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.

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.

Raiding corps who don't own land is a bad idea.

We have been screaming for some type of game mode in which you can have a competitive setting without the high stakes of PC and if done right this may be that mode.

Raid Mechanics
The attacker should not need a district to launch an attack from i suppose this is self explanatory but it needs said. Removing that gap gives everyone the opportunity to perform this action. CP cost should be proportional to actually sending an attack to take a district, for corps that own land, and be substantially less for corps that do not. This gives an endgame for corps that do not wish to participate in PC but rather be a pirate type corporation. This makes it more difficult for a corp in PC to try to manage raiding with the other CP actions. As much as i want this to be a big battle a raid, as opposed to a battle, is a small scale event and should be handled as such. 6v6 or 8v8 in a domination type match would be ideal for a raid.
Battles should also have no clone limit and play until the MCC is destroyed to allow sides to use as many resources as possible/wanted to achieve victory. A vehicle cap should also be in place of 1 major vehicle HAV/ADS and 1 minor Vehicle LAV/DS. This makes the match much more tactical and prevents a corporation from deploying 6 tanks to hold the one point.
A 1 minute warning should be all a corporation receives and this 1 minutes can be within 1 hour of your timer for example 0.H has a district timer set at 01:00 A raid can happen at 00:01-02:01 if the raid is placed at 00:00 or at 2:00. This is a perfect raid style timer. Making your opposition scramble to find people not currently deployed to defend against the raid. The War Barge should also only be 1 minute long. Many may disagree with this short of a warning but a raid should not give you advance warning because with greater then 2 minutes i can get the 6-8 of the best 0.H players into this battle as if we knew it was going to happen the whole time. Even with 2 minutes it will still be relatively easy to field a team to fight those battles.
I also believe multiple raids by different corporations on even the same district should be allowed. Doing so would cause those small elite corps like 0uter.Heaven the inability to field the players necessary to prevent all raids from being successful and keep us out of pubs where we destroy the hopes of many players. Since raids cost CP this makes corps that have districts less able to Send Attacks, Sell Clones, Move Clones, Change Timers and (if anyone read my previous thread) Change Map Layout.

Raid Benefits
Raids need to have great incentive for the competitive player base not currently in PC to use their CP to do raids. So in light of that statement i believe

A successful Raiding Corporation should receive PC style payouts (ISK and Salvage) AND massively increased chance for random officer gear drops. Should the match result in a no show by the defending corporation there needs to be a severe penalty either through isk or CP I currently don't know how to penalize and need help from the CPM's and CCP to make it worthwhile to at least provide a resistance or for the attackers to stay through a noshow. This further takes competitive players from public matches and gives the new players a chance to love the game.

A successful Raided Corporation will receive NO isk, Enemy Salvage and a Massively increased chance for random officer gear drops. The no isk part is essential as this makes the defending corporation want to be as efficient as possible. If say 0.H gets raided by P.E we will want to attempt to win the match with minimal casualties due to the isk inefficiency possibility. However if officer gear is more circulated we will finally see them used in PC due to the ability to have a reliable way to earn more.

also ccp, think , if you have a standard timer, for those who prime time is different like japans night time is. your forcing them to play american timers, if anything your looking at a possible lawsuit cause no where in your ula does it state that this is a primarily an american time game. the way you have it is fine, it calls for logistics just like on eve, eve people want to hit the russians they have to plan a week or two in advance, alarm clock that, make sure the approriate pilots will be available. this is no different on dust. your just listening to the dumbest qq in game so far to date.and if anything i will be on the foriegners side. because a set default timer forces other to grind while a select group does not have to do a damn thing. you call that balance? the game is balanced timer wise, just not as many foriegn players, and no one is to blame but your company and your advertising ability as well as sonys advertising of your game.do your self a favor save your time , effort and money, and just advertise to get a bigger player base in the regional timers that your lacking player count. like do i seriously have to tell you how to run a company correctly? so what if 65% if the players complain about timers,(all american timers) , to set a default is to single out, to single out people is possible and most likely a lawsuit, i know i would if you had it 12 hour different from when i played,

Im ok with that. Some corps might risk the chance that there will be a retaliation ,and they might not have enough people online to defend, but thats part of the dynamic. if you initiate a raid on just a "space leasing" raider corp, and they dont show, you get a bunch of their stuff and any corp that suffers a string of losses like that is either going to have to back out or declare bankruptcy.



The monopoly potential is if the most powerful corps decide that, hey, lets just sit on districts and collect their benefits, and just do raids as PC fights. And use our combined might to confiscate land from anyone who doesn't comply with the arbitrary raiding system. Its very possible. they might even get a system where they grab a bunch of districts, and then rent them out to small corps interested in raid fights, but then cancel the agreement if they raid at an inopportune time or raid a corp, like a "billboard" corp, that the regulars don't want to see raided.

The big corps in Molden Heath...will...put their own interests and bottom lines over those of the game. Thats fine, they are trying to build empires, but that doesn't mean that they should be given leverage over everything. The only leverage these powerful corps should hold is the promise of daily, repeated revenge raids.

You know what im saying? Id rather see raiders controlled through use of force, rather than see them controlled though just politics. I fear Molden Heath coming together to exile and ban a very successful raiding corp from raiding by barring their access to land. Thats what I want to prevent. I want raider corps access to be determined by their war effort. If they are always putting up a good fight, they will carve a spot people will have to respect, if they lose their fights, they will lose their ability to continue their war effort and will have to withdraw.


But yes, overall, we are in complete agreement that raiders should be vulnerable to being raided themselves, otherwise we have a unbalanced system. You should not go out raiding unless you are aware of the potential backlash from the people you just raided. Our difference of opinion mainly centers on the how this should be done.

You're idea limits hits per district, my idea limits hits based on indvidual daily success. To-mae-to,To-mah-toe

BTW- Every single one of those pillaging groups you describe was killed, dead never to to rob/****/pillage ever again ever, when caught or successfully opposed. Which I also proposed as a possible risk mitigatory element, that losing a raid would disable those raiders' raiding ability for a period.