|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Imp Smash
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
567
   |
Posted - 2015.01.23 07:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
I am interested in a lot of this, especially with the thought given to updated rewards.
I have a question about stratagems and a suggestion or two based upon response:
1. Will corps Be forced to pick and choose between stratagems? As in, your warbarge can set a limited number so you can't have everything at once.
In the case of 'yes, you will have a limit on the number you can have'
I would like to suggest a stratagem to allow less clone loss for jumping further.
I would like to suggest two potential stratagems that affect mission timer (if technically feasible) either lowering it a small percentage or raising it a small percentage to allow for more or less bleeding depending on who you are attacking/defending against.
In the case of 'no, you can have them all simultaneously eventually.' I would like to suggest a stratagem that would allow 1 random opposing stratagem to not function. (itself being exempt) For a bit of variety in the battle conditions.
As far as Raids are concerned:
Will other game modes besides Skirmish be potentially available? |
Imp Smash
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
574
|
Posted - 2015.01.25 23:23:00 -
[2] - Quote
I gotta agree with Zatarra here. I am all for sandbox Everyone Vs Everyone play -- at the same time, the biggest reason being that raiding non landholding corps is bad, is that you can raid any small newb corp who are trying to build up a wallet, PC team, etc.. to take a run at PC and keep them out of the game from the get go.
Not very cool.
Also, where would the fight take place? No internal ship battles yet ;P |
Imp Smash
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
616
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 07:03:00 -
[3] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:danthrax martin wrote:Landowners are who you want to initiate raids? BS. All I need is some guys and a clone pack to initiate PC.
I'm fine with cp+isk+(clones?)(warbarge?)
But the idea to require land makes me very confrontational and want remind people that a majority of the playerbase does not hold land.
Kitten off Requiring land to initiate a raid would defeat the whole point of a raiding system.
This. times 10. Of course anyone should be able to raid. Did y'all forget? Sandbox!
That being said -- not being able to hit non land holding corps back for a raid does seem a bit carebear and allow for some abusive risk free trolling.
(I say the above despite having said, earlier in this thread, that smashing non land holding corps and keeping them out of PC preemptively would be crap)
So I think I see where the people who think land should be required come from. Risk free attacks is a ludicrous concept.
There has to be some middleground where non land holding corps can raid, and can be attacked in return in some way that does not cripple them and remove them from PC.
I have ideas on that -- but poorly formed and not well thought out. So I'd leave it to y'all to start that process if y'all agreed with the above statements. |
|
|
| |
|