|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 11:15:00 -
[1] - Quote
Sequal's Back wrote:That's really annoying I agree..
But you know, I think it's only if the team who attacks that no show that the defenders should get their clones. Some corporations sometimes get attacked 3-4 times in 30min and they can't defend all battles. They might lose a district that way so it's already an important loss.
Too easy to abuse, unfortunately.
What I can see happening is someone making an alt corp, inviting some new bros in and then using the resulting CP earnings to fund the free Clone Packs (provided they don't have districts) and then using those clone packs to attack the defending turf belonging to the main corporation. At which point, providing a no show, the clones would transfer and the defending corp just got a DK paycheck.
Alternatively, if it can only transfer clones to the district if it isn't at clone capacity, it'd just be used as a regeneration + locking mechanism for the district itself. Just got out of a really hard battle with low clones on the district? Attack it with your alt corp's clone pack and lock it up, aid in the regeneration.
And if you're being attacked 3-4 times in the span of 30m and can't defend all battles, you probably need to re-evaluate your timers or how much turf you have =P That sort of situation is one of the reasons PC 2.0 was put in place: Holding only what you can feasibly defend.
Aeon Amadi for CPM 2
Design A SKIN 2
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 13:34:00 -
[2] - Quote
Sequal's Back wrote:Well Aeon.. I'm not quiet use to PC 2.0 stuffs yet x) I just threw this idea out of my mind reading what the OP said. Unfortunatly, you're right, people will exploit this once again..
And they rightfully should, because unfortunately that's the only way to get CCP to fix things most of the time
Aeon Amadi for CPM 2
Design A SKIN 2
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 13:44:00 -
[3] - Quote
Sgt Kirk wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:Sequal's Back wrote:Well Aeon.. I'm not quiet use to PC 2.0 stuffs yet x) I just threw this idea out of my mind reading what the OP said. Unfortunatly, you're right, people will exploit this once again.. And they rightfully should, because unfortunately that's the only way to get CCP to fix things most of the time You make a good point Cat Merc.
UK is best K.
Aeon Amadi for CPM 2
Design A SKIN 2
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 14:13:00 -
[4] - Quote
General Mosquito wrote:Why are people touchy about no shows?
It is, and should remain an effective way to harass a larger, stronger group.
If a corp wants to earn and then spend their CP, why should they be restricted from it because it works at making big groups salty?
BTW, if you form up an hour before a PC, its your own fault for getting bored. Get better organized.
I'm in agreement with you here.
Aeon Amadi for CPM 2
Design A SKIN 2
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 15:29:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote: If a corp completely no shows the CP wallet should be frozen for a period of X days (no CP in and no ability to spend CP) or a CP penalty to the wallet equivalent to the CP cost of the attack launched or a set amount that gives pause to leaving a battle completely empty.
Why...? Because they made you field sixteen people in the hopes that they'd show? I don't see a problem with it. I'm sure the argument will be 'stacked timers' but If you can't field 16 people to defend the district in a real attack than you don't deserve the district anyway.
Aeon Amadi for CPM 2
Design A SKIN 2
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 21:00:00 -
[6] - Quote
Leither Yiltron wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:Kain Spero wrote: If a corp completely no shows the CP wallet should be frozen for a period of X days (no CP in and no ability to spend CP) or a CP penalty to the wallet equivalent to the CP cost of the attack launched or a set amount that gives pause to leaving a battle completely empty.
Why...? Because they made you field sixteen people in the hopes that they'd show? I don't see a problem with it. I'm sure the argument will be 'stacked timers' but If you can't field 16 people to defend the district in a real attack than you don't deserve the district anyway. This is some of the laziest reasoning I've seen anywhere in the community, and I'm kinda surprised to see it from you Aeon. Mechanics which discourage the creation of content or fights and punish people who organize and DO show up to play the actual game are completely undesirable. PC takes people's time. Time organizing battles, managing districts, preparing for fights, and then playing them out. Everyone could spend that time doing a whole number of other things, both in game and out of it, if they're not going to get any content. Sitting around on the starmap or in a war barge waiting for a team that never appears isn't content. It's incredible that people sit around forum-warrior'ing and then deign to judge that groups of 16+ people deserve to have their time completely wasted extremely frequently, and that this is an okay situation to foster within the game mechanics. I haven't sat around providing feedback about PC for years so that we can lazily dismiss clear flaws in the design which will push Molden Heath to become even more (somehow?) of a ghost town. At the end of the day, people play this game to fight FPS battles. Encouraging an environment where that doesn't happen within the game mechanics is a fantastic way to further deflate the player base.
I'm not of the volition of telling people what they should do with their CP or how they should go about fighting their wars. Clone Packs were much more expensive before and it was a completely legitimate and valid tactic to buy one, throw it at an enemy, and then stack a different timer to make them either choose between fighting one or the other or forcing them to field enough for both.
It's just as valid a tactic as having a single A-team constantly being fielded for one battle after the other because of the frankly ridiculous concept that you can only ever attack their territory within a small window of the day and frankly I don't see anything wrong with it. The tactical use of a bait and switch is completely fine in the realm of warfare.
But maybe if the reasonings were better presented than "I don't want to be bored after preparing for an hour and a half" or "I don't like uncertainty" I'd be much more willing to play ball but at the moment that's all that is being presented.
Aeon Amadi for CPM 2
Design A SKIN 2
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 21:42:00 -
[7] - Quote
hails8n wrote:Karras Hearn wrote:So many people in this thread seem to be forgetting that this is new Eden we are fighting in. This is a place where anything goes (within the bounds of game mechanics). Can you imagine the riots there would be if CCP decided to apply the same logic being presented in this thread to EVE Sov wafare? All of High Sec would burn and the summer of rage back in 2011 would seem like a minor disagreement compared to what would happen.
Forcing an opponent to chose which timer to defend has been a valid tactic since the beginning of time. And in EVE we have a better name for the tactic of denying fights: Blueballing.
Welcome to warefare in the harshest cluster of stars known to man. Welcome to New Eden. Buckle in and Harden the **** Up Yeah, but this is an Fps. Imagine playing Bf4 of something and just having no show battles back to back. No content/nothing, itd end the game due to boredom.
Not nearly the same. You can always do FW or pub matches which, while screwy at the moment, will at least guarantee you a fight.
PC is different. It is a competitive environment where unorthodox tactics may, at times, thrive and where things will not always go as you expect or how you want them to.
Aeon Amadi for CPM 2
Design A SKIN 2
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.08.02 21:45:00 -
[8] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Benjamin Ciscko wrote:Since some of you believe this is working as intended I will tell you why it is flawed since the first step to solving a problem is identifying it. The whole idea of PC is huge risk huge reward, so why is their a no risk huge reward aspect put into the game.
No showing requires: no isk no players no planning no financial reprecussions and since the no-showing corp has no districts their is no risk of retaliation
Reward: Potential timer stack Wearing down your opponent Preventing clones from being moved which prevents reinforcing weak districts and launching attacks if a corp wins a battle but has insufficient clones for an immediate re-up and their district to launch the re-up is tied up w/ a no-show they must either start over letting them regen essentially voiding a battle or lose 30mil by throwing a clone pack at it. the no-show may prevent the sale of clones at a more tactical time
I think the present Risk vs Reward sums up the issues quite well. The attacker literally has nothing at risk while the stakes for the defender are huge both in tangibles (the district) and intangibles (time).
Which is a valid argument but not a 100% valid justification for the complete removal of the ability to no show an attack. This didn't seem to be an issue when clone packs had a multi-million ISK price tag attached but now that entities can field them purely with activity it suddenly is an annoyance, or irritation to the defending party.
Which is amusing to me because I wonder what the response toward raiding. Attackers throw out CP for a "free" clone pack, hit your district with a raid, and use nothing but BPOs. Where's the risk there? While sort of a strawman argument, I think it's pretty relevant - would you feel the same way about raids? If not, why?
Aeon Amadi for CPM 2
Design A SKIN 2
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 00:10:00 -
[9] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Karras Hearn wrote:
I'm not saying there shouldn't be consequences for no-showing, I'm saying that those consequences should be in the form of the cost of attacking not by punishing them after the fact. Because punishing after the fact won't stop it from happening and those who are determined to do it will find ways around it. Punishing after the fact will also unfairly punish those who are being paid to no show by rivals of the defending corp, which is also a valid tactic (I don't know if it is actually happening, but it could and is a valid tactic)
I'm glad we agree here. The problem with an increased cost for CP attacks is that it could negatively impact the barrier to entry for corps trying to get into PC. Sure an ISK cost could be added to attacks even when you don't hold land, but I think that unfairly hits players trying to enter into PC. The specific act of no showing should be targeted to prevent impacting the barrier to entry. Thus a CP cost for no showing etc. At the bare minimum whether a defender or attack no shows there needs be a mechanic in place where the match auto completes giving victory to the team that bothered to put bodies in the match. Again, it's terribly easy to put people into a match (heck you can even start a pub squad) and avoid no show penalties while keeping the ability to feint and various other forms of emergent game play.
Maybe. A begrudging maybe.
Depends on what sort of numbers you're thinking of.
Aeon Amadi for CPM 2
Design A SKIN 2
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback. Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 15:03:00 -
[10] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:Kain Spero wrote:Karras Hearn wrote:
I'm not saying there shouldn't be consequences for no-showing, I'm saying that those consequences should be in the form of the cost of attacking not by punishing them after the fact. Because punishing after the fact won't stop it from happening and those who are determined to do it will find ways around it. Punishing after the fact will also unfairly punish those who are being paid to no show by rivals of the defending corp, which is also a valid tactic (I don't know if it is actually happening, but it could and is a valid tactic)
I'm glad we agree here. The problem with an increased cost for CP attacks is that it could negatively impact the barrier to entry for corps trying to get into PC. Sure an ISK cost could be added to attacks even when you don't hold land, but I think that unfairly hits players trying to enter into PC. The specific act of no showing should be targeted to prevent impacting the barrier to entry. Thus a CP cost for no showing etc. At the bare minimum whether a defender or attack no shows there needs be a mechanic in place where the match auto completes giving victory to the team that bothered to put bodies in the match. Again, it's terribly easy to put people into a match (heck you can even start a pub squad) and avoid no show penalties while keeping the ability to feint and various other forms of emergent game play. Maybe. A begrudging maybe. Depends on what sort of numbers you're thinking of. Really starting with finishing off the battle if no one shows up would be a good start. The CP penalty I think would need to at least 7500 CP (equivalent of moving/selling 150 clones), but I'm not sure if that would be of enough consequence to matter. Again, we'd be trying to recreate the pause given to folks that were throwing out clone packs at 30 to 80 million ISK a pop. A freeze on the CP wallet has also been suggested as well, but I'm not sure how much I like that idea. Something like the CP wallet being locked out for X days (no CP in or out). As someone said earlier though if people want to engage in something more meaningful than "weaponized boredom" we need raiding mechanics that can allow fights to occur in PC in less that 24 hours potentially with 8v8, 12v12, 16v16 set ups.
Yeah, you'll never get me on board with CP Wallet freezing. Sorry.
A CP penalty is one thing - I'm cool with making it more expensive to weaponize boredom and 7,500 CP is fine. But punishing players for blue-balling isn't in the spirit of New Eden and guaranteeing fights certainly isn't either. And ending the match early is in the same vein as something akin to a damage multiplier when you have all of the null cannons hacked, to be frank. That's something I've wanted to do for a long time because it would make redline matches go by faster and it would allow the stomped team an opportunity to make a comeback if they can turn it around and redline the other team.
IMO, probably a hell of a lot more dev intensive but I don't want a repeat of the "simple solutions" like when we nyxxed PC ISK generation and had to wait months for something worth a damn to replace it. That "solution" didn't do anything but make it impossible for smaller entities in PC to break in against the monsters who had stocked up on ISK prior. There was no reason to even get into PC otherwise because the entire scope of PC was artificially driven conflicts as it was the only way to make ISK.
If you want to do this, do it right and have something to replace it. Don't cut the cord and have players be on the backburner for months on end.
Aeon Amadi for CPM 2
Design A SKIN 2
|
|
|
|
|