DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest - Timers

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 9 post(s)
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4432	Posted - 2015.01.20 15:18:00 - [1] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: 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 Damnit beat me to it "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4433	Posted - 2015.01.20 15:49:00 - [2] - Quote Ghostt Shadoww wrote: You can't wake up and defend. Then that's your problem ... For me its more like, I'm not going to leave my job to do a PC match. If my corp is working and we always get attacked while we're all at work, are we just screwed until the weekend? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4433	Posted - 2015.01.20 16:08:00 - [3] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Ghostt Shadoww wrote: You can't wake up and defend. Then that's your problem ... For me its more like, I'm not going to leave my job to do a PC match. If my corp is working and we always get attacked while we're all at work, are we just screwed until the weekend? 1. Yes 2. Its the same in EVE 3. You play to your corps advantages and your enemies weakness 4. HTFU but in DUST it doesnt exist anymore So...basically what you want is districts being flipped basically back and forth daily. Japanese corps attack the American corps, American corps will wake up early for a while but eventually it'll get old. So Japanese corps will just take all the districts they want, and then the Americans will respond by taking them back the following day. Eventually no one bothers showing up because no one wants to wake up at 4AM every day to play a video game before work, and PC turns into nothing but no-shows. God that just sounds super fun! "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4435	Posted - 2015.01.20 16:15:00 - [4] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: 1. Dont blame me blame the system 2. We can move timers to our advantage now anyways and really none of these propsals for PC even seem to work at all I would love to hear your thoughts on the my proposal that Kane linked earlier in the thread, and any criticisms about how it would not work. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4435	Posted - 2015.01.20 16:26:00 - [5] - Quote Ghostt Shadoww wrote: Your stupid.... You're* "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4435	Posted - 2015.01.20 16:32:00 - [6] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Lazer Fo Cused wrote: 1. Dont blame me blame the system 2. We can move timers to our advantage now anyways and really none of these propsals for PC even seem to work at all I would love to hear your thoughts on the my proposal that Kane linked earlier in the thread, and any criticisms about how it would not work. 1. You are forced to play pub matches by the looks of it and pub matches are bad enough I never said in the proposal that you're forced to play pubs. Battle activity during the window would generate fuel, this includes fighting in FacWar or PC. Anything else? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4435	Posted - 2015.01.20 16:53:00 - [7] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Lazer Fo Cused wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Lazer Fo Cused wrote: 1. Dont blame me blame the system 2. We can move timers to our advantage now anyways and really none of these propsals for PC even seem to work at all I would love to hear your thoughts on the my proposal that Kane linked earlier in the thread, and any criticisms about how it would not work. 1. You are forced to play pub matches by the looks of it and pub matches are bad enough I never said in the proposal that you're forced to play pubs. Battle activity during the window would generate fuel, this includes fighting in FacWar or PC. Anything else? 1. What if you log on just for PC? 2. Windows are too large i mean 12hrs thats half a day where you could get hammered by a corp thats on a diff TZ which means back to same problems and luck of the draw and even then you have to put aside a whole evening incase you get attacked 3. Smaller corps or near dead corps who just want to play PC are punished by larger corps who just spam pubs so you get 1 hour window at best which again could be at there peak TZ and not yours so again back to the same problem 1. If you're being attacked every day, defending that district every day should generate enough fuel to maintain that district. Additionally if you're attacking, a similar principle applies. As I mention in the thread, it may be beneficial to widen the fuel generation window slightly (Maybe 1 hour on either side) to account for PC attack battles that take place off of your timer but still within your effective daily time of play. The fact of the matter is that if you want to own a district, a proportional part of your corporation must be actively playing any part of the game around the time your districts timers are set up. 2. Maximum window is 12 hours if you consistently fail to generate enough fuel every day. If properly maintained with a reasonable amount of activity during your reinforcement time, the attack window is 1 hour long. You have to severely neglect your districts to end up with a 12 hour timer. Maintaining the 1 hour window would be easy given reasonable levels of play during those times if your player-count is reasonably proportionate to the number of districts held. 3. Again the required activity is relative to the number of districts held. If a corporation only has 16 guys, that's the minimum required to defend a district. It would be easy for 16 guys who play at a reasonable rate to produce enough fuel to maintain the 1 hour timer on a single district. It would however be more difficult for them to produce enough fuel for 2 or more districts. This limitation directly prevents small corporations from holding more land than their numbers should support. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4436	Posted - 2015.01.20 17:57:00 - [8] - Quote Brush Master wrote: Going with a simple approach. What if you go with timers that shift on a certain time frame, say every week. Disable current ability to change a timer Implement a script that time shifts every district on the weekly reset. Shift should only be 1-2 hrs and random +/- If needed, basic logic to make sure a single timer zone is not over saturated, aka if 13:00 has over xx % skip any shifts to that time frame. Besides the disable timer on the client side, everything sounds like something that a server side script would run and modify all the districts. Slow time shifts would encourage players to attack districts that have shifted into a friendly time frame? I have a couple issues with restrictive or fixed timers. For one, you're basically entirely dependent on an algorithm to properly balance time zones and quite honestly I have zero faith that it would work properly, not to mention that automated systems meant to control player activity...are often prone to being gamed. However my main issue is that in the grand scheme of things, we want location to matter, right? And ideally the location of your districts and warbarge flotilla and assets should all matter. But now suddenly you have the game basically dictating where you can set up shop because its deciding where those reinforcement timers are going to be. So essentially 2 things can happen. 1. Location of timers is clumped together, so that one region of space is North America and another region is Asia, and another UK, ect. However now if an alliance wants to work with corporations from other regions, they are forcefully separated, and their districts and assets will not be able to readily support one another. 2. Location times are randomly spread out, so you have maybe a planet with 8 districts, 2 are NA, 2 are AU, 2 are UK, and 2 are JP. Well now if say a UK corporation have the manpower to hold 4 districts...they can really only hold 2 because that planet's timers make the other districts impossible to hold for them. Additionally those 4 groups will probably never fight one another despite being neighbors, because the timers are locked and at bad times for them, leading to further stagnation. Either way I don't see it working properly and it's a simple, but overly clunky system. This is the primary reasony why I made my proposal, to allow timers to be moved to avoid the restriction, but also force corporations to be active during their timer, as to stop them from moving them to a weird off-time. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4436	Posted - 2015.01.20 18:14:00 - [9] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: 1. So 1 match keeps it to a 1hour window of attack? 1a. If you make 3hr window then again it means you need to have 16 ready for 3hrs 2./3 If a small corp is good enough to maintain a number of districts by pure skill and teamwork then really why do they need this fuel bollocks because as it is now they could hold a number of districts anyways but under your plan they would be punished because they need more fuel so have to play alot more games for each member than a larger corp would have to - You are punishing them because of there corp size when its actual skill at playing the game that should determine who wins and how many districts they can hold before its too much 1. Exact values may vary but essentially around that much, since you would have 16 people playing. Additionally PC could generate more fuel per match than pubs or facwar, requiring fewer PC matches to reach your quote and more pubs to reach the quota. 1a. Read carefully. I never said the attack window would increase to 3 hours, just that you would be able to generate fuel one hour prior to one our post the attack window. Values are of course subject to change but as an example if your time is set to 2000, you could generate fuel anytime between 1900 and 2100. 2. Well a small corp can't run multiple PC matches at once, so they would spread their windows out, meaning that the relative amount of activity per hour is still the same. Requiring small corps to actually play the game during the times they have their timers set, is not punishing them for being a small corp. If their districts are spread out over a 3-4 hour time period, then all they have to do is play a handful of matches over that 3-4 hour spread. As I've said before, the required quota for a 1 hour timer is not difficult to reach, and even a small corporation that spreads its timers out instead of stacking them would have zero difficulty maintaining several districts. What it does prevent however is prevent corps of any size from hiding their districts at odd times where no one in their corporation plays. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4436	Posted - 2015.01.20 18:41:00 - [10] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: 1a. At 2100 its one hour past the 2000 so why bother? 2. Why shouldn't corps be allowed to whack timers into no play zones? you get no passive isk anyways since that is gone and either way if they play pubs all day then the no go timers still get shield or just get a token aussie in to play at odd times for the rest of the corp 3. I really cannot see how this solves anything, just makes it more complicated for the same problems to pop up 1a. This is primarily to give people some wiggle room in when their activity takes place, but isn't required. 2. Um because players should have their districts at times people actually play at? Otherwise you get the same crap we've had before? You state that under the assumption that the profit and benefit of owning a district won't be changed. They will.. Also "A Token Aussie" would be incapable of maintaining an entire district by himself, and even if you had a handful of "token aussies" would have limitations on how many districts they can maintain, especially if you stack them on the same time slot. 3. Problems this proposal addresses a. Heavily discourages players from stacking districts on the same time slot b. Heavily discourages players from placing timers in time zones they are not active in c. Prevents very small groups from holding large chunks of land, but allows them to hold a reasonable amount relative to their size d. Avoids the rigid mess that is Static Timers e. Requires people to actually play the game in order to gain benefit from it "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4436	Posted - 2015.01.20 19:07:00 - [11] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: 1. If the timer is at 8 and you can fuel at 9 which is past 8 how does that work? does it work for the next 8 timer? 2. Why should they? It is there district to do as they please 2a. You stated that its only going to be a few pub games at best - Is that requiring 1 person or 16? 3a. You can stack timers now but cant play them all anyways so it doesnt solve it and if anything they would stack timers when they are on so how do you attack another corp in china tz? you dont so the same problems we have now are in this 3b. Not really you can still do it and get token aussies for example, it doesnt stop it 3c. If the small group is good enough to hold lots of land then they should be able to and not be punished because they are smaller 3d. I like static, it means i can pick and choose which districts to attack 3e. Its requiring ppl to play the game just so they can PC 1. Again just wiggle room to account for games that start within the window but end after it. Not a required feature, just a thought. 2. And they can move it out if they want, but its going to be a hell of a lot harder to defend if they do so because it doesn't have proper maintenance (thus a larger attack window). So sure, do as you want, but its going to be a lot harder to properly defend. 2a. It would be closer to 8-16 people playing a normal amount within the time frame. 3a. Fuel generated is distributed evenly between all districts within that time. Meaning that if you have 2 districts in the same time slot, you need double the activity in that time slot to maintain it. Additionally because profitability is also tied to maintenance, it would become increasingly less profitable the more you stacked timers. So if a corp wants to make money, it's going to avoid stacking timers and then just hiring ringers to defend it. 3b. It doesn't stop it but it heavily decreases the effect. 3c. We've been over this, small groups will not have an issue maintaining multiple districts if they're placed in their normal play time. This doesn't punish small groups unless they pull shenanigans like stacking timers or sticking them in odd places. 3d. We disagree on something. I'm shocked. 3e. Oh god requiring people to play the game so they can play the game? What was I thinking?! falls over Sorry but you shouldn't just be able to sit back and relax while the profit rolls in and then only show up when someone attacks your **. One should have to actually do something if they want to make money. "That little st Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4442	Posted - 2015.01.20 19:30:00 - [12] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: 2. 8-16 so if you have 5 districts you need 40ppl on playing for fuel? people have lives and **** to do 3a. So 8ppl on but 5 districts stacked so you would have to 5times the fuel so instead of 40ppl you need 200ppl, i better get the chinese im sure they could spare a few 3b. Not if you have enough aussies 3c. They will now needing 200ppl because they want timers close to each other 3d. Current system aint that bad 3e. I can AFK in EVE and make money or press a button and make billions - If i want to get on and play 1 PC like i can do now i should be able to do it - What happens in EVE with towers, you group up hit it and 24hrs later do it again why cant i do that with a district like i do now? 2. Only if all of the districts are stacked at the same time. If you have 4 districts, timers set back to back, 8-16 people could play a reasonable amount of time over the course of 4 hours, and meet the quota. If you put all 4 timers on the same time slot, then it would take 4 * (8-16) so 32-64 people. The point is....don't stack timers on the same time slot unless you have a ton of people to maintain it. Spread them out...and it's perfectly reasonable. 3a. Sure, feel free to bring large amounts of people into your corporation to help you defend your PC. Is this a bad thing? 3b. Sure, then you'll be a mostly Australian corp ;) 3c. Only if they stack their timers. If they can commit to 4 districts in PC spread out over 4 hours, surely they can play the game over those 4 hours. 3d. lol let it go on record that Sparky thinks the system that ultimately came out of the cheesiness of the Blue Waffle's collective rectum "Aint that bad". I think my work here is done. 3e. Further evidence that you don't really care about what works best overall, rather what works best for your personal preference of play. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4442	Posted - 2015.01.20 19:57:00 - [13] - Quote Oh Sparky, at least you're consistent in your irrationality and inability to actually read and fully comprehend what people say before vomiting out your opinion. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4442	Posted - 2015.01.20 20:19:00 - [14] - Quote Lazer Fo Cused wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Oh Sparky, at least you're consistent in your irrationality and inability to actually read and fully comprehend what people say before vomiting out your opinion. 1. So you have stopped debating and trying to convince me that we should all have 500ppl playing at all times just to get a magic shield to refuel - dont you believe in your idea? No I'm saying that I've explained it to you multiple times and you clearly don't understand it. If you really think I think 500 people should be playing at all times, then you've missed the point completely. And to be honest I have better things to do with my time than try to explain this to you. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4452	Posted - 2015.01.21 16:55:00 - [15] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Ghostt Shadoww wrote: You can't wake up and defend. Then that's your problem ... For me its more like, I'm not going to leave my job to do a PC match. If my corp is working and we always get attacked while we're all at work, are we just screwed until the weekend? Would that not encourage you to recruit players to cover for you? With each District you add, you should be adding coverage /garrisons to your corporation. As Jaysyn said it would encourage that because it's necessary. But as I pointed out before, if you allow attackers to attack whenever they want, you're looking at any point in a 24 hour window. Sure people can wake up early to do a PC match, but if the other side is doing it in a comfortable afternoon and you're defending at 4AM, that's not sustainable. So you really have to go under the assumption of what is possible in the long rune. So if we say the average person can devote 8 hours to playing the game in a sustainable fashion, that means you need 16 guys for every 8 hours. You can recruit others to cover the empty time, so 2 more teams of 16 for a grand total of 48 players to defend a single district. 48 players needed for a single district seems excessive to me. Hell I think 8 hours might be a little much to expect, if people get off at 6PM and play till mightnight, that's only 6 hours for each group which would push the total needed players to 64). There is also the issue of imbalance between regions in that there are far more NA players than Oceania and I imagine Europe lands somewhere in the middle. So if an Alliance snatches up most of the Oceanic players (Which would be easier given the lower player count), they're going to have a distinct advantage that is nearly impossible to counter since no one will be left to defend against them in that time slot. As an aside, I'll admit that I'm not Uber Hardcore like some of the guys here. And while I'm willing to make some changes every once in a while, you have to remember that at the end of the day this is still a video game. Video games are supposed to be fun, and if I have to literally change my lifestyle, sleep, or work schedule so I can play the game....the fun starts to quickly evaporate and it turns into a chore. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4452	Posted - 2015.01.21 17:21:00 - [16] - Quote Zene Ren, you didn't fully read everything I said since I already addressed your counterpoints in the original post. Thor Odinson42 wrote: If you can attack instantly anytime the districts just won't matter. I can only assume that you'd need some start up ISK to even enter the fray. If your district was lost the same day you took it while you were asleep I think people would lose interest pretty quick. It would be no different than the frustration corps felt when they thought they were fighting Team X and find 15 Team Players when they enter the warbarge, except they'd log in and see they had nothing. I can picture the CEO saying, well ** that. I can tell you with 100% certainty that PC corps now aren't going to recruit 500 players to maintain their holdings. They'll just turn on their PS4 and play PS2. My point exactly. Even with a full day's notice, being attacked any time of the day is going to quickly cause issues. If we had an even distribution of players around the world it would be less of an issue, but which certain regions have small player bases that tend to clump into singular groups, whoever grabs those groups first is going to dominate. What you'll end up with is a handful of alliances dominating PC because they hold all of the players from a certain region, allowing them to freely take any district because the defenders will simply be unable to find anyone to recruit in those time zones. I mean honestly, can someone list out the remaining active PC-capable corps from Australian/Japan? How many can there be? 5? 10? Whichever alliances recruit those corps first will be holding all of the cards and we'll just have another blue waffle. "That little st Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4452	Posted - 2015.01.21 17:57:00 - [17] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: i can tell you guys one thing for sure we had timers mechanic till now did it worked? did a variations of it worked? instead of game mode for all vets we have elite club that most people within even tell it does not work and every variation will not i am only saying most vets do stomp newbs because they are locked off from the game mode they want to play only do not worry about holding the districts for now open the flood gates let everybody who wants to play it as a focused mode play it and then just do minor tweaks with penalties or benefits after that when we will have data what needs to be done "I mean honestly, can someone list out the remaining active PC-capable corps from Australian/Japan? How many can there be? 5? 10? Whichever alliances recruit those corps first will be holding all of the cards and we'll just have another blue waffle." we got that because of those locks and abusing mechanics constantly needing tweaks instead of adding new things still if there is not that many of those then why are you even mentioning the threat of being attacked constantly at 4 am or some other not good for you hours? ( on a side note your arguments are starting to contradict each other) We never had a real variant on timers, only how end of battle results would proc to help mitigate the district locking. No major or substantial change was made to the way timers worked. You're running under the assumption that any sort of timer whatsoever will have the same results but that thought process is misguided. I'm not advocating for some elite club, I'm advocating that a corporation shouldn't just automatically win because it's in a time zone the other side can't defend against. And I'm not contradicting myself. If a single Japanese corp can casually launch PC matches during the afternoon against a NA corporation at some god awful hour in the morning, they can keep those attacks up forever and do so without breaking a sweat, whereas the NA corp will burn out quickly because of **** times. Ok so the NA corp has to recruit a Japanese corp to fight the Japanese....but what do they do if all of the Japanese Corps are already taken? Additionally you'll come back with "Well the Americans can just attack back at a time that works for them and the Japanese will be in the same boat!" but heres the deal. Due to the LARGE spready in player count, a Japanese corp will NEVER have a hard time finding a NA alliance to defend for them becuase there are a lot of NA groups. However a NA Alliance will struggle to find a Japanese corp for their alliance. Even if we assume there are 2 NA alliances for every Oceanic corporation, that means that half the alliances will be unable to defend the Oceanic time slot. Does that seem right to you? So what choice do they have? THey'll be forced to just merge with another alliance, ok so now we have just a small handful of Super Alliances, and their numbers will basically be entirely dictated by the number of separate group available in odd time regions. And you're not really correct, there were indeed more Oceanic groups before PC went to , but there was never even close an even distribution of players globally, so this problem would have persisted anyways. Hell the Oceanic server was shut down BECAUSE there were so few players on it. No amount of increased activity will avoid this issue unless the global player population is brought up to be nearly even. "That little st Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4452	Posted - 2015.01.21 18:16:00 - [18] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: they will struggle to get other time zone corps but it will not be impossible like it is now with any form of timers and locks yes you 're contradicting yourself a bit because you over estimate other regions fighting force and then try to put fear into people that stay behind open mechanic by crating artificial scenarios although they are better then constantly abusing timers mechanic to rule them all by it it still be always open to play for underdogs that want to do only PC and the wheels will turn all the time yes but then they did not have any alliance tools to respond for an attack on any of their corp districts beside mailing and pub channels and that is not enough where is the sense in playing PC if it is always closed for participants creating other issues for other game modes? Im not creating artificial scenarios, I'm staying that there is not enough of a player balance globally for everyone to properly defend all time zones, this is a fact. There are other options that can deal with the Timer associated issue other than simply removing them. For the sake of discussion, could you please clearly list out the issues you see with the current timer mechanic so I can offer up solutions? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4452	Posted - 2015.01.21 18:35:00 - [19] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: there is only one and it is the most irritating people from what i know and it is inability to play PC constantly for players with enough SP and is and with 16 man of friends when they are online ATM Sorry I'm not tracking what you mean, could you rephrase it? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4452	Posted - 2015.01.21 18:41:00 - [20] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Zene Ren wrote: there is only one and it is the most irritating people from what i know and it is inability to play PC constantly for players with enough SP and is and with 16 man of friends when they are online ATM Sorry I'm not tracking what you mean, could you rephrase it? players with the right amount of SP, team mates, and time at the moment they are online, want to queue for PC and play that mode this is not possible with timers So...so we're clear, you want people to be able to attack a district at any time of the day with minimal notice? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4452	Posted - 2015.01.21 18:52:00 - [21] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: Personally, I think this right here is a necessity for raiding. No warning, if you're not paying attention to some kind of activity monitor, we could technically conduct the entire raid without you ever realizing it. Make raids not support more than 1 squad of raiders which will be blue to one another. If other raiders decide to raid at the same time my squad is raiding, then we're red to everyone who isn't us (yay Escalation!!). I do like the idea of needing a beachhead to mount a formal attack, there should be minimal warning (but warning nonetheless) for this beachhead attack. Raiding NEEDS to be a thing in PC. Raiding? Absolutely. Flipping a district? God no. Theres too much riding on the line for Suprise Buttsex PC attacks if they can take your district in the process. Battles that happen on the fly that give a PC similar experience with less riding on the line? Totally cool with that. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4452	Posted - 2015.01.21 18:54:00 - [22] - Quote el OPERATOR wrote: Not at all, Pokey and I actually butt heads pretty often (kinda often? Sometimes. We disagree sometimes. ) I'd say its a 5 part love to 4 part hate ratio, +/- 1 depending on the day. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4452	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:02:00 - [23] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: IDK, I agree and disagree at the same time. Flipping a District should be possible through raiding though much, much harder to do than to just mount a formal attack. If I am constantly raiding one of your outlying District and you never pay attention to it doesn't it make sense that I would eventually become more familiar with that District than you are? If I raid your District a dozen times over the course of a month and you have shown no activity there wouldn't it make sense that your grip on the District would decay as my raids became more frequent? By no means should it be a simple "we're going to raid this District tonight and it'll be ours tomorrow". Though if I wage a war of attrition on that District and you simply ignore it shouldn't it make sense that I would eventually be able to embezzle your profits while you still foot the bill on paper? Can raiding have a factor in weakening the defenses of a District? I don't see an issue with that. But I think the final battle that decides the ownership really needs to have more notice so both teams can make sure the best of the best are online for the big finale. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4453	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:22:00 - [24] - Quote Zene, could you please answer my question at the top of the page? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4453	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:35:00 - [25] - Quote Thor Odinson42 wrote: I think this is the area where future tweaking could swing the pendulum of quantity vs quality. If AE is able to get a couple of squads worth of guys to log in and swing an entire war then obviously they might need to look at battles spinning up quickly while making the window of attack smaller. Well heres my deal. I totally think that Zerging should have a place in PC. If you're able to spin up battles on the fly and send a swarm of players to collectively devour the enemy's profits by overwhelming them with the sheer number of battles, I think something along that line is fine. However you also don't want zerging to be the ONLY part of PC....quality has to trump quantity in other situations too. That's why I've been moving more towards the "Sure, you can raid whenever you want and if corporations want to defend against it, they need a lot of people to do so. You can make money doing this and it can work to weaken the enemy's empire" at the same time skill and ability also has to matter, so if you want to completely rip a district away from someone, you need to actually win the important battles to obtain land. It leaves a place for those who want to have PC on the fly, but also means that skilled players can still hold and defend land against the swarm. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4453	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:38:00 - [26] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: "yes" Ok so lets say players are on in 6 hour shifts, 16 players each, 4 shifts a day... are you saying that an alliance needs to have 64 players for every district the alliance owns to properly defend it? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4455	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:59:00 - [27] - Quote Tesfa Alem wrote: And by far Pokey's is the best one. @Pokey, With the "fuel" needed to keep the shield up and reduce the attack window, how about having it a sort of resource per day that a daily surplus can be traded out to other districts held by the same corp to keep the other districts shields up? Defend district A, Consecutive wins/ lack of attacks keep the window 1 hr and shield fully charged. Take district B, add surplus to reduce window quicker. Consecutive wins on districts A and B, and if the corp manages to take district C then the surplus from the A & B shorten C's attack window. Hmmmmmmmmm I dunno. I mean the idea is to force players to be on during their timers and I have concerns that corps could stack districts at an odd time and then just zerg a single districts open at a normal time, allowing them to fuel many districts but only really be active for one of them. With some limitations....maybe? I get what you're going for but I'm a little reluctant on being too lenient to be with the fuel distribution. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4455	Posted - 2015.01.21 20:08:00 - [28] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Zene Ren wrote: "yes" Ok so lets say players are on in 6 hour shifts, 16 players each, 4 shifts a day... are you saying that an alliance needs to have 64 players for every district the alliance owns to properly defend it? pokey i think you are exaggerating a bit, this is still a game when you're writing shifts etc. i am starting to think you're more hardcore gamer then you think you're saying ;) I've played EVE, I know what it's like to pay $15 a month for the right to work a second job. Thing is you really do need to have people on all the time because literally a single person could wake up at an odd time when your alliance has no one on, and sweep all of your districts. Yes it's an extreme case but extreme cases happen in games like this more often than you may expect. I mean if I knew that there was a 6 hour period where and alliance didnt have sufficient people online, I would take a squad and steal everything they have, every single change I got. Like I don't disagree that people should be able to participate in PC on the fly pretty much any time of day, but the fact of the matter is that if you shift 100% of PC to that model, suddenly it takes very few people to attack but a shitload more to defend. You're basically taking the issue of overly restrictive timers and completely reversing it, but the opposite extreme is just as bad for number of reasons. Thats why I'm pushing for a more hybrid system, seperating Raids vs Conquest so that the Zergs and the Elites can each have a place in the game without totally dominating the field. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4457	Posted - 2015.01.21 20:38:00 - [29] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: "suddenly it takes very few people to attack but a shitload more to defend" only when you want to bite more then you can chew No, it will take multiple teams of 16 to defend a district, but only one team to attack it. Owning a single district would mean it takes more defenders than it takes attackers. Zene Ren wrote: solutions in between are always bad "Thats why I'm pushing for a more hybrid system, seperating Raids vs Conquest so that the Zergs and the Elites can each have a place in the game without totally dominating the field." no one will be happy with this In a true compromise, no one is 100% happy. If you're not interested in working towards a compromise, then there is really no reason to continue debating. In the end the only person I need to convince has a blue tag next to his name. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4457	Posted - 2015.01.21 20:45:00 - [30] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: No, it will take multiple teams of 16 to defend a district, but only one team to attack it. Owning a single district would mean it takes more defenders than it takes attackers. i never said that when a district is attacked ATM some one else can attack it in the same time that is over interpretation from your side attackers should be queued for the fight for the attacked district It will take multiple teams of 16 to cover the defense of the district over a 24 hour period. Thus it will take more than 16 unique players to be available to defend the district. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4458	Posted - 2015.01.21 20:58:00 - [31] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Zene Ren wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: No, it will take multiple teams of 16 to defend a district, but only one team to attack it. Owning a single district would mean it takes more defenders than it takes attackers. i never said that when a district is attacked ATM some one else can attack it in the same time that is over interpretation from your side attackers should be queued for the fight for the attacked district It will take multiple teams of 16 to cover the defense of the district over a 24 hour period. Thus it will take more than 16 unique players to be available to defend the district. this will only encourage to build bigger alliances nothing more IMO you do not need every defender to be a "pro gamer" also as there will be not only pro gamers attacking ;) and i've edited my last post also but i will add here that i am not against compromise only that i am against any form of timers for a veteran players game more that will hinder an accessibility to that mode and that will lead again to proto stomping pubs from boredom etc. etc. Bigger alliances like the ones that dominate Null in EVE? lol. Super Corps and Alliances are something that should always be avoided. Granular groups leads to more combat, large groups lead to stagnation. Heres what I don't get about your argument is that I offer up "Here, Raids will give you exactly what you're asking for, the ability for vets to jump into a PC pretty much whenever they want, the only thing they can't do is capture whenever they want." but you come back with "Nope if they can't capture then they'll just go back to stomping pubs" even though they're getting the PC battles you're asking for, the only difference is the end condition of the district. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4458	Posted - 2015.01.21 21:11:00 - [32] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Heres what I don't get about your argument is that I offer up "Here, Raids will give you exactly what you're asking for, the ability for vets to jump into a PC pretty much whenever they want, the only thing they can't do is capture whenever they want." but you come back with "Nope if they can't capture then they'll just go back to stomping pubs" even though they're getting the PC battles you're asking for, the only difference is the end condition of the district. this will only lead to abusing any form of timers and locks by land owners again as it is now, limiting accessibility and motion in MH, thus i seriously do not want timers. we had this till now big guys will be untouchable as they are now... Um zerging their districts and stealing all of their profits is hardly "untouchable". And what exactly are you getting at with "Locking"? Do you mean moving them to an undesirable time slot? Or are you talking about self attacking to lock? I've already proposed a solution to the first and there is a thread discussing how to prevent the latter. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4462	Posted - 2015.01.21 22:00:00 - [33] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Zene Ren wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Heres what I don't get about your argument is that I offer up "Here, Raids will give you exactly what you're asking for, the ability for vets to jump into a PC pretty much whenever they want, the only thing they can't do is capture whenever they want." but you come back with "Nope if they can't capture then they'll just go back to stomping pubs" even though they're getting the PC battles you're asking for, the only difference is the end condition of the district. this will only lead to abusing any form of timers and locks by land owners again as it is now, limiting accessibility and motion in MH, thus i seriously do not want timers. we had this till now big guys will be untouchable as they are now... Um zerging their districts and stealing all of their profits is hardly "untouchable". And what exactly are you getting at with "Locking"? Do you mean moving them to an undesirable time slot? Or are you talking about self attacking to lock? I've already proposed a solution to the first and there is a thread discussing how to prevent the latter. alt corps, region time zone locking there are and will always be people that abuse timer system in their favor and seriously it will leave us in the place that we are now, all in all timers are bad and the argument about PS2 is not that valid as people claim to be we can now build mulit time zone alliances within the game to keep our land w/o the need to leave it unguarded we have one server and one community and we should have one end game mode for vet players that want to do PC only i seriously need to repeat myself ;( having timers will and are leading to vets playing in pub matches because they can not do PC at any given moment solutions like the fuel and other for the latter thing you mentioned plus a solution for pub proto stompers and q syncs are only a band aid for PC PC that is available 24/7 will deal seriously with so many problems with one solution, no timers A raid is PC. I can be done at any given moment. The only difference is that they cant steal a district by default at some god awful hour. Raiding encourages alliance to have 24 hour patrol, but doesn't make it a complete necessity. I mean honestly would you be fine If I solo flipped all of your alliance's districts by doing it in a time slot where you don't have people on? Are you REALLY ok with that mechanic? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4462	Posted - 2015.01.21 22:09:00 - [34] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: Many of us have already chimed in to say that Pokey's proposal is pretty much closest to an actually working proposal we have encountered. Others have chimed in to disagree. I personally don't see the point in trying to reinvent the wheel, when someone has already done the work. Though, I do see a critical flaw in Pokey's proposal, which is why it quite likelly never make it very far. It would require some effort from the developers cries It was a rough cut, don't hate me! In all honesty, I unfortunately do no get paid to do this stuff and I have a lot of projects on my plate on top of my actual job and life. I by no means think my idea is perfect and I think I even said it needs like.....a shitload of polish, but constructive criticism is appreciated If anything I'm just trying to produce very rough ideas for the Developers to run with, you know? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4462	Posted - 2015.01.21 22:13:00 - [35] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: A raid is PC. I can be done at any given moment. The only difference is that they cant steal a district by default at some god awful hour. Raiding encourages alliance to have 24 hour patrol, but doesn't make it a complete necessity. I mean honestly would you be fine If I solo flipped all of your alliance's districts by doing it in a time slot where you don't have people on? Are you REALLY ok with that mechanic? i seriously do not understand how can you be so hesitant to try and build after some time of chaos and district flipping a proper security multi time zone alliance this is seriously strange IMO we have one server one universe why lock players behind timers in the game with that core system is really beyond me just leave it all to the in game community and let PC crown have their PC constantly... And again, to avoid the situation I described, you would need people online, 24/7. We're talking 48-64 players for every single district an alliance owns. There's what....245 districts or so? So in order for all alliances to properly defend 24/7 you would need 11,760-15,680 players playing PC actively every day for 6-8 hours a day. We do not have the player count to support that kind of system no matter how you try to justify its existence. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4463	Posted - 2015.01.21 23:13:00 - [36] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: You don't seem to understand. We don't have the playerbase in the entire game to support what you're asking for. Fixing PC is not going to make people magically flock to play Dust, and certainly not in the required numbers to support your idea. Additionally you still have not told me how your idea gets past the imbalance in regional playerbase as well as excessive talent pooling we see in other areas such as Japan. Because why bother even trying to get a district if you know some guy in a different time zone will steal it out from under you? You're basically going balls deep with "Oh just send the entire system into total chaos and hopefully the playerbase will magically triple to make it all work!" Here's the deal. PC is unique because people always bring the best of the best to the fight. You want EVERYONE to be involved, everyone in the game. All the time. Which means what you get is a mix of everyone, newbies, vets, and everyone in between. You know what other game mode is like that? Public Contracts. If you make PC so chaotic, so manpower intensive that alliances are scraping together anyone they can get just to fill the damn time slots....what do you end up with? A public match. And since ownership wont matter because it'll just get flipped the second your patrols have an opening, how is that any different from a pub match? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4463	Posted - 2015.01.21 23:29:00 - [37] - Quote Thor Odinson42 wrote: Alaika Arbosa wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: Craziest thing, this "Raiding " proposal ( which I'm not against) doesn't even scratch the surface of what PC is currently, organized matches between organized combatants. All you're proposing is the ability to have a Skirmish match, but be paid for it by the district holder. You want a departure from pubs but all you've proposed just equals another pub. The gamemode doesn't change. Only the number of people available to fight. Lame. This is exactly the problem, you don't want PC to change from the status quo. You don't want it to evolve into something more than a glorified, overly complex tournament ladder. Where is the Open World Sandbox gameplay if everything 100% revolves around sitting in a lobby waiting to fight the same 16 guys that you fight every time you attack a District because everyone just hires them as ringers? We've seen where the status quo gets us, now is the time for change. I don't think you are seeing where he is coming from. PC currently takes a lot of organization and planning. This is no different in huge nullsec groups. The problem we have here is that we are limited to 16 v 16. You can't have an open sandbox with 16 v 16. Why does it have to be hardmode or easy mode? Why can't it be somewhere in the middle? Well to be fair, isn't that middle ground supposed to be FacWar or PC Raiding? And then Conquest being the most challenging? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4464	Posted - 2015.01.21 23:46:00 - [38] - Quote Zene Ren wrote: Holy ***. What part of "WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PLAYERS IN ALL THE TIME ZONES TO MAKE TRUE MULTI-TIME ZONE ALLIANCES" are you not getting? If we had 50,000 players logging in and playing daily I would actually probably agree with you but we dont. Yeah there will be total and utter chaos, and then 90% of the people will say "* this, it's cheaper to just play pubs!" and we'll be right back to where we are now.c Not good enough to take a district in PC? Just do it at a weird time when they're not online! But that's ok because the group that's better than you that you ganked the district from will come right back and kick you in the teeth anyways and take it back. What you want is a place for a group to deploy as a 16 man team to learn teamwork and practice for PC. What you're asking for is to turn PC into a training ground rather than a competative enviroment. What I'm offering is allowing part of PC to be used for training without completely undermining the competative nature of PC. Want to give your new guys a chance to train? Put them in charge of defending against Raids. Want to give your vets a change to fight against the best of the best? Put them in charge of defending against Conquest. If your corporation is not good enough to forcefully take a district without making use of ambush attacks, then they are not good enough to defend that district. "That little st Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4464	Posted - 2015.01.21 23:48:00 - [39] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Well to be fair, isn't that middle ground supposed to be FacWar or PC Raiding? And then Conquest being the most challenging? Yes, it's supposed to be. Which is why it is particularly ridiculous that so many people want to make sure that PC becomes a way to spin up matches at will where you can almost quarantee there will be no opposition present at all, let alone something you'll have to work at to beat. I completely agree. Rework Conquest be what it was always intended to be, the best of the best fighting each other. Rework FacWar and/or Raids to be the opportunity new players need to be involved in PC without putting a corporation's land on the line. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4467	Posted - 2015.01.21 23:58:00 - [40] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Alright, Pokey, calm down. Take a smoke break, get your head back in the game, I'm the only one allowed to make a fool of themselves on the forums because it makes guys like you look a lot more level-headed. Really hard for me to do that when you're doing what I'm doing and getting frustrated. Take a breather broseph, lemme be the one that nerd rages so you look a lot more reasonable. sigh I know I know, I just get frustrated when I tell people "Here, you can have what you want except for this minor detail because you know...compromise" and the answer is "Nope, I want 100%". I need a beer. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.