DUST Search - Thread under Construction (Second attempt)

Mobius Wyvern wrote:

Aeon Amadi wrote:

IMO, corporation rank shouldn't be so artificial as to have some sort of numerical value based gimmick in-game. A player's loyalty to a corporation and the corporation's loyalty to that player are largely human factors that shouldn't be affected by in-game mechanics. You can limit corp hopping by adding restrictions (24 hour hard-set timers to removing roles, leaving corp, etc). Players staying together is not a gameplay mechanic, it's a human bond that is established based on trust and largely subject to a right and proper backstabbing in the right conditions (something we need more of in this game).

I feel that there should be less focus on how to keep players together and more on what separates them. Everyone rings for everyone in PC, it's a fact. Giant conglomerates of freelancers who are "available at the time and ready for a good stomp" isn't something we're lacking right now. What we are lacking are incentives for players to legitimately learn to hate one another, to lose things they've attained, and to be so utterly defeated as to have to start over.

PC as a whole needs to be more tactical and less "good fight". The good fights will come on their own. Just spit-balling ideas here but, something like newer corps only being able to launch attacks on districts bordering hi-sec systems would give plenty of tactical value in having territory deeper into low-sec. Having rewards that benefit having that deep low-sec territory (better salvage/biomass) gives further tactical advantage. You create a reason for players to -WANT- that territory, to covet it and genuinely desire to take it by any means necessary, including carving a bloody path through one's allies.

PC should be a rabbit hole that allows players to go as deep as they genuinely want to go, and fight as hard as they want to fight, with rewards plentiful (not ISK or clones) to allow for continued expansion of one's empire, should they choose it, with risks involved that allow for diminishing returns. A good example: Goonswarm once lost all of their sovereignty in a single day because someone didn't foot the Sov Bill (which increases based on how much sovereignty you have). It's just an idea.

"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 14356	Posted - 2015.01.10 01:03:00 - [1] - Quote This is fantastic, made better by the fact that it is almost a carbon copy of what I have done myself. Now, someone mentioned changing clonepacks into MCC which is kind of cool when you think about it. A warbarge flying around dropping MCC's the have clones in them to establlish a beachhead. I also want to have a strict range limit on cp attacks from the Warbarge, and not clone mortality, just to make the initial attack simpler /you know I prefer the initial attack to be launched from a list of districts in the client. If I get really edgy, what if you have a capacity of X MCC's. The MCC's could be manufactured in some way, such as reprocessingsalvaged gear into Nanites and Materials, and Clone packs from Biomass. I agree with the system being self sustaining but augmentable if you have districts, but the capacity of the warbarge inhibits established corps from using only CP's. What about District Timers, or do you prefer a whole different section for that? How do we define corporate Rank such as that they help keep players together, not corp jump to exploit a system, can not be exploited via new alts, yet require corporations to build their ranks by recruiting and training new players. What about Surface Infrastructure, do we go back to properly punish far attacks, and make the SIs neceessary, not the way we have it now where cargo hubs rule. Rewards, the CPM and I agree that the main motivator of fighting cannot be clones for the sake of clones, nor ISK. There needs to be rarity that is only collected on districts. However, we have discussed going to a "you get what you kill" in PC. That would allow lower level and new corporations to use their free clonepack, use adv gear and try to "do their best", possibly eeking out a profit and valuable experience. Just some stuff written from bed. Again, really like what I am seeing. Maybe I will break out special sections for subcomponents of PC; but I feel they need to be all a part of the bigger context. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 14375	Posted - 2015.01.10 03:42:00 - [2] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: IMO, corporation rank shouldn't be so artificial as to have some sort of numerical value based gimmick in-game. A player's loyalty to a corporation and the corporation's loyalty to that player are largely human factors that shouldn't be affected by in-game mechanics. You can limit corp hopping by adding restrictions (24 hour hard-set timers to removing roles, leaving corp, etc). Players staying together is not a gameplay mechanic, it's a human bond that is established based on trust and largely subject to a right and proper backstabbing in the right conditions (something we need more of in this game). I feel that there should be less focus on how to keep players together and more on what separates them. Everyone rings for everyone in PC, it's a fact. Giant conglomerates of freelancers who are "available at the time and ready for a good stomp" isn't something we're lacking right now. What we are lacking are incentives for players to legitimately learn to hate one another, to lose things they've attained, and to be so utterly defeated as to have to start over. PC as a whole needs to be more tactical and less "good fight". The good fights will come on their own. Just spit-balling ideas here but, something like newer corps only being able to launch attacks on districts bordering hi-sec systems would give plenty of tactical value in having territory deeper into low-sec. Having rewards that benefit having that deep low-sec territory (better salvage/biomass) gives further tactical advantage. You create a reason for players to -WANT- that territory, to covet it and genuinely desire to take it by any means necessary, including carving a bloody path through one's allies. PC should be a rabbit hole that allows players to go as deep as they genuinely want to go, and fight as hard as they want to fight, with rewards plentiful (not ISK or clones) to allow for continued expansion of one's empire, should they choose it, with risks involved that allow for diminishing returns. A good example: Goonswarm once lost all of their sovereignty in a single day because someone didn't foot the Sov Bill (which increases based on how much sovereignty you have). It's just an idea. +1 I thought of something, what if we have 2 types of clonepacks, one that can not be used to win a district, and is more manageable to new corps, and initiates only 8v8 or 12v12 attacks? And the other one is the 16v16 and is needed to claim a district. just a thought. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"