DUST Search - You Can Still Make Isk Locking Districts

Free Beers wrote:

To see how buy my book! Just kidding had to channel my inner Mr Zitro. So with limited info I have here is how you can do it (took me all of 10 minutes)

Corp A lets call them Nyain San attacks the morally depleted corp B AE and send 150 clones. Corp A doesn't show up but corp B does and receives 75 clones as such. Yes A loses 150 total. Next step is that instead of reup Corp B then attacks corp A district. The attacker corp B then doesn't show up thus allowing NS to make a bit of profit.

Yes this is over simplified and no I dont have the exact numbers, well, because I can't be bothered.

So the changes really only increase the work involved to lock and decrease the overall profit that can be made from locking 2 districts. Now groups like NF that are ninja-attacking corps that are locking can only do so much to prevent this because of their own critical mass of districts and limited potential clients to buy districts.

Is this a step forward? Sure. Does it solve the problem. No.

Edit: I would like to point out that 99% of isk coming into dust is via pub matches so this doesn't really impact the economy as much as you would think. Also PC has always been a status symbol for corps in recruitment and comp level in dust. So you could have small and big corps losing isk on PC but still supporting it with taxes. So yes Locking is harder but I can see corps still locking with no issue. So as someone mentioned its a band aid not a solution.

This does makes things more difficult but it doesn't stop the ability to lock. Remember 5 months ago people knew about this but did not care to do it. There was a point in time where it was the easy choice regardless of whats involved. CCP made this more difficult but that may not be much of a barrier if corps still want to lock.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Free Beers Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1912	Posted - 2014.03.07 19:03:00 - [1] - Quote To see how buy my book! Just kidding had to channel my inner Mr Zitro. So with limited info I have here is how you can do it (took me all of 10 minutes) Corp A lets call them Nyain San attacks the morally depleted corp B AE and send 150 clones. Corp A doesn't show up but corp B does and receives 75 clones as such. Yes A loses 150 total. Next step is that instead of reup Corp B then attacks corp A district. The attacker corp B then doesn't show up thus allowing NS to make a bit of profit. Yes this is over simplified and no I dont have the exact numbers, well, because I can't be bothered. So the changes really only increase the work involved to lock and decrease the overall profit that can be made from locking 2 districts. Now groups like NF that are ninja-attacking corps that are locking can only do so much to prevent this because of their own critical mass of districts and limited potential clients to buy districts. Is this a step forward? Sure. Does it solve the problem. No. [CCP]FoxFour> STFU beers[CCP]FoxFour> Erm [CCP]FoxFour> I mean[CCP]FoxFour> shit [CCP]FoxFour> you were defending me
Django Quik Dust2Dust. 2337	Posted - 2014.03.07 19:14:00 - [2] - Quote Doing this would lost you 75 clones every other day and your districts would be vulnerable to attack when you're sending an attack too, so it wouldn't be the perma lock situ that it is right now. Dedicated sidearm scout - Watch out for that headshot Scout community is the nuts
STEALTH HUNTER ZERO D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 156	Posted - 2014.03.07 19:20:00 - [3] - Quote Yes, but that's a lot of time wasted and probably a lot of isk still wasted.... I really don't think anyone could keep it up for very long though.
Castor Crave Orbital Flares 407	Posted - 2014.03.07 19:24:00 - [4] - Quote Gives you 0.55mil per day on a lab/storage facility and 2.75mil on a production facility. Yield for all 245 districts as such is 134.75mil - 673.75mil per day, down from 2.156bil - 2.695bil. That's an improvement :) Mercenary Log
Ares 514 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 625	Posted - 2014.03.07 19:25:00 - [5] - Quote The key is the situation will be somewhat improved. Sure PC is **** as is. On that we all can agree. This is a band-aid, it's just to bad it took them over a month of constant locks and 6+ months of abuse to fix it. The light is that it would take much more effort to lock now then a simple click and no one showing up. You can't stack timers as easily and someone has to go in each battle to win. People can abuse it sure, but at least it's not as easy / simple to abuse as it was. The mic bubble bug...** I yield, CCP will be fixing it SOON. Current ETA 1 year since bug
John Demonsbane Unorganized Ninja Infantry Tactics League of Infamy 2240	Posted - 2014.03.07 20:13:00 - [6] - Quote I think the beneficial effect is not purely economical (although Castors math, if correct, is a massive improvement and more than I thought it would be!). It's psychological. With a lower return on the investment with more work, at a certain point it will no longer be worth it to lock so many districts. More become available, more people can get involved. (Now, they will all "lock" some districts too, because that's how everyone has been trained to treat PC, as farmville.) But, a certain number of districts will be available a lot of the time, and there will be more action and more importantly, more turnover, which is the main goal. "The line between disorder and order lies in logistics" -Sun Tzu Forum Warrior lv.2 Amarr victor!
Free Beers Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1917	Posted - 2014.03.08 01:49:00 - [7] - Quote I would like to point out that 99% of isk coming into dust is via pub matches so this doesn't really impact the economy as much as you would think. Also PC has always been a status symbol for corps in recruitment and comp level in dust. So you could have small and big corps losing isk on PC but still supporting it with taxes. So yes Locking is harder but I can see corps still locking with no issue. So as someone mentioned its a band aid not a solution. This does makes things more difficult but it doesn't stop the ability to lock. Remember 5 months ago people knew about this but did not care to do it. There was a point in time where it was the easy choice regardless of whats involved. CCP made this more difficult but that may not be much of a barrier if corps still want to lock. [CCP]FoxFour> STFU beers[CCP]FoxFour> Erm [CCP]FoxFour> I mean[CCP]FoxFour> shit [CCP]FoxFour> you were defending me
Django Quik Dust2Dust. 2343	Posted - 2014.03.08 13:13:00 - [8] - Quote Economically, locking now will make no sense - you'd earn more isk by doing pubs. And that's if you're using planetary clones to do it, in which case you're always going to have at least one district unlocked. If you do it with clone packs, you lose a lot of isk! Logistically, it is possible to lock but a lot of effort for very little return and very few really care about the 'bragging rights' over what everyone knows has always been a flawed/broken system. Dedicated sidearm scout - Watch out for that headshot Scout community is the nuts
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 659	Posted - 2014.03.08 13:26:00 - [9] - Quote Regarding the lost attacker's clones.. If the attacker becomes a no-show, they should open that clone pool up to a profiteer situation, and allow a random corp waiting in Queue to use those clones to attack the District. In other words: If attacker doesn't show, after timer expires another corp can bully in and use those clones as a free deployment. Would be great for teaching newer corps how to fight without having to dump investments down, while forcing the older corps to always be on their toes. If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 3181	Posted - 2014.03.08 13:38:00 - [10] - Quote edit: herp derp, misread. Yes, this is still stupid and I imagine locking will never be fixed until PC 2.0 and even then there will probably be some other easily exploitable mechanic.


CCP Nullarbor C C P C C P Alliance 3614	Posted - 2014.03.10 21:50:00 - [11] - Quote We are currently discussing making 2 additional changes, would appreciated feedback: - Removing the automatic payout of 150 clones worth of biomass, instead it will only count the clones actually destroyed in battle. - Removing the clone stealing mechanic, it was added to make defence easier but we're not happy with how that is working obviously. Just wanted to add that longer term PC 2.0 is undergoing some pretty significant changes that alleviate a lot of these shortcomings. For now, these content changes along with the fix going out this week should help. I wouldn't rule out a round of adjustments to pricing and clone pack size etc in the short term as well, depending on how this goes. CCP Nullarbor // Exotic Dancer // Team True Grit

jerrmy12 kahoalii Pradox XVI Proficiency V. 426	Posted - 2014.03.10 21:53:00 - [12] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: We are currently discussing making 2 additional changes, would appreciated feedback: - Removing the automatic payout of 150 clones worth of biomass, instead it will only count the clones actually destroyed in battle. - Removing the clone stealing mechanic, it was added to make defence easier but we're not happy with how that is working obviously. Just wanted to add that longer term PC 2.0 is undergoing some pretty significant changes that alleviate a lot of these shortcomings. For now, these content changes along with the fix going out this week should help. I wouldn't rule out a round of adjustments to pricing and clone pack size etc in the short term as well, depending on how this goes. How about, reduce the price of automaticly selling clones so you make 5 mil per day or 4 mil, decresse the price of clone packs to 6 or 10 mil, and done. People can get in pc, less profits from distrcits (5 mil is not too much for a corp) Closed beta vet Logi, Heavy, Python, Scout.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 1668	Posted - 2014.03.10 21:54:00 - [13] - Quote I'd definitely kill the auto-150 biomass payment, but you've gotta buff the per clone ISK value for those destroyed in battle to compensate. I'd like to be your CPM1 candidate
Kain Spero Imperfects Negative-Feedback 2974	Posted - 2014.03.10 21:55:00 - [14] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: We are currently discussing making 2 additional changes, would appreciated feedback: - Removing the automatic payout of 150 clones worth of biomass, instead it will only count the clones actually destroyed in battle. - Removing the clone stealing mechanic, it was added to make defence easier but we're not happy with how that is working obviously. Just wanted to add that longer term PC 2.0 is undergoing some pretty significant changes that alleviate a lot of these shortcomings. For now, these content changes along with the fix going out this week should help. I wouldn't rule out a round of adjustments to pricing and clone pack size etc in the short term as well, depending on how this goes. Some good changes that will plug some holes. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Bojo The Mighty L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 3463	Posted - 2014.03.10 22:00:00 - [15] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: We are currently discussing making 2 additional changes, would appreciated feedback: - Removing the automatic payout of 150 clones worth of biomass, instead it will only count the clones actually destroyed in battle. - Removing the clone stealing mechanic, it was added to make defence easier but we're not happy with how that is working obviously. Just wanted to add that longer term PC 2.0 is undergoing some pretty significant changes that alleviate a lot of these shortcomings. For now, these content changes along with the fix going out this week should help. I wouldn't rule out a round of adjustments to pricing and clone pack size etc in the short term as well, depending on how this goes. Yes I tried Redline Railgunning
NextDark Knight Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy 265	Posted - 2014.03.10 22:13:00 - [16] - Quote I wish there was a way us mercs could keep that 150 biomass without jerks exploiting it. Forge Changes needed Officer Splash 3.0, Proto 2.7 Advanced 2.5 Standard 2.1. Original ROF needs to return!
jerrmy12 kahoalii Pradox XVI Proficiency V. 428	Posted - 2014.03.10 22:15:00 - [17] - Quote NextDark Knight wrote: I wish there was a way us mercs could keep that 150 biomass without jerks exploiting it. EXACTLY Closed beta vet Logi, Heavy, Python, Scout.
Django Quik Dust2Dust. 2361	Posted - 2014.03.10 22:29:00 - [18] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: We are currently discussing making 2 additional changes, would appreciated feedback: - Removing the automatic payout of 150 clones worth of biomass, instead it will only count the clones actually destroyed in battle. - Removing the clone stealing mechanic, it was added to make defence easier but we're not happy with how that is working obviously. Just wanted to add that longer term PC 2.0 is undergoing some pretty significant changes that alleviate a lot of these shortcomings. For now, these content changes along with the fix going out this week should help. I wouldn't rule out a round of adjustments to pricing and clone pack size etc in the short term as well, depending on how this goes. Sound like good points to start with. Something still needs to be done about the massive profits earnt by selling produced clones though. Dedicated sidearm scout - Watch out for that headshot Scout community is the nuts
jerrmy12 kahoalii Pradox XVI Proficiency V. 429	Posted - 2014.03.10 22:32:00 - [19] - Quote Django Quik wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: We are currently discussing making 2 additional changes, would appreciated feedback: - Removing the automatic payout of 150 clones worth of biomass, instead it will only count the clones actually destroyed in battle. - Removing the clone stealing mechanic, it was added to make defence easier but we're not happy with how that is working obviously. Just wanted to add that longer term PC 2.0 is undergoing some pretty significant changes that alleviate a lot of these shortcomings. For now, these content changes along with the fix going out this week should help. I wouldn't rule out a round of adjustments to pricing and clone pack size etc in the short term as well, depending on how this goes. Sound like good points to start with. Something still needs to be done about the massive profits earnt by selling produced clones though. For a big corp, you need money brah. Closed beta vet Logi, Heavy, Python, Scout.
xxwhitedevilxx M Maphia Clan Corporation 1847	Posted - 2014.03.10 23:14:00 - [20] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: We are currently discussing making 2 additional changes, would appreciated feedback: - Removing the automatic payout of 150 clones worth of biomass, instead it will only count the clones actually destroyed in battle. - Removing the clone stealing mechanic, it was added to make defence easier but we're not happy with how that is working obviously. Just wanted to add that longer term PC 2.0 is undergoing some pretty significant changes that alleviate a lot of these shortcomings. For now, these content changes along with the fix going out this week should help. I wouldn't rule out a round of adjustments to pricing and clone pack size etc in the short term as well, depending on how this goes. mighty Nullarbor, please tell me you're looking at continent vs continent disparities for what concerns reinforcement windows >Bastard I : "Cce me ne... futt! XD"

Kira Lannister Ancient Exiles. Renegade Alliance 2343	Posted - 2014.03.10 23:21:00 - [21] - Quote Zitro is a TAC AR Modded Controller using scrub. "The Ancient Templars will guard fearlessly the people, the land and the heavens of the empire." Book of Exiles 1:3
pink FLUFF Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 111	Posted - 2014.03.10 23:25:00 - [22] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: We are currently discussing making 2 additional changes, would appreciated feedback: - Removing the automatic payout of 150 clones worth of biomass, instead it will only count the clones actually destroyed in battle. - Removing the clone stealing mechanic, it was added to make defence easier but we're not happy with how that is working obviously. Just wanted to add that longer term PC 2.0 is undergoing some pretty significant changes that alleviate a lot of these shortcomings. For now, these content changes along with the fix going out this week should help. I wouldn't rule out a round of adjustments to pricing and clone pack size etc in the short term as well, depending on how this goes. No white-boarding, more action.
KenKaniff69 Fatal Absolution 2226	Posted - 2014.03.10 23:32:00 - [23] - Quote There's another way to make profit as well. Not even kidding. CCP it's your job to figure it out. We already do enough R&D on your finished products. The problem with tanks
Free Beers Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1943	Posted - 2014.03.10 23:44:00 - [24] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: We are currently discussing making 2 additional changes, would appreciated feedback: - Removing the automatic payout of 150 clones worth of biomass, instead it will only count the clones actually destroyed in battle. - Removing the clone stealing mechanic, it was added to make defence easier but we're not happy with how that is working obviously. Just wanted to add that longer term PC 2.0 is undergoing some pretty significant changes that alleviate a lot of these shortcomings. For now, these content changes along with the fix going out this week should help. I wouldn't rule out a round of adjustments to pricing and clone pack size etc in the short term as well, depending on how this goes. You have been missed Nullarbor. Who is responsible for PC/FW and PC 2.0? I going to assume its some unknown devs hidden behind the Iron Wall of Silence in Shanghai. Yay way to go ccp learn your lessons of deving PC 1.0 without community input (psst cpm doesn't count). [CCP]FoxFour> STFU beers[CCP]FoxFour> Erm [CCP]FoxFour> I mean[CCP]FoxFour> shit [CCP]FoxFour> you were defending me
Toro Navajo Defenders of the Helghast Dream Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive 52	Posted - 2014.03.11 00:31:00 - [25] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: We are currently discussing making 2 additional changes, would appreciated feedback: - Removing the automatic payout of 150 clones worth of biomass, instead it will only count the clones actually destroyed in battle. - Removing the clone stealing mechanic, it was added to make defence easier but we're not happy with how that is working obviously. Just wanted to add that longer term PC 2.0 is undergoing some pretty significant changes that alleviate a lot of these shortcomings. For now, these content changes along with the fix going out this week should help. I wouldn't rule out a round of adjustments to pricing and clone pack size etc in the short term as well, depending on how this goes. Why not add the amount of districts able to be owned to a skill tree? #9Posted: 2014.03.08 13:26 \| Report Unlike 1 Regarding the lost attacker's clones.. If the attacker becomes a no-show, they should open that clone pool up to a profiteer situation, and allow a random corp waiting in Queue to use those clones to attack the District. In other words: If attacker doesn't show, after timer expires another corp can bully in and use those clones as a free deployment. Would be great for teaching newer corps how to fight without having to dump investments down, while forcing the older corps to always be on their toes. If you can read this, it means you are reading. Unless you are skimming
NextDark Knight Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy 266	Posted - 2014.03.11 01:07:00 - [26] - Quote Person attacking with the most attacking clones get the attack! It will be fun for all! Also one of my posts is missing.. how strange!! Forge Changes needed Officer Splash 3.0, Proto 2.7 Advanced 2.5 Standard 2.1. Original ROF needs to return!
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 3239	Posted - 2014.03.11 01:16:00 - [27] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: We are currently discussing making 2 additional changes, would appreciated feedback: - Removing the automatic payout of 150 clones worth of biomass, instead it will only count the clones actually destroyed in battle. - Removing the clone stealing mechanic, it was added to make defence easier but we're not happy with how that is working obviously. Just wanted to add that longer term PC 2.0 is undergoing some pretty significant changes that alleviate a lot of these shortcomings. For now, these content changes along with the fix going out this week should help. I wouldn't rule out a round of adjustments to pricing and clone pack size etc in the short term as well, depending on how this goes. I love it when you talk dirty, Nullarbor.
Disturbingly Bored Forum Warfare 1986	Posted - 2014.03.11 03:37:00 - [28] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: We are currently discussing making 2 additional changes, would appreciated feedback: - Removing the automatic payout of 150 clones worth of biomass, instead it will only count the clones actually destroyed in battle. - Removing the clone stealing mechanic, it was added to make defence easier but we're not happy with how that is working obviously. Just wanted to add that longer term PC 2.0 is undergoing some pretty significant changes that alleviate a lot of these shortcomings. For now, these content changes along with the fix going out this week should help. I wouldn't rule out a round of adjustments to pricing and clone pack size etc in the short term as well, depending on how this goes. I think I know why exploits like this keep making it into the game: The people at CCP are unwilling or incapable of thinking like assholes. Put your jerk hats on devs! Try to think like your greedy, selfish, evil and conniving player base! (I kid, I kid. Kind of. But option #1 as you have listed sounds reasonable. I'll let some other asshat figure out how to exploit it.) I used to own the FAT GAT until this --> [ASCII Art removed - *draconian forum overlord* CCP Logibro]
IgniteableAura Pro Hic Immortalis 655	Posted - 2014.03.11 03:38:00 - [29] - Quote Remove all isk from clones. Give isk based on a different metric than clones. Total kills in battle instead would be smarter. Or based on mcc destruction. Clones are clones, not isk faucets. Treat them as a commodity that can't be sold for isk. Only purchased with isk. PHI Recruitment or PHIsh Tank in game Youtube
Toby Flenderson research lab 328	Posted - 2014.03.11 03:40:00 - [30] - Quote Free Beers wrote: To see how buy my book! Just kidding had to channel my inner Mr Zitro. So with limited info I have here is how you can do it (took me all of 10 minutes) Corp A lets call them Nyain San attacks the morally depleted corp B AE and send 150 clones. Corp A doesn't show up but corp B does and receives 75 clones as such. Yes A loses 150 total. Next step is that instead of reup Corp B then attacks corp A district. The attacker corp B then doesn't show up thus allowing NS to make a bit of profit. Yes this is over simplified and no I dont have the exact numbers, well, because I can't be bothered. So the changes really only increase the work involved to lock and decrease the overall profit that can be made from locking 2 districts. Now groups like NF that are ninja-attacking corps that are locking can only do so much to prevent this because of their own critical mass of districts and limited potential clients to buy districts. Is this a step forward? Sure. Does it solve the problem. No. Edit: I would like to point out that 99% of isk coming into dust is via pub matches so this doesn't really impact the economy as much as you would think. Also PC has always been a status symbol for corps in recruitment and comp level in dust. So you could have small and big corps losing isk on PC but still supporting it with taxes. So yes Locking is harder but I can see corps still locking with no issue. So as someone mentioned its a band aid not a solution. This does makes things more difficult but it doesn't stop the ability to lock. Remember 5 months ago people knew about this but did not care to do it. There was a point in time where it was the easy choice regardless of whats involved. CCP made this more difficult but that may not be much of a barrier if corps still want to lock. Are you sure it's 99%?



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page