| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Soraya Xel
Abandoned Privilege
Top Men.
4045
   |
Posted - 2014.10.07 18:36:00 -
[61] - 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.
|
Cyrus Grevare
WarRavens
Capital Punishment.
345
|
Posted - 2014.10.07 21:36:00 -
[62] - Quote
PC does need a change at least some tweaks, personally I see much less battles than before, there's less incentive to participate, I also get that the way things were before left the game mode open to much exploitation and 'blue doughnuts'
Removing passive ISK solved some problems but made things uninspired for several participants. I like the idea of more battles happening on a district at each day and the surprise factor it would cause.
Just brainstorming as we all are,
What if?
Each district, one timer, no passive ISK generation.
Add to that "Waves of Opportunity" ( , couln't help myself):
To generate ISK (which I think is done selling clones excess clones?) you need to open up the district to more danger than just your preset timer, say a window of 2~3 hours after your usual battle timer in which the district is open to any attack (first come first served). Said attacks could come from a ready for action CORP or even by an individual putting a bounty on the district (more thoughts on that later)
If defending a district seems like a lot of work and you can't afford to field a team you simply don't generate ISK (you can still get attack on your usual timer though as currently), if your team is ready and set to defend you get a hefty profit for your time - granted you don't get attacked or you successfully defend 
Taking it a step further, say you're a director in charge of a district, you want to generate ISK but aren't sure you can defend it, you could risk opening it and get lucky with no attacks, or maybe even setting any possible contracts on the district as open to alliance or open to general public in which case you can set a contract reward for a successful defense, some set ISK amount per participant taken out of the CORP wallet.
As mentioned before, during these "waves of opportunity" any Corp can attack or an individual can put a bounty by fronting up a clone pack. In the case of a bounty this contract would be open to the public and the one putting it would offer a reward in case of a successful attack, it the attacking party wins, the district is awarded to the owner of the bounty contract.
These "Wave of opportunity" contracts would appear on the special contracts section of the battle finder according to the visibility options: Corp, Allience, or Public. if public it could show the contract reward for defense or capture.
There would be only one attack per district during the open timers, but as soon as one is over another could be set if still within the timeframe of the wave of opportunity.
Thoughts?
www.protofits.com - a Dust 514 fitting tool
|
Michael Arck
5854
|
Posted - 2014.10.07 23:57:00 -
[63] - Quote
It is my understanding it was removed to loosen the foothold of elite corporations. People praised it. Now, people want it back.
What in the world?
We need to start thinking about B, C, and D...instead of just thinking about A.
Archistrategos / The 7th Prime / Selah
*Where the fear has gone there will be nothing....only I will remain
|
Alaika Arbosa
Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc.
2174
|
Posted - 2014.10.08 00:05:00 -
[64] - Quote
Michael Arck wrote:It is my understanding it was removed to loosen the foothold of elite corporations. People praised it. Now, people want it back.
What in the world?
We need to start thinking about B, C, and D...instead of just thinking about A.
I don't want it back.
Leave it gone, come up with something else that gives value to Districts.
Treat them a planetary versions of the things outposts can do in Eve.
Come up with something that isn't poofing Isk from nowhere.
Let them be profitable, but make them be profitable only because someone else in the economy is expending Isk.
IDGAF if people can make shedloads of Isk from Districts so long as it isn't just Isk from nowhere flooding the pockets of Dusts gated community residents.
The Universe is hostile, so impersonal
Devour to survive
So it is, so it's always been....
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
1211
|
Posted - 2014.10.08 05:35:00 -
[65] - Quote
What is broken in PC is just a micricosm of the biggest problem the game has, the strong have incentive to prey on the week. If there is passive ISK, the strong exclude all others, if it is based on wins, the strong attack the weak. We need a system where the #1 team either can't or has no incentive to, attack the #60 team. #1 should be defending from top 10 teams and #60 should be playing against #55-65. Otherwise we have the same broken system of a few players dominating everything.
Because, that's why.
|
Viktor Hadah Jr
Negative-Impact
Gentlemen's.Club
5307
|
Posted - 2014.10.08 05:46:00 -
[66] - Quote
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.
EVE 21 Day Trial
Templar BPOs EVE 2nd decade CE items
|
Soraya Xel
Abandoned Privilege
Top Men.
4057
|
Posted - 2014.10.08 07:43:00 -
[67] - 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.
|
Michael Arck
5861
|
Posted - 2014.10.08 08:06:00 -
[68] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote: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?
I think the answer is no, off the top of my head. You need a mechanic that makes people want to play PC and since art imitates life, money makes the world go round.
Other than that, I don't see an incentive to bring people to PC because the playerbase is WAY different now. Maybe the answer will appear later.
But bringing back passive ISK? Nope. All you will do is take it out later when people complain about it. Blaming it for the reason why somehow in October of 2014, they are getting "protostomped" in pub matches.
Archistrategos / The 7th Prime / Selah
*Where the fear has gone there will be nothing....only I will remain
|
Haerr
Clone Manque
1584
|
Posted - 2014.10.08 08:19:00 -
[69] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote: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?
No matter what mechanic or system used for PC the 16v16 lobby shooter matches aren't going to become more sandbox-y.
Any "sand" will have to come before the matches even start. I doubt with the restrictions, hot-fix + minimal UI changes, that; that is going to possible.
In the mean time there needs to be a game mode especially for competitive team play. Something that does not exclude most of the Dust players by default.
Perhaps that game mode could be a continuous tournament.
* One tournament per server.
* Server selection weighted by the ping times of players in the team.
* Continuous queue.
* Teams face each other based on win streak.
* For a win your team gets +X% rewards.
* For a lose your team loses its accumulated bonus and is kicked out of the queue.
+ Team deploy
+ Always available
+ Available to all
+ Can be done with minimal UI changes
- Not sandboxy at all.
Edit: Made a THREAD |
Tesfa Alem
Death by Disassociation
216
|
Posted - 2014.10.08 08:50:00 -
[70] - Quote
I dont like passive isk yet there investment in going for Pc is just not worth it. No point in holding on to territory, or announcing to other corps i will attack you at your best time in two days so you can get everybody ready. I have borrowed heavily from ideas i have heard before in Pc discussion.
There ought to be all three game modes as an option in PC. Whichever game mode you choose imapacts what you can do to the district you attack.
District open for attack without warning for 1 hour 30 min out of every 24. Staggered timers are set by CCP, so you can only invade districts you can feel comfortable with holding on to. District 1 at 6 am EST, district 2 at 7 am EST, planet by planet etc.
Phase 1
Ambush Raid:.. Attackers are allowed 1 small 50 man clone pack. High payout based on clones killed, based on the price of the clone pack. 15 mil isk means maximum 15 mill payout divided equally to the winning side. Top of the board gets same payout as bottom, its a CORP battle so all corp members get the same payout. No shows means no payout for either side. Attackers if they win gets to wear down the enemy district clones. Defenders if they win, lock thier district against that attacker for the day, clones are restocked, and earn some isk based soley off of kills. No clones killed means no payout. Defender no shows means the second phase of the invasion is unlocked.
Phase 2
Skirmish: Open only to teams who have defeated the district owners in Ambush Raid. 15 minute window to buy extra clone packs for both sides, the attackers keep clones in addition to the clones they save from Ambush. Payout is the same, equivalent to clone pack invested by both sides. Defender wins district is locked. Attacker wins/ defender no shows 3rd phase is unlocked.
Domination: Last Stand. 15 minute window for extra clones purchased as necessary. Payout for flipping district/ keeping district equivalent to total isk invested from both sides.
If the Attacker invested 30 million isk and the defender never showed up then the attacker would keep the isk and get a district but earn no more than that. You cant farm when you make no profit. However a long drawn out battle would see 1 side keeping thier isk as well as all of the isk invested by the other side. Payout for the fight and a massive payout for winning the battle for the district. If two sides show up from the same corp/ alliance and dont fight but just hang around, they get zero isk because nobody died, nothing was lost.
TL; DR, Every corp gets a window to attack every district, thus opening up PC to more corps. This allows more causual players to show up and maybe **** up another corp without planning days in advance. Following through means a massive payout. Defenders can get decent payout by playing actively Ambush an 1 and a half each day If your corp doesn't feel like holding on to a specific district, just no show and attack some other corp the day after.You should rewarded handsomley for actively defending a district, and activley defending it should not take hours and days of prep work. Better side wins.
Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
|
|
|
One Eyed King
Land of the BIind
4662
|
Posted - 2014.10.08 19:29:00 -
[71] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote: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?
My idea would be to have a greater number of smaller districts such that a large corp couldn't possibly hold and defend all of them. Owning too many would force them to thin out their power, and make them susceptible to attack.
The greater the number of districts that smaller corps can attack, the less able a large corp is of monopolizing them. With more incentives to hold higher tier districts with less thinning, they would in theory be encouraged to try and hold on to the fewer, more profitable tiers.
Whether the actual mechanics of this would work you could say better than I.
Or if there is a way to make additional changes to make this viable.
Soraya Xel wrote: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.) 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.
I like this idea, but how would this work? Could they re tool the Special Contracts section, or would there be a change to Pub contracts? It seems at least one of them would require a client update.
You can always tell a Millford Minja
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
9696
|
Posted - 2014.10.08 19:53:00 -
[72] - Quote
The trick with districts is that you have to work with what's only available. You also have to account for the clones and come up with a proposal that is the least-exploitable and doesn't require a change in the UI while encouraging more battles and disrupts the blue doughnut.
On Twitter: @HilmarVeigar #greenlightlegion #dust514 players are waiting.
|
Soraya Xel
Abandoned Privilege
Top Men.
4079
|
Posted - 2014.10.08 19:56:00 -
[73] - 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.
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
9696
|
Posted - 2014.10.08 20:01:00 -
[74] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote: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.
I guess we'll have to look towards Eve Online as an example of how to deal with that considering right now that Eve has a blue doughnut problem but CCP announced changes for Eve that seem to aim a proverbial Thale's sniper rifle right at that doughnut starting with the jump range of certain ships.
On Twitter: @HilmarVeigar #greenlightlegion #dust514 players are waiting.
|
Soraya Xel
Abandoned Privilege
Top Men.
4079
|
Posted - 2014.10.08 20:26:00 -
[75] - 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.
|
Dust User
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
796
|
Posted - 2014.10.08 23:15:00 -
[76] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote: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.
Win battles consistently and start flipping their districts, it works every time.
Problem is they re-shuffle and form a new one. Generally with the guys that broke them up.  |
Haerr
Clone Manque
1588
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 09:48:00 -
[77] - Quote
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. |
Soraya Xel
Abandoned Privilege
Top Men.
4091
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 13:55:00 -
[78] - 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.
|
Haerr
Clone Manque
1589
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 14:59:00 -
[79] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote: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.
Could this work then?
Continuous tournament.
* One tournament per server.
* Server selection weighted by the ping times of players in the team.
* Continuous queue.
* Teams face each other based on win streak.
* For a win your team gets +X% rewards.
* For a lose your team loses its accumulated bonus and is kicked out of the queue.
* Accessed by TCOs, queue contract accepted by TLOs.
Since it is team only? (Just a thought...) |
Soraya Xel
Abandoned Privilege
Top Men.
4097
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 15:09:00 -
[80] - 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.
|
|
|
ZDub 303
Escrow Removal and Acquisition
Negative-Feedback
3298
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 15:18:00 -
[81] - Quote
There was a lot of discussion about this with Kane Spero back before he pushed for the killing blow to PC.
The truly optimal solution to PC needs to be a bottom-up approach instead of the top-down approaches we currently have. No source of income in a game should be paid directly to a corporation wallet which would then need to be 'paid' to members. Instead corporation assets should be paid for with taxes... even though in Dust there is very little other than clone packs for a corporation to even purchase.
I still think the optimal solution would be to make research labs generate zero clones per day and some amount of static isk. Excess clone production is worth zero and sales from killing clones is worth something.
This would be the only dust solution I can think.
In legion hopefully they will move more towards a farms and fields style of play. Where you can do highly profitable PVE on your own districts which then pays some amount of corp tax. It gives line members and corporation leaders both a reason to want to own districts. You only want to own as many districts as you can use though, as it will obviously get very expensive to defend massive amounts of space you cannot use.
However, that needs to be balanced with a 'not enough' philosophy to prevent people from feeling like they have enough and no reason to attack. There needs to be some sort of conflict driver as well obviously. Possibly spawning 'anom' style things with lots of concentrated PVE in a short time with a long respawn. Then some sort of resources worth fighting for that deplete and redistribute over time.
In the end, I think EVE's solutions to lack of conflict drivers in null sec is going to apply to Dust/Legion as well. You can see a lot of parallels. They are nerfing capital ship force projection through jump fatigue changes. There is a clear analogue to this with both unlimited range clone packs and then the change to clone projection throughout molden heath. Its very clear that the changes to attack range and clone death rates that were made in early uprising where incorrect. The entire game mode suffers from force projection issues and is likely why its remained a largely unpopular game mode. Its a general failure of game design unfortunately.
I honestly do not think anything can be done to make PC in Dust worthwhile to play. It needs a complete redesign, which requires Legion unfortunately. The best they can do is make PC worthless, so the isk faucet doesn't impact Legion players when/if they do allow some amount of character/asset transfer.
I hate to say it, and I know many of you don't care but its in Legion's best interest for Dust's PC game mode to remain worthless. That is why it is this way.
B C R U are letters, not words - Wierd Al Yankovich
|
Haerr
Clone Manque
1589
|
Posted - 2014.10.09 15:23:00 -
[82] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote: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.
The reasons for mentioning Dust roles are that the "backbone" for implementing a continual tournament is already in place, you could likely use the existing back end systems to run the tournament in a different region.
Corp guy accepts queue contract.
Match contract spawns in the available corp contracts for the next timer. (When a suitable opposing team has been found.)
If you win then a contract for the next timer will automatically spawn. |
KA24DERT
TeamPlayers
Negative-Feedback
649
|
Posted - 2014.10.10 12:13:00 -
[83] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote: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?
I don't like this implications of the word "exploitable" to describe the previous state of PC.
It took a LOT of hard work on the part of everyone engaged in warfare to keep and hold land, and the passive ISK was the carrot on the stick to encourage such effort.
That ISK inspired the best content that ever happened in this game, 3 humongous wars with infighting and backstabbing galore.
And now what?
You can play in PC and win, but if you lose enough suits you still come up negative.
Who the hell wants to raise armies, organize practices, and run grueling campaigns for THAT?
Removing passive ISK killed the high-end content in this game, and bringing that ISK back will get that content flowing again.
Was it an isk faucet? YES, but the game needs a real source of income. Was the Isk Faucet too big? YES! But that can be fixed by TURNING DOWN THE FAUCET.
Were corps hoarding too much land? YES. But if you want to prevent people from squatting on too much land (relative to their size), then reduce the time slots available for timers! Make it so that timers can only be set at two hour intervals and a corp can only hold 12 districts unless they can field two teams.
Totally removing all passive ISK from PC was an excessive measure with nothing to replace the mechanic, and it's time to get over that dogma and hit the undo button.
|
Alaika Arbosa
Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc.
2183
|
Posted - 2014.10.10 14:13:00 -
[84] - Quote
KA24DERT wrote:Soraya Xel wrote: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? I don't like this implications of the word "exploitable" to describe the previous state of PC. It took a LOT of hard work on the part of everyone engaged in warfare to keep and hold land, and the passive ISK was the carrot on the stick to encourage such effort. That ISK inspired the best content that ever happened in this game, 3 humongous wars with infighting and backstabbing galore. And now what? You can play in PC and win, but if you lose enough suits you still come up negative. Who the hell wants to raise armies, organize practices, and run grueling campaigns for THAT? Removing passive ISK killed the high-end content in this game, and bringing that ISK back will get that content flowing again. Was it an isk faucet? YES, but the game needs a real source of income. Was the Isk Faucet too big? YES! But that can be fixed by TURNING DOWN THE FAUCET. Were corps hoarding too much land? YES. But if you want to prevent people from squatting on too much land (relative to their size), then reduce the time slots available for timers! Make it so that timers can only be set at two hour intervals and a corp can only hold 12 districts unless they can field two teams. Totally removing all passive ISK from PC was an excessive measure with nothing to replace the mechanic, and it's time to get over that dogma and hit the undo button.
The "undo button" should never be pressed because: Passive Isk was always a bad idea and the forum knew it before PC had even been officially released.
Returning Passive Isk will not fix the problem, it will only cause it to get worse. There is no incentive to fight because none of you actually want to fight, you simply want to farm. It was obvious way back when that that is what would occur and what happened? If you really wanted to fight, you wouldn't care about going negative fiscally, you'd be fighting for the fights and doing it in [STARTER_FIT]s if that is what it took.
Now the former farmers are crying for the return of their meal ticket, I say let the Passive Isk stay dead and move forward with developing some other reasonable method of incentivizing participation in PC. There should definitely be a way by which PC is a profitable endeavor, however, this profit should not come in the form of free Isk just for sitting on a District.
The old method was silly and made no sense in the context of New Eden. Comparing the old PIG faucet to its closest corollary in Eve (Moon Mining), you find that PC is as close to risk free isk as you can get in New Eden. You sit on a District and poof, your Corp Wallet starts ticking up numbers while you kiss your neighbors ass to not attack you so you can both farm in peace.
- Find Moon
- Find District
- Clear Moon/Anchor Tower
- Seize District
- Invest in Fuel/Mods/Stront
- Kiss Ass
- Accumulate Moon Goo
- Accumulate Isk
- Safely Transport Goo to Market
- Accumulate More Isk from Ether
- Sell Goo to a player for profit
- Print even more Isk from Ether since the NPC
- Buy Orders for Clone Biomass NEVER DRY UP!!!!
Do you see the difference? First one is that to Moon Mine, you need to invest in things that allow you to collect the commodity you want to sell for profit. This expense is even beyond those necessary to find the moon (DOTLAN or a whole lot of Survey Probes) and clear the moon (billions paid to mercs or spent on funding your own attack).
After that, you need to defend your moon and keep your tower out of RF (this is similar in that you need to defend your District) so that it can collect the valuable moon goo which you seized the moon for.
Once you have accumulated a reasonable amount, you need to transport this valuable cargo from your tower to market and hope and pray to whatever god you hold holy that you don't get ganked and lose it all in a matter of moments.
Get it to market safely? Well, then you need to sell it to another player for Isk that they are losing and you are gaining.
Even if you take away the steps in bold and place the towers deep in the blue doughnut, Moon Mining is still vastly riskier than PC if for no other reason than potential for ganking during transport. There is no such risk associated with selling Clone Biomass back to Geneolution. It is purely riskfree Isk generated from ether straight into your corp wallet
Leave PIG in Dust as little more than a bad memory and move forward to develop something that is truly impactful and allows Districts to be a profitable part of Dust without simply converting ether to Isk.
The Universe is hostile, so impersonal
Devour to survive
So it is, so it's always been....
|
Soraya Xel
Abandoned Privilege
Top Men.
4110
|
Posted - 2014.10.10 14:36:00 -
[85] - 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.
|
Bradric Banewolf
D3ATH CARD
400
|
Posted - 2014.10.10 15:00:00 -
[86] - Quote
Xocoyol Zaraoul wrote:PC is pointless without actual EVE integration, at least FW has an effect EVE side as well as giving players Loyalty Points that can be spent on Aurum Substitutes or specialist/state gear that is flat-out just "Better."
At this point I'd like to see a removal of the pointless PC and re-introduce Corp Matchmaking, until we actually find a reason why anyone should give a damn about owning literally useless land that has zero effect Dust side or EVE side.
Yep. The land is pointless, and needs more than just isk value. Passive isk isn't the answer. District control needs to affect both eve and dust. CCP could implement a trade market and a better PC experience by making districts have a more effective purpose other than flag waving?!
You got it right with the loyalty store and factional warfare! I think this is what PC should've been all along. Districts should be in a constant contested state for control with the corp winning the most battles controlling large chunks of the district control. At certain levels of control being reached that corp can begin to reap the benefits of their labor in the form of production. Cargo hubs could hold gear produced in the production facility, but would need to be protected. Smaller corps could try to pirate gear and resources producing great fighting for everyone, and implementing the pirating system so many have asked for.
I know alot of this would require a client-side fix, but one more may very well fix our current PC situation. As it is now the player base has largely loss interest, and can't trust each other pass alpha?!
"Anybody order chaos?"
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
3544
|
Posted - 2014.10.10 15:20:00 -
[87] - Quote
Passive isk was exploited to the benefit of a few players and to the detriment of the majority of players.
Anyone who says otherwise is trolling or blind.
PC was locked down as content for an elite few and all others denied entry so that corps could harvest hundreds of millions per week.
Alt corps engaging to lock out battles each week with clone packs that did not expend was a thing. Allies would similarly lock frienly districts and not deploy. Only one battle per day is allowed per district.
Many corps have deliberately set the lock timers to exclude 90% of players due to Most people having jobs and needing sleep, creating an artificial buffer that discouraged anyone from wasting the effort it would require to get 16 bodies for a midnight raid.
All of these factors ended with endless isk for a few and no entry for others.
Claiming it wasn't exploited outright is like claiming that the earth is flat or that devouring arsenic is safe.
Passive ISK needed to not be a thing and should have been killed with fire in its infancy.
It contributed nothing useful to the game as a whole.
It did, however, insure that a select few players would never have to concern themselves with the same difficulties suffered by the rest of the playerbase.
Keep saying you don't like the claim that it was exploited.
Im a goon. We excel at abusing bad mechanics but this one took the cake so thoroughly that even we were disgusted by the sheer stupidity of it. |
Sequal Rise
Les Desanusseurs
101
|
Posted - 2014.10.10 15:40:00 -
[88] - Quote
Bring back passive isk payout (not as much as before) but prevent corps from having more than 2 districts. It'll become MUCH more fun, with MUCH more corporations having districts!
Check that corps doesnt create secondary ones/academy corps in order to have more districts, and your problem will be solved!
Sorry for my bad english ^^
|
Alaika Arbosa
Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc.
2184
|
Posted - 2014.10.10 17:06:00 -
[89] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Passive isk was exploited to the benefit of a few players and to the detriment of the majority of players.
Anyone who says otherwise is trolling or blind.
PC was locked down as content for an elite few and all others denied entry so that corps could harvest hundreds of millions per week.
Alt corps engaging to lock out battles each week with clone packs that did not expend was a thing. Allies would similarly lock frienly districts and not deploy. Only one battle per day is allowed per district.
Many corps have deliberately set the lock timers to exclude 90% of players due to Most people having jobs and needing sleep, creating an artificial buffer that discouraged anyone from wasting the effort it would require to get 16 bodies for a midnight raid.
All of these factors ended with endless isk for a few and no entry for others.
Claiming it wasn't exploited outright is like claiming that the earth is flat or that devouring arsenic is safe.
Passive ISK needed to not be a thing and should have been killed with fire in its infancy.
It contributed nothing useful to the game as a whole.
It did, however, insure that a select few players would never have to concern themselves with the same difficulties suffered by the rest of the playerbase.
Keep saying you don't like the claim that it was exploited.
Im a goon. We excel at abusing bad mechanics but this one took the cake so thoroughly that even we were disgusted by the sheer stupidity of it.
Your closing statement should be the subtitle of everything written about PC ever.
The Universe is hostile, so impersonal
Devour to survive
So it is, so it's always been....
|
Breakin Stuff
Goonfeet
Special Planetary Emergency Response Group
3551
|
Posted - 2014.10.10 20:04:00 -
[90] - Quote
Alaika Arbosa wrote:
Your closing statement should be the subtitle of everything written about PC ever.
No that subtitle is "10% of the fun for 1000% of the normal price." |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |