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 [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 11 post(s)
Zatara Rought Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 5032	Posted - 2015.01.23 20:45:00 - [151] - Quote 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. Founder & CEO of Fatal Absolution Skype: Zatara.Rought Email: Zatara.Forever@gmail official pawn of ArkenaKirkMerc
Zaria Min Deir 0uter.Heaven 1089	Posted - 2015.01.23 21:05:00 - [152] - 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!"
Ares 514 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1042	Posted - 2015.01.23 21:26:00 - [153] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: Ares 514 wrote: Kain Spero wrote: 501st Headstrong wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: 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 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. Whatever it is, there needs to be a cost for corps not defending against raids. After i posted this i saw some good ideas by others. Overlord of Broman
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4508	Posted - 2015.01.23 21:36:00 - [154] - Quote Ares 514 wrote: Whatever it is, there needs to be a cost for corps not defending against raids. After i posted this i saw some good ideas by others. Agreed. If there is no penalty for failing to defend against a raid, it would be best to just not show up and throw your ISK away. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Dust User KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1543	Posted - 2015.01.23 21:57:00 - [155] - 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. This just brought my blood pressure down a few points.
501st Headstrong 0uter.Heaven 812	Posted - 2015.01.23 21:59:00 - [156] - Quote Ok so I'm just going to try and compile with some ideas and workarounds Command Points: Earnable by every corporation member via near Corporation Missions. Must be used to in corp functions Upgrades to them: Reduces CP usage Generates CP Faster Etc (Check 1st Page) Such as: Attacking a District (Raid/Conquest) Finding out the Map of a district (Costs a lot of CP, but highly beneficial) Changing timers of a District (Increases the more hours you change it from) Harvesting District Resources Buying Bulk Items in case a corp does not want a tax Defending against Raids Corp Advertisement (Future) At the start of PC 2.0, all current sockets will be me randomized so no one knows what district has what Districts might be taken from all corps and each corp given 1 with full clones that they pick (Possible, not confirmed) **Raiding*** Requires X amount of CP to initiate. Should be greater CP with the more mercs you bring. 16 raiders should be quite a lot of CP Winning awards the Attackers what the defenders lost along with a keep what you kill. A total pot of Isk for all the items lost is also generated, along with (As proposed) a higher rate of salvaging Officer Weapons. Showing up for a Defense causes only a loss in items, but it should require little CP to defend. No-showing requires a massive CP loss, and slight loss of clones (The type of Raids should each cost a certain amount of CP, with Bleeding Clones and higher payouts costing more CP.) Corporations with no districts should be able to be raided however for substantial LP, with a No-show stealing a large amount of the corps CP (Not enough for a recoup however. Used more if you have a grudge against a corp that stays out of PC. Similar to going to a Pirate hangout to beat the snot out of them ) Why should Corps Hold Districts if all they will do is get harassed?? Districts all have some bonuses (Other thread and Radar supply this) Cargo Hubs. 600 clones, 50 clone Regen. Great for launching attacks, almost useless without Production Facilities to back them up... PFs- 200 Clone max with 150 clone regen. The Resuppliers. Capable of being Overwhelmed, they should only regen 75 clones however if attacked. Meaning they can be sniped if sending a massive clone shipment SRLs( If keeping, these manufacture Hacked Decryptor Keys in slow quantities I believe it was stated. Or they could manufacture keys that then are doled out to Player Warbarges which make them into Special Hacked Decryptor Keys, which open our damn boxes Caldari PFs (No Clone Attrition. Direct battle bonuses to the defender. Slight however, nothing insane. ) "There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD Moody come back SWBF3!!
Velvet Overkill SI6MA 129	Posted - 2015.01.23 22:05:00 - [157] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: New Concept: Member Donations Corporation Members can also "fuel the war" by donating their own Components, generating Command Points. Will players be able to donate their own Components to Corporations they don't belong to or other players?
Travis Stanush Y.A.M.A.H 320	Posted - 2015.01.23 22:19:00 - [158] - Quote 501st Headstrong wrote: **Raiding*** Corporations with no districts should be able to be raided however for substantial LP, with a No-show stealing a large amount of the corps CP (Not enough for a recoup however. Used more if you have a grudge against a corp that stays out of PC. Similar to going to a Pirate hangout to beat the snot out of them ) How would this work? Where would the battle take place?(random skirmish map?) Where to park the Warbarge?(assuming that is their base of operations) No I will not show you where they touched me!!!
501st Headstrong 0uter.Heaven 812	Posted - 2015.01.23 22:22:00 - [159] - Quote Travis Stanush wrote: 501st Headstrong wrote: **Raiding*** Corporations with no districts should be able to be raided however for substantial LP, with a No-show stealing a large amount of the corps CP (Not enough for a recoup however. Used more if you have a grudge against a corp that stays out of PC. Similar to going to a Pirate hangout to beat the snot out of them ) How would this work? Where would the battle take place?(random skirmish map?) Where to park the Warbarge?(assuming that is their base of operations) By LP, I meant CP. Battle takes place at random. However every Corporation has a base. It says so in your Corporate Information. Warbarge would be parked there. "There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD Moody come back SWBF3!!
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4509	Posted - 2015.01.23 22:37:00 - [160] - Quote 501st Headstrong wrote: **Raiding* Corporations with no districts should be able to be raided however for substantial LP, with a No-show stealing a large amount of the corps CP (Not enough for a recoup however. Used more if you have a grudge against a corp that stays out of PC. Similar to going to a Pirate hangout to beat the snot out of them ) Why would you punish a corp that chooses not to do PC? "That little st Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

Dust User KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1545	Posted - 2015.01.23 22:39:00 - [161] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 501st Headstrong wrote: **Raiding*** Corporations with no districts should be able to be raided however for substantial LP, with a No-show stealing a large amount of the corps CP (Not enough for a recoup however. Used more if you have a grudge against a corp that stays out of PC. Similar to going to a Pirate hangout to beat the snot out of them ) Why would you punish a corp that chooses not to do PC? Because they used to do PC, ran their mouth, got removed for the lols and is now banished to pubs for eternity. Yes, this happens.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4509	Posted - 2015.01.23 22:53:00 - [162] - Quote And what about groups that are in and get pushed out and decide its not for them. You want to give people the ability to harass them anyways? "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
steadyhand amarr shadows of 514 3503	Posted - 2015.01.23 23:02:00 - [163] - Quote to be clear, owning land should always generate more profit than just a simple raid, raiding should only be the 1st step for smaller corps to start building an ISK and asset bank so they can eventually take on big boys. its simply a method of smaller corps to take part. that said if you cant defend all the land from constant raid attacks you should be pulling back to hold what you can safely defend. a very simple only 1 raid per district every 24/48 hours will stop "raid spaming" but still allow to have a night of raiding...you would just have to spread it out. also Raids should never cripple they should be annoyance that if not delt with leads to been deadly. for example to effectively "bleed" a corp it needs to be near under constant attack from an alliance sized group. and just to be triple clear. OWNING LAND IS ALWAYS BETTER THAN A RAID! Raid is just for people like my 8 to 16 buddies or just want to ** off the bigger corps and make a bit of isk without the headacke that comes with owning a huge corp...just frankly im way to busy for that kind of thing edit: this video is what we should be aiming for i meet friends in pub....we move to FW where we find a few other friends.... then we start doing PC raids...after while we notice we winning a lot we gather more friends...corp is 30-40 big we made a grab for land.... will ally with a few other corps and form an allinace....we *** how some random scrubs we saw in FW are starting to raid our land.... You can never have to many chaples -Templar True adamance
Radar R4D-47 0uter.Heaven 855	Posted - 2015.01.24 00:03:00 - [164] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: 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. No its the opposite Kain if a corp has overextended themselves they won't have CP because it can't actively be gained quickly. Thus having too many districts is a burden on a corp instead of a boon. Holding more land in my proposal gives incentive to those that maintain a larger active player base and penalizies small elite forces like 0.H from attempting to take over too much. Example if 0.H is hitting this cap however it is implemented either daily weekly monthly or just filling until full (being able to be met multiple times in even the same day) with 4 districts we would want to expand to a point where our corp meets the cap and have a decent buffer but if we expand to much that becomes inefficient. Over expansion could leave us vulnerable to attack since we wouldn't be able to make enough CP to do any PC required action. Since based on what I have read CP will be more valuable spent then stored I don't believe corps would attempt to stockpile CP unless they are expecting to need it for defenses or if they want to launch a lot of raids all at once. I personally see no true downfall to giving corps incentive to hold land as that is how wars will begin because corps are greedy and want to be famous/rich/powerful. Originally the incentive was isk but it got so broken that we are at our current situation. Since there will be a cap however and the need to actively maintain this currency there cannot be another isk situation. Unfourtantly if there isn't incentive to hold more then 2 districts then PC will not change and continue to be a LOL fest with no wars like early PC had. In closing this means a PRO style force could be just as effective as a TP/0.H style force. This would also encourage teams like 0.H to allow more players in corp wich hopefully would lead to a larger PC player base because as stated previously the percentage of PC to actual players is stupid low. Give corps a reason to want to take multiple districts and hopefully lead to a more fulfilling PC experience.
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 5953	Posted - 2015.01.24 03:00:00 - [165] - Quote 501st Headstrong wrote: **Raiding*** Corporations with no districts should be able to be raided however for substantial LP, with a No-show stealing a large amount of the corps CP (Not enough for a recoup however. Used more if you have a grudge against a corp that stays out of PC. 1. Where Rewards exist there is also exists Risk. Getting raided is a Risk of land ownership; this Risk is assumed when a corp opts to pursue the Rewards of owning land. Your model demands that a corp which has opted not to pursue Reward still assume the Risks of having done so. That's a wee 'bit silly and a way 'bit out-of-equilibrium. 2. Say all the big PC wheels decide that its more economical to farm than to fight, blue up, and agree to an armistice with whomever else might still be around. While they farm PC 2.0 for risk-free Isk (again), what types of things do you think they might find entertaining? Bullying lesser players, perhaps? Demanding lolTribute? Surely, such reputable corps as yours or Nyain San would never do such a thing. 3. A 'bit personal but pertinent nonetheless. My first corp (Pro Hic Immortalis) was removed from PC by Team Players in the months which following PC 1.0. A few of our guys apparently talked smack, so they straight up whooped us like 50 times in a row. Having had a successful run in PC up to that point, the repeated beatdowns were disheartening, but worse, we'd grown very found of playing together as a team, and the knowledge that we wouldn't be able to do it again -- at least for a very long time -- was a tough pill to swallow. If we had had at that time the ability the run raids together (or anything, for that matter) it would've made all the difference in the world for our morale. We would've come back better, no doubt, and perhaps Dust wouldn't have lost the dozens of beta veterans I once called corpmate. Let's say, on the other hand, TP had had the ability to take from us more than everything we had. I'll bet they would have, and I'll bet it wouldn't have been good for our already bad morale. I fail to see how that in any waywould've possibly been good for the game. TL;DR: I've seen better ideas. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
Zatara Rought Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 5039	Posted - 2015.01.24 03:29:00 - [166] - Quote Raiding corps who don't own land is a bad idea. Founder & CEO of Fatal Absolution Skype: Zatara.Rought Email: Zatara.Forever@gmail official pawn of ArkenaKirkMerc
501st Headstrong 0uter.Heaven 813	Posted - 2015.01.24 03:49:00 - [167] - Quote My reasoning for such was it takes such a high amount of CP that it cant be spammed, and it is for those grudge matches. It makesense in that ptiates tore their CP and Loot somewhere. That is it. You do not know where this is however, what map. If you own land and are getting smashed by raiders, why do they get to steal and hide? Why can they not be in the alightest way countered? Are the bonuses for.holding a district so great that corps will deal with endless raida from every corp who you stomped in a pub, and you cannot evwn retaliate? Regardless of blue donuting, that can happen anyway, causing a stale. If Im being pestered by bees, explain why I cant dedicate massive ( And I mean being ablet o do this takes large CP for relatively little reward if the corp you attack has no resources. They do not have to show either.) Resources. I dont know, maybe it's okay for yall, but it just doeant seem roght. This is risk vs reward. If you raid someone, your corp should be able to become a target. It then becomes a game. Can you raid and fight that corp so much that they cant muster the CP to deatroy and cripple your war effort. Ljke you said Pokey, you reap what you sow. You should not be able to steal, hide, and then be safe. A corp with relatively little to do after a war should be able to save up CP, get a twam, and show those raiders who's boss. Sorry for typos, on phone. Please just answer how that makes sense to you "There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD Moody come back SWBF3!!
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4515	Posted - 2015.01.24 03:59:00 - [168] - Quote 501st Headstrong wrote: Ljke you said Pokey, you reap what you sow. You should not be able to steal, hide, and then be safe. A corp with relatively little to do after a war should be able to save up CP, get a twam, and show those raiders who's boss. Well i don't really remember saying that exactly, but anyways. I think more so what you're looking for is a Warbarge counter attack, which could perhaps be launched following a raid against your district. I think however that allowing people to bully non-PC corps simply for existing is a nice way to make people quit the game. Even if the CP cost is high, it's basically harassment against a corp that just wants to be left alone. So retaliation triggered by conflict? Sure. But it should be a one time deal for each act of aggression, not something you can do whenever you feel like it. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
501st Headstrong 0uter.Heaven 813	Posted - 2015.01.24 04:02:00 - [169] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: 501st Headstrong wrote: Ljke you said Pokey, you reap what you sow. You should not be able to steal, hide, and then be safe. A corp with relatively little to do after a war should be able to save up CP, get a twam, and show those raiders who's boss. Well i don't really remember saying that exactly, but anyways. I think more so what you're looking for is a Warbarge counter attack, which could perhaps be launched following a raid against your district. I think however that allowing people to bully non-PC corps simply for existing is a nice way to make people quit the game. Even if the CP cost is high, it's basically harassment from a corp that just wants to be left alone. So retaliation triggered by conflict? Sure. But it should be a one time deal for each act of aggression, not something you can do whenever you feel like it. That would be acceptable. Apologies if angeted or anmoyed anyone. "There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner Official 0uter.Heaven Mascot XD Moody come back SWBF3!!
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4515	Posted - 2015.01.24 04:03:00 - [170] - Quote No irritation here ^_^ You raise a good point, you just don't want it to turn in a system that allows excessive trolling. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 5959	Posted - 2015.01.24 05:16:00 - [171] - Quote No offense taken whatsoever, 501st. I've nothing but respect for you and Radar. o7 Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
Radar R4D-47 0uter.Heaven 856	Posted - 2015.01.24 06:25:00 - [172] - Quote Zatara Rought wrote: Raiding corps who don't own land is a bad idea. How is that a bad idea? Raiding should be accessible by the many and PC by the few or else we are stuck with the current situation of 1% of the playerbase actually performing an endgame mode. Remember that since CP is a factor players will actually have to be apart of a corporation to experience this version of endgame. Raiding will either be the best way to troll or the best way to play dust based on how CCP releases it. As long as CP is something that requires a moderate level of activity to gain any corp should be allowed to launch a raid on district owners. To allow all corps accessibility to endgame content without the fear of and highstakes that comes with being a land owning PC corp. Raiding to me is a casual competitive way to play dust and PC is the hardcore way to play dust. However since raiding is still competitive it allows a corporation to test their mettle against a PC active corp to not only train their troops but to gauge the talent of their corporation and attempt to breakout on the PC scene instead of raiding. CCP just needs to make sure holding land gives a large incentive to players or else we will be as stagnant in PC in the future as we are now.
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4379	Posted - 2015.01.24 07:19:00 - [173] - 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
Travis Stanush Y.A.M.A.H 320	Posted - 2015.01.24 07:32:00 - [174] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: 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. I believe a 24 hr rest timer would be sufficient. IMO after a successful raid there really isn't anything worthwhile to steal right? What if you could only raid during a 3 hr window during the day? 1 hr before and after the 1 hr window used to take districts? That way raiding will not be risk free (no shows) because active corps will be able to have people on during that time. Edit: Also maybe add a mechanic that allows a corp that successfully defends it land with the ability to keep it unlocked? maybe justify this by boosting productivity until it so it reaches max after the raid period instead of after the 24 hr period? No I will not show you where they touched me!!!
Radar R4D-47 0uter.Heaven 858	Posted - 2015.01.24 09:15:00 - [175] - Quote Raiding in my opinion should not affect PC except in the case of a no show in which some kind of penalty should be inflicted on the district holder. If you read my post about raiding should those mechanics be used it gives the masses availability to raid a long as they have CP to spend. With attackers having a greater reward then defenders to encourage people to raid and district holders would want to defend to prevent the penalty from affecting them. I would like feedback on what a penalty should be for a no show as that would be the best information Rattati could glean from this thread. Next to a general idea of how the community wants raiding to be.
bigolenuts Ancient Exiles. 1421	Posted - 2015.01.24 10:13:00 - [176] - Quote 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. I use to play this game, but my dog got sick- Zatara the Pizza Boy
Shutter Fly Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 500	Posted - 2015.01.24 11:25:00 - [177] - Quote I'm not particularly sure about the idea of raiding non-PC corps, but it doesn't make sense that they would be able to initiate raids without the possibility of retaliation. Actually, I think the idea behind the reward/loss system of raids is a bit unclear, which is making the problem even harder to pin down. My understanding of how raids could work (in terms of costs, rewards, and losses): Raids have an initial CP cost to the side that initiates, and no CP cost for the defending corp. A no-show results in a significant loss of CP (more than a raid attack, and no clone loss) The clones used in the battle have to come from somewhere, the CP cost to the attacker covers their clones, while the defenders use clones stored on the district (I imagine raids having clone counts of ~50-80). A loss by the defender results in a (smaller than no-show) loss of CP, and the clones used in the defense. A loss would require balancing clone expenditure with CP loss (losses in raids would not hinder generation, thus having a very minor impact on numbers) A win by the defender results in no CP loss, and the acquisition of any of the attacker's leftover clones The winner (attacking or defending) gets a payout based on total losses, including both gear and biomass (this may be in additional forms beyond ISK) Corps without districts can be raided, but the attack will have a significantly higher CP cost, will take clones from the defenders corporate warbarge storage, and cannot be launched on a corp with insufficient clone reserves. Once again, I'm still on the fence about raiding corps that don't own land, but I threw it in to show how I think it could be done.
Lazer Fo Cused Shining Flame Amarr Empire 619	Posted - 2015.01.24 11:30:00 - [178] - Quote 1. Lets raid a corp which has no land so we fight in space? Really people? they need to have land
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4381	Posted - 2015.01.24 11:39:00 - [179] - 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
Shutter Fly Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 500	Posted - 2015.01.24 11:55:00 - [180] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: 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. 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.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.

Moody come back

Moody come back

Moody come back

Moody come back