| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Laz Ulian Sol
The Solecism of Limitation
221
   |
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:20:00 -
[31] - Quote
I had a thought a while back...but decided it wasn't worth the effort of writing up a proper post in ideas and suggestions.
However, for the benefit of your question I'll give you a simplified post of it.
Essentially I wanted district ownership to give passive bonuses to regular public gameplay. Say a minor ISK multiplier to pub games so once you own a district it makes playing the rest of the game better for ISK gaining and only applies to members of corps that actually play. Of course there would be maximums and extremes and such but that's the general idea.
Clone sale would still net some profit but only if manually done, automatic clone sale would no longer occur. If a district is full of clones it doesn't make money on its own.
That's what I would personally like to see. Along with a few other things; but let's keep it simple.
In the short term, no money gain from ownership would cause the incentive for play to diminish I feel.
CCP never gave the Imperfects a private match after winning the testers tournament.
CCP never gave us SP Rollover.
|
Denn Maell
PIanet Express
Canis Eliminatus Operatives
275
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:21:00 -
[32] - Quote
If clone packs were bought/sold on the open market then supply and demand would be a major check against the ability to simply passively farm isk ( Lack of interest in PC would mean the clone packs stay on the shelf longer, meanwhile you didn't sell them and production dies down).
At least that's what I got the impression of how PC was 'supposed to work'.
But, yes. No passive isk generation would mean I would still be interested in PC (provided PC Lag were addressed and other incentives were in place).
The most OP weapon on the Dust Battle Field:
One good logi, one rep tool, and a heavy.
|
The Robot Devil
Brave Bunnies
Brave Collective
2326
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:25:00 -
[33] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:I've heard lots of different views on the issue, but I would like to hear as many opinions as possible. If there was no passive ISK and you only got ISK from fighting would you want to hold land?
This would also be in light of increasing clone pack sizes back to their original 150 at the current 300k per clone cost. Fighting getting you double what you receive now but no passive ISK to prop up payroll, vehicle reimbursement, or the hiring of ringers. The only issue is you only collect the payment when you win your fights and if you can't win your fights you end up with nothing.
I think it would work better. People would fight for wanting to have something and it would remove the problem of making massive amounts of money for doing very little. Owning a district should have a perk, I don't know what it should be but it shouldn't just make so much ISK that it puts non district holders at a disadvantage like it does now.
Let the district owners have access to the district anytime they want to for training or some other thing that gives the corp something because hard work should be rewarded. Maybe have the district make a percentage of whatever bonus the EVE side gets. If the PI is increased by a certain amount on that planet then give a percentage of the profit to the DUST side so that the EVE pilots have to be involved but the percentage would be small enough not to just make so much ISK that it breaks things.
Maybe for a while the reward should just be having your corp's name on the deed until something better is worked out. Let the ownership just be bragging rights or some other thing that doesn't discourage players from playing. I will think more about it but it is a very difficult situation.
"One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production."
Raoul Duke
|
Thumb Green
THE STAR BORN
892
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:27:00 -
[34] - Quote
SteelDark Knight wrote:Ripley Riley wrote:Kain Spero wrote:If there was no passive ISK and you only got ISK from fighting would you want to hold land?
This would also be in light of increasing clone pack sizes back to their original 150 at the current 300k per clone cost. Fighting getting you double what you receive now but no passive ISK to prop up payroll, vehicle reimbursement, or the hiring of ringers. The only issue is you only collect the payment when you win your fights and if you can't win your fights you end up with nothing. All of this sounds great. It would keep PC from being an ISK printing press. It would be possible to lose ISK on PC... ... ... But the phrasing of that second paragraph tells me that you don't actually support this idea. That this post is a front and your vested interests are to keep PC making millions of ISK for AE without having to do very much of anything. You do know that DNS the majority landholders in PC is much more than AE, right?
For reference the majority landholders in DNS are: Escrow Removal and Acquisition (29.39% ,~72 districts), Ancient Exiles.(25.71%, ~62 districts, and Nyain San (25.71%, ~62 districts).
The rest are: Capital Acquisitions LLC (5.31%, ~13 districts), Arhendee Mercenaries (4.9%, ~12 districts), Dem Durrty Boyz (2.86%, ~7 districts), Die Valkyrja (2.04%, ~5 districts), Gods Among Men (0.82%, ~2 districts), Fatal Absolution (0.41% ~1 district), Dirt Nap Squad (0.41%, ~1 district)
Support Orbital Spawns
|
Dunk Mujunk
RestlessSpirits
766
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:27:00 -
[35] - Quote
Ok, i've never pced, but here is my 2 cents-
ISK reset, leave all current players with 10 million isk (random number, changable) start new players with 10 million isk. Enough to get vets back on their feet (pc peeps are the best of the best right?) and enough to let noobs do some testing on a lot of basic equipment.
District reset, everything neutral, start from scratch (I know you pc guys will love that).
Open up null sec, what does it matter, we can hardly effect eve, they won't be hurt by it. Give everyone a realistic chance at holding a district.
PvE, at least to the point where if you attack a district and no player corp is defending, you still fight someting. Doesn't have to be full blown PvE, bots would be good for now.
Figure a way to cap corp profits, so holding districts does not mean you are automatically rich. Maybe base it roughly around coep size, cost of equipment lost during last weeks battle (vs people only) winnig %. Just ideas here, but # of districts being the only deciding factor would be a problem with open null sec
ISK bonuses for who you fight, if your corp/alliance owns 40 districts and you attack a corp/alliance with 1 district, you make next to nothing, win or lose. If you own 1 district and you attack a corp with 40 districts, you make a fair amount of isk, win or lose (keeping in mind isk cap).
This part I know little about but I hear alot of people say the attack mechanics are no good right now. As a working stiff, it's hard to say I can be online for a window 24 hours away or more. Find a way to rework the attack mechanics so when I jump on, I can schedule or partake in a pc within a few hours. This would get way more people in on pc me thinks.
Thats all I can think of right now, again, i'm pretty ignorant on the topic, so don't bash me to hard lol.
Switzerland is small and neutral. We're more like Germany. Ambitious and misunderstood.
Futurama
|
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3310
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:31:00 -
[36] - Quote
Denn Maell wrote:
But, yes. No passive isk generation would mean I would still be interested in PC (provided PC Lag were addressed and other incentives were in place).
The only incentive that would come out of this situation would be the ISK paid to those in match from biomass on the victory screen and the loot that each side gets.
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
|
TechMechMeds
SWAMPERIUM
3049
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:31:00 -
[37] - Quote
I think its a good idea, I'll not bother expanding on what I think of PC as a whole though lol.
I'm about 4 days away from mining barge and I'm trying to mine about 5 million units of tritanium in the meantime. I'm putting it in station after I have bought out everything in my 'home' station and then place large stacks ranging in prices. Iv got two mining lasers and mining drones as well. I'm loving eve even though I'm just a little btch in the galaxy at the mo lol.
Edit : 5 million units of veldspar.
If you know what a telefrag match is, then I love you.
The tritanium I sell is more relevant than dust has ever been.
|
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3310
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:33:00 -
[38] - Quote
The Robot Devil wrote:Maybe for a while the reward should just be having your corp's name on the deed until something better is worked out. Let the ownership just be bragging rights or some other thing that doesn't discourage players from playing. I will think more about it but it is a very difficult situation.
The potential problem I see is this change goes in and then we end up with no one wanting land. I'm not sure if prestige is enough.
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
|
Sgt Kirk
Fatal Absolution
Dirt Nap Squad.
5634
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:33:00 -
[39] - Quote
I'd like to have management cost of these areas. Who's paying for all this ****? Or at least to upkeep it?
1st Official Role Playing Gallente Asshole -Title Awarded by True Adamance
|
Ares 514
D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
775
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:38:00 -
[40] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Outlaw OneZero wrote:Kain Spero wrote:I've heard lots of different views on the issue, but I would like to hear as many opinions as possible. If there was no passive ISK and you only got ISK from fighting would you want to hold land?
This would also be in light of increasing clone pack sizes back to their original 150 at the current 300k per clone cost. Fighting getting you double what you receive now but no passive ISK to prop up payroll, vehicle reimbursement, or the hiring of ringers. The only issue is you only collect the payment when you win your fights and if you can't win your fights you end up with nothing. Honestly, if you want more fights you need to lower the cost of clone packs not raise it. If you increase payouts, remove passive ISK generation and reduce clone pack costs then you'll see a lot more people fighting in PC. You can't have the per clone cost in a clone pack be less than the payout for biomass. If you do you end up with people clone pack attacking in order to kill the clone pack and make ISK.
I strongly support the idea of removing passive ISK generation.
The concept of reducing the cost of clone packs IMO would result in much larger participation in PC. The 36million is just too much when it takes multiple packs. You have a valid point about the biomass to price issue. Right now it's 36 million ISK to about 28million payout I believe. I wonder if there's a good way to reduce the cost without having this issue... no quick fixes jump to mind at the moment though.
...
|
|
|
Ares 514
D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
775
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:39:00 -
[41] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:The Robot Devil wrote:Maybe for a while the reward should just be having your corp's name on the deed until something better is worked out. Let the ownership just be bragging rights or some other thing that doesn't discourage players from playing. I will think more about it but it is a very difficult situation. The potential problem I see is this change goes in and then we end up with no one wanting land. I'm not sure if prestige is enough.
Well, we've had it pumping ISK out forever, I'd rather try the other side of the coin and see what happens.
...
|
Free Beers
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
2303
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:45:00 -
[42] - Quote
Ares 514 wrote:Kain Spero wrote:The Robot Devil wrote:Maybe for a while the reward should just be having your corp's name on the deed until something better is worked out. Let the ownership just be bragging rights or some other thing that doesn't discourage players from playing. I will think more about it but it is a very difficult situation. The potential problem I see is this change goes in and then we end up with no one wanting land. I'm not sure if prestige is enough. Well, we've had it pumping ISK out forever, I'd rather try the other side of the coin and see what happens.
We have had the other side of it in open beta when there was no isk from PC (you actually had to pay it). If only winning a match gives you isk its bad. Not to mention most isk rewards dont cover the cost of what you lost. Tankers would be screwed and so would ADS pilots. I fly ADS and use 250k suits in PC and have lost isk in 4 of the last 8 I played in.
My concern is the vast majority if people just want to punish the PC corps for farming and can't see that passive isk only thing going right now. The issue is not passive isk its economies of scale in which a small group of players can hold many districts. This is how players are becoming rich. I would rather this be addressed and leave the isk out of it for now.
Its hard to focus on whats really wrong with PC when the whole lot is a piece of ****.
Every mercs life ends the same way. It is only the details of how he lived and died that distinguishes one from another
|
Outlaw OneZero
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1443
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:48:00 -
[43] - Quote
How about remove clone costs from the equation completely?
Attack contract costs 16 Million. This money goes into the payout pool. Defender wins, every merc gets 1 mil + 25% value of all equipment destroyed in match. Attacker wins, they get their money back + 25% value. No show results in automatic win for defender.
Defending your land earns you money, successful attacks earn a small amount of money and put you closer to ownership. |
ANON Cerberus
Tiny Toons
499
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:50:00 -
[44] - Quote
While I am sure that PC needs changes, in fact I know it needs some pretty big changes to become a decent game mode that all players will want to get involved with at some point.
Right now I would say - dont even worry about PC. Right now the game has bigger problems. Get CCP to start fixing the bugs and problems they brought in with 1.8. Then we can go over much older problems.
Once we have a solid base then we can theory-craft ideas for PC and other game modes. I know many people that have stopped playing this game since the 1.7 / 1.8 fiasco. Until KEY issues are sorted the game is not worth the time needed for PC. |
Free Beers
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
2304
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:53:00 -
[45] - Quote
Outlaw OneZero wrote:How about remove clone costs from the equation completely?
Attack contract costs 16 Million. This money goes into the payout pool. Defender wins, every merc gets 1 mil + 25% value of all equipment destroyed in match. Attacker wins, they get their money back + 25% value. No show results in automatic win for defender.
Defending your land earns you money, successful attacks earn a small amount of money and put you closer to ownership.
Wouldn't work. The numbers are to low to make pc worth fighting. Plus attacking an winning has to be more valuable then not fighting at all. YOU have to have motivation to HOLD districts is where that breaks down.
A lot of these suggestions are trying to solve 1 small problem and not realizing the PC as a whole is quiet complex in nature.
Every mercs life ends the same way. It is only the details of how he lived and died that distinguishes one from another
|
Hansei Kaizen
The Jackson Five
133
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:54:00 -
[46] - Quote
Leonid Tybalt wrote:No? What incentive is there if you can't make isk of it?
New Eden = capitalism. If there's no capital to be made of an endavour, then there's no reason doing it.
I think this is true. If you want someone to do something you should incentivise it. I am far from a friend of capitalism, because I think that money cant be the only incentive to explain human behaviour. But besides ISK, what would incentivise the people to play in PC, especially against stronger opponents?
In a unregulated capitalism-like environment (however abstract), exactly what happened in MH is gonna happen all the time. Building of cartels and monopolys that ultimately bring the system to stasis. The concept is so simple, every child learns it by playing monopoly. If the monopoly is established, the game is over 
What contributes greatly is the natural superiority of high SP players. If you take away a reward for losing, why would anyone fight them?
The answer to your complaint is PvE. Always.
NPE status: (Gò»°Gûí°n+ëGò»n+¦ Gö+GöüGö+
Casual solo
|
Ares 514
D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
775
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:54:00 -
[47] - Quote
Free Beers wrote:Ares 514 wrote:Kain Spero wrote:The Robot Devil wrote:Maybe for a while the reward should just be having your corp's name on the deed until something better is worked out. Let the ownership just be bragging rights or some other thing that doesn't discourage players from playing. I will think more about it but it is a very difficult situation. The potential problem I see is this change goes in and then we end up with no one wanting land. I'm not sure if prestige is enough. Well, we've had it pumping ISK out forever, I'd rather try the other side of the coin and see what happens. We have had the other side of it in open beta when there was no isk from PC (you actually had to pay it). If only winning a match gives you isk its bad. Not to mention most isk rewards dont cover the cost of what you lost. Tankers would be screwed and so would ADS pilots. I fly ADS and use 250k suits in PC and have lost isk in 4 of the last 8 I played in. My concern is the vast majority if people just want to punish the PC corps for farming and can't see that passive isk only thing going right now. The issue is not passive isk its economies of scale in which a small group of players can hold many districts. This is how players are becoming rich. I would rather this be addressed and leave the isk out of it for now. Its hard to focus on whats really wrong with PC when the whole lot is a piece of ****.
Fair points; but the ISK for clone sales is WAY to much. If it can't be 0 it needs to be severely reduced. Honestly any reduction helps. I still feel it should be 0.
I feel your pain though and have lost a lot of ISK personally when you loose PC's, which even if it happens 50% of the time* you'll probably loose out if you're running really good gear.
* no clue on our win ratio just using 50% as an example :)
...
|
Shadowswipe
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
233
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 17:34:00 -
[48] - Quote
Better answer.
Make clones supply and demand dependent. If clones are just being manufactured and no fighting, the sell value of clones eventually goes to zero. If there is tons of fighting going on, but you somehow make clones and can sell them, you get a premium. Best of all worlds and makes real world sense. |
NAV HIV
The Generals
General Tso's Alliance
1446
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 17:50:00 -
[49] - Quote
The way it's going, soon enough ISK won't even be a factor... It Should be Full on battles. Only Corps who would be willing to Defend and fight for districts constantly should be on PC. Not to take 30-40 district and farm ISK. Makes it Stale, creates a lot of blue donuts. That's why i proposed this idea...
- Clones generated from a district should be used for fighting
- There should be some kind of penalty or taxes for Excess clones. This would force District holders to use their clones for fighting other CORPs. Only Corps with a lot of players would hold multiple districts then. This way CORPS with enough players would get access to PC and grow from there. Rather than the usual One Blue donut Beating the other blue donut, which has been the tradition since the beginning of PC
- Incase The excessive clones generated becomes an issue, CCP can make a FW section for a High Sec, Null Sec (Not sure how the layers work in EVE, but you guys can decide whats what) CORPs would be able to Deploy Clones generated from the District to Defend or attack Districts on FW. CORPS wouldn't own the said districts. If they win, may be the Faction would own it. Corps would get better salvages and good ISK payouts for their effort. This would make FW more interesting. This could bring back the old Contract style of battles.
- Districts should produce minerals which could be used for getting LP store weapons and items for the CORP. For this there should be CORP vault. The directors and CEO would have control of the vault.
- Minerals from Gallente Space would allow the Corp to produce Gallente LP store items for the CORP. Same would go for other Factions. It would make more sense for a Corp to be loyal to a certain Factional Warfare and EvE integration.
- Corp should not be allowed to sell the items on Player markets. Might disrupt the economy a bit too much. District ownership should be there to help Corp and its members gain access to weapons. Help train the members and motivate them fight better to make ISK...
- Regular FW battles should be there for more relaxed FW matches. For newer players to play FW matches and also for players who are not interested in a CORP or for players who just wanna play solo. They can Still have access to LP with the LP points earned.
If everyone decides to get off the pointless ISK generating machine, there is a lot that can be achieved. |
Outlaw OneZero
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1444
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 17:56:00 -
[50] - Quote
Free Beers wrote:Outlaw OneZero wrote:How about remove clone costs from the equation completely?
Attack contract costs 16 Million. This money goes into the payout pool. Defender wins, every merc gets 1 mil + 25% value of all equipment destroyed in match. Attacker wins, they get their money back + 25% value. No show results in automatic win for defender.
Defending your land earns you money, successful attacks earn a small amount of money and put you closer to ownership. Wouldn't work. The numbers are to low to make pc worth fighting. Plus attacking an winning has to be more valuable then not fighting at all. YOU have to have motivation to HOLD districts is where that breaks down. A lot of these suggestions are trying to solve 1 small problem and not realizing the PC as a whole is quiet complex in nature.
The overall concept still stands, now we are starting to argue about the details. So up the contract price to 32 Million, increase payout of destroyed equipment. A point can be found where it is cheap enough for most corps to work up an attack contract and the payout is high enough to reward a win on either side. It would be nice to see a dynamic that would lead to significant decisions about what equipment to field too.
I personally would like to see successful attacks being nearly zero gain isk wise. Defending would be where you would make your money. But holding territory without any activity would be minimal or no gain. |
|
|
Django Quik
Dust2Dust.
2857
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 18:21:00 -
[51] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:The Robot Devil wrote:Maybe for a while the reward should just be having your corp's name on the deed until something better is worked out. Let the ownership just be bragging rights or some other thing that doesn't discourage players from playing. I will think more about it but it is a very difficult situation. The potential problem I see is this change goes in and then we end up with no one wanting land. I'm not sure if prestige is enough.
No one wants land already. Do you see people lining up to try to take it? No. Because unless you're the uber elite top 5% corps, you don't stand a chance. The only incentive in PC currently is to those already holding land - there is zero incentive for anyone outside to try to get in.
Give up the isk incentive and rely on the only reason being fun - people will still go for it because THERE'S NOTHING ELSE TO DO. People will do it because it's more fun than pubs and FW. The best fun there has been in PC1.0 has been Thunderdome and PFC - do you see those people worrying about their passive isk?
That said, I'm against removing sale isk completely, more just the auto-sale; at least then people have to sell real clones off their land to make any money from them and risk leaving their districts vulnerable.
Dedicated sidearm scout - Watch out for that headshot
Scout community is the nuts
|
Void Echo
Total Extinction
2410
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 18:31:00 -
[52] - Quote
Yes I would.
An alternative to passive ISK gaining is active ISK gaining.
Example: Corporation A holds 1 District, the clone count fills up on that District, Corporation A gets a notification and is given 2 options. Option 1: Keep the clones and wait for an attack or use them for an attack or Option 2: Sell X number amount of clones and gets X amount of ISK for every clone they sell.
At the same time, no clones are automatically sold and corporation A can no longer gain ISK from clone growth. They must chose to either fight for their district or to get another district or they must sell their assets to gain ISK.
Youtube
Closed Beta Vet
CEO: Total Extinction
|
Sad Heavy
Eternal Beings
Proficiency V.
28
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 18:41:00 -
[53] - Quote
Tallen Ellecon wrote:The problem with PC is that it's trying to simplify a game mode that should be complex. Things take place in New Eden but geography and the market have no bearing on anything? They should just bring back corp battles, and scrap PC until there is some meaningful connection to EVE, because right now one alliance is trying to make themselves the only ones people can fight and quite frankly the rest of us get really tired of fighting the exact same people. The most fun my corp has had in a long time has been switching a districts back and forth with Eternal beings. It's not about making money or avoiding fights, it about having a place to have fun, and anyone who thinks they can give us more fun by taking all the districts is an ass.
So take away the ISK incentive and I could still see it being fun for people who play DUST for fights and not for farmville. In the end what is 3 billion ISK if you can't have fun?
It has been fun, you've burnt out my isk these last few battles though  |
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3312
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 18:45:00 -
[54] - Quote
Guys, just to be clear again we are likely looking on only being able to get simple number changes to what we currently have. Right now the current potential numbers floating are as follows:
Plan One: Passive Reduction
*Greatly reduce clone sale price (passive ISK) and increase Biomass price: something like 40-60k clone sale and 160-180k biomass
Plan Two: Passive Elimination
*Reduce clone sale price (passive ISK) to effectively 0 and double biomass price to 200-210k
Paired with both these plans would be a clone pack size increase to 150 clones at a cost of 300k per clone to prevent self-attacks for locking or ISK farming by killing the clone pack.
*******
While I hate passive ISK, my concern is still that eliminating it may lead to negative effects on participation in PC.
The side benefit of turning off passive ISK all together is that it could allow a new region to be opened up without the concern of passive ISK bleeding into the Dust economy from the PC system on an even larger scale.
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
|
Void Echo
Total Extinction
2412
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 18:49:00 -
[55] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Guys, just to be clear again we are likely looking on only being able to get simple number changes to what we currently have. Right now the current potential numbers floating are as follows:
Plan One: Passive Reduction
*Greatly reduce clone sale price (passive ISK) and increase Biomass price: something like 40-60k clone sale and 160-180k biomass
Plan Two: Passive Elimination
*Reduce clone sale price (passive ISK) to effectively 0 and double biomass price to 200-210k
Paired with both these plans would be a clone pack size increase to 150 clones at a cost of 300k per clone to prevent self-attacks for locking or ISK farming by killing the clone pack.
*******
While I hate passive ISK, my concern is still that eliminating it may lead to negative effects on participation in PC.
The side benefit of turning off passive ISK all together is that it could allow a new region to be opened up without the concern of passive ISK bleeding into the Dust economy from the PC system on an even larger scale.
The negative affects of these options is welcome because to the community, the coalition your involved in has negatively affected everyone else by denying them a chance to fight. So according to the community, anything that will remove DNS & N-F form PC will be greatly welcomed by all. (If you want to know where I though of this, look through the forums and see how much complaining small corps are doing).
Youtube
Closed Beta Vet
CEO: Total Extinction
|
Sev Alcatraz
Bullet Cluster
Lokun Listamenn
557
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 18:50:00 -
[56] - Quote
If you hold more then 5 districts they go into siege mode where there is no timer and no warning of attack and you are at the mercy of the enemy
closed beta Vet
"The mashed up corpses of red Berrys make for great track lube"
|
Tallen Ellecon
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
1666
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 18:57:00 -
[57] - Quote
Sev Alcatraz wrote:If you hold more then 5 districts they go into siege mode where there is no timer and no warning of attack and you are at the mercy of the enemy
I kinda like this, but then people would just create alt corps to hold their districts.
Supporter of tiericide, EVE interaction, and a proper NPE SoonGäó514
"No blue tags make Tallen go crazy.
|
Levithunder
Butt Hurt Try Hards
Primus Federation
191
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 19:07:00 -
[58] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:I've heard lots of different views on the issue, but I would like to hear as many opinions as possible. If there was no passive ISK and you only got ISK from fighting would you want to hold land?
This would also be in light of increasing clone pack sizes back to their original 150 at the current 300k per clone cost. Fighting getting you double what you receive now but no passive ISK to prop up payroll, vehicle reimbursement, or the hiring of ringers. The only issue is you only collect the payment when you win your fights and if you can't win your fights you end up with nothing.
The way it is now:
36 million for a clone pack
10 million isk made by selling extra clones
What it should be:
1-5million for clone pack
District generates 1-2million daily
*PC shouldn't be about the corperations losses or gains the corperation shouldn't be like "well we can't do PC because its 40 kagiillion isk!" There should be cheap battles for corps so people can do what they want which is to fight. The losses and gains should be more concerning to the player not the corp, if ccp listens to your half brained idea then not only will people who have never done it won't want to spend 40 million isk to fight but veteran corps will be unwilling to pay to reattack lost districts
I mean which do you prefer BROKEN OR A DEAD game mode ?
OR someone could listen to my idea for once and everyone would win new players and old players.
(-í° -£-û -í°) against my adversaries.
|
Levithunder
Butt Hurt Try Hards
Primus Federation
191
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 19:12:00 -
[59] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Guys, just to be clear again we are likely looking on only being able to get simple number changes to what we currently have. Right now the current potential numbers floating are as follows:
Plan One: Passive Reduction
*Greatly reduce clone sale price (passive ISK) and increase Biomass price: something like 40-60k clone sale and 160-180k biomass
Plan Two: Passive Elimination
*Reduce clone sale price (passive ISK) to effectively 0 and double biomass price to 200-210k
Paired with both these plans would be a clone pack size increase to 150 clones at a cost of 300k per clone to prevent self-attacks for locking or ISK farming by killing the clone pack.
*******
While I hate passive ISK, my concern is still that eliminating it may lead to negative effects on participation in PC.
The side benefit of turning off passive ISK all together is that it could allow a new region to be opened up without the concern of passive ISK bleeding into the Dust economy from the PC system on an even larger scale.
Yes yes another broken idea .......
So what your saying is you need to do a quick rushed number change that makes PC even more undesirable to the players
Yep this is gonna turn out well.
(-í° -£-û -í°) against my adversaries.
|
The Robot Devil
Brave Bunnies
Brave Collective
2327
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 19:21:00 -
[60] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:
While I hate passive ISK, my concern is still that eliminating it may lead to negative effects on participation in PC.
.
This is the problem now, there is absolutely no incentive to play PC because a majority of the players feel they don't even have a chance against some of the best players in the game with unlimited funds. It is not worth bragging about if it costs you the rest of the game because you are poor.
I would go with Plan Two: Passive Elimination
*Reduce clone sale price (passive ISK) to effectively 0 and double biomass price to 200-210K
I think this would make the most difference, good corps would make ISK for fighting but it wouldn't be so much that it just blew the regular time spent in matches out of the water. If a normal pub pays 300k then each battle of PC should pays an extra 200K for a win and none for losing. The big long term problem is what you are pointing to, in three months when emotions aren't so high why would we play in a total ISK sink.
Tough call because we don't know what the future holds if we jump too far in. This is where CCP usually borks up, they step way over the line and it is because we want them to to teach other 1337 players a lesson. If I was CCP I would start rolling back profit by like 10% a month during a hotfix or something. When people start complaining just stop and wait a month. If it is still no good then bump it 5% or down 5% because when the forums starts to cry that means it is just about right. As much as we want it to be drastic we must look down the pike and understand that there does have to be a reward for the risk that outweighs other parts of the game.
"One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production."
Raoul Duke
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |