DUST Search - [Announcement] Planetary Conquest Think Tank

Kevall Longstride wrote:

OK.

My general disregard for all things PC related is reasonably well documented. D-UNI tried it and by the time I decided to pull us out of it, the egos, histrionics, drama, epeen and exploits damn well near broke me personally and made me dread logging on lest I got dragged into yet another bitchfest of which my caring about was precisely zero. I very nearly quit the game entirely because of it.

PC is played by a minority of the player base, a passionate and vocal minority but minority nevertheless.

Any examination of the mechanics of PC is I feel not going fully service its potential, without addressing the question as to why its not as popular as it should be is kind of silly. Yes potential, I might not be its biggest fan but I know it could be something special if its failings a force multiplier for player participation are addressed and dealt with.

Rattati asked in the OP, 'Please, pass the message forward, and especially if you or your corporation was active in PC, and quit for whatever reason.' (my underlining).

It's vitally important that we use the opportunity that we have now, to find those reasons to quit and see what can be done about them now rather than later.

Was it logistical, time consuming, a failure in UI or explanation? Time pressures, technical problems or just plain odd boring?

Let CCP know.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 10 post(s)
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 5599	Posted - 2015.04.05 14:27:00 - [1] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Cody Sietz wrote: I think it's in a good place right now, but I'm not a CEO. Looking forward to seeing what PC can change and become. Just so long as we don't see a return to the days of nobody fighting and the big blue donut. There is an exploit that needs to be stamped out. If everyone wants to just hold hands and sing kumbaya, I still don't think I have an answer for that Smaller scale fights that can hurt a corporation are more likely to spark an extended conflict. If raiding is done in the form of 8 v 8 using small 3 point maps with a single large socket. It's gotten to the point where with any PC fight most teams field some form of ringers because there just aren't enough quality players to fight these battles centralized in every corporation anymore. And that's ok, it's what alliances are for. But internet drama rarely starts at the alliance level, it starts at the corporation level. Corporations need to be able to more freely instigate bullshit and those small scale fights are a way to give them that freedom. 8 v 8 raiding is key imo. Otherwise, it'd be the eve link, but from what I hear those guys don't give a damn about us anymore so focus on raiding. Constantly hitting up someones district before it fills up for the week and gets "extracted" would be a hilarious conflict driver. Usually banned for being too awesome.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 5599	Posted - 2015.04.05 14:48:00 - [2] - Quote I'm a fan of Total War style games. Honestly, if we could build a game mode like that which had a more intricate ground map and rules associated with it, instead of this wheel of districts.... that'd be something worth playing. Usually banned for being too awesome.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 5604	Posted - 2015.04.05 15:22:00 - [3] - Quote 501st Headstrong wrote: Himiko Kuronaga wrote: I'm a fan of Total War style games. Honestly, if we could build a game mode like that which had a more intricate ground map and rules associated with it, instead of this wheel of districts.... that'd be something worth playing. That'd be sick :) Can you explain more on that? If you've never played a Total War game, this footage will probably give you a decent idea of how a campaign works, but more importantly what the map looks like. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQVodJKAkI0 For dust PC, I would do something similar to this, but "turns" can be done every 24 hours and how much you can do with those turns is dictated by district placement, clone count placement, and most importantly your number of available command points. Now in Shogun 2, you have clearly defined borders around every province, as well as a town/castle at the center of it. Now replace the concept of a province with a district, and the town/castle with a planetary infrastructure of the corporations choice. Armies move about the map in Shogun 2 as icons of the general or highest ranking officer leading them. In Dust, they would be MCC's loaded with clone detachments. But as in Total War, provinces/districts could also be upgraded with optional facilities on the side with more other functionality specific to that district. One such optional infrastructure when fully upgraded could make it so that the primary infrastructure has additional friendly large turret installations placed around defensive locations. Perhaps another upgrades the missile installations so that they have increased ranged and anti-air capability, shutting down early game enemy dropship strategies. Perhaps another is simply an increased clone reserve for that district, plain and simple. Now ideally, I'd like it so fighting multiple battles in a row on a district meant fighting in different locations on that district for each battle. And having optional infrastructure gives us an excuse to do this. Attacking from the north could have you engaging on one of the optional infrastructures to take out that ones specific advantage prior to the final showdown on the primary infrastructre, but leaving the advantage from the southern infrastructure at full strength. If an attacker is willing to take their time, they could drag out the engagement and hit every one of the optional facilities before taking on the main target in its weakened state. (it also stands to reason that one of these optional facilities would be a skyfire battery for knocking out enemy eve support, but this demands that somebody on the EVE devteam actually gives a damn sadly) Usually banned for being too awesome.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 5615	Posted - 2015.04.05 18:19:00 - [4] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Cody Sietz wrote: I think it's in a good place right now, but I'm not a CEO. Looking forward to seeing what PC can change and become. Just so long as we don't see a return to the days of nobody fighting and the big blue donut. There is an exploit that needs to be stamped out. If everyone wants to just hold hands and sing kumbaya, I still don't think I have an answer for that I think there needs to be a ranking of districts. If District A and District B are the same, why fight? Corp. A can keep District A and Corp. B keep B. If District A is better than B though they have a reason to always fight, even if it is just prestige. The other big problem with PC is the same 16 guys can dominate the whole thing, certainly a 100 or so can, and do. The solution is to force players to be stationed on a limited number of districts and only can defend those districts. Corporations should be able to have unlimited districts, but they have to hold each with different players. This would mean that a 200 man corp wouldn't have the same 16 guys playing every PC and new corps could have a chance against the Team B and Team C districts. What is being proposed was too complicated for me to figure out but I didn't see those two problems being addressed and they are the two that kept me from PC. On point 1, no. No one will care about the prestige of anything. We don't now, and we won't later. on point 2, you will never stop people from holding lots of land through artificial player limitation. We will just use alts, and we will hate CCP for making us do that. But we will do it all the same. You'll be pissed off, we'll be pissed off. That's a lose-lose suggestion. Usually banned for being too awesome.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 5615	Posted - 2015.04.05 18:22:00 - [5] - Quote Are you having a conversation with yourself? Stop that immediately. Usually banned for being too awesome.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 5615	Posted - 2015.04.05 18:25:00 - [6] - Quote He really is. He's having a conversation with himself. Crazy bastard, stop. In the name of all that is decent, quit being weird. Usually banned for being too awesome.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 5615	Posted - 2015.04.05 18:28:00 - [7] - Quote I don't want my children learning how to post wrong because they saw this guy doing unethical stuff on the dust forums. Somebody stop this monster. Usually banned for being too awesome.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 5618	Posted - 2015.04.05 18:33:00 - [8] - Quote Assuming drone AI worked that would be a funny solution honestly. Usually banned for being too awesome.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 5619	Posted - 2015.04.05 20:33:00 - [9] - Quote There is no such thing as a passive benefit in PC. If you own land, its going to be threatened. That means you're active enough to defend it, or you're not. The mere concept of passive isk only ever applied to Nyain San because they were able to sit behind timers nobody could bother with. Usually banned for being too awesome.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 5626	Posted - 2015.04.06 05:50:00 - [10] - Quote Kevall Longstride wrote: OK. My general disregard for all things PC related is reasonably well documented. D-UNI tried it and by the time I decided to pull us out of it, the egos, histrionics, drama, epeen and exploits damn well near broke me personally and made me dread logging on lest I got dragged into yet another bitchfest of which my caring about was precisely zero. I very nearly quit the game entirely because of it. PC is played by a minority of the player base, a passionate and vocal minority but minority nevertheless. Any examination of the mechanics of PC is I feel not going fully service its potential, without addressing the question as to why its not as popular as it should be is kind of silly. Yes potential, I might not be its biggest fan but I know it could be something special if its failings a force multiplier for player participation are addressed and dealt with. Rattati asked in the OP, 'Please, pass the message forward, and especially if you or your corporation was active in PC, and quit for whatever reason.' (my underlining). It's vitally important that we use the opportunity that we have now, to find those reasons to quit and see what can be done about them now rather than later. Was it logistical, time consuming, a failure in UI or explanation? Time pressures, technical problems or just plain odd boring? Let CCP know. In EVE, you can blob with numbers and individual incompetence can still go toward victory. In Dust PC, not being at the top of the game means you are met with immediate failure. So I can only imagine how PC nearly tore your organization apart. You're supposed to be there for the newbies, and this was akin to throwing them to the wolves. A hilarious thing to envision, honestly. I wish you'd recorded. Usually banned for being too awesome.