Dreaming again but rather than 3 matches would a new version of skirmish 1.0 be workable where the objectives close in on the enemy base?

Stage 1 : hack one of the points around the base to choose your staging ground. Defenders can scout to try and find you and stop you gaining a hoothold.

Stage 2 : Attackers must hack several points may be the power grid, defence grid and communications.

Stage 3 : Storm the base, if the attackers out clone the enemy and the match ends but the defender retains the base and gets the chance to commit more clones to the fight. Succeed in infiltrating and hacking and you take the base. If the owner outclones the attacker the assault must be restarted.

I know I see a lot of people asking for the return of something like this. I don't know if it's a possibility even. But I like how the single match progresses, it's more open and seemless. Of course non of this maybe possible.

I do like the idea that an ambush is used to try and reduce clonecount.. raids could be used for the same thing.

I like the idea of staged offensive/defensive map styles, both for PC and FW. Gives both of them a different feel and texture than the normal skirmish matches we have now, that offer nothing different, other than intensity, than what Public Matches do.

Need that before we even touch the warbarge stuff in my opinion. Skirmish 3.0 was needed years ago.

Yes, it's been 2+ years since we last saw Skirmish 1.0.

[quote=Lady MDK]Dreaming again but rather than 3 matches would a new version of skirmish 1.0
The suggestion with 3 consecutive games was meant as a workaround / placeholder until we can have something proper. I think it's importaint the defenders actually defends something, not just spawns far off (as the attackers) and have to hack their own objectives, like it's done today.

If everything is owned by the defending corporation at the start of match, it becomes a completely different game even with the current game modes we have today. Things like Turrets which are located closest to the enemy MCC, which are pointless today since they are neutral, will be strategical importaint. (The enemy might be forced to spawn tanks to take out the blaster turrets before infantry can enter the base, etc)

I know that at this stage Dust development is occurring without changes to the EVE link, but the mobility issue has to be addressed.

Clones moving point to point is one thing. There is an existing New Eden process for that: Medical Clones, Jump Clones.
Warbarges being a semi-permanent deployable structure however (or a ship, but clearly there's not enough development time to sort that out) is something completely different.

There simply has to be some sort of time and risk limitation to their deployability. As well as some other fundamental quantified variables:

Can Warbarges move planet to planet in a system, are they vulnerable to anything and is there any transport cost (time or $)?

Can Warbarges move system to system and if so why *wouldn't* they use the EVE stargates, thus becoming vulnerable?

Do Equipment and Vehicles take up space in the Warbarge?

At the very least it seems that Warbarges, if they're to exist in New Eden, should be visible to EVE ships. They're clearly intended to be occupying the same physical universe. They should have to deal with capsuleers in some manner, be it only visible to them (probably too little), or completely destructible by them (probably too much for an initial roll out).

New Eden interactions are very much shaped by geography.

Dust, when talking about moving something between New Eden planets and systems, should be as well.

The lynchpin to this step is the introduction of the Warbarge Clone Vats Module (name TBD) where Clonepacks can be built with regular intervals, allowing Corporations without Districts to launch relatively risk free attacks on Districts. These attacks should be initiated from a list of Districts, displaying Timers, Clones, Corporation and other useful statistics and not from the Starmap itself.

Right on the money, but EVE attacks are not on the table.

These Warbarges will not exist as a physical entity in 2015, they are as someone said, a metaphysical "home" and can not be attacked or destroyed except through new game modes that are not being discussed at the moment but A)"warbarge vs warbarge" is an idea, and B) "raid the warbarge" would mean a type of non-district PC where the attacker would fight in a "ship map" and steal resources (dust moon goo), but again not on the table for 2015.

That is a good idea for making logistics work, clone packs should be good to get a foothold but not sustainable. Some form of distance formula penalty from warbarge using clonepacks would make sense. Then reinstill the movement penalties on land, and then the whole system starts working as intended, i.e. investments in infrastructure to overcome logistic penalties, just like war.

...We may also reduce the available Timers

and/or set Districts to fixed Timers that canGÇÖt be changed.

Awesome, every district can have their timer changed, but only to x:00. This will mean that a corp that can reliably field a team 24 hours a day can hold 24 districts. If they want more than 24 districts, they'll need to be able to field 2 teams for at least one timer. If they want to sleep, then they can probably hold 12 districts, etc.

This will greatly reduce land hoarding and open up land for smaller corps.



Um, no.

That will tie entire regions of space to corps that operate in certain timezones.

Actually it would open it up for corps without (32) 6+ KDR players to grow their numbers and participate albeit with a different strategy than those small elite corps.

Without changing the timer mechanics you keep the power in the hands of a select few. And really the thing that's always stopped those groups is getting burnt out. A change in the mechanics of the timers benefits everyone.

So community members are furiously masturbating collaborating on fundamental PC design. Here's an idea that I came up with that seems to have gone over well.

• Districts no longer hold clones, they hold MCC's. Control of a district is lost when the defender has no more MCC's remaining
• Defenders lose an MCC if they lose a battle on the district
• Attackers require an MCC and a "Clone block" (basically a single unit of an additional resource) to attack
• Attacks happen through a system other than direct clone movement; this is a full rework of part of the logistics subsystem that needs to be discussed
• Clone destruction is no longer the primary payoff determiner; this involves a full rework of the rewards subsystem that needs to be fleshed out and discussed
• In-game clone count for both teams is set at a reasonably high default. 150-180+ has been on the table for discussion.

The quick list of reasons:

• Simplification of attacking, defending, and attrition - The granularity of clone movements is an over complication that doesn't add much tactical value. Attrition rates are crazy hard-to-intuit calculations, and again don't add much tactical value. The new system is much simpler: You can attack a district, or you can't. You have defenses left on a district, or you don't.
• Removal of "unwinnable" games - Gameplay value is detracted when one team or another has to play a match with a critically low number of clones under the current system
• Separation of battle win-conditions and sovereignty/logistics in general. The intertwining of these systems makes balance a lot harder.

This theme of degranularization of PC resources is extensible, and should be applied throughout the redesign wherever possible. Complication for the sake of complication isn't necessarily more "tactical" or "strategic", and comes with its own share of pitfalls.

At the same time talent pooling is a very real and problematic part of planetary conquest even today. One of my concerns is that by giving 'corp-wide' bonuses to compel people into corps you could very well end up with a stronger incentive for the 'elite' to all just aggregate into one super corp.

Ccp All of yaw is full of it .you telling me u don't know what's going on.I'm sick of it and I'm speaking for all the real gamers. When I say there nothing but cheaters on dust with there mod controller and hackers. you telling me you don't see excessive amount of kills with The combat ,ar and the scrambler. Your slow u can kick me if u want. That why everbody that a real gamer is going to destiny.I know you dont care bcuz your goal and the cheaters are to get the game on a damn computer anyway. obvious you don't play your own damn game Or u wouldn't seen the fufu stuff that's being said and going on.I'm a vet on here and everybody knows what's going on.till you fit it im not going to play.You might as well pull the plug and open up the legion. P.s good money on a game to get ran by lames that really cant play

I'd like to chip in an idea I was thinking about as well on the availability of battles, and giving District owners a chance to become more active in their districts.

The basic idea is that when districts are able to make DUST Goo / Warbarge Fuel that it produces X / day.
However, this amount can be increased by having a district be set to "Active" (It would require certain privileges to do)

When a District is set to "Active" it will remain so for the next 1 hour. (Note this "active" period cannot overlap with that district's "vulnerable" period) During this time it will passively produce an additional sum of DUST Goo / Warbarge Fuel / Clones (Depending on the infrastructure type)

To balance this out though the District becomes attackable during this "active" period by anybody who wishes to assault the District, which would cause Planetary Raids to be had. A Planetary Raid would be slightly different from Planetary Conquest in a number of ways:
1) It would be fighting over the resources produce / stockpiled there. A decisive victory could see the entire gain of the "active" period taken
2) A District could not switch hands during an "Active" period, but losses in the District could still make impact in later battles.
3) Planetary Raids would use some format of the Ambush Game Mode.

Ideally this game mode would be set up to promote very swift conclusions to the battles, and for the Attacker to walk away with some portion of the product relative to their performance. (Ranging from 0 - 100% of gained product)

The overall idea here is to promote Districts as a fighting ground for corps in a way that allows them to fight when they are active and profit from it while also allowing other entities to come and disrupt those activities.

This part worried me. From my perspective one of the most important things that PC needs to make it feel like you are conquering land, is to Make Location Matter! So getting away from using the Starmap raised a red flag and caused me to reread that paragraph several times.

The lynchpin to this step is the introduction of the Warbarge Clone Vats Module (name TBD) where Clonepacks can be built with regular intervals, allowing Corporations without Districts to launch relatively risk free attacks on Districts. These attacks should be initiated from a list of Districts, displaying Timers, Clones, Corporation and other useful statistics and not from the Starmap itself.

Dear players

...{Lots of stuff about warbarges.}