| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3305
   |
Posted - 2014.04.14 15:25:00 -
[1] - Quote
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.
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
|
commando biffle
Shadow Company HQ
Lokun Listamenn
59
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 15:29:00 -
[2] - 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 not don't like you but this is a good post
514MB!!! its a joke right?
|
Free Beers
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
2300
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 15:33:00 -
[3] - Quote
so turn pc back into an isk sink? Sorry man, i have lost money on half the pc matches i played in (we won them too) but my 250k suits or ADS will run me 2-3-4 mill and I hate to think what tankers make.
Lastly, if you take away the isk what you have is a bunch of players with tons of isk and no chance for newer groups (or vets coming back like WTF did) to compete.
lets face it PC 1.0 is trash and ccp foxfour should feel bad. You're on CPM tell ccp to get this **** **** design out of the game.
Every mercs life ends the same way. It is only the details of how he lived and died that distinguishes one from another
|
VALCORE72
NECROM0NGERS
Caps and Mercs
138
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 15:33:00 -
[4] - Quote
same . im voten for suger lol like her voice and her ideas |
HowDidThatTaste
Ancient Exiles.
Dirt Nap Squad.
4568
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 15:38:00 -
[5] - Quote
While this is an interesting concept, let play it out a few months.
1 st question after you take a district could you sell the clones off it and abandon the district?
It would seem to encourage more corps to just no show battles why put the effort into holding it if you know you might loose.
Only fight against corps you know you could beat and not take on the tougher corps, would kinda be like the corp battles of old
Many many no shows and people ducking fights. |
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star.
EoN.
3330
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 15:42:00 -
[6] - Quote
So only the rich can go to war and the peasents are left to pubs
Looks like kain is just a PR man for DNS and wants to keep the donut as it is with this idea |
Free Beers
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
2300
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 15:44:00 -
[7] - Quote
HowDidThatTaste wrote:While this is an interesting concept, let play it out a few months.
1 st question after you take a district could you sell the clones off it and abandon the district?
It would seem to encourage more corps to just no show battles why put the effort into holding it if you know you might loose.
Only fight against corps you know you could beat and not take on the tougher corps, would kinda be like the corp battles of old
Many many no shows and people ducking fights.
Taste I advocated for passive is to be gone months ago until i realized it doesn't make the game better it just punishes corps and players. I tried many of time to come up with different ways to make it better but gave up. PC 1.0 is a piece of **** and needs to go.
What you said is right if you cant win or could lose why fight you just lose isk. So we go back to grinding isk in pubs to fight in PC like we did back in open beta remember?
Sorry kane the idea is dead and you need to let it go. You dont have to save ccp from themselves because they designed a ******* **** game mode not you.
Every mercs life ends the same way. It is only the details of how he lived and died that distinguishes one from another
|
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3305
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 15:48:00 -
[8] - Quote
HowDidThatTaste wrote:While this is an interesting concept, let play it out a few months.
1 st question after you take a district could you sell the clones off it and abandon the district?
It would seem to encourage more corps to just no show battles why put the effort into holding it if you know you might loose.
Only fight against corps you know you could beat and not take on the tougher corps, would kinda be like the corp battles of old
Many many no shows and people ducking fights.
No passive means selling clones gets you nothing. Essentially the clone sale value gets turned to 0 or 1 ISK and biomass gets ramped up to 200k from 100k.
Beers, no, not turning PC into an ISK sink because the biomass value would be increased. So for example killing off a 450 clone cargo hub would net each player involved at least 5.625 million ISK.
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
|
Ripley Riley
Incorruptibles
1721
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 15:50:00 -
[9] - Quote
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.
He imposes order on the chaos of organic evolution...
|
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3306
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 15:50:00 -
[10] - Quote
Free Beers wrote: Sorry kane the idea is dead and you need to let it go. You dont have to save ccp from themselves because they designed a ******* **** game mode not you.
As long as I have the CPM tag and even after I'm still going to do what I can to make the game better for the community. I may be crazy or naive, but at this point I'm following it through to the end.
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
|
|
|
ADAM-OF-EVE
Dead Man's Game
1238
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 15:51:00 -
[11] - Quote
as it stands pc generated isk is going to die anyway once eve pilots are able to claim the land and start paying us to take it for them. i think its best to get that ball rolling now so when it does happen we dont have a huge change and a lot of rage.
what ccp needs to do is take all of M.H districts back and create a contract system with actual isk rewards in it for a win.
it should be made by dummy corps until eve players can take over and the contracts put at different values so mercs can choose which ones to fight. obviously different sides of the contracts would be different values so as to get players fighting for the best ones.
this needs to be done as it will bring a bit off balance and put all of the reward in the battles won and not in the passive isk gained.
give us a new stats on the leaderboard for contracts won and loss
when eve pilots finally put contracts out for us they can see who is the better bet for them
I will logi the s* out of you
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=99075&find
|
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3306
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 15:52:00 -
[12] - Quote
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.
Just identifying the realities that will result. If the change gets more people playing PC then I see it as a positive change, but if eliminating passive ISK turns PC into a ghost town because no one wants to actually hold land then it would be a mistake.
I've alway hated passive ISK and you can look through my posting history to validate that.
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
|
VALCORE72
NECROM0NGERS
Caps and Mercs
138
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 15:53:00 -
[13] - Quote
sure as long as eve can move clones for pc and a isk wipe befor market hits lol 1 will never happen |
SteelDark Knight
Ancient Exiles.
Dirt Nap Squad.
352
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 15:54:00 -
[14] - Quote
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? |
Thumb Green
THE STAR BORN
892
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:00:00 -
[15] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:HowDidThatTaste wrote:While this is an interesting concept, let play it out a few months.
1 st question after you take a district could you sell the clones off it and abandon the district?
It would seem to encourage more corps to just no show battles why put the effort into holding it if you know you might loose.
Only fight against corps you know you could beat and not take on the tougher corps, would kinda be like the corp battles of old
Many many no shows and people ducking fights. No passive means selling clones gets you nothing. Essentially the clone sale value gets turned to 0 or 1 ISK and biomass gets ramped up to 200k from 100k. Beers, no, not turning PC into an ISK sink because the biomass value would be increased. So for example killing off a 450 clone cargo hub would net each player involved at least 5.625 million ISK.
But only if they win.
Support Orbital Spawns
|
Leonid Tybalt
Inner.Hell
456
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:00:00 -
[16] - Quote
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.
That said "holding" districts should be a matter of actual FIGHTING. Not district locking bullshit as it is now... |
Korvin Lomont
United Pwnage Service
RISE of LEGION
912
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:01:00 -
[17] - 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.
Funny that the CPM comes up with that after some well known Corps have exploited PC like hell. So in all honesty PC is dead and no matter what CCP will do it will stay so. The Corps currently holding the majority of Molden Heath are by now so rich they could deny anyone access to PC no matter what CCP will do or change.
Sadly any change made will hurt new corps more than the ones currently farming ISK. With CCP's quite tolerant stance towards exploiters they have killed their most anticipated gamemode and CCP should feel bad. The sadest part they knew about the possible exploits from day one  .
But back to the topic what would be the alternative to passive ISK? Fighting just to hold some land for prestige? Don't get me wrong IMHO the current implemetation is awfull but without connection to the EVE market I see no point in grabbing land without passive ISK. I would love to have a reason other than ISK but I don't think CCP can come up with a solution to the fiasko they let happen... |
Leonid Tybalt
Inner.Hell
456
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:03:00 -
[18] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote: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.
It's funny how the figurehead of the most notorious district locking group in Molden Heath starts talking about having to "fight" for your land.  |
VALCORE72
NECROM0NGERS
Caps and Mercs
138
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:07:00 -
[19] - Quote
just feels like personal gain and i dont think thats what hes trying to say . bad rep goes a long way even when they are spot on right |
Free Beers
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
2301
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:07:00 -
[20] - Quote
ADAM-OF-EVE wrote:as it stands pc generated isk is going to die anyway once eve pilots are able to claim the land and start paying us to take it for them. i think its best to get that ball rolling now so when it does happen we dont have a huge change and a lot of rage.
what ccp needs to do is take all of M.H districts back and create a contract system with actual isk rewards in it for a win.
it should be made by dummy corps until eve players can take over and the contracts put at different values so mercs can choose which ones to fight. obviously different sides of the contracts would be different values so as to get players fighting for the best ones.
this needs to be done as it will bring a bit off balance and put all of the reward in the battles won and not in the passive isk gained.
give us a new stats on the leaderboard for contracts won and loss
when eve pilots finally put contracts out for us they can see who is the better bet for them
Adam thats to many assumptions CCP has only said the idea of PC 2.0 is completely different than the existing design, but thats all (per ccp lockingbro)
I have always advocated for mercs working for and with eve groups to do good stuff in new eden. Kane it just trying to find something to improve pc 1.0 till pc 2.0 comes. To me him trying to improve pc no means there is no pc 2.0 coming anytime soon.
Still no passive isk is worse than passive isk. We had that in open beta and you had to grind pub isk to play in PC. Most poeple just burnt out and stopped
Every mercs life ends the same way. It is only the details of how he lived and died that distinguishes one from another
|
|
|
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3307
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:09:00 -
[21] - Quote
Korvin Lomont wrote:
Funny that the CPM comes up with that after some well known Corps have exploited PC like hell.
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1036443#post1036443
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1130521#post1130521
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1207023#post1207023
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1412859#post1412859
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
|
Outlaw OneZero
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1441
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:10:00 -
[22] - 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.
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. |
Mortishai Belmont
G.L.O.R.Y
RISE of LEGION
112
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:12:00 -
[23] - Quote
Well, your problem there are these super corps (dirtnap) who are holding lots of districts already and have generated mass amounts of isk. So they would still have the advantage and make it close to impossible for smaller corps to have a fighting chance.
Besides, bringing in ringers is kind of what Dust is about right? It's all about us being mercs, what does a merc do, if not fight others battle for money?
Though, I think having the defenders pay for installations for defence would be a nice touch.
On a side note, installations should have plate shielding for the lower parts, lest they just be tank fodder for every match.
To answer the question though, yes, I would die for my land because it is mine without pay. Though if there is no benefit to actually holding the land, most people would see no purpose in it.
G.L.O.R.Y solider,
Master of the Gallente Heavy
|
Free Beers
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
2301
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:12:00 -
[24] - Quote
Leonid Tybalt wrote:Kain Spero wrote: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. It's funny how the figurehead of the most notorious district locking group in Molden Heath starts talking about having to "fight" for your land.
You do realize that kane runs ERA right? Not NS or AE or the other BIG corps at the time. The only corp that was actually attacking districts during the lock out? ERA history
You kids really believe whatever you make up in your head?
Every mercs life ends the same way. It is only the details of how he lived and died that distinguishes one from another
|
ADAM-OF-EVE
Dead Man's Game
1238
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:12:00 -
[25] - Quote
Free Beers wrote:ADAM-OF-EVE wrote:as it stands pc generated isk is going to die anyway once eve pilots are able to claim the land and start paying us to take it for them. i think its best to get that ball rolling now so when it does happen we dont have a huge change and a lot of rage.
what ccp needs to do is take all of M.H districts back and create a contract system with actual isk rewards in it for a win.
it should be made by dummy corps until eve players can take over and the contracts put at different values so mercs can choose which ones to fight. obviously different sides of the contracts would be different values so as to get players fighting for the best ones.
this needs to be done as it will bring a bit off balance and put all of the reward in the battles won and not in the passive isk gained.
give us a new stats on the leaderboard for contracts won and loss
when eve pilots finally put contracts out for us they can see who is the better bet for them Adam thats to many assumptions CCP has only said the idea of PC 2.0 is completely different than the existing design, but thats all (per ccp lockingbro) I have always advocated for mercs working for and with eve groups to do good stuff in new eden. Kane it just trying to find something to improve pc 1.0 till pc 2.0 comes. To me him trying to improve pc no means there is no pc 2.0 coming anytime soon. Still no passive isk is worse than passive isk. We had that in open beta and you had to grind pub isk to play in PC. Most poeple just burnt out and stopped
oh ok.. simple then.
pay mercs who win in clones. they generate clone packs to the owning corp. these clone packs should then be allowed to be traded with other mercs. this way no passive isk however isk already in game is being transferred about.
no passive isk but supply of clones would generate income and also allow others to attack the suppliers.
everyone wins.
I will logi the s* out of you
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=99075&find
|
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3307
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:13:00 -
[26] - Quote
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.
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
|
Tallen Ellecon
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
1660
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:17:00 -
[27] - Quote
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?
Supporter of tiericide, EVE interaction, and a proper NPE SoonGäó514
"No blue tags make Tallen go crazy.
|
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3307
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:18:00 -
[28] - Quote
ADAM-OF-EVE wrote:
oh ok.. simple then.
pay mercs who win in clones. they generate clone packs to the owning corp. these clone packs should then be allowed to be traded with other mercs. this way no passive isk however isk already in game is being transferred about.
no passive isk but supply of clones would generate income and also allow others to attack the suppliers.
everyone wins.
Problem is that changes like this are not so simple. Changes numbers from 110,000 to 1 is simple as is 120 to 150. With the resources available right now to address PC we'll be lucky to even get those kinds of changes.
The question is simple. If you only got money from biomass would you fight to hold land?
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
|
Outlaw OneZero
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1443
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:20:00 -
[29] - 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.
So remove biomass as the payout basis, link it to salvage and the total cost of gear spent on the match. Winner gets XX% of total expenditure on match. |
Free Beers
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
2303
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 16:20:00 -
[30] - Quote
ADAM-OF-EVE wrote:Free Beers wrote:ADAM-OF-EVE wrote:as it stands pc generated isk is going to die anyway once eve pilots are able to claim the land and start paying us to take it for them. i think its best to get that ball rolling now so when it does happen we dont have a huge change and a lot of rage.
what ccp needs to do is take all of M.H districts back and create a contract system with actual isk rewards in it for a win.
it should be made by dummy corps until eve players can take over and the contracts put at different values so mercs can choose which ones to fight. obviously different sides of the contracts would be different values so as to get players fighting for the best ones.
this needs to be done as it will bring a bit off balance and put all of the reward in the battles won and not in the passive isk gained.
give us a new stats on the leaderboard for contracts won and loss
when eve pilots finally put contracts out for us they can see who is the better bet for them Adam thats to many assumptions CCP has only said the idea of PC 2.0 is completely different than the existing design, but thats all (per ccp lockingbro) I have always advocated for mercs working for and with eve groups to do good stuff in new eden. Kane it just trying to find something to improve pc 1.0 till pc 2.0 comes. To me him trying to improve pc no means there is no pc 2.0 coming anytime soon. Still no passive isk is worse than passive isk. We had that in open beta and you had to grind pub isk to play in PC. Most poeple just burnt out and stopped oh ok.. simple then. pay mercs who win in clones. they generate clone packs to the owning corp. these clone packs should then be allowed to be traded with other mercs. this way no passive isk however isk already in game is being transferred about. no passive isk but supply of clones would generate income and also allow others to attack the suppliers. everyone wins.
CCP put in clones because there was an old rule that dust couldn't use any existing eve resources (dust can't negatively effect eve economy) with intention of dust of selling them to eve. It was terrible because what you fight with is your only income. So CCP built in fight OR make isk. I can't begin to tell you how many times i want to punch ccp foxfour (Not literally I love foxy its just a figure of speech MR Banhammer) It was just a terrible idea to begin with.
That said, I highly doubt there will be dust mercs selling clones going forward. The clone production and use for fighting works okay right now. CCP needs to come up with another way to bring isk into PC for mercs. Trying to do both with 1 thing is terrible idea.
/rant
Every mercs life ends the same way. It is only the details of how he lived and died that distinguishes one from another
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
BrotherofHavok
PIanet Express
Canis Eliminatus Operatives
28
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 19:27:00 -
[61] - 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.
Well, if other posts are anything to look at, the current land holders would still hold land because, and I quote/paraphrase to the best of my memory "the main reason people play PC is to fight your best 16 against the best 16 of another corp/corps. It's not about the isk or the payouts it about the lack of blueberries."
That being said, would I hold land without the passive isk? Sure, why? Because there would most likely be something else that would make it worth while to hold onto land. It could be just the excessive isk payout and SP you get from winning (holding land means you get attacked more and can attack others for free so more chances of winning), or it could be the reward our Eve side characters get. Hell, they could finally open up production on Dust side and make it worth all players time to hold land. If however they don't change the rewards and just leave it to holding land and receiving victory pay then the answer is maybe. I would have to try a few times and judge if the reward/payout is worth the hassle of suffering through so much lag.
Sincerely,
Your Multi-purpose Everything User
|
IgniteableAura
Ancient Exiles.
Dirt Nap Squad.
875
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 19:31:00 -
[62] - Quote
Real solutions:
1. Remove all passive isk generation. You must actively use your district to make money (PvE) Officer item generation is better than the current isk generation. Low chance of officer drops and other equipment based on usage. PC should revolve around bottom-up income streams.
2. Allow corps to bring 64 players into a match. No more 24 player groups defending 100 districts (some districts can have 64, 32, 12.) Allows smaller elite corps to hold specific districts and never lose them while allowing larger corps the freedom to "zerg" smaller elite corps
3. Reinforcement timers should only effect the last battle. Attacks should be able to happen at any time. Once there is 200 clones the distinct is locked and the final battle happens on the specified timer. Again, keeps single 25 man corps from holding onto large swaths of land and timer stacking. (all corp members get a mail when a district is under attack and they can go defend)
4. Remove clone packs entirely. Allow corps to "accrue" clones through FW/Pubs. They are allowed to have a single facility as a corp that is genolution owned. Once full they can use this to raid a single district. It can only be used when full, all clones are sent. Clone generation rate needs to be balanced. (a corp in PC should not be using clone packs, if they want to use clone packs they have to play pubs/FW to earn them. They can only earn one. This keeps "shell corps" from becoming an issue as then the players have to be active in that corp and can only issue a single attack)
Youtube
|
Ares 514
D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
777
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 19:31:00 -
[63] - 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.
Plan Two is the better option of the two you have listed IMO.
...
|
Ares 514
D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
777
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 19:32:00 -
[64] - Quote
Levithunder 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. 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.
I like this. I agree the main reason corps don't participate is it costs to much for a clone pack UNLESS you're farming ISK in PC already, in which case you don't need clone packs.
...
|
General John Ripper
20043
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 19:41:00 -
[65] - Quote
Most people are motivated by greed. You need to exploit that.
Everytime I get a like, another bug is fixed.
20k bugs fixed. :)
|
BrotherofHavok
PIanet Express
Canis Eliminatus Operatives
28
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 19:43:00 -
[66] - Quote
IgniteableAura wrote:Real solutions:
1. Remove all passive isk generation. You must actively use your district to make money (PvE) Officer item generation is better than the current isk generation. Low chance of officer drops and other equipment based on usage. PC should revolve around bottom-up income streams.
2. Allow corps to bring 64 players into a match. No more 24 player groups defending 100 districts (some districts can have 64, 32, 12.) Allows smaller elite corps to hold specific districts and never lose them while allowing larger corps the freedom to "zerg" smaller elite corps
3. Reinforcement timers should only effect the last battle. Attacks should be able to happen at any time. Once there is 200 clones the distinct is locked and the final battle happens on the specified timer. Again, keeps single 25 man corps from holding onto large swaths of land and timer stacking. (all corp members get a mail when a district is under attack and they can go defend)
4. Remove clone packs entirely. Allow corps to "accrue" clones through FW/Pubs. They are allowed to have a single facility as a corp that is genolution owned. Once full they can use this to raid a single district. It can only be used when full, all clones are sent. Clone generation rate needs to be balanced. (a corp in PC should not be using clone packs, if they want to use clone packs they have to play pubs/FW to earn them. They can only earn one. This keeps "shell corps" from becoming an issue as then the players have to be active in that corp and can only issue a single attack)
I agree slightly with #'s 1, 3, and 4. HOWEVER! Option #2 is a wtf for me. How could you say that adding more players into the match would be a good idea? It's already at 32 players (16v16) and has more lag than all other game types combined. Doubling the number of players in theory could decrease said lag, but with CCP's record and abilities would more than likely destroy the gameplay entirely.
Sincerely,
Your Multi-purpose Everything User
|
Flyingconejo
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
743
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 19:44:00 -
[67] - Quote
Free Beers has said already most of what I wanted to say. PC 1.0 is beyond recovery. Sure, increasing the clone pack size might get you some more battles and make it more fun, but I wouldn't expect too much.
Removing passive isk is always a good thing, but it is too late now. There should be some kind of benefit you could get from a district, that required active involvement from the owner, but we can't get that with a quick fix.
What really depresses me is the insistence of the OP to get "small number changes" that can be introduced with a small patch. That can only mean that PC 2.0 is not expected for the Fanfest, not even SoonTM. Would it be close to be launched, there would be no need to hotfix PC 1.0. |
IgniteableAura
Ancient Exiles.
Dirt Nap Squad.
877
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 19:59:00 -
[68] - Quote
BrotherofHavok wrote: How could you say that adding more players into the match would be a good idea? It's already at 32 players (16v16) and has more lag than all other game types combined. Doubling the number of players in theory could decrease said lag, but with CCP's record and abilities would more than likely destroy the gameplay entirely.
Lag is not a derivative of the number of people playing. Frame rate, yes. But its not my job to optimize the code, thats up to CCP to ensure. There are plenty of PS3 games that go far and above the 32 player limit. Many of them are 6+ years old.
Another thought, but increasing biomass amounts will cause another issue entirely. You will just get shell corps attacking and generating a lot more isk than before. Except now you create a permalocked environment.
Single cargo hub owned by shell corp "launches an attack with all 450 clones", 90 million isk is transferred to "real corp". Clone pack is purchased by real corp to resecure cargo hub and another is sent to "lock" and generate another 24 million isk.
Youtube
|
Flyingconejo
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
747
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:12:00 -
[69] - Quote
IgniteableAura wrote:
Single cargo hub owned by shell corp "launches an attack with all 450 clones", 90 million isk is transferred to "real corp". Clone pack is purchased by real corp to resecure cargo hub and another is sent to "lock" and generate another 24 million isk.
^^^ 1.0 is unfixable. 
Actually, they could just send a 449 attack, and leave 1 on the district to save the cost of one clone pack. |
ZDub 303
TeamPlayers
Dirt Nap Squad.
2471
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:13:00 -
[70] - Quote
The problem with PC is that there really isnt a lot of reason to desire holding a district without passive isk generation. If you remove that, it becomes the old corporation battle system with a really complex interface. There needs to be a reason for players to desire holding/owning a district and clearly passive isk generation is not a great motivator. But, that level of change requires a large iteration and will be a while until it is implemented. So...
Given that PC has been a colossal failure overall (which has to do with both the mechanics of the game mode and how horrible the lag is in PC matches) I feel at this point there probably isnt much reason to keep it around. I say remove passive isk generation, let PC fall apart and stay in shambles until they can revamp it with a 2.0 iteration. Its certainly a better alternative that allowing the broken game mode to inject so much isk into the economy while we all wait for a real fix.
You can still make money off of battles at least, so there is still a reason to play it occasionally. |
|
|
General John Ripper
20044
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:15:00 -
[71] - Quote
What if...
No passive isk.
Salvage rewards are buffed. You get the dropsuits and modules of mercs you personally kill, about 75 % of what they were wearing.
isk rewards after the fight remain the same.
When market comes out, we already have a healthy supply of suits we can't use to sell. Whats the point of the market if its only going to apply to officer gear and lp gear? Reconfigure the salvage system to give the market everyone wants more purpose.
Everytime I get a like, another bug is fixed.
20k bugs fixed. :)
|
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
2773
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:17:00 -
[72] - Quote
Definitely don't see the reason to grind out all day fighting for land that you don't benefit or get rewards from.
weRideNDie2getha since 2010
|
IgniteableAura
Ancient Exiles.
Dirt Nap Squad.
878
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:21:00 -
[73] - Quote
Flyingconejo wrote:IgniteableAura wrote:
Single cargo hub owned by shell corp "launches an attack with all 450 clones", 90 million isk is transferred to "real corp". Clone pack is purchased by real corp to resecure cargo hub and another is sent to "lock" and generate another 24 million isk.
^^^ 1.0 is unfixable. Actually, they could just send a 449 attack, and leave 1 on the district to save the cost of one clone pack.
Yea true, I was doing simple math
It could be fixable by allowing a market for clones. That would help to stabilize isk generation from PC. Like someone already stated in this thread; surplus clones and no battles = low cost for clones. But open market is likely another year away. Clone market is probably the best place to start anyway.
Youtube
|
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
2774
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:21:00 -
[74] - Quote
ZDub 303 wrote:The problem with PC is that there really isnt a lot of reason to desire holding a district without passive isk generation. If you remove that, it becomes the old corporation battle system with a really complex interface. There needs to be a reason for players to desire holding/owning a district and clearly passive isk generation is not a great motivator. But, that level of change requires a large iteration and will be a while until it is implemented. So...
Given that PC has been a colossal failure overall (which has to do with both the mechanics of the game mode and how horrible the lag is in PC matches) I feel at this point there probably isnt much reason to keep it around. I say remove passive isk generation, let PC fall apart and stay in shambles until they can revamp it with a 2.0 iteration. Its certainly a better alternative that allowing the broken game mode to inject so much isk into the economy while we all wait for a real fix.
You can still make money off of battles at least, so there is still a reason to play it occasionally.
I say remove biomass sale. Leave the biomass destruction at the number it is now and make clone packs free (or almost free). It destroys PC but leaves it from affecting dust until 2.0 comes out. yes people could actively farm districts but that requires effort at least.
exactly...if you remove passive ISK, you might as well just reinstate corp battles.
The only way removing ISK could make sense is if all of our gear somehow comes from the corps with land that manufactures them. But even then, you still need an open market for this to make sense.
So, when you buy a proto suit.....it only comes from a corp that manufactured it through their districts and sold it on the market. I don't know if CCP would have us manufacture these items, manually. So, if we were to manufacture them passively, ... we are back to the current system.
But honestly, I do like the fact this idea of corps earning ISK from selling items they made from materials off of their districts.
weRideNDie2getha since 2010
|
Youmadbroyolo
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:23:00 -
[75] - Quote
You know the only way to fix this now? with all the ISK that has built up? Inflation. That is literally the only way for things to be fixed, there would be massive inflation as money lost value in the real world. Same should be true for dust. nothing works with so many having so much money.
Needs to be inflation or a economic collapse needs to happen. |
Gaurdian Satyr
Glitched Connection
93
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:25:00 -
[76] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Free Beers wrote: Sorry kane the idea is dead and you need to let it go. You dont have to save ccp from themselves because they designed a ******* **** game mode not you. As long as I have the CPM tag and even after I'm still going to do what I can to make the game better for the community. I may be crazy or naive, but at this point I'm following it through to the end.
You no whats best for the game...Cut DNS territory in half and let everything get stable again so the zero care protostompers will disappear allowing newer people to come in and stand a chance....there are many times ive thought of dropping this game in the trash were it belongs in its current state cause its 0 fun unless you have gods grace to end up on the side of the stompers and then its still barely fun cause there is nothing to do.....the only reason i can think thats keeping me on is my corp...no...my friends ive made before this started
Passive ISK isnt a problem...its whos owning and controling that money is were any problem is at
-holds arms in O- throw it in the story basket bro
|
BrotherofHavok
PIanet Express
Canis Eliminatus Operatives
29
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:29:00 -
[77] - Quote
IgniteableAura wrote:BrotherofHavok wrote: How could you say that adding more players into the match would be a good idea? It's already at 32 players (16v16) and has more lag than all other game types combined. Doubling the number of players in theory could decrease said lag, but with CCP's record and abilities would more than likely destroy the gameplay entirely. Lag is not a derivative of the number of people playing. Frame rate, yes. But its not my job to optimize the code, thats up to CCP to ensure. There are plenty of PS3 games that go far and above the 32 player limit. Many of them are 6+ years old.
Alrighty then, I have my work cut out for me with this reply.
FIRST: It is true that lag is not a derivative of the number of people playing however if you look at the Eve setup in which more players adds more resources/lessen stress to individuals then you could say that the number of players actually hurts/helps with lag. To my knowledge CCP has treated Dust no differently and generally when there are less total players on you get put in matches with worse and worse lag issues.
SECOND: Frame rate and Lag are arguably one and the same. If the frame rate drops to a whopping 4 frames a second (not seen since the early 90's or before) then the fast pace of a FPS begins to have issues. Also, if the frame rate begins to 'cough' and by that I mean that it sometimes goes from 30 (random number) all the way down to 0 and then back up again you have what most players refer to as lag when others begin to 'blink' around the screen.
THIRD: While I did argue the point for/against more players in the 'FIRST' section I didn't argue the connection between players. The way the Battle Finder works is that it matches your connection, your ping, to those of other players and finds a decent connection rate (dependent on the number of players/matches/standards in place) and puts you into a match together. With PC this idea is completely thrown out the window and instead, rather than finding a good match for you, you jump straight into a match with absolutely no idea what the connection will be like. With some help I have found that areas where players are at can have absolutely atrocious ping (as much as 500) which means that it takes up to 500 seconds for the signal to bounce from there back to me. Now, is that number the same with my teammates? No. Is it the same with the enemy? Probably, but it always seems to affect them less than it does me. What does that mean? the match is on a server or connection closer to them and therefore they suffer less lag.
FOURTH: Lag-bombing. Also referred to as Equipment-Spamming. Strangely enough, this issue effects the enemy team far more than your own team and as such many "PC trained teams" push this strategy always. Meaning even if they don't want to do it or they don't like to do it they are told to do it by their CEO's/team leaders. More players would mean more equipment spamming and worse lag for my team. If they removed equipment after you swapped suits this would be less of a problem, but there you have it.
FIFTH: Not your job? Unless you are a DEV then you're damn right it's not your job but that doesn't solve the issue of your 64v64 or 32v32 recommendation for PC matches.
SIXTH: Bringing up other games really doesn't help with the problems of this one.
Finally done with all that. My recommendation? Rip it out. Since CCP cannot ensure decent connections without the battle finder, PC will always remain broken. They would need new servers devoted to each match (costly), or they would need to change how PC matches are played out. Add some AI that aren't affected by the lag so that your team has a better chance if it suffers through lag. Faction Warfare matches could go with 32v32 players BUT CCP has stated time and time again that there isn't enough of a player base for new game types and honestly Faction Warfare has always had trouble finding players for the "loser" factions so it would probably mean longer waiting times and incomplete/unfilled matches. So what can we do? Nothing. Hate to say it, but my answer remains to either Rip it out, or lessen the worth of owning a district/multiple districts.
Sincerely,
Your Multi-purpose Everything User
|
R F Gyro
Clones 4u
1275
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:30:00 -
[78] - 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 game balance 101 says that winning in a game shouldn't give you rewards that increase your chances of winning future games. ISK helps you win, so ISK shouldn't be the reward.
Personally I'd go with "monuments" as the rewards for holding districts. Something on the scale of the crashed titan on Caldari prime, sitting in the background so you can see it towering over you when fighting in the district. Maybe with a corp logo plastered across it. The longer you hold the district, or the more districts you hold (or both), the bigger the monument. Also, news items should be published - in game, on the CCP websites and in gaming press - for particularly noteworthy monument building events.
"Soldier of Fivetune [5TUN] corporation today completed the construction of the first level 7 monument in New Eden, on Bosena IV, district 9, after holding all districts on the planet for 100 consecutive days."
ISK/salvage payout should be 80% of the value of the assets lost on the field or something, all going to the winner.
RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
|
KILLER EI ITE16
Inner.Hell
4
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:31:00 -
[79] - Quote
I would like if you brought back the corp battles from chromosome |
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3345
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:33:00 -
[80] - Quote
HowDidThatTaste wrote:While this is an interesting concept, let play it out a few months.
1 st question after you take a district could you sell the clones off it and abandon the district?
It would seem to encourage more corps to just no show battles why put the effort into holding it if you know you might loose.
Only fight against corps you know you could beat and not take on the tougher corps, would kinda be like the corp battles of old
Many many no shows and people ducking fights.
Let it play out a few months? How many billions of ISK would that be? 200 or so?
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
|
|
BrotherofHavok
PIanet Express
Canis Eliminatus Operatives
31
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:38:00 -
[81] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:HowDidThatTaste wrote:While this is an interesting concept, let play it out a few months.
1 st question after you take a district could you sell the clones off it and abandon the district?
It would seem to encourage more corps to just no show battles why put the effort into holding it if you know you might loose.
Only fight against corps you know you could beat and not take on the tougher corps, would kinda be like the corp battles of old
Many many no shows and people ducking fights. Let it play out a few months? How many billions of ISK would that be? 200 or so?
10 mil isk a day, 245 districts = 2.45 bil a day * 30 days = 73.5 billion isk a month. I agree with Thor, how many months did you want to let it play out?
Sincerely,
Your Multi-purpose Everything User
|
Leonid Tybalt
Inner.Hell
459
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:39:00 -
[82] - 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.
Disband DNS and stop hugging eachother like you do now, while locking everybody else out from PC and you'll see a positive effect on PC participation... |
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3347
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:39:00 -
[83] - Quote
Gaurdian Satyr wrote:Kain Spero wrote:Free Beers wrote: Sorry kane the idea is dead and you need to let it go. You dont have to save ccp from themselves because they designed a ******* **** game mode not you. As long as I have the CPM tag and even after I'm still going to do what I can to make the game better for the community. I may be crazy or naive, but at this point I'm following it through to the end. You no whats best for the game...Cut DNS territory in half and let everything get stable again so the zero care protostompers will disappear allowing newer people to come in and stand a chance....there are many times ive thought of dropping this game in the trash were it belongs in its current state cause its 0 fun unless you have gods grace to end up on the side of the stompers and then its still barely fun cause there is nothing to do.....the only reason i can think thats keeping me on is my corp...no...my friends ive made before this started Passive ISK isnt a problem...its whos owning and controling that money is were any problem is at
To be quite honest DNS isn't the problem. The mechanics have been crap since they dropped PC. The problems became more obvious as the corps within DNS knocked all the other corps out of PC little by little.
There's just not enough competition there. It got to the point where every single attack that came in was a super team. That wears people down and people just started locking. You'd lock to maintain your hold and launch attacks, but then it got to the point where whoever you attacked would hire a super team.
With these mechanics it would have required the elite players to maintain restraint which is a ridiculous notion.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
Appia Vibbia
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
2099
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:41:00 -
[84] - Quote
I really don't see a reason to care about passive ISK gain.
The whole system needs to go. Districts shouldn't have just popped up out of nowhere. EVE's Planetary Interaction should have been the main driving force for Planetary Conquest. Instead we have two systems that work simultaneously that have somewhat related uses.
The clone pack was a failure. If you could have a variable amount of clones purchased or stack clone packs it would be different but 100, 120, or 150 just isn't enough to make the time invested feel worth it.
Ydubbs81 RND wrote:
So, when you buy a proto suit.....it only comes from a corp that manufactured it through their districts and sold it on the market. I don't know if CCP would have us manufacture these items, manually. So, if we were to manufacture them passively, ... we are back to the current system.
Again, making DUST and EVE mesh together as a single system would be wonderful. But that is a long ways off.
Appia Vibbia for CPM1
AppiaVibbia(at)gmail(dot)com
AKA Nappia, AKA Mathppia
|
IgniteableAura
Ancient Exiles.
Dirt Nap Squad.
879
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:44:00 -
[85] - Quote
Youmadbroyolo wrote:You know the only way to fix this now? with all the ISK that has built up? Inflation. That is literally the only way for things to be fixed, there would be massive inflation as money lost value in the real world. Same should be true for dust. nothing works with so many having so much money.
Needs to be inflation or a economic collapse needs to happen.
The majority of the isk in the economy is actually from public matches. Individuals in PC represent <5% of the dust population, granted they have a lot more isk/player due to passive income streams on top of public income.
http://dustnews24.com/2014/03/18/way-of-the-mercenary-aquisition/
Inflation will largely effect the non-PC active community because they can only run public matches and won't have any supplemental income from PC. Corps outside of PC also usually have a much higher tax.
Youtube
|
Free Beers
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
2309
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:44:00 -
[86] - Quote
Outlaw OneZero wrote: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.
You have missed the point outlaw. If attacking gives none but defending is where its at then what drives conflict? PC and the design that goes with it is very complex. Right now holding a district is worth the most so thats what people want to do. If you change it to defending then PC stays the same we have now.
Like i said before its economies of scale and the very very low player population to add to it. There are very few people that run PC these days( just like eve)
Every mercs life ends the same way. It is only the details of how he lived and died that distinguishes one from another
|
Leonid Tybalt
Inner.Hell
459
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:47:00 -
[87] - 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.
Disband DNS and stop hugging eachother like you do now, while locking everybody else out from PC and you'll see a positive effect on PC participation... |
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3347
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 20:48:00 -
[88] - Quote
Instead of laying out PI like you do now, they could have a few different layouts.
You could have the manual approach that you currently have in Eve, but planets that have active districts would be different map layouts that you'd fight on. You could choose more defensive layouts that produced less PI or more PI and less defense. I'd thought about manual layouts for this, but I'm sure that would be very expensive from a developmental standpoint.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
IgniteableAura
Ancient Exiles.
Dirt Nap Squad.
879
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 21:07:00 -
[89] - Quote
BrotherofHavok wrote:
-stuff about lag/frame rate
1. Its all a matter of code design and server infrastructure. It has less to do with location if the servers are set correctly and have the bandwidth and coding to handle the incoming signals. "aka net code"
2. Frame rate and lag are NOT the same. Frame rate comes from design and hardware. Lag is caused from a poor network. Frame rate has little to do with the network. "turning down graphic quality" improves frame rates but has little effect on lag.
3. 500 ping is 500 milliseconds (half a second). Ping is going to change based on server location and your own network and the server with which you are connected. As long as CCP has well placed servers and good net code, many people can play in the same game with little lag.
4. Equipment lag bombing is mostly a thing of the past, it was a problem in the code. This effects frame rate, not lag. Those are two different things. Frame rate /=/ Lag. I have never had an issue with equipment bombing because I use an SSD and have a new PS3. Older code caused huge frame rate issues for some people in PC games, but has "mostly" been fixed. (try running on 480p resolution, it helps with frame rate)
5/6. Bringing up other games is pertinent because it shows a history of other games having more players (256 in a single match, all one server) and not having lag issues. It proves a point in that more players /=/ more lag as long as there is proper design.
Youtube
|
Jadd Hatchen
The Phoenix Federation
483
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 21:29:00 -
[90] - 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.
Kain, honestly the problem is that CCP has not made the EVE game more interdependent with DUST. I would be happy with taking districts resulting in no passive income for DUST directly, however there has to be a reason to make EVE pilot want the DUST districts to be taken. So basically, stuff has be be produced by the districts for the EVE pilots to want and use to make other things that will earn them a profit. Then the EVE pilots will hire DUST mercs for very handsome sums to take and hold districts. This will spur on an economy that is so far COMPLETELY VOID in the DUST universe. This is the thing you need to be concerned with as a CPM rep that hopes to ever represent me.
Make there a REASON for the EVE pilots to want me to fight for them! Make there a reason for the EVE pilots to want to provide orbital support for the control of a district. Make there a reason that EVE pilot will fund entire DUST corps to further their empires in EVE.
Do all of that and this too:
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=137656&find=unread
|
|
|
Outlaw OneZero
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1446
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 21:44:00 -
[91] - Quote
We are all discussing putting band-aids on a sucking chest wound here. PC is, at best, high stakes, winner take all skirmish, at worst, an ISK faucet. Pull the plug, start over with a more meaningful Dust/EVE crossover game mode. |
BrotherofHavok
PIanet Express
Canis Eliminatus Operatives
31
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 21:53:00 -
[92] - Quote
Outlaw OneZero wrote:We are all discussing putting band-aids on a sucking chest wound here. PC is, at best, high stakes, winner take all skirmish, at worst, an ISK faucet. Pull the plug, start over with a more meaningful Dust/EVE crossover game mode.
I agree 100%. +1
EDIT: See topic Protesting the Protest
Sincerely,
Your Multi-purpose Everything User
|
Patrick57
6995
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 21:57:00 -
[93] - Quote
Hell no, because then, if your corp wanted to make money, you'd have to set a tax (a deal breaker for many people), or rely on people donating to the corp. Maybe just lower the passive ISK income? I don't know. 
Hell is empty and all the devils are here.
-William Shakespeare
|
BrotherofHavok
PIanet Express
Canis Eliminatus Operatives
31
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 22:00:00 -
[94] - Quote
IgniteableAura wrote:BrotherofHavok wrote:
-stuff about lag/frame rate
Some kind of Counter argument
First off will edit or reply again later, going out to socialize. Thanks for correcting my mistake, I did indeed mean milliseconds.
Define Lag:
lag is impaired computer functionality (slow application responses or reduced/choppy frame rates) resulting from high latency, packet loss, or low-performance (generally video) hardware
Sincerely,
Your Multi-purpose Everything User
|
Patrick57
6996
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 22:02:00 -
[95] - Quote
Leonid Tybalt wrote:Disband DNS and stop hugging eachother like you do now, while locking everybody else out from PC and you'll see a positive effect on PC participation...
Just putting this out there, GG, you guys had a very strong team, and I'd love to see more of you.
Hell is empty and all the devils are here.
-William Shakespeare
|
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3315
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 22:11:00 -
[96] - Quote
Void Echo wrote:
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).
The current land holders will adapt and overcome as they always have, so these changes wouldn't remove them from participating in PC. My concern is that this could reduce or eliminate corps, especially new ones, working towards getting involved in Planetary Conquest since the promise of wealth from passive ISK would be gone. Now what we are looking at is the incentive being that players work towards forming strong organizations to fight others in order to get ISK and that could very well be a positive direction.
You have to understand that having land has the inherent negative of the game basically saying, "You will play at X time if someone chooses to attack you or you will loose this land." That negative is offset by the passive ISK and the corp programs like payroll and vehicle replacement that it can fund. As a result when you remove passive ISK entirely is could lead many corps not even trying to enter the PC arena because there is no way to set off the entry costs.
I guess it comes down to whether or not the negatives of turning off passive are outweighed by it's benefits.
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
|
Levithunder
Butt Hurt Try Hards
Primus Federation
192
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 22:14:00 -
[97] - Quote
Outlaw OneZero wrote:We are all discussing putting band-aids on a sucking chest wound here. PC is, at best, high stakes, winner take all skirmish, at worst, an ISK faucet. Pull the plug, start over with a more meaningful Dust/EVE crossover game mode.
Agreed.
(-í° -£-û -í°) against my adversaries.
|
Levithunder
Butt Hurt Try Hards
Primus Federation
192
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 22:25:00 -
[98] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Void Echo wrote:
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).
The current land holders will adapt and overcome as they always have, so these changes wouldn't remove them from participating in PC. My concern is that this could reduce or eliminate corps, especially new ones, working towards getting involved in Planetary Conquest since the promise of wealth from passive ISK would be gone. Now what we are looking at is the incentive being that players work towards forming strong organizations to fight others in order to get ISK and that could very well be a positive direction. You have to understand that having land has the inherent negative of the game basically saying, "You will play at X time if someone chooses to attack you or you will loose this land." That negative is offset by the passive ISK and the corp programs like payroll and vehicle replacement that it can fund. As a result when you remove passive ISK entirely is could lead many corps not even trying to enter the PC arena because there is no way to set off the entry costs. I guess it comes down to whether or not the negatives of turning off passive are outweighed by it's benefits.
Why don't you do what you want and don't bother the community you say you want OUR feedback but you come on the forums and tell us what your planing todo and won't stray from it. You just want the community to recognize what your doing.
You say you want to let everyone fight but do you think making a clone pack cost from 36,000,000isk to 60,000,000isk is a good idea???
FYI bud your stepping 24,000,000isk in the wrong direction.
NO small corp is willing to pay more than 10,000,000isk for a clone pack just to get there butt kicked in by ancient exiles or nyisn sain PERIOD.
(-í° -£-û -í°) against my adversaries.
|
Cenex Langly
D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
715
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 22:36:00 -
[99] - 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.
Remove the passive ISK completely. Have districts act like POS's in EVE that generate different amounts/types of resources. These resources can be sold to industry people (in eve) that will build all the gear/modules/etc in DUST and sell it back.
Thus you have an open market that uses generated ISK from PUB matches to determine price of the goods, that will determine the price of the resources generated from the districts. Corporations will have to sell the generated resources at prices that will reflect what the general public can afford for those goods. If no one can afford proto gear any more then resource values will drop, and when people can afford good expensive proto gear then prices will rise. Economy 101.
As for that, people will fight over the districts but they won't go out of control over the passive ISK income (******* stupid imo). This is exactly the Moon-Goo exploit that happened a few years ago in EVE, trillions of ISK flooding the game... Absurd.
Also having districts "mine planets out" of resources causing shifts in which districts hold which resources will mean that corporations will continually fight in regular (or irregular) intervals for the most valuable districts. (Resource shifting).
As for attacking districts, they need to change the mechanic completely. It should be free to attack a district, but should require reinforcement windows to win-over a districts control. (which should require new modules like TCU's in EVE).
DUST needs to reflect EVE sovereignty warfare if it is going to make any good PC mechanic.
And for the love of all that is holy we need Corp Battle's back in game so we can practice against other corps, or duke it out with those that we absolutely loathe, like Escrow and DDB and, yes you, you quebec fools (I won't even capitalize your name).
Newb
|
Soldner VonKuechle
SAM-MIK
General Tso's Alliance
508
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 23:04:00 -
[100] - Quote
Super easy fixes that takes minimal coding time:
Enlarge clone packs top 150, price change if need be.
Elongate the attack window from 1 to 3 hours, making it logistically impossible to stack a 150 man god mode army to control the whole of MH; smaller corps of 30 or less would gladly sit on one or two distinct at most, they'll at least get to play.
Keep passive income as is, its the incentive to get the smaller guys in and to stay in if these other changes happen.
It's gotta be a package deal, you can't chop or change one variable in the quick fix, it breaks it farther.
There are more problems in the players than in the game.
|
|
|
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
2785
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 23:15:00 -
[101] - Quote
Cenex Langly 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. Remove the passive ISK completely. Have districts act like POS's in EVE that generate different amounts/types of resources. These resources can be sold to industry people (in eve) that will build all the gear/modules/etc in DUST and sell it back. Thus you have an open market that uses generated ISK from PUB matches to determine price of the goods, that will determine the price of the resources generated from the districts. Corporations will have to sell the generated resources at prices that will reflect what the general public can afford for those goods. If no one can afford proto gear any more then resource values will drop, and when people can afford good expensive proto gear then prices will rise. Economy 101. As for that, people will fight over the districts but they won't go out of control over the passive ISK income (******* stupid imo). This is exactly the Moon-Goo exploit that happened a few years ago in EVE, trillions of ISK flooding the game... Absurd. Also having districts "mine planets out" of resources causing shifts in which districts hold which resources will mean that corporations will continually fight in regular (or irregular) intervals for the most valuable districts. (Resource shifting). As for attacking districts, they need to change the mechanic completely. It should be free to attack a district, but should require reinforcement windows to win-over a districts control. (which should require new modules like TCU's in EVE). DUST needs to reflect EVE sovereignty warfare if it is going to make any good PC mechanic. And for the love of all that is holy we need Corp Battle's back in game so we can practice against other corps, or duke it out with those that we absolutely loathe, like Escrow and DDB and, yes you, you quebec fools (I won't even capitalize your name).
It's what I suggested but you need an open market for this to be a reality.
weRideNDie2getha since 2010
|
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
2785
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 23:19:00 -
[102] - Quote
Levithunder wrote:Kain Spero wrote:Void Echo wrote:
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).
The current land holders will adapt and overcome as they always have, so these changes wouldn't remove them from participating in PC. My concern is that this could reduce or eliminate corps, especially new ones, working towards getting involved in Planetary Conquest since the promise of wealth from passive ISK would be gone. Now what we are looking at is the incentive being that players work towards forming strong organizations to fight others in order to get ISK and that could very well be a positive direction. You have to understand that having land has the inherent negative of the game basically saying, "You will play at X time if someone chooses to attack you or you will loose this land." That negative is offset by the passive ISK and the corp programs like payroll and vehicle replacement that it can fund. As a result when you remove passive ISK entirely is could lead many corps not even trying to enter the PC arena because there is no way to set off the entry costs. I guess it comes down to whether or not the negatives of turning off passive are outweighed by it's benefits. Why don't you do what you want and don't bother the community you say you want OUR feedback but you come on the forums and tell us what your planing todo and won't stray from it. You just want the community to recognize what your doing. You say you want to let everyone fight but do you think making a clone pack cost from 36,000,000isk to 60,000,000isk is a good idea??? FYI bud your stepping 24,000,000isk in the wrong direction. NO small corp is willing to pay more than 10,000,000isk for a clone pack just to get there butt kicked in by ancient exiles or nyisn sain PERIOD.
increasing the clone pack cost and number of clones is a good idea. 120 clones definitely needs to be increased to at least 150..at most 200. But then you don't want people to just spam clone packs all the time. You want attacks to be strategic..instead of launching clone packs and hitting any district from anywhere. So, you have to increase the cost of the clone pack....$80M was a good number. I don't think it should be lower than that.
It used to cost $240M to takeover a hub. CCP got that part right
weRideNDie2getha since 2010
|
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
2785
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 23:26:00 -
[103] - Quote
In fact, $80M is too low. The reason that CCP reduced the number of clones in the pack is because they wanted to limit the clone pack attacks. I agree with their intention but instead of nerfing the number of clones, they should have just raised the price. $120M for 200 clones sounds about right....$120M - $150M or so.
weRideNDie2getha since 2010
|
Tebu Gan
Dem Durrty Boyz
Dirt Nap Squad.
798
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 23:27:00 -
[104] - 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.
Hmm, that is an interesting thing to think about. My very first thought, "In that case, why would I want to hold land?". I would want to attack quite often.
But I can instantly see perks to actually holding land for those that want to attack and make money. Holding districts is beneficial because of the clone generation. Basically free clones. But that would also mean that at some point, production stops. Meaning the district can be considered null and useless at that point.
But then again, attacking is the only way to make money. So you move those clones out to another district (some) and make some money. Still the district is important because again, free clones. I think this would place a heavy emphasis on district ownership as a source of revenue still.
But, at the same time it limits the amount of districts that a corp would actually want to hold. Sure if you can consistently hold districts, that means more money. But considering the fact that money generation comes from actual fighting, you want many opponents, meaning you don't want to hold the whole of MH, or even a large portion.
Then again, a large corporation, I mean alliance, could gather up most of the districts like we are currently doing, and just make bank from those sending clone packs at us, still abusing the system for the good of just a few people. But actually allowing people to hold more land, means more battles (through free clone generation). Meaning more potential earnings, as it can be expensive running clone packs.
An interesting idea.
Tanks - Balancing Turrets
|
Maximus Stryker
Who Are Those Guys
908
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 23:39:00 -
[105] - Quote
No.
My basic thoughts:
- Need incentives to attack
- Need incentives to hold land (not just winning the ISK by winning a defense contract)
- Possibility, much better EVE rewards. Since EVE is not interested in DUST at the moment, make the the rewards for holding districts & space stupid helpful to EVE players. Like, really really helpful to them.
- If no passive ISK for owning districts, than maybe DUST players can get other rewards like a "booster" By owning districts...you get more stuff when you play pubs...kinda like how when you have increased loyalty to a faction, you get stuff from their store, when when you own a district, you get higher reputation and that reputation allows pubs to be more profitable, perhaps in both terms of ISK and SP.
Faction Channels for FW Staging
PIE Ground Control | Caldari Hierarchy | Turalyon | Chosen Matari
|
deepfried salad gilliam
Sanguine Knights
649
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 23:41:00 -
[106] - Quote
id fight for my own place in new eden real estate even if it payed less than a pub match
id also be fine with winner takes all
350 k isk for each dead clone
and
75% salvage rate
It'll help define roles, i promise:)
|
Rowdy Railgunner
Capital Acquisitions LLC
Dirt Nap Squad.
383
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 23:45:00 -
[107] - 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 should work is clones supply the district. EVE support should be needed to move clones. Clones only generate ISK when someone else buys them off of you. Clones should be supplied for an attack at a rate that the EvE pilot drops them onto district. So if someone buys 3 clone packs and has an EVE character drop all 3 packs on one district then say it is a 450 clone district the attackers have 450 clones as well as the defenders. If it is a 300 clone district, the EVE character only drops 2 packs on it and 300 clones are available to the attackers. Oh and clone packs should be 150 per. What is this 120 BS? And all of nullsec should be opened up. MH is nice and all, but people that don't live in MH don't care, and they shouldn't. But if you add in planetary control for the planet that your moon circles cutting into mining or cap production... I can picture a lot more EVE FPS players getting involved with PC. DUST needs to opened up on a grand scale and it needs to matter in nullsec. Alliance must control the planet to mine the moons or it takes a hefty tax set by the DUST corp that owns it. EVE is big. DUST is small right now, I don't think this would really be a problem unless EVE just continues to **** on DUST.
|
Ludvig Enraga
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
1017
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 23:45:00 -
[108] - Quote
I really don't see the point. Ideally districts should have resources sellable on EvE market.
PLC, NK, Scout - before 1.8.
That's right, I stack that OP Sh!t.
|
Monkey MAC
Rough Riders..
2531
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 00:06:00 -
[109] - Quote
The Idea of holding land to do nothing more than defend it? No I wouldn't bother, I would fight to take it from someone but I wouldn't put effort into defending it if I don't get a benifit.
There needs to be a reason, something that makes me care, that makes me want more land than I have.
1) Ground-Based Facilities need to give HUGE bonuses to Alliances and Corporations. For Example
Gùå Research Facilities lower the time to research/produce blueprints, while increasing the number of runs per blueprint.
Gùå Production Facilities reduce the production time/resource consumption of producing items
Gùå Space Elevator Facilities allow for the transferal of resources at a faster rate than mining them by hand.
Gùå Mining Facilities while producing small amounts of resources also restrict mining in adjacent districts by Capsuleers, forcing them to either mine elsewhere or pay levies as set by the Space Elevator
Gùå Storage Facilities alloe resources to be stored on planet where EvE pilots cannot salvage/mine/steal or otherwise obtain without permission.
2) Allow Dust-Mercs to run missions to sabotage/steal resouces from these facilities
Gùå Allow Blueprint Segments to be stolen / delay completion of the current blueprint research
Gùå Allow inventory items to be stolen / delay completion of a manufacturing run
Gùå Disable Taxes Levies / Halt all interplanetary transport of materials
Gùå Disable Minning Operations
Gùå Steal Resouces
Doing this will mean people like myself will hold land not just for the sake of holding it, but because of the industrial power it can grant. Done correctly PC should provide income for its custodians, but in a far more round about way then the current method of selling surplus clones.
Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work.
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
|
Levithunder
Butt Hurt Try Hards
Primus Federation
192
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 00:44:00 -
[110] - Quote
Ydubbs81 RND wrote:In fact, $80M is too low. The reason that CCP reduced the number of clones in the pack is because they wanted to limit the clone pack attacks. I agree with their intention but instead of nerfing the number of clones, they should have just raised the price. $120M for 200 clones sounds about right....$120M - $150M or so.
Well I guess it will be coming out of your wallet then not mine:)you realize that corp contracts in beta were 5-10 million right? And everyone still wants that game mode returned right? Soooooo yeah PC is gonna still be broken after fanfest in 2014.
(-í° -£-û -í°) against my adversaries.
|
|
|
Levithunder
Butt Hurt Try Hards
Primus Federation
192
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 00:46:00 -
[111] - Quote
Monkey MAC wrote:The Idea of holding land to do nothing more than defend it? No I wouldn't bother, I would fight to take it from someone but I wouldn't put effort into defending it if I don't get a benifit.
There needs to be a reason, something that makes me care, that makes me want more land than I have.
1) Ground-Based Facilities need to give HUGE bonuses to Alliances and Corporations. For Example
Gùå Research Facilities lower the time to research/produce blueprints, while increasing the number of runs per blueprint.
Gùå Production Facilities reduce the production time/resource consumption of producing items
Gùå Space Elevator Facilities allow for the transferal of resources at a faster rate than mining them by hand.
Gùå Mining Facilities while producing small amounts of resources also restrict mining in adjacent districts by Capsuleers, forcing them to either mine elsewhere or pay levies as set by the Space Elevator
Gùå Storage Facilities alloe resources to be stored on planet where EvE pilots cannot salvage/mine/steal or otherwise obtain without permission.
2) Allow Dust-Mercs to run missions to sabotage/steal resouces from these facilities
Gùå Allow Blueprint Segments to be stolen / delay completion of the current blueprint research
Gùå Allow inventory items to be stolen / delay completion of a manufacturing run
Gùå Disable Taxes Levies / Halt all interplanetary transport of materials
Gùå Disable Minning Operations
Gùå Steal Resouces
Doing this will mean people like myself will hold land not just for the sake of holding it, but because of the industrial power it can grant. Done correctly PC should provide income for its custodians, but in a far more round about way then the current method of selling surplus clones.
This is why I allied myself with rough riders this right here:)
(-í° -£-û -í°) against my adversaries.
|
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
2785
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 00:48:00 -
[112] - Quote
Levithunder wrote:Ydubbs81 RND wrote:In fact, $80M is too low. The reason that CCP reduced the number of clones in the pack is because they wanted to limit the clone pack attacks. I agree with their intention but instead of nerfing the number of clones, they should have just raised the price. $120M for 200 clones sounds about right....$120M - $150M or so.
Well I guess it will be coming out of your wallet then not mine:)you realize that corp contracts in beta were 5-10 million right? And everyone still wants that game mode returned right? Soooooo yeah PC is gonna still be broken after fanfest in 2014.
corp contracts were whatever corps agreed to. PFB and HS fought for $300M, if I am correct.
it used to cost $160M or $300M to take over a district. And this was before there were multi-billion ISK corps.
weRideNDie2getha since 2010
|
Levithunder
Butt Hurt Try Hards
Primus Federation
192
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 00:49:00 -
[113] - Quote
Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Levithunder wrote:Kain Spero wrote:Void Echo wrote:
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).
The current land holders will adapt and overcome as they always have, so these changes wouldn't remove them from participating in PC. My concern is that this could reduce or eliminate corps, especially new ones, working towards getting involved in Planetary Conquest since the promise of wealth from passive ISK would be gone. Now what we are looking at is the incentive being that players work towards forming strong organizations to fight others in order to get ISK and that could very well be a positive direction. You have to understand that having land has the inherent negative of the game basically saying, "You will play at X time if someone chooses to attack you or you will loose this land." That negative is offset by the passive ISK and the corp programs like payroll and vehicle replacement that it can fund. As a result when you remove passive ISK entirely is could lead many corps not even trying to enter the PC arena because there is no way to set off the entry costs. I guess it comes down to whether or not the negatives of turning off passive are outweighed by it's benefits. Why don't you do what you want and don't bother the community you say you want OUR feedback but you come on the forums and tell us what your planing todo and won't stray from it. You just want the community to recognize what your doing. You say you want to let everyone fight but do you think making a clone pack cost from 36,000,000isk to 60,000,000isk is a good idea??? FYI bud your stepping 24,000,000isk in the wrong direction. NO small corp is willing to pay more than 10,000,000isk for a clone pack just to get there butt kicked in by ancient exiles or nyisn sain PERIOD. increasing the clone pack cost and number of clones is a good idea. 120 clones definitely needs to be increased to at least 150..at most 200. But then you don't want people to just spam clone packs all the time. You want attacks to be strategic..instead of launching clone packs and hitting any district from anywhere. So, you have to increase the cost of the clone pack....$80M was a good number. I don't think it should be lower than that. It used to cost $240M to takeover a hub. CCP got that part right btw you just don't want smaller corps attacking your districts more often :) join me in a pub match and you will taste my laser beams
(-í° -£-û -í°) against my adversaries.
|
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
2785
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 00:53:00 -
[114] - Quote
Levithunder wrote:Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Levithunder wrote:Kain Spero wrote:Void Echo wrote:
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).
The current land holders will adapt and overcome as they always have, so these changes wouldn't remove them from participating in PC. My concern is that this could reduce or eliminate corps, especially new ones, working towards getting involved in Planetary Conquest since the promise of wealth from passive ISK would be gone. Now what we are looking at is the incentive being that players work towards forming strong organizations to fight others in order to get ISK and that could very well be a positive direction. You have to understand that having land has the inherent negative of the game basically saying, "You will play at X time if someone chooses to attack you or you will loose this land." That negative is offset by the passive ISK and the corp programs like payroll and vehicle replacement that it can fund. As a result when you remove passive ISK entirely is could lead many corps not even trying to enter the PC arena because there is no way to set off the entry costs. I guess it comes down to whether or not the negatives of turning off passive are outweighed by it's benefits. Why don't you do what you want and don't bother the community you say you want OUR feedback but you come on the forums and tell us what your planing todo and won't stray from it. You just want the community to recognize what your doing. You say you want to let everyone fight but do you think making a clone pack cost from 36,000,000isk to 60,000,000isk is a good idea??? FYI bud your stepping 24,000,000isk in the wrong direction. NO small corp is willing to pay more than 10,000,000isk for a clone pack just to get there butt kicked in by ancient exiles or nyisn sain PERIOD. increasing the clone pack cost and number of clones is a good idea. 120 clones definitely needs to be increased to at least 150..at most 200. But then you don't want people to just spam clone packs all the time. You want attacks to be strategic..instead of launching clone packs and hitting any district from anywhere. So, you have to increase the cost of the clone pack....$80M was a good number. I don't think it should be lower than that. It used to cost $240M to takeover a hub. CCP got that part right btw you just don't want smaller corps attacking your districts more often :) join me in a pub match and you will taste my laser beams
smaller corps need to do what we had to do when pc first started. Ask most corps that were here when pc first started what they did to prepare for pc. We all played pubs and grind out ISK to fund our pc efforts.
If a corp can field a team and can defend their districts then they have more than enough people to grind out in pubs to save for pc efforts.
PS:: lasers are for those afraid to get their hands dirty fighting over an objective.
weRideNDie2getha since 2010
|
deepfried salad gilliam
Sanguine Knights
649
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 00:56:00 -
[115] - Quote
Maximus Stryker wrote:No.
My basic thoughts:
- Need incentives to attack large amounts of isk for a win from biomass and salvage
- Need incentives to hold land (not just winning the ISK by winning a defense contract) free clones, isk from biomass and salvage
- Possibility, much better EVE rewards. Since EVE is not interested in DUST at the moment, make the the rewards for holding districts & space stupid helpful to EVE players. Like, really really helpful to them.
- If no passive ISK for owning districts, than maybe DUST players can get other rewards like a "booster" By owning districts...you get more stuff when you play pubs...kinda like how when you have increased loyalty to a faction, you get stuff from their store, when when you own a district, you get higher reputation and that reputation allows pubs to be more profitable, perhaps in both terms of ISK and SP.
It'll help define roles, i promise:)
|
Thurak1
Psygod9
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
548
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 00:58:00 -
[116] - 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.
No passive isk no reason to even have PC other than a pissing contest. |
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3353
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 01:08:00 -
[117] - Quote
Ydubbs81 RND wrote:In fact, $80M is too low. The reason that CCP reduced the number of clones in the pack is because they wanted to limit the clone pack attacks. I agree with their intention but instead of nerfing the number of clones, they should have just raised the price. $120M for 200 clones sounds about right....$120M - $150M or so.
I can't disagree more.
PC would be more dead than it is now. If clone packs were cheap (10 mil) there would be fighting. You'd need to be in a god mode donut for 4 or 5 months to afford 120 mil clone packs.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3353
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 01:09:00 -
[118] - Quote
Thurak1 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. No passive isk no reason to even have PC other than a pissing contest.
People did corp battles for ZERO ISK all the time. People want to play in a team setting.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3353
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 01:13:00 -
[119] - Quote
I just can't wrap my head around wanting to increase the cost of entry for a game mode that is suffering from a lack of participation.
It would be like a restaurant that is struggling increasing the cost of their entrees.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
2786
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 01:24:00 -
[120] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:Ydubbs81 RND wrote:In fact, $80M is too low. The reason that CCP reduced the number of clones in the pack is because they wanted to limit the clone pack attacks. I agree with their intention but instead of nerfing the number of clones, they should have just raised the price. $120M for 200 clones sounds about right....$120M - $150M or so.
I can't disagree more. PC would be more dead than it is now. If clone packs were cheap (10 mil) there would be fighting. You'd need to be in a god mode donut for 4 or 5 months to afford 120 mil clone packs.
reason CCP reduced the clone pack number to 120 from 150 (from what I could remember) is that they wanted to reduce the clone pack attack spam. If you reduce clone packs to $10M, everyone would be spamming clone pack attacks. It would be cheaper to launch attacks with clone packs instead of from your districts.
People shouldn't be launching attacks from across the universe.....it should be strategic and you should be invading a corp's territory instead of being able to hop over the wall
weRideNDie2getha since 2010
|
|
|
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
2786
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 01:25:00 -
[121] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:I just can't wrap my head around wanting to increase the cost of entry for a game mode that is suffering from a lack of participation.
It would be like a restaurant that is struggling increasing the cost of their entrees.
Forget about this blue donut for a sec.......lack of participation has to do with corps being afraid to attack or feeling that they aren't ready or good enough. Not sure if even we lowered clone pack attacks to $5M..would we get corps out of pubs and trying to get into pc.
weRideNDie2getha since 2010
|
medomai grey
WarRavens
League of Infamy
590
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 01:41:00 -
[122] - 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.
Districts should not reward players with direct ISK. ISK gain from districts should be indirect. For example, a district holder taxes an EVE player for mining. Or the district generate resources for manufacturing products for sale.
Medium frame EHP is not medium
|
anaboop
NECROM0NGERS
Caps and Mercs
35
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 02:04:00 -
[123] - Quote
Reset isk
Limit districts held per corp/alliance
No ringers outside of alliance
Alliances with to many districts must break from alliance In order to gain more disricts
Thats all that comes to mind atm lol
In the moment when I understand my enemy, well enough to defeat him, I also love him. And then I destroy him.
|
ROCKO THE HELLHOUND
Ultramarine Corp
43
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 02:16:00 -
[124] - Quote
hmm, so in case you would be too short of ideas and as reaction PC would get to dangerously near a complete pull from the game as from some suggested here, i would share the basics of my idea about how such a game-mode would at least work for everyone - a !!WARNING!! for the too young or too *******d to read a proper sized text, here it comes! :)
1st of:
only corporations with a set number of members that have been in the corp for a set time (like one or two months] and that have capped-out in their Active-SP-Cap the previous week should be legitimised to make any expansive moves on the PC-Map (attacks of districts on additional planets - making "PC" more planet-focused than district focused).
and the size of the pool of members that forfill those two requirements a corporation has, should determine in which scale this corporation can then attempt to expand/ the maximum number of planets they should be allowed to be active at all - which leads me to a closer look at my 2nd point:
with the forfillment of said requirements, the corps would gain the right to be present at set numbers of planets - free of restrictions to numbers of districts held (the lore explanation could also refer to chepness and un-problematicness of moving raw clone units around on planets, but the expenses and mortality rates related to the undertaking of lifting them into space and transporting them between solar-systems, star-clusters etc.).
when this rules would be active, my idea of PC would be played like this:
a corp with, for example 16 members meeting the requirements would be allowed to try their luck on no more than 2 planets,
a corp with, for example 24 members meeting the requirements would be allowed to try their luck on 3 planets - and so on, every set number of players more meeting those two requirements a corp has, an additional planet could be set foot on.
and if the number of players meeting the requirements falls under the requirements necessary to set foot on the number of planets they "are already on" by owning one or more districts on them, they would still stay fully legitimised for both sorts of actions on this planets: defenses of held districts and offensive moves for other districts on this planet.
just please not forget to then also include the option to abandon districts - and please give us finally free acces to "our land", warbarges etc. - it would feel so epic, it's what we want to feel less "lobby-shooter-inhabitant" and more "MMORPG-Universe-Inhabitant" - even if it's just for walking around and enjoying the view without null-cannons firing and stuff, or weapon-testing, training to move organised as squad
(with Friendly-Fire off versus instalations (wouldn't feel right otherwise) but on versus teammates),
dropship-piloting training, etc. .
also the specific charm of my solution lies in the fact that then the whole PC-Map would not be anymore just a play-garden for a few elite-corps to overrun and posses (as long as the shear number of planets versus legitimate players balance doesn't break too much, producing too big "planet shortage" in the process)
- but instead PC would become playground for every merc-corp that legitimised themselves by forfilling the set requirements to be of enough importance to set a foot into there - as it should have been since the beginning of PC i think - but at least some little ISK holding a district should generate, otherwise it would just turn into an enlarged Planetary Fight Club again - and i think this would be at best just the second best option. |
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3354
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 02:18:00 -
[125] - Quote
Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote:Ydubbs81 RND wrote:In fact, $80M is too low. The reason that CCP reduced the number of clones in the pack is because they wanted to limit the clone pack attacks. I agree with their intention but instead of nerfing the number of clones, they should have just raised the price. $120M for 200 clones sounds about right....$120M - $150M or so.
I can't disagree more. PC would be more dead than it is now. If clone packs were cheap (10 mil) there would be fighting. You'd need to be in a god mode donut for 4 or 5 months to afford 120 mil clone packs. reason CCP reduced the clone pack number to 120 from 150 (from what I could remember) is that they wanted to reduce the clone pack attack spam. If you reduce clone packs to $10M, everyone would be spamming clone pack attacks. It would be cheaper to launch attacks with clone packs instead of from your districts. People shouldn't be launching attacks from across the universe.....it should be strategic and you should be invading a corp's territory instead of being able to hop over the wall
I could totally buy that if PC was active.
Until they can tie the clones into the economy with an Eve/Dust connection CCP is going to need to adjust prices on clone packs to stimulate participation.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3354
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 02:35:00 -
[126] - Quote
Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote:I just can't wrap my head around wanting to increase the cost of entry for a game mode that is suffering from a lack of participation.
It would be like a restaurant that is struggling increasing the cost of their entrees. Forget about this blue donut for a sec.......lack of participation has to do with corps being afraid to attack or feeling that they aren't ready or good enough. Not sure if even we lowered clone pack attacks to $5M..would we get corps out of pubs and trying to get into pc.
People had pulled out of PC long before the donut formed. As more and more corps pulled out of PC it cranked up the level of difficulty. The mechanics and poor design of PC caused corps to pull out of PC very early on. If I had to guess many of them anticipated changes that never came.
But you are right, I'm not sure how many corps will line up to get their teeth kicked in. CCP should have pulled PC months ago and brought back corp battles while the new team develops PC 2.0. I think the learning curve is so steep for PC now that it will take quite a while for corps to get up to speed. It can't be stressed enough how big of a mistake it was to release PC without some low risk form of team deploy to practice for PC.
If pub payouts weren't so cheap I could side with you a little easier on this one. I hit up squad finder and run a few matches with random squads every time I play, I've yet to find a squad where people weren't talking about how low on ISK they are. I just don't believe the dynamics of the game right now support a rigid approach. Pubs are filled with solo playing, sniping, redline tanking, muder taxi blueberries and we want a vibrant PC.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
Poonmunch
Sanguis Defense Syndicate
838
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 02:39:00 -
[127] - 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.
You can get passive ISK from just holding land in PC?
Who knew?
I guess I don't do enough (any) to know how it all works.
Munch
Minmatar Patriot (Level 7)
Dedicated Sniper
|
Gaurdian Satyr
Glitched Connection
95
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 02:52:00 -
[128] - Quote
anaboop wrote:Reset isk
Limit districts held per corp/alliance
No ringers outside of alliance
Alliances with to many districts must break from alliance In order to gain more disricts
Thats all that comes to mind atm lol
^this also
Its a fail-safe to keep this monopoly crisis from happening again
-holds arms in O- throw it in the story basket bro
|
Deluxe Edition
TeamPlayers
Dirt Nap Squad.
747
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 02:55:00 -
[129] - Quote
If we remove passive isk from the game and increase clone biomass payouts from winning matches organizations such as DNS would be incentivized to just attack ourselves for profit. It would not only encourage district locking, but actually make it the best way for a corporation to receive a steady income. |
Cyrius Li-Moody
0uter.Heaven
4796
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 02:57:00 -
[130] - Quote
Deluxe Edition wrote:If we remove passive isk from the game and increase clone biomass payouts from winning matches organizations such as DNS would be incentivized to just attack ourselves for profit. It would not only encourage district locking, but actually make it the best way for a corporation to receive a steady income.
FRONT LINE FIT FIGHT
Youtuber. Your friendly neighborhood whiskey-fueled merc.
|
|
|
Duran Lex
Fraternity of St. Venefice
Amarr Empire
709
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 03:41:00 -
[131] - Quote
Deluxe Edition wrote:If we remove passive isk from the game and increase clone biomass payouts from winning matches organizations such as DNS would be incentivized to just attack ourselves for profit. It would not only encourage district locking, but actually make it the best way for a corporation to receive a steady income.
Non PC corporations need a way to make decent isk as well. I think Faction Warfare payouts should be drastically increased to around 1 - 2 million isk a match for winning and around 500k - a million for loosing. This would allow corporations not currently in PC to farm up a war chest to compete in PC.
Can always make it so you are unable to attack anyone in your alliance. Since you know, the only reason to do so would be to continue the abuse of a broken system.
I say wipe all isk made from PC and try this again in PC 2.0.
If that fails, wipe the isk again and try PC 3.0. Rinse and repeat till there is a working system. It's not like we have a merged economy to **** up. |
Ares 514
D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
778
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 04:37:00 -
[132] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:Ydubbs81 RND wrote:In fact, $80M is too low. The reason that CCP reduced the number of clones in the pack is because they wanted to limit the clone pack attacks. I agree with their intention but instead of nerfing the number of clones, they should have just raised the price. $120M for 200 clones sounds about right....$120M - $150M or so.
I can't disagree more. PC would be more dead than it is now. If clone packs were cheap (10 mil) there would be fighting. You'd need to be in a god mode donut for 4 or 5 months to afford 120 mil clone packs.
Did you see my post earlier saying 10 million for a clone pack? Once again we are on the same page.
...
|
Ludvig Enraga
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
1020
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 04:38:00 -
[133] - Quote
Jadd Hatchen 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. Kain, honestly the problem is that CCP has not made the EVE game more interdependent with DUST. I would be happy with taking districts resulting in no passive income for DUST directly, however there has to be a reason to make EVE pilot want the DUST districts to be taken. So basically, stuff has be be produced by the districts for the EVE pilots to want and use to make other things that will earn them a profit. Then the EVE pilots will hire DUST mercs for very handsome sums to take and hold districts. This will spur on an economy that is so far COMPLETELY VOID in the DUST universe. This is the thing you need to be concerned with as a CPM rep that hopes to ever represent me. Make there a REASON for the EVE pilots to want me to fight for them! Make there a reason for the EVE pilots to want to provide orbital support for the control of a district. Make there a reason that EVE pilot will fund entire DUST corps to further their empires in EVE. Do all of that and this too: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=137656&find=unread
Unfortunately right now the problem with this is that if you unlocked market and made valuable assets produced by districts it would lead to DNS hegemony ad perpetuum. Especially since there is really nothing Dust side to spend massive amounts of isk on.
First they must make good PC mechanics where there is an incentive to keep attacking other districts as opposed to holding hands. Also logistics should be complicated - the more districts you hold the tougher to defend (not just having more matches in a day), also the farther districts are apart the tougher to defend. An enemy should not know which districts are better protected but there is gotta be ways to find out (e.g espionage, or paying NPCs to get intel clues).
This is not rocket science, can be implemented with limited coding. Just takes a couple of talented guys with experience in tactical games (hell, table top games at that) to sit down with a piece of paper and hammer things out.
PLC, NK, Scout - before 1.8.
That's right, I stack that OP Sh!t.
|
Ludvig Enraga
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
1020
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 05:26:00 -
[134] - Quote
Levithunder wrote:Kain Spero wrote:Void Echo wrote:
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).
The current land holders will adapt and overcome as they always have, so these changes wouldn't remove them from participating in PC. My concern is that this could reduce or eliminate corps, especially new ones, working towards getting involved in Planetary Conquest since the promise of wealth from passive ISK would be gone. Now what we are looking at is the incentive being that players work towards forming strong organizations to fight others in order to get ISK and that could very well be a positive direction. You have to understand that having land has the inherent negative of the game basically saying, "You will play at X time if someone chooses to attack you or you will loose this land." That negative is offset by the passive ISK and the corp programs like payroll and vehicle replacement that it can fund. As a result when you remove passive ISK entirely is could lead many corps not even trying to enter the PC arena because there is no way to set off the entry costs. I guess it comes down to whether or not the negatives of turning off passive are outweighed by it's benefits. Why don't you do what you want and don't bother the community you say you want OUR feedback but you come on the forums and tell us what your planing todo and won't stray from it. You just want the community to recognize what your doing. You say you want to let everyone fight but do you think making a clone pack cost from 36,000,000isk to 60,000,000isk is a good idea??? FYI bud your stepping 24,000,000isk in the wrong direction. NO small corp is willing to pay more than 10,000,000isk for a clone pack just to get there butt kicked in by ancient exiles or nyisn sain PERIOD.
This is my problem with Kain he starts threads 'to stimulate public discussion' then turns around and pushes his agenda. CPM should be a conduit for the community, not a bunch of school boys on a power trip. It's a tough and selfless job but it has to be done right to have credibility.
PLC, NK, Scout - before 1.8.
That's right, I stack that OP Sh!t.
|
Korvin Lomont
United Pwnage Service
RISE of LEGION
916
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 07:33:00 -
[135] - Quote
So you have expressed your thoughts on this earlier, but still you let this crap happen for nearly 9 months...
This leads me to the assumption that the CPM was not able or willing to change this. And If I remember correctly you had some chances to do so as CCP has already overhauled PC twice.
In the case you were not willing to change the passive ISK the question is why did you change your opinion as the possible exploit was known for the whole time?
In the case you were not able or empowered to change things what happened all of a sudden that you are now empowered to do so?
The CPM has already proven that they have influence on what CCP does, the question for me is simple why did you not use your influence to save CCP most anticipated game mode before it was broken beyond repair?
The thing is no matter what CCP will do the coprs currently holding molden heath have enough resources to deny any new corp access to PC.
And to make things even worse your suggestions would further cater them.
|
jerrmy12 kahoalii
1006
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 07:38:00 -
[136] - 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 losers need at least 500k or 1 mil or no one will fight, say do well but lose by 1 clone, ragequit
Closed beta vet
Tears, sweet delicious tears
|
Supacharjed
Alpha Response Command
57
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 07:45:00 -
[137] - Quote
I would fight to hold land, just for the sake of holding land.
Diehard Commandbro.
Part Time Ninja Turtle
Full Time Badass.
|
Django Quik
Dust2Dust.
2859
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 08:02:00 -
[138] - Quote
Look, forget any notion of "saving PC1.0". It's a lost cause and has been for many months. The only aim now should just to be to make it as much fun as it can be until it's completely gotten rid of. PC1.0 is no fun as it is now because everyone in there is just clamming up and holding onto their isk printers rather than caring about fighting.
Forget about incentives, just make it fun. Get rid of passive isk entirely and make the clones cheap to buy and there will be lots of attacks. If people don't want to bother defending their land, someone else will do it because some (I'd wager a lot) just want to have good fights and you can't get them from pubs or FW.
PC1.0 is dead. There is no reason for anyone to try to get into it because they know that they won't stand a chance. People don't want to get into PC right now even though everyone knows it's free isk if you can do it. There is no bigger incentive available and people still don't want to do it. There is no way you can do anything to incentivise them more, so stop trying. Take down the barriers to entry - drastically lower the clone pack costs.
You don't need to increase the biomass payout at all. Turn off passive isk and people will fight because there's nothing else to do. At least there'll be fights! If people want to self-attack to ensure they get isk, let them - they won't be able to do this on dozens of districts all at the same time and it'll leave the others open for other corps. This scenario is infinitely more preferable to the current corpse of PC1.0 that is withering away.
Dedicated sidearm scout - Watch out for that headshot
Scout community is the nuts
|
Jebus McKing
334
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 08:35:00 -
[139] - 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?
There is money gained from holding a district? Never got paid. Still had fun every once in a while.
Good fights > money
@JebusMcKing // TIERICIDE, just do it, CCP.
ò_Ô
|
Leonid Tybalt
Inner.Hell
462
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 11:21:00 -
[140] - Quote
Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote:I just can't wrap my head around wanting to increasewst of entry for a game mode that is suffering from a lack of participation.
It would be like a restaurant that is struggling increasing the cost of their entrees. Forget about this blue donut for a sec.......lack of participation has to do with corps being afraid to attack or feeling that they aren't ready or good enough. Not sure if even we lowered clone pack attacks to $5M..would we get corps out of pubs and trying to get into pc.
And why the **** do you think they are afraid to attack huh?
If they knew their corp wallets wouldn't be nearly empty after a single attack like it is now (clone pack costs, vehicle and dropsuit reimbursements etc.) then smaller corps would probably be delighted to attack.
But you assholes are locking all the smaller corps out. |
|
|
Hansei Kaizen
The Jackson Five
136
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 11:47:00 -
[141] - Quote
Gaurdian Satyr wrote:anaboop wrote:Reset isk
Limit districts held per corp/alliance
No ringers outside of alliance
Alliances with to many districts must break from alliance In order to gain more disricts
Thats all that comes to mind atm lol
^this also Its a fail-safe to keep this monopoly crisis from happening again
I think this is the only option, too. How do you keep a real-life monopoly from forming? IRL it is difficult, because you cant control and have insight into everything that is happening. But in a game you can do this. You can implement a parameter "district ownership limitations per corporation per alliance", set it to "n" and see if it works.
Whats the alternative? Nullify the benefits from owning a district, or, to more effect, make it cost something to own a district? Or you subsidize the ones you want to have empowered (the not district holding corps). Like give them extra players on the battlefield, or give them free orbitals, or many many bonus clones for attacking? Because yeah, the problem is that the enemy is waay too far up the power level (time on hand, SP, ISK, teamwork, etc.), to have anyone challenging them effectively.
Or you just let them be and see if the empire crumbles again. Could work, might not. Still the gamemode would be sealed from outsiders.
The answer to your complaint is PvE. Always.
NPE status: (Gò»°Gûí°n+ëGò»n+¦ Gö+GöüGö+
Casual solo
|
Django Quik
Dust2Dust.
2860
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 12:01:00 -
[142] - Quote
Can we please try to keep this discussion on topic - that is:
Would you play PC if there were no passive isk?
This is not about "what can be done to save PC1.0". This is not "what should be done for PC2.0". This is not "what else could be done for PC1.0".
Dedicated sidearm scout - Watch out for that headshot
Scout community is the nuts
|
Tesfa Alem
Death by Disassociation
Top Men.
105
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 12:15:00 -
[143] - 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.
What would make PC worth anything is being able to visit the district that you own. FCs and higher can take people down for a visit. Also your district should be open to raids from other players who buy a cheap clone pack (say 50 clones or less) at anytime. Auto defense systems purchased by the land owner sch a drones and installations in addition to who ever may be available in the corp to defend that district. Raiders win, you lose clones and cash. Defenders win and all of the war costs are reimbursed.
PC needs to be dynamic. It needs to be more exiting than merely waking up at 4 in the morning to proto stomp or be protostomped in a skirmish.
Basically it needs to be fun. Not a full time job.
Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
|
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
2792
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 13:47:00 -
[144] - Quote
Leonid Tybalt wrote:Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote:I just can't wrap my head around wanting to increasewst of entry for a game mode that is suffering from a lack of participation.
It would be like a restaurant that is struggling increasing the cost of their entrees. Forget about this blue donut for a sec.......lack of participation has to do with corps being afraid to attack or feeling that they aren't ready or good enough. Not sure if even we lowered clone pack attacks to $5M..would we get corps out of pubs and trying to get into pc. And why the **** do you think they are afraid to attack huh? If they knew their corp wallets wouldn't be nearly empty after a single attack like it is now (clone pack costs, vehicle and dropsuit reimbursements etc.) then smaller corps would probably be delighted to attack. But you assholes are locking all the smaller corps out.
they're afraid cause they're aware of who they can't beat.
Smaller corps weren't participating before this donut anyway. Only ones that tried were on PFC and they asked for protection.
weRideNDie2getha since 2010
|
Gregor stormwalker
Seraphim Auxiliaries
74
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 13:47:00 -
[145] - Quote
Ok IMO we need PC 2.0 with a free market set-up something smiler to fox Gaden has talked about, also PVE as an anti monopoly mechanic by which I mean your pc districts are randomly attacked by drones with the chances of a district being attack increasing with the ownership of more districts
That being said with only number changes its going to be hard to fix, there have been lots of idea so here's one I did not see
how about changing the number of clones a district can hold and generates
current
production: 80/100
capacity: 300/450
proposed
production: 40/60
capacity: 250/350
I personally would also remove the ability for corps with more than say 10 districts from buying clone packs (yes I know shadow/throw away corps but its worth a try)
the idea is reducing the amount of passive isk by reducing clone production
while also reducing the number of attacks required to take a district, the clone pack limit means if you want to be a big district owner you are going to have to work harder to keep more than 10.
as I said what we really need is a complete rework but in the absence of that something like this might work
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star.
EoN.
3360
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 14:46:00 -
[146] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Can we please try to keep this discussion on topic - that is:
Would you play PC if there were no passive isk?
This is not about "what can be done to save PC1.0". This is not "what should be done for PC2.0". This is not "what else could be done for PC1.0".
You cant answer that question alone
The problem with PC runs alot deeper than just passive ISK
It needs a complete overhaul and starting from scratch
To obtain the blue donut should be hard as hell but if no one is intrested in PC like it is now then it will be easier
No one gives a **** about PC anymore, it doesnt really offer anything or mean anything |
lDocHollidayl
Ancient Exiles.
Dirt Nap Squad.
536
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 14:57:00 -
[147] - Quote
Free Beers wrote:Leonid Tybalt wrote:Kain Spero wrote: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. It's funny how the figurehead of the most notorious district locking group in Molden Heath starts talking about having to "fight" for your land. You do realize that kane runs ERA right? Not NS or AE or the other BIG corps at the time. The only corp that was actually attacking districts during the lock out? ERA historyYou kids really believe whatever you make up in your head?
OH MY... eh the puppet is back.
Every corp in PC abused locking save 1 or 2 that were slaughtered quickly...and AE who did it very last. Your strings were locking early and often. |
Free Beers
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
2326
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 15:29:00 -
[148] - Quote
lDocHollidayl wrote:Free Beers wrote:Leonid Tybalt wrote:Kain Spero wrote: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. It's funny how the figurehead of the most notorious district locking group in Molden Heath starts talking about having to "fight" for your land. You do realize that kane runs ERA right? Not NS or AE or the other BIG corps at the time. The only corp that was actually attacking districts during the lock out? ERA historyYou kids really believe whatever you make up in your head? OH MY... eh the puppet is back. Every corp in PC abused locking save 1 or 2 that were slaughtered quickly...and AE who did it very last. Your strings were locking early and often.
When ERA started with 3 districts they were locked up tight back when it started back in january. The continued to lock their districts like everyone else. I dont see how that makes kane the leader of the most notorious district locking group in Molden Heath. Pretty sure NS and AE. had quite a few more districts that where locked under their belt and farmed a lot more isk than ERA. Which would make them a bit more notorious to me. Thats just me and everyone can have their opinion regardless how poor it is.
I just not a fan of hypocrites and tell it like it is Doc. You, my friend are just a bitter kane hater that is just seeing what he wants to see in my words.
Every mercs life ends the same way. It is only the details of how he lived and died that distinguishes one from another
|
Monkey MAC
Rough Riders..
2533
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 15:35:00 -
[149] - Quote
Hansei Kaizen wrote:Gaurdian Satyr wrote:anaboop wrote:Reset isk
Limit districts held per corp/alliance
No ringers outside of alliance
Alliances with to many districts must break from alliance In order to gain more disricts
Thats all that comes to mind atm lol
^this also Its a fail-safe to keep this monopoly crisis from happening again I think this is the only option, too. How do you keep a real-life monopoly from forming? IRL it is difficult, because you cant control and have insight into everything that is happening. But in a game you can do this. You can implement a parameter "district ownership limitations per corporation per alliance", set it to "n" and see if it works. Whats the alternative? Nullify the benefits from owning a district, or, to more effect, make it cost something to own a district? Or you subsidize the ones you want to have empowered (the not district holding corps). Like give them extra players on the battlefield, or give them free orbitals, or many many bonus clones for attacking? Because yeah, the problem is that the enemy is waay too far up the power level (time on hand, SP, ISK, teamwork, etc.), to have anyone challenging them effectively. Or you just let them be and see if the empire crumbles again. Could work, might not. Still the gamemode would be sealed from outsiders.
This is only needed in current iterations of PC once EvE players have intrest in holding land in DUST the persistent economy will even everything out.
Also to help reduce monopolisation
1) Increase Districts per planet, the more districts there are the harder it is to own a majority share.
2) No inter-alliance attacks, period
3) Make interplanetary attacks require traversal of a Warbarge, this will happen 6 hours before a ground attack, these warbarges can be attacked to reduce the amount of clones available to attackers
Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work.
Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
|
lDocHollidayl
Ancient Exiles.
Dirt Nap Squad.
536
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:00:00 -
[150] - Quote
Free Beers wrote:lDocHollidayl wrote:Free Beers wrote:Leonid Tybalt wrote:Kain Spero wrote: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. It's funny how the figurehead of the most notorious district locking group in Molden Heath starts talking about having to "fight" for your land. You do realize that kane runs ERA right? Not NS or AE or the other BIG corps at the time. The only corp that was actually attacking districts during the lock out? ERA historyYou kids really believe whatever you make up in your head? OH MY... eh the puppet is back. Every corp in PC abused locking save 1 or 2 that were slaughtered quickly...and AE who did it very last. Your strings were locking early and often. When ERA started with 3 districts they were locked up tight back when it started back in january. The continued to lock their districts like everyone else. I dont see how that makes kane the leader of the most notorious district locking group in Molden Heath. Pretty sure NS and AE. had quite a few more districts that where locked under their belt and farmed a lot more isk than ERA. Which would make them a bit more notorious to me. Thats just me and everyone can have their opinion regardless how poor it is. I just not a fan of hypocrites and tell it like it is Doc. You, my friend are just a bitter kane hater that is just seeing what he wants to see in my words.
You claimed ERA fought..in fact you said the only corp that attacked during lock out? Your statement is just false. Your propaganda was just called out. Nothing more or less here. I know truths are a tricky subject on these forums.
|
|
|
lDocHollidayl
Ancient Exiles.
Dirt Nap Squad.
536
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:07:00 -
[151] - Quote
Simply put Free Beers it is very unwise to use a players character as support for his ideas or intentions. Kain wants to improve the game...I believe this is a fact.
But to say he did all he could as a player to "improve the game" would lose in court very quickly. Let Kain respond to those who question his character...this puppet thing puts words in his mouth that the strings may not like.
Sorry for the off topic nature...when I see blatant false propaganda I have a tough time not typing. |
Django Quik
Dust2Dust.
2861
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:26:00 -
[152] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Django Quik wrote:Can we please try to keep this discussion on topic - that is:
Would you play PC if there were no passive isk?
This is not about "what can be done to save PC1.0". This is not "what should be done for PC2.0". This is not "what else could be done for PC1.0". You cant answer that question alone The problem with PC runs alot deeper than just passive ISK It needs a complete overhaul and starting from scratch To obtain the blue donut should be hard as hell but if no one is intrested in PC like it is now then it will be easier No one gives a **** about PC anymore, it doesnt really offer anything or mean anything
There are other threads that discuss the deeper problems about PC1.0 and how they might be fixed. This thread is the product of some of those and asks a simple question with a simple premise - "If PC had no passive isk, would you still play it?"
You can and should answer that question alone because it is one serious possible change that could actually happen - any other thoughts of mechanics or limits or really anything other than simple numerical changes are not "on the table" for PC1.0. So let's discuss the question of the OP, not off-topic hypotheticals.
Dedicated sidearm scout - Watch out for that headshot
Scout community is the nuts
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3367
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:33:00 -
[153] - Quote
I don't think anyone would fight with PC 1.0 mechanics if passive ISK was taken away. Why would someone spend 100 or so million taking a district if there was no return on investment?
Now if clone packs were 5 or 10 million ISK AND passive ISK was taken away, I'd say hell yeah people would fight. But this would be glorified corp battles solely on the basis of wanting to play in a team deploy setting. It would take away any and all conquest strategy out of PC (of which there was little anyway).
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
Django Quik
Dust2Dust.
2861
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:37:00 -
[154] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:I don't think anyone would fight with PC 1.0 mechanics if passive ISK was taken away. Why would someone spend 100 or so million taking a district if there was no return on investment?
Now if clone packs were 5 or 10 million ISK AND passive ISK was taken away, I'd say hell yeah people would fight. But this would be glorified corp battles solely on the basis of wanting to play in a team deploy setting. It would take away any and all conquest strategy out of PC (of which there was little anyway).
There is NO strategy to PC1.0. None. Zero. ZIlch.
No one's trying to take districts anyway.
We're still working on Kane to drop clone pack prices way way down.
Glorified corp battles would be better than no battles at all because no one even has a chance at PC1.0. It's not like corp battles are coming back any time soon. Might as well do something with PC1.0 because it's a waste of space as it is.
Dedicated sidearm scout - Watch out for that headshot
Scout community is the nuts
|
calisk galern
BurgezzE.T.F
General Tso's Alliance
2341
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:38:00 -
[155] - Quote
i'd rather it be gear based, alliances in eve use moon and POS's held in null sec to build capital class ships in various ways and make money.
dust should have the focus on the unique expensive high grade gear with pc rather then just making isk.
pc should be the end game, and thus should be how we get end game gear. |
Exergonic
TeamPlayers
Dirt Nap Squad.
344
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:39:00 -
[156] - Quote
Drop all passive isk gained by selling clones by 80%... Increase payout by 75% for win... Add a 20% isk payout for when you lose the game... Questions?? |
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star.
EoN.
3369
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:41:00 -
[157] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Django Quik wrote:Can we please try to keep this discussion on topic - that is:
Would you play PC if there were no passive isk?
This is not about "what can be done to save PC1.0". This is not "what should be done for PC2.0". This is not "what else could be done for PC1.0". You cant answer that question alone The problem with PC runs alot deeper than just passive ISK It needs a complete overhaul and starting from scratch To obtain the blue donut should be hard as hell but if no one is intrested in PC like it is now then it will be easier No one gives a **** about PC anymore, it doesnt really offer anything or mean anything There are other threads that discuss the deeper problems about PC1.0 and how they might be fixed. This thread is the product of some of those and asks a simple question with a simple premise - "If PC had no passive isk, would you still play it?" You can and should answer that question alone because it is one serious possible change that could actually happen - any other thoughts of mechanics or limits or really anything other than simple numerical changes are not "on the table" for PC1.0. So let's discuss the question of the OP, not off-topic hypotheticals.
The full question is this
'If PC had no passive ISK, would you still play it even tho it would be exactly the same as it is now and no gameplay/mechanic changes would take place?
I can tell you what most players answers would be to the full question, it would be no, why would it be no? because nothing would change, the blue donut still exists, small corps dont give a crap, big corps dont care and farm pubs, donut wont care because its not hard to sell clones manually and they still keep the donut, PC would still suffer framerate/lag problems etc
You cannot answer OP question because it is a **** question, its redundant, the problems of PC far outweigh this and even if it changes would it infact change anything? no it wouldnt
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3369
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:43:00 -
[158] - Quote
Exergonic wrote:Drop all passive isk gained by selling clones by 80%... Increase payout by 75% for win... Add a 20% isk payout for when you lose the game... Questions??
That would certainly boost participation, but only if you dropped clone packs to next to nothing. At their current price it would still be a ghost town.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3321
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:44:00 -
[159] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:I don't think anyone would fight with PC 1.0 mechanics if passive ISK was taken away. Why would someone spend 100 or so million taking a district if there was no return on investment?
Now if clone packs were 5 or 10 million ISK AND passive ISK was taken away, I'd say hell yeah people would fight. But this would be glorified corp battles solely on the basis of wanting to play in a team deploy setting. It would take away any and all conquest strategy out of PC (of which there was little anyway).
Even if there was no passive you still have to put the per clone price in a pack over the cost of biomass and I doubt anyone would enjoy that being reduced from 100k to 25 or 60k.
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3369
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:47:00 -
[160] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Django Quik wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Django Quik wrote:Can we please try to keep this discussion on topic - that is:
Would you play PC if there were no passive isk?
This is not about "what can be done to save PC1.0". This is not "what should be done for PC2.0". This is not "what else could be done for PC1.0". You cant answer that question alone The problem with PC runs alot deeper than just passive ISK It needs a complete overhaul and starting from scratch To obtain the blue donut should be hard as hell but if no one is intrested in PC like it is now then it will be easier No one gives a **** about PC anymore, it doesnt really offer anything or mean anything There are other threads that discuss the deeper problems about PC1.0 and how they might be fixed. This thread is the product of some of those and asks a simple question with a simple premise - "If PC had no passive isk, would you still play it?" You can and should answer that question alone because it is one serious possible change that could actually happen - any other thoughts of mechanics or limits or really anything other than simple numerical changes are not "on the table" for PC1.0. So let's discuss the question of the OP, not off-topic hypotheticals. The full question is this 'If PC had no passive ISK, would you still play it even tho it would be exactly the same as it is now and no gameplay/mechanic changes would take place? I can tell you what most players answers would be to the full question, it would be no, why would it be no? because nothing would change, the blue donut still exists, small corps dont give a crap, big corps dont care and farm pubs, donut wont care because its not hard to sell clones manually and they still keep the donut, PC would still suffer framerate/lag problems etc You cannot answer OP question because it is a **** question, its redundant, the problems of PC far outweigh this and even if it changes would it infact change anything? no it wouldnt
Part of me thinks the question is actually, "If we weren't making billions and billions of ISK each day, would you guys still think I'm an ahole?". I don't think that is the entirety of it, but I really believe from the many posts from those within the donut that they think they've tactically joined this super alliance in preparation for all the fighting that's just around the corner.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
|
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star.
EoN.
3371
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:51:00 -
[161] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Django Quik wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Django Quik wrote:Can we please try to keep this discussion on topic - that is:
Would you play PC if there were no passive isk?
This is not about "what can be done to save PC1.0". This is not "what should be done for PC2.0". This is not "what else could be done for PC1.0". You cant answer that question alone The problem with PC runs alot deeper than just passive ISK It needs a complete overhaul and starting from scratch To obtain the blue donut should be hard as hell but if no one is intrested in PC like it is now then it will be easier No one gives a **** about PC anymore, it doesnt really offer anything or mean anything There are other threads that discuss the deeper problems about PC1.0 and how they might be fixed. This thread is the product of some of those and asks a simple question with a simple premise - "If PC had no passive isk, would you still play it?" You can and should answer that question alone because it is one serious possible change that could actually happen - any other thoughts of mechanics or limits or really anything other than simple numerical changes are not "on the table" for PC1.0. So let's discuss the question of the OP, not off-topic hypotheticals. The full question is this 'If PC had no passive ISK, would you still play it even tho it would be exactly the same as it is now and no gameplay/mechanic changes would take place? I can tell you what most players answers would be to the full question, it would be no, why would it be no? because nothing would change, the blue donut still exists, small corps dont give a crap, big corps dont care and farm pubs, donut wont care because its not hard to sell clones manually and they still keep the donut, PC would still suffer framerate/lag problems etc You cannot answer OP question because it is a **** question, its redundant, the problems of PC far outweigh this and even if it changes would it infact change anything? no it wouldnt Part of me thinks the question is actually, "If we weren't making billions and billions of ISK each day, would you guys still think I'm an ahole?". I don't think that is the entirety of it, but I really believe from the many posts from those within the donut that they think they've tactically joined this super alliance in preparation for all the fighting that's just around the corner.
I wouldnt call it tactics tbh
A few just jumped on the bandwagon like a flea onto a cat and sold out simple as, i mean the last corp standing is the damn french ffs and bravo to em |
Leonid Tybalt
Inner.Hell
464
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:52:00 -
[162] - Quote
Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Leonid Tybalt wrote:Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote:I just can't wrap my head around wanting to increasewst of entry for a game mode that is suffering from a lack of participation.
It would be like a restaurant that is struggling increasing the cost of their entrees. Forget about this blue donut for a sec.......lack of participation has to do with corps being afraid to attack or feeling that they aren't ready or good enough. Not sure if even we lowered clone pack attacks to $5M..would we get corps out of pubs and trying to get into pc. And why the **** do you think they are afraid to attack huh? If they knew their corp wallets wouldn't be nearly empty after a single attack like it is now (clone pack costs, vehicle and dropsuit reimbursements etc.) then smaller corps would probably be delighted to attack. But you assholes are locking all the smaller corps out. they're afraid cause they're aware of who they can't beat. Smaller corps weren't participating before this donut anyway. Only ones that tried were on PFC and they asked for protection. Those PFC corps were even asking for protection from smaller corps instead of only from the bigger dogs. So, blame those smaller corps for locking other small corp's out and removing their ability to compete.
Bullshit.
Your argument makes 0 logical sense. What would the smaller corps have to be "afraid" of? Losing a battle? It's not the end of theworld to lose a battle. It is however the end of certain corps if they lose too many PC battles due to costs.
Costs that you members of the blue sphincter don't need to care about since your chickenshit passive isk farming insures that every team in every PC battle you partake in can run full proto gear and lose it, without taking a financial hit because passive isk farming alone makes up for those losses in about an hour.
It's like a billionaire joining a friday night poker game with a bunch of low income working men, and feel "gutsy" going all in on thefirst hand... |
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3370
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:53:00 -
[163] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote:I don't think anyone would fight with PC 1.0 mechanics if passive ISK was taken away. Why would someone spend 100 or so million taking a district if there was no return on investment?
Now if clone packs were 5 or 10 million ISK AND passive ISK was taken away, I'd say hell yeah people would fight. But this would be glorified corp battles solely on the basis of wanting to play in a team deploy setting. It would take away any and all conquest strategy out of PC (of which there was little anyway). Even if there was no passive you still have to put the per clone price in a pack over the cost of biomass and I doubt anyone would enjoy that being reduced from 100k to 25 or 60k.
It's not that I disagree with you. But would you be willing to pay $5000 to box Manny Pac in your first boxing match? If you factor in the donut, people aren't going to set their corp wallet's on fire. You have to take into account that 90% of the elite players in Dust reside in your alliance and hold 239 out of 245 districts.
If you want to see participation it's going to have to come cheap for those outside the donut.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
Django Quik
Dust2Dust.
2861
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:59:00 -
[164] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:The full question is this
'If PC had no passive ISK, would you still play it even tho it would be exactly the same as it is now and no gameplay/mechanic changes would take place?
I can tell you what most players answers would be to the full question, it would be no, why would it be no? because nothing would change, the blue donut still exists, small corps dont give a crap, big corps dont care and farm pubs, donut wont care because its not hard to sell clones manually and they still keep the donut, PC would still suffer framerate/lag problems etc
You cannot answer OP question because it is a **** question, its redundant, the problems of PC far outweigh this and even if it changes would it infact change anything? no it wouldnt
What would change? The donut would have no reason to exist. Selling clones would net no isk because their sell value is now 0, as per Kane's suggestion.
I think we all agree no one cares about PC and it will still be broken - at least this way people could actually have a go before it gets wiped and PC2.0 comes along in a few months time.
This is a real and plausible possibility to do now to improve Dust514. We will not be getting ANY mechanical changes to PC1.0, so this is one of the only things that can be done to change anything at all. If you'd rather keep it as it is right now, then you'd rather see no one playing PC1.0 at all.
And Kain, I've said it before but you seem to be skipping over it - you can keep clone pack prices low and payouts high; you just have to only pay out for clones actually killed and not count undeployed clones in that number. Pretty sure that could be done in a hotfix with the number changes. Corps could still lock but in order to make any profit from it, they'd need to actively join the attack and kill themselves off. You couldn't do that with just 24 guys on dozens of districts all with the same timer.
Dedicated sidearm scout - Watch out for that headshot
Scout community is the nuts
|
Maximus Stryker
Who Are Those Guys
909
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 18:04:00 -
[165] - Quote
I read some talk about competitive team play...leave that for when we get Arena Battles. Honestly, PC is not the realm for this.
PC needs to be about further immersion, not just an epeen fighting contest. Deeper immersion literally means having a reason to fight for and hold land within the New Eden universe. Immerse us. Don't bait us by making the game solely about gaining ISK by winning attacks.
Provide reasons for both EVE Pilots/Corps and DUST mercs/Corps to want to work together to own own the ground and space.
A few examples that I can think of are below but I am sure you smarties can think of better ones:
DUST
- Passive ISK (yes, this is a valid motivating factor)
- 'Reputation' (this is similar to how 'standing' works for factions - the better your 'Reputation' the better your rewards in pubs, and maybe it can reduce the cost of items in the market by a certain percentage)
- Have districts produce something tangible for the corp, if not ISK, than perhaps prototype or office weapons than can be solid on market or given to corp members
- PVE on districts (rewards could go to the corp or the individual player, or both)
EVE (I am not an EVE player and not very little)
- Help change timers quickly (similar to FW?)
- Increase productivity of stations in Space (so a ship that normally takes 14 days to build can be built in 7 days)
- Generate fuel (I think fuel is important...?)
- Overall make the rewards so bad ass that any and every EVE corp would want to own some districts
TL;DR = competitive play is for Arena Battles, PC is for increased depth and immersion into the New Eden Universe
Faction Channels for FW Staging
PIE Ground Control | Caldari Hierarchy | Turalyon | Chosen Matari
|
Outlaw OneZero
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1453
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 18:18:00 -
[166] - Quote
To answer OPs question, yes we would fight for and hold land in PC without passive ISK, IF the costs to do so were reasonable.
PC is currently the only game mode that allows team deploy. Many of our members would embrace the chance to fight full team vs team battles like we used to in the old Corp contract days. Would we get knocked around a bit? Of course, but if the price was right, we would welcome the opportunity to get better. |
BrotherofHavok
PIanet Express
Canis Eliminatus Operatives
36
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 18:21:00 -
[167] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:
It's not that I disagree with you. But would you be willing to pay $5000 to box Manny Pac in your first boxing match? If you factor in the donut, people aren't going to set their corp wallet's on fire. You have to take into account that 90% of the elite players in Dust reside in your alliance and hold 239 out of 245 districts.
If you want to see participation it's going to have to come cheap for those outside the donut.
I agree. 239 districts making (assuming full clones 24/7) 10 mil isk a day = 2.39 billion isk a day. How many clone packs can they buy even if they lost every district the next day? 2,390,000/36,000,000 = 66 clone packs (some change). So naturally DNS can then attack 66 times in rapid succession from just 1 day of passive isk farming. For myself however it would take a week or more of pure ambush playing to get enough isk for just 1 clone pack. then you have to factor in that I would need at least 3-5 clone packs to actually capture the district (about 400 clones max +80 clones a day + some shifting of clones from other districts, lag issues and losses in continued battles) and of course I would need to stockpile specialized fitted suits for the matches themselves to give a higher chance of success in the battles...
I would need 180 mil for the clone packs alone + maybe 40 mil for enough proto suits for 5 continuous battles. 220 mil to take a single district would take me individually maybe 1-2 months of continued & constant ambush spamming to acquire. True, the cost of the clone packs should mostly be covered by the corp but with 100 players who sometimes regularly get on a PC match series to take a district will take months. We're here to have fun after all.
Are they better players? Maybe not, but they're deep pockets mean that their less than perfect skill can be supplemented with isk fat suits and repetitive clone packs.
Sincerely,
Your Multi-purpose Everything User
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3373
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 18:27:00 -
[168] - Quote
BrotherofHavok wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote:
It's not that I disagree with you. But would you be willing to pay $5000 to box Manny Pac in your first boxing match? If you factor in the donut, people aren't going to set their corp wallet's on fire. You have to take into account that 90% of the elite players in Dust reside in your alliance and hold 239 out of 245 districts.
If you want to see participation it's going to have to come cheap for those outside the donut.
I agree. 239 districts making (assuming full clones 24/7) 10 mil isk a day = 2.39 billion isk a day. How many clone packs can they buy even if they lost every district the next day? 2,390,000/36,000,000 = 66 clone packs (some change). So naturally DNS can then attack 66 times in rapid succession from just 1 day of passive isk farming. For myself however it would take a week or more of pure ambush playing to get enough isk for just 1 clone pack. then you have to factor in that I would need at least 3-5 clone packs to actually capture the district (about 400 clones max +80 clones a day + some shifting of clones from other districts, lag issues and losses in continued battles) and of course I would need to stockpile specialized fitted suits for the matches themselves to give a higher chance of success in the battles... I would need 180 mil for the clone packs alone + maybe 40 mil for enough proto suits for 5 continuous battles. 220 mil to take a single district would take me individually maybe 1-2 months of continued & constant ambush spamming to acquire. True, the cost of the clone packs should mostly be covered by the corp but with 100 players who sometimes regularly get on a PC match series to take a district will take months. We're here to have fun after all. Are they better players? Maybe not, but they're deep pockets mean that their less than perfect skill can be supplemented with isk fat suits and repetitive clone packs.
I've said it in a few places that CCP needed to raise/lower the price of clone packs relative to the participation in PC while they strengthen the Eve/Dust connection and tied everything into a larger New Eden economy.
If PC is dead, clone packs are cheap. If PC is active, clone packs are expensive (or if people are locking).
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3374
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 18:32:00 -
[169] - Quote
Outlaw OneZero wrote:To answer OPs question, yes we would fight for and hold land in PC without passive ISK, IF the costs to do so were reasonable.
PC is currently the only game mode that allows team deploy. Many of our members would embrace the chance to fight full team vs team battles like we used to in the old Corp contract days. Would we get knocked around a bit? Of course, but if the price was right, we would welcome the opportunity to get better.
It would change the trajectory of Dust in a big way if PC as we know it was changed to a glorified corp battle system. Dropping the cost of clone packs to next to nothing and removing passive ISK would make this happen. Just use the payout system for pubs for the winners only with a higher multiplier and as someone said above give the loser 50% of the payout that the winner gets.
This brings in all of Dust and gives them some time to prepare in a team deploy environment for PC 2.0.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
BrotherofHavok
PIanet Express
Canis Eliminatus Operatives
36
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 18:34:00 -
[170] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:
I've said it in a few places that CCP needed to raise/lower the price of clone packs relative to the participation in PC while they strengthen the Eve/Dust connection and tie everything into a larger New Eden economy.
If PC is dead, clone packs are cheap. If PC is active, clone packs are expensive (or if people are locking).
And dude, don't get it twisted they are amazing players and they have 100x the experience in PC in comparison to those outside the donut.
AH! So your idea would be an adjustable cost. Maybe a supply and demand trend on the market for clones? In other words an actual market and not some random entity that just completely buys clones without fear of large stockpiles and low numbers of buyers?
I wonder why CCP never thought of that? Eh, CCP?
Sincerely,
Your Multi-purpose Everything User
|
|
|
Outlaw OneZero
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1457
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 18:35:00 -
[171] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:Outlaw OneZero wrote:To answer OPs question, yes we would fight for and hold land in PC without passive ISK, IF the costs to do so were reasonable.
PC is currently the only game mode that allows team deploy. Many of our members would embrace the chance to fight full team vs team battles like we used to in the old Corp contract days. Would we get knocked around a bit? Of course, but if the price was right, we would welcome the opportunity to get better. It would change the trajectory of Dust in a big way if PC as we know it was changed to a glorified corp battle system. Dropping the cost of clone packs to next to nothing and removing passive ISK would make this happen. Just use the payout system for pubs for the winners only with a higher multiplier and as someone said above give the loser 50% of the payout that the winner gets. This brings in all of Dust and gives them some time to prepare in a team deploy environment for PC 2.0.
PC has no real impact on EVE right now, so why not bring the rest of the players back into this game mode and end the passive ISK gain? |
BrotherofHavok
PIanet Express
Canis Eliminatus Operatives
36
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 18:37:00 -
[172] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:
It would change the trajectory of Dust in a big way if PC as we know it was changed to a glorified corp battle system. Dropping the cost of clone packs to next to nothing and removing passive ISK would make this happen. Just use the payout system for pubs for the winners only with a higher multiplier and as someone said above give the loser 50% of the payout that the winner gets.
This brings in all of Dust and gives them some time to prepare in a team deploy environment for PC 2.0.
Here's a thought. If CCP is trying to bridge the gap between Eve and Dust, then why can't the Eve side start the contracts? Why is it that dust players get the passive isk payouts? Shouldn't it be like...
Eve players want the bonuses from a district, they rent/pay tax for the bonuses of Dust corp districts. Current owners don't want to give bonus to Eve corp/alliance then eve corp/alliance creates a contract through concord which initiates/promotes dust players into taking over the district. Of course, through concord means that there will be heavy penalties (eve to dust transfer rates) for making those contracts.
Sincerely,
Your Multi-purpose Everything User
|
DUST Fiend
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
12788
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 18:38:00 -
[173] - Quote
I'd rather have districts that actually offered something gameplay wise, and not some magical isk fountain, but I've all but given up on any form of meaningful interaction from basically anything in this game.
My DUST 514 Music Videos
Solo Incubus pilot, superb expert of wallet depletion
|
Duran Lex
Fraternity of St. Venefice
Amarr Empire
711
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 18:45:00 -
[174] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Can we please try to keep this discussion on topic - that is:
Would you play PC if there were no passive isk?
This is not about "what can be done to save PC1.0". This is not "what should be done for PC2.0". This is not "what else could be done for PC1.0".
Well it's pretty easy to see what kains ulterior motive is with the question, based on his responses throughout the thread.
He knows that CCP is looking into removing the passive isk in the meantime to cut back on the Farmville game, and kain does not want that at all. So he Created this thread looking to garner support, yet received barely any.
So because this was a **** thread asking a question that does nothing to change PC beyond culling gameplay that was never intended, people started going to the topics that actually had to do with PC instead of kains personal agenda.
Btw, since you might be too busy wiggling your tongue around in kains ******* to notice, repeatedly creating posts telling others they are off topic is also off topic. |
Maximus Stryker
Who Are Those Guys
910
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 18:52:00 -
[175] - Quote
Duran Lex wrote:Django Quik wrote:Can we please try to keep this discussion on topic - that is:
Would you play PC if there were no passive isk?
This is not about "what can be done to save PC1.0". This is not "what should be done for PC2.0". This is not "what else could be done for PC1.0". Well it's pretty easy to see what kains ulterior motive is with the question, based on his responses throughout the thread. He knows that CCP is looking into removing the passive isk in the meantime to cut back on the Farmville game, and kain does not want that at all. So he Created this thread looking to garner support, yet received barely any. So because this was a **** thread asking a question that does nothing to change PC beyond culling gameplay that was never intended, people started going to the topics that actually had to do with makin PC a playable game mode instead of kains personal agenda. Btw, since you might be too busy wiggling your tongue around in kains ******* to notice, repeatedly creating posts telling others they are off topic is also off topic.
I thought Kane support only making ISK by attacking because his in game business model is to be a paid mercenary service and not hold/defend territory. Wouldn't a change only help him...?
Faction Channels for FW Staging
PIE Ground Control | Caldari Hierarchy | Turalyon | Chosen Matari
|
Duran Lex
Fraternity of St. Venefice
Amarr Empire
713
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 19:00:00 -
[176] - Quote
Maximus Stryker wrote:Duran Lex wrote:Django Quik wrote:Can we please try to keep this discussion on topic - that is:
Would you play PC if there were no passive isk?
This is not about "what can be done to save PC1.0". This is not "what should be done for PC2.0". This is not "what else could be done for PC1.0". Well it's pretty easy to see what kains ulterior motive is with the question, based on his responses throughout the thread. He knows that CCP is looking into removing the passive isk in the meantime to cut back on the Farmville game, and kain does not want that at all. So he Created this thread looking to garner support, yet received barely any. So because this was a **** thread asking a question that does nothing to change PC beyond culling gameplay that was never intended, people started going to the topics that actually had to do with makin PC a playable game mode instead of kains personal agenda. Btw, since you might be too busy wiggling your tongue around in kains ******* to notice, repeatedly creating posts telling others they are off topic is also off topic. I thought Kane support only making ISK by attacking because his in game business model is to be a paid mercenary service and not hold/defend territory. Wouldn't a change only help him...?
The only thing I know from this thread is that whenever someone says "yes passive isk should be removed", he responds by telling you why that's a bad idea.
That to me speaks for itself. |
Takahiro Kashuken
Red Star.
EoN.
3374
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 19:02:00 -
[177] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:The full question is this
'If PC had no passive ISK, would you still play it even tho it would be exactly the same as it is now and no gameplay/mechanic changes would take place?
I can tell you what most players answers would be to the full question, it would be no, why would it be no? because nothing would change, the blue donut still exists, small corps dont give a crap, big corps dont care and farm pubs, donut wont care because its not hard to sell clones manually and they still keep the donut, PC would still suffer framerate/lag problems etc
You cannot answer OP question because it is a **** question, its redundant, the problems of PC far outweigh this and even if it changes would it infact change anything? no it wouldnt
What would change? The donut would have no reason to exist. Selling clones would net no isk because their sell value is now 0, as per Kane's suggestion. I think we all agree no one cares about PC and it will still be broken - at least this way people could actually have a go before it gets wiped and PC2.0 comes along in a few months time. This is a real and plausible possibility to do now to improve Dust514. We will not be getting ANY mechanical changes to PC1.0, so this is one of the only things that can be done to change anything at all. If you'd rather keep it as it is right now, then you'd rather see no one playing PC1.0 at all.
Have a go? where it costs 50mil per attack?
It means only the rich can wage war while the peasents are left to pubs
I said that on page 1 and we have gone around in a full circle now |
Fox Gaden
Immortal Guides
2939
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 19:02:00 -
[178] - Quote
ISK only for fighting is even worse than Passive ISK, as there would be no point to hold land. The district would have no value. It would not matter if you were the attacker or defender.
Districts need to have a way to make ISK for a Corp that requires effort on the part of the members of that Corp. The system needs to insure that the more districts your Corp has, the more work it is to keep them all making ISK. You should need 1000 active members to hold all of MH and keep the districts pumping our ISK at full capacity. Obviously we need to get rid of District Locking.
- PVE
- Industry
- Complicated District based mining setups similar to PI in EVE.
Districts should provide the potential for big profits, but it should require work to actualize that potential.
Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.
|
Fox Gaden
Immortal Guides
2939
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 19:15:00 -
[179] - 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.
Plan One is the better choice to limp along until PC 2.0.
Plan Two would be the final blow to PC.
If you turned off Passive ISK all together there would be no point in opening up another region. It would not be about holding land anymore. It would just be about generating fights. It would not matter where those fights are.
You might as well get rid of the districts and just introduce another PUG match mode that awards more ISK.
Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3374
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 19:16:00 -
[180] - Quote
Again, I think we are talking about short term fixes to PC 1.0.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
|
|
Django Quik
Dust2Dust.
2862
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 19:22:00 -
[181] - Quote
Duran Lex wrote:Django Quik wrote:Can we please try to keep this discussion on topic - that is:
Would you play PC if there were no passive isk?
This is not about "what can be done to save PC1.0". This is not "what should be done for PC2.0". This is not "what else could be done for PC1.0". Well it's pretty easy to see what kains ulterior motive is with the question, based on his responses throughout the thread. He knows that CCP is looking into removing the passive isk in the meantime to cut back on the Farmville game, and kain does not want that at all. So he Created this thread looking to garner support, yet received barely any. So because this was a **** thread asking a question that does nothing to change PC beyond culling gameplay that was never intended, people started going to the topics that actually had to do with makin PC a playable game mode instead of kains personal agenda. Btw, since you might be too busy wiggling your tongue around in kains ******* to notice, repeatedly creating posts telling others they are off topic is also off topic.
This thread came out of other threads we've had discussing what to do about PC1.0 and removing passive isk was actually partially my idea and is something I'm really pushing for - if you think that's somehow supporting Kain, you're sadly completely misguided.
If you want to discuss other ways to improve PC1.0 go to those other threads and do it - this thread was clearly created to find out how people feel about a single proposal of removing passive isk.
Dedicated sidearm scout - Watch out for that headshot
Scout community is the nuts
|
Django Quik
Dust2Dust.
2862
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 19:23:00 -
[182] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Have a go? where it costs 50mil per attack?
It means only the rich can wage war while the peasents are left to pubs
I said that on page 1 and we have gone around in a full circle now
If you'd read my other posts you'd know I'm also for drastically reducing clone pack price. In fact I stated as much in the part of my post that you didn't quote.
Dedicated sidearm scout - Watch out for that headshot
Scout community is the nuts
|
General John Ripper
20059
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 19:24:00 -
[183] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Django Quik wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Django Quik wrote:Can we please try to keep this discussion on topic - that is:
Would you play PC if there were no passive isk?
This is not about "what can be done to save PC1.0". This is not "what should be done for PC2.0". This is not "what else could be done for PC1.0". You cant answer that question alone The problem with PC runs alot deeper than just passive ISK It needs a complete overhaul and starting from scratch To obtain the blue donut should be hard as hell but if no one is intrested in PC like it is now then it will be easier No one gives a **** about PC anymore, it doesnt really offer anything or mean anything There are other threads that discuss the deeper problems about PC1.0 and how they might be fixed. This thread is the product of some of those and asks a simple question with a simple premise - "If PC had no passive isk, would you still play it?" You can and should answer that question alone because it is one serious possible change that could actually happen - any other thoughts of mechanics or limits or really anything other than simple numerical changes are not "on the table" for PC1.0. So let's discuss the question of the OP, not off-topic hypotheticals. The full question is this 'If PC had no passive ISK, would you still play it even tho it would be exactly the same as it is now and no gameplay/mechanic changes would take place? I can tell you what most players answers would be to the full question, it would be no, why would it be no? because nothing would change, the blue donut still exists, small corps dont give a crap, big corps dont care and farm pubs, donut wont care because its not hard to sell clones manually and they still keep the donut, PC would still suffer framerate/lag problems etc You cannot answer OP question because it is a **** question, its redundant, the problems of PC far outweigh this and even if it changes would it infact change anything? no it wouldnt Part of me thinks the question is actually, "If we weren't making billions and billions of ISK each day, would you guys still think I'm an ahole?". I don't think that is the entirety of it, but I really believe from the many posts from those within the donut that they think they've tactically joined this super alliance in preparation for all the fighting that's just around the corner.
I think Thor is a pretty good guy and a good sport. who cares what his wallet is? It has nothing to do with the person. Don't just disagree because your jelly. The players in pc are more in a position to tell you what is broken or not.
Everytime I get a like, another bug is fixed.
20k bugs fixed. :)
|
Django Quik
Dust2Dust.
2863
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 19:29:00 -
[184] - Quote
Fox Gaden wrote:ISK only for fighting is even worse than Passive ISK, as there would be no point to hold land. The district would have no value. It would not matter if you were the attacker or defender.
Districts need to have a way to make ISK for a Corp that requires effort on the part of the members of that Corp. The system needs to insure that the more districts your Corp has, the more work it is to keep them all making ISK. You should need 1000 active members to hold all of MH and keep the districts pumping our ISK at full capacity. Obviously we need to get rid of District Locking.
- PVE
- Industry
- Complicated District based mining setups similar to PI in EVE.
Districts should provide the potential for big profits, but it should require work to actualize that potential.
These ideas, though good, can not be implemented in PC1.0, so the question is: do we leave PC as it is until PC2.0 comes along? Or do we take away any incentive to lock and donut and make Molden Heath accessible to many many more corps?
Dedicated sidearm scout - Watch out for that headshot
Scout community is the nuts
|
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3321
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 19:35:00 -
[185] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Have a go? where it costs 50mil per attack?
It means only the rich can wage war while the peasents are left to pubs
I said that on page 1 and we have gone around in a full circle now If you'd read my other posts you'd know I'm also for drastically reducing clone pack price. In fact I stated as much in the part of my post that you didn't quote.
The issue there is if you make clone packs even cheaper than the are now we are going to be right back where we were with 1.7 with 90% of Molden Heath locked under self -attacks except this time you'll have players running the mock battles to extract ISK. Unfortunately this enumerates one of the core problems which is clones being both the thing you use to fight AND your source of income.
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
|
General John Ripper
20060
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 19:39:00 -
[186] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Django Quik wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Have a go? where it costs 50mil per attack?
It means only the rich can wage war while the peasents are left to pubs
I said that on page 1 and we have gone around in a full circle now If you'd read my other posts you'd know I'm also for drastically reducing clone pack price. In fact I stated as much in the part of my post that you didn't quote. The issue there is if you make clone packs even cheaper than the are now we are going to be right back where we were with 1.7 with 90% of Molden Heath locked under self -attacks except this time you'll have players running the mock battles to extract ISK. Unfortunately this enumerates one of the core problems which is clones being both the thing you use to fight AND your source of income.
Clones shouldn't be a main source of income.
Revamp the salvage system to make up for the clone income. Players build up a huge inventory of proto gear they can't use.
Foundation for player market is starting to be built. Whats the point of player market if people will only sell officer gear? Why would they buy gear at a standardized price just to resell in the market? The salvage system is the yin to the markets yang. Instead of looking at just one piece of the puzzle, see how they can fit together and create a balance.
That only solves part of it, still need to figure out what passive benefits the district should give. Any ideas that can help me further expand my thoughts?
Everytime I get a like, another bug is fixed.
20k bugs fixed. :)
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3379
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 19:45:00 -
[187] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Django Quik wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:Have a go? where it costs 50mil per attack?
It means only the rich can wage war while the peasents are left to pubs
I said that on page 1 and we have gone around in a full circle now If you'd read my other posts you'd know I'm also for drastically reducing clone pack price. In fact I stated as much in the part of my post that you didn't quote. The issue there is if you make clone packs even cheaper than the are now we are going to be right back where we were with 1.7 with 90% of Molden Heath locked under self -attacks except this time you'll have players running the mock battles to extract ISK. Unfortunately this enumerates one of the core problems which is clones being both the thing you use to fight AND your source of income.
But if there is no passive ISK from the districts why would you lock them?
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3379
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 19:47:00 -
[188] - Quote
I want to make something clear about my recent posts on this subject. I don't think any of this is a long term answer. I'm talking about a short term solution to prevent Dust's economy from being damaged beyond repair as well as stimulating some team play in preparation for PC 2.0.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3321
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 19:55:00 -
[189] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote: But if there is no passive ISK from the districts why would you lock them?
If you are looking at 5 mil a lock but a match pays out 16 to 32 mil or more per mock battle then you could easily manage to lock everything down or just enough to easily prevent any kind of timer stacking while providing content to your members and ISK. Heck even with 36 million ISK clone packs Enternal Beings and KEQ did just this running battles on their district on Oddelulf and letting the district pass back and forth.
Better still, or worse, you lock half or more of your districts and then let the others come under attack from a mass wave of cheap clone packs and you just sit back and farm the battles in easily managed chunks.
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3379
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 20:03:00 -
[190] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote: But if there is no passive ISK from the districts why would you lock them? If you are looking at 5 mil a lock but a match pays out 16 to 32 mil or more per mock battle then you could easily manage to lock everything down or just enough to easily prevent any kind of timer stacking while providing content to your members and ISK. Heck even with 36 million ISK clone packs Enternal Beings and KEQ did just this running battles on their district on Oddelulf and letting the district pass back and forth. Better still, or worse, you lock half or more of your districts and then let the others come under attack from a mass wave of cheap clone packs and you just sit back and farm the battles in easily managed chunks.
I hear you, but if people lock in that scenario then it means that we can't ever have nice things.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
|
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3379
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 20:04:00 -
[191] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote: But if there is no passive ISK from the districts why would you lock them? If you are looking at 5 mil a lock but a match pays out 16 to 32 mil or more per mock battle then you could easily manage to lock everything down or just enough to easily prevent any kind of timer stacking while providing content to your members and ISK. Heck even with 36 million ISK clone packs Enternal Beings and KEQ did just this running battles on their district on Oddelulf and letting the district pass back and forth. Better still, or worse, you lock half or more of your districts and then let the others come under attack from a mass wave of cheap clone packs and you just sit back and farm the battles in easily managed chunks.
If I had to guess KEQ and Eternal Beings just don't want to give you 100% of MH.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3321
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 20:05:00 -
[192] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:Kain Spero wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote: But if there is no passive ISK from the districts why would you lock them? If you are looking at 5 mil a lock but a match pays out 16 to 32 mil or more per mock battle then you could easily manage to lock everything down or just enough to easily prevent any kind of timer stacking while providing content to your members and ISK. Heck even with 36 million ISK clone packs Enternal Beings and KEQ did just this running battles on their district on Oddelulf and letting the district pass back and forth. Better still, or worse, you lock half or more of your districts and then let the others come under attack from a mass wave of cheap clone packs and you just sit back and farm the battles in easily managed chunks. If I had to guess KEQ and Eternal Beings just don't want to give you 100% of MH.
Maybe so, but what it proves is that given the proper motivation (whether that is ISK or denying an enemy an asset) the player behavior will occur.
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and CPM news
|
kiarbanor
S.e.V.e.N.
General Tso's Alliance
374
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 20:07:00 -
[193] - Quote
The removal of passive ISK from PC should have been done a long time ago, as soon as the first profitable locking occurred. So, I'm all for removing it now.
Why am I for this? The removal of passive ISK from PC does not affect the other game modes in a negative way. However, leaving passive ISK does negatively impact other game modes.
PC 1.0 is dead right now; so, what would it hurt?
Remove passive ISK, lower clone packs to 16 mil for 200 clones, and just watch how active PC becomes. There will be no more locking because it gains you nothing. The only advantage of owning districts is prestige and the fact you can attack or defend at no cost (other than Merc gear).
There are plenty of corps that only want good fights and a way to team deploy. Se\7eN, for example, would take on anyone and have fun doing so, win or lose. Do you know why? Because it's a freaking game and we want to play as a team vs other teams that share our mindset. It will be a great way to prepare for PC 2.0.
It would honestly be a way to bring back corp battles, which was the best part of Dust that I've experienced.
|
Maximus Stryker
Who Are Those Guys
910
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 20:57:00 -
[194] - Quote
thinking only in short term solutions, I could support stopping passive ISK and lowering the cost of clones packs.  go for it
see my previous posts about longer term solutions
Faction Channels for FW Staging
PIE Ground Control | Caldari Hierarchy | Turalyon | Chosen Matari
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3379
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 21:21:00 -
[195] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote:Kain Spero wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote: But if there is no passive ISK from the districts why would you lock them? If you are looking at 5 mil a lock but a match pays out 16 to 32 mil or more per mock battle then you could easily manage to lock everything down or just enough to easily prevent any kind of timer stacking while providing content to your members and ISK. Heck even with 36 million ISK clone packs Enternal Beings and KEQ did just this running battles on their district on Oddelulf and letting the district pass back and forth. Better still, or worse, you lock half or more of your districts and then let the others come under attack from a mass wave of cheap clone packs and you just sit back and farm the battles in easily managed chunks. If I had to guess KEQ and Eternal Beings just don't want to give you 100% of MH. Maybe so, but what it proves is that given the proper motivation (whether that is ISK or denying an enemy an asset) the player behavior will occur.
I'm 100% certain that dropping 150 or 200 clone packs for even 40 mil isn't going to result in fighting on a large scale.
If you drop clone packs down to 5 to 10 mil there would be a lot of fighting, I guess it depends on what you want out of this.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
Duran Lex
Fraternity of St. Venefice
Amarr Empire
713
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 21:34:00 -
[196] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote: But if there is no passive ISK from the districts why would you lock them? If you are looking at 5 mil a lock but a match pays out 16 to 32 mil or more per mock battle then you could easily manage to lock everything down or just enough to easily prevent any kind of timer stacking while providing content to your members and ISK. Heck even with 36 million ISK clone packs Enternal Beings and KEQ did just this running battles on their district on Oddelulf and letting the district pass back and forth. Better still, or worse, you lock half or more of your districts and then let the others come under attack from a mass wave of cheap clone packs and you just sit back and farm the battles in easily managed chunks.
Change passive isk to passive LP gain.
Removes the hatred of hoarding billions of isk, adds a slight incentive to hold district.
The top corps prolly wouldn't care for the LP, so they wouldn't defend as adamantly, thus allowing lower corps to attack and gain districts. Lower corps would have an incentive to defend for the LP so they can save their ISK for PC by using relatively free gear in pubs.
Of course the passive LP would have to be a large enough amount for corps to decide whether it's worth the risk and isk to defend.
Though I suppose that wouldn't exactly make sense with New Eden's purpose of loyalty points since it's not a faction related game mode. |
anaboop
NECROM0NGERS
Caps and Mercs
36
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 21:36:00 -
[197] - Quote
anaboop wrote:Reset isk
Limit districts held per corp/alliance
No ringers outside of alliance
Alliances with to many districts must break from alliance In order to gain more disricts
Thats all that comes to mind atm lol
Isk wipe and asset wipe of isk purchased gear.
As far as dust goes now, its just not worth the time your basically better off afking farming til cap in a day or two then wait for reset rinse and repeat.
Until CCP takes away all that ill gotten profit, I refuse to play simple as that.
Passive isk doesnt matter, its the holding all of the districts which is the problem
In the moment when I understand my enemy, well enough to defeat him, I also love him. And then I destroy him.
|
Vulpes Dolosus
Sver true blood
General Tso's Alliance
1391
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 22:04:00 -
[198] - Quote
I'd like to see a form of PvE generate ISK rather than passively. Basically you fight over a district in PC and then you are awarded a contract to kill rats (probably rogue drones or something) or something every so many hours or so many times a day (these could also affect clone creation for PC defense as well as planetary interaction for EvE players). That way owning large amounts of districts would be difficult to complete contracts for and costly to defend, opening either more corps to PC or allowing larger land owners to rent out their unfillable contracts.
Not to mention it kills two birds with one stone fixing PC and introducing PvE.
Me in my ADS: 1,2
|
Tallen Ellecon
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
1678
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 22:13:00 -
[199] - Quote
I love the question "If you remove passive ISK who'd play PC?"
Because the real question is "Who's playing it now?"
I'm sure more people would play if it was less expensive to get into and less profitable, because 99% of Dust isn't playing it anyway.
Supporter of tiericide, EVE interaction, and a proper NPE SoonGäó514
"No blue tags make Tallen go crazy.
|
Himiko Kuronaga
Fatal Absolution
Dirt Nap Squad.
3468
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 22:19:00 -
[200] - Quote
Holding territory must serve a purpose.
If no isk is given passively in one form or another, then the territory holds no purpose.
The fights do, but if all we're playing for is gudfights then we don't need a map with territory on it.
In which case, CCP made the wrong game. |
|
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3384
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 22:30:00 -
[201] - Quote
anaboop wrote:anaboop wrote:Reset isk
Limit districts held per corp/alliance
No ringers outside of alliance
Alliances with to many districts must break from alliance In order to gain more disricts
Thats all that comes to mind atm lol
Isk wipe and asset wipe of isk purchased gear. As far as dust goes now, its just not worth the time your basically better off afking farming til cap in a day or two then wait for reset rinse and repeat. Until CCP takes away all that ill gotten profit, I refuse to play simple as that. Passive isk doesnt matter, its the holding all of the districts which is the problem
That would be a good solution if you were going for under 100 players online instead of 4000.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
xxwhitedevilxx M
Maphia Clan Unit Unicorn
2257
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 22:30:00 -
[202] - 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 haven't gone through the whole thread, but I would actually love if there were some kind of meaning behind districts. Maybe not just for us, but for Eve players too, like, don't know, Industry? Mining? Or Pve on districts. This Idea is actually a great Idea: if nobody attacks you, no one gets the money. But there should be another meaning behind districts.
-#Firmocosìperchènonhopersonalità
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
3384
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 22:37:00 -
[203] - Quote
Himiko Kuronaga wrote:Holding territory must serve a purpose.
If no isk is given passively in one form or another, then the territory holds no purpose.
The fights do, but if all we're playing for is gudfights then we don't need a map with territory on it.
In which case, CCP made the wrong game.
I believe PC 2.0 will have ways to become wealthy and I certainly imagine there is some form of conquest/territorial conflict involved.
Level 3 Forum Warrior
|
BrotherofHavok
PIanet Express
Canis Eliminatus Operatives
37
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 22:59:00 -
[204] - Quote
I've reappeared to change my opinion. Until the issues with lag & equipment spamming have been changed it's just too much of a headache and rising blood pressure to take.
I refuse to play PC and to take it a step farther, i refuse to play with/against any members of the Dirt Nap Squad. Because of my own and the rest of the players/corps/alliances ability to take PC districts away from you, DNS sits on a rising throne of isk. Your constant spamming of proto suits - no, your required use of proto suits - and prototype gear tanks & dropships takes away all the fun of playing against you. I've had one match in 2 weeks that was actually fun to play against your members and that was because they were only 2, they didn't equipment spam, and they stuck to a LAV. Did they kill me a bunch? Hell yeah. Was it Challenging? Hell yeah again. Was it fun? yes. And then the next match they bulled out dual ADS and raped tanks, dropships, LAVs, and finally infantry until the match was over with 130ish clones to 0.
Hopefully in the future DNS will uplift whatever protosuit requirements they (or their members) have and use skill to win matches. Until then. Good day.
Sincerely,
Your Multi-purpose Everything User
|
The Robot Devil
Brave Bunnies
Brave Collective
2337
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 23:12:00 -
[205] - Quote
The only way to fix PC in the long run is to allow battles that can flip the district every three to four hours so that the corps that hold the district have to be there all the time to hold it or some type of sov mechanic like in EVE in which the attackers have to place a District Control Unit in the district. The DCU would have massive HP and have to be taken out with damage done and/or time hacked. Any other approach makes it very difficult to dislodge a handful of good players.
Even with no ISK at all DNS will still own all of the districts because there aren't any corps that can touch their caliber of players and by forcing them to constantly fight in an ISK sink will either burn them out or make them go broke. A battle every 24 hours at the time of their choosing is the root problem, not ISK generation. ISK generation is just a side effect of a bad takeover mechanic.
If you can't beat them now then what makes you think that you can beat them with no passive income? They are good at playing the game and that isn't going to change.
"One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production."
Raoul Duke
|
Doc Browner
Subsonic Synthesis
RISE of LEGION
238
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 23:21:00 -
[206] - 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.
What are you all alone in your sandbox?
Need someone to play with?
As far as I'm concerned is the best thing the community can do is completely Ignore the whole scam y'all got going on.
Just leave you alone in your sandbox to play with yourself.
Then maybe CCP will fix it and we all can have fun competing for districts on the GAME we call DUST 514
It's sad that CCP thinks this is good for their game proto 24/7 against noobs is great for the new player experience
CCP could remove dirt nap from Pub matches and give them moldy health to play proto stompers in all day
Dirt Nap has ruined PC, the lagging has ruined it, and last but not least the EVE culture has ruined it
I spill my Blood for Freedom and righteousness
|
The Robot Devil
Brave Bunnies
Brave Collective
2338
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 23:27:00 -
[207] - Quote
Doc Browner 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. What are you all alone in your sandbox? Need someone to play with? As far as I'm concerned is the best thing the community can do is completely Ignore the whole scam y'all got going on. Just leave you alone in your sandbox to play with yourself. Then maybe CCP will fix it and we all can have fun competing for districts on the GAME we call DUST 514 It's sad that CCP thinks this is good for their game proto 24/7 against noobs is great for the new player experience CCP could remove dirt nap from Pub matches and give them moldy health to play proto stompers in all day Dirt Nap has ruined PC, the lagging has ruined it, and last but not least the EVE culture has ruined it
So being good at the game and working hard to make friends has broken the game? DNS is good at what they do and has worked hard to bring the best players into one spot. It is good players moving as a group to accomplish a goal and little else. Don't be mad at skilled diplomats and fighters because we as a community can't break their resolve.
"One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production."
Raoul Duke
|
Canari Elphus
Dirt Nap Squad.
1433
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 23:45:00 -
[208] - Quote
The Robot Devil wrote:Doc Browner 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. What are you all alone in your sandbox? Need someone to play with? As far as I'm concerned is the best thing the community can do is completely Ignore the whole scam y'all got going on. Just leave you alone in your sandbox to play with yourself. Then maybe CCP will fix it and we all can have fun competing for districts on the GAME we call DUST 514 It's sad that CCP thinks this is good for their game proto 24/7 against noobs is great for the new player experience CCP could remove dirt nap from Pub matches and give them moldy health to play proto stompers in all day Dirt Nap has ruined PC, the lagging has ruined it, and last but not least the EVE culture has ruined it So being good at the game and working hard to make friends has broken the game? DNS is good at what they do and has worked hard to bring the best players into one spot. It is good players moving as a group to accomplish a goal and little else. Don't be mad at skilled diplomats and fighters because we as a community can't break their resolve.
It is also based on the false assumption that corps within DNS are the only ones that run proto in pub matches. With how much I see proto on a regular basis, I would expect that almost every corp in the game would do it if they had the financial means.
As to the topic itself, I would still fight for land if there was no 'passive' isk generation but rather active. As stated many times, something needs to have value for you to want to fight for it. Selling clones for ISK was a bad mechanic from the start and probably only introduced due to the deadline of having to 'release' the game in May.
If they really wanted to throw New Eden for a loop, they would have district control have an impact on SOV mechanics and provide bonuses (or penalties should bunnies invade a district in an enemy one) to player controlled systems in null. Im sure pilots would pay a pretty penny if those mechanics were introduced and it would work to allow for corps of all skill levels to have a piece of the pie as there are a ton of systems and there is no way that the best corps could be involved in each fight. You would see two types of groups emerge, the true merc and the payroll merc. True mercs would go to the highest bidder no matter the side while the payroll mercs would receive a contracted paycheck whether there is a fight or not.
Canari Elphus for CPM1
|
Miokai Zahou
The Southern Legion
League of Infamy
173
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 00:00:00 -
[209] - 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.
So..... why not remove passive isk income and add an isk multiplier payout for each districts owned (up to 10 or whatever is a reasonable amount) when playing pubs matches and faction points earned in FW?
Doing so gives people reason to play all game modes then and restricts the amount of districts owned per corporation.
Noob isn't really a status, it's the online equivalent of a 5-year old calling you a poopy fart head.
|
Miokai Zahou
The Southern Legion
League of Infamy
173
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 00:05:00 -
[210] - Quote
Double post my bad
Noob isn't really a status, it's the online equivalent of a 5-year old calling you a poopy fart head.
|
|
|
Maximus Stryker
Who Are Those Guys
911
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 01:41:00 -
[211] - Quote
Tallen Ellecon wrote:I love the question "If you remove passive ISK who'd play PC?"
Because the real question is "Who's playing it now?"
I'm sure more people would play if it was less expensive to get into and less profitable, because 99% of Dust isn't playing it anyway.
Yea, PC is very busted right now and DNS doesn't seem to be helping that, thought they say they will...
Faction Channels for FW Staging
PIE Ground Control | Caldari Hierarchy | Turalyon | Chosen Matari
|
Django Quik
Dust2Dust.
2866
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 07:28:00 -
[212] - Quote
The Robot Devil wrote:If you can't beat them now then what makes you think that you can beat them with no passive income? They are good at playing the game and that isn't going to change.
Why would they try to hold onto so much land if it generated no income? It would also be the true test of Kain's statement that the DNS takeover was just to make a point and force CCP into changing PC1.0.
If clone pack prices were drastically reduced, zerg attacks would actually be viable and every corp in the game would actually be able to attack. There'd be much lesser entry barriers to PC.
With no incentive to hold land, there would obviously be people who would no show obviously more powerful attackers, so they'll lose the land they can't/won't defend. But since the only way to gain anything from PC would be to fight, people would gladly fight opponents they think they stand a chance against. This will hopefully result in corps self-matchmaking - picking corps to attack that they stand a decent chance of actually getting fights from and also a chance of winning. Big scary corps would only get fights from other big scary corps and smaller corps would likewise fight each other. Granted this wouldn't stop people self-locking or taking over the whole of MH but what would be the point? They'd gain nothing from either of those activities.
Dedicated sidearm scout - Watch out for that headshot
Scout community is the nuts
|
BrotherofHavok
PIanet Express
Canis Eliminatus Operatives
43
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 11:36:00 -
[213] - Quote
Miokai Zahou wrote: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. So..... why not remove passive isk income and add an isk multiplier payout for each districts owned (up to 10 or whatever is a reasonable amount) when playing pubs matches and faction points earned in FW? Doing so gives people reason to play all game modes then and restricts the amount of districts owned per corporation.
I like this idea for multiple reasons.
1st it removes the passive isk farming which nearly every player outside of DNS hates
2nd, it provides a "limiter" if you would on the number of districts you could hold. Why go beyond so many districts if it no longer becomes worth it? However, it wouldn't provide enough of a restriction since it would still be a defensive strategy to keep all the districts, or be a means of making isk to constantly attack other districts.
3rd, it's simple.
Sincerely,
Your Multi-purpose Everything User
|
BrotherofHavok
PIanet Express
Canis Eliminatus Operatives
43
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 11:46:00 -
[214] - Quote
The Robot Devil wrote:Doc Browner 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. What are you all alone in your sandbox? Need someone to play with? As far as I'm concerned is the best thing the community can do is completely Ignore the whole scam y'all got going on. Just leave you alone in your sandbox to play with yourself. Then maybe CCP will fix it and we all can have fun competing for districts on the GAME we call DUST 514 It's sad that CCP thinks this is good for their game proto 24/7 against noobs is great for the new player experience CCP could remove dirt nap from Pub matches and give them moldy health to play proto stompers in all day Dirt Nap has ruined PC, the lagging has ruined it, and last but not least the EVE culture has ruined it So being good at the game and working hard to make friends has broken the game? DNS is good at what they do and has worked hard to bring the best players into one spot. It is good players moving as a group to accomplish a goal and little else. Don't be mad at skilled diplomats and fighters because we as a community can't break their resolve.
Hate to burst your bubble, but many other players and myself have played against members of DNS and we have seen a trend, a definite pattern if you would.
Even when using proto gear, as long as there isn't too much lag then many of their players lose a lot of their "skill" and are easier to kill. Now, before everyone starts yelling at me or picking me off at the battlefield all the time (go ahead lets play the game - introduce bounty hunter systems CCP), I do not mean that all of DNS are only good when they proto-stomp or make use of strong lag. I've come across many good players that I've said, "yes, I should have died most of the time against them".
That being said, I've taken out DNS madrugars and gunnlogis with advanced swarm launchers and remote explosives. I've taken down heavies with starter suits, I've killed logis and assaults in my basic scouts/sentinels/commanods. I've wrecked the LAVs when 1 or 2 of them try to run me over as if they were still using logi LAVs. And i've had a number of good Last Stands against overwhelming proto forces and survived long enough to take down at least one guy (at most I think was 12 and that was against a squad of Nyain San).
Why am I saying all this? I probably got a little irritated with your statement above about "being good at the game" or "working hard to bring the best players into one spot" since there is too much evidence that a number of DNS players are really only 'at their best' when lag is on their side. To the members of DNS that are still good beyond the lag... good luck, have fun, good fight.
Sincerely,
Your Multi-purpose Everything User
|
Yagihige
Crux Special Tasks Group
Gallente Federation
750
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 12:45:00 -
[215] - Quote
How about if we were to entirely remove the selling of clones to NPC for profit? Meaning you could only sell clones to other players.
Corps would have to actively find buyers for their produced clones instead of it being an automatic way to earn money.
If a corp wanted to supply their own members, they could donate clones or sell them directly at the lowest they could without losing money.
If any corp/alliance owned too many districts on their own they'd be sitting on a stack of unusable clones.
Corps would want to sell clones to players outside of the elite and open up ways for many more people to participate in PC.
A Clone Market would be introduced. Anyone could browse this market and buy clones from PC corps. Clone packs would still be available for corps to buy at a higher price. Corps that opted to buy the packs would then need to distribute bought clones between their members. These clones also couldn't be resold on the clone market.
A corp selling on the market could put their clones up for sale either as free clones, slave clones or excluded clones. This would mean that they could prevent rival corps from buying clones and use them against the selling corp. Free clones could be used against any corp, slave clones could only be used in favor of the selling corp and excluded clones could be used against any other corp but the selling corp.
Corps would have safeguards, when selling clones they coulp require that the buyer has a minimum amount of SP or require approval from corp directors before your buy offer is accepted.
Once clones are in the hands of individual players they can't be put back in the market again or transferred back to the corp, they have to be used in the battlefield.
Then when battles were scheduled, CEOs would need to set the minimum number of clones each player would need to bring in with them. 10 clones meaning at least a total of 160, 20 clones meaning at least a total of 320, whatever. You could still function as usual and use players of your choice or open up the battle to whoever filled the prerequisite number of clones to enter.
If done well, this could open up PC to smaller corps and limit how much territory any corp can control before their income stalls.
em ta kool t'nod
|
Kain Spero
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Dirt Nap Squad.
3340
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 14:40:00 -
[216] - 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 that could improve the situation. 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
|
Soraya Xel
Abandoned Privilege
Top Men.
1969
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 14:48:00 -
[217] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:I think CCP understands that there are complex issues regarding Planetary Conquest with some potentially straight forward changes that could improve the situation. The most important of these issues being passive ISK and clone pack size.
Is there any chance that we may see them demonstrate this understanding in the very near future?
I'd like to be your CPM1 candidate
|
Outlaw OneZero
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1464
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 15:06:00 -
[218] - 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 that could improve the situation. The most important of these issues being passive ISK and clone pack size. Is there any chance that we may see them demonstrate this understanding in the very near future?
Better question, what did you tell them the community wants? |
Outlaw OneZero
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
1466
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 18:28:00 -
[219] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote: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 that could improve the situation. The most important of these issues being passive ISK and clone pack size.
I'll guess that since you didn't mention it, significant clone pack cost reduction was not part of your discussion, enjoy your continued blue donut... |
jerrmy12 kahoalii
1025
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 18:33:00 -
[220] - Quote
Outlaw OneZero wrote:Kain Spero wrote: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 that could improve the situation. The most important of these issues being passive ISK and clone pack size. I'll guess that since you didn't mention it, significant clone pack cost reduction was not part of your discussion, enjoy your continued blue donut...
whats a bluenut?
Closed beta vet
Tears, sweet delicious tears
|
|
|
Ydubbs81 RND
Ahrendee Mercenaries
Dirt Nap Squad.
2794
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 20:28:00 -
[221] - Quote
Leonid Tybalt wrote:Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Leonid Tybalt wrote:Ydubbs81 RND wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote:I just can't wrap my head around wanting to increasewst of entry for a game mode that is suffering from a lack of participation.
It would be like a restaurant that is struggling increasing the cost of their entrees. Forget about this blue donut for a sec.......lack of participation has to do with corps being afraid to attack or feeling that they aren't ready or good enough. Not sure if even we lowered clone pack attacks to $5M..would we get corps out of pubs and trying to get into pc. And why the **** do you think they are afraid to attack huh? If they knew their corp wallets wouldn't be nearly empty after a single attack like it is now (clone pack costs, vehicle and dropsuit reimbursements etc.) then smaller corps would probably be delighted to attack. But you assholes are locking all the smaller corps out. they're afraid cause they're aware of who they can't beat. Smaller corps weren't participating before this donut anyway. Only ones that tried were on PFC and they asked for protection. Those PFC corps were even asking for protection from smaller corps instead of only from the bigger dogs. So, blame those smaller corps for locking other small corp's out and removing their ability to compete. Bullshit. Your argument makes 0 logical sense. What would the smaller corps have to be "afraid" of? Losing a battle? It's not the end of theworld to lose a battle. It is however the end of certain corps if they lose too many PC battles due to costs. Costs that you members of the blue sphincter don't need to care about since your chickenshit passive isk farming insures that every team in every PC battle you partake in can run full proto gear and lose it, without taking a financial hit because passive isk farming alone makes up for those losses in about an hour. It's like a billionaire joining a friday night poker game with a bunch of low income working men, and feel "gutsy" going all in on thefirst hand...
Losing ISK comes with losing a battle..it is what it is. A lot of the corps lost ISK when pc started. At the beginning of pc we had to fight to get districts since we didn't land grab. Clone pack cost $80M and it took $240M to take a hub or $160M to take a prod facility. If you lose any one of those battles, you had to start over. So, don't make excuses for why corps aren't launching. I'm not saying that a clone pack is adequate but when we started, clone packs were $80M. The risk of losing ISK is something we had to take if we wanted to pc. And that's what they need to do as well...period!
If they feel that they are going to lose, then they won't attack, which has always been the case.
weRideNDie2getha since 2010
|
CLONE117
True Pros Forever
770
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 21:13:00 -
[222] - Quote
...y not just add a protocol into pc..for a tempory fix.protocol will activate when any group of corps/alliance takes control of more than 60% if districts on molden heath. during which concord drafts 5-6 players picked by ccp to run battles and take districts from controlling alliance/corps.they will also by issued a special fitting and tag.to symbolize the protocol. the fit makes them invincible and so on. and each district they take is perma lock for the duration of the protocol. and the protocol ends when controlling corps/alliance have less than 5-10% districts of molden heathe. during which the protocol ends and the hand picked players lose the suits and tags. as well with all the isk and items that may have been acquired so theres essentially no reward in doing it. and all districts that were captured by these 5-6 players will be immediately set to neutral. and so on..which intended result would make molden heathe impossible to take complete control of ever again.and also make the game mode more open to a larger amount of corps/players and so forth.and should hurt the isk farming as well.
would go into more detail but am pretty sure no one wants to suffer the consequences of being dicks.oh.forgot.controling alliances teams will be un able to leave or back out of the battle once entered during the protocol.so they have to stand and get slaughtered and taste the pain they've been causing...until ccp finds a better solution to fix the game mode.
^my preferred idea though.
other idea is to just have all districts be reset to neutral every two weeks.
mlt vets are eternal. they shall be the bane to proto scrubs everywhere...
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: [one page] |