|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
11
   |
Posted - 2015.07.15 00:20:00 -
[1] - Quote
If this is Dust's end-game "working as intended", I (for one) am not interested. These battles should be spectacular and hard fought; not pubstomps on steroids. A KDR boost for the very same "L33T" farmers we have to thank for PC 1.0's failures. This is embarrassing, and it will impact morale.
PS: 270k Isk is alot easier to make running a couple pubs.
Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.15 00:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
Jadek Menaheim wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:If this is Dust's end-game "working as intended", I (for one) am not interested. This is embarrassing.
PS: You could've made that 270k Isk alot easier running a couple pubs.
God, some people just don't get this is a sandbox. Play in it however you want and quit your whining. This is good step for Dust as a F2P game--the goal of which is to be accessible to many customers, not just a few 'elites' of a game who seem to want to be gatekeepers of content.
I hope you have good fun in your sandbox. This is exactly what the "L33T" want. Easy fights to stroke ego. Something entertaining to interrupt the monotony of risk-free farming. Good times.
Give us real raids, and I'll show you whining.
Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.15 00:39:00 -
[3] - Quote
Jadek Menaheim wrote:Working intended as a meta tactic. 
Bring 'em to their knees, Jadek! Bleed 'em dry ... over time.
+1 for doing your part to curb over-expansion.
+1 for making PC 2.0 better, interesting, and more accessible.
Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.15 01:30:00 -
[4] - Quote
Jadek Menaheim wrote:
What are you looking for?
Suggested Raid Mechanics
* 8v8 Acq or Dom
* 15,000 CP
* Winner takes loser's losses; loser takes winner's losses
* Wire each district with a "raid window" set one hour prior to daily attack timer (credit: Tebu)
* Raids can be executed within the 1st 5 minutes of window (attack timer = 23:00; raid window = 22:00-22:05)
* If executed, Raid begins 30 minutes following execution (credit: Balistyc)
* On execution, Raiders and Defenders receive corp-wide notification. For example:
- "[Insert Corp Name] warbarges inbound! ETA 23:55. Defend: System X - Planet Y - District Z.
- "Warbarges outbound for [Insert Corp Name], ETA 23:55. Target: System X - Planet Y - District Z.
* On Raider Victory, % of District clone reserves are stolen; Isk proceeds redistributed by CP contribution
* On Raider Defeat, Raider Corp cannot raid districts belonging to victorious Defender corp for 48 hours[/quote]
Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.15 01:54:00 -
[5] - Quote
Jadek Menaheim wrote:^Raid mechanics look cool, but what is the logic behind the 48 district defense against more raids, rather than just being an artificial block. Quote:On Raider Loss, Raider Corp cannot raid districts belonging to victorious Defender corp for 48 hours. Does the winning district pick up some kind of temporary IFF code against raiders warbarges deploying from space which assists defenders district in increasing ability of shooting their ships on sight. I would make the addition that if raider corp attacks defender corp within this 48hr period after losing they have a 25% chance or greater of having the clone pack auto-fail thus losing all of those command points.
The district / district owner isn't immune to all raids for 48 hours, only raids from the previously defeated corp:
XER raids NF. XER raid fails.
NF is immune to XER raids for the next 48 hours.
XER may raid other corps within this period.
Other corps may raid NF within this period.
* provides the landowner a reward/respite for successfully fending off a raid.
* makes it a headache for district owner to protect itself against raids via "raid lock" by Alt or Friendly corp
* makes harassment contracts less fool-proof
* limits spammability
Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.15 02:23:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jadek Menaheim wrote:Adipem, I would still like a reason for how the block is possible in the first place.
What are your thoughts on the IFF transponder point I put forward?
I would also like to put forward the idea the IFF transponder codes can be changed with a large investment of CP from the raiding corp in order to attack the same district with in the 48hr period (this would reduce or eliminate the probability for a clone pack to auto-fail, because the district knew your IFF and blew up your transport ships with their district orbital cannons.)
Suggested mechanics are rough; freshly pulled from arse; have yet to polish :-) I absolutely love your IFF idea and override. The more stuff to spend CP on, the better. Alternatively, (spitballing) could put tactical consumables like this in the DK Market. Another player recommended selling district "Raid Screens" for DK.
Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.15 02:41:00 -
[7] - Quote
Jadek Menaheim wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:Suggested mechanics are rough; freshly pulled from arse; have yet to polish :-) I absolutely love your IFF idea and override. The more stuff to spend CP on, the better. Alternatively, (spitballing) could put tactical consumables like this in the DK Market. Another player recommended selling district "Raid Screens" for DK. Ooooh. Corp to corp trading of mega value items would be most interesting to see play out.
You're two steps ahead of me ... tons o' potential :-)
Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley (for CPM2)
|
|
|
| |
|