DUST Search - Possibly fixing PC

TRULY ELITE wrote:

Derrith Erador wrote:

TRULY ELITE wrote:

You don't realise the real reason Passive ISK was taken away is because Tso's were farming with no effort at all and making huge money of it. That's why I propose there be some sort of setback to having 12 corps in 1 alliance. I know this might sound a bit punishing but how is sitting on districts and doing nothing fun? It's not, so can we get back to the ol days of WAR! When there was actually like 3 different superpowers or more and not just one. Ways to implement this could be like having an alliance wallet or splitting the divedens of Passive ISK generation equally to each corp.

I believe this would promote better and stronger co-operation and friendships through alliance and not just 'hey let's form together to get unlimited ISK'.

I'm going to go ahead and call some grade A BS on that. Tso's was never in power during the time of passive Isk. Eon was, Cronos was, O.H. had their time I believe, and DNS was the most famous (and yes, I was DNS). But not Tso's. And it isn't that I judge those powers for doing that, they were in power. Add to the fact that the community, as a whole, were too lazy to do anything about it (or poor, I prefer going with both). And I don't blame them on that either, I was a part of three Nyain san blitzes, all failed miserably, and I can safely assure you I will never be a part of anything like that again because we couldn't get help.

But you have to stop laying some of the blame on CCP and major superpowers for PC and take up some of the responsibility yourselves. Many people complained about major alliances farming, but did nothing about it. The only time they did anything was during the FEC war, funded mainly by AE (?) and former Cronos superpower, Seraphim Initiative. The way I saw, they got all brave because it wasn't coming out of their wallet.

But on the making a penalty for having too many corps in an alliance, well... I guess it could work.

Yes but if it was to return then who would benefit the most? Tso's? Or new corps?

FAs official perv and lech. My dream is to turn 80 and become a dirty old man chasing skirts.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Derrith Erador Fatal Absolution 2821	Posted - 2014.10.09 11:05:00 - [1] - Quote Well, here comes another long winded post from Derrith. And what a twist, I'm not ranting about ADS! Anyway, on to the subject matter, we all know PC is a flawed and rather crappy system. Let's see just how we can implement a decent fix for that. Issue 1: Passive isk. Personally I believe we should bring that back, with some modifications. Mod 1: I believe in order to avoid what I call "The Nyain Effect", we should add to each district owned by X corp to have a 25% penalty to any district with corresponding timers under X corp. Example: Say FA has a district at 2100 and we make about (random number) 20mil isk a day off it. Having a second district under that timer would lower the isk production rate of both the first district and the corresponding district. District 1 will make 15mil a day, as will district 2. Having a third district on this timer would render third district useless, and have no need of said district, FA will definitely sell it to some newb corp for money (we're nice people that way). Issue 2: Alt corps/ and vanity corps. I've heard FAs fair Princess Zatata argue that if this change would be implemented, there would be an increased number of alt and vanity corps. Let me start off by saying you can't stop vanity corps, or alt corps. This idea should get the ball rolling in highly discouraging it, however. Mod 2: When AE and FA merged to become the Last of Dust (pretty horrid fail, almost as bad as MHPD), I had a panty dropper library inside FA that I put on a word document to transfer over to TLODs private GD thread. I had to wait two weeks, and the corp had to have about 10 members inside of corp for me to transfer my said panty dropper library. Now my question to CCP is this, why is it that I have to wait two weeks and have ten or so corp members to make as simple and insignificant as a GD thread, yet I can create a corp instantly and launch clone packs all over the place? That just doesn't make sense to me. Proposed fix: Make a corp have to exist for at least a week and have at least 20 members inside of corp. Again, you can't stop alt corps, but this will greatly discourage it, if I'm correct. Issue 3: Spreading more combat in Molden Heath. As it is right now, MH is a smoldering ruin of hippies, and beatnicks. How to get rid of them, you ask? The answer is probably simple. Mod 3: Increasing rewards for flipping a district and successfully defending a district. As it is currently, we get isk based off of a 150 clone count, no matter the winning side, or how many of those clones we kill on enemy team, along with gear destroyed in battle. But there's no real reward for defending a district from 400 clones, you get the same reward if you defended it from 150, along with destroyed clones. Make defenses to where if a district is successfully defended, the biomass of attacking clones turns to isk, and goes right into the defenders wallets, making for a nice paycheck on their end. And on the attackers side. Giving a reason to flip the district is the key. As it is right now, people will go into some new corps turf, beat the crap out of him, but not so much to where he can't come back and have it happen all over again. Solution to this being that if you flip the district, an extra isk reward will be given to mercs in said battle. Another idea that pops up is to make the Surface research lab the district type that if you successfully defend or flip, an extra reward on top of the defense or flip reward would make those areas bloodbaths. Issue 4: A lot of PC have been shouting about this for a while now. I'm sure I'm not the only guy who thinks "Gee, I'm getting kind of sick of having to fight on the cargo hub map over and over and over again. Mod 4: Introduce new maps every time a re-attack takes place. The initial defense will be the same old map, but the re-attack will have a different map waiting for you, and thus a different plan. BTW, on a side note, nearly every PC vet I've talked to despises the Gallente research facility, that map has produced better slideshows than Microsoft Powerpoint. Just kill that map. Issue 5: Getting new corps in PC. A lot of new corps complain that it's hard getting in PC. And for the most part, you're right. Clone packs are too expensive, and pub isk gained is laughable. Mod 5A: This idea does not come from me. I take no credit, Sota Pop came up with this idea. For new corps trying to get into PC, it would be prudent and helpful to give them discounts on the clone packs so they don't have to grind for so long for it. Mod 5B: increase pub isk by 50%. Typically we get about 200k per match in a pub, which for new corps, grinding that out is rather frustrating. Increasing the pub isk would give pubbies a good reason to keep playing so they don't have to go dirt poor nearly every match, and would help the isk grind for the new boys and girls. Again, sorry for the long windedness. FAs official perv and lech. My dream is to turn 80 and become a dirty old man chasing skirts.
Derrith Erador Fatal Absolution 2821	Posted - 2014.10.09 11:11:00 - [2] - Quote Cavani1EE7 wrote: I'm so proud of you. I love you too, daddy! FAs official perv and lech. My dream is to turn 80 and become a dirty old man chasing skirts.
Derrith Erador Fatal Absolution 2823	Posted - 2014.10.09 15:17:00 - [3] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: In response to the OP. Mod 1: Diminishing returns for passive ISK on districts owned by the same Corp on the same timbers. I am not sure on this one. Mod 4: Change the map for subsequent battles in a district. [b] NO! Absolutely Not! District ownership barely feels like owning land as it is. This would remove any recognizable distinction of a District, and completely banish any lingering feelings of ownership. Besides, my suggestion above would make Research Facilities much more common. (If you donGÇÖt like the Research Facility socket, replace it with the Gallente Communications facility socket.) Mod 1 response: Well, the main problem we had in PC was the fact that corps could use obscene timers to put a lot of districts on "lockdown" where they could farm isk with impunity and the community would not do anything about it. I was a part of three Nyain San blitzes, I can easily assure you I understand why the community didn't want any part of that. Spending my peaceful coffee filled mornings getting blasted by core nades isn't exactly what I'd call a good morning Aside from that, none of them were ever successful. Mod 4 response: Another one of our problems in PC was map variety. There is no map variety, except for the occasional bridge, or fifth point in the city. There is three types of districts, and three types of maps to coincide. I understand your hesitation on this suggestion, but I believe it is the best way to keep map variety alive. If you're still completely against this idea, you could also try just implementing more maps for each type of district, they would turn, but they'd be different. @Alaiko Arbosa: For my own sake, I'm going to ignore until you have something productive to say. Until then, have a good day. FAs official perv and lech. My dream is to turn 80 and become a dirty old man chasing skirts.
Derrith Erador Fatal Absolution 2823	Posted - 2014.10.09 15:46:00 - [4] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: Just at first glance: Issue 1: I don't really like passive ISK, it should be earned one way or another. Besides, even wth a corp cap, how do you prevent alt corps? (See issue 2) Issue 2: Not positive but I'm pretty sure Dust's corp system is integrated with Eve's. Changing something like this might not be possible. Besides, what if legitimate small corps actually want to hold districts (more likely "district") and hire ringers to fill their slots? Unlikely, but it could happen. Issue 3: I'd have to think about it, but I do think there should be more reward in PC. I just haven't run any numbers or anything... Issue 4: this is a bad idea if things are kept as they are otherwise. It is important to know what map you're fighting on and build your team/strategize around that. If we could know the map/installations before hand I may be more open to it, still not too inclined. Issue 5: Again, how would you differentiate between a new corp and an alt corp? Issue 1 response: There is no real reward for holding a district, that is my beef. And like I said, you can't stop alt corps, my theory should highly discourage it however. Issue 2 response: Ringers are a very important part of Dust, gives us our merc mindset and allows hiring for outside help. And the problem with that is also the fact that some corps hire nothing but ringers. Some of those are alt corps. Heck, I've got my own alt corp for kicks and giggles. Issue 4 response: I've said it before, I'll say it again. A lot of PC vets are sick and tired of the same three maps we get, we want something new. Issue 5 response: See issue 1 response. Though I'm afraid if we both keep talking about these, we'll be going in circles. FAs official perv and lech. My dream is to turn 80 and become a dirty old man chasing skirts.
Derrith Erador Fatal Absolution 2825	Posted - 2014.10.09 16:53:00 - [5] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: Moorian Flav wrote: Quote: Molden Heath shouldn't be restricted to the Dust elite. It should be easy for smaller corporations to give PC a stab. Big corps will always dominate Molden Heath but it doesn't mean that small corps should have to pay 50mil just to test the waters. I was thinking about suggesting 1 free clone pack per corp a week but then you would simply see a lot of alt corps taking over districts with ringers just for a laugh. IDK. If there was a way to give non-PC corps with a member cap (like at least 20 members) that were not currently in PC a free clone pack, that may increase PC action but I am not sure how easily that would be to code for CCP. The problem is this only adds a minimal entry barrier. Now you just need 20 alts per alt corp. No big deal. Alts are free. Maybe you could get away with it if it had a weekly WP requirement to count. So the characters counted must be in active use. That's... actually an interesting idea. And on the alts going into a corp, let me ask you a question. Who other than Sota Pop do you know with 20 alts laying about? Not many I'd wager. I still like your idea, but I think mine would be better, as it would highly discourage it. But as any PC vet knows, you can't stop alt corps. @Vulpes, when I mentioned Sotas idea about lowering isk cost for clone packs for newer corps, he didn't say newer corps, he said corps that don't hold land. Miscommunication on my end, sorry. FAs official perv and lech. My dream is to turn 80 and become a dirty old man chasing skirts.
Derrith Erador Fatal Absolution 2825	Posted - 2014.10.09 16:57:00 - [6] - Quote Vulpes Dolosus wrote: 2 Didnt really answer the question. The goal is to weed out apt corps, but how to you prevent filtering out legitament small PC corps? The problem therein lies that this cannot be done. At least not to my knowledge. Soraya offered a decent proposal for such an issue above, but I'm honestly unsure if that will work. FAs official perv and lech. My dream is to turn 80 and become a dirty old man chasing skirts.
Derrith Erador Fatal Absolution 2845	Posted - 2014.10.11 01:01:00 - [7] - Quote TRULY ELITE wrote: You don't realise the real reason Passive ISK was taken away is because Tso's were farming with no effort at all and making huge money of it. That's why I propose there be some sort of setback to having 12 corps in 1 alliance. I know this might sound a bit punishing but how is sitting on districts and doing nothing fun? It's not, so can we get back to the ol days of WAR! When there was actually like 3 different superpowers or more and not just one. Ways to implement this could be like having an alliance wallet or splitting the divedens of Passive ISK generation equally to each corp. I believe this would promote better and stronger co-operation and friendships through alliance and not just 'hey let's form together to get unlimited ISK'. I'm going to go ahead and call some grade A BS on that. Tso's was never in power during the time of passive Isk. Eon was, Cronos was, O.H. had their time I believe, and DNS was the most famous (and yes, I was DNS). But not Tso's. And it isn't that I judge those powers for doing that, they were in power. Add to the fact that the community, as a whole, were too lazy to do anything about it (or poor, I prefer going with both). And I don't blame them on that either, I was a part of three Nyain san blitzes, all failed miserably, and I can safely assure you I will never be a part of anything like that again because we couldn't get help. But you have to stop laying some of the blame on CCP and major superpowers for PC and take up some of the responsibility yourselves. Many people complained about major alliances farming, but did nothing about it. The only time they did anything was during the FEC war, funded mainly by AE (?) and former Cronos superpower, Seraphim Initiative. The way I saw, they got all brave because it wasn't coming out of their wallet. But on the making a penalty for having too many corps in an alliance, well... I guess it could work. FAs official perv and lech. My dream is to turn 80 and become a dirty old man chasing skirts.
Derrith Erador Fatal Absolution 2849	Posted - 2014.10.11 14:00:00 - [8] - Quote TRULY ELITE wrote: Derrith Erador wrote: TRULY ELITE wrote: You don't realise the real reason Passive ISK was taken away is because Tso's were farming with no effort at all and making huge money of it. That's why I propose there be some sort of setback to having 12 corps in 1 alliance. I know this might sound a bit punishing but how is sitting on districts and doing nothing fun? It's not, so can we get back to the ol days of WAR! When there was actually like 3 different superpowers or more and not just one. Ways to implement this could be like having an alliance wallet or splitting the divedens of Passive ISK generation equally to each corp. I believe this would promote better and stronger co-operation and friendships through alliance and not just 'hey let's form together to get unlimited ISK'. I'm going to go ahead and call some grade A BS on that. Tso's was never in power during the time of passive Isk. Eon was, Cronos was, O.H. had their time I believe, and DNS was the most famous (and yes, I was DNS). But not Tso's. And it isn't that I judge those powers for doing that, they were in power. Add to the fact that the community, as a whole, were too lazy to do anything about it (or poor, I prefer going with both). And I don't blame them on that either, I was a part of three Nyain san blitzes, all failed miserably, and I can safely assure you I will never be a part of anything like that again because we couldn't get help. But you have to stop laying some of the blame on CCP and major superpowers for PC and take up some of the responsibility yourselves. Many people complained about major alliances farming, but did nothing about it. The only time they did anything was during the FEC war, funded mainly by AE (?) and former Cronos superpower, Seraphim Initiative. The way I saw, they got all brave because it wasn't coming out of their wallet. But on the making a penalty for having too many corps in an alliance, well... I guess it could work. Yes but if it was to return then who would benefit the most? Tso's? Or new corps? Both, if you read my proposal thoroughly, you'd know that the stacking penalty gets rid of having excess districts beyond what you can defend. Only a corp with a strong Asian, European and American (these countries seem to be the major landholders right now) team could possibly become a major landholder, and not many corps have that, if any. FAs official perv and lech. My dream is to turn 80 and become a dirty old man chasing skirts.