DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest

CCP Rattati wrote:

Kain Spero wrote:

Zene Ren wrote:

man seriously i've read most of your comments about the matter, you do not need to double post this kind of stuff rather advocate for leaving the timers behind us that is what you can do

inventing a more complex "walls" as this this Pokey's forum user will only make things worse with every iteration

this needs to be an easy and straight forward mechanic, no timers at all, if you can't be online your alliance needs to have the tools to be aware that a district is in danger of attack and respond to that, nothing more nothing less

making more complex solutions will always destroy the dynamic , make this mode stale, leave most SP wise people out of it thus staying in status quo of the elite club

Your vision is that all organizations need to be global, have massive numbers, and be available 24/7. How is that balance towards the wide variety of groups that attempt to play this game and want to participate in planetary conquest?

How does having land being taken while the owner sleeps give the system a sense of permanence?

No, they just shouldn't hold more land than they can defend and/or manage. Reduce your holdings, it is not your god-given right to have what you used to have. Blink


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 9 post(s)
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4273	Posted - 2015.01.20 10:35:00 - [1] - Quote You summoned me and I'm here. I really think that CCP reaching into the sandbox to manipulate timers to "reset" them is a core violation of the sandbox. You currently have 12 Alliances and 72 Corporations involved in the system ( www.dustcharts.com ). How does reducing all of their holdings to ash and nullifying what work they have put into PC as dysfunctional as it is seem justifiable in anyway? Screwing over everyone to address the outlier that is Nyain San seems like an overreaction. Their ownership share has been shrinking steadily and they are already feeling the pressure of not having players at their current timers which can be seen in them shifting their timers mainly from 1200 to 1300. Many ideas have been put on the table to address the issue including Pokey's expanding timers related to activity here: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=187670 I would also say that a majority of planetary conquest players are open to the idea of implementing some sort of window system that can be seen in posts like Fox's here: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2561895#post2561895 This is not a situation where a magic wand can be waved to address the issue. A good system that allows players to choose when they want to play on the land that they own and relate their activity to the maintenance of timers and wealth generation of districts seems like worth taking the time to implement rather than going off and doing a simplistic and shoddy fix. Allow timers to be adjustable but implement with an escalation of cost as in E, but use Warbarge components rather than ISK to adjust these timers. Second, allow a timer to only be shifted X hours per cycle to allow an owner that has their district a way to counter attack. Another option would be to remove the ability to change the timer immediately after taking a district, but allow it to be changed after a 24 hour cycle. This would allow an owner to counter attack, but if the district is defended then the timer can be manipulated based on costs and rules regarding how much a timer can be shifted in one go. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4273	Posted - 2015.01.20 10:56:00 - [2] - Quote Another thing that would dramatically reduce people using timer hiding would be to implement a system where you can only attack a district within X hours of your own timer. If you hide a district then you should also use the utility of those clones in any attacks you plan. This could be worked into the "attack from a list" system so districts outside your attack window don't show up. Clone packs generated by player activity would still be free to attack any timer they wish though. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4275	Posted - 2015.01.20 11:31:00 - [3] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: Any form of timer can be gamed. Just remove the dam things and introduce hourly rewards. Or simple have timezone areas so certain areas are always open to attack in EU time and then locked off etc. Or put in a shield system where barrage a bases shields and the defenders get a warning to rally troops or somthing. TIMERS DO NOT WORK. Or hell use the Eve system you attack a base knock into a vaun state then 24 hours later it's open to attack or somthing. Timers just ruin the spontaneous nature of what PC could be and will always be gamed no matter what you do. I think having a way to affect districts instantly is good and needed in the form of raids etc., but you do need some way to schedule a fight so you actually have people show up on either end. You could always give less warning ( 20 hour minimum delay instead of 24 hours would dramatically change the current system). Folks have been discussing having districts have 4 hour windows that the attacker can then select the hour they will have the attack land the next day. I think a system like that strikes a good balance between attacker and defender advantage and it make trying hold 50+ districts without the manpower to back it up pretty much impossible. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4276	Posted - 2015.01.20 12:01:00 - [4] - Quote If the problem is timers being stacked around low PCU times rather than resetting all timers why not just tackle the problem area and do something like scramble timers set between 0800 to 1400 UTC? If you look at www.dustcharts.com you can see that timers are already fairly evenly distributed with the outlier being the spike at 1300. I still think that CCP going in and changing around the current timers feels like a violation of the sandbox though. At least minimize that violation. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4282	Posted - 2015.01.20 14:32:00 - [5] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Kain Spero wrote: If the problem is timers being stacked around low PCU times rather than resetting all timers why not just tackle the problem area and do something like scramble timers set between 0800 to 1400 UTC? If you look at www.dustcharts.com you can see that timers are already fairly evenly distributed with the outlier being the spike at 1300. I still think that CCP going in and changing around the current timers feels like a violation of the sandbox though. At least minimize that violation. "violation" of sandbox, these are game rules that were decided at a single point in dusts life. They are no more sacred than any other rule. Doesn't mean it should be done without due diligence, but can and should be done if necessary. Changing the rules around timers is one thing but unilaterally going in and changing everyone's timers for them seems like a horse of a different color. It seems that you all would be able to come up with a solution that introduces some form of counterplay to timer hiding without having to force people's hand. Can you let us know what the current % of players is per hour based on PCU, so players can provide some informed feedback on timer adjustments that are going to be based on something like that? Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4290	Posted - 2015.01.20 16:10:00 - [6] - Quote As a few people have suggested, windows of attack in the 2-4 hour range seem to make a lot more sense than the specific 1 hour timer set-up that we have now. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4299	Posted - 2015.01.20 20:36:00 - [7] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: A) Randomize - all Timers will be reset to a random TZ within the allowed Begin and End settings Would this mean changing up the timers but not allowing any within X hours of downtime or something similar? Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4304	Posted - 2015.01.20 23:35:00 - [8] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: With regards to raiding: I definitely agree that is the area to work on low-warning more-flexible battles, and something I really want to see. Locking down timers for capture battles is a quick change, and allows us to move on into developing features like that with more flexibility. If we get hung up on a very complicated timer system for capture battles with moving timers and windows and crud, I think it'd delay CCP's ability to fix other issues with PC or get more PC content out. There was a meeting of minds today of pretty much every major leader in Planetary Conquest happened to be there. They agree that PC needs to be addressed, but the opinion was unanimous that region locking timers is a bad idea. Some of those in attendance: Arirana, Badgerr Ragerr, dy5t0pia, Evan Gotabor, Ghostt Shadoww, Gilgamesh iBUN, Hawkin Pete, Kalante Schiffer, Kane Spero, Kardia Scorpio, Maylar Snow, Mr Machine Guns, Noktix Luxifer, Poncho Polous, Roman837, saxonmish, Shepherd Grey, Shiyou Hidiyoshi, Silver Strike44, SoTa PoP, TheD1CK, Viktor Hadah, xTheSiLLyRaBBiTx, Zaria MinDeir, Ydubbs81 RND, and others. Corps big and small, casual and elite, people that combined have 1,000s of hours of experience having to deal with Planetary Conquest and it's faults and would like nothing more than to see it flourish. These folks currently involved in planetary conquest do want to see new people be brought into the system and many have even been trying to even give districts away but struggle to find interested parties. Some don't have districts right now but would like to have their names on the map. There is excitement about coming changes to planetary conquest but they don't want to see mechanics like fixed timers potentially mess up that recovery. For these folks goals like owning a planet are something to aspire to and for many geography and placement really does matter. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4305	Posted - 2015.01.21 02:58:00 - [9] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: The Godfathers agree that there is no mafia problem I'm kidding, but you know Well we have a ready gang of players who know the game intimately and are well connected on top of that in that channel and it seems ignoring their knowledge about Planetary Conquest, the problems they've had to go through, and discounting their experience doesn't seem to make much sense. They DO think there are problems with PC and no they don't think timers are perfect. Option (E) was the most popular by far, but region locking was universally thought of as a stupid idea. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4309	Posted - 2015.01.21 13:05:00 - [10] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Zaria Min Deir wrote: Yes. Because we sure don't want to pay any attention to the people who not only have extensive experience in planetary conquest in the past, but are still actively involved and are actually interested in its future. Because their opinions are obviously worthless. No-one has seen those opinions, why is there not a collective proposal from that distinguished group of major minds? Except for this little gold nugget: "Region locking is stupid" There is a massive conflict of interest, and lots of vested interest as well in that group. I have yet to see an idea from the current PC lobby, other than Pokeys. There was another group of vested interest players that tried something like this, i.e. refuse to admit there is a problem, refuse to be honest and offer ideas that addressed the problem, but much rather criticize all changes/ideas that were proposed. It didn't work then, and it won't work now. Again, if you think that these planetary conquest players don't think there are problems in the game mode you'd be wrong. They acknowledge that planetary conquest is stagnate, needs change, better less-gameable rewards, it needs battles that are less high stake and more immediate so players other than "the 16" can get a chance, it needs a timer system where attackers and defender can meet in the middle, it needs a logistical revamp so it's not simply whoever has the most districts wins in the end, it needs a timer system that allows organizations to aspire to goals like owning a planet, it needs the lab map removed until it can be optimized, and the list goes on. Some PC players want windows, others want the 1 hour timers, generally people that read through it liked Pokey's proposal etc. Getting this group to come to an agreement on anything (these are people that have been going in a merry go round fighting each other for 2 years in addition to some fresh faces) is usually a trying experience. The players generally thought "region locking was stupid" but they did think that exponentially increasing costs to change your timers was fair. Most are even fine with there being a reset; however, there really isn't an agreement on what timers should be. The opinions vary far and wide, but that doesn't mean they should be discounted when they look at a list of options and can pick out ones that are bad outright. Not every player is a designer. Sometimes the best they can do is look at what's being proposed and identify which options are bad. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news

Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4311	Posted - 2015.01.21 14:39:00 - [11] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: timers in any form in PC are only hindering game play people that have few hours of play time and want to log in for some PC action are denied that form of fun only because any form of timers if those so called "skilled vets" worry about not being able to hold a district only because there is no timer mechanic, they should just organize better within the game for alliance assistance no one ever said that small corp or even a medium sized corp should be able to hold whole planet for them self, only with timers mechanic it is possible thus making the game stale and PC action on hold for everyone else, this is wrong direction then does more harm because bigger number of people wanting to get into PC is denied with this for the sake of smaller tight knit "skilled vets" that are and will abuse any form of timers and locks mechanic everytime (alts, district hopping, manipulation with attack windows etc.) timers and locking mechanic is wrong at its core and will always make PC stale in any form and any time within multi time zoned game The funny thing is there is a contingent of PC vets that would like nothing more than to go to a completely timerless system. I think the key is to strike a balance between the two extremes of restrictive timers and timerless gameplay. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4311	Posted - 2015.01.21 15:13:00 - [12] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: what we have now is stale isk farm elite club and it will always be like that with timers and what we should have is 90% or 100% of SP eligible people to play PC all the time thus leaving PUBs for newbies and FW for medium advanced SP wise people that it is why people are begging for corp battles back why is it so hard for those elitists vets abusing mechanics of timers to open the game mode for all?!?! If you really think that most players in planetary conquest wouldn't like to see and end to the stagnation and more people in the game mode so folks can choose to be PCing most of the time I have a bridge to sell you. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4311	Posted - 2015.01.21 15:28:00 - [13] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: man seriously i've read most of your comments about the matter, you do not need to double post this kind of stuff rather advocate for leaving the timers behind us that is what you can do inventing a more complex "walls" as this this Pokey's forum user will only make things worse with every iteration this needs to be an easy and straight forward mechanic, no timers at all, if you can't be online your alliance needs to have the tools to be aware that a district is in danger of attack and respond to that, nothing more nothing less making more complex solutions will always destroy the dynamic , make this mode stale, leave most SP wise people out of it thus staying in status quo of the elite club Your vision is that all organizations need to be global, have massive numbers, and be available 24/7. How is that balance towards the wide variety of groups that attempt to play this game and want to participate in planetary conquest? How does having land being taken while the owner sleeps give the system a sense of permanence? Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4314	Posted - 2015.01.21 18:44:00 - [14] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Kain Spero wrote: Zene Ren wrote: man seriously i've read most of your comments about the matter, you do not need to double post this kind of stuff rather advocate for leaving the timers behind us that is what you can do inventing a more complex "walls" as this this Pokey's forum user will only make things worse with every iteration this needs to be an easy and straight forward mechanic, no timers at all, if you can't be online your alliance needs to have the tools to be aware that a district is in danger of attack and respond to that, nothing more nothing less making more complex solutions will always destroy the dynamic , make this mode stale, leave most SP wise people out of it thus staying in status quo of the elite club Your vision is that all organizations need to be global, have massive numbers, and be available 24/7. How is that balance towards the wide variety of groups that attempt to play this game and want to participate in planetary conquest? How does having land being taken while the owner sleeps give the system a sense of permanence? No, they just shouldn't hold more land than they can defend and/or manage. Reduce your holdings, it is not your god-given right to have what you used to have. Couldn't agree more. Personally I never wanted to be a landowner. Just a merc with a barge raiding the countryside like a Viking War Party. The system thus far has only really been open to those that want to be empire builders. Been there, controlled 99%, don't need or want to do it again. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4317	Posted - 2015.01.21 23:34:00 - [15] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Probably because region locking automatically blues up an area based not on in-game affilitations (corps and alliances) but on out-of-game affiliations ( global player region). This, in turn, then could create WORSE bluelocks once a group has enough players spread across global regions, since the total available is restricted by region and easier to control. If I have 16 NA players who can fight on the ASIA primetime we should be able to keep whatever we are able to take, districts included. I think it was Kane who invented this term "region locking". I am not suggesting any sort of "region lock". I am suggesting the timers do not change from where they're originally seeded at, which should be scattered around the map to create a fairly varied play map. If you have 16 players who can fight on the Asian prime time you should be able to keep whatever you take, assuming you can also defend it in the Asian prime time. Timezones are based on regions and if timers are locked and unchangeable then yes, you are proposing region locking PC. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4319	Posted - 2015.01.22 01:44:00 - [16] - Quote Soraya, that depends on what you think is the core problem. Is it that CCP hasn't engaged the Asian and even the EU community to participate in PC? Is it that clones at 1200 can be used to attack a 2300 timer so that North American players meta the control of the 1200 districts rather than taking them for themselves? Is it that timers can be drastically changed right after capture to prevent counter Attack? Is it that districts don't have enough intrinsic value to make it worthwhile for many corps? Is it that the barrier of entry is too high currently paired with winner-takes-all mechanics? Region locking addresses a symptom without addressing the core problems while at the same time creating new ones. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4327	Posted - 2015.01.22 08:16:00 - [17] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: ..... since Kane wants to defend Nyain San's method of acquiring districts.... Soraya, you've obviously not been paying attention. An exponential increasing cost to switch a timer the further you try to change would not allow a team to use 1 TZ team to acquire (NS using US and EU players) and then 1 TZ team to defend (NS then using Japanese players) after dramatically altering a timer. Also, disallowing using those districts to attack too many hours outside of a districts reinforcement timer would prevent players from seeing value in the districts as a logistical asset in their own time zone. This value is why players in North America have defended Nyain San's districts time and again. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4327	Posted - 2015.01.22 08:36:00 - [18] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: Edit.....so my phone posted this message 6 hours late....opps This is why quoting is always the safest bet. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news