|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
804
   |
Posted - 2015.01.23 10:50:00 -
[1] - Quote
I really like this. Are you guys looking for number speculations and more Corporation Modules or just our feedback on this atm? If just feedback, then my only concern is as previously stated- Large Corporations will fill up uber-quickly, however I can also see Corps just grabbing new players to get those milestones, and then just using these same 16 players instead of the new bro straight out of the academy, who will need months or a year to become very competitive.
-The raids could become a way of farming and padding if both sides use BPOs. May Raids PLEASE take down a Corporations Command Points??
After all, Raiding usually is a prerequisite to a big attack. If Command Points are needed to Defend Districts and such, bleeding a Corporation to a certain thresh hold (Dependent on how many Command Points they originally had. Bleed to 1/6 of the original total so a Larger Corp can't just subjugate tinier ones who have no chance of defending against raids.
-Make the different number of people in Raids cost more Command Points exponentially. Scenario- Blitz takes in only a squad of 0H for 500 CP, however we plan on launching from a Raid, which if successful leads to taking down the Defense Network (Dom). He wants to take more, but it'll cost too much CP, and we need it to launch the true Skirmish PC we all know and love afterwards.
This way, PE can only say muster 6 or 8 people going into a raid, whereas the defending corp always get the Advantage in CP, being able to field more members. Making this 8v8 is the wrong way to go about it. When a threat hits a village, all the villagers rise. Of course defending costs a certain amount of CP as well (Make it exponential), but it would make the mode uber challenging if it's 1 squad vs 10 or 12 players. More tactics, hell it could even be used for training as an uber tough Ambush and for building squad Cohesion.
Modules:
Resource Hub- Allows for increased Storage CP, however requires X CP to maintain (Perhaps also allow Cargo Hub Districts to do this? Or are we staying away from Districts doing that?)
Spy Network- Allows for raiding a Corporation with no districts. Used for corporations to still get some competitive flavor, however it requires high CP from the attacking corporation. All corps are based somewhere, this would essentially be attacking the main base, which requires absolutely no CP to defend. The perks are for attacking corporations that you despise. Say a guy in FWA jihads your Proto Tank. You want this guy to pay, his whole corp to pay. You convince your leadership to raid them, hell even grind the CP to initiate the attack. That is the type of thing I'd surely do.
This is New Eden. No one is safe. 07. Love this thread.
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
805
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 11:04:00 -
[2] - Quote
Kevall Longstride wrote:We want PC corps to recruit more players and grow the PC playerbase, which as a percentage of the total player base is stupidly low.
This is why CP is based on player numbersin corp and not districts owned. There are a finite number of districts and we don't want them to limit player expansion.
Can a corp with more members have more total CP? It absolutely sucks when more than 16 X up for PC and we're full, some of these guys up till 1 in the morning. Allowing multiple raids a night mixed with high-quality PC battles and managing districts would be the bustle and hustle a corp needs.
Squad 1 is full for the Raid vs PE 50, please make sure that our Cargo Hub sells its clones. Yes, I know it'll cost 10 CP.
Shooter join the battle vs KOTR pls, the battle went into Defense Network from the Raid
Unique, set up a raid vs MULA. We need to keep them distracted so they can't ring for PE
This...OMG this...
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
805
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 11:21:00 -
[3] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Something to consider in regard to timers and the CP cost of district attacks (would like to see this replaced with Warbarge mechanics in the long run). I would make attacks that vary from your own districts timer have an increasingly higher CP cost. This should allow people to raid into another TZ, but attempting to stockpile districts on say a 1300 timer and then attack districts at 2300, 0300, etc. would be costly and unappealing.
It goes both ways. Be on a 00:00 timer and it's hard to fight Warravens.
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
805
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 11:27:00 -
[4] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:Raiding: 20 minute raid delay. Attacking force drops to map regardless of whether or not the defenders (who get an immediate muster email) are on-site. I love.If all hack points are taken and held for three minutes the raiders escape with a moderate haul of whatever. Nothing to sing about. I feel some raids should be ambush, and others depending( for more CP), could be actual Resource extractionThe instant even one red dot spawns in the defense is on as the defenders trickle in to protect their assets and the battle progresses per usual mechanics. Are there unusual mechanics at the beginning?The defended districts should provide a much higher yield than undefended because the raiders have to beat the defenders for the loot and to get more time before an insurmountable defense. Makes a lot of sense.Attackers can only attack a given district once per day. I disagree. You should be allowed to attack more than once (maybe as a future Corp upgrade I digress. Personally, i play PC for the fights, not the Isk. I'd raid to see if a corp can give me a fight, and it'd suck to waste that one chance on no one being home. Allow it to be done every 5 or 6 hours, with additional upgrades allowing for more. I can raid when I get home from school, and before bed after pc  Once the battle ends the district locks out further raids for an hour to give the defenders a breather. So...it can be raided by another corp??????Raid defense costs zero CP. i LIKEAs mentioned earlier: Payouts for actual fights should be increased and worth the raider force's time. Uncontested wins should feel like yeah you got loot, but you should have gotten more...
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
805
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 11:28:00 -
[5] - Quote
Radar R4D-47 wrote:Incoming wall of text but I must get on my laptop. My phone won't cut it
lol I'll read it General
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
806
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 11:30:00 -
[6] - Quote
Kevall Longstride wrote:CP cost values for corp actions are not finalised and can be tweaked. There are likely ways to increase a corps CP pool based on numbers but I'd want a modifier to slightly increase CP action cost to prevent super large corps having a pool large enough to change timers in massive lumps in one go.
Call this modifier 'corruption', the larger the playerbase a corp has, the more chance for CP to be skimmed. We could then have a further stratagem to reduce a corps 'corruption' level, producing another CP cost that has to be managed.
Make some Corporation Modules need constant CP (CEOS and Directors have to approve of these), which increase the trick game of juggling a war that chugs CP with having to manage other things... I can see where you are coming from however.
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
806
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 11:31:00 -
[7] - Quote
Kevall Longstride wrote:Pagl1u M wrote:Kevall Longstride wrote:We want PC corps to recruit more players and grow the PC playerbase, which as a percentage of the total player base is stupidly low.
This is why CP is based on player numbersin corp and not districts owned. There are a finite number of districts and we don't want them to limit player expansion. This will change nothing, I explain to you what is going to happen. I will spam invites in every match I play, I will go to the academy to say everyone to join my corp, I will accept every newb to my corp. Then I will still only play with my friends, I will let the same 20-25 players play PC. I will have a hundred newb in the corp just to be able to obtain more CPs, to be able to passively farm districts, changing Timers and stuff. You will have more players in PC corps but you wont have more players involved in PC You could do that but how long do you think these players will hang around if you choose to treat them with such disdain? Corps that actively grow and expand their playerbase, include them in raids and Pc matches and value them are going to become the better corps. How long do you think you and your 20-25 fiends will hold out against a corp of several hundred, well motivated players? This is New Eden, you reap what you sow here.
In my proposal above, can you Raid or attack a corp with no districts?!!! Please?
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
806
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 11:36:00 -
[8] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:If CP aren't tied to district ownership then it seems you can raid all you want within you CP wallet without owning land. 
Thats the dream though
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
807
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 12:06:00 -
[9] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Kevall Longstride wrote:How long do you think you and your 20-25 fiends will hold out against a corp of several hundred, well motivated players?
I can see the elites holding out just fine. 'Several hundred players' sounds so grand, but in the end it's 16v16. It doesn't matter how many average players are in the attacking corp, if there's a solid A-team in the defending corp the defending corp will do just fine.
This is why some attacks (for more CP)- Bleed Clones instead of just resources. At least, it should be this way. A corp whose teams are always on to fight can last, but 20 to 25 having to fight off raids of districts and actual PCs will become burned out if mass attacked by plenty of smaller corps, or getting all the PC they wish :) Raids should not be able to take a district, but they sure as hell should severely wound a district
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
812
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 21:59:00 -
[10] - Quote
Ok so I'm just going to try and compile with some ideas and workarounds 
Command Points:
Earnable by every corporation member via near Corporation Missions.
Must be used to in corp functions
Upgrades to them:
Reduces CP usage
Generates CP Faster
Etc (Check 1st Page)
Such as:
Attacking a District (Raid/Conquest)
Finding out the Map of a district (Costs a lot of CP, but highly beneficial)
Changing timers of a District (Increases the more hours you change it from)
Harvesting District Resources
Buying Bulk Items in case a corp does not want a tax
Defending against Raids
Corp Advertisement (Future)
At the start of PC 2.0, all current sockets will be me randomized so no one knows what district has what
Districts might be taken from all corps and each corp given 1 with full clones that they pick (Possible, not confirmed)
****Raiding*****
Requires X amount of CP to initiate. Should be greater CP with the more mercs you bring. 16 raiders should be quite a lot of CP
Winning awards the Attackers what the defenders lost along with a keep what you kill. A total pot of Isk for all the items lost is also generated, along with (As proposed) a higher rate of salvaging Officer Weapons. Showing up for a Defense causes only a loss in items, but it should require little CP to defend. No-showing requires a massive CP loss, and slight loss of clones (The type of Raids should each cost a certain amount of CP, with Bleeding Clones and higher payouts costing more CP.)
Corporations with no districts should be able to be raided however for substantial LP, with a No-show stealing a large amount of the corps CP (Not enough for a recoup however. Used more if you have a grudge against a corp that stays out of PC. Similar to going to a Pirate hangout to beat the snot out of them )
Why should Corps Hold Districts if all they will do is get harassed??
Districts all have some bonuses (Other thread and Radar supply this)
Cargo Hubs. 600 clones, 50 clone Regen. Great for launching attacks, almost useless without Production Facilities to back them up...
PFs- 200 Clone max with 150 clone regen. The Resuppliers. Capable of being Overwhelmed, they should only regen 75 clones however if attacked. Meaning they can be sniped if sending a massive clone shipment
SRLs( If keeping, these manufacture Hacked Decryptor Keys in slow quantities I believe it was stated. Or they could manufacture keys that then are doled out to Player Warbarges which make them into Special Hacked Decryptor Keys, which open our damn boxes
Caldari PFs (No Clone Attrition. Direct battle bonuses to the defender. Slight however, nothing insane. )
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
|
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
812
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 22:22:00 -
[11] - Quote
Travis Stanush wrote:501st Headstrong wrote:****Raiding***** Corporations with no districts should be able to be raided however for substantial LP, with a No-show stealing a large amount of the corps CP (Not enough for a recoup however. Used more if you have a grudge against a corp that stays out of PC. Similar to going to a Pirate hangout to beat the snot out of them ) How would this work? Where would the battle take place?(random skirmish map?) Where to park the Warbarge?(assuming that is their base of operations)
By LP, I meant CP.
Battle takes place at random. However every Corporation has a base. It says so in your Corporate Information. Warbarge would be parked there.
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
813
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 03:49:00 -
[12] - Quote
My reasoning for such was it takes such a high amount of CP that it cant be spammed, and it is for those grudge matches. It makesense in that ptiates tore their CP and Loot somewhere. That is it. You do not know where this is however, what map. If you own land and are getting smashed by raiders, why do they get to steal and hide? Why can they not be in the alightest way countered? Are the bonuses for.holding a district so great that corps will deal with endless raida from every corp who you stomped in a pub, and you cannot evwn retaliate? Regardless of blue donuting, that can happen anyway, causing a stale. If Im being pestered by bees, explain why I cant dedicate massive ( And I mean being ablet o do this takes large CP for relatively little reward if the corp you attack has no resources. They do not have to show either.) Resources. I dont know, maybe it's okay for yall, but it just doeant seem roght. This is risk vs reward. If you raid someone, your corp should be able to become a target. It then becomes a game. Can you raid and fight that corp so much that they cant muster the CP to deatroy and cripple your war effort. Ljke you said Pokey, you reap what you sow. You should not be able to steal, hide, and then be safe. A corp with relatively little to do after a war should be able to save up CP, get a twam, and show those raiders who's boss.
Sorry for typos, on phone. Please just answer how that makes sense to you
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
813
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 04:02:00 -
[13] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:501st Headstrong wrote: Ljke you said Pokey, you reap what you sow. You should not be able to steal, hide, and then be safe. A corp with relatively little to do after a war should be able to save up CP, get a twam, and show those raiders who's boss. Well i don't really remember saying that exactly, but anyways. I think more so what you're looking for is a Warbarge counter attack, which could perhaps be launched following a raid against your district. I think however that allowing people to bully non-PC corps simply for existing is a nice way to make people quit the game. Even if the CP cost is high, it's basically harassment from a corp that just wants to be left alone. So retaliation triggered by conflict? Sure. But it should be a one time deal for each act of aggression, not something you can do whenever you feel like it.
That would be acceptable. Apologies if angeted or anmoyed anyone.
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
813
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 14:13:00 -
[14] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Roman837 wrote:All very interesting suggestions.
My theory. To make raids much more attainable on both side...woukd be to make raids only be 8 attackers and 8 defenders.
Make the map always a 4 point map.
Reasons why. Raids are lightning fast. They hit you hard. The enemy wouldn't form a large army to do a raid. It would be seen. Instead the pick the best of the best. The small elite raiders. And they hit.
The defender...When sensing a battle always prepares. They man the walls and have their army ready to repel. In a raid. It may be tough for every corp...even large corps...more so for the smaller corps to get 16 players to go defend it. 8 tho is very manageable.
Or as we see now in PC(myself as guilty party) included...The 16 defenders will be picked not from your corp...but from who ever you can scramble.
raids need to be small party's. Please make them 8 vs 8. Attacker has the advantage of selecting the best 8 and preparing before they attack. Defender needs the benefit of the doubt that they can field 8 players aswell. 16 may be very tough for small corps.
Other than that..If you successfully defend a raid...your district should be free from being raided for a locked period of time but not locked from being hit with real attack. When a district gets hit by a real attack it should cease all production of goo. This prevents people from locking them selves with alt corps and cashing in on goo. Something to consider as well is to allow raids to vary is size with differing CP cost and rewards based on the raid size. Exactly what I was thinking brother :) Also, remember now that autosell will no longer be a thing and if you are in the under attack state you can't manage a district which means you won't be able to sell off clones.
After all of the reading, I truly feel we need Corporation Ranks to really help in balance. I had an idea, just disappeared. Will come back. Also, people have been worried that small corps may not be able to field players in the event of a raid. Id like to clarify that a Corp can only be raided back if their Corporation Rank is high enough, and enough CP is used. Attack a Rank 1 corp while you are Rank 8, and it requires massive CP. Again, only as retaliation, not out of the blue. I believe in a 24 hr raid timer, however your district will be set at a certain timer for regen, open to attack 3 hours before and after. The timer decides regen. Raiding later and later from that timer takes more and more CP. Midnight raid? Sure. Requires lots of CP, ans you are then vulnerable to counterattack when you least expect it as well.
Raiding paralyzes districts, meaning it would make Cargo Hubs very easier to take, as Radar proposed then only regen a meager 50, with 600 holding clones. Production Facilities with only 200 and 150 regen wpuld be taken in one zurge with no regen capacity.
I would personally fight tooth and nail against a raid on a SRL because I want my hacked decryptor keys.
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
813
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 20:01:00 -
[15] - Quote
I have to disagree Roman. If anything, not being able to bring help will stunt Raiding. MULA, despite what ppl say, is a strong corp. 8 of you could definitely beat 8 FWA if this ever happened. So being able to ring out, these new corps that will get raided in pc shpuld have that option. This way there are pirate corps, and Security corporations.
Pay us 10 mil a week from your districts and we'll put an alt on your corp so Im on when your guy's primetime is done. Ill ferry in my corp to defend your holdings.
Raiding should also include the ability to attack whenever, but the farther away from a corps primetime, the more CP. A corp can be raided once every few hours, with the CP needed to raid slowly decreasing to regular. Yhink of it as a district on high alert. Defenses are high, so commanding your men to attack so soon again takes a lot more CP
There shpuld be different raids. Some change the size and content of your raiding party, others change how sudden the raid will be, and others still determine the amount of resources able tp be gained, be it clones, isk, or CP
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
813
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 20:15:00 -
[16] - Quote
Mima Sebiestor wrote:I have not read every page here. I apologize for any duplication in my request.
Please add a requirement so that PC/raiding battles can only be entered by the corporations involved.
This would effectively remove ringers, and allow for a more rewarding (challenging) experience for field commanders.
Along with the timer update, fielding full teams shouldn't be an issue. Corp mates getting left out of PC, due to a mixed 'A' team fielding PC (all day), may still be an issue. This also allows recruitment to be more specific in seeking desired suits/vehicles.
The benefits of an alliance should be revisited as well. Should the ringer rule be implemented, maybe the alliance could field teams, if and only if it is in defense of a raid, targeted against one of it's own corporations. I also think that an even larger scale 'alliance battle/conquest' could be fun!
I really dont feel limiting this one's one battles would be the way this goes. Say ( Extreme Example), I leave OH and make a Raiding Corporation. I should have to pay more CP, but being able call your friends and provide them content I feel is a far better sandbox. In PC, you get your best to defend districts and attack. In raiding, you should be able to do so as well. The kicker is if you have enough time to do so. With your alliance part however, it raises a cool idea. Alliance corps require less CP to ferry in. They are right there in allaince chat, should allow for tjem to come in and help if you're on short notice. And It would be really sick if raids across multitudes of allaince districts occur so everyone is busy
, followed by Defense Network Seiges, and then Pcs the next day all day. That could be a very fun alliance battle. Hell, you should.be able to raid a corp in more than one day to keep them busy, but there are diminishing rewards after the first.
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
817
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 02:28:00 -
[17] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Thor Odinson42 wrote:Jadek Menaheim wrote:Felt nifty being a fly on the wall in Bamm Havoc's chat with the CPM on Team Speak.
Kane Spero brought to my attention the idea of having to spend command points to accept and kick players from corp.
I'm considering whether it would be beneficial to the meta of corp hiring and giving leverage to workers by having the kick player from corp cost more CPs than accepting and processing their application.
Might offer some interesting gameplay if you can get a bunch of alt characters into a group and proceed to sabotage the CP pool by mass removing them yourself from the corp. I don't think there needs to be anything at this point that would dissuade corps from recruiting. Actually I only think you should have a cost for kicking a member or them leaving. Even that maybe a bit iffy. The reasoning being if you are just farming recruits and not doing anything with them and they start leaving then it drains your CP. Also, this would limit the use of loading into a corp, filling it with CP, and then leaving.
Or you could be sabotaged by people you thought were serious in joining, only to find they leave and you now have far less CP. No thanks
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
819
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 02:59:00 -
[18] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:There could always be a grace period of X days. It seems like it would be important to only recruit members serious about joining. Also, if corp history becomes available you look at someone's history and it shows they are a corp hopper then you don't recruit them.
Clarify please
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
819
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 05:00:00 -
[19] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:CP per earned Component, should go up from low to max based on how long you have been in the corporation. That means a gang of 16 elites cannot go around multiple alt corps, filling up their CP pool and moving on.
That works very well. Make sure it tracks actuve players, so you cant "bake" alts in anotger corp yo get the CP while you currebtly dabble
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
820
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 19:16:00 -
[20] - Quote
Zatara Rought wrote:I think Radar and Haerr that you're misunderstanding me.
I not suggesting that raiding shouldn't be a mechanic.
I am stating that empowering corps to raid other corps who own no land and do not with to participate in PC...is a bad idea.
For various reasons.
That's why districts need to be immensely helpful, and increase your CP in some way. More districts, more CP, more actions to be taken, more Pcs and Raiding, repeat
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
|
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
821
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 11:56:00 -
[21] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:How are you supposed to raid a non-land holding corp?
Where?
That's the point, non land holding corps don't have a location you can pin down and attack. Not only that it would easily allow landholders to attack and suppress new corps to keep them from having the chance to break in.
You can raid a static srstronghold. Raiding a flotilla of Frankensteinian warship chop jobs strikes me as something only a lunatic would contemplate as more than an idle mental exercise.
Seriously go to your Corporation, look @ Headquaters. Coordinates to be counter-raided.
Raiding "smaller corps without land would not be feasible. Counter-raiding in an attempt to jam them from raiding you for a while should be allowed however. Say you're a PC Corp with 10 districts. You have guys on and everything, but there are 20 corps raiding you. Are you SERIOUSLY not allowed to do anything back to them. No way to track where the raiders went?
For a Significant (As in you defend several Raids without losing the CP), you should be able to initiate a Counter-raid on someone who raided you recently (Let's do, within that day). It takes a little while longer (About 20 minutes), but it should be allowed. Otherwise there is no real risk vs reward for Raiders who show up in BPOS , only reward if they win, and nothing if they lose. Nothing is not a risk. Losing something a risk. Counter-raiding would not be feasible all the time if getting mass-attacked, you have no time for it. But if only one of two raiding corps attack, you should be allowed to counter, in an attempt to steal back a little isk and CP that was stolen from you.
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
823
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 16:29:00 -
[22] - Quote
SirManBoy wrote:Breakin Stuff wrote:Interesting posts operator. I agree with you on some points, disagree on a couple. But mostly nicely thought out.
As far as raiding: I think it should be kept to 8v8 or 12v12. This is an entry level opening to PC and a means for PC corps to make use of their members who can't do PC because a lot of PC corps have set in stone fight teams. Raids should be open to more than the conquest window.
Upon a raid that is repelled tge defenders should gain an IMMEDIATEA OPPORTUNITY TO DESTROY ATTACKER ASSETS in the form of a retaliatory attack initiated immediately after a successful defense.
Warbarges should not be destroyed unless yours are destroyed when you lose a district. However wrecking clone assets and causing CP loss is an option to represent infrastructure damage.
However if raiders go unopposed there should be no opportunity to retaliate. I am fine with adding variety to the game by adding 8v8 and 12v12 battles to the proposed raiding system, but raids should also increase Dust's overall capacity for full 16v16 matches. Raids aren't just an opportunity for non-PC qualified people to be involved in team matches, they also present the opportunity for A-teams to get more reps in between their standard PC battles.
Have 16 raids require more CP than 8, while defenders are allowed to bring in however many they wish. If ypu only have enough CP for a squad but the corp youre raiding has 30 on, there is no reason why only 6 out of 30 defenders can help. 6 vs 16 is far more competitve, and gives help to defenders. This will encourage raiders to raid simultaneously with other corps to split forces
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
823
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 19:36:00 -
[23] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:6 v 16 isn't interesting gameplay unless the six have a wildcard that matters.
There's no value in a game mode where one side risks everything and the other comparatively nothing.
A reasonable point. Perhaps allow a certain amount of defenders to wnter without a CP cost, but extra require CP. We dont need less people to try PC, we want more. Limiting certain raids to smaller numbers lessens getting more people into raiding. 16 vs 16 should not only be open to corps qith land otherwise we have the same problem we have now
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
836
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 20:39:00 -
[24] - Quote
el OPERATOR wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:"Raid Reprisal"
A CP-free counter-strike option offered to Landholder within 15 minutes following a failed Raid defense.
Playmode: 50 clone Ambush
On landholder victory, reclaim 50% of whatever the raiders stole (clones, components, etc).
On landholder defeat, reclaim 0%.
Standard Salvage rules apply.
^ A response with boundaries. An opportunity to teach those pirates a lesson. Could even call it "risk free" if you'd like. I'd prefer less of the "risk-free" Ambush aspect (we have those, they're under 'Ambush' in Public Contracts) tho I do like the 15 minute Reprisal Attack idea. A Get 'em Before They Get Away kind of thing. What if it cost CP, say half of what it costs to raid, but it a win returned 80% of assets stolen with the remaining 20% NOT going to the raiders but instead being "lost" (damaged, destroyed, hidden, w/e).
I really wouldn't like that, because then teams could fight the raid battle, lose, but know they stalled enough to gather the ringers to stop the Raid. Retaliation Raid concept was my idea, but you damage the other corp's CP production
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
880
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 11:03:00 -
[25] - Quote
No exact date yet
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD
Moody come back
SWBF3!!
|
|
|
| |
|