DUST Search - Raiding Ideas and Feedback Compilation Thread

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Raiding Ideas and Feedback Compilation Thread

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 6015	Posted - 2015.01.25 09:56:00 - [1] - Quote District Count / Corp Member <--- easily fudged Daily Missions Completed <--- not-so-easily fudged Daily Clone Sales <--- not-so-easily fudged Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 6017	Posted - 2015.01.25 10:25:00 - [2] - Quote I'm thinking about the relationship between a given corp's Revenue and Headcount. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 6074	Posted - 2015.01.26 16:51:00 - [3] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: A good point has been made. Raid attacks large or small need to require an MCC/CLone pack. Essentially a raid needs require the same resource build up as a normal district attack. I actually thought that this would always be the case, but it seems other didn't think so. I'm among the latter group, and I disagree with you, Kain Spero. Apologies in advance for the wordiness to follow :-) Missed Oportunity There is a large percentage of players in the game who are not presently awash in Isk. Many of those players (and the corps who employ them) wish to try their hand in the big leagues. Many more would jump at the opportunity to earn a paycheck. I say we let them try. What better way than through Raids? And what better time than now? All the excitement and buzz that will be PC 2.0's "grand opening" is likely to attract a crowd. It'd be a missed opportunity to let that crowd walk by and not invite them in. Increased Participation If we want to get the crowd in and involved, we must mind our Barriers to Entry. If we set them high, the crowd will walk by PC 2.0's "grand opening" disinterested; if they can't afford the entry fee, why would they bother to care? If, on the other hand, we set them low (at least, for a part of PC) there's a good chance we'll get them, keep them in and see a permanent increase in PC participation. Lipstick on a Pig Raids should be less like High Risk / High Reward PC matches and more like playing the Penny Slots. Low Risk, Low Reward, Low Barriers to Entry. This formula adds fish to the pond and keeps them coming back for more. Increasing participation is not only good for the game, but is also sure-fire way to shakeup PC. If we fail to add fish to the pond, PC 2.0 will end up looking just like PC 1.0. All that work on a new playground, only to attract the same spoiled kids. Status quo maintained. Lipstick on a pig. Passive Income (Conquest) > Active Income (Raid) When a fledgling corp outlays X million Isk on a clone pack, it does so with the intent of turning of turning a profit. With this initial investment, it sets out to attack a district, occupy said district, and eventually recover its initial investment plus gains thanks to the passive income generated by said district. Passive income is inherently more valuable than active income; this is especially true in Dust, where a large and successful corp can readily multiply sources of passive income. Raids are different from Conquest. There is no passive income stream at the end of the Raid road. These are strictly Active Income activities and a 'bit like gambling. If a Raid fails, the Raiders lose a 'bit of money. If the Raid Succeeds, the Raiders make a 'bit money. The Conquest model pays more in the end -- and pays passively, which is huge -- so the requirement of large initial investment can be justified. Requiring a large initial investment from Raiders does not make sound economic sense. These are my initial thoughts. Thank you for reading. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 6074	Posted - 2015.01.26 18:19:00 - [4] - Quote Feasible Raid Models Low Risk, Low Reward Raids w/ High Barriers to Entry - New game; same players - Low odds of increase in short-term participation rates - Low odds of increase in long-term participation rates High Risk, High Reward Raids w/ High Barriers to Entry - New game; same players - Low odds of increase in short-term participation rates - Low odds of increase in long-term participation rates High Risk, High Reward Raids w/ Low Barriers to Entry - No Limit Poker; everyone can afford to play, at least initially - Fair odds of increase in short-term participation rates - Low odds of increase in long-term participation rates Low Risk, Low Reward Raids w/ Low Barriers to Entry - Penny Slots; everyone can afford to play; everyone can afford to lose - Good odds of increase in short-term participation rates - Good odds of increase in long-term participation rates Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 6074	Posted - 2015.01.26 18:30:00 - [5] - Quote Infeasible Raid Model: Low Risk, High Reward Raids This model is fundamentally infeasible, as it violates principles of risk and reward. As a rule, risk and reward must go hand in hand; as one increases, so goes the other. If we were to assume Low Barriers to Entry, portions of Radar's raid model come dangerously close to violating the risk-return tradeoff principle. If 0.H Raiders win, we get huge paychecks and lots of booty, up-to-and-including officer gear. The district holder is hit hard; his passive revenue stream is interrupted, and his farming operations enter a recovery period. We get rich and ruin their day. And if we so chose, we can do permanent damage by hitting the same corp over and over again. And if we lose, oh well! Nothing lost but a few CP and whatever we paid on our suits. We'll stomp some pubs and try our luck tomorrow. ^ Not exactly what Radar said, but you get the idea. This model isn't sustainable. It offers huge reward potential at negligible risk exposure. Such an environment would be dominated by Raiders. This approach could fixed increasing the risks of raiding or increasing barriers to entry, but both of these would drive away the fledgling corps we're seeking to attract to PC. A better option, in my opinion, would be to lower rewards (and damage potential) of raids. The potential for raid reward should be much higher than pubs, but not as as high as the rewards of actually holding land. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 6091	Posted - 2015.01.27 04:15:00 - [6] - Quote Thanks, Kain. I'd forgotten that we were doing away with high-price clone packs. The concepts and concerns above may or may not still apply; you guys know best. Here are a few more thoughts: On Districts Basic Components for Merc Barge and Corp Flotilla can be purchased with Isk, salvaged or manufactured by Districts. Rare Components are generated exclusively through Districts. Early stage upgrades are fairly inexpensive and can be accomplished using Basic Components; advanced stage are upgrades are costly and many require Rare Components. Holding districts is the surest way to procure Rare Components, though they can also be procured by successfully Raiding a District. Different types of Districts generate different types of Rare Components. In addition to manufacturing Basic and Rare Components, Districts can also provide a source of passive income through clone sales. Once a district reaches 100% of its clone capacity, excess clones are automatically liquidated. Districts which generate revenue are most likely to be Raided, as the higher the clone volume on hand, the more a Raider is able to steal. Districts below 50% capacity are immune to Raid. On Raid Reprisals Following a successful Raid, a district holder is given option to pursue and counterattack Raiders. The counterattack much be launched with 5 minutes of Raider victory, else Raiders make a successful getaway. If counterattack is not launched, clones stolen by Raiders are immediately liquidated (5 minutes after victory). If counterattack is launched, Raiders are given of notice Ambush (you've been waylaid!) and a brief opportunity to assemble. If Raiders ignore counterattack or are defeated in the Ambush to follow, 50% of the clones stolen from district are returned to district. If Raiders successfully defend themselves, they escape with 100% of the clones stolen, which are automatically liquidated following the match. Assorted Attack Types https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Vb8fkfEqJKbDK8QTbJsWz_UKD7I_UhBwB0SSbtwlikM/edit?usp=sharing Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 6205	Posted - 2015.01.30 15:00:00 - [7] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: Adipem, I think you schedule of attack types works well. I don't think the core clones on a district should be affected by raiding though. Raiding being about the daily clone production would strike a good balance for Risk v Reward. Double Post: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2598875#post2598875 Hypothetical: Assume that districts at maximum clone capacity generate passive Isk. Scenario: Farming proves to be more efficient than fighting. Between occasional bouts, the Big Boys invariably blue up, their at-rest state being at peace rather than at war. The types who fail to play nice or lick boot will be labeled warmonger and promptly removed. Those corps removed (in addition to outcasts, fledglings, casuals and upstarts) will become the Raider Corps. In Peace Time, these rebels exist to disrupt your Risk-Free Farming Operations. In War Time, their services can be purchased to detract from the revenue base and reinforcements of your enemies. Their role in PC is different from yours as a landholder, but their role in PC is nonetheless meaningful and active. Conclusion: If this hypothetical were to become reality, it would be our responsibility to prevent the Big Boys from farming PC 2.0. If they get rich again, no one would be to blame but us. I think it likely that Raiders will be our best bet at keeping PC farm-fest free. A successful Raid should impact Landholder income. In times of Peace, it'll be the only thing which can. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 6209	Posted - 2015.01.30 15:15:00 - [8] - Quote I could be wrong, but PC 2.0's Conquest Model presently lacks incentive sufficient to justify its risk exposure. From what we know so far, most corps would favor the Raider Model. I think it likely that Rattati will "add value" to holding Districts to bring Risk/Reward into equilibrium. Hence my assumption of passive Isk. (it very well may end up being something else of value) Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley

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.