DUST Search - Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:[Feedback] Planetary Conquest Revisited

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 11 post(s)
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4352	Posted - 2015.01.23 08:14:00 - [1] - Quote The timer proposal seems fairly reasonable and tying these systems to Command Points which must be actively generated feels like a win. I'll update when I've re-read this a few times. x) Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4355	Posted - 2015.01.23 08:41:00 - [2] - Quote Will clones autosell for Command Points or will a player with the proper roles have to sell off clones themselves using Command Points? Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4356	Posted - 2015.01.23 09:51:00 - [3] - Quote New Concept: Command Points Command points seem like a pretty dang brilliant way to keep track of activity and cap how much any one character can generate. New Concept: Corporate Missions Corporate Missions feel like another win and a way to get people interest in building up their corporation. Will these take the place of Daily Missions or be in addition to the current Dailies? New Concept: Corporate Command Will a Corporation have to declare a location like a Corp HQ for this? And if So, will it be able to be changed by spending command points potentially with an increasing cost based on how far you move it? The Corporate Command will auto upgrade if it has available components, and does not require the CEO or Directors to do so. Sometimes CEOs and Directors take a vacation so this is good to have automated and the more automated the less of a burden it is logistically. Good stuff. New Concept: Stratagem Makes sense and seems fairly straight forward. New Concept: Earning and Donating Components and Command Points. Automation is a wonderful thing. Less logistics for those few players that take up the task which means less burnout and the machine keeps trucking. New Concept: Member Donations Love it. BUY WAR BONDS TODAY! Donate to the War effort! New Concept: Corporate Actions Super awesome. Inactive corps run out of Command Points over time and become easy pickens. If you over expand your districts or war activities your whole system could end up collapsing. Think smart and spend your command points wisely! Proposed Stratagems: Mission Network - grants Corporate Missions, upgrading adds more missions Planet Trading - Claim Resources (TBD) from Districts Clone Directive(clone pack)/Orbital Construction(mcc) - generates clonepacks/mcc, upgrading creates and holds more War Council - Reduces CP cost of Actions Looks like some really good stuff. I really hope you go for MCCs to degranulate loss and win conditions! War Council- ha! Makes me think back to the days when the CPM was actually called the War Council. x) Updated Concept: District Income I think I would need to get more details about this system. If you end up moving to MCCs being what you use to fight and these clones being what you use for income then an easy winner! Death to biomass and a new dawn of active wealth generation from districts! Rarity will be generated on Districts, but has no further design at this moment. This I think needs to be carefully implemented. District rarity shouldnGÇÖt be so specific that you only end up with X districts having a specific kind of resource. New Concept: Default Timers IGÇÖm a little wary of basing anything off PCU even though the statistical trends have been pretty stable over the lifetime of Dust. Could distance from TQ DT be elaborated a bit more? If Timers have been changed and the District is lost, the Timer will reset to Default. Can you define lost a bit more specifically? Does this mean if a district is abandoned or do you mean when a district is taken over by another owner? Both? Updated Concept: Changing Timers This seems to be an effective middle ground that will address some of the least desirable timer gameplay that is currently present in Dust. New Concept: Raids Lower the Jolly Roger and man the MCCs. Arrrrrrrrr!!!!!!! PC has desperately needed a lower stakes way of coming at the game mode and this will be a real winner. Updated Concept: Rewards Death to biomass!!! This will eliminate a lot of the ways the system is currently gamed . Updated Concept: Maps What map is it tonight, Brain?... The same map we fight on every night PinkyGÇª Rings . This is a very positive change. would consider randomly generating maps one time around and then fixing them so battle intel on how previous fights have gone down on a district would hold value. It would even be nice to see maps that you normally only see in FW and Public play in Planetary Conquest as well. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4359	Posted - 2015.01.23 10:32:00 - [4] - Quote Is there a chance that these default timers will be localized to planets, systems, etc? Or will they just be scattered about randomly? TQ DT is mentioned. Does this mean timers can't be set within a certain time of DT or what? Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4360	Posted - 2015.01.23 10:57:00 - [5] - Quote Kevall Longstride wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Would I be correct in thinking that raiding will cost CP. So a raiding corp would still need missions runners to help fill the CP pool. Secondly could theory lanch a raiding campaign on a corp to bleed them of isk while building up your own war chest? Yes to first point, don't see why not on the second. Depends on the mechanics of raiding which is still under discussion. I might have a suggestion for that: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=186091 Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4362	Posted - 2015.01.23 11:17:00 - [6] - Quote 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. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4362	Posted - 2015.01.23 11:25:00 - [7] - Quote 501st Headstrong wrote: 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. It would, but you wouldn't have as many issues where folks defend a large block of districts outside their own time zone in the hopes of using those districts in a war with an enemy around their own reinforcement times. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4363	Posted - 2015.01.23 11:34:00 - [8] - Quote If CP aren't tied to district ownership then it seems you can raid all you want within your CP wallet without owning land. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4363	Posted - 2015.01.23 12:09:00 - [9] - Quote 501st Headstrong wrote: 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 I think having raids cost CP to initiate and to defend would make this actually more significant. If a small group is trying to hold a lot of land then, win or lose, over time their CP can be bled dry and they will be left defenseless. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4365	Posted - 2015.01.23 13:46:00 - [10] - Quote Vitantur Nothus wrote: Kevall Longstride wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Would I be correct in thinking that raiding will cost CP. So a raiding corp would still need missions runners to help fill the CP pool. Yes to first point, don't see why not on the second. Depends on the mechanics of raiding which is still under discussion. That kinda stinks from a pirate's point-of-view. If you have 16 guys from different corps who are all looking for trouble, why not let them make trouble? And preferably, then and there; the urge to pillage may be gone in X hours. Arrrrr. :: excited about raids :: Eh, I think requiring command points to raid is a fair trade. Without that cost a lot of exploitative mechanics could be introduced using alt corps etc. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news

Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4365	Posted - 2015.01.23 14:02:00 - [11] - Quote Tieing CP pool to district amount seems unnecessary and could create some negative results. One of the issues right now is that in many ways whoever has the most districts wins logistically. There is no need to extend that mechanic in CP pools. Attack and Defense power should not be increased with district growth but through player activity to regenerate the pool and by upgrading the Corporate Command. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4365	Posted - 2015.01.23 14:13:00 - [12] - Quote Beren Hurin wrote: What if the Corp could get some LP from FW and there were some LP store options for buying clone packs with special bonuses? Since corporate missions are like daily missions is should be plenty easy to get CP and components even if you just played faction warfare so no real need. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4365	Posted - 2015.01.23 14:32:00 - [13] - Quote Radar R4D-47 wrote: Kain Spero wrote: Tieing CP pool to district amount seems unnecessary and could create some negative results. One of the issues right now is that in many ways whoever has the most districts wins logistically. There is no need to extend that mechanic in CP pools. Attack and Defense power should not be increased with district growth but through player activity to regenerate the pool and by upgrading the Corporate Command. Read my CP proposal it takes your fear out of tiered CP. I read through it. The issue is you want the CP pool to be fairly limited so a lot of activity would drain the pool if it's not being actively replenished. Stockpiling CP because you have a lot of districts eliminates the need to be constantly replenishing the pool, which means if a corp has over extended their holdings past their active player base they would still have a large buffer of CP to fall back on which somewhat defeats the purpose of the CP in the first place. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4366	Posted - 2015.01.23 16:23:00 - [14] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: John ShepardIII wrote: I just deleted dust. Time to redownload it Well, it has become pretty common knowledge that doing that regularly does, at least slightly, improve client performance ;) I just choked on my drink a bit. WHY YOU try to kill me? Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4370	Posted - 2015.01.23 17:49:00 - [15] - Quote I think something that would work as a compromise for the randomization of the map is that the map stays the same until a flip happens then the map gets randomized again. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4370	Posted - 2015.01.23 18:56:00 - [16] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Eh wording can be hard sometimes, I know I fail at it frequently. But yeah since basically....all of PC is Cargo Hubs now, I think randomizing them at the start is fine. Randomising the SIs to reset the situation would be fine. No issue with that. Randomising the maps, particularly the way Rattati has even implied randomising them basically between every on the same district? Many issues. And like I stated, there are actual reasons why so many districts were changed to cargo hubs. If the only thing we are looking for, is to not have the cargo hub be so prevalent, there is an even better, and more long term, solution. Make the other district types at least as desirable to hold as cargo hubs are. This, I believe, would be necessary even after some sort of initial reset "scramble". If cargo hubs are the best ones to have, people will once again just start changing the majority of their districts into cargo hubs (given that the ability to change the SI is retained, as Rattati said it would). And then we are back at the same "problem". Or don't have the SI actually determine what the large socket ends up at after randomized or changed. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4379	Posted - 2015.01.24 07:19:00 - [17] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: I disagree. If raiders can initiate a raid whenever they want, as many of them as they want, why should the defender be penalised both for showing up to defend AND not being able to be there 24/7 to defend? That's just ridiculous. Raids need to be limited in how many can happen per day for sure. Either by a rest timer, meeting certain conditions for a raid like clone overflow X days in a row, or a combination of the two. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4381	Posted - 2015.01.24 11:39:00 - [18] - Quote bigolenuts wrote: Skimming through and I'd like to know. Corp A raids Corp B. Corp A is not in PC but is there any way Corp B can raid them back? Will the war barges be accessible? I'm trying to keep up but my Dustanese is not very good. Currently a Corporate Command cannot be raided AFAIK, but I think being able to counterattack a raid using a district map would be a good feature to implement. Essentially this would be a revenge attack that a Corporate Command can come under following a raid. Radar, raids affecting district production and causing an expenditure of defender command points seems like a sufficient penalty and effect on Planetary Conquest. Basically if successfully raided your clone production stops the same way as a loss currently does on a district but your core clone/ MCC count is unaffected. Whether no shows are punished or not I think would come down to whether raids happen around the district timer or if a district being open to a raid 24/7 approach is taken. In any case, the CP cost of raiding needs to be balanced against the CP cost of manually selling clones so that raiding is a more CP expensive way of gathering ISK. I imagine raiding would also cost clones/MCC no matter the outcome. In the case of a no show (maybe the shields of the MCC aren't lost on victory) then the raider keeps their MCC/ clones. This would allow you to immediately raid again even if you don't have MCC/ clones in storage. I think a mechanic like that would provide enough of a benefit if there is a no show. In the case of a raider no-showing (MCC shields aren't lost on victory) have the raid not cost the district owner any CP. Being able to raid even if you don't own any land is really the whole point behind a raiding mechanic in the first place, but I do agree that revenge attacks should be possible. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4382	Posted - 2015.01.24 12:10:00 - [19] - Quote Shutter Fly wrote: I see show/no-show as a matter of cost management. It shouldn't be a straight matter of: show = good / no-show = bad. Not showing up would be a definite, moderate loss of one resource (CP, for example). Showing up would be betting that you can win for a moderate gain, with the possibility of anywhere from minor to severe (in relation to no-show) losses of other resources (clones, ISK, some CP). Although I mentioned clone loss, but no hit to clone production, in my previous post. I also like the idea of halted production with no loss. My only issue is the "loss" of clones (in the battle) with no actual impact on clone reserves. Also, it could diminish the returns of multiple attacking wins in a single day, depending on how the other penalties are determined. Yeah, essentially you should want to show up to prevent the negative outcomes of a raid. The idea of MCC replacing clones as the mechanics of conquering and determining ownership I think really starts to shine when you begin to look at things like raiding. A raid puts your clone production at risk but not necessarily your stock of MCC that ensure your district ownership is unaffected. The issue I see with raids is that the stakes of a raid need to be balanced. Too low and defenders don't care and don't show up, too high and we end up with the "best 16" being picked to defend against a raid. I think generating/not generating would be a good way to determine is a district is raidable and limit the number of raids. Stopping clone production would allow you to "soften" up a district as a precursor to an actual attack as well. Once we add district resource production down the line though in addition to clones I think we'll need a more robust system like this: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=186091 Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4382	Posted - 2015.01.24 13:15:00 - [20] - Quote 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. 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. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news

Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4386	Posted - 2015.01.24 16:07:00 - [21] - Quote Eh, I don't see any reason to make raiding corp specific. Let it follow the same rules as PC. Plus with the way CP work if they aren't in your corp they aren't fueling your ability to raid. 8v8 raiding can be an option but there should be a way to do 16 v 16 raiding as well. Full teams need a way to quickly access fights in PC as well as small ones. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4387	Posted - 2015.01.24 17:03:00 - [22] - Quote Thor Odinson42 wrote: What if bringing in non corp members cost more CP? Call it a clone programming fee. Don't make it much, but anything over 50% ringers would result in a negative in some resource column. Okay, normally I hate anything that hurts freedom of association but I like this idea a lot. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4387	Posted - 2015.01.24 17:10:00 - [23] - Quote Roman837 wrote: 8v8. My answers final lol. Would be good for both sides. Make it 100 clones. If the defender no shows easy penalty. They lose a hundred clones on their districts. This will weakened their defence against a real attack. Point of raid. Strategic strike. If you kill the core clones off a district you risk the stakes being far too high for raids. If you want to affect the ownership position of a district launch a full attack. Stopping production and regeneration of the clones/MCC seems to be a pretty good middle ground. Let the attacker choose the size or the raid and match type. Depending on the match the stakes are raised and the rewards are different. Raid - 8 v 8 Ambush - 1x CP Raid - 8 v 8 Dom - 1.5x CP Raid - 8 v 8 Skrim - 2x CP Raid - 16 v 16 Skirm - 3x CP The potentially rewards would scale in a similar fashion as the CP. Steal 10% of Daily Clones Steal 20% of Daily Clones Steal 30% of Daily Clones Steal 50% of Daily Clones Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4387	Posted - 2015.01.24 17:16:00 - [24] - Quote Thor Odinson42 wrote: If you make it impossible to profit by using +50% ringers it's win/win. You don't prevent people from playing with friends (or recruiting before accepting). It doesn't need to be impossible to make profits but if you increase the CP cost of actions then you provide a strong incentive to be in the same corp during corp actions. What I like about CP is that it opens up options like setting up a defense contract with another corp at the cost of CP. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4388	Posted - 2015.01.24 17:29:00 - [25] - Quote Sounds like raids would be a great opportunity to train new FCs then. Also, I don't really agree that these raids should HAVE to have an FC available. Your 16 won't be able to be everywhere at once and the stakes aren't extremely high. You describing elites running amok is exactly why core ownership clones should NOT be affected by a raid. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4388	Posted - 2015.01.24 17:30:00 - [26] - Quote Roman837 wrote: Kain Spero wrote: Thor Odinson42 wrote: If you make it impossible to profit by using +50% ringers it's win/win. You don't prevent people from playing with friends (or recruiting before accepting). It doesn't need to be impossible to make profits but if you increase the CP cost of actions then you provide a strong incentive to be in the same corp during corp actions. What I like about CP is that it opens up options like setting up a defense contract with another corp at the cost of CP. I hate no shows as well, but I think if you make a raid cost the defender CP and they keep noshowing they'll have their CP burn out anyways. Maybe if you no show a raid it actually cost you double the CP. This way you don't get directly into high stakes ownership levels, but if a corp vanishes then you eat through their CP. Maybe if you hit 0 CP your districts become unoccupied? Horrible idea. No. Raids are for resources. Not occupation. District shouldn't be effected. This is not promoting good fights this is promoting noob farming. Either way if you hit 0 CP you will no longer be able to launch defensive actions as it the design of the CP system. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4388	Posted - 2015.01.24 17:38:00 - [27] - Quote Roman837 wrote: Kain Spero wrote: Sounds like raids would be a great opportunity to train new FCs then. Also, I do really agree that these raids should HAVE to have an FC available. Your 16 won't be able to be everywhere at once and the stakes aren't extremely high. You describing elites running amok is exactly why core ownership clones should NOT be affected by a raid. Hence Corp exclusive. It is imperative. Defends and attacks. Corp exclusive. I would have to strongly disagree. I think something like Thor mentioned where it cost more CP to bring in ringers would be fine, but players should be allowed to freely associate even if there is a cost to that. Corps may very well want to bring only potential recruits on a raid to try them out as well as a myriad of other potentials. Corp purity is a much lower priority than the freedom to associate in what's the only real sandbox arena in Dust. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4388	Posted - 2015.01.24 17:47:00 - [28] - Quote Travis Stanush wrote: Raiding should really have its own thread. If Mr Spero would be so kind as to put his best ideas forth in a separate thread then we can properly hash this out there. That's actually a good point. If people want to start putting their proposals here I'll try to keep it organized like Fox's PC thread: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=188647&find=unread Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4389	Posted - 2015.01.24 17:58:00 - [29] - Quote Roman837 wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Roman837 wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Roman837 wrote: Horrible idea. No. Raids are for resources. Not occupation. District shouldn't be effected. Districts should be affected to the extent that a successful raid interrupts farming operations. If the raiders are beaten back, then back to business-as-usual. Incentives for showing up for the fight. Farms of resource yes. Clones no And if the two are one and the same? I hope they are not. Clones are for combat. It sounds like clones may be for ISK while MCC are for combat potentially. Anyways got a thread up to focus the raid discussion so we don't make Rattati's life a pain by burying the other responses to the PC proposal: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=188647&find=unread Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4389	Posted - 2015.01.24 17:59:00 - [30] - Quote mispost Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news

Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4391	Posted - 2015.01.24 19:03:00 - [31] - Quote bigolenuts wrote: Kane, I am watching you. You smell the iskies and I see what you are doing lol Go right ahead. I'll be seeing you in pubs soon. You'll be knocking the dust off of your character. Funny stuff...I wonder who you are already in talks with about a return...hmmm....we will see in due time I suppose. It's more that I sense some actual fun coming back to Dust, but I'm sure folks will find ways to make those ISKies as well. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4406	Posted - 2015.01.25 02:25:00 - [32] - Quote 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. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4406	Posted - 2015.01.25 02:36:00 - [33] - Quote 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. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4420	Posted - 2015.01.25 11:23:00 - [34] - Quote Assert Dominance wrote: please remember to keep the gallente research lab out of the rotation until its fixed (if its ever fixed). I have to agree and pretty strongly. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4464	Posted - 2015.01.30 13:59:00 - [35] - Quote SirManBoy wrote: 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. I have to agree here. There is no reason to force raiding to only be 8v8 or 12v12. With a command point system being introduced there is an easy and effective way to scale the costs of raiding with larger raids costing more CP and smaller raids costing less. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4471	Posted - 2015.02.01 13:16:00 - [36] - Quote Radar R4D-47 wrote: el OPERATOR wrote: You're idea limits hits per district, my idea limits hits based on indvidual daily success. To-mae-to,To-mah-toe Why are you trying to limit a gamemode? This reduces activity server wide. Since Warlords Endgame will revolve around CP why would CCP limit the amount of times someone can raid when we have a limited amount of a resource we have to produce? If 0.H has 2000CP and to raid it cost 200 CP we better be able to use all of our CP to raid if that's what we feel like doing that day. You all keep forgetting CP is going to be the driving factor of everything. I posted this back on page 5. No one should be limited by mechanics only by a resource. Currently we can PC as much as we want but it costs time and isk. So why should we limit raiding? As long as raiding has a cost to limit its infinite potential then a corp can only raid till that cost can no longer be met. That being said CCP will make or break the game based off this currency the community knows nothing about. So I hope it is implemented with extreme caution. I agree that raids would need to be limited by resources. At the same time owning districts and engaging in direct territorial warfare needs to be hands down better than raiding in terms of wealth generation/ rewards. If holding land doesn't provide better rewards than raiding does then everyone will just attempt to be raiders. Raiding should be more expensive in terms of unit of wealth generated per CP and it should cost similar resources in terms of clones/MCC as a district attack. In the end corporate command needs to have a more limited storage capacity of clones/MCC as well, which makes sense with corporate command acting as a single permanent district. Requiring the expenditure of an MCC/clones in order to raid will ensure that the decision to raid is made carefully by landowners as it would weaken their ownership position on a district. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4472	Posted - 2015.02.01 22:13:00 - [37] - Quote 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. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4480	Posted - 2015.02.04 09:03:00 - [38] - Quote I think probably the easiest way to address the issue is to ensure that the raiders have to bring something to the table that they can lose. This would mean requiring a MCC or Clone Pack in addition to the CP cost to initiate the fight. Ideally though I think after being raided you should be able to make a revenge attack against the corp that raided you. I don't think a system where you attack someone's corporate command would work. I imagine a revenge attack being something like an Ambush and it would only cost CP to participate (no MCC or clone pack required). Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4550	Posted - 2015.02.09 17:11:00 - [39] - Quote Quite simply the donation of components to get command points needs to be off the table. The completion of daily missions needs to be tracked and used to generate command points or something of that nature. Using warbarge components will just lead to some nasty P2W scenarios and potential alt farming. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback. 4553	Posted - 2015.02.10 09:48:00 - [40] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Vitantur Nothus wrote: JIAF-PR wrote: Vitantur Nothus wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: New Concept: Member Donations Corporation Members can also "fuel the war" by donating their own Components, generating Command Points. :: snip :: All this argument come down with Aurum. No aspect of the argument involves Aurum. * Components are generated by corp-owned, district-based factories. * Components are stored within corp-owned, district-based facilities. * Components are used as payment to personnel for services rendered. * Components can be raided from district-based facilities and factories. When Raiders succeed in looting your Corp's factories or facilities, your paycheck will show it. You'll be as motivated to show up and defend as the Raider will be to Raid. Isk is old news. What we all want is components. What we'll all get is increased PC activity. Or so I hope :-) We have been mulling this over, the component=CP idea seemed simple and smart at the time, but alt-farming ruined it(Thanks Jadek!). We also foresaw the p2w coccerns so were thinking of a cap of donations anyway. The donations were more, "oh no, we are out of missions, we are running out of CP so everyone donate a few so we can hold the district" scenario. The updated idea is that CP is only earned, basically by doing daily missions. Components can be earned and donated, maybe at a cap but components would only upgrade the Corporation/Fleet Command Center (versus MCC). We haven't completed figured out altfarming in that context. Vitantur's idea of Districts creating components is a sound one as well. Please take the tinfoil hats off, this is getting quite exhausting. Constructive feedback in dev feedback threads is a requirement. This sounds good. Thank you for listening to the feedback about the Warbarge component -> Command point chain! Playing the game to get CP makes way more sense. I think helping upgrade the corporate command center with donated components is fair. The devil will be in the details of what all you can do with the Corporation/Fleet Command Center upgrades. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news

Kain Spero Negative-Feedback. 4600	Posted - 2015.02.14 15:37:00 - [41] - Quote GrimzOvaHourz wrote: when dis coming out https://trello.com/b/R44szWCe/dust-514-development-roadmap Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback. 4622	Posted - 2015.03.02 08:42:00 - [42] - Quote It still makes me sad to look at the road map and realize that raids are at least 4 months away if not more. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback. 4757	Posted - 2015.03.16 11:51:00 - [43] - Quote https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2680855#post2680855 Something that seems to be relatively untouched by these changes is clone logistics. Currently the attrition rates are far to forgiving and the differentiation between Surface Infrastructures leaves the Cargo Hub as the best choice for both attack and defense. I've written up a proposal with some suggestion SI changes and attrition changes with the following goals in mind: 1. Make location more significant 2. Make fights occur more often 3. Make being under attack a bad thing 4. Give clear advantages and disadvantages to each SI https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1n0svKNAiqWr0rhSgOEQ6JpMVjZYAi_bOuXaDF7hzhgI/edit?usp=sharing Ideally I would like to move away from clone attrition and just use an escalating command point cost for longer range attacks. If this were done the 50% mark of clone attrition would become the new maximum jump range for a surface infrastructure. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback. 4887	Posted - 2015.03.24 23:30:00 - [44] - Quote Balistyc Farshot wrote: The core problem with districts gaining value is that people will hoard and stack them (This happened last time). It is going to happen! I was discussing with some of my fellow PC players and I would like to see the corps that cross a certain threshold of Districts to have their timers removed or significantly reduced. Also take off locking the districts. If you are at the top of the list with 50 districts, you can be attacked with a 1 hour notice (Could be a prototype to raiding). The Active player missions requirement will make a good move in this direction to stop ringer corps, but we are all aware that if value is associated to districts, some corps will hoard the districts and find a way to gather more resources than the others. This makes holding more districts dangerous and it becomes a double edged sword. Newer corps without districts could then stack timers and multi attack the monster corps who hold the most districts. Let me know your ideas. Creating arbitrary numbers on a district limit just creates a reason for arbitrary alternate corporations. It's a balancing act. You want people to desire more land to create conflict but there needs to be a reasonable escalation in the "cost" of holding that land and/or extracting that wealth. The command point generation will be key. In order to extract that wealth from districts will require a growing number of command points per day, so, as a result, more active players. I would also have CCP consider having all PC fights happen at the top of the hour rather than randomizing them throughout the hour (an attack on a district set to 2000 will happen at 2000 rather than the random 2000 to 2050 currently in increments of 10 minutes). This would make everyone's scheduling lives easier and also make timer stacking someone who tries to overstock districts easier as well. Also, it seems that Planet Raiding has been taken off the backlog and put on 1.2 (huray! ), so that will hopefully expose corps to fights that can happen within 24 hours. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback. 4944	Posted - 2015.04.03 12:40:00 - [45] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Kain Spero wrote: Also, it seems that Planet Raiding has been taken off the backlog and put on 1.2 (huray! ), so that will hopefully expose corps to fights that can happen within 24 hours. Within 24 hours? I was hoping Raids would be more like surprise attacks carried out on-the-fly. Have a bunch corpmates online? Check the starmap, find an open raid window, raid. Having to schedule Raids in advance will make them less appealing to those of us who aren't willing or able to commit to a schedule. Many Dusters are casuals, and giving those casuals a shot a catching the bigboy corps with their pants down would be a great way to keep PC lean, moving and interesting. On-the-fly Raids would also provide an outlet for competitive play. Why stomp pubs for pennies with 5 friends when I can earn real money in more competitive matches with 15? "Within" probably should read better as "under". Right now you have to wait a minimum of 24 hours to get a fight in PC for a district attack. I agree these should be very short notice fights. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback. 4958	Posted - 2015.04.06 21:33:00 - [46] - Quote Components being donated to generate command points was actually taken off the table as far as I know because of the ability to buy components with AUR. If it hasn't been then it should be. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback. 4989	Posted - 2015.04.12 02:37:00 - [47] - Quote tritan abbattere wrote: In there was a thing called Orbital construction for MCC. Would be cool if eve players could attack this so eve can help out the ground troops. IDK if this could be a cool way to make eve - dust coop thing going again. At this time I don't think we are going to be able to get any kind of Eve dev support. In order to make planetary conquest meaningful it seems we are going to have to do it ourselves on the Dust side. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news

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.