DUST Search - Proposed Ideas to Improve Planetary Conquest

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Proposed Ideas to Improve Planetary Conquest

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3177	Posted - 2014.04.05 19:03:00 - [1] - Quote I think we all realise that Planetary Conquest has some holes in it still and I think simple changes could be made to dramatically improve how PC 1.0 plays out. The current situation I think exemplifies some of the numerous issues from clone pack size to passive ISK being better than fighting. I have a series of proposed ideas that I'd like to hear the community's thoughts on. Increase Clone Pack Size to 200 Clones at 80 million ISK a piece. Turn off clone auto sale or reduced passive clone sales to 60k and increase biomass from battle to 160k Make it where you only get ISK for clones killed in battle, which will tie up some loose ends potential locking for profit. Make clone moves a minimum of 200 clones so that a district is weakened when an attack is launched and help minimize the snowball effect of owning many many districts. Explore the idea of opening another Region of space in Dust 514 Planetary Conquest to spur activity, but only if the issues with passive ISK are addressed. Implement a district transfer function so that a corporation doesn't have to use a clone pack to get into PC and also open up possibilities in terms of how conflicts are resolved outside of battle. Add an option at the end of battle to liquidate loot for ISK, so that even when a battle is lost you still have a way to make ISK out of it or come close to breaking even. Thanks to Eugune Killmore for helping get some of the brain juice flowing in this discussion. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3181	Posted - 2014.04.05 19:32:00 - [2] - Quote Traky78 wrote: 80 millions for 200 clones is too much, 60 millions will be much better. I'm concerned if the price is too low and the clone pack to0 useful we'll just end up with everyone using clone packs rather than their districts. The higher price also makes sure that locking with clones packs is done at a significant loss. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3187	Posted - 2014.04.05 19:50:00 - [3] - Quote neolutumus wrote: I am just going to leave this here and there and everywhere In this discussion I'm looking for simple solutions that can be primarily hotfixes. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3195	Posted - 2014.04.05 20:31:00 - [4] - Quote 1st Lieutenant Tiberius wrote: Good ideas, 200 clone Clone Packs would truly make battles a lot more exciting. I would know cause we've been fighting you guys and 120 clones goes away pretty fast lol +1 120 Clones it utter crap and a waste of ISK. It has to get changed. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3200	Posted - 2014.04.05 22:43:00 - [5] - Quote SUCIA-KEILY wrote: I find good ideas, I have another 75% of the attack or defense of a district is made with players of the same corporation that attacking or defending. so many ghosts corporations were eliminated, other practices of courage that passeth not to comment. I think it's important to allow players the freedom of association, so I really don't see this as a good idea. For example, (and something I'll add to the list) is that I think that anyone should be able to provide Orbital support despite your alliance membership. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3203	Posted - 2014.04.06 00:14:00 - [6] - Quote norttheantiv wrote: What do people think about clone pack prices being related to ownership. The less districts a Corp hold the cheaper the clone pack. For example, let's say all clone packs become 200 clones If the Corp issuing the attack has no districts this is say 40 mil If the corp owns one district it becomes 80 mil and so on. I know that this might be open to exploitation and needs further development as an idea, but it would definitely cause corps that might otherwise not attack to do so as much for recreation as to get themselves a district. This would also stop larger groups using clone pack attacks as it would become cost prohibitive. You would just end up with folks creating shell corps to launch cheap clone packs from, so it would make the game more annoying without actually solving anything. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3208	Posted - 2014.04.06 03:10:00 - [7] - Quote iliel wrote: Items 1-5 are perfect. Item 6 seems like it could introduce a new form of district locking (for example, a corp transfers its district to an ally the moment that district comes online). Therefore, it is problematic. Item 7 is interesting. However, there is the current problem where players who actually kill a clone or destroy a vehicle are not necessarily rewarded the said clone's gear or the vehicle. This, I think, must be changed before an option for players to sell their loot is offered. Item 8 also seems interesting. My guess is that you want to allow corporations in the same alliance to have friendly but competitive skirmishes with one another. However, I think your suggested change would make the Eve-Dust connection a bit arbitrary and could further alienate the Dust community from Eve. Should you want something like 'practice matches,' perhaps suggest that CCP releaase another game mode to be a part of 'Other Contracts.' I mean: they already have the code for corporate battles, why not just tweak that code to be like the current PC and put it into the 'Other Contract' section? Great work overall. 6: When you transfer a district is would still be available to be attacked. I would likely see it transferring in the "online" state to mirror the way district transfers currently occur through abandonment and then clon-packing. 7: I think right now 50% of gear used in battle is salvaged. I think this option is better than the losers getting no ISK at all. 8. The intent is more to let the relationships between Eve and Dust be more free-form. A small corp could strike up a convo with a pilot in local and have that pilot providing OB support in a couple minutes. I think this would actually help prevent mass groups organizing quite as much under a single just because of Orbital Support. This would also allow corps that have no Eve players and thus can join an alliance to befriend pilots in an alliance and still be able to have them come to their aid. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3211	Posted - 2014.04.06 07:45:00 - [8] - Quote iliel wrote: Good points. I bet you and other CPMs will make sure district locking in any form won't make its way into Dust again. So the transferring idea would definitely be useful once setup. I like the idea of selling salvage. Perhaps, if implemented, this function could be added to FW too. The question, though, is: how would salvage be valuated? Also, in terms of the Dust-Eve connection, perhaps you could also add some bonus to Eve players who do eventually ally with a specific Dust corporation or alliance? I think it's useful to continue to develop possibilities of intimate connections between Dust and Eve players. A less intimate relation (like the one you describe) would be a stepping stone for the more intimate ones. I don't play Eve, so I don't know what would be useful to its players. Maybe Eve players who join or ally with a given Dust corp/alliance could generate passive isk according to the playtime of Dust players in that corp/alliance? I'm fairly certain most if not all items actually have an ISK valuation when you look at the SDE or at least have a spot where it can be put on the tables, so that would take care of the loot selling issue. You actually make a good point about FW. That could very well be the solution to adding the bit of ISK to it that it desperately needs. Again this loot selling thing could require too much bandwidth to implement. Ideally I think the bonuses as well as access to OB support could be done via standings. Maybe just make this something that takes place and it set on the Eve side via standings in order to decrease the Dev cost Dust side. The problem here is that I think that could leave some Dust only corps out in the cold. The flip side is I'm fairly certain that adding a standing system in Dust would have a very high Dev cost, so using Eve to implement would be the best bet as far as that is concerned. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3211	Posted - 2014.04.06 08:17:00 - [9] - Quote Jadek Menaheim wrote: Kain Spero wrote: Traky78 wrote: 80 millions for 200 clones is too much, 60 millions will be much better. I'm concerned if the price is too low and the clone pack to0 useful we'll just end up with everyone using clone packs rather than their districts. The higher price also makes sure that locking with clones packs is done at a significant loss. While these are great suggestion Kain, I am concerned that the 80 million ISK per clone pack will initially favor the current establishment in the blue doughnut. I actually had a good long talk with Eugene about this. My initial thought was 150 clones at 40 million ISK, but what's needed is a truly effective clone pack that leads to good fights, but still is balanced in that it's better to attack from districts rather than using straight clone packs. 15 Two-hundred man clone packs would be infinitely more effective that 30 120 or even 150 man clone packs in an example of a mass attack. You can't ignore 200 clones and a full team would have to be fielded against 200 clones since you would be unable to just kill 20-50 clones and go. The other reason behind the clone packs being 80 million ISK is that it would make turtling up against a mass attack extremely expensive. At the end of the day nothing can be done to win someone's fights for an organization, but the system can give them a good chance. If people want it to be a numbers game a massive number of clones fighting in pubs and collecting taxes can afford a clone pack in no time, but instead of being a wasted 36 million ISK they get something that's effective but not super spammy. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3213	Posted - 2014.04.06 14:52:00 - [10] - Quote Odigos Ellinas wrote: "Add an option at the end of battle to liquidate loot for ISK, so that even when a battle is lost you still have a way to make ISK out of it or come close to breaking even." This should be temporary solution until player market is aded to the game. And can i have a answer for my timer question. Why not shorter timers ??? It will force corporations to recruits more players and send them to PC battles. This way a larger player base can participate in PC. The end goal is to have fights and "surprise" we're fighting now isn't really a great mechanic. People have real lives and should be given the chance to schedule out how to respond to starting a fight or setting up a defense. The other side of this is that the timers as they are give a chance for the organization needed to occur between both Eve and Dust. This would be especially true if Orbital Support is opened up beyond the chains of alliance membership. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news

Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3213	Posted - 2014.04.06 14:54:00 - [11] - Quote Dirks Macker wrote: Before commenting, it worries me that a CPM member is making these specific suggestions. It indicates the current iteration of PC is the base from which CCP will expand on. I may be reading too much into it. I may also be overestimating how much they let the CPM in on. I obviously can't comment on any specifics regarding the longer term future of PC, but I do feel that low bandwidth changes in the short term would be resources well spent and provide a positive impact for the PC community. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3218	Posted - 2014.04.07 00:38:00 - [12] - Quote I'm sorry but any idea to limit freedom of association artificially control relationships between Dusters is just silly. Also arbitrarily forcing a player to not play as much PC as they want is bad design and bad game mechanics. Again the idea is to improve planetary conquest for everyone not have arbitrary ideas that you feel can counter players playing the game how they choose to. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3219	Posted - 2014.04.07 11:24:00 - [13] - Quote Egypt Musk wrote: Kain Spero wrote: Increase Clone Pack Size to 200 Clones at 80 million ISK a piece. This is a sure fire way to bankrupt smaller corps and and keep PC stagnant as it is. One should not be penalized for wanting to attack you should be able to purchase attack clones by number at the price of 100k -150k per clone up to as many that are on the district being attacked The sure fire way to bankrupt small corps is to leave the 120 clones at 36 million ISK in place. The current mass attacks being planed by various groups will fail miserably. Also, you make clone pack clones as cheap as district clones not even landholders would ever use their districts. For there to be balance clone packs have to have a drawback either in price or clone cost. Not to mention a price that low on clone pack clones would just end a new era of locking.. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3219	Posted - 2014.04.07 12:57:00 - [14] - Quote Leither Yiltron wrote: To the first, yes. To the second, a bit of discussion. In general mitigating some of the risk factors for the losers in PC is a rather critical piece of encouraging fights. Liquidating loot sounds like it would take a goodly amount of dev time to implement though. I'm more open to something along the lines of a fixed multiplier of the winner's pool paying out to the losers. In effect that makes it cheaper to play, but you still have to lose clones to get the refund. Say around 1/4th of the winner's pool (I'm throwing a number out). As the loser you're going to make 50k/death at a 1.0KDR in this system. To be clear, the winner would still get the full pool. That's a really good point. The loot idea has been something that has been bugging me for a while, but I think this idea is infinitely better considering the potential Dev time needed. Especially if this could be hotfixed. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3227	Posted - 2014.04.08 12:41:00 - [15] - Quote Original points in the OP have been updated to reflect the discussion. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3235	Posted - 2014.04.08 19:32:00 - [16] - Quote TokinABowl wrote: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=153445&find=unread Again, getting feedback in on the ground floor for PC 2.0 is great, but timely, low bandwidth, adjustments need to be made to PC 1.0. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3238	Posted - 2014.04.09 04:41:00 - [17] - Quote Thor Odinson42 wrote: Locking wouldn't be an issue if the numbers were tweaked to make attacking and winning the most profitable action. Also make clone packs only available to non-landholders. If the primary advantage of having a district were being able to attack with more clones it changes everything. If you also introduced the window timers and 30 minute spawns of battles you have a game mode that is going to be played by a much larger portion of our playerbase. Again, alt corps would make this a silly thing to try and implement. Example: you have Corp A and Corp B in an alliance but only Corp A has land. Under this setup Corp A hold the land and Corp B launches the clone packs. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3246	Posted - 2014.04.09 17:12:00 - [18] - Quote Eugene Killmore wrote: The only thing that will save PC is increasing clone pack size or adding the ability to buy up to 450 clones at a set price per clone. At this point every other PC change is inconsequential in my mind other than adding a new region. Clone packs must allow corps a fighting chance and 120 is just stupid. And increasing clone pack size is such an easy change. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3255	Posted - 2014.04.09 23:20:00 - [19] - Quote Vrain Matari wrote: Tallen Ellecon wrote: No passive ISK No passive ISK No passive ISK Incentivize conflict over complacency, at this point the incentive to make ISK instead of fight is not only detrimental to PC now in terms of fair fights (if any) but also to any future iteration of PC where those that have made so much off the current mechanics have a huge upper hand and we're back to where we are now. No passive ISK No passive ISK Must +1. I'm pretty much in the same boat with killing off passive ISK except for the feedback I gotten from people outside the donut. The issue then becomes what incentivizes people to fight for districts or more importantly hold them? Holding a district means you have to react to those that attack you while living the life without land (which Imperfects strived for at the launch of planetary conquest) allows you freedom to fight when you choose to fight with no way for an enemy to attack you back although you have to base your match time on the timers set by district owners. I will say that 110k ISK per clone for doing nothing while getting 100k per biomassed clone when it includes the cost of equipment used in fighting and the time in fighting as well is nuts. If it weren't more profitable to sit on clones then the current blue donut would not exist I don't think or at least the ties would be much more tenuous. Can the prestige of having your name on district be enough to drive people to fix themselves into saying, "We are willing to defend every 24 to 48 hours at this set time should our enemies choose to attack us"? I think the drive to build sand castles is strong, but is it enough with just some minor variations of the current PC mechanics if the value of districts (passive ISK) is eliminated? Long term mercs don't need to be owning the districts. I think PC 1.0 has proven that out. They need to be owned at the corporate level and there needs to be relative parity between Eve and Dust CEOs and Directors. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3257	Posted - 2014.04.10 05:59:00 - [20] - Quote Kristoff Atruin wrote: Another idea would be to cut down the value for automatic clone sales by quite a bit, and have one particular SI that holds a lower max number of clones but receives more isk per clone on manual sales. ie: the facility is better at preparing / storing clones, so a higher percentage of them arrive at the destination in good condition. So what you would ideally do is have some factories, a central cargo district and sales points to get your isk out. If you want to make isk then some point of your supply chain gets weakened, and due to clone movement attrition you want them close together. If someone takes out part of that chain or locks it by attacking, your income goes down. To go with that we'd need to be able to transfer clones to other corporations, so if I didn't have a sales district I could sell my clones to someone who does with them taking a portion of the profit. Not hotfixable, but it's an idea. Yeah, an interesting idea. The more I think about it the more getting rid of auto sale makes sense. 5 districts? Not too hard to manage. 245 districts? Manual sale because a major logistical task. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news

Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3260	Posted - 2014.04.10 15:44:00 - [21] - Quote Django Quik wrote: Precisely. If passive isk is turned off completely, you can still make isk from each of your districts every day, it just becomes an active process and involves the inherent risk of lower clone counts. Risk <> Reward. Done. DO IT I still consider that passive ISK, but yeah it does add an active element to it. I just don't like the idea that people right now could log off for weeks and if their districts didn't get attacked they would come back to a bunch of ISK without even a small amount of activity. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3262	Posted - 2014.04.11 12:04:00 - [22] - Quote Chance, when people are talking about a hotfix it means only server side changes are made not client side, and if you put in some kind of timer you would have to communicate that to the player in-game and thus it would require client side changes and likely UI elements. Also, I'm sorry but your ideas of putting completely artificial timers and barriers on how much PC players participate in is just plain bad and completely counter to the sandbox. Vet players will just resort to using their numerous 10 to 15m SP alts to bypass an arbitrary system like that. Simply, you would be adding an annoying logistical layer with no real benefit. The solution here is not by creating some kind of corral but by adjusting the incentives. Eliminate auto sale and make fighting of much higher value than sitting on a district collecting clones and watch the sparks fly. Dust is a lobby shooter and that isn't changing, so yes if someone has better players they will beat you. Long term one of the issues that needs to be resolved is the fact that every PC fight is for the ownership of the district. SInce it is such high stakes there is an expectation that you field your best or hire someone that can actually compete against your enemies. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3263	Posted - 2014.04.11 14:41:00 - [23] - Quote Django Quik wrote: FYI - Hotfixing = changing numbers Hotfixing =/= adding anything new whatsoever There is actually a good bit of PC mechanics that can be changed server side or can result from changes in how things in Eve operate. Something I'm curious to get people's feelings on. Time to get rid of the War Barge strike in Planetary Conquest? The original plan was to remove it with the change to the OB mechanics, but the CPM requested that it be left in so people in the PC community would have time to build their eve connections in response to the new mechanic. Personally, unless OB support it opened to outside of corp and alliance I think War Barge strikes need to remain. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3263	Posted - 2014.04.11 14:47:00 - [24] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: Kain, how would you feel about pushing for the removal/replacement of districts with whole planets being a single district/combat area? It would allow CCP to spread DUST to more regions without rampantly increasing the district count. I don't think the total number of districts should rise much, but given how much EVE participation is relevant to where EVE groups live, I think it'd be ideal to get DUST in as many regions as possible. Reducing or removing the district pile would allow region proliferation without district proliferation. In the long run I would like for planets and the districts that go with them to build up naturally from SI being placed on the planet with the planet having a limited number of slots like a suit or ship. Some planets have more slots (districts) and others have less but there is no district to interact with until something has actually been built first. I'm not really sure about just having 1 district per planet. Maybe you have 1 keystone district on each planet, Soraya, that acts like a starting point with the above concept and it allows you to spawn side districts on the planet over time. Obviously this is a digression and would not really be possible in a hot fix. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3263	Posted - 2014.04.11 14:54:00 - [25] - Quote As long as auto sale ISK goes away I see no problem with having a lot of districts. Also, while adding a region is a few lines of code I think monkeying with the number of districts per planet may be more resource intensive with not a huge benefit. Also, I think the district model is fine for now, but long term you also need to add geography in how the districts link together when it comes to attacking and defending. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3263	Posted - 2014.04.11 15:21:00 - [26] - Quote Ares 514 wrote: Given what you said about hot fixes being server side I'm going to make a very valid assumption you know nothing about software releases. Hot fixes are NOT limited to server side unless CCP are complete idiots. This is why you see the client syncing, it's updating your client. How much they can update client side is debatable, but horfixes in all proper use of the term mean changing the code. Of course you have to touch code to make any changes. It's a matter if that code is being handled by the server or the client. Example: changing a clone pack from 120 to 150 doesn't require any code changes on the client running on the PS3 and thus you don't have to download a patch for it. I'm by no means a programming wizard, but I do understand how CCP is able to handle updates and hotfixes. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3263	Posted - 2014.04.11 15:37:00 - [27] - Quote Thor Odinson42 wrote: He doesn't want to hear that, but It's honestly a nobrainer for CCP to implement this because it opens up PC to so many more players. If you were able to set a window of downtime for a district (let's say 8 hours) this would give a corporation the ability to cover a timeframe that they aren't likely to have people on for battles. Outside of that window, it's game time. You either have people on or you don't. But like I said, they don't want this. It would require them to recruit and maintain more players. God forbid they have to add a player with a KDR under 4. Eh, not really. We actually had a case where I was sick and wasn't able to distribute the fight card, so folks weren't ready or expecting matches. I logged in and two of those matches were right on top of each other and we only had minutes to prep. We assembled two teams and dealt with both with one actually being a district attack, which resulted in us flipping the district. I'm sure attack windows could be handled just fine by DNS, but honestly this ends up turning the game into a job. You MUST be on every day to defend districts over these X hours is just not a good way to do it. Dust 514 is still a lobby shooter and that is best experience when you have two full teams facing off against each other. Now I could see it where you combine a timer and a window with the window fight allowing the attackers to make money and if they press the attack it triggers the timer and then it becomes a fight for the district. Again, I'm not sure I like the attack windows idea, but I'll try to poke around and see how much that could be implemented in a hot fix. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3263	Posted - 2014.04.11 16:17:00 - [28] - Quote The system still needs to be balanced and adding mechanics that will add long term problems isn't the best course. I don't think the mechanics should go out of their way to punish players for being good. I put out some pokes about the window issue and I'm also in the process of getting a meeting set with CCP so these issues can be discussed. When I hear something back about how much the timers can be manipulated I'll let you know. We just need to be careful we don't swing the pendulum so far one direction that it becomes the blob always wins or Planetary Conquest becomes something you MUST do every day to keep your district. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3263	Posted - 2014.04.11 16:21:00 - [29] - Quote Problem is alt corps would be created to take advantage and use that kind of system to lock districts from attack for free. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3264	Posted - 2014.04.11 16:37:00 - [30] - Quote Ares 514 wrote: [quote=Kain Spero][quote=Ares 514] I just don't want you to limit what you think they can achieve on a hotfix. I know a lot about software development and from what I have seen they have a fairly robust hotfix system. Obviously configuring server numbers SHOULD be easiest but small changes to the client side should be relatively easy to. If we can push them to tweak a few items PC 1.0 could be much improved even if it still really needs a complete new version to make it what it should have been. Agreed. The most important thing for these suggestions that they be low bandwidth. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news

Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3265	Posted - 2014.04.11 16:54:00 - [31] - Quote I think folks are underestimating the value of effective clone packs. I'm also curious now if a raiding mechanic can be implemented. What if instead of auto sale on the reinforce timer it spawns a match that you have to go into and win to get the ISK from your auto sale. The match spawns in other contracts for the attacker side where anyone can join. Attackers win they get ISK from the clone sale instead. Each side gets 40 clones. The effect would be a way for corps without land to siphon ISK from the big boys and potentially use that ISK to fund effective clone packs rather the relying on just taxes and donations. (My concern is this idea would require too much bandwidth) I'm fine with entertaining the idea of smaller clone packs I just think you won't solve PC 1.0 self attacking with clone packs unless the packs exceed the ISK you get from killing it combined with the passive ISK. Although with the above idea or turning off passive clone sales that problem would be largely eliminated. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3266	Posted - 2014.04.11 19:41:00 - [32] - Quote Cyrius Li-Moody wrote: Personally I think it's silly that the same 16 people can instantly teleport all over MH and defend as many districts that they want at literally the same time. While this game should not be about zerging. 3 or 4 A-Teams should not be able to defend an entire region. More importantly it should not cost billions of isk to just try to overwhelm 30 people. We have 4 A-teams just under Escrow via FA, Teamplayers, Imperfects and The Rainbow Effect, so try not to exaggerate the numbers too much. Instant travel via the sleeper implants is actually one of the things that makes Dust unique compared to Eve and it is honestly a good thing. Trying to arbitrarily limit how much PC someone can play in a given period or where then can play is just a silly idea that will end up benefiting vets anyways (more likely to have high SP alts that are still PC ready). Also, something everyone should read: http://outofcake.wordpress.com/2012/12/10/malcanis-law/ Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3266	Posted - 2014.04.11 20:16:00 - [33] - Quote Vrain Matari wrote: Battle could even be an ambush ^^ I think it would have to have objectives, so either Dom or Skirmish. Honestly, whatever is easier for them to potentially program. The issue is even if the idea is good it may take too much bandwidth. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3268	Posted - 2014.04.11 20:40:00 - [34] - Quote Marcus Stormfire wrote: Kain Spero wrote: 5. Explore the idea of opening another Region of space in Dust 514 Planetary Conquest to spur activity, but only if the issues with passive ISK are addressed. 9. Add the ability to bring up the map for upcoming battle while in the War Barge. (Probably can't be done in a hotfix) #5 I definitely agree with this. Right now Eve pilots don't see a reason to really get involved with Dust Battles. I foresee a glorious future of burned and cratered planets with spaceship graveyards in orbit. We cant have that without the eve side getting more exposure to Dust. #9 I have always been a fan with manipulating game environment (with limits) This would give Mercs the ability to help plan out the battles and help make players truly feel like they are a part of the game. I know that the ability to open doors for example would keep me entertained for days. =) -Marcus For bringing up the map I simply mean having the normal in-match map function available on the direction pad. Nothing fancy with the map in the center of the room. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3268	Posted - 2014.04.12 04:02:00 - [35] - Quote Cyrius Li-Moody wrote: This isn't about you. this isn't about your alliance. this about the game. Couldn't agree more. Please explain to me in detail hot the hotfixes I suggested specifically benefit my alliance only and me only. I'm all ears. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3268	Posted - 2014.04.12 04:31:00 - [36] - Quote Cyrius if you are talking logistics and geography at the corp and alliance level then, yes, I would love to see some changes there, but what I don't think would be good would be placing arbitrary limits on the players themselves. Again, I don't see that happening in a hotfix, but things that have to be considered for beyond PC 1.0. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3269	Posted - 2014.04.13 15:28:00 - [37] - Quote Django Quik, I think the problem of everyone spawning in could be only having it appear in other contracts for other player corps (no npcs) and giving priority to full squads. Again, I think the idea may require too much bandwidth. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3270	Posted - 2014.04.13 22:32:00 - [38] - Quote In terms of what can be done for Planetary Conquest 2.0 I get really excited. I get the feeling that the potential in Dust that drew us to this game can actually be realized and the Dust 514 can become a true game. I think being vulnerable during resource export and allowing for those realtime no timer fights alongside timer fights for the districts really would be a great way to go. While these visions comes to be though we have the reality that is PC 1.0. I really don't feel that letting it languish while we wait for PC 2.0 is an option. The two biggest issues to me are passive ISK and clone pack size. The rest of the discussion becomes nuanced mechanics that may or may not be able to be addressed with the resources available. Listening to the discussion here though is seems if we could get two things thrown into a quick hotfix while some of these other things are looked at it's increasing the clone pack to 150 with the same current cost per clone and turning off auto sale of clones. These are things that must be done and every day that goes by PC 1.0 digs itself further into the hole. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3340	Posted - 2014.04.16 14:39:00 - [39] - Quote The meeting with CCP went very well. I think CCP understands that there are complex issues regarding Planetary Conquest with some potentially straight forward changes. The most important of these issues being passive ISK and clone pack size. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3340	Posted - 2014.04.16 15:06:00 - [40] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: Kain Spero wrote: I think CCP understands that there are complex issues regarding Planetary Conquest with some potentially straight forward changes. The most important of these issues being passive ISK and clone pack size. So when do we get fixes? Unknown, but I've made my opinion know to CCP that if/when they decide on changes they need to inform the community. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news

Kain Spero Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 3341	Posted - 2014.04.16 17:49:00 - [41] - Quote The Robot Devil wrote: Kain Spero wrote: Soraya Xel wrote: Kain Spero wrote: I think CCP understands that there are complex issues regarding Planetary Conquest with some potentially straight forward changes. The most important of these issues being passive ISK and clone pack size. So when do we get fixes? Unknown, but I've made my opinion know to CCP that if/when they decide on changes they need to inform the community. The need to inform us and then really listen to what we have to say, form a different set of changes based off of our input, run it by the CPM, change it again if needed then tell us the final plan for final feedback. EVE has just now moved to this kind of system and DUST would be smart to emulate that way of changing the game. I do think they listen but I don't always think that they act on those suggestions. Could not agree more. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.