DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest

Pokey Dravon wrote:

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.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 9 post(s)
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 720	Posted - 2015.01.20 10:00:00 - [1] - Quote if i may ask, - What will be the main impact of each change? - What is the end goal? To shorten timers? keep more districts available? Keeping more districts available to attack is a good thing, but i would go with the timer adjustments that fall more in line with new PC mechanics being planned. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 729	Posted - 2015.01.21 19:42:00 - [2] - 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. - Pats Incubus on the side - reads post - Pats incubus on the side again Those words really stung, and PC guys, you had better get your act together and try to propose something constructive, trust me i fly, and have seen what comes when you make Rattati angry. YOU DONT WANT TO SEE RATTATI ANGRY! In all seriousness though, the bare minimum a timer reset and removing control from the corps is a good thing. Instead of offering a false brick wall (what are you gonna do? go on strike? lol burn jita? ) i would go with the option that seems the most egalitarian of the lot. 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. Since all 3 of the Districs are vulnerable to attack it still requires the manpower and recruits needed to beat off raids 3 serperate hours of the day. Rewards holding a district as well as enabling expansion. Yet, over extend your forces with out the player count to back a corp up, you'll end up losing a district. Raids give 15 min notice, but major invasion fleets give 24hr notice. Basically the difference between a raiding merc warbarge and a large attacking Corp warbarge. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 729	Posted - 2015.01.21 20:26:00 - [3] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 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. Give the fuel consumption diminshed returns. Cap on surplus. 1 trade per 24 hrs. Any extra trading of fuel will be removed from home district timer. Fuel will be expended during transport, -25% per transport. e.g 100 units needed for restocking shield window. 100 unit surplus. 75 units from A to B. 50 units from A to C. 25 units from A to D. 0 from A to E. This way you can shore up defenses in times of war. Fuel can be 'raided'. Loss of units means expansion of timer. Districs close by however can benefit and be supported. Districts farther out, not at all and will therefore be more susceptible to raids, just like outer worlds seperated from a home planet. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 730	Posted - 2015.01.22 05:08:00 - [4] - Quote Derrith how would you feel on staggered hours on a planet's districts. They are supposed to be planets, with a day night cyle. On small planets it can be staggered say hourly District 1 through 5 have a 5 hour staggered window, which encourages raiding in low population areas. Larger planets have more overlapping windows. Planets with roughly 12 or more districts can have them overlap every half hour. District I, 1:00, District II 1:30 District III 2:00 and so on. The reason they should not over lap on larger planets is because we dont want to have PC window near or during down time. Everytime the devs need to do some maintenance work it would give those corps a massive advantage. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 730	Posted - 2015.01.22 06:02:00 - [5] - Quote Derrith Erador wrote: Wait, would the owner of these districts be able to set a timer? Then if so, the others would be set on other hourly intervals in correspondence to that one? No the timers would be have to be pre-set by CCP, invading corps should pick the timers that work best for them. That being said, since larger planets will have more overlapping timers it ought to be easy to find a planet with many corrseponding timezones to your own. Stronger Corps could take control of larger population centers, and thus be able to defend more successfully against raids having a smaller window, weaker corps pushed out to the fringes of space, where a less habital planet with few population centers would have large windows would be very difficult to defend all the districts from raids out there. sore of like the difference between enforcing the lawn int the north east where DC, boston, new york, baltimore and philadelphia are just a few hours apart and trying to hold on to nevada with las vegas and a few other no name towns along the way. alot more potential for lawlessness and raiding. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.