|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Aeon Amadi
Ancient Exiles.
Renegade Alliance
4776
   |
Posted - 2014.01.30 10:28:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Logibro wrote:It's something we're aware of, and we're working on fixing it. Can't give a date as Chinese New Year means most of Shanghai is on holidays starting about now.
I'm no game designer (yet) but I think a viable solution would be to say that the clones from clone pack are of a lower grade and can't be reimbursed, this way a clone pack used to attack a district isn't worth anything to the defender. If that doesn't work I'd escalate to reducing victory payouts.
Useful Links
//forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588
//forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
|
Aeon Amadi
Ancient Exiles.
Renegade Alliance
4779
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 11:11:00 -
[2] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote:I just don't get how hard it can be to remove ISK generation and fix the refunding exploit. Those two things would solve this problem right away. After that they can look at doing things like increasing the payout for winning.
They don't need to fix every single problem with PC as it's going to be deleted when PC 2.0 comes around. They just need to do those small bandaids.
It's also funny they were supposed to at least lower ISK generation (to 60k ISK per clone) three months ago, but for some unknown reason that has never happened. Just do these bandaid fixes and leave PC be until PC 2.0 or delete PC right now and forget it ever existed.
I always love reading the "remove 'x' content please" arguments. Last thing this game needs is less content - PC is the only thing that separates this game from a 100% match-maker shooter and, well, it just barely does that at the moment.
Removing ISK generation would just kill any reason to go into PC what-so-ever, the entire point of getting into PC is to make ISK and removing that defeats the entire purpose of a "risk vs reward" style gameplay. What we need is a more methodical way to go about it and one solution I really liked was having it so that clone packs could only be used to attack a district bordering a high-sec system. Gives a more tactical reason to have space in a certain area as opposed to just anywhere and it kills district locking all together in systems that -dont- border high-sec.
Only thing you need to do then is make it so that systems that can be attacked by those clone packs don't make any ISK from it; as previously stated. Gives players a reason and drive to push further into low-sec and more tactical space because otherwise they're subject to just constant attacks by just anyone and they don't make anything from it, only when their clones are at capacity in the district.
Useful Links
//forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588
//forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
|
Aeon Amadi
Ancient Exiles.
Renegade Alliance
4782
|
Posted - 2014.02.01 16:08:00 -
[3] - Quote
Such stark opposition, disagreement and a general consensus all saying "remove ISK generation, increase ISK payouts". I don't think anyone really sat down and thought that out, at all.
How does it solve district locking if not promote it? If I am not making ISK from the selling of clones on a district filled to capacity, than it's pointless to have that district in the first place if not to coax other entities to attack it - which is essentially putting it up on the chopping block to lose it...
Further more, if that's the case, why not just attack it with a dummy corp anyway? I'm making more (guaranteed) money from doing so, thereby I could just throw clones back and forth between two or more districts with two separate corporations - not like I'm making any money from them at maximum capacity anyway. It's Red vs Blue but with profit as the main selling point.
And as far as the "minority" argument goes, I find it almost insulting. Let's go over a few of the "minority" aspects that were removed from the game because they didn't work as intended:
Marauder HAVs.
Black Ops HAVs.
Enforcer HAVs.
Remote Vehicle Armor Repairers/Shield Transporters
Corp Battles.
Those are just the ones I can name off the top of my head. Add Planetary Conquest to mix for the sake of "fixing it" and what we're left with is literally a game focusing on a terrible public match-maker which has received plenty of complaints and evidence that it is not working optimally, a faction warfare system which isn't self-sustaining and a three match new player academy. This game would become -more- a lobby shooter with little to no control over what kind of impact you have, leaving the only real "Eve/Dust Link" that would exist would be on sparse occasion in Faction Warfare.
Beyond that, you're killing off any aspect of the game's persistence; albeit the thin veil of territorial control in FW, I guess, could be considered that.
I'm against poorly thought out "band-aid" solutions that would do more harm than good and I'm starkly against removing more content from the game when it's likely to never return given the glacial pace of meaningful change that does occur in this game. Disagree how you may but at least do us the service of coming up with a viable solution.
Useful Links
//forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588
//forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
|
Aeon Amadi
Ancient Exiles.
Renegade Alliance
4782
|
Posted - 2014.02.01 16:14:00 -
[4] - Quote
ANON Cerberus wrote:ReGnYuM wrote:The only issue right now with PC is the locking. Once this is fixed I see no problem.
If you honestly have a problem with corps farming ISK then make a PC team and do something about it. The point is, getting established in PC is very hard and 90% of the people who complain in this thread neither have the ability or dedication to thrive in Molden Heath.
We earned ISK unlike players who run BPO's and farm pubs with no risk You have some sound logic there, however my previous experience of PC battles put me off until I am convinced otherwise. I used to fight a little (Not loads but I did some battles n PC) back in ANONYMOUS. I may well fight in PC again. You mention people using BPO`s in pubs, hell sometimes I even run starter suits as I have no other way to make isk. When you are threw head first into matches where you encounter 1 or 2 squads of proto, I do kill them sometimes. Granted I get my ass handed to me as well but the amount of times I have seen proto users lose 10+ proto kits in a match, I message them and ask them how they can afford it and they just reply with a laugh. So if running proto and losing proto really affects me yet does not effect the 'elites' what would you suggest I do to counter this? The only way I could ever compete in PC is to first build up a stocklpile of isk to begin with, hence BPO suits and militia starter fits. When you are on the other side of this fence buddy it is a lot different. I know you dont have to worry about such things.
Solution to that (and I'm fully prepared to hear all the nay-sayers complain about this) is to just remove the tiers all together and have just Frames and Specialist (Assault/Scout/etc) suits. Do away with the Militia/Standard/Advanced non-sense all together and leave it with just the Frames and the two suits that they branch off of.
Way easier to balance four Assault suits on one level than it is to balance twelve of them. Plus it levels the playing field dramatically, leaving the outcome of a fight to individual fit, player skill and actual skill level investment. "Proto-stomping" wouldn't exist any longer because it'd be entirely phased out and it would pave the way for future content to be more easily implemented.
Useful Links
//forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588
//forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
|
Aeon Amadi
Ancient Exiles.
Renegade Alliance
4782
|
Posted - 2014.02.01 20:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:Such stark opposition, disagreement and a general consensus all saying "remove ISK generation, increase ISK payouts". I don't think anyone really sat down and thought that out, at all.
How does it solve district locking if not promote it? If I am not making ISK from the selling of clones on a district filled to capacity, than it's pointless to have that district in the first place if not to coax other entities to attack it - which is essentially putting it up on the chopping block to lose it...
Further more, if that's the case, why not just attack it with a dummy corp anyway? I'm making more (guaranteed) money from doing so, thereby I could just throw clones back and forth between two or more districts with two separate corporations - not like I'm making any money from them at maximum capacity anyway. It's Red vs Blue but with profit as the main selling point. Removing ISK generation and fixing the refunding exploit would indeed solve district locking (with a profit), and certainly wouldn't promote it. You wouldn't be able to just attack yourself either with a clone pack or from another district while making money from it. If you're using clone packs it costs you 36m each attack and even if rewards were increased to for example 200k ISK per clone killed, you still wouldn't be able to make a profit. If you're attacking from another district you might be able to make a small profit from each battle, but the attacking district can ALWAYS be attacked by anyone else. PC does not need a complete redesign at this point. PC 2.0 shouldn't be too far of, so there's absolutely no reason to begin demanding huge changes to PC. At the moment PC just needs the few bandaid fixes in the form of removed ISK generation, fixed refunding exploit and possibly a ISK payout increase. Doing that would keep PC running at a reasonable level until it can be replaced by PC 2.0. Edit: When I'm talking about removing ISK generation I wouldn't have a problem if it stayed at a symbolic value of 10-20k per clone sold. With 20k per clone it would be less than 2m ISK per district per day. Currently districts make 8m+ each day which is simply way too much.
It's not just he 200k isk per clone; there's usually a baseline 1,000,000 per player active. Fielding a 16 man team and killing off all 120 clones would net you a 4m ISK profit.
And yes, the attacking district can always be attacked by anyone else - including your dummy corp that you're using to lock up the districts in the first place.
There's no easy way out of this, you can't just up and remove ISK generation without giving some other reason for having territory in the first place. Two million a day would cover the losses of perhaps three, maybe four people who took the time out of their day to defend it. The entire reason the ISK generation was increased to begin with was because people were losing more ISK than they were gaining, which I usually don't have much of a problem with but the band-aid proposed doesn't give any incentive to do PC at all. Corporations would be exhausting more effort to keep the districts than they were worth.
It's been eight months. At this point, we're long overdue for the meaningful interaction PC was supposed to provide; so it's not out of the realm of belief to want to see that happen. I'm a patient guy though, and I know PC 2.0 likely isn't going to come for at least another few months - on the other hand, the band aid applied shouldn't be yet another knee jerk reaction to people getting riled up and screaming "remove" or "nerf". This needs to be handled with a scalpel and none of the solutions proposed here are scalpel changes.
Useful Links
//forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588
//forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
|
Aeon Amadi
Ancient Exiles.
Renegade Alliance
4785
|
Posted - 2014.02.02 12:46:00 -
[6] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:It's not just he 200k isk per clone; there's usually a baseline 1,000,000 per player active. Fielding a 16 man team and killing off all 120 clones would net you a 4m ISK profit.
And yes, the attacking district can always be attacked by anyone else - including your dummy corp that you're using to lock up the districts in the first place.
There's no easy way out of this, you can't just up and remove ISK generation without giving some other reason for having territory in the first place. Two million a day would cover the losses of perhaps three, maybe four people who took the time out of their day to defend it. The entire reason the ISK generation was increased to begin with was because people were losing more ISK than they were gaining, which I usually don't have much of a problem with but the band-aid proposed doesn't give any incentive to do PC at all. Corporations would be exhausting more effort to keep the districts than they were worth.
It's been eight months. At this point, we're long overdue for the meaningful interaction PC was supposed to provide; so it's not out of the realm of belief to want to see that happen. I'm a patient guy though, and I know PC 2.0 likely isn't going to come for at least another few months - on the other hand, the band aid applied shouldn't be yet another knee jerk reaction to people getting riled up and screaming "remove" or "nerf". This needs to be handled with a scalpel and none of the solutions proposed here are scalpel changes. 1. There isn't a baseline million ISK per player active. You are aware that all clones killed, including your own teams, is a part of the payout to the winning team? Thus, if you kill 150 clones and lose 100 yourself the winning team will get 25 million ISK or around 1.5 million per player. There is no more ISK than what comes from clones killed. 2. If people was losing ISK even if they were winning you increase active ISK generation (ISK payouts for winning), not pump passive ISK generation to insane levels. Passive ISK generation shouldn't cover your losses, winning should, so there would be no problem with removing passive ISK generation altogether or reduce it to a symbolic value of 2 million or less ISK per district per day. 3. If you're farming active ISK generation from attacking yourself from another district, the attacking district can always be attacked by anyone else. I have no idea why you're talking about a dummy corp attacking the attacking district, because if you're locking the attacking district up with a clone pack you just threw the profit you wanted to make completely out of the window. 4. Removing passive ISK generation would not remove all incentives to have districts. You would want to have districts to be able to attack others without the use of clone packs. The incentive in PC is about getting districts to be able to attack and make ISK from winning those matches. 5. I don't want CCP to allocate resources to try and improve PC. That would be entirely pointless. Let them work on other aspects that sorely needs the work, and give PC these few bandaids to keep it running. Removing ISK generation and fixing the refunding exploit would do exactly that. Edit: Not to mention that redesigns of PC would take a while to be implemented, meanwhile PC corps are making billions of ISK EVERY day with NO risk. Removing ISK generation and fixing the refunding exploit would put a stop to that right now. Edit2: Passive ISK generation should never even have been implemented, so I really have no idea why you're even defending it now. Passive ISK generation is insanely stupid and just needs to be deleted and forgotten about.
Brosef, I've been doing PC for months now - I know how much I make when the other team no-shows with a clone pack. You still get paid a hefty amount. And the whole bit about attacking the attacking district with a dummy corp is just... I don't understand how you could -not- foresee that as a problem. You increase the payout from the win and you're just refunding them the money anyway because you -already- get plenty of ISK from a no-show on a clone pack as it is.
Removing passive ISK Generation would be a bad idea. It's nice when you have people to attack and when people are attacking you but a lot of good it's going to do you when you don't, you'll just have this block in space with your name on it being worthless. It's basically forcing corporations and alliances to fight unnecessarily, there's no reason to do it other than "for the **** of it", that doesn't make any sense at all and there is no system in Eve Online or Dust 514 that goes off of that system.
Passive ISK Generation isn't "insanely stupid", it's actually rather smart considering that you don't want them to spend extra time on PC. It gives corporations a -reason- to do PC and a reason to have districts while we wait for a way to make ISK with work involved (PvE in Null-sec Sovereignty being a primary example). Band-aids need to be applied, sure, but the band-aid your suggesting just turns PC into pub-matches where you have to start your own battles and wait a day or two before they happen.
"Edit2: Passive ISK generation should never even have been implemented, so I really have no idea why you're even defending it now."
^ This is personal incredulity.
Useful Links
//forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588
//forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
|
|
|
| |
|