DUST Search - [Announcement] Planetary Conquest Think Tank

All Channels

General Discussions

[Announcement] Planetary Conquest Think Tank

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 10 post(s)
Lady MDK Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire 347	Posted - 2015.04.06 07:15:00 - [121] - Quote DUST Fiend wrote: Lady MDK wrote: Maken Tosch wrote: I'm sure CCP has models for jet fighters since they were originally available to players back during the very-early days of closed beta or maybe alpha. Though I'm not sure how a rudimentary AI would be able to handle jet fighters if they are ever used as pirate NPC attacking PC districts. Simplistic drones or drone infested vehicles (a simple reskin) might be easier (only if the AI understands terrain that is). Use the AI for turrets to pick targets (something that has shot the drone/got within a certain range) and make it relative idle until actvated then it tries to move into its optimal range/maintain its range. If it used turret AI all you'd have to do is stand next to them and they wouldn't target you Maybe it should be tweaked for drones lol. Anyone getting annoyed by reading of the above post should consider the following. I don't care so neither should you :)
Kevall Longstride DUST University Ivy League 2710	Posted - 2015.04.06 07:21:00 - [122] - Quote We held no more than 5 districts at a time and our PC adventure lasted just over 6 months, hardly a majority of the time. I'm also very grateful too for the considerations that the PC community gave us because they wanted to help us achieve our stated goal which was to give new players a taste of PC in an as controlled manner as was possible. The limited logistical mechanics of PC made that a real headache but we had a serious crack at it. If we only had some sort of Meta lock out for training matches or the proposed Arena SI, it would've have been very different. And quite a few D-UNI alumni are now still active in PC having had a taste of it, so in that respect it worked out as well as I'd hoped. But it was a lot of very hard work.... CPM 1 member CEO of DUST University Vist dustcpm.com
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 989	Posted - 2015.04.06 07:52:00 - [123] - 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 If its more profitable not to fight, thats what corps will resort too. I think the trick is how to encourage conflict, at the same time not making alliances meaningless? Does it mean opening up more space? Have too many planets for the few select alliances to hold onto? i dunno, heck, i can't even say if i'll be throwing my corp into raids or joining a PC ready corp. Skrimish at 2 in morning for a million isk is still just skrimish. The 'compettive' players I fight often enough in pubs. Not arrogant enough to claim i wipe the floor with them, but i can at least hold my own, and with a good squad of buddies beat them from time to time. I'm just throwing this question out there: Whats valuable enough to incentivize players like me enough to start in on PCs, whilst at the same time not being so valuable as to convince CEOs not to fight each other and the return of Kane Spiero's donut? Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Zaria Min Deir 0uter.Heaven Back and Forth 1304	Posted - 2015.04.06 10:17:00 - [124] - Quote Thor Odinson42 wrote: The thing we've been doing with putting your squads in corp squad finder to build squads is pretty ingenious, but it wouldn't work in most corps because you'd have jackasses jumping in those squads. We need a team builder UI in a bad way. I think many FCs would probably have paid quite a bit of money for one. How many hours wasted saying, "how many in your squad??"? This. Oh god I am so tired of people being unable to count to 16 without me holding their hands. Have you considered installing the improved keyboard? "Go Go Power Rangers!"
Luther Mandrix WASTELAND JUNK REMOVAL 480	Posted - 2015.04.06 11:20:00 - [125] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: Thor Odinson42 wrote: The thing we've been doing with putting your squads in corp squad finder to build squads is pretty ingenious, but it wouldn't work in most corps because you'd have jackasses jumping in those squads. We need a team builder UI in a bad way. I think many FCs would probably have paid quite a bit of money for one. How many hours wasted saying, "how many in your squad??"? This. Oh god I am so tired of people being unable to count to 16 without me holding their hands. 1.UI Teambuider would be nice. 2.Option for Commander when he/she clicks on players name (Move to squad A,B,C,D) 3.Option for Commander to promote to Squad leader in Squads A,B,C,D 4.End of Match Option to give Medals of Valor out to Players
Sigourney Reever Hyasyoda Terrestrial Acquisitions Firm 103	Posted - 2015.04.06 13:56:00 - [126] - Quote Luther Mandrix wrote: Zaria Min Deir wrote: Thor Odinson42 wrote: The thing we've been doing with putting your squads in corp squad finder to build squads is pretty ingenious, but it wouldn't work in most corps because you'd have jackasses jumping in those squads. We need a team builder UI in a bad way. I think many FCs would probably have paid quite a bit of money for one. How many hours wasted saying, "how many in your squad??"? This. Oh god I am so tired of people being unable to count to 16 without me holding their hands. 1.UI Teambuider would be nice. 2.Option for Commander when he/she clicks on players name (Move to squad A,B,C,D) 3.Option for Commander to promote to Squad leader in Squads A,B,C,D 4.End of Match Option to give Medals of Valor out to Players Team Commander is outside the scope of these changes: https://trello.com/c/Hb4bmjI0/197-team-commander-role
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback. 4956	Posted - 2015.04.06 14:33:00 - [127] - Quote Sigourney Reever wrote: Team Commander is outside the scope of these changes: https://trello.com/c/Hb4bmjI0/197-team-commander-role That was for a complex in match commander. Luther'a idea is more of an out of match cat herder. The cat herding is real. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Zaria Min Deir 0uter.Heaven Back and Forth 1307	Posted - 2015.04.06 14:41:00 - [128] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: The cat herding is real. ^^^^ Have you considered installing the improved keyboard? "Go Go Power Rangers!"
Sigourney Reever Hyasyoda Terrestrial Acquisitions Firm 103	Posted - 2015.04.06 15:12:00 - [129] - Quote I agree about the cat herding, but since the current team building is accomplished via the chat interface, wouldn't it be logical to assume that these changes would be persistent across all client 'states' we experience (Merc Qtrs, Warbarge, In-Match, and EOM)? More broadly, are we conceding that even in PC, OMS will not be allowed to be placed directly by the Defender? As it is, the majority of OMS locations are hardly optimal for defense of Skirmish Maps. It seems obvious to me that since turrets operate in parallel with vehicle modules that they'd be a simple and straightforward resource sink for District upgrades and customization without insurmountable odds for the Attacker. Defenders could be rewarded (directly and indirectly) for economic and strategic use of their infrastructure. Non Pilots could even be encouraged to skill into Turret Skills... Ooh, and It would make (Local) Geography matter, and In New Eden, Geography always matters.
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback. 4958	Posted - 2015.04.06 15:24:00 - [130] - Quote Sigourney Reever wrote: More broadly, are we conceding that even in PC, OMS will not be allowed to be placed directly by the Defender? As it is, the majority of OMS locations are hardly optimal for defense of Skirmish Maps. It seems obvious to me that since turrets operate in parallel with vehicle modules that they'd be a simple and straightforward resource sink for District upgrades and customization without insurmountable odds for the Attacker. Socket positions are hard coded into the maps so unique placement of turrets isn't possible, so yes you have to concede that defender-placed isn't possible. Rather than some overly complex system I'd just like a 17th man "on the field" that always has the map view up, can issue orders to squads, and is responsible for dropping warbarge strikes and orbitals. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news

Luther Mandrix WASTELAND JUNK REMOVAL 481	Posted - 2015.04.06 15:40:00 - [131] - Quote Sigourney Reever wrote: I agree about the cat herding, but since the current team building is accomplished via the chat interface, wouldn't it be logical to assume that these changes would be persistent across all client 'states' we experience (Merc Qtrs, Warbarge, In-Match, and EOM)? More broadly, are we conceding that even in PC, OMS will not be allowed to be placed directly by the Defender? As it is, the majority of OMS locations are hardly optimal for defense of Skirmish Maps. It seems obvious to me that since turrets operate in parallel with vehicle modules that they'd be a simple and straightforward resource sink for District upgrades and customization without insurmountable odds for the Attacker. Defenders could be rewarded (directly and indirectly) for economic and strategic use of their infrastructure. Non Pilots could even be encouraged to skill into Turret Skills... Ooh, and It would make (Local) Geography matter, and In New Eden, Geography always matters. I would like some random gameplay thrown into PC.One time it plays like skirmish another time a death match.
Sigourney Reever Hyasyoda Terrestrial Acquisitions Firm 103	Posted - 2015.04.06 15:56:00 - [132] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: Sigourney Reever wrote: More broadly, are we conceding that even in PC, OMS will not be allowed to be placed directly by the Defender? As it is, the majority of OMS locations are hardly optimal for defense of Skirmish Maps. It seems obvious to me that since turrets operate in parallel with vehicle modules that they'd be a simple and straightforward resource sink for District upgrades and customization without insurmountable odds for the Attacker. Socket positions are hard coded into the maps so unique placement of turrets isn't possible, so yes you have to concede that defender-placed isn't possible. Rather than some overly complex system I'd just like a 17th man "on the field" that always has the map view up, can issue orders to squads, and is responsible for dropping warbarge strikes and orbitals. Since when are OMS Installations Sockets? They can be removed quite easily from within the 'Sockets' (complexes of buildings/structures that may or may not also contain OMS infrastructure) as evidenced by Ambush mode Sockets. Remember there IS a menutab in game for their delivery.. in-Match, select 4-way Left, scroll down: Vehicles Off Map Support Installations
Maken Tosch DUST University Ivy League 11446	Posted - 2015.04.06 18:05:00 - [133] - Quote JJ'S wrote: 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. PC became a minority... It is a learned behavior from a game feature that has stayed the same since implementation. Nearly every corporation participated in PC for months when it launched.. There are some who didn't like the scheduled time line approach to it.. As even Pyrex uses this as an excuse to why they stopped PC'ing.. But in majority most people stopped PC'ing because the lag made it nearly unplayable for 8-9 months of DUST's mid product cycle. That mixed with the DIsconnects. Now we have largely lost our veteran populations and are stuck with maybe 400 players max that are true active vets... And a majority of DUST's players are users that have picked up the game within the last 3-6 months.. PC for most of 2014 was near pointless. D-Uni was alot of bullshit... The Drama that one corporation created in PC was insane... Nearly every power corporation who ended up running the show ended up making concessions to D-Uni on allowing them free districts to which they completely tried to manipulate situations so that leadership was making a profit off of PC that was given to them because of their name. Despite what is said about pulling D-Uni out of PC... Pretty much D-Uni held districts for a majority of PC's existence.. Largely given to them by the alliances of power those days. If your argument about relevancy to PC is based on D-Uni students not being able to form 15 people under a leader and be competitive with people at the end game of DUST? well that is just funny.. I've been a part of Dust University practically almost since its creation if I recall correctly and I was there when D-UNI got its own district with only one purpose in mind which is to train new players so that they can be ready to join other corps like Molon Labe, Nyan San, FA, Goonfeet, etc. We were never meant to be the measure of the health of Planetary Conquest at all. Also, we never held districts for the majority of the time. We gave up on PC a long-ass time ago. Eve Online Invite https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
Balistyc Farshot The Exemplars 135	Posted - 2015.04.06 18:40:00 - [134] - Quote I would like to add in that when designing PC think of three points: Ringers of the best players will be involved no matter what. Flip side if you tell someone this is the pinnacle, they need to be climbing towards something and currently it is to fight the best players in a game where they try their hardest. I think the issue is that the best have not been invested in training other players for quite a long time. Make them require other players so it isn't the same 16 guys from a combination of corps always fighting each other. Make the corp care for its Mercs and the Mercs care for the corp. I have said this in other threads but corp loyalty should be a two way street. Players should need corps and corps should need players. Others have said it as well but let the individual player get value from playing in the big games. If they never feel value why would they strive for this? If the corp doesn't need the corp members because they will use ringers why do they care about baby corp mates? Always remember, someone is going to ring together all the big alliances and try to game the system with politics. We all know that the best players for some reason hate fighting each other in tough fights in this game, so force this a little by encouraging a rotation that doesn't become a peaceful sit down with another corp. This game requires fighting to interact and focus on fighting. Now to start shotgunning and REing again, everyone will love this play style. Face Palm!
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback. 4958	Posted - 2015.04.06 20:38:00 - [135] - Quote Sigourney Reever wrote: Since when are OMS Installations Sockets? They can be removed quite easily from within the 'Sockets' (complexes of buildings/structures that may or may not also contain OMS infrastructure) as evidenced by Ambush mode Sockets. Remember there IS a menutab in game for their delivery.. in-Match, select 4-way Left, scroll down: Vehicles Off Map Support Installations Yeah, have to ask CCP, but basically always. Not talking about building sockets Obviously. Customizing locations of turrets on the fly player side is actually impossible in the current system. Turrets can only go where they have been set up to go on CCP's end. Something you just have to accept as part of the legacy code. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Sigourney Reever Hyasyoda Terrestrial Acquisitions Firm 103	Posted - 2015.04.06 20:48:00 - [136] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: Yeah, have to ask CCP, but basically always. Not talking about building sockets Obviously. Customizing locations of turrets on the fly player side is actually impossible in the current system. Turrets can only go where they have been set up to go on CCP's end. Something you just have to accept as part of the legacy code. That's terrible. This game, I swear.. I'll suggest using portions of the Warbarge Strike code. It's clear we can designate an area on the map, it's clear that Installation animations can be 'dropped' into battle, I've been hit by them. why is Dust so freakin Amateur Hour?
Shiyou Hidiyoshi Ancient Exiles. 1368	Posted - 2015.04.06 22:16:00 - [137] - Quote Balistyc Farshot wrote: I would like to add in that when designing PC think of three points: Ringers of the best players will be involved no matter what. Flip side if you tell someone this is the pinnacle, they need to be climbing towards something and currently it is to fight the best players in a game where they try their hardest. I think the issue is that the best have not been invested in training other players for quite a long time. Make them require other players so it isn't the same 16 guys from a combination of corps always fighting each other. Make the corp care for its Mercs and the Mercs care for the corp. I have said this in other threads but corp loyalty should be a two way street. Players should need corps and corps should need players. Others have said it as well but let the individual player get value from playing in the big games. If they never feel value why would they strive for this? If the corp doesn't need the corp members because they will use ringers why do they care about baby corp mates? Always remember, someone is going to ring together all the big alliances and try to game the system with politics. We all know that the best players for some reason hate fighting each other in tough fights in this game, so force this a little by encouraging a rotation that doesn't become a peaceful sit down with another corp. This game requires fighting to interact and focus on fighting. 1. Yes ringers who are good are always involved no mattet what but I have an idea as to how to limit it so there isn't extreme ringing going on. 2. Many of the people in PC are old faces but new faces are showing up, the problem is keeping people interested and making them realize that they cannot play PC like a pub or even expect to pull their pub scores in PC easily. I have tried teaching new players in other corps and it is hard keeping them motivated. For many, starting in PC is like starting to play Dust before matchmaking, it is a long painful road. 3. I agree but to be more specific, corps in PC should provide minor benefits to those in the corp and the benefits could be tiered too. Mercs should have benefits though, maybe different benefits but not things as good as people who have been in a PC corp for a long time. CEOs should also decide who gets the benefits, pub players in a corp should not benefit from the work of PC players and the CEO should decide who gets rewarded with bonuses and who does not. As for minor ringer benefits that could be different but minor when compared to corp benefits, they should be earned somehow instead of given by someone because they are mercs who do what they please with no leadership. Lastly, maybe there can be another type of benefit that is even more minor than the ringer benefit which is alliance wide. Alliance members should get rewarded for helping the alliance, maybe corp A's CEO can give benefits to corp B's members individually for helping. 4. Incorrect to a certain degree, most want good fights not constant stomps. Only the pub players who kd pad that try PC want nothing but stomps, the others want actual fights. "I don't always lock threads but when I do, I vigorously masturbat afterwards." - CCP LockingBro
Luther Mandrix WASTELAND JUNK REMOVAL 481	Posted - 2015.04.06 23:10:00 - [138] - Quote We need a PC Loyalty Store for buying items (weapons and dropsuits made in PC) with the sales divided up to the manufacturing Corps in PC.Real Sales for Real Player earned isk.Not that old NPC Magic money machine. Maybe we could earn LP fighting for Player Corporations to spend in the LP Store in PC. I want to do the same for Pirate Factions.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 19929	Posted - 2015.04.07 01:05:00 - [139] - Quote Luther Mandrix wrote: We need a PC Loyalty Store for buying items (weapons and dropsuits made in PC) with the sales divided up to the manufacturing Corps in PC.Real Sales for Real Player earned isk.Not that old NPC Magic money machine. Maybe we could earn LP fighting for Player Corporations to spend in the LP Store in PC. I want to do the same for Pirate Factions. That's a fundamental part of the new idea. We are calling them BMK's (Black Market Kredits), or Trade goods, and they can be traded for items in the Black Market. All names TBD. These items would likely begin with being unique skins, not powercreep items. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 19929	Posted - 2015.04.07 01:08:00 - [140] - Quote One question, and this is a crazy one. If we were to setup a system that allows a SKIN to take into account the Corporation Name. Would corporations be interested in having CCP customize, based on request, a corp skin that would be available in the marketplace, but say "This SKIN only appilies if you are in D-Uni", for example? I don't have the tech yet, but this seems fairly awesome, so I would love to get your feedback. A bit of a off-topic, but I already have 30 plus top corp emails joining the cause, so I'm happy. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


Luther Mandrix WASTELAND JUNK REMOVAL 481	Posted - 2015.04.07 01:20:00 - [141] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: One question, and this is a crazy one. If we were to setup a system that allows a SKIN to take into account the Corporation Name. Would corporations be interested in having CCP customize, based on request, a corp skin that would be available in the marketplace, but say "This SKIN only appilies if you are in D-Uni", for example? I don't have the tech yet, but this seems fairly awesome, so I would love to get your feedback. A bit of a off-topic, but I already have 30 plus top corp emails joining the cause, so I'm happy. We would love this make it so Number One
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 5701	Posted - 2015.04.07 01:25:00 - [142] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: One question, and this is a crazy one. If we were to setup a system that allows a SKIN to take into account the Corporation Name. Would corporations be interested in having CCP customize, based on request, a corp skin that would be available in the marketplace, but say "This SKIN only appilies if you are in D-Uni", for example? I don't have the tech yet, but this seems fairly awesome, so I would love to get your feedback. A bit of a off-topic, but I already have 30 plus top corp emails joining the cause, so I'm happy. Better yet, have a generic skin that will auto-change to whatever the colors of their current corp has. If they move to a different corp, the colors of the skin will change to match the new corp. You could have a new form of griefing, SKINWOXING, where a spy will change the corp colors to bubblegum pink right before a corp battle so the entire team deploys looking simply fabulous. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Luther Mandrix WASTELAND JUNK REMOVAL 481	Posted - 2015.04.07 01:27:00 - [143] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: One question, and this is a crazy one. If we were to setup a system that allows a SKIN to take into account the Corporation Name. Would corporations be interested in having CCP customize, based on request, a corp skin that would be available in the marketplace, but say "This SKIN only appilies if you are in D-Uni", for example? I don't have the tech yet, but this seems fairly awesome, so I would love to get your feedback. A bit of a off-topic, but I already have 30 plus top corp emails joining the cause, so I'm happy. Better yet, have a generic skin that will auto-change to whatever the colors of their current corp has. If they move to a different corp, the colors of the skin will change to match the new corp. You could have a new form of griefing, SKINWOXING, where a spy will change the corp colors to bubblegum pink right before a corp battle so the entire team deploys looking simply fabulous. Nice but may be less money for the company
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 8594	Posted - 2015.04.07 01:43:00 - [144] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: ... looking simply fabulous. LMAO Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
Terry Webber Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 630	Posted - 2015.04.07 02:07:00 - [145] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: One question, and this is a crazy one. If we were to setup a system that allows a SKIN to take into account the Corporation Name. Would corporations be interested in having CCP customize, based on request, a corp skin that would be available in the marketplace, but say "This SKIN only appilies if you are in D-Uni", for example? I don't have the tech yet, but this seems fairly awesome, so I would love to get your feedback. A bit of a off-topic, but I already have 30 plus top corp emails joining the cause, so I'm happy. This would be awesome.
Cross Atu OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4222	Posted - 2015.04.07 02:12:00 - [146] - Quote Kain Spero wrote: Sigourney Reever wrote: Team Commander is outside the scope of these changes: https://trello.com/c/Hb4bmjI0/197-team-commander-role That was for a complex in match commander. Luther'a idea is more of an out of match cat herder. The cat herding is real. A huge factor in what burned me out on playing PC. See a cool idea thread? Mail me the title and I'll take a look =)
BLUNT SMKR Ahrendee Inc. Negative-Feedback 250	Posted - 2015.04.07 02:50:00 - [147] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: One question, and this is a crazy one. If we were to setup a system that allows a SKIN to take into account the Corporation Name. Would corporations be interested in having CCP customize, based on request, a corp skin that would be available in the marketplace, but say "This SKIN only appilies if you are in D-Uni", for example? I don't have the tech yet, but this seems fairly awesome, so I would love to get your feedback. A bit of a off-topic, but I already have 30 plus top corp emails joining the cause, so I'm happy. Would be kool if corp leaders could choose corp colors. An corp members could buy corp color suits n guns ( maybe with the corp logo imprint on em too) in the black market. TeamWork>KDR Jump Off a Cliff An Hit The Sky With Me
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback. 4960	Posted - 2015.04.07 02:53:00 - [148] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: One question, and this is a crazy one. If we were to setup a system that allows a SKIN to take into account the Corporation Name. Would corporations be interested in having CCP customize, based on request, a corp skin that would be available in the marketplace, but say "This SKIN only appilies if you are in D-Uni", for example? I don't have the tech yet, but this seems fairly awesome, so I would love to get your feedback. A bit of a off-topic, but I already have 30 plus top corp emails joining the cause, so I'm happy. Would be AMAZING! Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS 972	Posted - 2015.04.07 03:01:00 - [149] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Luther Mandrix wrote: We need a PC Loyalty Store for buying items (weapons and dropsuits made in PC) with the sales divided up to the manufacturing Corps in PC.Real Sales for Real Player earned isk.Not that old NPC Magic money machine. Maybe we could earn LP fighting for Player Corporations to spend in the LP Store in PC. I want to do the same for Pirate Factions. That's a fundamental part of the new idea. We are calling them BMK's (Black Market Kredits), or Trade goods, and they can be traded for items in the Black Market. All names TBD. These items would likely begin with being unique skins, not powercreep items. How many sub markets do we need? Instead of a single market place, we have a market place and lp store. soon we will have a PC lp store? Can we also have a blue print store? How about a quafe store too? And while your at it you can make stores for every NPC corp and pirate faction to go along with the future warbarge store we should add as well. Because more than anything, dust needs more stores that sell the same things. Stores > new content
Peter Hanther Kottentale Solutions 91	Posted - 2015.04.07 03:02:00 - [150] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: One question, and this is a crazy one. If we were to setup a system that allows a SKIN to take into account the Corporation Name. Would corporations be interested in having CCP customize, based on request, a corp skin that would be available in the marketplace, but say "This SKIN only appilies if you are in D-Uni", for example? I don't have the tech yet, but this seems fairly awesome, so I would love to get your feedback. A bit of a off-topic, but I already have 30 plus top corp emails joining the cause, so I'm happy. Well that seems pretty neat and all, I would like a simpler set of dynamic ones that simply put your corp logo on them somewhere. So you do not have to wait for CCP to agree to the request. How can Kottentale Solutions help you?



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: 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.