|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1070
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 08:45:00 -
[1] - Quote
I don't know if this is working as intended for CCP and the rest of the PC playing community seems less vocal about it so hey what the heck I'll try and get my voice out there.
This needs to change, having an OB dropped on your MCC or ground spawn as you call in dropships and stuff; its not cool. This is how it works; when you deploy into the PC game there is 10 minutes of warbarge time during which the orbiting satellite is active, once its active a capsuleer can dock on it granted there are no contesting forces. Now, with the current system this means that as long as the capsuleer docks for at least 3 minutes before us Dust Bunnies start the match (when the warbarge timer hits 0:00) the Capsuleer's team can drop an EVE strike on the enemy as their deploying in their ground spawn and MCC.
This has become a legitimate tactic in PC games and frankly its starting to become silly, it needs to go. I'm sure (I hope) other people agree with me on this.
I have not yet reached a good state of mind to discuss Orbital Bombardment as well as other issues in Planetary Conquest games because whatever CCP does, I roll with the punches, its the only way to keep yourself sane with this game, but if anyone out there has an opinion regarding this post and lets talk about it.
I digress,
To CCP; Change it so that satellites can only be docked on AFTER the 10 minutes at the warbarge are up, so at worst the only OB to hit us will be 3 minutes into the game if we are lacking counter EVE support.
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1077
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 18:40:00 -
[2] - Quote
Tebu Gan wrote:Ignoring the other idiot posters, agreed, it is an unbalanced mechanic that can drastically change the course of the game in just the first few seconds.
Some might call it fair play, since you would have had to get EVE support in the first place, and not to mention, hold the station. Is it not enough that they will get an OB every 3 minutes on top of earned OBs. I like that EVE actually plays a big part of PC, but that part shouldn't be that HUGE.
Those OBs can make or break a game on their own, seems a bit much to allow one right from the git go. It would be nice if we could start a match normally, get everything setup, get in our places, and then boom, OB. The damn things are devastating enough, that you don't NEED one right at the start. All that is is icing on the cake.
Agreed on starting the timer, AFTER battle has started.
Yeah I'm just going to ignore the Inexperienced and Uninformed.
Honestly its a simply fix, satellite goes live once Dust Bunnies Deploy into the game, not the warbarge. But as other avid PC players know, this is only one issue regarding planetary conquest currently; but I think it is an issue that is extremely prevalent and I would think relatively easy to hotfix
While you're at it CCP; Vanity items, just sayin
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1079
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 20:37:00 -
[3] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Aikuchi Tomaru wrote:There's an easy solution: Get your own Eve pilots. Disagree. Speaking as someone who has had orbital supremacy in the majority of the PC matches I've played, I think it's a terrible and cheap mechanic. Being able to randomly destroy everything on spawning can cripple a team, and there is very little you can do about it.
He obviously either; has not played very many PCs or hasn't played PCs at the level in which we are used to Arkena. I'm not trying to sound elitist, but when you're fighting top tier corporations suddenly every little thing matters.
Every second lost during initial deployment can be detrimental and decisive to which team will win the game.
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1083
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 20:47:00 -
[4] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:1st Lieutenant Tiberius wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Aikuchi Tomaru wrote:There's an easy solution: Get your own Eve pilots. Disagree. Speaking as someone who has had orbital supremacy in the majority of the PC matches I've played, I think it's a terrible and cheap mechanic. Being able to randomly destroy everything on spawning can cripple a team, and there is very little you can do about it. He obviously either; has not played very many PCs or hasn't played PCs at the level in which we are used to Arkena. I'm not trying to sound elitist, but when you're fighting top tier corporations suddenly every little thing matters. Every second lost during initial deployment can be detrimental and decisive to which team will win the game. Getting beaten right out of the gate is very hard to overcome. In many cases you could just back out, it's over. It's a cheesy mechanic that they have commented was unintended. As most know it's the warbarge time and being able to connect to the district during that time that allows this. It's really hard to believe how much PC is ignored with the amount of ISK it generates. I wonder what's the time spent by CCP on BPOs and their impact on the economy vs the time spent on PC.
lol I know right, they're saying BPOs are market breaking yet the perpetual accrual of ENOURMOUS amounts of wealth in a system where, not only profit is ensured, but assets are untouchable as well.
If CCP is trying to create an In-game economy the logical thing to do would be an ISK wipe, wonder how people will feel about that statement
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1087
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 20:59:00 -
[5] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote: It's really hard to believe how much PC is ignored with the amount of ISK it generates. I wonder what's the time spent by CCP on BPOs and their impact on the economy vs the time spent on PC.
According to CPM Hans, the isk generation of BPOs makes PC isk generation look like abject poverty. Then why aren't there a bunch of BPO billionaires out there? I know one guy. I know quite a few PC billionaires.
The problem is very, very apparent and yet unspoken of. Maybe its because, as you said, such a small population of players actually play PC, because PC is so abhorrently broken. And because PC is so abhorrently broken, no-one but a small population of players actually play PC and because of this; the very apparent problems with PC are unspoken of.
It is truly a vicious cycle.
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1088
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 21:13:00 -
[6] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:1st Lieutenant Tiberius wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote: It's really hard to believe how much PC is ignored with the amount of ISK it generates. I wonder what's the time spent by CCP on BPOs and their impact on the economy vs the time spent on PC.
According to CPM Hans, the isk generation of BPOs makes PC isk generation look like abject poverty. Then why aren't there a bunch of BPO billionaires out there? I know one guy. I know quite a few PC billionaires. The problem is very, very apparent and yet unspoken of. Maybe its because, as you said, such a small population of players actually play PC, because PC is so abhorrently broken. And because PC is so abhorrently broken, no-one but a small population of players actually play PC and because of this; the very apparent problems with PC are unspoken of. It is truly a vicious cycle. No doubt. I've tried to get some threads going in general discussion, but the masses just think PC players are all glitchers who use modded controllers and mouse and keyboard at the same time.
Its because there is such a HUGE learning curve when comparing Pubs to PC. There is a difference between Pub Gungame and PC gungame.
PC is mostly for a small population of particular types of players or, on rare occasions, breed newer players who have PC gungame
and when I say PC gungame, I dont mean simply knowing how to shoot your weapon and kill somsone; but having a form of initiative as well as an understanding on how to win the game
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1090
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 21:31:00 -
[7] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:Team deploy is needed in a big way. There should be a pub match mode that allows team deploy.
You could set up a team just as you do for a squad currently, but they could only deploy into FW, PC, and a new pub match gamemode (a seperate skirmish). They could make the payouts higher in the team deploy game mode to give incentive to players to play in the team mode.
They also need to redo the mechanics in PC to make the battles spin up sooner. Like 30 minutes to an hour instead of 24-48 hours. These steps right here would do a LOT for PC competition in six months.
There are plenty of players with the SP and the overall knowledge of Dust to get competitive in PC. The problem is the learning curve of PC. That step is like going from PeeWee football to the NFL. The beta corp battles really prepared people for PC in a way that I doubt CCP thought of. We've been doing PC for 7 months now, but most of the ML guys started doing corp battles in Nov/Dec and we were being the curve then.
The lack of team deploy is a glaring issue.
Agreed, I've thought long and hard on how to teach newer players the skills needed to perform well in PC but the only way to do that is by putting them in PC games, but that comes with the risk of (at least in 0.Hs current state) jeopardizing scarce assets. Pubs are in no way good training for PC games and neither is FW at its current state honestly.
+1 Agreed team deploy is a necessary addition to this game
Also check out this thread I made ages ago that I recently bumped and see what you think about, I'd really appreciate it.
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1094
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 21:43:00 -
[8] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:I made it a favorite, I'll keep it bumped.
Thank you kindly sir o7
It's a simple request really, hopefully CCP at least reads all these ideas and considers them.
I absolutely love this game and I don't know how many other people can say that without a heavy heart like I can, I just want this game to continuously improve
Signed, a less than bitter vet
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1094
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 21:55:00 -
[9] - Quote
Just so Logibro doesn't lock this for not discussing the OP topic I will reinstate the proposed fix:
Make it so a district satellite only comes online after us Dust Bunnies delpoy into the actual game, not the warbarge.
I now open this thread to discussion about PC and its issues!
Thor Odinson42 wrote:Make the ISK generation come from the fights and not from locking or clone sales.
I like this idea, I think there needs to be a different incentive to owning land and a countermeasure to limiting how much land a corp/alliance can own based on how many teams they can field at any given point in time.
Honestly I kind of like the way PC games can come daily or every 2 days (depending on districts owned that is) having PC battles occur every hour on the hour might be overwhelming to even the most no-lifing corp in Dust. But I have yet to think of an alternative.
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1097
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:06:00 -
[10] - Quote
Sylwester Dziewiecki wrote:It's weird that you reporting such game breaking mechanic so late..
I agree and am ashamed that it took me so long to muster up the attention span and time to post this. Honestly I am also surprised that I'm the only person thus far to report on this issue (I might be wrong but I used the search tab before posting)
But, better late than never I say, wouldn't you agree?
The Sinwarden
|
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1098
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:17:00 -
[11] - Quote
Sylwester Dziewiecki wrote:1st Lieutenant Tiberius wrote:Sylwester Dziewiecki wrote:It's weird that you reporting such game breaking mechanic so late.. I agree and am ashamed that it took me so long to muster up the attention span and time to post this. Honestly I am also surprised that I'm the only person thus far to report on this issue (I might be wrong but I used the search tab before posting) But, better late than never I say, wouldn't you agree? Sure I do. We missing in Dust God-like bug hunters, that can spawn things for purpose of testing some mechanic and can work with EVE bug hunters that test things on SISI server.
I am not entirely sure what you just said, elaborate?
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1099
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:41:00 -
[12] - Quote
Sylwester Dziewiecki wrote:1st Lieutenant Tiberius wrote:Sylwester Dziewiecki wrote:1st Lieutenant Tiberius wrote:Sylwester Dziewiecki wrote:It's weird that you reporting such game breaking mechanic so late.. I agree and am ashamed that it took me so long to muster up the attention span and time to post this. Honestly I am also surprised that I'm the only person thus far to report on this issue (I might be wrong but I used the search tab before posting) But, better late than never I say, wouldn't you agree? Sure I do. We missing in Dust God-like bug hunters, that can spawn things for purpose of testing some mechanic and can work with EVE bug hunters that test things on SISI server. I am not entirely sure what you just said, elaborate? I mean group of people that can test things before they are released to public with same ones that do it with EVE for CCP.
But PC is already live, CCP has already made that commitment. I for one can surely say that if they shut down PC it will be detrimental to my attitude towards Dust; I can only take so much of Pubs, PC is what keeps me playing the game.
It is past the tipping point for CCP, the only solution now is to figure out how to fix PC not taking it off the game and putting it back in months in the future
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1099
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:45:00 -
[13] - Quote
D3LTA Blitzkrieg II wrote:PC broke, let it go
Can't, it's the only thing keeping me in Dust.
Apart from your ugly mug, of course
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1100
|
Posted - 2014.02.11 22:55:00 -
[14] - Quote
D3LTA Blitzkrieg II wrote:& the coms bug.
^ Still ever prevalent as well CCP
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1111
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 08:52:00 -
[15] - Quote
Cross Atu wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote: It's really hard to believe how much PC is ignored with the amount of ISK it generates. I wonder what's the time spent by CCP on BPOs and their impact on the economy vs the time spent on PC.
According to CPM Hans, the isk generation of BPOs makes PC isk generation look like abject poverty. I generally trust Hans, but I really want to see those numbers and how they were derived before I'm willing to accept that particular statement. I'm not a math genius and I clearly don't have CCP or CPM level access, but based on what I do have access to I simply cannot see how that adds up within the current game state. /more on topic +1 OP, I'm all for "adapt or die" but some things are just lopsided and need to be refined, this case seems like one of them. 0.02 ISK Cross
Agreed, I've been playing this game for more than a year now and I've always adapted to the changing paradigm but this is a glaring issue with a very very simple fix in my eyes. I don't know why it would be so hard to adjust, this isn't something that "needs more data" its something that needs to be fixed ASAP
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1113
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 18:11:00 -
[16] - Quote
Mister0Zz wrote:This thread is hilarious. Its like saying there should be a cap for one corp's district ownership because otherwise the corp will get too strong. Its directly counter to the design philosophy because what you just suggested doesn't fit into the game. You should be punished for not coming to fight prepared, not coddled. The fact that they can sway a fight so much means they are an asset you can't ignore, something you should be clamoring to get for yourself. Complaining about it constantly will just keep getting you glassed.
Um, no its not like saying there should be a cap to one's district ownership
Do you all possess reading comprehension? I am not whining about lacking EVE support, I have both played with EVE support and against opponents who have support and I do not complain about getting OBs dropped on me, in fact, there is a contingency plan for everything even OBs dropped on us at the beginning of the game
but the reality is that being able to drop an OB at the ground/MCC spawn at the first second of the game is a BROKEN, UNINTENDED mechanic I do not understand how you all dont see this, or maybe you just have never had it happen to you.
Again I am not whining about not having EVE support or whatever you knumbskulls are saying, I am addressing the fact that CCP should make it so that satellites come online WHEN THE GAME STARTS and NOT IN THE WARBARGE that way OBs would only be able to dropped at the minimum 3 minutes after the game begins, ample time for both teams to perform their initial deployment
If the majority doesn't agree with me, fine, keep the mechanic; I will adapt and overcome.
But lets just hope that when the time comes that you actually want to try out PC; you don't get pissed off when an OB lands on your ground spawn taking out half your deployment team before you can say "my momma never raised me to be a considerate person"
Now, do not stop providing your opinion but please make it a constructive discussion. Why would you want to keep a mechanic such as this one, and what would be bad about making it so OBs can only be dropped at a minimum 3 minutes after the game starts and not the second we load into the match.
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1114
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 20:35:00 -
[17] - Quote
Ares 514 wrote:1st Lieutenant Tiberius wrote:Sylwester Dziewiecki wrote:It's weird that you reporting such game breaking mechanic so late.. I agree and am ashamed that it took me so long to muster up the attention span and time to post this. Honestly I am also surprised that I'm the only person thus far to report on this issue (I might be wrong but I used the search tab before posting) But, better late than never I say, wouldn't you agree? I actually put a post saying exactly this about OB's at the start of the PC battle a few days after release. No one cared. I must say you have received some really stupid guys on your thread though. I fully support this change since it is messed up being able to drop an OB at the start of the battle.
I apologize, I actually remember reading about your post now I should've searched better. But regardless I figured the issue needs to be put to light continuously.
I have no idea why other people don't see this as a problem
The Sinwarden
|
1st Lieutenant Tiberius
0uter.Heaven
1114
|
Posted - 2014.02.12 23:52:00 -
[18] - Quote
Ares 514 wrote:1st Lieutenant Tiberius wrote:Ares 514 wrote:1st Lieutenant Tiberius wrote:Sylwester Dziewiecki wrote:It's weird that you reporting such game breaking mechanic so late.. I agree and am ashamed that it took me so long to muster up the attention span and time to post this. Honestly I am also surprised that I'm the only person thus far to report on this issue (I might be wrong but I used the search tab before posting) But, better late than never I say, wouldn't you agree? I actually put a post saying exactly this about OB's at the start of the PC battle a few days after release. No one cared. I must say you have received some really stupid guys on your thread though. I fully support this change since it is messed up being able to drop an OB at the start of the battle. I apologize, I actually remember reading about your post now I should've searched better. But regardless I figured the issue needs to be put to light continuously. I have no idea why other people don't see this as a problem The more posting on the issue the better. Just passing along info on my failed attempt to raise the issue.
Link me your post and I will edit it into the OP, I'll bump it as well
The Sinwarden
|
|
|
|