|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
1155
   |
Posted - 2013.01.14 11:46:00 -
[1] - Quote
I really hope CCP wont rush into the territorial conquest part of the game. Imo, as long as Factionnal Warfare isnt spot on, it's not worth going further as it will be even more complicated to sort out.
Now, i like your idea of the "no one took the defense contract ? then battle goes into mercenary tab and is open to every random dude out there." But this would only work if there's actually a reward to get for those no-corp mercs. LP is a solution, but it's not enough as those guy wont get ISK or SP for fighting those battles while knowing they will end up in front of an organized corp in a fight that may cost them some pretty good money.... Also, what about collateral then ? those mercs would pay some ? If not, what's in it for the corp that set the attack contract ? nothing.
Also, i agree FW shouldnt require an enemy for a district to switch owner. It shouldnt also be able to change owner every 20 minutes. So why not just add a freakin reinforce timer of 20 to 24h after a battle took place ?
At first, with so many district flipping sides without a fight, Capsuleers involved in FW would have way more incentives to care for dust mercs so they can protect them. And then, with the reinforce timers, fights will probably happen every day or so round the same time when war rages in the stars.
But even then, with Capsuleers unable to throw in any extra money to the mercs, why bother right ? Why lose tons of equipment to win petty amounts of ISK ? Some would say that setting contracts at 50 mil is good money. But personnaly, i wouldnt put 50 Mil as collateral for a fight that can get me another 50 mil minus every equipment loss. That's just silly. Setting 50 mil as collateral with a win expectancy of 200 mil would make me think harder. And even then, not sure many actual merc would go for it.
bottom line. fix FW first as it needs a tremendous amount of work. dont rush planetary conquest that will require even more complicated stuff and EVE interaction if we want the slightest chance to be of any interest to the hardcore capsuleers in those forsaken regions of new eden. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
1155
|
Posted - 2013.01.14 12:22:00 -
[2] - Quote
Except we dont actually own FW districts. We just flip them and then they're in the hands of the empire we worked for. An empire that doesnt spend a dime in any of those fights.
When you mention that you dont get my critic regarding collateral, it surprises me. Am i the only one that finds very odd to engage half the money of what you expect to win ? It doesnt make any sense at all when you add the cost of the equipment. What you expect to win is EVERY TIME less than what you will risk ! Merc works for money, if the job doesnt seem interesting on the risk\reward ratio, well you just dont do it. Pure logic.
Adding LP to the mix could ease the pain, but i maintain it wouldnt be enough. Also, do you know how long it will take for corps to play such kind of collateral on a regular basis ? collateral that would cover the possible loss of 16 (yes coz it will finally be 16 players) players losing maybe 100 suits, weapons, modules, half o dozen HAV, LAVs, or dropships ? It could take more than a while. Bankroll management of corps is gonna be painfull.... FW contracts are badly designed, corp tools for gathering money from members are absent... etc..
Imo, the winning team of a FW contract should get both collateral and a bonus fee from the empire for which it worked. In order to avoid any exploit from stupid warriors,hum players, this reward should be calculated on the loss of the winning team. Say a team lost 2 mil worth of equipment, you get a 4 millions bonus or something. This could still be used to make easy money, but as i dont see exploits jerks being willing to destroy their KDR for ISK, it could be a decent solution to make FW way more interesting.
On the eve side, maybe EVE players could support a specific contract and boost the multiplier for that bonus reward at their own expense ?
Now, regarding nullsec aka planetary conquest and player owned planet\district as AFAIK it is limited to null-sec. You say it will need less EVE interactions ? 
So what ? We just go and fight for districts inside systems owned by EVE player run corporations and they have no say in that ?
"Hey dude, you own the system ? yeah ? Well i dont give a frack, i'll just take that planet entirely, see ya !"
2 days later
"hey dude, you own the system ? yeah ? well i dont give a frack, i have a beaf with the guy that owns that planet right there and will take it for my corp now, see ya !"
It just cannot work this way. Planetary conquest has to be bound somehow to system sovereignty. it CANNOT ignore that in its mechanics. Or it will be pointless.
So in the end, yes. 0.0 side of dust should require more EVE interaction than FW where systems flipped between NPC factions. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
1155
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 11:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
I'm sorry folks but as far as i know, planetary conquest is 0.0 only. I mean, player owned planets. Not planets conquered in the name of an NPC faction. If you think differently, please link a source cause for me, low sec districts are not planned to be owned by player corporations....
Thus why i only talk about null-sec. Owning a district, or a planet with your CORP name on it, and changing stuff on it needs to be done in a Sovable system. Thus why i say that planetary conquest for our corps isnt close, and SHOULDNT be close. |
|
|
| |
|