I believe more mercs would play for all sides and be "true" immortal mercenaries playing for the highest bidder if they offered some sort of faction specific rewards, be it through LP or added monetary incentives. I think, setting monetary aspect on a back burner, they need to first fully sync our FW system with Eve's by allowing eve corporations to host contracts on particular planets then picking which corp they want to go take the contract. This will remove the shotgun approach to FW that our current system takes and will allow corps to strategically pick which planet to take as well as the corp they want to hire to go take it. Hopefully if they just take baby steps fixing this, one step at a time, we will see a fully functional, worthwhile FW system.

I understand your point of view but what happen for corp where the majority of player worked? + we need time to sleep, your idea is good for week end but not in the week, personnaly

The thing is, that's how it's supposed to work. Have you ever seen any EvE gameplay? Things can be attacked at any time, whether you're at work, on the toilet or in the land of make believe. It has to be constant warfare, and setting up time zones is way inconsistent with the way things are done in New Eden, that would mean that the PvP was still consensual and...Well...Let's face it, that's a CoD thing. Not a New Eden thing.

True, but this game is called dust514, yes we are in EVE universe but we can have our own mechanic system, i have absolutly nothing against eve or is player but if i want his mechanic i play eve and not dust

I SWARE!!!! if you put reinforcement timers into dust, i will paint your server pink, and advertise free pink shiny stuff on the web!

Not going to lie, this kind of makes me want to do it more, not less.

..... What about reinforcement timers that can be influenced by the actions of smaller groups?

Like with what happens currently in Faction Warfare and the "dust influence" affecting the percentages on how easy/hard a system is to capture?

So we take a 12 hour reinforcement timer and for every 8v8 corp battle... shave off thirty minutes? This way we have more collateral damage and generally more combat out of sovereignty conflicts?

The same goes DUST. If someone is online and leaves the station (joins a battle) they are fair game. You should not however be able to take someones district if they are not online. This would be no fun for either side and it would encourage the development of very large corporations. If you had to have enough members online at all times to defend a district there would be no small corporations around owning just one or two districts.

I cannot see a situation where we find that acceptable. We want both small and large organizations to be able to have at the least the ability to participate in district gameplay when we get to it.

While that can certainly be justified I do believe that a limit should be placed on the length of time the district can be protected while the corp is offline. Mainly because you may end up with a situation where a new corp comes in claims a district, actively defends it for awhile, and then doesn't log on for weeks or months or more effectively taking that district off the market permanently.

Please go back to eating crayons then. If you actually read what I wrote and understand my concerns you would see that there is no economic motivation under current model for FW militia corps to actually want to pay mercs to take or defend districts.

TL:DR No merc contracts

So, in short this thread goes about
1) how to create an incentive to fight, and
2) how to organise the fights

Mostly, we have some good mechanics in place in Eve which grew over time. And in my opnion, most of these mechanics can be translated into dust.

1) Make every district generate a passive cop income. the lower the sec status of the solar system, the higher the income. If a corp owns an entire planet, multiply the income by a factor, is the entire constellation owned, an even bigger factor. You own a region? Well done, payday has arrived ;) I'm deliberately not suggesting specific amounts and factors, because this obviously would have to be tweaked.

2) How to set up fights? Now this is more challenging. In Eve we got a couple of really nice mechanics, which could be adopted for Dust. War Declaration, Bounties, Fleet Adverts and FW System Control.

So, you want to take over a district? First, you have to declare war on the owning corp. After 24 hours, fighting can legally occur, and you can order your war barges into orbit arround their planets. The more barges you got, the more planets you can assault simultaneously. The more MCC's you got, the more districts you can assault simmultaneously.

Now, how to make sure there are ppl willing to fight? Allow the owning corp to set up a Battle Advert for each district that is being attacked. They can decide who can join in on the battle based on standing and membership (no standing, light blue, blue, corp or alliance). Warring factions are automatically excluded from these Battle Adverts, negative standing is by default excluded, but can be allowed. These adverts could be set up in advance, and automatically activate once a war starts.

Any team eligible to act on the advert, can enter the battle. At that point, a match is set up which will start once both sides have a full team, or once a timer runs out. Depending on which side wins the battle, district control will shift. Once control has shifted completely to the agressing side, ownership will change. The beauty is, that timers are built into this system. Let's say you need 12 consecutive wins to flip the system. A match will start a 2 hour timer, so it will take a minimum of 24 hours to flip a system in the case noone shows up.

But what about pay-out?

Let both sides put up a contract pool on the district. Teams are payed out from this pool, based upon win/loss and value destroyed.

My 5 cents on the topic ;)

CCP foxfour

I sat down at my computer to type out my idea and i realized something you probably already know. It's not an either or ideaology when it comes to timers or persistant control model but a combination. If you stick with just one type you expose players to certain strong negatives with either one. The combination minimizes this

So forgive me for assuming once again.

I see a timer window that the defender sets. That attacker chooses to attack during this widow the rewards are greater for the attacker if it wins. Now the attacker can choose to attack at any time it wants (and may have a slight negative to the owner of district) but its a hollow victory. An occuping corp should not force a change in district loyatly or reward to the owner. If anything its a seige of the district to force a fight. That said the defender once seiged can choose to fight to remove the siege at anytime.

This will strongly encourage players to attack during the defenders window. If not the defender can choose any time to force a fight to remove the occupancy of the district. You should be able to do anything to your district till you repeal the occupiers though. So you can attack when you want but it doesn't really help.

change of topic

I still think there needs to be a global alliegance system so that the more districts/planets/systems a corp holds the higher the loyalty factor is required to maintain the x,y,z bonues etc.

Last

I have talked to a bunch of eve and dust corps and the idea to transfer control of districts is a big deal to them also. One even suggested to me that you can make it eve side for now to limit the dust coding.

So while you thinks its a low priority its very high for us in terms of meta gaming. Which is needed greatly in dust as even eve is just a space game without the meta.

back later have to troll scrub corps in LFBattle channel

I like the combination.

Attacking during the vulnerability = siege.

Attacking outside the window is a raid with ISK impact on the corp but it's not an attempt to take the district.

Being able to take districts and sell them on the secondary market somehow, is pretty key.

This implies that eve side contracts for defense be available so that subcontracting can occur.

CCP foxfour

I sat down at my computer to type out my idea and i realized something you probably already know. It's not an either or ideaology when it comes to timers or persistant control model but a combination. If you stick with just one type you expose players to certain strong negatives with either one. The combination minimizes this

So forgive me for assuming once again.

I see a timer window that the defender sets. That attacker chooses to attack during this widow the rewards are greater for the attacker if it wins. Now the attacker can choose to attack at any time it wants (and may have a slight negative to the owner of district) but its a hollow victory. An occuping corp should not force a change in district loyatly or reward to the owner. If anything its a seige of the district to force a fight. That said the defender once seiged can choose to fight to remove the siege at anytime.

This will strongly encourage players to attack during the defenders window. If not the defender can choose any time to force a fight to remove the occupancy of the district. You should be able to do anything to your district till you repeal the occupiers though. So you can attack when you want but it doesn't really help.

change of topic

I still think there needs to be a global alliegance system so that the more districts/planets/systems a corp holds the higher the loyalty factor is required to maintain the x,y,z bonues etc.

Last

I have talked to a bunch of eve and dust corps and the idea to transfer control of districts is a big deal to them also. One even suggested to me that you can make it eve side for now to limit the dust coding.

So while you thinks its a low priority its very high for us in terms of meta gaming. Which is needed greatly in dust as even eve is just a space game without the meta.

back later have to troll scrub corps in LFBattle channel

Good post beers
i like it, Once enemies arent able to take the district outside the reinforcement window thats good, make the impact be a slight reduction in w/e passive resources come in.

Also i like ur global allegiance system. Makes it harder for corps to keep expanding and maintaining districts/planets/systems bonuses which would make numbers matter. Am i gettin that right?

I have a question that interesting (I think) regarding the Dust/EVE economy link. When people have to produce weapons before they're able to being used, how do the AUR weapons fit in?

In eve there was a major riot when it became known that you could get a ship skin by using only AUR to pay for it, instead of the original Item + aur. The problem was that the way CCP wanted to do it skipped the production and industry side completely, spawning items out of thin air. To me it seems AUR items in Dust are the same, they skip the isk(produced) item completely as it stands now.

How is CCP going to change AUR items, to not make the same mistake twice?