DUST Search - Return Passive Isk to PC

Haerr wrote:

Soraya Xel wrote:

hfderrtgvcd wrote:

What's the point of getting territory if the only thing you can do with it is get clones to get more territory?

That is one of the multiple inherent problems with Planetary Conquest. I think it's unredeemably broken, but I'm open to ideas how to make it better.

PC - Random Surprises

What PC district owners want is a way to make ISK off of their controlled territory.

This is where Raids/Invasions (Pirate raid or Sansha invasion) comes in.

Any district at full capacity that is not under attack is subject to the possibility of a Raid/Invasion during their timer.

A Raid/Invasion spawns a contract ~5-20 mins before the timer, depending on how many clones the Pirates send but also to make it more tedious for corps to attempt blocking and/or farming raids on their own territory using alts.

Squads which have one or more players which are in corps that hold a district in MH are unable to accept raid/invasion contracts.

The Pirate faction should take into account how successful a corp is at defending their districts when spawning contracts - the more a corp wins against the raiders the more seldom the Pirates will launch attacks against them.

'Just a rough mock up; if the CPM thinks it is worth exploring (i.e. if it is at all possible to implement) then the community can pitch in to fill out the gaps.

Maybe it will be possible to do team deploy in combination with this since it is such a sought after feature.

CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 3979	Posted - 2014.10.06 20:47:00 - [1] - Quote Passive ISK should not be returned to PC while there's no viable way to prevent rampant exploitation that will in turn be used to harm other game modes. The end to district locking didn't prevent a complete lock-up of any sort of competition in the mode so everyone could just sit back and rake in ISK. Nothing has been done that will prevent another Dirt Nap Squad-esque situation where 98% of the districts are just free farming slots. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 3979	Posted - 2014.10.06 20:59:00 - [2] - Quote As a note, if anyone has ideas on how we can make PC viable and difficult to exploit, without like, you know, introducing PvE, please share. Just remember my newly coined Soraya's Law: "Stupid ideas tend to be exploitable." CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 3979	Posted - 2014.10.06 21:11:00 - [3] - Quote Cavani1EE7 wrote: It didn't have to be completely removed, 2 million ISK per day would've been fair. 2 million ISK a day for no effort is still free money. For General Tso's Alliance, that'd be 296,000,000 ISK every day for free. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 3982	Posted - 2014.10.06 21:34:00 - [4] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Passive ISK affects other game modes so it should never return. The idea is to promote good fights and simply having hundreds of districts to fight over for no reason is a problem. The districts should merely be the set up for tournament style competition. Every district should be ranked, 1 to whatever, and no corp team should be able to hold more than one district, then we all play to see how high we can get. You can challenge only three spots above your current rank. It is all about pride and bragging rights so it should be about proving how good you are. This isn't a bad idea in itself, a ranked league scenario. But it's not even close to related to Planetary Conquest, which is meant to be a territorial fight. Your suggestion sounds like an entirely separate type of mechanic. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 3985	Posted - 2014.10.06 21:54:00 - [5] - Quote hfderrtgvcd wrote: What's the point of getting territory if the only thing you can do with it is get clones to get more territory? That is one of the multiple inherent problems with Planetary Conquest. I think it's unredeemably broken, but I'm open to ideas how to make it better. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4001	Posted - 2014.10.07 04:57:00 - [6] - Quote I see ideas in here about tiering off districts. I think there's a lot of value in such a concept. But how do you make holding the smaller/less valuable districts unappealing to the blue donut? CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4004	Posted - 2014.10.07 13:51:00 - [7] - Quote TheD1CK wrote: As for Passive ISK, how rich did the mercs in PC get via this? and you cut it off .... understandable But cutting it off without removing some of the ISK that fell from the sky leaves only those who got In first and started farming early can afford battle costs no issue, why would newer mercs want to compete with that? Very rich. Unfortunately, removing ISK from players gets very very dicey. Especially since in some cases, players may have spent AUR on gear used to "earn" it. TheD1CK wrote: A passive ISK payment COULD be restored and have it factor that 1 District pays X ammount Adding a second district brings in 75% of X. A third District brings 50% of X. And no.4 brings 25% of X District no.5 pays no passive ISK, And district no.6 comes at a cost, so a passive payout rather than income Each District from 6 + costs an increasing ammount for your corp to control. This is frequently proposed EVE side to fix sov, and it's flawed here for the same reason it is there. Nyain San 1 holds a district, Nyain San 2 holds a district, Nyain San 3 holds a district, Nyain San 4 holds a district, etc. In a sandbox environment, artificial limits like that are fairly easy to circumvent. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4004	Posted - 2014.10.07 14:57:00 - [8] - Quote Nah, Bright Cloud, then you'd just have groups of 32 pro players versus 32 scrubs. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4004	Posted - 2014.10.07 15:17:00 - [9] - Quote Denchlad 7 wrote: What if we take Cavanis idea of 2 Million per District, but, each day you hold said district you get paid less and less (1.8 Million, 1.6 Million, etc), therefore encouraging your corp to take other districts if you still wish to collect the isk from it. Might actually liven up PC a bit so daily fights return. Only issue I see is GTA corps flipping each others districts daily with no shows. So to make it harder, what if we changed it so you cant attack a district held by an Alliance Member, forcing, as an example, FA to attack say a PE district if they want isk, rather than an ML or GAM district for flipping. I'll expand the idea furrher at some point. I see you caught the problem with your own idea. But your proposed solution is also flawed. I am affiliated somewhat with the Goons, though we are not in an alliance. Corps could leave an alliance just so they can flip districts back and forth. Or they could just use alt corps. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4004	Posted - 2014.10.07 15:27:00 - [10] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: You add diminishing returns to held districts, ordered by value. Your first district is 100% benefit. Second district is 80% benefit, 3rd tier 60 and so on, with every district past the 5th being worth only 5% of it's total value while retaining all costs to maintain. Altcorps? CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.

Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4004	Posted - 2014.10.07 15:35:00 - [11] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Soraya think very hard and tell me of any system ever in EVE or other game that the players never figured out how to exploit and game the ever living sht out of. Planetary Conquest should not be enabled to ruin the rest of the game. If we can't come up with an at least mildly* robust framework for PC ISK generation that isn't donutable, it shouldn't be allowed to come back. I'm only poking holes in ideas so that everyone can get on the same page of why this is so problematic to solve, so that hopefully someone can figure out a solution that will work. Breakin Stuff wrote: But see my previous post about opening PC district flipping to all corps so that people pulling blue donut crap can be utterly screwed by being lazy. Which post? CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4004	Posted - 2014.10.07 15:36:00 - [12] - Quote Denchlad 7 wrote: Realistically though, how many of said corps would run without an Alliance again? And as Breakin said, we will find a way of exploiting whatever system is put in place anyway. The problem is, alliances don't matter. The actual alliance structure is nothing but a name badge on the forums. The actual "alliance" is people's willingness to work together, and as long as that still exists, corps will be happy to drop alliance in order to exploit the mechanic. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4019	Posted - 2014.10.07 15:59:00 - [13] - Quote Okay, so after further explanation on Skype, Breakin's concepts are distinctly Not Awful(TM), though it would probably involve some pretty heavy code work on CCP's part. Lot of good ideas on how CCP can move forward with real territorial gameplay in the future. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4019	Posted - 2014.10.07 16:08:00 - [14] - Quote Haerr wrote: Soraya Xel wrote: hfderrtgvcd wrote: What's the point of getting territory if the only thing you can do with it is get clones to get more territory? That is one of the multiple inherent problems with Planetary Conquest. I think it's unredeemably broken, but I'm open to ideas how to make it better. PC - Random Surprises What PC district owners want is a way to make ISK off of their controlled territory. This is where Raids/Invasions (Pirate raid or Sansha invasion) comes in. Any district at full capacity that is not under attack is subject to the possibility of a Raid/Invasion during their timer. A Raid/Invasion spawns a contract ~5-20 mins before the timer, depending on how many clones the Pirates send but also to make it more tedious for corps to attempt blocking and/or farming raids on their own territory using alts. Squads which have one or more players which are in corps that hold a district in MH are unable to accept raid/invasion contracts. The Pirate faction should take into account how successful a corp is at defending their districts when spawning contracts - the more a corp wins against the raiders the more seldom the Pirates will launch attacks against them. 'Just a rough mock up; if the CPM thinks it is worth exploring (i.e. if it is at all possible to implement) then the community can pitch in to fill out the gaps. Maybe it will be possible to do team deploy in combination with this since it is such a sought after feature. Haerr, a raid system doesn't sound horrible, but again, the idea of restricting to people in or out of corps with districts just leads to altcorping. ;) Districts could be held by one or two man corps that just ring in their team. Also, if anything, being successful defending against raids should lead to more contracts being spawned, as the only way to maintain churn is to keep the stress high on top end landholders. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4021	Posted - 2014.10.07 16:21:00 - [15] - Quote Haerr wrote: Hold on maybe if there was a fee to field non corp members in defence of a raid? (So that it would only be profitable with a full corp team.) You'd also need a tax to joining or leaving corps as well, which would have larger effects on the game as a whole. Otherwise people would just jump around. I think there's merit in the notion of just spawning assault raids from pirate factions on districts that would degrade clone counts and income. Within one's timer, it could be expected that they must either defend, or the district might just end up "unclaimed" if they don't. Another thing I think may be key to fixing PC is randomizing the PC timers (with heavier weight to time zones where there are more players on) and then disabling timer changes. The ability to stash 50 districts in the 12:00 timer has to end for any rework of PC to succeed. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4021	Posted - 2014.10.07 16:46:00 - [16] - Quote Haerr wrote: Perhaps requiring that a player has been a corp member for a full day before being able to participate would work? I dislike the 00:00 & 01:00 timers just as much as the 12:00 timers! Besides failing to successfully defend a district makes it vulnerable to opportunist attacks from other PC corps... Maybe. That's a very restrictive system though. Not sure it's very sandbox-y. The concept of weighting timers by player population would mean there would always be timers for all time zones. Just more of them where there's more players to use them. So ideally, in any given time zone, you'd have a proportional number of districts to the playerbase. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4024	Posted - 2014.10.07 17:16:00 - [17] - Quote Dust User wrote: Having attacks take place the same day they're launched would fix a lot. It's a whole lot harder getting ringer teams with 30 minute notice vs 24-48 hours. The question is, is it right to turn maintaining districts into a job, where you must have a full team logged in every day at the same time, or risk losing your district without a fight? And while this would hurt vet corps ability to assemble ringers, a lot of newer corps wouldn't be able to manage under this system at all. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4024	Posted - 2014.10.07 17:18:00 - [18] - Quote Side note: Really loving the ideas and discussion coming out of the thread, even if they're ideas I try to shoot down. Definitely hoping to bring this thread to CCP and have a discussion on how to revive PC. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4045	Posted - 2014.10.07 18:36:00 - [19] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: I'm brainstorming a proposal at the moment. Let's see if I can iron out the OBVIOUS kinks and exploits, then make it simple as possible. It's gotta be both simple and light on UI. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4057	Posted - 2014.10.08 07:43:00 - [20] - Quote Viktor Hadah Jr wrote: Like i said before both mechanics current and past are sh*t don't choice one over the other make a whole new PC mechanic that works don't bring back something that has been proven that it is easily broken. The question is can we get an idea for a new mechanic that won't be so easily exploitable? CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.

Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4079	Posted - 2014.10.08 19:56:00 - [21] - Quote Disrupting the blue doughnut is hard, Maken. Ask the General Tso's guys what would have to be done to the game to make them drop their allies, stop allowing Nyain San to hide under their skirt, and actively and intentionally go after each other. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4079	Posted - 2014.10.08 20:26:00 - [22] - Quote Jump range changes as announced, so far, will likely benefit the CFC in the end. Nothing announced so far has yet come close to breaking EVE's doughnut. ;) The CFC's vast resources means it can better cope with the change than others, leading to a net advantage for them. Sov changes may make it easier for new powers to break into sovereign space, but are still unlikely to actually fragment the coalition. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4091	Posted - 2014.10.09 13:55:00 - [23] - Quote Haerr wrote: Can we have a 'Team Deploy' mode that does not require us to put in millions of ISK? * Standing Corp contracts for Faction Warfare (so that you could queue a team (16 players) together) * Standing Corp contracts for Team Pub matches (again ability to queue 16 players together) Just something. A highlight point is that I feel any mode where you can queue 16 players together should always pit you against 16 players who also queued together. Queue sync FW matches versus randoms is generally a stomp. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4097	Posted - 2014.10.09 15:09:00 - [24] - Quote I think a tournament/ranking system would need to be an entirely different mode than PC. I think it'd be a great option to have. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4110	Posted - 2014.10.10 14:36:00 - [25] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Soraya Xel wrote: The question is can we get an idea for a new mechanic that won't be so easily exploitable? I don't like this implications of the word "exploitable" to describe the previous state of PC. You may not "like the implication", but it's true. Planetary Conquest was never really free of rampant district locking and blue doughnuting that has characterized the majority of it's lifetime. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4130	Posted - 2014.10.12 01:29:00 - [26] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: Also, blue donuts in Dust were NEVER as stable as blue donuts in Eve, even with all the bugs and flaws in PC. The donuts were always crumbling and being reformed. Content was always being generated right up to the point where the incentive was removed. Sometimes the names changed, but it was almost always the same people. When it was removed, 99% of the game was controlled by a single alliance, because everyone just switched to the winning side any time they weren't winning rather than actually fighting. (Props to Outer Heaven and What the French for being incredible outliers in this regard.) CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4147	Posted - 2014.10.13 02:04:00 - [27] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: And what exactly was wrong with what happened before? It was constant non-stop warfare! You and I remember "before" very differently. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4157	Posted - 2014.10.13 20:01:00 - [28] - Quote KA24DERT wrote: You've all been brainwashed that passive isk is inherently bad, and that may be true, but you are totally ignoring what is possible given the situation, and totally ignoring, via ignorance or selective reasoning, the GOOD that came with passive ISK. There is one group of people to whom passive ISK was a "good" thing: People able to easily mass it, and horribly unbalance the game through rampant proto-stomping. It helped an excruciatingly small percentage of the playerbase. How it helped them, was to help them ruin the game for everyone else. Passive ISK is inherently bad. It's bad in EVE, we have ten years of evidence on that. It's bad in DUST, where we knew it was bad going in, and all evidence since has proved it. The only way I can support ISK coming back to PC is when someone figures out a way to prevent a 99% blue donut farm for the ISK spread among the tryhard folks with no competition. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4201	Posted - 2014.10.16 15:17:00 - [29] - Quote Atiim wrote: Why would there be a fee for conquering a district? The big point to a sov maintenance bill is a cost for maintaining the district is one of the few scalable ways to penalize holding land you aren't using. If you make money off fighting on the district, but it costs money to hold the district, you only want to hold as many districts as you can fight on. If a regular cost to district ownership was had, but you could earn a profit on combat, theory stands that you would not want to hold more districts than you could actively field players on regularly. Scaling the cost or penalizing multiple district holdings doesn't work, because you can just use alt corps to keep any individual corp's holdings size low. But a flat cost for every district scales naturally, and there's no way to avoid that cost through shell corps. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4208	Posted - 2014.10.16 16:13:00 - [30] - Quote Dust User wrote: What happens when nobody attacks your district for weeks at a time? Do you just lose ISK? You would. Unless you're using that district to attack others and profit off of that. Sov bill means that stagnation will equal bankruptcy. Squatting on 50 districts in the 12:00 timer would deplete your cash flow real fast. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.

Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4216	Posted - 2014.10.16 17:21:00 - [31] - Quote Dust User wrote: Soraya Xel wrote: Dust User wrote: What happens when nobody attacks your district for weeks at a time? Do you just lose ISK? You would. Unless you're using that district to attack others and profit off of that. Sov bill means that stagnation will equal bankruptcy. Squatting on 50 districts in the 12:00 timer would deplete your cash flow real fast. lol That sounds like a terrible idea. As Thor said, you shouldn't be punished because everyone else is a bunch of pussies. It's one of the few ways ISK generation could be responsibly re-added into the game. I will never support a system that just dumps ISK into the game for landholders being in the game again. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 4244	Posted - 2014.10.16 20:41:00 - [32] - Quote Dust User wrote: So far the best idea I've seen is one timer per hour. This would also prevent "squatting". Each group has multiple corps, each managing whatever districts they have room for in their window of play. They ring members from the main corp for the fights. Not a solution, it's too easy to exploit. KA24DERT wrote: Fact is that Passive Isk is a proven system that worked, most of its flaws have been fixed, and 2 more minor fixes will make it viable content generator AND open it up to all kinds of corps. Passive ISK worked for TeamPlayers, sure. Because until your corp decided to give it up, you had free money all day every day. It just ruined the game for everyone else. CPM1 Elect. Thanks for all your support. [email protected] for ideas, thoughts, and feedback.