|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Zaria Min Deir
0uter.Heaven
1077
   |
Posted - 2015.01.23 15:53:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:
Updated Concept: Maps
We want to move from always fighting on Cargo Hubs, so while PC2.0 is being implemented, maps should be more randomly generated and possibly all SI' bonuses set to zero.
This concerns me, as it came out of the left field completely. Please tell me, PLEASE tell me, that when you say you plan to randomly generate district maps, you mean THE SOCKETS, not the actual maps? And you mean randomly generate the sockets ONCE, not between each battle?
The district map (not the sockets) being the actual physical layout, the geography, the placement of the different sockets. There are 3 in PC, currently. And I believe the reason those 3 were probably the only ones put in PC to start with still stands. They are quite possibly the only maps in the pub rotation that are actually any good for this sort of competitive play with such small teams, they have enough variation combined with balance to be viable.
Also, the main issue. The reason why so many districts are set to Cargo Hubs, is because you didn't make the other types desirable enough in comparison.
So, maybe instead of doing away with the relevance of the SI to the actual district, you actually rebalance the different district types and make is not desirable to only hold cargo hubs? There, problem solved, no more having to mostly fight on that one large socket. Though, replacing the gallente research facility in the rotation would probably do almost as much to add variety.
Another thing... you make mention of SIs, as in changing them costs points, but you are also saying you plan to make them meaningless by removing their bonuses and even removing the relationship between the SI and the large outpost on the district.
Then, what is the point of the different SIs? Just do away with them entirely, if they are no different from each other?
Have you considered installing the improved keyboard?
"Go Go Power Rangers!"
|
Zaria Min Deir
0uter.Heaven
1078
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 16:07:00 -
[2] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:All these "We'll bleed the landholders dry!" suggestions are concerning me slightly.
Here we have mechanics to allow corps to attack districts with no actual cost to themselves other than the investment of CP and manpower. Given that you can just spam BPOs at something, it likely isn't that much.
We also have a large number of suggestions to prevent large corps from holding much land.
I get that lots of people are concerned we'll have another DNS. But under this current proposal... Why would you hold land in the first place?
We have all these details on how everyone can attack a district, but none on why you would want a district.
In-*******-deed.
There is currently no incentive to hold districts, other than either vanity, or wanting to actually fight other teams. That is, being able to launch attacks with the clones you make.
But with this proposal, a corp that doesn't need districts to generate those attacks. So if you can attack all you want without owning districts, and there is particular benefit to holding a district, in fact attackers will have all the advantages to "bleed you dry" if you do defend... why would anyone want to hold districts? O.o
Well, maybe the option to sell clones again will provide that incentive, if it done right. Maybe.
Have you considered installing the improved keyboard?
"Go Go Power Rangers!"
|
Zaria Min Deir
0uter.Heaven
1081
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 16:15:00 -
[3] - Quote
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 ;)
Have you considered installing the improved keyboard?
"Go Go Power Rangers!"
|
Zaria Min Deir
0uter.Heaven
1082
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 17:47:00 -
[4] - Quote
Roman837 wrote:Zaria Min Deir wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:
Updated Concept: Maps
We want to move from always fighting on Cargo Hubs, so while PC2.0 is being implemented, maps should be more randomly generated and possibly all SI' bonuses set to zero.
This concerns me, as it came out of the left field completely. Please tell me, PLEASE tell me, that when you say you plan to randomly generate district maps, you mean THE SOCKETS, not the actual maps? And you mean randomly generate the sockets ONCE, not between each battle? The district map (not the sockets) being the actual physical layout, the geography, the placement of the different sockets. There are 3 in PC, currently. And I believe the reason those 3 were probably the only ones put in PC to start with still stands. They are quite possibly the only maps in the pub rotation that are actually any good for this sort of competitive play with such small teams, they have enough variation combined with balance to be viable. Also, the main issue. The reason why so many districts are set to Cargo Hubs, is because you didn't make the other types desirable enough in comparison.So, maybe instead of doing away with the relevance of the SI to the actual district, you actually rebalance the different district types and make is not desirable to only hold cargo hubs? There, problem solved, no more having to mostly fight on that one large socket. Though, replacing the gallente research facility in the rotation would probably do almost as much to add variety. Another thing... you make mention of SIs, as in changing them costs points, but you are also saying you plan to make them meaningless by removing their bonuses and even removing the relationship between the SI and the large outpost on the district. Then, what is the point of the different SIs? Just do away with them entirely, if they are no different from each other? CCP. This proposal looks much better to swallow then the original. Thank you for taking the time to listen and make the change. The only issue I see is what Zaria mentioned. We need to know what the battle field is that we are going to be fighting on. If it generates randomly and we do not know till we deploy..This will be disastrous to the Field Commanders. We pick our players based on map lay out. We do reconnaissance missions sometimes just to find out what the lay out will be. I understand you want us fighting on more then Cargo hubs. My Kdr and pride has been left in the floor many of times in what we call meat grinder fights. my solution to this woukd be simple and meet both our needs. Don't tell us what the map is....until we attack it. Then...In contract details... Tell us what map it is! In detail. Is it 3 in 2 out cargo hub. Is it a bridge map production facility. That way we know and have 24 hours to plan. It can be totally random before attacking...and once you attack you now know what you will be fighting on. win win
Not win-win, but slightly less lose-lose.
There will be no value to gathering intel, there will be no way to plan ahead, there will be no way to choose to play to your team's strengths.
Also, it eliminates the potential of the defender having the advantage of knowing their land, if the attacker is going in blind attacking for the first time.
No, I don't think just the act of attacking should give you the map intel automatically, but there needs to be a way to know the map (if you put in the effort) before loading in to the battle. Otherwise, we are in yet another way making PC fights not very different from pubs. If someone wants to fight on a random, unknown map, they can go deploy into a pub or fw anytime they please. Some of us appreciate and enjoy the planning and tactics involved in thinking ahead, and would appreciate the continued ability to do so.
Have you considered installing the improved keyboard?
"Go Go Power Rangers!"
|
Zaria Min Deir
0uter.Heaven
1083
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 17:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote: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.
And, once again, I would like a response from Rattati about what he means by randomisation. Are we talking the current maps in PC, with maybe some sockets added? Are we talking all the maps in pub rotation? Something in between?
Have you considered installing the improved keyboard?
"Go Go Power Rangers!"
|
Zaria Min Deir
0uter.Heaven
1084
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 18:23:00 -
[6] - Quote
Pokey Dravon wrote:Zaria Min Deir wrote:Kain Spero wrote: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. And, once again, I would like a response from Rattati about what he means by randomisation. Are we talking the current maps in PC, with maybe some sockets added? Are we talking all the maps in pub rotation? Something in between? How I'm reading it is that all existing SI will be randomized and bonuses removed. Chances are players will be able to change it to what they want but it will offer no benefit other than selecting what socket you want to fight on. However SI will persist between battles and only change if the owner changes it. Further down the line we may see the reintroduction of SI bonuses but for right now they'll likely be removed.
If that is how I was reading it too, I'd basically go "huh, seems meaningless, but little harm done"...
Random just doesn't, to me, mean tied to the SI. As in, if the large socket is determined by the SI, as it is now, how is that random?
If what he means is "we will scramble up the current district SIs" without actually touching the maps... he chose a really weird way of saying it.
Have you considered installing the improved keyboard?
"Go Go Power Rangers!"
|
Zaria Min Deir
0uter.Heaven
1085
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 18:47:00 -
[7] - Quote
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".
Have you considered installing the improved keyboard?
"Go Go Power Rangers!"
|
Zaria Min Deir
0uter.Heaven
1087
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 19:11:00 -
[8] - Quote
Hawkin P wrote:
EDIT: I still don't like the payout structure! This gives no bonus to winning! THERE NEEDS TO BE A REWARD FOR WINNING. Basically I can just no show a battle and the other team gets nothing, and has to sit their for 3 battles (over and hour) to take the district which now maybe holds some value possibly because your explanation of it is so complex, it is not clear. The value of holding a district is based on the corp point cost and how easy it is to earn corp points. Corp Points will be a new currency in the game and if you make them as rare as your pointless box keys and then start to sell them. It will ruin the game
Also, this.
Have you considered installing the improved keyboard?
"Go Go Power Rangers!"
|
Zaria Min Deir
0uter.Heaven
1087
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 20:06:00 -
[9] - Quote
Ares 514 wrote:Kain Spero 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 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. I agree that raids should cost CP to defend so you can bleed them dry; however, if they don't show then the defender should loose some CP too (less then going to defend but a small amount).
I disagree. If raiders can initiate a raid whenever they want, as of then 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.
Have you considered installing the improved keyboard?
"Go Go Power Rangers!"
|
Zaria Min Deir
0uter.Heaven
1089
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 21:05:00 -
[10] - Quote
Zatara Rought wrote:I have already brought up to Rattati that randomizing the maps in rotation will be a very tough pill to swallow and not an affable outcome or even short term solution. Unless there's some reason why we can't, I think the majority will support all current SI's being randomized (so that there's a lot less cargo hubs) as opposed to every SI simply being random maps and having no reliability in choosing what map configuration you wish to play on.
In the long term I've expressed hope that eventually corps will be able to choose specific map configurations on their owned districts.
Thank you.
Have you considered installing the improved keyboard?
"Go Go Power Rangers!"
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|