DUST Search - Dev Blog: Planetary Conquest

Quote:

So after much discussion internally we think we need some new new numbers. Before I go into this if you have not read my previous big post please check it out: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=627150#post627150

One of the things we realized with those numbers is that it was possible to lock out districts by attacking them with alt corps and MAKE money, not lose money. Woops. :D Glad we think these things through so clearly. :P

So some more changes

Original numbers:
Genolution starter package clones: 100
Genolution starter package ISK: 20M ISK
Clone generation rate: 40
PF clone generation rate: 60
Minimum clone loss: 100
Clone sell value: 100,000 ISK
Minimum clone movement: 100

Numbers proposed in previous post:
Genolution starter package clones: 200
Genolution starter package ISK: 40M ISK
Clone generation rate: 100
PF clone generation rate: 150
Minimum clone loss: 150
Clone sell value: No change
Minimum clone movement: No change

New numbers we are thinking about:
Genolution starter package clones: 200
Genolution starter package ISK: 40M ISK
Clone generation rate: 75
PF clone generation rate: 100
Minimum clone loss: 150
Clone sell value: No change
Minimum clone movement: 150

On top of that we want to bump the cost of moving:
Genolution base cost to move: 500,000 -> 3M ISK

Most of these changes are trying to find a balance between making this gameplay profitable, fun, balanced, and removing exploits. Keep the discussion going guys!

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 189 post(s)
steadyhand amarr Imperfects Negative-Feedback 357	Posted - 2013.03.18 18:51:00 - [961] - Quote as a quick point. we does an attacker have to wait till the next day for an attack, surely an attacker should be aloud to launch chained attacks if he wins with time left on the hour clock. This gives everybody in both coprs a good hour of fighting. and after the hour the attacking side can see if they want to continue the next day or deiced its not worth it. see agree with the 24 hour declaration though as it gives both sides time to draw up a game plan i can see a lot of attacks simply burning out due to the fact smaller corps cant get everyone going for the 4-5 days it would take to cap a district from simple burnout and wanting to play something else. At the moment the system heavily favorurs big corps in this regard. please as always remember you core playerbase has lives unlike most people here :P

CCP FoxFour C C P C C P Alliance 2070	Posted - 2013.03.18 19:02:00 - [962] - Quote So after much discussion internally we think we need some new new numbers. Before I go into this if you have not read my previous big post please check it out: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=627150#post627150 One of the things we realized with those numbers is that it was possible to lock out districts by attacking them with alt corps and MAKE money, not lose money. Woops. :D Glad we think these things through so clearly. :P So some more changes Original numbers: Genolution starter package clones: 100 Genolution starter package ISK: 20M ISK Clone generation rate: 40 PF clone generation rate: 60 Minimum clone loss: 100 Clone sell value: 100,000 ISK Minimum clone movement: 100 Numbers proposed in previous post: Genolution starter package clones: 200 Genolution starter package ISK: 40M ISK Clone generation rate: 100 PF clone generation rate: 150 Minimum clone loss: 150 Clone sell value: No change Minimum clone movement: No change New numbers we are thinking about: Genolution starter package clones: 200 Genolution starter package ISK: 40M ISK Clone generation rate: 75 PF clone generation rate: 100 Minimum clone loss: 150 Clone sell value: No change Minimum clone movement: 150 On top of that we want to bump the cost of moving: Genolution base cost to move: 500,000 -> 3M ISK Most of these changes are trying to find a balance between making this gameplay profitable, fun, balanced, and removing exploits. Keep the discussion going guys!

Django Quik R.I.f.t 306	Posted - 2013.03.18 19:10:00 - [963] - Quote Ah jeez, how'd we miss that!? heh What's this new number? 'Genolution base cost to move: 500,000 -> 3M ISK'
Cerebral Wolf Jr Immobile Infantry 850	Posted - 2013.03.18 19:10:00 - [964] - Quote I'll for the new changes with the exception of the Genolution base cost to move being so high, That's a lot when you consider how much a district will be earning. Maybe settle for the middle ground of 1.5m?
Telcontar Dunedain Imperfects Negative-Feedback 361	Posted - 2013.03.18 19:39:00 - [965] - Quote CCP FoxFour wrote: So after much discussion internally we think we need some new new numbers. ... Most of these changes are trying to find a balance between making this gameplay profitable, fun, balanced, and removing exploits. Keep the discussion going guys! Do not like. I think you've designed towards making this a passive isk farm. You've made it worse with the 40m minimum buyin for people without districts. Too expensive to raid with too little reward for killing people instead of sitting and farming with the zerg. 75k/100k/125k would be a better set of numbers instead of 50/100/400

CCP FoxFour C C P C C P Alliance 2074	Posted - 2013.03.18 19:48:00 - [966] - Quote Telcontar Dunedain wrote: 50/100/400 Where did you get those numbers from? They are 50/100/200

Telcontar Dunedain Imperfects Negative-Feedback 361	Posted - 2013.03.18 19:52:00 - [967] - Quote CCP FoxFour wrote: Telcontar Dunedain wrote: 50/100/400 Where did you get those numbers from? They are 50/100/200 You are correct, however you lose 30m per attack instead of 20m per attack now (as a raider).

CCP FoxFour C C P C C P Alliance 2074	Posted - 2013.03.18 19:53:00 - [968] - Quote Telcontar Dunedain wrote: CCP FoxFour wrote: Telcontar Dunedain wrote: 50/100/400 Where did you get those numbers from? They are 50/100/200 You are correct, however you lose 30m per attack instead of 20m per attack now (as a raider). I have said it before and will say it again, this gameplay is not meant to encouraging raiding with the clone starter packs, it is actually designed to discourage that. Once you own a raiding should be viable, but not owning a district and making money from those that do is not something we are designing for.

Telcontar Dunedain Imperfects Negative-Feedback 361	Posted - 2013.03.18 20:00:00 - [969] - Quote CCP FoxFour wrote: Telcontar Dunedain wrote: CCP FoxFour wrote: Telcontar Dunedain wrote: 50/100/400 Where did you get those numbers from? They are 50/100/200 You are correct, however you lose 30m per attack instead of 20m per attack now (as a raider). I have said it before and will say it again, this gameplay is not meant to encouraging raiding with the clone starter packs, it is actually designed to discourage that. Once you own a raiding should be viable, but not owning a district and making money from those that do is not something we are designing for. 24 hours notice for every fight. Discouraging raiding playstyles so that people can passively farm. No advantage to attacking versus farming your clones. No difference between districts so no reason to move around once you are fat and have the timers you want. This design is too conservative imo, it needs some more meat and spice.
Sextus Hardcock Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz 100	Posted - 2013.03.18 20:20:00 - [970] - Quote CCP FoxFour wrote: Telcontar Dunedain wrote: CCP FoxFour wrote: Telcontar Dunedain wrote: 50/100/400 Where did you get those numbers from? They are 50/100/200 You are correct, however you lose 30m per attack instead of 20m per attack now (as a raider). I have said it before and will say it again, this gameplay is not meant to encouraging raiding with the clone starter packs, it is actually designed to discourage that. Once you own a raiding should be viable, but not owning a district and making money from those that do is not something we are designing for. I agree with this design idea. The Geno Pack has no travel cost associated with it, and so must be made inferior to using your clones and paying to transport them from your district, to the point of invasion. The Pack serves to allow corps who have no foothold in a district yet to get a shot, not as a spec ops option for mercs/raiders or to otherwise bypass the clone travel degredation mechanic.

Telcontar Dunedain Imperfects Negative-Feedback 361	Posted - 2013.03.18 20:33:00 - [971] - Quote Sextus Hardcock wrote: CCP FoxFour wrote: Telcontar Dunedain wrote: CCP FoxFour wrote: Telcontar Dunedain wrote: 50/100/400 Where did you get those numbers from? They are 50/100/200 You are correct, however you lose 30m per attack instead of 20m per attack now (as a raider). I have said it before and will say it again, this gameplay is not meant to encouraging raiding with the clone starter packs, it is actually designed to discourage that. Once you own a raiding should be viable, but not owning a district and making money from those that do is not something we are designing for. I agree with this design idea. The Geno Pack has no travel cost associated with it, and so must be made inferior to using your clones and paying to transport them from your district, to the point of invasion. The Pack serves to allow corps who have no foothold in a district yet to get a shot, not as a spec ops option for mercs/raiders or to otherwise bypass the clone travel degredation mechanic. What would be a specops/raider option, besides having to hold sov?
Kiso Okami Militaires Sans Jeux 30	Posted - 2013.03.18 21:21:00 - [972] - Quote Telcontar Dunedain wrote: What would be a specops/raider option, besides having to hold sov? I guess that, right now, the answer is "none". Since they're trying to make you get a territory to make it your staging ground for raiding. Otherwise, Genolution clones would be the only viable way to do it, unless you could raid and steal the target people's clones to keep yourself supplied. But that would force you to fight every other jump. @FoxFour: You need to make passive farming less profitable than active farming, and then adding bonuses to owning more territories to increase the ISK production of your territories. I'd prefer if the bonuses only apply to adyacent districts to the ones that you own, which would encourage fighting amongst neighbors (like most territorial warfare was done back in the feudal eras of most ancient civilizations).
Booker DaFooker Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 73	Posted - 2013.03.18 21:54:00 - [973] - Quote preferred to 100 ISK baseline clone price, we all like profit right? Makes the districts worth fighting for. I do worry that smaller corps are being priced out of starting with the 40mil buy in. it's not a problem for me personally but new blood is always essential in any economy, it's like the housing market, it all grinds to a halt without first time buyers!
PT SD Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 190	Posted - 2013.03.18 22:49:00 - [974] - Quote I love the changes. This is turning into a real time game of Slay, I love the mechanics. It actually makes the DUST4514 become strategical, complex, and a lite war sim for our arm chair strategists. CCP do not dumb this type of gameplay down, because simple people can't figure it out. We want New Eden, and we want it now.
R F Gyro ZionTCD Legacy Rising 338	Posted - 2013.03.18 23:08:00 - [975] - Quote PT SD wrote: I love the changes. This is turning into a real time game of Slay, I love the mechanics. It actually makes the DUST4514 become strategical, complex, and a lite war sim for our arm chair strategists. CCP do not dumb this type of gameplay down, because simple people can't figure it out. We want New Eden, and we want it now. Don't forget the plans for MCC commanders playing a RTS-style game as well, to sit in between the turn-based strategy that is planetary conquest and the console FPS elements. Add the New Eden metagame and you've got fun on so many levels.
Sextus Hardcock Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz 100	Posted - 2013.03.18 23:21:00 - [976] - Quote Telcontar Dunedain wrote: What would be a specops/raider option, besides having to hold sov? Using a district as a staging ground you could invade other districts based on the potential loot gained. Corps that run 23/7 proto make good targets if you can consistently get a superior ISK efficiency against them. Other than that, not much. At least until the Merc Marketplace gets implemented.
Sontie VENGEANCE FOR HIRE 158	Posted - 2013.03.18 23:24:00 - [977] - Quote These larger numbers make it seem like smaller/newer corps are going to have a hell of a time trying to get involved in PC, at least until the number of districts becomes substantially more.
PT SD Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 190	Posted - 2013.03.18 23:36:00 - [978] - Quote Sextus Hardcock wrote: Telcontar Dunedain wrote: What would be a specops/raider option, besides having to hold sov? Using a district as a staging ground you could invade other districts based on the potential loot gained. Corps that run 23/7 proto make good targets if you can consistently get a superior ISK efficiency against them. Other than that, not much. At least until the Merc Marketplace gets implemented. Imagine 16 kamikaze militia Mercs attacking districts day after day of Protobears. Their ISK efficieny is going to be null. The tears are going to be delicious.
Parson Atreides Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising 176	Posted - 2013.03.18 23:39:00 - [979] - Quote Sontie wrote: These larger numbers make it seem like smaller/newer corps are going to have a hell of a time trying to get involved in PC, at least until the number of districts becomes substantially more. Imagine if you were a smaller corp of moderately skilled players. You can field 16... barely. For a corp like this, participating in PC will be very... expensive. First, most other corps will know your not the best, so you will be a target. And every time your attacked, you will lose a significant amount of isk, even if you win. Combine that with the significant cost of just getting started, and if your not a top 20 corp, forget about PC. And if your not one of their best 16 fighting in one of these corps, your pretty much just a isk farmer for your corp. Sucks. There's no reason some of these smaller corps can't merge together to create an average-sized group with a moderate amount of players and decent amount of depth. A lot of these smaller corps have a few really good players, but can't shine in Corp battles nor will they be able to in PC because they're all spread around. Plenty of people want to run their own corp, but if they're not willing to merge with similar corps (both in terms of skill and size) to try to be competitive, I really don't have a lot of sympathy. Not to mention, it's going to be almost impossible to create a system that doesn't favor bigger corps over smaller ones or vice versa and still keep it skill-based, fun and balanced.
Mr Gloo Gloo What The French CRONOS. 39	Posted - 2013.03.19 00:10:00 - [980] - Quote No ISK farming without conquest. You need more and more districts to farm more and more clones !!! 40M for 200 clones minimize alt corps effect, but do not avoid it completely. The thing is that now you could see a result at medium-long term, instead of short-medium term. So to organize this well without finally have a real corp split, it's much more complicated (but still not impossible) Do you loose ISK splitting corp with the new numbers ? Same answer, it just needs more time, so no ... Will I personnaly take the risk and the time to do it now ? I don't think so.

Belzeebub Santana SVER True Blood Unclaimed. 448	Posted - 2013.03.19 00:25:00 - [981] - Quote It's a good day when the community can help show that there are exploits an up coming release and that the Devs aren't so high and mighty not to take notice. We pushed this topic throughout this threadnuaght to the point where some were sure it wasn't feasible. These new new numbers seem legit with the cost of moving mercs being higher also. With the point of Raiders, they can use Geno to take them to any district and they can fight to get a base for their staging or if they are hired to grief a corp they first have to do this which can be asked for in the price of the contract. The Raider/ Griefer Corp stay as long as they can hold that outpost and expand if they want to and can abandon it for the Employer corp or just up and leave to go back as a districless corp to Raid/ Grief wherever your next employer beckons.
Django Quik R.I.f.t 310	Posted - 2013.03.19 00:36:00 - [982] - Quote PC is really not going to be viable for smaller/newer corps. There is nothing inherently wrong with the design on that. A corp that can't field a full team every day just isn't ready for this yet. Now if you want to form up an alliance with other corps, you might be able to join in some of the fun but this is not meant to be easy-town; this will be a tooth and nail battle to survive, let alone thrive. If anything the high entry cost is saving the smaller corps from wasting time, effort and isk on something that they have no chance of doing well at. And this isn't meant to be elitist and condescending - you see those <5 man corps who put up corp contracts? This is saving them from 'trying it out' until they have the funds, mercs and experience to compete. But don't get me wrong, there will still be plenty of corps playing PC. Just take a look at the leaderboards - The top 50 corps will easily all be playing and probably all the way down to the 250 and 500 marks too.
PT SD Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 190	Posted - 2013.03.19 00:36:00 - [983] - Quote Belzeebub Santana wrote: It's a good day when the community can help show that there are exploits an up coming release and that the Devs aren't so high and mighty not to take notice. We pushed this topic throughout this threadnuaght to the point where some were sure it wasn't feasible. These new new numbers seem legit with the cost of moving mercs being higher also. With the point of Raiders, they can use Geno to take them to any district and they can fight to get a base for their staging or if they are hired to grief a corp they first have to do this which can be asked for in the price of the contract. The Raider/ Griefer Corp stay as long as they can hold that outpost and expand if they want to and can abandon it for the Employer corp or just up and leave to go back as a districless corp to Raid/ Grief wherever your next employer beckons. SSSShhhh!!! You said enough.
D'Finn Rhedlyne Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore 268	Posted - 2013.03.19 00:51:00 - [984] - Quote 50 pages, 1.5 hours of my life that I will never get back... TOTALLY worth it! Keep up the good work Mercs and CCP... together we will make this game like nothing that has gone before!
Maken Tosch Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore 1699	Posted - 2013.03.19 01:38:00 - [985] - Quote Holy Shishcabob! That's a lot of discussion on this thing.
5Y5T3M 3RR0R The Southern Legion 4	Posted - 2013.03.19 01:48:00 - [986] - Quote Okay this is a really important question to me about the current conquest system. Who really wants to sell your conflict resource (clones) for a profit in a conflict game? We need to encourage the players to spend their clones in conflict and reward them for doing so regardless of if they are a defender or attacker. Your current system is based on the premise that we should be farming these clones to make a profit and this is fundamentally flawed for a game designed around FPS (unlike EVE). Currently by looking over the posts here I can see your system is making people apprehensive about spending their clones in conflict and being the defender has developed an association with unacceptable risk. If you work on the premise that conflict should be perpetual and territory will change hands only in one of two circumstances: A. The leadership makes a strategic error and leaves a territory under resourced. B. The troops make a tactical error and expend excessive resources attempting to win the match. It will be much more enjoyable for players to be involved in the primary premise of this whole system. List of potential changes I would suggest: 1. Make losing clones in combat more profitable than selling clones. Why? It encourages players to enter combat regardless of the risk of territorial loss and discourages a farming mentality. 2. Make winning the match by MCC destruction more benificial than clone count. Why? If it is more benificial to win by killing the MCC than by cloning the enemy it will encourage players to fight even after they hit the minimum loss threshold.Yes, sometimes players will want to hold back but it will be a tactical decision on the part of the battle commander and that adds another level of realism and complexity for corparations and battle commanders to consider at a strategic level. 3. Make the make the Minimum loss for a match equal to the Maximum possibly generated by a territory. Why? A territory will naturally be able to perpetually support either Offense or Defence but will quickly be depleted if it attempts to achieve both at the same time. This means that the Corparations involved will have to make a stategic decision what to with each territory as conflicts evolve. Smaller corporations will be able to earn a continual profit by just defending their one small piece of territory and keep a toehold in the conquest game no matter how larger their enemy while larger corporations with greater aspirations have hard decisions to make about how they will balance earning profit and maintaining conquest and defending existing territory. 4. Give corparations the ability to buy clones up to 1/100,000 Warpoints which they can keep in reserve on their GÇÿWarbargeGÇÖ, but only allow them to deploy to 1 territory per day. Why? This removes the ability of shell corportations to maniplulate the market in a way that destroys game play. Yes, massive corportations will be able to hold a massive number of clones in reserve but they are already going to find a way through weight of numbers and ISK to hold more territory and should be encouraged to participate in the conquest game without an excesive advantage. This also gives solid limitations which are hard for them to circumvent and allows them to perpetually keep a foot in the game at the potential of a very high cost in ISK which then need to earn somewhere. Also think of all the potential options it gives every corp in the way it can contribute to the above ideal of perpetual warfare, almost every reasonably sized corp will be able to maintain one daily conflict without it being a complete drain on their conquest based resources. Some examples of the effects: Large Corp attacks Small Corp (regardless of clones deployed) If Small Corp wins it earns profit, keeps territory and Large Corp pays the cost. If Small Corp is currently defensive and losses they keep their territory and Large Corp earns profit but gains no territory and has spent their 1 daily recharge. If Small Corp is currently on offense and loses, Large Corp earns profit and potentially gains territory.
Talos Alomar Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 519	Posted - 2013.03.19 02:26:00 - [987] - Quote Parson Atreides wrote: There's no reason some of these smaller corps can't merge together to create an average-sized group with a moderate amount of players and decent amount of depth. A lot of these smaller corps have a few really good players, but can't shine in Corp battles nor will they be able to in PC because they're all spread around.. If they can't form an alliance then they shouldn't be thinking about sov. Holding sov is going to take more money and manpower than many people are expecting.
Parson Atreides Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising 178	Posted - 2013.03.19 03:53:00 - [988] - Quote Talos Alomar wrote: Parson Atreides wrote: There's no reason some of these smaller corps can't merge together to create an average-sized group with a moderate amount of players and decent amount of depth. A lot of these smaller corps have a few really good players, but can't shine in Corp battles nor will they be able to in PC because they're all spread around.. If they can't form an alliance then they shouldn't be thinking about sov. Holding sov is going to take more money and manpower than many people are expecting. Exactly my point. I don't feel we need to cater to smaller corps at all when there are ways for them to be more competitive, or if they choose not to participate, then that's their choice.
SHANN da MAN D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire 8	Posted - 2013.03.19 04:18:00 - [989] - Quote Quote: So after much discussion internally we think we need some new new numbers. Before I go into this if you have not read my previous big post please check it out: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=627150#post627150 One of the things we realized with those numbers is that it was possible to lock out districts by attacking them with alt corps and MAKE money, not lose money. Woops. :D Glad we think these things through so clearly. :P So some more changes Original numbers: Genolution starter package clones: 100 Genolution starter package ISK: 20M ISK Clone generation rate: 40 PF clone generation rate: 60 Minimum clone loss: 100 Clone sell value: 100,000 ISK Minimum clone movement: 100 Numbers proposed in previous post: Genolution starter package clones: 200 Genolution starter package ISK: 40M ISK Clone generation rate: 100 PF clone generation rate: 150 Minimum clone loss: 150 Clone sell value: No change Minimum clone movement: No change New numbers we are thinking about: Genolution starter package clones: 200 Genolution starter package ISK: 40M ISK Clone generation rate: 75 PF clone generation rate: 100 Minimum clone loss: 150 Clone sell value: No change Minimum clone movement: 150 On top of that we want to bump the cost of moving: Genolution base cost to move: 500,000 -> 3M ISK Most of these changes are trying to find a balance between making this gameplay profitable, fun, balanced, and removing exploits. Keep the discussion going guys! You say Minimum Clone movement is going to be 150 clones ... is that only for movement to attack? What about moving clones from one District you own to another District you own (reinforcement)? Is going to stay at 100 Minimum or will that be raised to 150 Minimum also? If Reinforcement Movement is raised to 150 clone Minimum it will ALWAYS be a severe drain on the donating district ( 1/2 or 1/3 of Maximum clones allowed in District depending on SI in District) and leave it vulnerable to attack from another Corp in its weakened state.
Maken Tosch Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore 1699	Posted - 2013.03.19 04:49:00 - [990] - Quote 5Y5T3M 3RR0R wrote: Okay this is a really important question to me about the current conquest system. Who really wants to sell your conflict resource (clones) for a profit in a conflict game? Ships, moon resources, control towers, ammunition, modules, etc. are all conflict resources in Eve Online yet plenty of people buy and sell them like the New York Stock Exchange. But that doesn't mean the vast majority of the players don't use those resources to start conflicts. Much of the reason for buying and selling (once the market opens up to allow a player-controlled economy) is to fund for wars. Much of the reason for farming is to fund wars. So far, Eve Online has thrived under this system and I'm confident it will help FPS players as well since it provides a supplemental source (secondary) income to the average corp needing to find ways to fund their battles.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page