|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2272
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 08:54:00 -
[1] - Quote
Pleased this is out now. I think we're on the cusp of sorting out PC with this proposal and dare I say it, making it interesting again.
As Rattati has said, this thread is going to be watched and 'cared' for very closely, so please keep the ego out of it.
One thing I'd ask for all you devious types out there. The CPM have spent the last few days trying to figure out any potential exploits that might exist in this proposal and we haven't yet. We thought we'd got close but then Rattati pointed out the checks and balance within the proposal to counter it.
So if you think you've spotted a crack please explain it here in this thread so it can be tracked and looked at. We all want this working correctly from day one and not having to be fixed later.
There is also iteration planned for to expand further on the concepts shown here.
I'm particularly pleased about the raids notion and the chance of smaller squads to take part in such an activity.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2272
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 09:08:00 -
[2] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Regarding timer changes - do those require CP to maintain, or is it a one-time move cost? Will large landholders be able to move all their districts to the dreaded 12:00 timer for a one time cost and hold them there without expenditure, or will require a CP cost to maintain land off the default timers?
What kind of warning will raided corps get before the attack?
No cost to maintaining them as I understand it but if they lose the district it gets reset to its default timer. They then have win it back and then grind the CP to change it to their preferred timer.
This stops corps using alt corps to 'fight' and keep a district locked.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2272
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 09:19:00 -
[3] - Quote
Placing timers on a difficult timer is still possible but there is now a direct cost to moving those timers using CP. The amount of CP that a corp can earn is also capped to a level that prevents the hoarding of CP to allow for multiple timer changes en mass.
The cap level is reasonable but still low. It means effectively that either only one districts timer can be moved several hours or multiple timers changed an hour at a time.
The more disricts you own, the greater the strain on your CP pool.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2272
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 09:26:00 -
[4] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote: A
// Can raids affect an enemy corp's Command Points? This would give further incentive to defend against them and would encourage entities to launch raids on their enemies for more than just ISK (which we have plenty of). B
// POTENTIAL EXPLOIT: If BPO's create BPC's in the salvage, this seems like a way for particularly patient players to generate ISK using throw-away alts for the cost of a single BPO through farming. C
// <3 times infinite for chart. D
// I think that there should be an included corp-only leaderboard that shows which of your corp members are participating the most in activities that net you CP and what not. CCP Rattati wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Am I correct in thinking that corporate missions are much like daily missions but across the corp? So for example, a corporate 'Berserkers' mission would require 400 kills across the corp or something similar. no, still individual missions Would much prefer corporate mission that everyone can deal their fair share into, honestly. This puts a lot of stress on having members who are constantly doing missions, whether or not they want to, whether or not they're there. We got lives, too, yo! See above proposal (D)
As to point D, if you look at the diagram in the lower left, there is now a trackable metric for a CEO to measure a players value to the corp (finally)
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2272
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 09:31:00 -
[5] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Kevall Longstride wrote:Placing timers on a difficult timer is still possible but there is now a direct cost to moving those timers using CP. The amount of CP that a corp can earn is also capped to a level that prevents the hoarding of CP to allow for multiple timer changes en mass.
The cap level is reasonable but still low. It means effectively that either only one districts timer can be moved several hours or multiple timers changed an hour at a time.
The more disricts you own, the greater the strain on your CP pool. Wait, CP is capped on the same level regardless of the size of corp? So large corps are encouraged to split into smaller corps that form an alliance...?
There's a War Council Stratagem that will reduce CP cost.
There is a cap but it's not set in stone yet and could be altered by other factors. Remember of course that the more members you have, the faster your CP pool is filled. This is to encourage corps to recruit and train new members using the new advertisement feature in the road map.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2272
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 09:40:00 -
[6] - Quote
137H4RGIC wrote:Pagl1u M wrote:Larger corps will still have enough CP (do we really have to use this two letters???) to change their timers, lock districts and sell clones to farm passively.
If you make it so it is very hard to earn CPs then smaller Corps wouldnt be able to do almost anything.
May I suggest a limit to the number of CPs a corp can earn in a day? Good eye on that one. Very good eye. I do see non participants stocking up cp to wait until a big slugger had gone through war and is low on cp to unleash hell on them.
There is a CP cost to everything that PC corp may want to do, buying/selling clones, timer changes etc. We haven't told you the costs of such activities yet, just the concept of how it will work. This figures are still being worked on but I'd hope you get the general idea.
For instance, when the advertisement/recruitment feature on the road map arrives, there might be a higher CP cost to keep that advert at the top of the recruitment page. (speculation on my part there)
The point being that CP is going to be the commodity (fuel) for corps to do corp activities. There's too muck ISK flowing around at the moment due to mistakes of PC1.0.
Using CP means that a corp is going to have to earn a position of power and influence, not just buy it.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2272
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 09:42:00 -
[7] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:Kevall Longstride wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Kevall Longstride wrote:Placing timers on a difficult timer is still possible but there is now a direct cost to moving those timers using CP. The amount of CP that a corp can earn is also capped to a level that prevents the hoarding of CP to allow for multiple timer changes en mass.
The cap level is reasonable but still low. It means effectively that either only one districts timer can be moved several hours or multiple timers changed an hour at a time.
The more disricts you own, the greater the strain on your CP pool. Wait, CP is capped on the same level regardless of the size of corp? So large corps are encouraged to split into smaller corps that form an alliance...? There's a War Council Stratagem that will reduce CP cost. There is a cap but it's not set in stone yet and could be altered by other factors. Remember of course that the more members you have, the faster your CP pool is filled. This is to encourage corps to recruit and train new members using the new advertisement feature in the road map. What is the likeliness of getting more Strats (Stratagems) in the future in the form of new content? New stuff for us to use? This handful of stuff is a good starting point but I surely hope it isn't all we're getting!
I'd say that more stratagems to come is a reasonable request and one likely to happen at some point. Remember, the Warbarge concept and the PC one is modular, allowing for easier iteration.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2274
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 10:05:00 -
[8] - Quote
Not seen UI yet. Don't get me wrong as self proclaimed UI cheerleader on the CPM I'm all for better UI but right now I want you guys help Rattati nail this at its most fundamental level.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2275
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 10:10:00 -
[9] - Quote
As I understand it Kane, a district is reset to its default timer on loss and abandonment.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2280
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 10:29:00 -
[10] - Quote
One thing I wanted to bring up is the default district timers being based on PCU.
It's not just the total PCU but also based on regional PCU. The upshot of this will be, to use the EU as an example, that there are always going to be a number of districts with favourable default timer for each region. These are going to be the most hotly contested in that region as the timer is more suited to that regions peak playing times, saving them the CP cost to change it.
That's not to say a US corp can't make a move on it but they'd better be be prepared to defend while they change the timer to a US TZ. And hope they don't lose it while doing so.
The practical upshot of this is that there is now more value in actually fighting for districts. The days of a 32 man corp owning 75% of Molden Heath using locking exploits and alt corps is over. You want to own that much of MH in the future? Get recruiting, grow the active PC player base and actually fight for it.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2283
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 10:53:00 -
[11] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote: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?
As it is right now (and subject to change of course) there are timezones without districts. These are +/- 2 hrs to DT. It would be fair to assume that timers can't be changed to within that time frame but Rattati is going to have to be the one to give a difinite answer on that.
As to the spread, if I'm reading the chart I have correctly, a planets default district timers are spread over a certain TZ allowing a corp to reasonably hold a planet. As to systems I'm not sure but I'd expect planets in the same system to be in adjacent TZ's to allow for overlap.
Once again, I'll say that this all subject to change.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2283
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 10:55:00 -
[12] - Quote
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.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2286
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 11:00:00 -
[13] - Quote
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.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2286
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 11:03:00 -
[14] - Quote
Shutter Fly wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:
New Concept: Raids We want to make it possible to add District Raiding, in the form of short warning challenges. Raids will not cause Districts to be lost, but the margin of win will dictate how much ISK the Raiders get away with. You should put up a fight to defend your district against Raids, but it will not buckle you to let one Raid slide. Perfect to train New Players, both on Attacking and Defending. These might be in 8v8, 12v12 or 16v16 varieties.
Good news blueberries, looks like something may be seriously cutting into my usual pubstomping. Sounds like old-school CBs, only better ( Yarrr) Also, I'm still a bit confused about the form the Corporate Missions are going to take. Can only one person complete each mission? Any chance we could get an example of something that could be a corporate mission?
Another reason the CPM liked this proposal. We want to give the vets something to do that's meaningful and keep them from stomping. PC 1.0 isn't achieving that goal because it's worth more to not fight. PC 2.0 give those vets something to do now.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2286
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 11:08:00 -
[15] - Quote
501st Headstrong wrote: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.
We want feedback mainly. Anymore numbers flung around and I'm concerned Rattati's head may burst.
As to concerns to corps padding out member numbers to earn more CP with alts. Only active players will earn the CP for a corp, dormant players will not.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2288
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 11:22:00 -
[16] - Quote
501st Headstrong 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. 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...
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.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2291
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 11:29:00 -
[17] - Quote
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.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2292
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 12:18:00 -
[18] - 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.
'Elites' are elites because until now they've been able to pick the fights they want, when they want and against who they want.
Let's see see how elite they are are two week of continuous fighting over an opponent that can rosta a fresh group of 16 everyday.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
2292
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 12:26:00 -
[19] - Quote
Pagl1u M wrote: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 Say for example that I have 25 great players, that make my A-Team, and 100 newbs or average players that I invited just to be able to earn more CPs. Now with 25 players I cant cover evry tz so I might be attacked when I only have 6 players. Do you really think I d use My newbs? I d call ringers to help me... I hope it is clear that I m not talking about me, or my corp. I m talking about what could be done. Putting a limit based on number of players only push us to recruit everyone we can, not to train them or to get them involved but just to farm.
Ahhhh yes..... ringers.
Who in turn will be contributing CP to their corp which will soon have enough to spend CP on attacking a district , clone packs, and what have you.....
How long do you think it'll be before they get bored of fighting your battles now that MH is on the verge of a free for all, no holds barred war? They'll have a whole variety of corps to fight for, hope you'll have enough to pay for them. Oh wait, no passive ISK generation anymore.
CPM 1 member
CEO of DUST University
Vist dustcpm.com
|
|
|
|