DUST Search - Protesting the Protest

Canari Elphus wrote:

Advice: Wait until Fanfest which is a mere couple weeks away to see what changes are involved to the logistics of PC before calling for its demise. Also, dont blame 'lag' as the reason for losses as it will just invite people to troll as PC players have been having to deal with lag since the games 'launch'. PC consists of corps from almost every region of the globe so its not like lag is being intentionally created as a game mechanic, its just an unfortunate product of memory leaks brought on by socket design and server mechanics.

I will continue to say this to anyone trying to propose changes to the game - Always think about how it benefits the game overall when you are making suggestions.
How will it impact the health of the game?
How will it impact the playerbase as a whole?
How will it move the game forward?

If I were you, I would answer these questions in your post as it would seem as if you are proposing something to benefit the game other than seem like its just a complaint and you wish to punish people because they stole all the cookies.

Flaws I see with your plan:
- No proposed replacement for competitive play - Half the reason mercs are involved in PC is because it is a guaranteed 16v16 against the best of another corp where you dont have to worry about blueberries.
- No proposal for how PC could be fixed - All that is stated is that its about lag and the fact that one alliance is dominating right now. If there is something wrong with it, what can be done to fix it that is good for the game and its players overall?
- There is no attempt to get people on your side - If you want something to succeed dont make it an us-vs-them scenario. You are automatically put people against you from the outset

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
BrotherofHavok PIanet Express Canis Eliminatus Operatives 18	Posted - 2014.04.11 15:27:00 - [1] - Quote Dear CCP, Please remove ALL PC combat for the foreseeable future. Do NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE open the rest of New Eden to PC combat. Why? Because as of this moment, of the 243 districts that could be owned by corporations and alliances, 238 of them are owned by a single alliance. Now I know, players would tell me to HTFU and just get better at playing the game, but in all honesty the PC's are set up to reward players with the laggiest connection to the rest of the world. I'm tired of wasting my isk on PC matches that I know will most likely not win because we will lag so unbelievably hard that crossing the street seems like a daunting task. What would happen if you were to open the rest of New Eden? Sure, initially there would be some new corps with new districts. However, you would see the alliance that already has a large number of districts taking up the majority of the new districts. Why you may ask? Because they would have the money and the clones to attack all the new districts and take them. Eventually you would see what is happening now. A single alliance gathering all the districts under a single rule. SO! Until the lag issues can be resolved, I ask that you do not give into the whims of an alliance already so powerful due to their district ownerships and massive lag usage, and instead I ask that you remove ALL PC combat for the time being. Thank you. Sincerely, Your Multi-purpose Everything User
Knight Solitaire 660	Posted - 2014.04.11 15:29:00 - [2] - Quote Planetary Conquest. Conquest Working as intended. (Passive ISK Farming is the only thing that needs to go) Woof! Woof! -Some dog on the street
BrotherofHavok PIanet Express Canis Eliminatus Operatives 20	Posted - 2014.04.11 15:30:00 - [3] - Quote I agree, CONQUEST, not LAG, not CONQUERED! Sincerely, Your Multi-purpose Everything User
Knight Solitaire 660	Posted - 2014.04.11 15:31:00 - [4] - Quote Also, I'd like to add that some of my smoothest battles have been Vs Nyain / AE / Die Valkyrie, despite being on a different continent to them. Restart before each battle and play in SD. Its annoying, but it works for me most of the time. Woof! Woof! -Some dog on the street
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 607	Posted - 2014.04.11 15:42:00 - [5] - Quote Knight Solitaire wrote: Planetary Conquest. Conquest Working as intended. (Passive ISK Farming is the only thing that needs to go) TL;DR - No That assumes that the system is set up for someone to actually be able to take every district. What I mean by the statement above is that New Eden seems particular designed to largely resist one group from having a stranglehold on all of the assets. In EVE, there are enough avenues for player error - greed, timers, jump gates, sandbox - for one group to spark a change, at least some of the time. And just by what is possible in EVE, there is no way that one alliance would own every asset in Null sec (And I mean own almost all of the unique assets, not "Goons own the Moons"). The problem with PC is that the end game was actually "beaten". And the mechanics of DUST/PC can't cope with one alliance owning everything. In a system designed to encourage cost/benefit analysis, how does one side win when their opponent has only benefits? There is no feasible situation for a corp that is not in PC to have a realistic chance of holding - not acquiring - a district for the simple reason that they would not have enough money. Passive ISK farming needs to go More logistical pressure needs to be put on corps (AI drones that cut into clone reserves if not managed, for example) Political infrastructure - district trading, share buying, etc - needs to be implemented Timer system need to be reworked (There is not enough flux or chaos in the system at the moment) I could go on, but you get the point. DUST 514 BETA VET 16.2M Lifetime SP SH4T --> PFBHz --> PFB --> SH4T --> Fatal
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 463	Posted - 2014.04.11 15:45:00 - [6] - Quote There is a reason that in even free markets there are anti - trust laws to prevent monopolies. You now see this in PC. It prevents competition and innovation. Because, that's why.
dent 308 Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 2746	Posted - 2014.04.11 16:06:00 - [7] - Quote These guys formed an alliance of corps that had demonstrated the ability to take and hold districts. What sort of mechanic would you propose that could counter this without just destroying the whole point of kicking more ass and taking more stuff? Victor Laszlo: ... If we stop breathing, we'll die. If we stop fighting our enemies, the world will die.
Free Beers Imperfects Negative-Feedback 2267	Posted - 2014.04.11 16:10:00 - [8] - Quote dent 308 wrote: These guys formed an alliance of corps that had demonstrated the ability to take and hold districts. What sort of mechanic would you propose that could counter this without just destroying the whole point of kicking more ass and taking more stuff? TEST Alliance. BEST Alliance. Every mercs life ends the same way. It is only the details of how he lived and died that distinguishes one from another
Ansiiis The Trustworthy Mocking Bird Inc. 969	Posted - 2014.04.11 16:12:00 - [9] - Quote PC need meaning. Why should these players go and play a gamemode worse than pub matches to fight for something that they already have plenty of? No district is important. Not one. So they jsut play farmville and have fun while CCP turns a blind eye on it. Redberries
Piercing Serenity PFB Pink Fluffy Bunnies 608	Posted - 2014.04.11 16:14:00 - [10] - Quote dent 308 wrote: These guys formed an alliance of corps that had demonstrated the ability to take and hold districts. What sort of mechanic would you propose that could counter this without just destroying the whole point of kicking more ass and taking more stuff? Anything that requires more man-power to be deployed to maintain the current system. For example, if each planet had rouge drones that activated their own PC battle (During the down time of a district), corps would have to spend much more time actually fighting off the drones to protect their districts. This would require an enormous amount of man power at any given moment, which no alliance would be able to maintain. As a result, corps/alliances would downsize so that the losses incurred by a loss to drones would not be unmanageable. There would need to be some system in place to discourage the big blue doughnut, but I don't know what that is DUST 514 BETA VET 16.2M Lifetime SP SH4T --> PFBHz --> PFB --> SH4T --> Fatal

DJINN Marauder Ancient Exiles. Dirt Nap Squad. 5046	Posted - 2014.04.11 16:18:00 - [11] - Quote Ansiiis The Trustworthy wrote: PC need meaning. Why should these players go and play a gamemode worse than pub matches to fight for something that they already have plenty of? No district is important. Not one. So they jsut play farmville and have fun while CCP turns a blind eye on it. The meaning is currently ISK. The passive isk income of PC gives it meaning..regardless of how broken it is. Also, I'm having trouble finding ways to make it so PC isn't under some kind of monopoly. Before we Blued up, the corps in DNS were doing all the fighting anyway lol. It'd be hard to make a system where the group with the most skill, doesn't own the majority. GôÉGô¥GôÿGô£Gôö > GôÉGô¢Gô¢ Gÿà¿When will dust get better?Gÿà Forum Warrior Pro I \| Warframe is awesome! \| PSN: I-NINJA-ALL-DAY
Canari Elphus Dirt Nap Squad. 1410	Posted - 2014.04.11 16:22:00 - [12] - Quote Advice: Wait until Fanfest which is a mere couple weeks away to see what changes are involved to the logistics of PC before calling for its demise. Also, dont blame 'lag' as the reason for losses as it will just invite people to troll as PC players have been having to deal with lag since the games 'launch'. PC consists of corps from almost every region of the globe so its not like lag is being intentionally created as a game mechanic, its just an unfortunate product of memory leaks brought on by socket design and server mechanics. I will continue to say this to anyone trying to propose changes to the game - Always think about how it benefits the game overall when you are making suggestions. How will it impact the health of the game? How will it impact the playerbase as a whole? How will it move the game forward? If I were you, I would answer these questions in your post as it would seem as if you are proposing something to benefit the game other than seem like its just a complaint and you wish to punish people because they stole all the cookies. Flaws I see with your plan: - No proposed replacement for competitive play - Half the reason mercs are involved in PC is because it is a guaranteed 16v16 against the best of another corp where you dont have to worry about blueberries. - No proposal for how PC could be fixed - All that is stated is that its about lag and the fact that one alliance is dominating right now. If there is something wrong with it, what can be done to fix it that is good for the game and its players overall? - There is no attempt to get people on your side - If you want something to succeed dont make it an us-vs-them scenario. You are automatically put people against you from the outset Canari Elphus for CPM1
xxwhitedevilxx M Maphia Clan Unit Unicorn 2217	Posted - 2014.04.11 16:22:00 - [13] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: There is a reason that in even free markets there are anti - trust laws to prevent monopolies. You now see this in PC. It prevents competition and innovation. We're lucky they have some serious economists there at CCP...oh, wait.... -#Firmocosìperchènonhopersonalità
xxwhitedevilxx M Maphia Clan Unit Unicorn 2218	Posted - 2014.04.11 16:39:00 - [14] - Quote DJINN Marauder wrote: Ansiiis The Trustworthy wrote: PC need meaning. Why should these players go and play a gamemode worse than pub matches to fight for something that they already have plenty of? No district is important. Not one. So they jsut play farmville and have fun while CCP turns a blind eye on it. The meaning is currently ISK. The passive isk income of PC gives it meaning..regardless of how broken it is. Also, I'm having trouble finding ways to make it so PC isn't under some kind of monopoly. Before we Blued up, the corps in DNS were doing all the fighting anyway lol. It'd be hard to make a system where the group with the most skill, doesn't own the majority. Actually, the only seriously broken system imo is the reinforcement window. It allows you to be untouchable by certain TZ letting you put your reinforcement windows in a dead TZ. The districts should have a 2-3 hours reinforcement window in order to discourage the behavior above, letting people from other timezones able to attack, always giving the defenders the opportunity to chose, in a three-hours window, the time they want to fight. It's not because people in DNS are skilled and all the others are unskilled, mind you. I personally don't see any trouble in blue donuts, anyway. -#Firmocosìperchènonhopersonalità
xxwhitedevilxx M Maphia Clan Unit Unicorn 2219	Posted - 2014.04.11 16:49:00 - [15] - Quote Canari Elphus wrote: Advice: Wait until Fanfest which is a mere couple weeks away to see what changes are involved to the logistics of PC before calling for its demise. Also, dont blame 'lag' as the reason for losses as it will just invite people to troll as PC players have been having to deal with lag since the games 'launch'. PC consists of corps from almost every region of the globe so its not like lag is being intentionally created as a game mechanic, its just an unfortunate product of memory leaks brought on by socket design and server mechanics. I do agree on everything but not with the part above. "Lag" is actually the thing that decide which of the two teams wins (if it is an intercontinental match). An easy example: have you ever shot with a Forgegun or a Railgun in a PC? If the server is not "yours" you'll see your shots going out of the railgun/forgegun after a couple of seconds, so it's fair to assume that this is exactly your latency. I'm sure you already know what 2 seconds of latency means in a competitive game. It' not simply the difference between life and death, it's the difference between getting owned and easily win, even if there were no framerate drop / lag. -#Firmocosìperchènonhopersonalità
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 466	Posted - 2014.04.11 16:52:00 - [16] - Quote I don't know much about the mechanics of PC but it seems like one thing that should happen is that corp size needs to be limited more and the payout system discourages alliances rather than encouraging them. There are a few ways to do this. I won't make suggestions because I am just too ignorant about the intricacies. Because, that's why.
Zahle Undt Bullet Cluster Lokun Listamenn 1290	Posted - 2014.04.11 16:57:00 - [17] - Quote xxwhitedevilxx M wrote: The districts should have a 2-3 hours reinforcement window in order to discourage the behavior above, letting people from other timezones able to attack, always giving the defenders the opportunity to chose, in a three-hours window, the time they want to fight. I always thought there should be a much smaller window for battles than the 24 hours, but as I think about it now it would just encourage more people to "blue up" so they can have alliance coverage. I don't know what to do about PC at this point, I know when I participated in it a while back it wasn't fun because it wasn't some strategic battle against corps (like corp battles used to be) it was just spam uplinks and FotM fits. No variety. I would probably just remove PC until you have at least 48 on 48 battles and put 16 vs. 16 corp battles back in if corps really want to face off against the best of other corps. I also really like Piercing Serenity's idea of district owners having to defend their clones against rogue drones or they don't generate profit. Most tankers are like sand people. They frighten easily, but will quickly return...and in greater numbers.
xxwhitedevilxx M Maphia Clan Unit Unicorn 2219	Posted - 2014.04.11 17:04:00 - [18] - Quote Zahle Undt wrote: xxwhitedevilxx M wrote: The districts should have a 2-3 hours reinforcement window in order to discourage the behavior above, letting people from other timezones able to attack, always giving the defenders the opportunity to chose, in a three-hours window, the time they want to fight. I always thought there should be a much smaller window for battles than the 24 hours, but as I think about it now it would just encourage more people to "blue up" so they can have alliance coverage. Oh, wait, I didn't mean the 24 h "stasis" time. I meant the reinforcement window. For example I have a district at 16:00 ET now, and all attackers actually attacks between 16:00 and 17:00.In my example it would have been from 16:00 to 19:00. -#Firmocosìperchènonhopersonalità
SteelDark Knight Ancient Exiles. Dirt Nap Squad. 351	Posted - 2014.04.11 17:05:00 - [19] - Quote I have come to the conclusion that the problem is that people are broken more so than Planetary Conquest itself is broken. On that note, feel free to come test yourselves against an Ancient Exiles team for a chance at 128 million ISK + Bounty. No risk, no cost other than what you chose to spend, and all potential reward. Looking forward to seeing you there. Ancient Exiles challenge
BrotherofHavok PIanet Express Canis Eliminatus Operatives 28	Posted - 2014.04.11 18:06:00 - [20] - Quote Canari Elphus wrote: Advice: Wait until Fanfest which is a mere couple weeks away to see what changes are involved to the logistics of PC before calling for its demise. Also, dont blame 'lag' as the reason for losses as it will just invite people to troll as PC players have been having to deal with lag since the games 'launch'. PC consists of corps from almost every region of the globe so its not like lag is being intentionally created as a game mechanic, its just an unfortunate product of memory leaks brought on by socket design and server mechanics. I will continue to say this to anyone trying to propose changes to the game - Always think about how it benefits the game overall when you are making suggestions. How will it impact the health of the game? How will it impact the playerbase as a whole? How will it move the game forward? If I were you, I would answer these questions in your post as it would seem as if you are proposing something to benefit the game other than seem like its just a complaint and you wish to punish people because they stole all the cookies. Flaws I see with your plan: - No proposed replacement for competitive play - Half the reason mercs are involved in PC is because it is a guaranteed 16v16 against the best of another corp where you dont have to worry about blueberries. - No proposal for how PC could be fixed - All that is stated is that its about lag and the fact that one alliance is dominating right now. If there is something wrong with it, what can be done to fix it that is good for the game and its players overall? - There is no attempt to get people on your side - If you want something to succeed dont make it an us-vs-them scenario. You are automatically put people against you from the outset Well, you are right. I have given no proposal in replacement for the PC that I wish to have removed. Why? Because everything I could suggest has already been suggested by numerous other players. Bring back merc contracts PvE battles Allow Teams to form rather than just squads Put in a system of PC battles that require risk or some serious loss. Something to offer a cost/benefit ratio. Maybe an AI attacks it, or randomly takes over a district, maybe a district has a limited life. 10-30 days of time before the district deceases? Maybe the districts per planet change on a regular basis. There are plenty of ways to make it so that the PC districts themselves are difficult to keep a hold of. Make it so that the clones are not automatically sold. Why isn't there a select a district and buy from? That way you weaken yourself potentially but you make money. Why just clones? Why not expendable equipment? "don't blame lag" I know that Lag is part of PC, but there are matches where the lag is so bad that I can drive a lav and die for no reason at all. I can fall 30 times and take fall damage to the point where I die even though I only fell maybe 10 meters. I have frozen in mid air several times. I have 'rubber-banded' all over the map. It is impossible to play PC matches and while I still try every once in a while, it is pointless to play. Yes, not all lag is intentional, but then why is it standard practice to find the enemy's equipment spot and blow it up? And no I do not mean a strategically placed equipment spot that will benefit a squad or team but rather at the initial spawn point. Sometimes it's so loud and bright that it's deafening and blinding. It is true that removing PC will not make the game move forward and could be a reason why some players leave all-together, but I'm not asking for its permanent removal, just a temporary removal while new solutions are implemented. There should never be a passive isk reward with close to zero cost/risk and there should never be a time in Dust where an alliance can make over 200 million isk a day without doing nearly anything at all. Sincerely, Your Multi-purpose Everything User



Pages: 1 :: [one page]