Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rinzler XVII
Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State
411
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 12:57:00 -
[1] - Quote
Remove locking, allow multiple attacks at the same time... eg you could orchestrate 3 consecutive attacks to wear the enemy Corp down.
Pc should have always have been free form, placing attack restrictions is stupid and has allowed a monopoly to happen..
Allow tactical attacks eg v an american Corp attack them at 3/4am there time... Pc is far too safe and with the big Corps allied together Pc has died...
Make it more like Eve, instead of this wishy washy crap we have now, it has killed any idea of lore and is a far cry from what we were initially promised
I Fight for the User
It's a shame that my user sucks at DUST
|
Leither Yiltron
0uter.Heaven
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 12:59:00 -
[2] - Quote
So you'd like to pull out the worst elements of PlanetSide 2 and Eve's old sov system and put them together in an unholy matrimony?
Nah breh.
Have a pony
|
Rinzler XVII
Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State
411
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 13:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
Leither Yiltron wrote:So you'd like to pull out the worst elements of PlanetSide 2 and Eve's old sov system and put them together in an unholy matrimony?
Nah breh.
Looking at your Corp I wouldn't expect you to agree... You gain too much from how things are..
I Fight for the User
It's a shame that my user sucks at DUST
|
Leither Yiltron
0uter.Heaven
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 13:42:00 -
[4] - Quote
Rinzler XVII wrote:Leither Yiltron wrote:So you'd like to pull out the worst elements of PlanetSide 2 and Eve's old sov system and put them together in an unholy matrimony?
Nah breh. Looking at your Corp I wouldn't expect you to agree... You gain too much from how things are..
You should look at my corp HISTORY instead. I'm frankly surprised that I haven't been kicked from 0H yet:
0uter.Heaven2015-08-09 00:44 - Now (0y 77d) Isuuaya Tactical2015-08-09 00:28 - 2015-08-09 00:44 (0y 0d) Molon Labe.2014-05-07 06:21 - 2015-08-09 00:28 (1y 94d) Osmon Surveillance2014-05-07 06:20 - 2014-05-07 06:21 (0y 0d) Twilight Sparkle Best Pony Corp2014-04-17 06:21 - 2014-05-07 06:20 (0y 20d) Expert Intervention2014-04-17 06:11 - 2014-04-17 06:21 (0y 0d) Ahrendee Mercenaries2014-02-21 11:49 - 2014-04-17 06:11 (0y 55d) Expert Intervention2014-02-14 07:30 - 2014-02-21 11:49 (0y 7d) KILL-EM-QUICK2013-01-10 17:30 - 2014-02-14 07:30 (1y 35d) Zumari Force Projection2013-01-10 07:54 - 2013-01-10 17:30 (0y 0d)
When I was active in PC, I was an FC for KEQ, the PC coordinator for ROFL, and an officer in ML. All of those organizations could have benefited drastically from what you're suggesting. I have a long history of advocating dramatic changes to PC that do contain some elements that play towards larger organizations, but also come as part of a cohesive design overhaul that takes the gameplay experience of both larger and smaller PC corps into account. That's really the key issue with your idea: It targets one design element of a large collection of design elements, all of which don't really fit together properly. Since we don't really have the resources in the Shanghai team for a proper overhaul, it really doesn't make sense to implement small bandaid fixes that won't really make the gameplay fun in PC overall.
Have a pony
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
2
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 13:47:00 -
[5] - Quote
Also defendong Leither, 0H is dead so we would gain nothing from this.
And why remove timers? New corps would take them when no one is on, just to lose them when the corp becomes reactive. Seems like easy farms. 07
PSN: saphireblue-7
#PortDust514
|
Arirana
Ancient Exiles.
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 15:02:00 -
[6] - Quote
The biggest issue with PC that has yet to be fixed is that it is more profitable to sit back and farm rather than go to war. Everything in PC is limited by CP. Selling clones and using clones costs the same amount, yet one yields immediate ISK and DK profit (selling clones) and sending attacks takes time and effort for much less possible profit (its actually likely you will LOSE isk with this option).
The second biggest issue is no showing, which in its current worst form is sending a free 25k CP attack and simply not showing up for it, forcing the defending side to spend time setting up a team and coming up with a plan, sitting in the warbarge for 10 mins, resetting, etc.
People like to defend no-showing as the only viable tactic a weak corp can use to intimidate a strong corp. Its actually not, the most viable tactic would be to show up with 16 people, fight for all your worth, learn, and improve. No-showing is one of the many things that drives people away from sending attacks to just pub stomping and using CP earned in pubs to sell clones, fueling more pub stomping.
Its not just the players' faults for lack of PC action, its the mechanics that revolve around farming and no showing. The best way for this to change would be to reduce the amount of ISK selling clones yields and increase the amount of DK it yields, reduce the CP cost of sending attacks by half.
Most importantly, MAKE FIGHTING PROFITABLE! Add ISK value to clones destroyed again, make it equal to the amount each clone would fetch you by selling it. By clones destroyed, I mean MANUALLY destroyed by players, clones lost automatically to a defeat should yield NOTHING. This way a no show with one person on the winning side won't produce anything.
But heres the most important part. The victor will receive the ISK generated by clone destruction by both sides, this will make winning matter again. With the current "Keep what you killed" mechanic losers can get paid more than the winners. I agree the losers should get something, the ISK value of the suits they destroyed should be sufficient, but it makes no sense for the loser to get the clone goo profit. Make people WANT to WIN instead of play passively.
Passive play in PC needs to die a quick death.
The Official Ari QQ Thread
Æ
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
17
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 15:06:00 -
[7] - Quote
Real Raids!
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
D4GG3R
Opus Arcana
2
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 15:21:00 -
[8] - Quote
Arirana wrote:The biggest issue with PC that has yet to be fixed is that it is more profitable to sit back and farm rather than go to war. Everything in PC is limited by CP. Selling clones and using clones costs the same amount, yet one yields immediate ISK and DK profit (selling clones) and sending attacks takes time and effort for much less possible profit (its actually likely you will LOSE isk with this option).
The second biggest issue is no showing, which in its current worst form is sending a free 25k CP attack and simply not showing up for it, forcing the defending side to spend time setting up a team and coming up with a plan, sitting in the warbarge for 10 mins, resetting, etc.
People like to defend no-showing as the only viable tactic a weak corp can use to intimidate a strong corp. Its actually not, the most viable tactic would be to show up with 16 people, fight for all your worth, learn, and improve. No-showing is one of the many things that drives people away from sending attacks to just pub stomping and using CP earned in pubs to sell clones, fueling more pub stomping.
Its not just the players' faults for lack of PC action, its the mechanics that revolve around farming and no showing. The best way for this to change would be to reduce the amount of ISK selling clones yields and increase the amount of DK it yields, reduce the CP cost of sending attacks by half.
Most importantly, MAKE FIGHTING PROFITABLE! Add ISK value to clones destroyed again, make it equal to the amount each clone would fetch you by selling it. By clones destroyed, I mean MANUALLY destroyed by players, clones lost automatically to a defeat should yield NOTHING. This way a no show with one person on the winning side won't produce anything.
But heres the most important part. The victor will receive the ISK generated by clone destruction by both sides, this will make winning matter again. With the current "Keep what you killed" mechanic losers can get paid more than the winners. I agree the losers should get something, the ISK value of the suits they destroyed should be sufficient, but it makes no sense for the loser to get the clone goo profit. Make people WANT to WIN instead of play passively.
Passive play in PC needs to die a quick death. Yeah
"Dagger is like a mage, damage him enough and he runs."
-Nega Matix
I watch anime for the boobs
|
Varoth Drac
Dead Man's Game
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 15:22:00 -
[9] - Quote
Ringers should be eliminated from the game. You should only be able to deploy to PC if you are a member of one of the two participating corporations.
Assistance from other corporations should be in the form of hiring another corporation to defend a district for you. You then give the hired corporation the ability to deploy for the defence, a a whole team. If you want assistance attacking, you should hire a corporation to attack a district for you. The hired Corp takes the district and then should be able to freely hand over the district.
Only mercs from two corporations should ever be present in a PC at the same time.
There should be a cooldown on Corp hopping. |
Arirana
Ancient Exiles.
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 15:28:00 -
[10] - Quote
Adipem Nothi wrote:Real Raids! Whats your idea for a real raid? I was thinking a window mode mechanic would be good, as in you can attack a district and in a hour or less the battle happens.
Reasoning is if you own a district, you should be able to defend it during the timer you have it set to. If you have multiple districts on the same timer, you're **** out of luck. The offset would be a raid cannot flip the district, only reduce the clone count and generate ISK for the raiders.
The Official Ari QQ Thread
Æ
|
|
Varoth Drac
Dead Man's Game
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 15:38:00 -
[11] - Quote
Arirana wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:Real Raids! Whats your idea for a real raid? I was thinking a window mode mechanic would be good, as in you can attack a district and in a hour or less the battle happens. Reasoning is if you own a district, you should be able to defend it during the timer you have it set to. If you have multiple districts on the same timer, you're **** out of luck. The offset would be a raid cannot flip the district, only reduce the clone count and generate ISK for the raiders. How about an attack within the reinforcement window that starts 10 mins after it's launched. The defenders then have the ability to delay it by 10-15 mins if they want, to make it harder for attackers to stack too many attacks at the same time. |
Grimmiers
897
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 15:39:00 -
[12] - Quote
I think location actually mattering would help a lot too. Being able to attack anyone anywhere makes it really easy for pc corps to get burnt out when a bunch of different corps can just attack, no show, troll, etc. Not only that, but there's no obvious reason to attack anyone. District services that benefit eve and dust and a marketplace would've added some depth.
After playing eve I thought it would be cool if dust players could fight on planetary interaction colonies too boost production, or steal isk. Planetary interaction is actually ran by drones, so it would be possible reprogram them to benefit you instead of the eve player and that eve player would hire mercs to get rid of the rogue drones. /offtopic
Basically there's little hope for a pc I'm interested in until there's a new game. |
Aeon Amadi
13
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 15:41:00 -
[13] - Quote
Theorycraft with me for a moment. Bear in mind that these ideas are fairly fresh so there's probably going to be a lot of issues with them (hence the point of theorycrafting).
Districts can be set as 'Active' or 'Inactive'. In an 'Inactive' state they are fundamentally worthless. They do not generate clones, you cannot move them, you pretty much just retain ownership of the district and that's about it.
In an 'Active' state you can use them as normally like you do today.
The key difference here is that in an 'Inactive' state you retain the typical battle mechanics. Battles are announced up to 24/48 hours ahead of time, you have time to prepare, etc. In an 'Active' state, you are given at most an hours notice and the district must stay in an 'Active' state for 12-24 hours.
This forces corporations to engage in risk/reward in order to get the benefits from their districts. They can be attacked in an 'Inactive' state and have notice but will not be able to recover from the losses unless they put the district in an 'Active' state. This, in theory, would significantly reduce the farming capability as you would have to have players online to defend the district in order to farm it since it can't generate/sell clones while 'Inactive'.
Since the 'Inactive' state is functionally worthless, it is impossible to retain for long periods of time as any attacks -WILL- do damage to the clone counts, even if they are miniscule. This forces the defending corporation to set it to 'Active' at some point in order to recover the losses, thus killing district holding for district holding's sake and making it difficult to farm without actively defending.
Still thinking about how to combat the no show mechanics in a feasible way. Might have something come lunch time.
Negative Introspection - Aeon's CPM Blog
Skype: nomistrav
|
Aeon Amadi
13
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 15:42:00 -
[14] - Quote
Grimmiers wrote:I think location actually mattering would help a lot too. Being able to attack anyone anywhere makes it really easy for pc corps to get burnt out when a bunch of different corps can just attack, no show, troll, etc. Not only that, but there's no obvious reason to attack anyone. District services that benefit eve and dust and a marketplace would've added some depth.
After playing eve I thought it would be cool if dust players could fight on planetary interaction colonies too boost production, or steal isk. Planetary interaction is actually ran by drones, so it would be possible reprogram them to benefit you instead of the eve player and that eve player would hire mercs to get rid of the rogue drones. /offtopic
Basically there's little hope for a pc I'm interested in until there's a new game.
Agree'd. Might actually be an interesting solution to no shows, actually, if you could only use a clone pack to attack a district in a system that is bordering a high-sec system. This gives tactical value to systems that are deeper in that are functionally immune to clone packs and allow newer corps to bridge in on the edge systems to gain their foothold.
Thoughts?
Negative Introspection - Aeon's CPM Blog
Skype: nomistrav
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
17
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 16:04:00 -
[15] - Quote
Arirana wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:Real Raids! Whats your idea for a real raid? I was thinking a window mode mechanic would be good, as in you can attack a district and in a hour or less the battle happens. Reasoning is if you own a district, you should be able to defend it during the timer you have it set to. If you have multiple districts on the same timer, you're **** out of luck. The offset would be a raid cannot flip the district, only reduce the clone count and generate ISK for the raiders. Suggested Raid Mechanics * Cost: 20,000 CP * Mode: 8v8, 3pt Skirm * 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 follows 30 minutes later (20min muster, 10min barge) (credit: Balistyc) * On execution, Raiders and Defenders receive corp-wide notification from NPC. For example: - "[Insert Corp Name] warbarges inbound! ETA 22:35. Defend: System X - Planet Y - District Z. - "Warbarges outbound for [Insert Corp Name], ETA 22:35. Target: System X - Planet Y - District Z.
Victory / Loss * District ownership does not change hands * Winner takes loser's losses; loser takes winner's losses * On Raider Victory, % of District clone reserves are "stolen" and immediately converted to ISK * On Raider Loss, Raider Corp cannot raid districts belonging to victorious Defender corp for 48 hours * On Raider No Show, Raider Corp cannot raid districts belonging to victorious Defender corp for 48 hours
Miscellaneous Ideas * Could sell tactical "anti-raid" consumables for DK in the District Market (credit: Balistyc) * Could restrict ringer participation * Could later implement a 16v16 "large raid" option which pillages a higher % of clones on victory * Could later implement a "raid reprisal" option for landholders (Ambush; reclaim % of stolen clones on victory)
Source (earlier discussion)
Dropsuit Usage Rates
|
Grimmiers
897
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 16:05:00 -
[16] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:
Agree'd. Might actually be an interesting solution to no shows, actually, if you could only use a clone pack to attack a district in a system that is bordering a high-sec system. This gives tactical value to systems that are deeper in that are functionally immune to clone packs and allow newer corps to bridge in on the edge systems to gain their foothold.
Thoughts?
That would work. I'd expect some corps would try and do border patrol, but I doubt it would last if the other spots were more lucrative.
Then if null sec or wormhole space was unlocked there would be no npc warbarges .
|
Arirana
Ancient Exiles.
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 16:06:00 -
[17] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:
Still thinking about how to combat the no show mechanics in a feasible way. Might have something come lunch time.
I think you're on to something with your active state idea. As for a no-show fix, I have a few ideas that have probably been thrown around before. Idea #1 is whenever an attack is sent, instead of it costing isk, the attacker will have to put some ISK up as collateral to concord (approx. 16-32mil ISK).
If the warbarge ends and there is no one on the attacker's side, the collateral is immediately forfeited to the defender to compensate for time wasted, and the battle is immediately decided and cuts to EOM(to save time), the collateral being divided up between everyone on the defender's side.
If the situation is reversed and the attackers show but the defenders don't, the match is immediately decided and cuts to EOM, but the defenders did not have to put up collateral.
Instead concord will directly tax their corp wallet(if its is empy then it will tax the players evenly) and give it to the attackers (8-16 mil ISK). The obvious trade off is that the attackers are one step closer to flipping the district. The re-up attack warbarge will be 5 mins long instead of 10 mins to save time as well.
What do you think?
The Official Ari QQ Thread
Æ
|
Arirana
Ancient Exiles.
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 16:18:00 -
[18] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:
Agree'd. Might actually be an interesting solution to no shows, actually, if you could only use a clone pack to attack a district in a system that is bordering a high-sec system. This gives tactical value to systems that are deeper in that are functionally immune to clone packs and allow newer corps to bridge in on the edge systems to gain their foothold.
Thoughts?
I like this idea, but being a noob to the security mechanic I have a hard time understanding the pattern to the layout of high sec and low sec systems. Are High sec systems all near eachother or are each randomly distributed? I think there would have to be a UI upgrade to the starmap to make this easier to understand for everyone.
The Official Ari QQ Thread
Æ
|
Aeon Amadi
13
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 16:31:00 -
[19] - Quote
Arirana wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:
Still thinking about how to combat the no show mechanics in a feasible way. Might have something come lunch time.
I think you're on to something with your active state idea. As for a no-show fix, I have a few ideas that have probably been thrown around before. Idea #1 is whenever an attack is sent, instead of it costing isk, the attacker will have to put some ISK up as collateral to concord (approx. 16-32mil ISK). If the warbarge ends and there is no one on the attacker's side, the collateral is immediately forfeited to the defender to compensate for time wasted, and the battle is immediately decided and cuts to EOM(to save time), the collateral being divided up between everyone on the defender's side. If the situation is reversed and the attackers show but the defenders don't, the match is immediately decided and cuts to EOM, but the defenders did not have to put up collateral. Instead concord will directly tax their corp wallet(if its empy then it will tax the players evenly) and give it to the attackers (8-16 mil ISK). The obvious trade off is that the attackers are one step closer to flipping the district. The re-up attack warbarge will be 5 mins long instead of 10 mins to save time as well. What do you think?
I'm mixed. I'd previously stated that I was against collaterals because it wouldn't really solve the problem. Forcing corporations to pay up a sum of ISK isn't going to stop or deter no show fights from the entities that really want to do it. No shows are, fundamentally, a problem because of the 'scheduled fight' system which doesn't really make much sense in the first place but it's what we have.
The thing about collaterals is that it would just add another barrier of entry for newer entities wanting to get into PC, I feel. Outer Heaven, Ancient Exiles, etc aren't going to have any qualms forking over a few million ISK to distract the enemy with weaponized boredom. It then becomes a war of attrition that the poorer, newer corporations that weren't around for PC ISK farming will never be able to win.
Now, if the ISK went to CONCORD and simply vanished, it'd be better off because then no showing becomes a dedicated ISK sink that takes that ISK out of the economy rather than exchanging it. But even still it retains the core issues described.
Negative Introspection - Aeon's CPM Blog
Skype: nomistrav
|
DDx77
MONSTER SYNERGY
420
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 16:39:00 -
[20] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:Grimmiers wrote:I think location actually mattering would help a lot too. Being able to attack anyone anywhere makes it really easy for pc corps to get burnt out when a bunch of different corps can just attack, no show, troll, etc. Not only that, but there's no obvious reason to attack anyone. District services that benefit eve and dust and a marketplace would've added some depth.
After playing eve I thought it would be cool if dust players could fight on planetary interaction colonies too boost production, or steal isk. Planetary interaction is actually ran by drones, so it would be possible reprogram them to benefit you instead of the eve player and that eve player would hire mercs to get rid of the rogue drones. /offtopic
Basically there's little hope for a pc I'm interested in until there's a new game. Agree'd. Might actually be an interesting solution to no shows, actually, if you could only use a clone pack to attack a district in a system that is bordering a high-sec system. This gives tactical value to systems that are deeper in that are functionally immune to clone packs and allow newer corps to bridge in on the edge systems to gain their foothold. Thoughts?
This is a very good idea.
Arirana is also dead on about PC no shows, It is the absolute worst.
What about also adding a timer when a colony is put in an "inactive" state? Like an upkeep?
So lets say the default timer is 12hrs. If at any point the colony is placed inactive, this timer starts ticking down.
If the colony is placed inactive for 2hrs then the remaining timer will be 10hrs for example. If this timer ever reaches zero, the corporation then loses this property. ( Or perhaps incur some type of penalty that withdraws ISK, CP, or DK)
And allow a corporation to "refill" this timer by using DK (Hopefully influencing corps to remain active in acquiring DK through fighting)
|
|
Aeon Amadi
13
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 16:42:00 -
[21] - Quote
Arirana wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:
Agree'd. Might actually be an interesting solution to no shows, actually, if you could only use a clone pack to attack a district in a system that is bordering a high-sec system. This gives tactical value to systems that are deeper in that are functionally immune to clone packs and allow newer corps to bridge in on the edge systems to gain their foothold.
Thoughts?
I like this idea, but being a noob to the security mechanic I have a hard time understanding the pattern to the layout of high sec and low sec systems. Are High sec systems all near eachother or are each randomly distributed? I think there would have to be a UI upgrade to the starmap to make this easier to understand for everyone.
Here's a link to Dotlan showing the security status of each system
High Sec = 0.5 - 1.0 Low Sec = 0.1 - 0.4 Null Sec = 0.0
So, Kadlina (0.4), for instance, would be a system vulnerable to Clone Packs because it's connected to Kattegaud (0.7). Whereas Klingt (0.3) would not be because it is a pipe system connected only to Weld (0.3) and Unertek (0.3).
But yes, the star map does need some work to illustrate these things =p
Negative Introspection - Aeon's CPM Blog
Skype: nomistrav
|
Aeon Amadi
13
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 16:45:00 -
[22] - Quote
DDx77 wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:Grimmiers wrote:I think location actually mattering would help a lot too. Being able to attack anyone anywhere makes it really easy for pc corps to get burnt out when a bunch of different corps can just attack, no show, troll, etc. Not only that, but there's no obvious reason to attack anyone. District services that benefit eve and dust and a marketplace would've added some depth.
After playing eve I thought it would be cool if dust players could fight on planetary interaction colonies too boost production, or steal isk. Planetary interaction is actually ran by drones, so it would be possible reprogram them to benefit you instead of the eve player and that eve player would hire mercs to get rid of the rogue drones. /offtopic
Basically there's little hope for a pc I'm interested in until there's a new game. Agree'd. Might actually be an interesting solution to no shows, actually, if you could only use a clone pack to attack a district in a system that is bordering a high-sec system. This gives tactical value to systems that are deeper in that are functionally immune to clone packs and allow newer corps to bridge in on the edge systems to gain their foothold. Thoughts?
This is a very good idea. Arirana is also dead on about PC no shows, It is the absolute worst. What about also adding a timer when a colony is put in an "inactive" state? Like an upkeep? So lets say the default timer is 12hrs. If at any point the colony is placed inactive, this timer starts ticking down. If the colony is placed inactive for 2hrs then the remaining timer will be 10hrs for example. If this timer ever reaches zero, the corporation then loses this property. ( Or perhaps incur some type of penalty that withdraws ISK, CP, or DK) And allow a corporation to "refill" this timer by using DK (Hopefully influencing corps to remain active in acquiring DK through fighting)
Sort of counter-intuitive. Would be selling clones just to be able to cover the inactive DK cost. Just being 'Inactive' is enough of a punishment, really. Entities can't generate clones unless it's set to active and it is still vulnerable to attack (and subsequently, loss). So they can't recover from the losses. No real reason to add costs and timers because they can't hold the district indefinitely in an inactive state =p
Negative Introspection - Aeon's CPM Blog
Skype: nomistrav
|
DEATH THE KlD
Imperfect - Bastards
624
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 16:46:00 -
[23] - Quote
Varoth Drac wrote:Ringers should be eliminated from the game. You should only be able to deploy to PC if you are a member of one of the two participating corporations.
Assistance from other corporations should be in the form of hiring another corporation to defend a district for you. You then give the hired corporation the ability to deploy for the defence, as a whole team. If you want assistance attacking, you should hire a corporation to attack a district for you. The hired Corp takes the district and then should be able to freely hand over the district.
Only mercs from two corporations should ever be present in a PC at the same time.
There should be a cooldown on Corp hopping.
This would make it much easier for new blood to enter PC. At the moment it's far too easy for old corporations with the right contacts to hire ringers that will stomp any opposition.
If you had to use your own mercs, defending districts would be harder and more players would be able to join in and learn PC. So we remove the mercenary factor? You realize corps are built around ringing and so are players..so no, ringing is fine..I shouldn't have to Corp hop every week just to do pc's
CEO of Imperfect Bastards and NF -Heimdallr69
Imps>NS>NF
|
Varoth Drac
Dead Man's Game
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 16:47:00 -
[24] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:Theorycraft with me for a moment. Bear in mind that these ideas are fairly fresh so there's probably going to be a lot of issues with them (hence the point of theorycrafting).
Districts can be set as 'Active' or 'Inactive'. In an 'Inactive' state they are fundamentally worthless. They do not generate clones, you cannot move them, you pretty much just retain ownership of the district and that's about it.
In an 'Active' state you can use them as normally like you do today.
The key difference here is that in an 'Inactive' state you retain the typical battle mechanics. Battles are announced up to 24/48 hours ahead of time, you have time to prepare, etc. In an 'Active' state, you are given at most an hours notice and the district must stay in an 'Active' state for 12-24 hours.
This forces corporations to engage in risk/reward in order to get the benefits from their districts. They can be attacked in an 'Inactive' state and have notice but will not be able to recover from the losses unless they put the district in an 'Active' state. This, in theory, would significantly reduce the farming capability as you would have to have players online to defend the district in order to farm it since it can't generate/sell clones while 'Inactive'.
Since the 'Inactive' state is functionally worthless, it is impossible to retain for long periods of time as any attacks -WILL- do damage to the clone counts, even if they are miniscule. This forces the defending corporation to set it to 'Active' at some point in order to recover the losses, thus killing district holding for district holding's sake and making it difficult to farm without actively defending.
Still thinking about how to combat the no show mechanics in a feasible way. Might have something come lunch time. Active / inactive districts could be ok, if the mechanic was needed.
I think 12 hours would be too long to have a district open to attack. Most corps have a window of a few hours a day when most people are active.
I think 1 hour would be too long to wait after launching an attack. You want to get the attack launched, set up and fought in the space of a reasonable play session of about 1 hour. So 10 - 20 mins wait time. You want to be able to get online, see who you have on, suggest an attack, group up and fight. All in one session. |
Bradric Banewolf
Titans of Phoenix Damage LLC
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 16:52:00 -
[25] - Quote
Rinzler XVII wrote:Remove locking, allow multiple attacks at the same time... eg you could orchestrate 3 consecutive attacks to wear the enemy Corp down.
Pc should have always have been free form, placing attack restrictions is stupid and has allowed a monopoly to happen..
Allow tactical attacks eg v an american Corp attack them at 3/4am there time... Pc is far too safe and with the big Corps allied together Pc has died...
Make it more like Eve, instead of this wishy washy crap we have now, it has killed any idea of lore and is a far cry from what we were initially promised
I would agree, but you're putting the cart before the horse. First the game mode has to be fixed mechanically. The game mechanics are still struggling with lag, latency, etc.
Second there are teams capable of coming through taking everything with no one to stand in there way because they have all the mods on their side. I know catching modders and punishing them is difficult. I know Sony won't step up and stop the use, but something to some effect has to be done. The game lag is one thing, but the lag produced from having a bunch of modders in a 30 meter area is unplayable?!
Third, the no shows are a clear indication that less experienced players have loss confidence due to the above statement. They know they can't fight the lag/latency in PC. So they just use gorilla tactics to try to get paid something. They don't even try to win?! They should feel confident enough to fight a true battle without being robbed by framer ate drop, not getting the server, or guys having a advantage because they play on different servers smh?!
Their tactics and teamwork should matter toward a solid win for them, or at least a strong loss. Instead they don't even push because they're damge isn't registering, while the enemy can kill entire heavies in one magazine?
If CCP can rid the game of modifications the game we will have an amazing game ready to make it's move to next Gen systems! Players want good battles, the game moved to ps4, and more players playing, but they can't seem to put down all their mods and play straight up. Modded controllers, Titan ones, and all sorts of glitches and cheats is how guys want to play PC now. They want to just kill everything with one rifle instead of team work and tactics.
CCP will never be able to next Gen this game as long as this exist. The community won't grow, and PC will continue to be dead no matter what CCP does. I play with new guys all the time, and try to teach teamwork and tactics. We talk about suits, vehicles, bonuses, statistics, etc. They all say the same thing though?! While all I say and train seems nice, they can't counter the super high TTK of some players they encounter, and lag/latency/framerate drop they experience when facing certain players (you know them) is too much, and they just quit (report to the redline).
Game could be awesome, but we are afraid of Internet badgering by p*ssies who can't bust a grape in real life. They keep you silent about theit cheats and mods. Instead you should be treating them like leppers, but alot of you just want to do the same.
Your idea is one that could be a thing if the bs went away. +1
"Anybody order chaos?"
|
Bradric Banewolf
Titans of Phoenix Damage LLC
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 16:56:00 -
[26] - Quote
I am all for making things harder! Challenge excepted! Ya'll know how I role! I've played Gallente sense the beginning lol! The star map could open up pass molded heath, and we could have a blast! The game could prosper 1,000 fold, but CCP is spending all their time making bs adjustments because of false readings do to mods?!
"Anybody order chaos?"
|
Varoth Drac
Dead Man's Game
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 17:08:00 -
[27] - Quote
DEATH THE KlD wrote:Varoth Drac wrote:Ringers should be eliminated from the game. You should only be able to deploy to PC if you are a member of one of the two participating corporations.
Assistance from other corporations should be in the form of hiring another corporation to defend a district for you. You then give the hired corporation the ability to deploy for the defence, as a whole team. If you want assistance attacking, you should hire a corporation to attack a district for you. The hired Corp takes the district and then should be able to freely hand over the district.
Only mercs from two corporations should ever be present in a PC at the same time.
There should be a cooldown on Corp hopping.
This would make it much easier for new blood to enter PC. At the moment it's far too easy for old corporations with the right contacts to hire ringers that will stomp any opposition.
If you had to use your own mercs, defending districts would be harder and more players would be able to join in and learn PC. So we remove the mercenary factor? You realize corps are built around ringing and so are players..so no, ringing is fine..I shouldn't have to Corp hop every week just to do pc's The mercenary factor is absolutely maintained. You just have mercenary corps that are hired to fight PC battles. |
TheD1CK
Dead Man's Game
2
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 17:09:00 -
[28] - Quote
Arirana wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:Real Raids! Whats your idea for a real raid? I was thinking a window mode mechanic would be good, as in you can attack a district and in a hour or less the battle happens. Reasoning is if you own a district, you should be able to defend it during the timer you have it set to. If you have multiple districts on the same timer, you're **** out of luck. The offset would be a raid cannot flip the district, only reduce the clone count and generate ISK for the raiders.
+ 1
I've thought about this a bit, and a few ideas come to mind
- Allow defenders to Deploy on the hour for ONLINE District timers. 10 mins after it is opened to platoons in a modified Other Contracts (Merc Contracts) and attackers can deploy. Pretty much leaving a hardcore Skirmish 1.0 battle. (This attack would be available to any ONLINE district at it's reinforcement timer) (Merc Contracts would also display a Squad Finder for open platoons only as well as upcoming timers)
- Raid (CP) Attacks could have varying risk v reward by changing the costs. Standard 150 clone packs could cost 40k to discourage their spam, and to add incentive for raiding a 25k 80 clone pack would be available and offer a chance for increased $/salvage rates and maybe allow salavge on BOTH teams in the 80 clone raid. So scrubs actually use it this keeps the option to attack with 150 clones at an increased cost, makes Raids worth it and possibly another CP pack with 200? clones at 60/80k CP? to add more depth to a Corps options. So far it's been a useless addition as not enough make use of it.
PC 2.0 was a pointless addition if CCP do not keep working on it. Also there should be some reimbursement for the time wasted for players in no show attacks. Even a % of the clones being sold for DK and 0 ISK payment. SOMETHING.
SOONtm
|
TheD1CK
Dead Man's Game
2
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 17:28:00 -
[29] - Quote
Varoth makes a good point on Ringers in parts, because you have to accept they are essential as team cannot deploy all the time every battle. So to change how it functions
- Mercs from District holding Corporations can only ring in agreed Contracts between them at a in-game set price for 5/10/15 mercs, so 5 mercs would be a cheap enough option to fill a team, while 10/15 to BE your team would cost a set amount of ISK that is paid from Corp to Corp. If you want to field multiple teams, you would have to pay for it.
-Solo mercs, would still be able to join IF they are not part of a land holding Corp, opening a chance for Raiding Corps to gain PC time outside of their battles and encouraging Merc/Raiding Corps. To discourage Corp hopping to bypass this, a 24hr stasis period is active when a merc joins a Corp for deploying into PC battles, adding a Merc loyalty bonus (+2% to DK earnings per rank) upto as much as 5 ranks gained by either your time/PC battles with your Corporation. resets on leaving.
Adds more depth to how Corps function and benefit players. And balances the use of experienced mercs by forcing them to be used in possibly expensive contracts. Squad of 5=5mil // 10=15mil // 15=30mil ??? could be estimates for the cost of PC Corp ringers.
SOONtm
|
Varoth Drac
Dead Man's Game
1
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 17:56:00 -
[30] - Quote
I'm getting more used to the idea that you don't need a full 16 players in a team. And both attackers and defenders would be in the same boat re having to have enough corp members available for PC.
Ok, so it would kind of suck having corps with lots of members who have to be kept in reserve to maximise the chance of having a full 16 team. Though the ability to raid would possibly give reserves something to do whilst the A team were fighting. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |