00 -
[4] - Quote
ReGnYuM wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:Tectonic Fusion wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:It was one of our initial design goals but I agree it is lacking right now.
Fortunately we are working out plans for Planetary Conquest 2.0 which has some new mechanics to make location more relevant. Meh. Ok we won't bother then  requesting planetary Statues!
Yes please! Great idea.
Ofc, only the Ammar are supercilious and vain enough to actually erect statues in industrial outposts, but that's cool. So long as you make it the one piece of destructable content i'll be a happy as can be.
P.S. Don't chince out with the physics, CCP. We need to be able to play LAV-football with her head. |
|
|
| |
|