DUST Search - Thread under Construction (Second attempt)

Maken Tosch wrote:

Terry Webber wrote:

Breakin Stuff wrote:

Terry Webber wrote:

But Breaking Stuff, there is still a possibility that one side would lose a battle if they can't leave their spawning area. So instead of having the redline as a barrier, CCP can just make it a boundary colored yellow instead of red for the battle and have the game notify the player that they're leaving the battlefield. It won't kill them if they stay in the redline too long.To protect a side's spawn area under the MCC, the MCC's guns and the turrets on the ground can shoot any enemy that breaches the perimeter.

Dynamic. Spawn. Points.

having two, and ONLY two that are right under each other was dumb. if you have two or better yet, the whole side of the battlefield where you enter is littered with spawns, you can't get pushed into one area and farmed.

That could work but one side can still just block the other if they can predict where their opponents will spawn next and get there fast enough. Having weapons that monitor the redline can help discourage this practice.

Dynamic Spawns seem to imply randomness in this case. But we all know that there is no such thing random in the universe. Even if you built the code to try to be random, the code will inadvertently create a pattern over time. Anyone who is smart enough to catch this pattern, will be able to exploit it.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Kain Spero Internal Error. 4151	Posted - 2015.01.10 10:34:00 - [1] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: 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. If it's not a fight for the district I could see it happening in a shorter time frame as well potentially. I think the MCC idea that has been kickina around has merit. Maybe one of these small attacks uses up fuel or resources but doesn't reduce the MCC count of the barge which would happen with an attack for the district. Could make these smaller attacks be sourced from a specific barge module even. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Internal Error. 4151	Posted - 2015.01.10 15:10:00 - [2] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: Timers ? - Current system? - Hard coded timer for each district? - Hard coded timer for each district, with ability to move timber up to 3 hours in either direction? - Vulnerability window in which the attackers can initiate the battle? If District timers are hard coded, even with the 6 hour flexibility bracket, then Districts on the same planet should have timers in the same time zone range. Hard coded timers seems like a bad idea. Even with a bracket the game and whatever calculation used to set the timers is determining X planet is an EU planet, Y is an Asian planet, Z is an American planet rather than that being organically developed by the players that decide to be involved in PC. I do think it would make sense to limit how far a timer can be shifted in one go. Several folks have been kicking around the window idea where the defender sets a 2 to 4 hour window and then the attacker decides the hour the attack will take place after the usual 24 hour wait. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Internal Error. 4151	Posted - 2015.01.10 15:32:00 - [3] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: 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. Alternatively we could get rid of Clone packs, Let Corps buy a Warbarge, and then grow their clones on their war barge. Then have Raids and the first phase of attacks on a district be 8v8 rather than 16 v 16. (No timer of Raids and the first phase of attacks.) If the Attackers in a Raid win, then they get some of the Defenders clones, as well as other stuff to make the Raid profitable. The issue I see with a raid being the first stage of a district takeover is that it means the stakes for the smaller, quicker fights are still high and will lead to the same pressures we have now in PC fights to always field your best. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Internal Error. 4151	Posted - 2015.01.10 15:42:00 - [4] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: Kain Spero wrote: Fox Gaden wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: 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. Alternatively we could get rid of Clone packs, Let Corps buy a Warbarge, and then grow their clones on their war barge. Then have Raids and the first phase of attacks on a district be 8v8 rather than 16 v 16. (No timer of Raids and the first phase of attacks.) If the Attackers in a Raid win, then they get some of the Defenders clones, as well as other stuff to make the Raid profitable. The issue I see with a raid being the first stage of a district takeover is that it means the stakes for the smaller, quicker fights are still high and will lead to the same pressures we have now in PC fights to always field your best. I am not apposed to making Raiding a seperat mechanic from actual attacks. What I am against is the entire Clone Pack mechanic. Don't get me wrong. I like the staged fight idea. I just think it would be good to have fights in PC that are lower stakes. I agree that clone packs need to burn in a fire. I like the idea of the barge moving to districts to make attacks. Instead of clone mortality though what if there was some other resource that determined range? Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Internal Error. 4152	Posted - 2015.01.10 22:21:00 - [5] - Quote For Other Stuff how about a way to transfer a district as an additional diplomatic option? I would say to limit transfers to corps with a certain Corp Rank to help prevent some alt corp shenanigans. Also an idea for a district facility: Arena. The Arena would allow you to rent out the district so others could play on it for the purpose of custom matches and corp battles. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Internal Error. 4154	Posted - 2015.01.11 11:50:00 - [6] - Quote This has been touched on a bit in this thread, but I really would consider moving away from specific clone counts on districts entirely. Leither posted some thoughts about that here: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2549352#post2549352 The basic idea is go to MCC count with set clone values per MCC. Run out of MCC in your barge and you can no longer attack while if you run out of MCC defending a district you lose that district. No more 20 clone fights etc. The sticking point for this kind of change though would be the need for another way to determine attack range and attrition like fuel. In regard to raiding and district resources I had some ideas on how that could work along the lines of your more instantaneous 15 min attacks: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2542172#post2542172 Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Internal Error. 4154	Posted - 2015.01.11 15:14:00 - [7] - Quote Terry Webber wrote: Fox Gaden wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Some spit-balled idea I had hidden away in my Imgur account that I thought of. Really high-level idea that probably isn't feasible at current but, yanno. http://i.imgur.com/h3bWsy7.png I like the idea, but I think it is out of scope of what is possible to implement at this time. In a perfect world I would like to have it implemented the way you suggest, but there are limits to what we can expect right now. I like this idea too and it perfectly describes a part of what selecting a district for an attack should be. Corp CEOs and directors would arrange an attack through the starmap like usual. The only difference is that instead of selecting icons representing districts, an actual district on the planet itself would be highlighted. But you may be right though. It would be a while before this is possible. I'd love to see a hex map for districts and a way for districts linked together to provide bonuses. You really don't get any sense of these being places on a planet with the way districts are now. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Internal Error. 4230	Posted - 2015.01.16 07:33:00 - [8] - Quote I really think that Phase 2 and Phase 3 should be able to happen on the same day, or there needs to be a mechanic where if X defenders don't show up for a Phase 2 Attack the defenders auto loose and the Warbarge timer starts up again for a Phase 3 match. One complaint about PC has been a lot of setup for just one match. I think letting Phase 2 and Phase 3 play out on the same attack would lessen this feeling. Also, I think doing a tug-of-war style gameplay until one side runs out of MCC could be interesting. If the attacking barge still has MCC and the defender wins a Phase 2 or 3 you could let the Defender counter attack the Warbarge using the district maps which would start Phase 2 in the case of a defender win in Phase 3 or a Phase 3 match in the case of a Phase 2 victory for the defender. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4236	Posted - 2015.01.16 13:22:00 - [9] - Quote I'd say that longer battles aren't outright a bad thing as long as things don't get too crazy. The example you've laid out sounds pretty good. I like the idea that you have somewhat of an escalation in potential match length as you get closer to the district being taken over. I like the armor idea for initiating Phase 3 on the same day, but I think no shows might need to be more harshly punished (if you haven't figured out I hate no shows ). If X% of the team on either side doesn't show up you forfeit the match, loose an MCC, and move onto the next phase in either direction. In your phase plan if the defenders push back the attack do they get a rest period like the current mechanics? Something to consider. Any resource production should be stopped until an attack is resolved so that we don't end up with friendly attacks again that result in economic benefit. This would also be a reason for a defender to want to press a counter attack and eliminate the warbarge's entire stock of MCC. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4239	Posted - 2015.01.16 14:27:00 - [10] - Quote ^^ Seems like we've found someone that hates no shows worse than me. X) Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news

Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4267	Posted - 2015.01.19 00:30:00 - [11] - Quote Maken Tosch wrote: Terry Webber wrote: Breakin Stuff wrote: Terry Webber wrote: But Breaking Stuff, there is still a possibility that one side would lose a battle if they can't leave their spawning area. So instead of having the redline as a barrier, CCP can just make it a boundary colored yellow instead of red for the battle and have the game notify the player that they're leaving the battlefield. It won't kill them if they stay in the redline too long.To protect a side's spawn area under the MCC, the MCC's guns and the turrets on the ground can shoot any enemy that breaches the perimeter. Dynamic. Spawn. Points. having two, and ONLY two that are right under each other was dumb. if you have two or better yet, the whole side of the battlefield where you enter is littered with spawns, you can't get pushed into one area and farmed. That could work but one side can still just block the other if they can predict where their opponents will spawn next and get there fast enough. Having weapons that monitor the redline can help discourage this practice. Dynamic Spawns seem to imply randomness in this case. But we all know that there is no such thing random in the universe. Even if you built the code to try to be random, the code will inadvertently create a pattern over time. Anyone who is smart enough to catch this pattern, will be able to exploit it. If you want truly dynamic spawning make it player controlled. CCP needs to take a page from battlefield 2142's book and make it where if you are all capped the MCC activates launchers that can shoot players out into the map. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news