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) |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
621
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
We recently released a developer blog which covers some details of our upcoming Planetary Conquest feature. However we expect that players may still have some unanswered questions which I am going to try to answer here.
What happens with the existing corporation battle contracts? As has been pointed out by many of the open beta testers the current iteration on corporation battles linked with faction warfare has a few issues, namely being easy to avoid conflict and a low investment for corporations resulting in abandoned battles. The tie in with faction warfare is difficult to visualize and the impact of the battles is hard to measure.
Alongside planetary conquest comes a new starmap where we will be displaying the war zone for faction warfare and the impact DUST 514 is having. We will also be removing the pre-negotiated contracts and instead opening up faction warfare mercenary battles to all players. The battles will automatically start based on demand and then players can join whichever side they like from the battle finder or directly from the map.
Does this mean we will be able to queue sync in faction warfare? Yes, provided there are enough spots open up you can organize to fill one side of a battle. We expect this will be home to more organized squads of players who either do not have any corp activity at the time or are not interested in planetary conquest but are after more competitive gameplay.
How is the location of faction warfare battles decided? The locations are decided based on recent plexing in EVE Online. There will generally be multiple battles to choose from of which you can see the locations and pick which faction and which planet you wish to fight for.
Will I receive skill points for faction warfare and corporation battles? Yes, both the faction warfare mercenary battles and the planetary conquest battles will award skillpoints at the end of the battle.
Friendly fire? Yes, friendly fire will be enabled but only for corporation battles not faction warfare or instant battles. This means if you have a problem with someone shooting friendlies you can have them removed from the corporation.
How many players can join corporation battles? Planetary conquest will feature 16 vs 16 skirmish battles. Squad sizes are also being increased to 6 players per squad.
How do corporations make money from planetary conquest? Owning districts generates clones and clones can be sold for profit. You will however require clones for battle in order to expand and defend your districts so balancing how you use them will be important. At the end of a district battle rewards are paid out to just the winning team based on the value of biomass from the clones destroyed. Salvage is also handed out to both teams and is based on the items destroyed on the opposing team, similar to a loot drop from EVE. Rewards are evenly balanced among the team members based on their time in the battle not war points.
How do corporations take districts from other corporations? The basis of it is you move clones from one of your own districts to an enemy district then battle it out with the occupant. How many clones you take dictate how many you have available for the attack, while the defender gets access to all of the clones on their district. With a fully stocked district we expect you would need to multiple successful battles over a few days to a week in order to deplete a district of its clone reserves.
There are a few other subtle rules which should make for interesting gameplay. CCP FoxFour is currently working on a more detailed guide to cover this.
What about pre-arranged friendly corporation battles or tournaments? With the corporation contracts being removed, players will need to use the setting of planetary conquest to organize friendly battles. We realize that this is not as flexible as it could be though and so our current development plan is to introduce an arena mode where corporations can arrange a no consequences engagement. This then leads down a very interesting path of tournaments and betting etc.
We also want to make sure that when arenas are introduced they have consequences for not showing up to fight, something the current corporation contracts suffer from.
Can I have other corporations fight my battles? You can always pull additional players in to corporation battles using squads and if they win they will paid out of the biomass rewards. However our plan is to eventually open up a contract market place where other corporations can be hired to attack or defend districts on behalf of someone else.
How does planetary conquest tie in with EVE? There is a gameplay link, but the details are unannounced for now. We will be posting a dev blog about that later on.
If you have any additional questions then post in this thread and we'll do our best to answer them here. |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
621
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:17:00 -
[2] - Quote
reserved |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1516
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:17:00 -
[3] - Quote
And here are all the fine details: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest |
|
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
254
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:19:00 -
[4] - Quote
first!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
all the loves <3 |
Moochie Cricket
SyNergy Gaming
143
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:20:00 -
[5] - Quote
2nd |
Mors Falce
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
14
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:21:00 -
[6] - Quote
YOU LIED TO US THERE WAS NO RICK ROLL!!!! jk yey for foxfour now getting to sleep! its a good read |
Beyobi
Soldiers Of One Network Orion Empire
76
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:24:00 -
[7] - Quote
How many players can join corporation battles? Planetary conquest will feature 16 vs 16 skirmish battles. Squad sizes are also being increased to 6 players per squad.
So would that be 2 squads of 6 and 1 squad of 4? or will the Conquest battles be 12v12 or 18v18? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1516
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:25:00 -
[8] - Quote
Beyobi wrote:How many players can join corporation battles? Planetary conquest will feature 16 vs 16 skirmish battles. Squad sizes are also being increased to 6 players per squad.
So would that be 2 squads of 6 and 1 squad of 4? or will the Conquest battles be 12v12 or 18v18?
The planetary conquest battles are 16v16. So you can take 2 full squads in plus another partial squad. |
|
Sentient Archon
Red Star.
799
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:25:00 -
[9] - Quote
Do we have to be enrolled in faction warfare to drop OBS? Please remove this as a restriction. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1516
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:26:00 -
[10] - Quote
Sentient Archon wrote:Do we have to be enrolled in faction warfare to drop OBS? Please remove this as a restriction.
To do orbital bombardment for factional warfare battles yes, you need to be in FW.
To do orbital bombardment for planetary conquest battles, that is corporations fighting to own districts, you need to be in the corporation or alliance. |
|
|
|
ChribbaX
Otherworld Enterprises Dust Control Otherworld Empire Productions
196
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:26:00 -
[11] - Quote
Interesting! |
|
Iron Wolf Saber
BetaMax. CRONOS.
3104
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:27:00 -
[12] - Quote
A good start.
A good starting foundation indeed. |
Icy Tiger
Universal Allies Inc.
1091
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:28:00 -
[13] - Quote
Worth it. This will be so bad ass. Now we need an ETA. |
Mr Pwnykins
Arrogance.
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:28:00 -
[14] - Quote
Die Well. |
Rhapsodyy Darkforce
SyNergy Gaming
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:31:00 -
[15] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Beyobi wrote:How many players can join corporation battles? Planetary conquest will feature 16 vs 16 skirmish battles. Squad sizes are also being increased to 6 players per squad.
So would that be 2 squads of 6 and 1 squad of 4? or will the Conquest battles be 12v12 or 18v18? The planetary conquest battles are 16v16. So you can take 2 full squads in plus another partial squad.
Was just thinking this.
Any particular reason you dont just make it 18v18 so theres 3 full squads?
|
Gusk Hevv
Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic
25
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:33:00 -
[16] - Quote
When will this build drop? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1519
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:36:00 -
[17] - Quote
Rhapsodyy Darkforce wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Beyobi wrote:How many players can join corporation battles? Planetary conquest will feature 16 vs 16 skirmish battles. Squad sizes are also being increased to 6 players per squad.
So would that be 2 squads of 6 and 1 squad of 4? or will the Conquest battles be 12v12 or 18v18? The planetary conquest battles are 16v16. So you can take 2 full squads in plus another partial squad. Was just thinking this. Any particular reason you dont just make it 18v18 so theres 3 full squads?
The possibility of changing squad size means any number we pick could quickly not be valid. On top of that every player that we add to the match is another player that corporations need to field and the larger we require corporations to be in order to participate in this feature. For now we though 16v16 was the right balance. |
|
GoD-NoVa
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
190
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:40:00 -
[18] - Quote
will there be a way to track organized corp battles to make it easier for everyone to see which corp has the most wins and against who? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1523
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:40:00 -
[19] - Quote
GoD-NoVa wrote:will there be a way to track organized corp battles to make it easier for everyone to see which corp has the most wins and against who?
Not at this time, but we do hope to add statistics for this. |
|
SoLJae
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
361
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:42:00 -
[20] - Quote
CCP, thanks for the exciting news.
I just have one question: When will we get this?
I know you mentioned that it will be later this year, but can you at least estimate it down to a month, if not a specific date?
|
|
Muchomojo
THE DOLLARS
7
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:43:00 -
[21] - Quote
Will we have access these districts outside of battle? Would it be logical that the defender has some sort of advantage in terms of knowing the terrain etc? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1523
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:43:00 -
[22] - Quote
SoLJae wrote:CCP, thanks for the exciting news.
I just have one question: When will we get this?
I know you mentioned that it will be later this year, but can you at least estimate it down to a month, if not a specific date?
More information on this will come later. Sorry. |
|
Alcare Xavier Golden
DUST University Ivy League
52
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:43:00 -
[23] - Quote
This just became kitten interesting again!!!
|
Kitten Commander
Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:44:00 -
[24] - Quote
"In an update arriving later this year, " ... at least some things never change |
Sergamon Draco
Darkstar Mercs
4
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:44:00 -
[25] - Quote
GREAAAAAAAAAAAAAT,when this starts?
|
Alcare Xavier Golden
DUST University Ivy League
52
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:44:00 -
[26] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Beyobi wrote:How many players can join corporation battles? Planetary conquest will feature 16 vs 16 skirmish battles. Squad sizes are also being increased to 6 players per squad.
So would that be 2 squads of 6 and 1 squad of 4? or will the Conquest battles be 12v12 or 18v18? The planetary conquest battles are 16v16. So you can take 2 full squads in plus another partial squad.
So...two full squads...and a sniper squad perhaps... |
Kain Spero
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1080
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:44:00 -
[27] - Quote
I really think that the current corp warfare system shouldn't be completely scrapped. The pre-arranged battles allow for grudge matches to take place and can act as a vehicle for competitive play. Is possible that a system can/will be reintroduced to allow for pre-arranged battles with an eye towards competitive play, but not have an effect of Faction Warfare of planetary ownership? |
Rhapsodyy Darkforce
SyNergy Gaming
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:45:00 -
[28] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Rhapsodyy Darkforce wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Beyobi wrote:How many players can join corporation battles? Planetary conquest will feature 16 vs 16 skirmish battles. Squad sizes are also being increased to 6 players per squad.
So would that be 2 squads of 6 and 1 squad of 4? or will the Conquest battles be 12v12 or 18v18? The planetary conquest battles are 16v16. So you can take 2 full squads in plus another partial squad. Was just thinking this. Any particular reason you dont just make it 18v18 so theres 3 full squads? The possibility of changing squad size means any number we pick could quickly not be valid. On top of that every player that we add to the match is another player that corporations need to field and the larger we require corporations to be in order to participate in this feature. For now we though 16v16 was the right balance.
Yeah i understand you dont want to exclude smaller corps from gettign in on the action. Just personally i would like to see team size remain as a multiple of squad size. And the fact it is only 2 less than 18v18 aka 3 full squads just made me think hmmm why?
A corp that has 16 probaly has 18 in most cases. Dont get me wrong this is far better than the 8v8 corp matches, and id like to see the size increase more over time, however i know that ccp dont want to exclude the smaller entities from carving out their little corner of space like has become so hard for new groups to do in eve.
Is there any thought around the ccp tables about having differant sized corp matches? So a small planet that only has 5 districts might be 8v8 or 12v12 battles on that planet, where as the bigger planets with up to 24 districts could have the bigger corp battles. Or something like that, so that small corps can still get some competitive play and larger corps can still get into bigger battles, and yet still give everyone the chance to claim some districts?
Maybe its a crap idea, but i was just thinking what happens to these smaller corps anyway when the player cap is increased again, as personally id certainly like to see us getting up to 32v32 ish numbers at some point. |
Luke Vetri
D3ath D3alers RISE of LEGION
48
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:45:00 -
[29] - Quote
Quote:Genolution only sells clones in packs of 100 to corporations that do not own districts
Will we be able to trade/transfer clones between corps. I'm thinking a corp not owning a district buying clones and passing them to one that does to bolster the numbers?
Not sure if that would be a good or bad thing yet... |
Galdor Seregon
DUST University Ivy League
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:46:00 -
[30] - Quote
New build coming? Not sure when? *cough*FANFEST*cough**cough**runs away having a coughing fit*fanfest... Fanfes... Fanfe.... Fanf... Fan |
|
Sven Lindblad
Algintal Core Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:47:00 -
[31] - Quote
Great, hopefully this update will come in the foreseeable future. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1523
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:48:00 -
[32] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:I really think that the current corp warfare system shouldn't be completely scrapped. The pre-arranged battles allow for grudge matches to take place and can act as a vehicle for competitive play. Is possible that a system can/will be reintroduced to allow for pre-arranged battles with an eye towards competitive play, but not have an effect of Faction Warfare of planetary ownership?
This system is replacing the current corporation warfare and we have a new system coming for factional warfare. More information on that later. |
|
Kitten Commander
Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:48:00 -
[33] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:I really think that the current corp warfare system shouldn't be completely scrapped. The pre-arranged battles allow for grudge matches to take place and can act as a vehicle for competitive play. Is possible that a system can/will be reintroduced to allow for pre-arranged battles with an eye towards competitive play, but not have an effect of Faction Warfare of planetary ownership?
I think thats where the 'arena' comes into play. |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
627
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:49:00 -
[34] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:I really think that the current corp warfare system shouldn't be completely scrapped. The pre-arranged battles allow for grudge matches to take place and can act as a vehicle for competitive play. Is possible that a system can/will be reintroduced to allow for pre-arranged battles with an eye towards competitive play, but not have an effect of Faction Warfare of planetary ownership?
From the OP:
Quote:What about pre-arranged friendly corporation battles or tournaments? With the corporation contracts being removed, players will need to use the setting of planetary conquest to organize friendly battles. We realize that this is not as flexible as it could be though and so our current development plan is to introduce an arena mode where corporations can arrange a no consequences engagement. This then leads down a very interesting path of tournaments and betting etc.
We also want to make sure that when arenas are introduced they have consequences for not showing up to fight, something the current corporation contracts suffer from.
|
|
Alcare Xavier Golden
DUST University Ivy League
52
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:49:00 -
[35] - Quote
Rhapsodyy Darkforce wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Rhapsodyy Darkforce wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Beyobi wrote:How many players can join corporation battles? Planetary conquest will feature 16 vs 16 skirmish battles. Squad sizes are also being increased to 6 players per squad.
So would that be 2 squads of 6 and 1 squad of 4? or will the Conquest battles be 12v12 or 18v18? The planetary conquest battles are 16v16. So you can take 2 full squads in plus another partial squad. Was just thinking this. Any particular reason you dont just make it 18v18 so theres 3 full squads? The possibility of changing squad size means any number we pick could quickly not be valid. On top of that every player that we add to the match is another player that corporations need to field and the larger we require corporations to be in order to participate in this feature. For now we though 16v16 was the right balance. Yeah i understand you dont want to exclude smaller corps from gettign in on the action. Just personally i would like to see team size remain as a multiple of squad size. And the fact it is only 2 less than 18v18 aka 3 full squads just made me think hmmm why? A corp that has 16 probaly has 18 in most cases. Dont get me wrong this is far better than the 8v8 corp matches, and id like to see the size increase more over time, however i know that ccp dont want to exclude the smaller entities from carving out their little corner of space like has become so hard for new groups to do in eve. Is there any thought around the ccp tables about having differant sized corp matches? So a small planet that only has 5 districts might be 8v8 or 12v12 battles on that planet, where as the bigger planets with up to 24 districts could have the bigger corp battles. Or something like that, so that small corps can still get some competitive play and larger corps can still get into bigger battles, and yet still give everyone the chance to claim some districts? Maybe its a crap idea, but i was just thinking what happens to these smaller corps anyway when the player cap is increased again, as personally id certainly like to see us getting up to 32v32 ish numbers at some point.
How about allowing the CEO/Directors set the team sizes of a given district? That way if your corp can only field 8 so be it but if you can field 18+ you've got that option. Afterall, a corp should be able to defend it's territory with the degree of resources it is able to bring to the table. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1524
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:49:00 -
[36] - Quote
Luke Vetri wrote:Quote:Genolution only sells clones in packs of 100 to corporations that do not own districts Will we be able to trade/transfer clones between corps. I'm thinking a corp not owning a district buying clones and passing them to one that does to bolster the numbers? Not sure if that would be a good or bad thing yet...
Not at this time no. |
|
GoD-NoVa
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
190
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:50:00 -
[37] - Quote
i don't know if this has been talked about but if friendly fire is turned on for corp battles, shouldn't the map have an increase in size? we normally set a OB on an objective to clear it before we rush in, but since most of the maps we play on are so small it would be a struggle to not kill off both teams |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1524
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:50:00 -
[38] - Quote
Rhapsodyy Darkforce wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Rhapsodyy Darkforce wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Beyobi wrote:How many players can join corporation battles? Planetary conquest will feature 16 vs 16 skirmish battles. Squad sizes are also being increased to 6 players per squad.
So would that be 2 squads of 6 and 1 squad of 4? or will the Conquest battles be 12v12 or 18v18? The planetary conquest battles are 16v16. So you can take 2 full squads in plus another partial squad. Was just thinking this. Any particular reason you dont just make it 18v18 so theres 3 full squads? The possibility of changing squad size means any number we pick could quickly not be valid. On top of that every player that we add to the match is another player that corporations need to field and the larger we require corporations to be in order to participate in this feature. For now we though 16v16 was the right balance. Yeah i understand you dont want to exclude smaller corps from gettign in on the action. Just personally i would like to see team size remain as a multiple of squad size. And the fact it is only 2 less than 18v18 aka 3 full squads just made me think hmmm why? A corp that has 16 probaly has 18 in most cases. Dont get me wrong this is far better than the 8v8 corp matches, and id like to see the size increase more over time, however i know that ccp dont want to exclude the smaller entities from carving out their little corner of space like has become so hard for new groups to do in eve. Is there any thought around the ccp tables about having differant sized corp matches? So a small planet that only has 5 districts might be 8v8 or 12v12 battles on that planet, where as the bigger planets with up to 24 districts could have the bigger corp battles. Or something like that, so that small corps can still get some competitive play and larger corps can still get into bigger battles, and yet still give everyone the chance to claim some districts? Maybe its a crap idea, but i was just thinking what happens to these smaller corps anyway when the player cap is increased again, as personally id certainly like to see us getting up to 32v32 ish numbers at some point.
This is where we would like to get to, with different districts having different size battles. We are just not there yet. |
|
Mad Rambo
Red and Silver Hand Amarr Empire
20
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:50:00 -
[39] - Quote
sounds very cool.
the only point i personally dislike is that there is no friendly fire in FW matches. FW is serious business. Its about system control, it influences where we can dock and where not. It should not leave the impression you can use FW battles as spray&pray training matches. It is not highsec after all. Mercs already do not care at all on which side they fight... don't go further in this direction.
the second point is the FW match generation. So what you basically said is that plexing will influence it in some form.. i guess the more you plex the higher the probability for a match? Thats not very well thought out. Dust would be the optimal tool for first strike tactics. BEFORE the organized plexing starts at enemy strongholds the fight would starts on the ground so that system flips can happen quicker. Planet influence determines how much we have to plex. Why should the dust thing start after we plex - its the wrong way around. Do it via LP donations, eve -> dust contracts etc. There should be more control about the aspect where matches happen and what systems have priority. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1524
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:51:00 -
[40] - Quote
Muchomojo wrote:Will we have access these districts outside of battle? Would it be logical that the defender has some sort of advantage in terms of knowing the terrain etc?
Not at this time no. |
|
|
Disturbingly Bored
Universal Allies Inc.
149
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:52:00 -
[41] - Quote
Just read the full blog post.
Holy kitten. |
Takahiro Kashuken
Intara Direct Action Caldari State
141
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:52:00 -
[42] - Quote
So as a solo player i can now jump into FW battles when they come up
Will i only be able to take part in PC if i am part of that corp, ie i cant just squad up and jump in with them when they launch
Also for FW and PC are the payouts increased? |
Cody Sietz
The Tritan Industries
67
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:52:00 -
[43] - Quote
Gusk Hevv wrote:When will this build drop? I would guess sometime after fanfest. |
dent 308
Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
1030
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:53:00 -
[44] - Quote
Excellent.
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1523
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:54:00 -
[45] - Quote
Takahiro Kashuken wrote:So as a solo player i can now jump into FW battles when they come up
Will i only be able to take part in PC if i am part of that corp, ie i cant just squad up and jump in with them when they launch
Also for FW and PC are the payouts increased?
And you will be able to choose your side. |
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
87
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:55:00 -
[46] - Quote
Well......
This is going to get VERY interesting. About to set off for home from work shortly. I expect this to be a threadnaught by the time I get home.
Don't disappoint me folks. You have 30 minutes. |
gobbybobbyy
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:55:00 -
[47] - Quote
"The battles will automatically start based on demand and then players can join whichever side they like from the battle finder or directly from the map."
corps/ alliances involved in Faction warfare should not be able to just play as Caldari, and then make the switch and play a gallente battle
thats stupid
you join 1 militia and fight for it
being able to hop between Militias in Fac war is stupid and breaks Fac war!!! |
iceyburnz
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
353
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:56:00 -
[48] - Quote
Question:
Will clones as a new resource feed into eve as a potential revenue stream for Dust 514 corporations.
And is this tied to the various hints dropped by devs over the last year of changes to the eve online clone replacement system? |
BursegSardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
57
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:56:00 -
[49] - Quote
Are EVE Tactical-OB mechanics changing from the WP system to something more time-based to better incentivize getting Capsuleers in orbit to aid in the planetary conquest?
Current mechanic serves no benefit to a losing team that can't get WP, so the EVE-Dust link looks rather meaningless in that respect. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1541
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 17:58:00 -
[50] - Quote
iceyburnz wrote:Question:
Will clones as a new resource feed into eve as a potential revenue stream for Dust 514 corporations.
And is this tied to the various hints dropped by devs over the last year of changes to the eve online clone replacement system?
To be honest this is where we would like to go, but we are not there yet |
|
|
Kaeralli Sturmovos
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
119
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:00:00 -
[51] - Quote
a few days to a week to cap a district!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
KITTEH, LOVE IT!!!!
was praying that it would not be some COD 5-min match. so happy that this will play out this way.
also kinda iffy on the "randoms can join either side" i assume this is more geared the non-corp players or NPC corp members, but dunno if this is the way to go.
|
Belzeebub Santana
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
438
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:00:00 -
[52] - Quote
So large corps can put out multiple attacks or defend multiple locations, where a smaller corp has to decide whether they attack or defend?
There is only 1 hr window a day to attack district A? Win or lose you wait another 24hrs to attack?
So a corp of 16 holds 24 districts and can be attacked at each district that day and they have to fight all 24 or what? do the times overlap? Do the defenders choose the time or is it the attackers? |
iceyburnz
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
353
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:01:00 -
[53] - Quote
Another Question:
In future will it be possible to have "Dust Industrial Mongols" acting in a one man corp but defending thier territory by hiring other corporations via contracts and what not?
Edit: or does the present system account for that? |
Takahiro Kashuken
Intara Direct Action Caldari State
141
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:02:00 -
[54] - Quote
gobbybobbyy wrote:"The battles will automatically start based on demand and then players can join whichever side they like from the battle finder or directly from the map."
corps/ alliances involved in Faction warfare should not be able to just play as Caldari, and then make the switch and play a gallente battle
thats stupid
you join 1 militia and fight for it
being able to hop between Militias in Fac war is stupid and breaks Fac war!!!
No it doesnt
If your standings are good in EVE above 0 then you can fight for all FW if you want to |
Kitten Commander
Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation
30
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:02:00 -
[55] - Quote
Belzeebub Santana wrote:So large corps can put out multiple attacks or defend multiple locations, where a smaller corp has to decide whether they attack or defend?
There is only 1 hr window a day to attack district A? Win or lose you wait another 24hrs to attack?
So a corp of 16 holds 24 districts and can be attacked at each district that day and they have to fight all 24 or what? do the times overlap? Do the defenders choose the time or is it the attackers?
From what they said, its the Districts holders that decide the time. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1541
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:03:00 -
[56] - Quote
Belzeebub Santana wrote:So large corps can put out multiple attacks or defend multiple locations, where a smaller corp has to decide whether they attack or defend?
There is only 1 hr window a day to attack district A? Win or lose you wait another 24hrs to attack?
So a corp of 16 holds 24 districts and can be attacked at each district that day and they have to fight all 24 or what? do the times overlap? Do the defenders choose the time or is it the attackers?
The corporation in control of the district chooses the reinforcement time. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1541
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:03:00 -
[57] - Quote
iceyburnz wrote:Another Question:
In future will it be possible to have "Dust Industrial Mongols" acting in a one man corp but defending thier territory by hiring other corporations via contracts and what not?
Edit: or does the present system account for that?
I hope so. |
|
Takahiro Kashuken
Intara Direct Action Caldari State
141
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:04:00 -
[58] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Takahiro Kashuken wrote:So as a solo player i can now jump into FW battles when they come up
Will i only be able to take part in PC if i am part of that corp, ie i cant just squad up and jump in with them when they launch
Also for FW and PC are the payouts increased? And you will be able to choose your side.
Are ISK payouts increased or do the payouts come directly from the corp instead or just a random number like in high sec matches? |
Kristoff Atruin
Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
359
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:04:00 -
[59] - Quote
Are there plans in motion to expand the list of facilities we might build in districts? For example, structures that give other defensive advantages than an increase in clone count or expand our industrial options, so that we're not limited to producing only clones? For example, building generic ground vehicle chassis parts that allow you to call in HAVs. Or resources that could be useful to eve players. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1541
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:04:00 -
[60] - Quote
Kristoff Atruin wrote:Are there plans in motion to expand the list of facilities we might build in districts? For example, structures that give other defensive advantages than an increase in clone count or expand our industrial options, so that we're not limited to producing only clones? For example, building generic ground vehicle chassis parts that allow you to call in HAVs. Or resources that could be useful to eve players.
Yes, but each SI offers a unique structure on the planet so we need more of those to add more SI. |
|
|
Druk Spyker
DUST University Ivy League
3
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:05:00 -
[61] - Quote
How will the moving of clones work? Will eve be involved to other planets or solar systems? |
Alcare Xavier Golden
DUST University Ivy League
52
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:06:00 -
[62] - Quote
Kristoff Atruin wrote:...Or resources that could be useful to eve players. Read with wiki.....classified
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Surface_Infrastructure |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1538
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:06:00 -
[63] - Quote
Druk Spyker wrote:How will the moving of clones work? Will eve be involved to other planets or solar systems?
For now you will be paying Genolution to move the clones.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Distance_And_Its_Effect_On_Moves |
|
Delirium Inferno
Chernova Industries
66
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:07:00 -
[64] - Quote
So wait, can any corporation attack any district or do they have to own a nearby district? And if so how does a corporation with no districts get started? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1547
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:09:00 -
[65] - Quote
Delirium Inferno wrote:So wait, can any corporation attack any district or do they have to own a nearby district? And if so how does a corporation with no districts get started?
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Maximum_and_Minimums
Genolution will sell packs of 100 clones to corporations that do not own districts. |
|
Belzeebub Santana
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
439
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:15:00 -
[66] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:So large corps can put out multiple attacks or defend multiple locations, where a smaller corp has to decide whether they attack or defend?
There is only 1 hr window a day to attack district A? Win or lose you wait another 24hrs to attack?
So a corp of 16 holds 24 districts and can be attacked at each district that day and they have to fight all 24 or what? do the times overlap? Do the defenders choose the time or is it the attackers? The corporation in control of the district chooses the reinforcement time.
so how many times can a district be attacked in a day? As defenders do you only defend the district once a day or once a day from every corp trying to take that district that day? Or is it first come first served and only the first corp to try and take the district is the only one the defenders need to fight and that district is locked for 24 hrs? |
Jack Sharkey42
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
37
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:16:00 -
[67] - Quote
How will this be handled in the event if a defending corporation doesn't have enough people to mount a suitable defense? Say even though their time has been set to be the most advantageous to them only 3 people can be on to defend. Could it turn into a 16 vs 3 fight where the 16 squad can burn through all of their available clones? |
RECON BY FIRE
IMPSwarm Negative-Feedback
68
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:16:00 -
[68] - Quote
Why are most of the questions always on stuff that doesnt half matter? How bout some legit questions/concerns/feedback here.
In regards to planetary conquest (NOT FW):
It is stated these battles will be skirmishes, but the only win condition is to clone the other team out. Why not just make it an ambush since this is the case? Do you not see an easy way out to defending the district? A corporation gets attacked and lets say they even field a full team of 16. They do nothing but sit in the MCC/redline and never lose a clone. The attacking team hacks all the null cannons and destroys the defending teams MCC, but the only penalty for the defending team is that they cant produce clones for a time. But it doesnt matter because they didnt lose any clones did they?
Therefore, destroying the MCC either needs to be added as a win condition for the attacking team, or something along the lines of if the defending team loses their MCC they also lose a percent amount of their clones (with possibly that same percent being added to the winning teams clones). Furthermore on this point, why would anybody field a team to defend their district if the only win condition is by clone out? If you never lose a clone you always win, even if your district cannot create more clones.
Also needing consideration is allowing corporations the ability to set their hour timeframe when they want to be attacked. What will stop people from doing something like setting that hour before or after downtime when there arent many players on so that they run the lowest chance of being attacked. I like the concept of being able to set the timeframe, but one hour is far too short. I would personally suggest something like a four to eight hour time frame when they CAN be attacked (still would get the day to prepare also), but once an attack starts it can still only last for an hour.
Could we also get rid of the vehicle self-destruct in everything but instant battles? Particularly in the planetary conquest matches I could see people calling in militia LAVs over and over to try and boost salvage/isk rates, although Im not sure how successful that would be cause I feel like you would simply get a bunch of militia LAVs in your salvage and you already get those free, so whoopdy do. But personally I feel it is important to get rid of the self-destruct feature in corp run battles and such to give the game more depth through doing stuff like putting a mobile clone unit on an LAV and parking it in a strategic spot. It has balance cause the opposing team could hack it and use it for their own benefit. |
jackbubu
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
24
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:17:00 -
[69] - Quote
how do you plan to stop abusing the "lockout" function?
what stops me to lock a district day after day and make it invulnerable?
lets take this scenario
Sell Clones Scenario 01:
Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Corporation sells clones at 11:00 on Monday District state changed to locked District unlocks at 12:00 on Tuesday -> i imidiatly sell clones after this, is the district again locked for 24h ?
|
kiarbanor
S.e.V.e.N.
14
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:17:00 -
[70] - Quote
This is why Dust 514 makes other games seem obsolete. I can't wait for this stuff. Thanks, CCP. Keep up the great work! |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1566
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:17:00 -
[71] - Quote
Belzeebub Santana wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:So large corps can put out multiple attacks or defend multiple locations, where a smaller corp has to decide whether they attack or defend?
There is only 1 hr window a day to attack district A? Win or lose you wait another 24hrs to attack?
So a corp of 16 holds 24 districts and can be attacked at each district that day and they have to fight all 24 or what? do the times overlap? Do the defenders choose the time or is it the attackers? The corporation in control of the district chooses the reinforcement time. so how many times can a district be attacked in a day? As defenders do you only defend the district once a day or once a day from every corp trying to take that district that day? Or is it first come first served and only the first corp to try and take the district is the only one the defenders need to fight and that district is locked for 24 hrs?
Correct. A district can only be under attack by one other corporation at a time. So each district will provide at most 1 battle per day. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1566
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:18:00 -
[72] - Quote
Jack Sharkey42 wrote:How will this be handled in the event if a defending corporation doesn't have enough people to mount a suitable defense? Say even though their time has been set to be the most advantageous to them only 3 people can be on to defend. Could it turn into a 16 vs 3 fight where the 16 squad can burn through all of their available clones?
The defenders can pull friends in from other corporations, but if they cannot get enough people to defend then they are going to eventually lose the district. |
|
jackbubu
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:18:00 -
[73] - Quote
Also what about downtime, will you block 11:00-12:00 as a reinforcement timer? |
iceyburnz
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
355
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:19:00 -
[74] - Quote
On the wiki article you guys stated you arn't ready to release the concept for eve bonues but invite the players to come up with ideas.
Heres mine:
a) Cargo Hub - Increases the volume of all storage facilities, command centers and starport for Eve PI by 25%
Purpose: Promotes synergy with eve through PI.
b)Surface Research Lab - Acts as 3 additional Lab Slots for PE, ME and Invention. These are avaialbel to corporations eve players available through the science and industry interface. Scientific networking 1 is required to access them (since eve players can drop BPs on planets). If the districts flips during a research job the research is lost.
Purpose: Promotes greater eve/dust player connectivity, motivating eve players to get dusties on board, especiall industry fouces corps for access to extra lab slots.
c) Production Facility - Reduces the time it takes to mainfacture Basic, Advanced & High Tech PI materials on a planet.
Purpose: Renewed intrested in PI? Synergy between eve and dust beyond "nuke it from orbit". |
Alcare Xavier Golden
DUST University Ivy League
54
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:20:00 -
[75] - Quote
RECON BY FIRE wrote:Why are most of the questions always on stuff that doesnt half matter? How bout some legit questions/concerns/feedback here.
In regards to planetary conquest (NOT FW):
It is stated these battles will be skirmishes, but the only win condition is to clone the other team out. Why not just make it an ambush since this is the case? Do you not see an easy way out to defending the district? A corporation gets attacked and lets say they even field a full team of 16. They do nothing but sit in the MCC/redline and never lose a clone. The attacking team hacks all the null cannons and destroys the defending teams MCC, but the only penalty for the defending team is that they cant produce clones for a time. But it doesnt matter because they didnt lose any clones did they?
Therefore, destroying the MCC either needs to be added as a win condition for the attacking team, or something along the lines of if the defending team loses their MCC they also lose a percent amount of their clones (with possibly that same percent being added to the winning teams clones). Furthermore on this point, why would anybody field a team to defend their district if the only win condition is by clone out? If you never lose a clone you always win, even if your district cannot create more clones.
Read the wiki...destroying the MCC is a perfectly valid means of winning and obtaining the district.
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1566
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:20:00 -
[76] - Quote
jackbubu wrote:how do you plan to stop abusing the "lockout" function?
what stops me to lock a district day after day and make it invulnerable?
lets take this scenario
Sell Clones Scenario 01:
Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Corporation sells clones at 11:00 on Monday District state changed to locked District unlocks at 12:00 on Tuesday -> i imidiatly sell clones after this, is the district again locked for 24h ?
You HAVE to attack with a minimum of 100 clones. During the battle a MINIMUM of 100 clones will be lost by the losing side. A district at most generates 60 clones per day, and that is with that specific SI. So if people want to waste clones locking out a district, go for it. It is not sustainable. |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
636
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:20:00 -
[77] - Quote
jackbubu wrote:Also what about downtime, will you block 11:00-12:00 as a reinforcement timer?
Yes the hours either side of downtime are not available for setting the reinforcement window. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1566
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:21:00 -
[78] - Quote
iceyburnz wrote:On the wiki article you guys stated you arn't ready to release the concept for eve bonues but invite the players to come up with ideas.
Heres mine:
a) Cargo Hub - Increases the volume of all storage facilities, command centers and starport for Eve PI by 25%
Purpose: Promotes synergy with eve through PI.
b)Surface Research Lab - Acts as 3 additional Lab Slots for PE, ME and Invention. These are avaialbel to corporations eve players available through the science and industry interface. Scientific networking 1 is required to access them (since eve players can drop BPs on planets). If the districts flips during a research job the research is lost.
Purpose: Promotes greater eve/dust player connectivity, motivating eve players to get dusties on board, especiall industry fouces corps for access to extra lab slots.
c) Production Facility - Reduces the time it takes to mainfacture Basic, Advanced & High Tech PI materials on a planet.
Purpose: Renewed intrested in PI? Synergy between eve and dust beyond "nuke it from orbit".
:D Glad to see people starting to offer suggestions on this topic. Keep them coming please.
I am not a fan of bonusing research things as the BPO's never have to be put in harms way. Manufacturing though would be a good one as things would have to go to the POS. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1566
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:24:00 -
[79] - Quote
RECON BY FIRE wrote:Why are most of the questions always on stuff that doesnt half matter? How bout some legit questions/concerns/feedback here.
In regards to planetary conquest (NOT FW):
It is stated these battles will be skirmishes, but the only win condition is to clone the other team out. Why not just make it an ambush since this is the case? Do you not see an easy way out to defending the district? A corporation gets attacked and lets say they even field a full team of 16. They do nothing but sit in the MCC/redline and never lose a clone. The attacking team hacks all the null cannons and destroys the defending teams MCC, but the only penalty for the defending team is that they cant produce clones for a time. But it doesnt matter because they didnt lose any clones did they?
Therefore, destroying the MCC either needs to be added as a win condition for the attacking team, or something along the lines of if the defending team loses their MCC they also lose a percent amount of their clones (with possibly that same percent being added to the winning teams clones). Furthermore on this point, why would anybody field a team to defend their district if the only win condition is by clone out? If you never lose a clone you always win, even if your district cannot create more clones.
Also needing consideration is allowing corporations the ability to set their hour timeframe when they want to be attacked. What will stop people from doing something like setting that hour before or after downtime when there arent many players on so that they run the lowest chance of being attacked. I like the concept of being able to set the timeframe, but one hour is far too short. I would personally suggest something like a four to eight hour time frame when they CAN be attacked (still would get the day to prepare also), but once an attack starts it can still only last for an hour.
Could we also get rid of the vehicle self-destruct in everything but instant battles? Particularly in the planetary conquest matches I could see people calling in militia LAVs over and over to try and boost salvage/isk rates, although Im not sure how successful that would be cause I feel like you would simply get a bunch of militia LAVs in your salvage and you already get those free, so whoopdy do. But personally I feel it is important to get rid of the self-destruct feature in corp run battles and such to give the game more depth through doing stuff like putting a mobile clone unit on an LAV and parking it in a strategic spot. It has balance cause the opposing team could hack it and use it for their own benefit.
The losing side loses a MINIMUM of 100 clones as well. |
|
BlG MAMA
PLAYSTATION4
13
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:25:00 -
[80] - Quote
wow that sounds cool |
|
Belzeebub Santana
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
440
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:25:00 -
[81] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:So large corps can put out multiple attacks or defend multiple locations, where a smaller corp has to decide whether they attack or defend?
There is only 1 hr window a day to attack district A? Win or lose you wait another 24hrs to attack?
So a corp of 16 holds 24 districts and can be attacked at each district that day and they have to fight all 24 or what? do the times overlap? Do the defenders choose the time or is it the attackers? The corporation in control of the district chooses the reinforcement time. so how many times can a district be attacked in a day? As defenders do you only defend the district once a day or once a day from every corp trying to take that district that day? Or is it first come first served and only the first corp to try and take the district is the only one the defenders need to fight and that district is locked for 24 hrs? Correct. A district can only be under attack by one other corporation at a time. So each district will provide at most 1 battle per day.
Do the defenders choose who they want attacking if there are multiple opponents? How does this stop a corp from.making a dummy corp to attack their districts and locking them up? |
Chad2k95
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:27:00 -
[82] - Quote
Excited for this but i have a Question for the Devs? I'm not quiet sure about the district taking and my Question is Do a Corporation start of with a district each so the Corp can defend or a attack other Corp controlled district because if we don't start out with one how do we take a district from another corp? |
Harkon Vysarii
Dead Six Initiative
35
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:28:00 -
[83] - Quote
Belzeebub Santana wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:So large corps can put out multiple attacks or defend multiple locations, where a smaller corp has to decide whether they attack or defend?
There is only 1 hr window a day to attack district A? Win or lose you wait another 24hrs to attack?
So a corp of 16 holds 24 districts and can be attacked at each district that day and they have to fight all 24 or what? do the times overlap? Do the defenders choose the time or is it the attackers? The corporation in control of the district chooses the reinforcement time. so how many times can a district be attacked in a day? As defenders do you only defend the district once a day or once a day from every corp trying to take that district that day? Or is it first come first served and only the first corp to try and take the district is the only one the defenders need to fight and that district is locked for 24 hrs? Correct. A district can only be under attack by one other corporation at a time. So each district will provide at most 1 battle per day. Do the defenders choose who they want attacking if there are multiple opponents? How does this stop a corp from.making a dummy corp to attack their districts and locking them up?
It doesnt and thats a clever and valid strategy. |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
263
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:29:00 -
[84] - Quote
Are we able to start looking at how many districts are on a planet yet? Where will the whole list of information be stored? Will that be a kind of surveying thing? |
jackbubu
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
28
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:29:00 -
[85] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:jackbubu wrote:how do you plan to stop abusing the "lockout" function?
what stops me to lock a district day after day and make it invulnerable?
lets take this scenario
Sell Clones Scenario 01:
Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Corporation sells clones at 11:00 on Monday District state changed to locked District unlocks at 12:00 on Tuesday -> i imidiatly sell clones after this, is the district again locked for 24h ?
You HAVE to attack with a minimum of 100 clones. During the battle a MINIMUM of 100 clones will be lost by the losing side. A district at most generates 60 clones per day, and that is with that specific SI. So if people want to waste clones locking out a district, go for it. It is not sustainable. maybe i should have read one paragraph further where it states that a locked district can still be attacked |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1569
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:30:00 -
[86] - Quote
Belzeebub Santana wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:So large corps can put out multiple attacks or defend multiple locations, where a smaller corp has to decide whether they attack or defend?
There is only 1 hr window a day to attack district A? Win or lose you wait another 24hrs to attack?
So a corp of 16 holds 24 districts and can be attacked at each district that day and they have to fight all 24 or what? do the times overlap? Do the defenders choose the time or is it the attackers? The corporation in control of the district chooses the reinforcement time. so how many times can a district be attacked in a day? As defenders do you only defend the district once a day or once a day from every corp trying to take that district that day? Or is it first come first served and only the first corp to try and take the district is the only one the defenders need to fight and that district is locked for 24 hrs? Correct. A district can only be under attack by one other corporation at a time. So each district will provide at most 1 battle per day. Do the defenders choose who they want attacking if there are multiple opponents? How does this stop a corp from.making a dummy corp to attack their districts and locking them up?
Only one attack can happen at a time, so no the defenders don't get to choose. The default clone generation rate is 40 clones per day, can be made 60. The loser of a battle losses a minimum of 100 clones. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1569
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:30:00 -
[87] - Quote
Chad2k95 wrote:Excited for this but i have a Question for the Devs? I'm not quiet sure about the district taking and my Question is Do a Corporation start of with a district each so the Corp can defend or a attack other Corp controlled district because if we don't start out with one how do we take a district from another corp?
Genolution will sell 100 clone packages to corporations that do not own a district. So you will need to buy those to get involved in Planetary Conquest. |
|
Shadowswipe
WarRavens
21
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:30:00 -
[88] - Quote
How do you stop a corporation from using dummy corps to start a battle and then while in the battle, intentionally losing all their clones to the defender to minimize the cost, and keeping a sought after district from being taken by a rival corp that can't get the battle setup before the dummy corp? If a dummy corp intentionally attacks a district for 20mil, 5 million will be given to the defenders for a net loss of 15mil. Which I assume is far less expensive than losing the district and whatever buildings might be in it. |
RECON BY FIRE
IMPSwarm Negative-Feedback
70
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:31:00 -
[89] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:RECON BY FIRE wrote:Why are most of the questions always on stuff that doesnt half matter? How bout some legit questions/concerns/feedback here.
In regards to planetary conquest (NOT FW):
It is stated these battles will be skirmishes, but the only win condition is to clone the other team out. Why not just make it an ambush since this is the case? Do you not see an easy way out to defending the district? A corporation gets attacked and lets say they even field a full team of 16. They do nothing but sit in the MCC/redline and never lose a clone. The attacking team hacks all the null cannons and destroys the defending teams MCC, but the only penalty for the defending team is that they cant produce clones for a time. But it doesnt matter because they didnt lose any clones did they?
Therefore, destroying the MCC either needs to be added as a win condition for the attacking team, or something along the lines of if the defending team loses their MCC they also lose a percent amount of their clones (with possibly that same percent being added to the winning teams clones). Furthermore on this point, why would anybody field a team to defend their district if the only win condition is by clone out? If you never lose a clone you always win, even if your district cannot create more clones.
Also needing consideration is allowing corporations the ability to set their hour timeframe when they want to be attacked. What will stop people from doing something like setting that hour before or after downtime when there arent many players on so that they run the lowest chance of being attacked. I like the concept of being able to set the timeframe, but one hour is far too short. I would personally suggest something like a four to eight hour time frame when they CAN be attacked (still would get the day to prepare also), but once an attack starts it can still only last for an hour.
Could we also get rid of the vehicle self-destruct in everything but instant battles? Particularly in the planetary conquest matches I could see people calling in militia LAVs over and over to try and boost salvage/isk rates, although Im not sure how successful that would be cause I feel like you would simply get a bunch of militia LAVs in your salvage and you already get those free, so whoopdy do. But personally I feel it is important to get rid of the self-destruct feature in corp run battles and such to give the game more depth through doing stuff like putting a mobile clone unit on an LAV and parking it in a strategic spot. It has balance cause the opposing team could hack it and use it for their own benefit. The losing side loses a MINIMUM of 100 clones as well.
You may want to add that to your Possible Conflict Resolutions table under District Penalty since I am not seeing that specified anywhere else. As long as that is true, then cool beans. Looks like its all pretty well thought out, good job.
edit: Although the time-frame mechanic could still use some looking at. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1569
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:32:00 -
[90] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:Are we able to start looking at how many districts are on a planet yet? Where will the whole list of information be stored? Will that be a kind of surveying thing?
This will all be public information. You will be able to see all the districts, who owns them, how many clones they have, and what their reinforcement timer is set to. |
|
|
JW v Weingarten
SyNergy Gaming
330
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:32:00 -
[91] - Quote
What if the defender could put down installations ( SoonGäó) like a cru and put 50 clones in it. If attackers hacks the cru, the 50 clones go to the attackers and defender loses 50 clones. If attacker destroys the cru, the defender loses 50 and attacker gains 0.
Maybe something interesting if they also bring back skirmish 1.0. defenders can put cru's closer to the attacker but if they lose it they also lose clones. |
Jack Sharkey42
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
38
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:33:00 -
[92] - Quote
On the list of effects due to win or loss conditions, the victory of the attacker in destroying the defenders MCC results in the defender still retaining control of the district. What then is the purpose of destroying the MCC? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1569
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:33:00 -
[93] - Quote
RECON BY FIRE wrote:You may want to add that to your Possible Conflict Resolutions table under District Penalty since I am not seeing that specified anywhere else. As long as that is true, then cool beans. Looks like its all pretty well thought out, good job.
edit: Although the time-frame mechanic could still use some looking at.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Possible_Conflict_Resolutions
The losing side of a battle will lose a minimum of 100 clones. If they lose 125 during the fight that is what they lose. If they lose 75 during the fight then they will lose a total of 100 at the end.
Done. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1569
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:35:00 -
[94] - Quote
Jack Sharkey42 wrote:On the list of effects due to win or loss conditions, the victory of the attacker in destroying the defenders MCC results in the defender still retaining control of the district. What then is the purpose of destroying the MCC?
It puts a time limit on the match. The only two ways to finish a match are MCC destruction and clone loss. If we did not have the MCC then the battles could go on for a very long time, the final clone could hide and prevent the match from ending, all sorts of crazy things. |
|
Gridboss
BetaMax. CRONOS.
188
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:35:00 -
[95] - Quote
How is initial ownership of districts decided? Is it whoever plants a flag first gets it at the beginning? |
Chad2k95
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:37:00 -
[96] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Chad2k95 wrote:Excited for this but i have a Question for the Devs? I'm not quiet sure about the district taking and my Question is Do a Corporation start of with a district each so the Corp can defend or a attack other Corp controlled district because if we don't start out with one how do we take a district from another corp? Genolution will sell 100 clone packages to corporations that do not own a district. So you will need to buy those to get involved in Planetary Conquest.
Ok. So what happens when you implement this system what i am asking is do every corp start of with a district so they can attack other corps districts so that was my question. I'm just thinking like this '' you implement the system and i'm a CEO and i want to take this planet'' if i want the planet who will i need to fight for it if a corp starts out with no district's will i be doing PVE at the beginning of this system |
Kain Spero
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1081
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:38:00 -
[97] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Kain Spero wrote:I really think that the current corp warfare system shouldn't be completely scrapped. The pre-arranged battles allow for grudge matches to take place and can act as a vehicle for competitive play. Is possible that a system can/will be reintroduced to allow for pre-arranged battles with an eye towards competitive play, but not have an effect of Faction Warfare of planetary ownership? From the OP: Quote:What about pre-arranged friendly corporation battles or tournaments? With the corporation contracts being removed, players will need to use the setting of planetary conquest to organize friendly battles. We realize that this is not as flexible as it could be though and so our current development plan is to introduce an arena mode where corporations can arrange a no consequences engagement. This then leads down a very interesting path of tournaments and betting etc.
We also want to make sure that when arenas are introduced they have consequences for not showing up to fight, something the current corporation contracts suffer from.
Whew, good deal. Speed reading not always a good thing. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1574
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:40:00 -
[98] - Quote
Gridboss wrote:How is initial ownership of districts decided? Is it whoever plants a flag first gets it at the beginning?
First corporation to buy a pack of clones from Genolution and place them on a district get it. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1574
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:41:00 -
[99] - Quote
Chad2k95 wrote:Ok. So what happens when you implement this system what i am asking is do every corp start of with a district so they can attack other corps districts so that was my question. I'm just thinking like this '' you implement the system and i'm a CEO and i want to take this planet'' if i want the planet who will i need to fight for it if a corp starts out with no district's will i be doing PVE at the beginning of this system
The districts will all start unowned. So whoever buys a package of clones from Genolution and places them on a district first gets that district. |
|
Jack Sharkey42
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
40
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:41:00 -
[100] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Gridboss wrote:How is initial ownership of districts decided? Is it whoever plants a flag first gets it at the beginning? First corporation to buy a pack of clones from Genolution and place them on a district get it.
Behold the maddest of the mad scrambles! |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1574
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:42:00 -
[101] - Quote
Jack Sharkey42 wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Gridboss wrote:How is initial ownership of districts decided? Is it whoever plants a flag first gets it at the beginning? First corporation to buy a pack of clones from Genolution and place them on a district get it. Behold the maddest of the mad scrambles!
Pretty much this. Going to be interesting. |
|
Delirium Inferno
Chernova Industries
68
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:44:00 -
[102] - Quote
Harkon Vysarii wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote: Do the defenders choose who they want attacking if there are multiple opponents? How does this stop a corp from.making a dummy corp to attack their districts and locking them up?
It doesnt and thats a clever and valid strategy. It's not so clever when you realize they said this would not be profitable since the losing team must lose at least 100 clones.
|
Jack Sharkey42
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
40
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:44:00 -
[103] - Quote
Two questions;
1. Will we be able to name our own districts or change their names or anything like that?
2. Will defender or attackers have the option to withdraw or surrender to avoid continued loss of clones in a fight? |
Alcare Xavier Golden
DUST University Ivy League
54
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:45:00 -
[104] - Quote
Surrender!?! *Walks away muttering under his breath* |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1574
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:45:00 -
[105] - Quote
Jack Sharkey42 wrote:Two questions;
1. Will we be able to name our own districts or change their names or anything like that?
2. Will defender or attackers have the option to withdraw or surrender to avoid continued loss of clones in a fight?
No and no although both of those are ideas we have in our head and are thinking about. |
|
Gilbatron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
81
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:45:00 -
[106] - Quote
some things:
1. Reinforcement Timer Window:
fixed 1 Hour WIndow ? seriously ? Waaaaay too short, the timer windows in eve make stuff (MUCH !) more interesting, especially for Towers, the fact that the defender (of a tower) can fail timing the tower also brings some interesting gameplay, where badly timed districts have to be defended by a random contractor and only the well timed can be defended by the owning corporation
2. Clone generation
A factory that "produces clones" is boring, especially if all factories produce the same amount and the rate can be adjusted by adding a obscure "produce 50% more" module. Clone Production should be tied to industrial skill(point)s and the players (note: plural !) organisational skill when setting up an effective production line. There should be districts of varying quality with different resources available
3. NPC Seeded Market
Meh, get rid of that, BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING
4. NPC Clone Transportation
seriously ? |
XANDER KAG
Crimson Wings Brigade
24
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:47:00 -
[107] - Quote
Controlling a single district will generate clones over time. If you end up producing more than you need, the excess clones can be sold for profit.
Corporations can expand into nearby unoccupied territory to claim it.
Does this mean that every corp gets one free district or do our CEO's pick a planet?I'm not asking for fairness but will small corps even have a real chance at controlling these districts for any amount of time? |
Druk Spyker
DUST University Ivy League
4
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:47:00 -
[108] - Quote
How many districts will be available at launch? |
Jack Sharkey42
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
41
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:48:00 -
[109] - Quote
XANDER KAG wrote:Controlling a single district will generate clones over time. If you end up producing more than you need, the excess clones can be sold for profit.
Corporations can expand into nearby unoccupied territory to claim it.
Does this mean that every corp gets one free district or do our CEO's pick a planet?I'm not asking for fairness but will small corps even have a real chance at controlling these districts for any amount of time?
GOD no! lol |
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
353
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:48:00 -
[110] - Quote
Icy Tiger wrote:Worth it. This will be so bad ass. Now we need an ETA.
LATERGäó |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
640
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:50:00 -
[111] - Quote
XANDER KAG wrote:Controlling a single district will generate clones over time. If you end up producing more than you need, the excess clones can be sold for profit.
Corporations can expand into nearby unoccupied territory to claim it.
Does this mean that every corp gets one free district or do our CEO's pick a planet?I'm not asking for fairness but will small corps even have a real chance at controlling these districts for any amount of time?
You pay 20 mil ISK to put your first deployment of clones down on to an empty district and then you own it. You can also deploy to an occupied district but you'll need to fight the owners for it. There should be plenty of room for everyone. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1575
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:53:00 -
[112] - Quote
Gilbatron wrote:some things:
1. Reinforcement Timer Window:
fixed 1 Hour WIndow ? seriously ? Waaaaay too short, the timer windows in eve make stuff (MUCH !) more interesting, especially for Towers, the fact that the defender (of a tower) can fail timing the tower also brings some interesting gameplay, where badly timed districts have to be defended by a random contractor and only the well timed can be defended by the owning corporation
We consider these to be much more like POCO's, and actually they work almost exactly like them just with moving clones being the action that reinforces them. While watching people fail miserably at setting the stront timers on a POS is funny, it means that when the corporation attacking shows up there might not be anyone to defend the district. This is no fun.
From experience in EVE the POCO system works much better for providing people with entertainment instead of blue ball ops.
Gilbatron wrote:2. Clone generation
A factory that "produces clones" is boring, especially if all factories produce the same amount and the rate can be adjusted by adding a obscure "produce 50% more" module. Clone Production should be tied to industrial skill(point)s and the players (note: plural !) organisational skill when setting up an effective production line. There should be districts of varying quality with different resources available
I agree, it would be awesome if there were other factors that go into this and if there were other resources. This is just our first pass at this. We are not done yet.
Gilbatron wrote:3. NPC Seeded Market
Meh, get rid of that, BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING
We hope to move towards a player driven market, but to do that we need reason for clones to be purchased outside of the battles themselves. I hope to see this be one of the first links between EVE and DUST ISK with EVE players wanting to buy clones.
Gilbatron wrote:4. NPC Clone Transportation
seriously ?
This is a feature that needs to stand on its own if EVE was not around. So this fits with our goal. When we finally do null sec, yea no NPC there. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1575
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:53:00 -
[113] - Quote
Druk Spyker wrote:How many districts will be available at launch?
Approximately 250. |
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
263
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:54:00 -
[114] - Quote
Is there a max amount of clones an attacker can move? And does the amount of clones moved affect the cost of transportation or is it just distance? |
Freshticles
Commando Perkone Caldari State
23
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:54:00 -
[115] - Quote
Unrelated to PC, but will the update that introduces this also bring the trade system, or any new drop suits? |
BursegSardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
59
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:54:00 -
[116] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:XANDER KAG wrote:Controlling a single district will generate clones over time. If you end up producing more than you need, the excess clones can be sold for profit.
Corporations can expand into nearby unoccupied territory to claim it.
Does this mean that every corp gets one free district or do our CEO's pick a planet?I'm not asking for fairness but will small corps even have a real chance at controlling these districts for any amount of time? You pay 20 mil ISK to put your first deployment of clones down on to an empty district and then you own it. You can also deploy to an occupied district but you'll need to fight the owners for it. There should be plenty of room for everyone.
What is the timetable for moving clones? Can I buy a million clones and conquer every open district immediately? Or attack every district at once? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1575
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:56:00 -
[117] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:Is there a max amount of clones an attacker can move? And does the amount of clones moved affect the cost of transportation or is it just distance?
The maximum clones that can be moved is equal to the maximum of the district they are being moved from. The default is 300, but this can be made 450.
And no, but see this table for complete details: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Distance_And_Its_Effect_On_Moves |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1575
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:57:00 -
[118] - Quote
BursegSardaukar wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:XANDER KAG wrote:Controlling a single district will generate clones over time. If you end up producing more than you need, the excess clones can be sold for profit.
Corporations can expand into nearby unoccupied territory to claim it.
Does this mean that every corp gets one free district or do our CEO's pick a planet?I'm not asking for fairness but will small corps even have a real chance at controlling these districts for any amount of time? You pay 20 mil ISK to put your first deployment of clones down on to an empty district and then you own it. You can also deploy to an occupied district but you'll need to fight the owners for it. There should be plenty of room for everyone. What is the timetable for moving clones? Can I buy a million clones and conquer every open district immediately? Or attack every district at once?
You can only buy clones from Genolution, they sell them in packs of 100, and they only sell them to people who do not own districts. They are terrible business men. |
|
Kaeralli Sturmovos
KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION
119
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:58:00 -
[119] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Jack Sharkey42 wrote:Two questions;
1. Will we be able to name our own districts or change their names or anything like that?
2. Will defender or attackers have the option to withdraw or surrender to avoid continued loss of clones in a fight? No and no although both of those are ideas we have in our head and are thinking about.
please let us be able to name things and hopefully with some sort of item you have to buy to change it. it would make for a great insult for our enemies. |
Delirium Inferno
Chernova Industries
69
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 18:59:00 -
[120] - Quote
Since it will take multiple attacks to take over a district, what's to stop a corporation from simply waiting until another corp almost depletes all of a defending corp's clones and then sweep in and get the final blow? Kill stealing to a whole new level. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1582
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:00:00 -
[121] - Quote
I think owning all, or most of the districts, should allow you to name the planet. Makes it a bit more of an achievement. And no one can re-name it until they take the majority of districts. Would be great fun. |
|
jackbubu
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
29
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:00:00 -
[122] - Quote
Kaeralli Sturmovos wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Jack Sharkey42 wrote:Two questions;
1. Will we be able to name our own districts or change their names or anything like that?
2. Will defender or attackers have the option to withdraw or surrender to avoid continued loss of clones in a fight? No and no although both of those are ideas we have in our head and are thinking about. please let us be able to name things and hopefully with some sort of item you have to buy to change it. it would make for a great insult for our enemies. First choice at hand are obviously Game of Thrones spoilers, see http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/Pandemic_Legion ;) |
Maken Tosch
Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore
1682
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:01:00 -
[123] - Quote
Team killing, here I come. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1582
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:01:00 -
[124] - Quote
Delirium Inferno wrote:Since it will take multiple attacks to take over a district, what's to stop a corporation from simply waiting until another corp almost depletes all of a defending corp's clones and then sweep in and get the final blow? Kill stealing to a whole new level.
For 1 hour after the battle starts ONLY the attacking corporation can launch another attack. This gives the attacking corporation time to see how the battle is going before committing to a follow up attack and removes that district sniping. |
|
Val'herik Dorn
CrimeWave Syndicate
342
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:02:00 -
[125] - Quote
OMNOMNOMNOM beaten by a dev so different post now...
When do we get more stuff... i like being able to own districts and i love the changes!
but but STUFF?!?! i need more STUFF!!!! |
BursegSardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
59
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:02:00 -
[126] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:BursegSardaukar wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:XANDER KAG wrote:Controlling a single district will generate clones over time. If you end up producing more than you need, the excess clones can be sold for profit.
Corporations can expand into nearby unoccupied territory to claim it.
Does this mean that every corp gets one free district or do our CEO's pick a planet?I'm not asking for fairness but will small corps even have a real chance at controlling these districts for any amount of time? You pay 20 mil ISK to put your first deployment of clones down on to an empty district and then you own it. You can also deploy to an occupied district but you'll need to fight the owners for it. There should be plenty of room for everyone. What is the timetable for moving clones? Can I buy a million clones and conquer every open district immediately? Or attack every district at once? You can only buy clones from Genolution, they sell them in packs of 100, and they only sell them to people who do not own districts. They are terrible business men.
Lol, but can I buy 10,000 packs and plop people into every single district all at once? Is there any limit on how many districts I can attack?
|
Gilbatron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
81
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:02:00 -
[127] - Quote
Quote:We consider these to be much more like POCO's, and actually they work almost exactly like them just with moving clones being the action that reinforces them. While watching people fail miserably at setting the stront timers on a POS is funny, it means that when the corporation attacking shows up there might not be anyone to defend the district. This is no fun.
From experience in EVE the POCO system works much better for providing people with entertainment instead of blue ball ops.
how about forcing the defender to set up a defence contract for the case where he can not fill all slots in the defending team ? randoms would have to fill the places |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1582
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:03:00 -
[128] - Quote
Val'herik Dorn wrote:OMNOMNOMNOM beaten by a dev so different post now...
When do we get more stuff... i like being able to own districts and i love the changes!
but but STUFF?!?! i need more STUFF!!!!
See my post above yours. :) |
|
Reav Hannari
Red Rock Outriders Red Rock Consortium
368
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:03:00 -
[129] - Quote
For a feature release lacking in new screen shots and full of tables its pretty kitten interesting. With only 250 districts open for grabs at the beginning there should be a mad scramble to find space for each corporation. I need time to digest all this information but the strategic element of moving clones around looks really interesting.
Is development far enough along to provide screen shots of what directors will see when planning for conquest? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1582
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:04:00 -
[130] - Quote
BursegSardaukar wrote:Lol, but can I buy 10,000 packs and plop people into every single district all at once? Is there any limit on how many districts I can attack?
You buy them as you use them. So no stock pilling the 100 clone packages.
Once you own districts, you can attack as many districts as you have clones to attack. |
|
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1582
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:04:00 -
[131] - Quote
Reav Hannari wrote:For a feature release lacking in new screen shots and full of tables its pretty kitten interesting. With only 250 districts open for grabs at the beginning there should be a mad scramble to find space for each corporation. I need time to digest all this information but the strategic element of moving clones around looks really interesting.
Is development far enough along to provide screen shots of what directors will see when planning for conquest?
We will have more of this kind of information at a latter time. |
|
Val'herik Dorn
CrimeWave Syndicate
342
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:05:00 -
[132] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Val'herik Dorn wrote:OMNOMNOMNOM beaten by a dev so different post now...
When do we get more stuff... i like being able to own districts and i love the changes!
but but STUFF?!?! i need more STUFF!!!! See my post above yours. :)
GAAH you beat my edit with your quote...
I am humbled master you forumfu is greater than my own. |
zyljan
The Vanguard II
3
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:06:00 -
[133] - Quote
Right now (in EVE) I'm paying 14mil per one lost clone! How can I get in on the 'buy 100 clones for 20mil' deal?
Also, will the loot table consist of only BPCs even if the losing side fields BPOs? |
iceyburnz
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
357
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:06:00 -
[134] - Quote
The Elephant in the room map question:-
Will this be released with a fully implimented - terrain unique to each planet - dynamic/procedurally generated maps
Or will it be ashland, line harvest, manus peak, skim junction, and the wards with the same old fishbowl terrain and randomly generated structues (what we sort of have now) with the SI as a central feature.
|
Kain Spero
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1081
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:07:00 -
[135] - Quote
Is there any way to transfer or give up district ownership outside of combat? When you take over a district can you automatically remove any structures built there? |
Free Beers
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
1216
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:08:00 -
[136] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote: Can I have other corporations fight my battles? You can always pull additional players in to corporation battles using squads and if they win they will paid out of the biomass rewards. However our plan is to eventually open up a contract market place where other corporations can be hired to attack or defend districts on behalf of someone else.
How ******* stupid is this? Are you just too lazy to code a contract system?
You have hundreds of ******* people working on this game and you can't code a God Damned Contract System to take districts for other corps. We talked about this in irc last summer and this is the **** you come up with almost a year later.
I don't want to play ******* sim dust514 null. Come on man you guys are better then this. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1599
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:10:00 -
[137] - Quote
iceyburnz wrote:The Elephant in the room map question:-
Will this be released with a fully implimented - terrain unique to each planet - dynamic/procedurally generated maps
Or will it be ashland, line harvest, manus peak, skim junction, and the wards with the same old fishbowl terrain and randomly generated structues (what we sort of have now) with the SI as a central feature.
Not full unique, we don't have the art resources to make that many levels. We do go to some crazy crazy lengths though, see stars in EVE skybox actually lining up with where they will be. So while not ready to give away all the information, I am sure you can make some assumptions for now. :P |
|
HowDidThatTaste
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
2314
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:10:00 -
[138] - Quote
Say a corp owns 10 planets and staggers the attack times to defend them.
What are the chances of all 10 being attacked in a day? What happens to a district that is not attack each day? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1599
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:11:00 -
[139] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Is there any way to transfer or give up district ownership outside of combat? When you take over a district can you automatically remove any structures built there?
You cannot remove the structures that are on a district, but any action that leaves you with 0 clones at a district will abandon that district. So selling all the clones or moving them all away will abandon it. |
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
87
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:12:00 -
[140] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Chad2k95 wrote:Ok. So what happens when you implement this system what i am asking is do every corp start of with a district so they can attack other corps districts so that was my question. I'm just thinking like this '' you implement the system and i'm a CEO and i want to take this planet'' if i want the planet who will i need to fight for it if a corp starts out with no district's will i be doing PVE at the beginning of this system The districts will all start unowned. So whoever buys a package of clones from Genolution and places them on a district first gets that district.
Welcome to the biggest griefing tactic EVER in the history of New Eden!!
Fun times!! |
|
Forlorn Destrier
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
922
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:13:00 -
[141] - Quote
Regarding transfer of ISK: I request that we have two wallets in Dust
1. Merc Wallet: corps can use funds from this wallet to purchase anything on the market (clones, MCC's, HAV, DS, LAV, dropsuits, guns, equipment, structure listed in the wiki, etc). Dust players can donate to this, and money can be given to players. Eve players cannot donate to this wallet.
2. Corp wallet: corps can use funds from this wallet to purchase only planetary structures, MCC's, and clones only; corps cannot purcahase HAV, LAV, DS, dropsuit, etc. Dust players can donate to this wallet, but cannot take funds from it except to make these purchases. In addiition, Eve players can donate ISK to this wallet, or take ISK out. Essentially, this gives corps with a precense in Eve the ability to more directly assist the troops on the ground even if they can't provide orbital support.
Imagine this: two corps - one with an industry presence in Eve and one with a PvP wing. The indy corp can't field OB support to their Dust merc, but they can help fortify the ground defenses in an indirect way (extra clones, for example); the PvP corp doesn't have the finances to help on with the extra clones, but can provide direct OB support during battle to balance out the wealth of the other corp.
Thoughts? |
Kain Spero
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1081
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:13:00 -
[142] - Quote
What happens if all of the clones are moved out of a district? |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:13:00 -
[143] - Quote
So right now, a maxed out district with a production facility will net 60 clones per reinforcement time that they will then sell to genolution for 100k each or 6mill isk. Otherwise a district will make 4 million isk each day.
So from clone profit alone it will take 25 days to pay off a normal infrastructure investment. It would take 17 days to pay off investments with a production facility.
Either way, it seems that district profits alone will not be able to sustain thinly stretched war mongerers this doesn't even include logistics costs.
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1599
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:13:00 -
[144] - Quote
HowDidThatTaste wrote:Say a corp owns 10 planets and staggers the attack times to defend them.
What are the chances of all 10 being attacked in a day? What happens to a district that is not attack each day?
A planet is made up of many districts, 5 to 24. If a corporation owns 10 districts how many get attacked is entirely up to if others decide to attack them. To be honest I don't know how likely it will be for all 10 districts to be attacked every day, probably come down to how many other corporations hate/like you.
If a district is not attacked it sits there generating clones. You can use it to attack other districts. |
|
BursegSardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
59
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:13:00 -
[145] - Quote
Free Beers wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote: Can I have other corporations fight my battles? You can always pull additional players in to corporation battles using squads and if they win they will paid out of the biomass rewards. However our plan is to eventually open up a contract market place where other corporations can be hired to attack or defend districts on behalf of someone else.
How ******* stupid is this? Are you just too lazy to code a contract system? You have hundreds of ******* people working on this game and you can't code a God Damned Contract System to take districts for other corps. We talked about this in irc last summer and this is the **** you come up with almost a year later. I don't want to play ******* sim dust514 null. Come on man you guys are better then this.
Whoa...
Perhaps they want to see how the core conquest system works before implementing the Merc contract system. If the system is broken as all hell at launch, they wasted the time making the merc system entirely. I'd rather they devote the guys who would be doing the contact system to making sure this conquest system is flawless before iterating on it.
As a parallel: Why introduce War Decs into EVE if the PVP mechanics aren't figured out yet? |
Reav Hannari
Red Rock Outriders Red Rock Consortium
369
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:14:00 -
[146] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:BursegSardaukar wrote:Lol, but can I buy 10,000 packs and plop people into every single district all at once? Is there any limit on how many districts I can attack?
You buy them as you use them. So no stock pilling the 100 clone packages. Once you own districts, you can attack as many districts as you have clones to attack.
You can only buy clones from Genolution if you own no districts and you pick an empty district for delivery of the 100 clones? I'm assuming at that point you own that district and can't purchase any more clones and you are limited to the 100 clones for the first day. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1599
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:14:00 -
[147] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:What happens if all of the clones are moved out of a district?
You abandon it and it becomes unowned. Anyone can take it at this point by moving clones to it. |
|
jackbubu
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
29
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:14:00 -
[148] - Quote
HowDidThatTaste wrote:Say a corp owns 10 planets and staggers the attack times to defend them.
What are the chances of all 10 being attacked in a day? What happens to a district that is not attack each day?
if its not attacked for one day it can generate clones again, delaying your eventuall capture of it |
Jack Sharkey42
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
44
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:14:00 -
[149] - Quote
Kevall Longstride wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Chad2k95 wrote:Ok. So what happens when you implement this system what i am asking is do every corp start of with a district so they can attack other corps districts so that was my question. I'm just thinking like this '' you implement the system and i'm a CEO and i want to take this planet'' if i want the planet who will i need to fight for it if a corp starts out with no district's will i be doing PVE at the beginning of this system The districts will all start unowned. So whoever buys a package of clones from Genolution and places them on a district first gets that district. Welcome to the biggest griefing tactic EVER in the history of New Eden!! Fun times!!
Nah, with an initial load out of 250 districts I think the griefing will be brief and limited. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1599
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:15:00 -
[150] - Quote
Reav Hannari wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:BursegSardaukar wrote:Lol, but can I buy 10,000 packs and plop people into every single district all at once? Is there any limit on how many districts I can attack?
You buy them as you use them. So no stock pilling the 100 clone packages. Once you own districts, you can attack as many districts as you have clones to attack. You can only buy clones from Genolution if you own no districts and you pick an empty district for delivery of the 100 clones? I'm assuming at that point you own that district and can't purchase any more clones and you are limited to the 100 clones for the first day.
Correct. Others can buy starter packs and attack your knew district though. This does mean though that due to the 24 hour minimum timer on attacks the first day won't see any battles. |
|
|
iceyburnz
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
357
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:16:00 -
[151] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Kain Spero wrote:Is there any way to transfer or give up district ownership outside of combat? When you take over a district can you automatically remove any structures built there? You cannot remove the structures that are on a district, but any action that leaves you with 0 clones at a district will abandon that district. So selling all the clones or moving them all away will abandon it.
Thats functional but seems to lack grace. I hope that gets iterated on.
Oh and can we sell spare clones to the fast food industry.
I want a double draugr burger with corpus crispies and a large quafe.
Edit: sweet burn about yesterdays assumptions :P |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1599
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:17:00 -
[152] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:So right now, a maxed out district with a production facility will net 60 clones per reinforcement time that they will then sell to genolution for 100k each or 6mill isk. Otherwise a district will make 4 million isk each day.
So from clone profit alone it will take 25 days to pay off a normal infrastructure investment. It would take 17 days to pay off investments with a production facility.
Either way, it seems that district profits alone will not be able to sustain thinly stretched war mongerers this doesn't even include logistics costs.
We want to start this on the safe side, we are still iffy about how much fighting will be going on. We have the ability to change this number easily as it is server side.
All districts will also start with an SI. |
|
Reav Hannari
Red Rock Outriders Red Rock Consortium
369
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:17:00 -
[153] - Quote
When this is deployed we'll still have separate economies? I'm guessing so and that we'll need to look to corp donations from our mercs to grab our first district. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1599
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:18:00 -
[154] - Quote
Reav Hannari wrote:When this is deployed we'll still have separate economies? I'm guessing so and that we'll need to look to corp donations from our mercs to grab our first district.
Correct. |
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:20:00 -
[155] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote: All districts will also start with an SI.
I assume that this is a default infrastructure that does not give bonuses? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1609
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:21:00 -
[156] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote: All districts will also start with an SI.
I assume that this is a default infrastructure that does not give bonuses?
Nope, the defaults will be randomized when we launch. |
|
Free Beers
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
1216
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:23:00 -
[157] - Quote
BursegSardaukar wrote:Free Beers wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote: Can I have other corporations fight my battles? You can always pull additional players in to corporation battles using squads and if they win they will paid out of the biomass rewards. However our plan is to eventually open up a contract market place where other corporations can be hired to attack or defend districts on behalf of someone else.
How ******* stupid is this? Are you just too lazy to code a contract system? You have hundreds of ******* people working on this game and you can't code a God Damned Contract System to take districts for other corps. We talked about this in irc last summer and this is the **** you come up with almost a year later. I don't want to play ******* sim dust514 null. Come on man you guys are better then this. Whoa... Perhaps they want to see how the core conquest system works before implementing the Merc contract system. If the system is broken as all hell at launch, they wasted the time making the merc system entirely. I'd rather they devote the guys who would be doing the contact system to making sure this conquest system is flawless before iterating on it. As a parallel: Why introduce War Decs into EVE if the PVP mechanics aren't figured out yet?
Step 1-You own district A on planet and you want district B,C,D,E,ETC Step 2-You create contract (either open or confidential) on merc contract window. Step 3-We accept your contract Step 4-We win district Step 5-We get paid you gain control of district.
Step 2 needs to be coded. End of Story. Why its not already in dust is beyond fail by ccp.
|
XXfootnoteXX
DUST University Ivy League
107
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:23:00 -
[158] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Reav Hannari wrote:When this is deployed we'll still have separate economies? I'm guessing so and that we'll need to look to corp donations from our mercs to grab our first district. Correct.
So corp tax's still wont be available? |
Maximus Stryker
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
397
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:23:00 -
[159] - Quote
Belzeebub Santana wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:So large corps can put out multiple attacks or defend multiple locations, where a smaller corp has to decide whether they attack or defend?
There is only 1 hr window a day to attack district A? Win or lose you wait another 24hrs to attack?
So a corp of 16 holds 24 districts and can be attacked at each district that day and they have to fight all 24 or what? do the times overlap? Do the defenders choose the time or is it the attackers? The corporation in control of the district chooses the reinforcement time. so how many times can a district be attacked in a day? As defenders do you only defend the district once a day or once a day from every corp trying to take that district that day? Or is it first come first served and only the first corp to try and take the district is the only one the defenders need to fight and that district is locked for 24 hrs? Correct. A district can only be under attack by one other corporation at a time. So each district will provide at most 1 battle per day. Do the defenders choose who they want attacking if there are multiple opponents? How does this stop a corp from.making a dummy corp to attack their districts and locking them up? Did you read how expensive it is to do all this...that cannot be sustained over time is my thoughts... |
Kain Spero
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1081
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:24:00 -
[160] - Quote
Can we move clones out of a district if we don't own another? |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1609
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:25:00 -
[161] - Quote
XXfootnoteXX wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Reav Hannari wrote:When this is deployed we'll still have separate economies? I'm guessing so and that we'll need to look to corp donations from our mercs to grab our first district. Correct. So corp tax's still wont be available?
Not yet no sorry. |
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:25:00 -
[162] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote: All districts will also start with an SI.
I assume that this is a default infrastructure that does not give bonuses? Nope, the defaults will be randomized when we launch.
So seeded SI are destructable, but player built aren't removable? |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
644
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:26:00 -
[163] - Quote
Free Beers wrote:BursegSardaukar wrote:Free Beers wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote: Can I have other corporations fight my battles? You can always pull additional players in to corporation battles using squads and if they win they will paid out of the biomass rewards. However our plan is to eventually open up a contract market place where other corporations can be hired to attack or defend districts on behalf of someone else.
How ******* stupid is this? Are you just too lazy to code a contract system? You have hundreds of ******* people working on this game and you can't code a God Damned Contract System to take districts for other corps. We talked about this in irc last summer and this is the **** you come up with almost a year later. I don't want to play ******* sim dust514 null. Come on man you guys are better then this. Whoa... Perhaps they want to see how the core conquest system works before implementing the Merc contract system. If the system is broken as all hell at launch, they wasted the time making the merc system entirely. I'd rather they devote the guys who would be doing the contact system to making sure this conquest system is flawless before iterating on it. As a parallel: Why introduce War Decs into EVE if the PVP mechanics aren't figured out yet? Step 1-You own district A on planet and you want district B,C,D,E,ETC Step 2-You create contract (either open or confidential) on merc contract window. Step 3-We accept your contract Step 4-We win district Step 5-We get paid you gain control of district. Step 2 needs to be coded. End of Story. Why its not already in dust is beyond fail by ccp.
That's the plan, just not for this release. Yes we would like it all delivered right now but unfortunately making games takes time.
|
|
Nomed Deeps
The Exemplars
96
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:26:00 -
[164] - Quote
As a lot seems dependent upon alliance and corp affiliations, will there finally be alliance UI added to DUST? |
Heinrich Jagerblitzen
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
142
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:26:00 -
[165] - Quote
Many thanks again to the team for putting this all together. This build is shaping up to be pretty insane compared to the more patch-like iterations we've seen the last year.
I'll be around and following the thread, but I'm not about to step on FoxFour's toes here as he breaks it down for you all. Once the dust settles (Sorry, I couldnt resist!) if there's issues we still need to collate and give back to the devs I'm happy to help however I can.
o7 |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1609
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:26:00 -
[166] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Can we move clones out of a district if we don't own another?
Yes, moving clones is how you... well move clones. If you move to a friendly district they just go there. If you move to an unowned district you take it. If you move to a hostile district it schedules a battle.
See this http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#District_Actions |
|
jackbubu
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
29
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:27:00 -
[167] - Quote
Seeing how you do not continue travel costs above 7 jumps am i correct to guess that the initial launch will be limited to 1 low sec region ? (would also fit the 250 districts) |
HowDidThatTaste
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
2314
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:27:00 -
[168] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:HowDidThatTaste wrote:Say a corp owns 10 planets and staggers the attack times to defend them.
What are the chances of all 10 being attacked in a day? What happens to a district that is not attack each day? A planet is made up of many districts, 5 to 24. If a corporation owns 10 districts how many get attacked is entirely up to if others decide to attack them. To be honest I don't know how likely it will be for all 10 districts to be attacked every day, probably come down to how many other corporations hate/like you. If a district is not attacked it sits there generating clones. You can use it to attack other districts.
So its like a large game of risk and the first day we all drop our flag in the country (planet/district) we want/can afford.
The next day all hell breaks loose and you start acquiring your neighbor who put his flag to close to yours
Question is there a strategic way to build your empire if you own all three districts around the center one. Can anyone attack any district or is there a foothold/beachead that acts like a bottelneck forcing players to acquire district a to get to district b then on to c where all the goodies are stored?
I understand each is essential its own but if a corp owns a planet wouldn't it make more sense that there is only one district that someone can attack to establish a beach head? |
XXfootnoteXX
DUST University Ivy League
107
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:28:00 -
[169] - Quote
Maximus Stryker wrote: Did you read how expensive it is to do all this...that cannot be sustained over time is my thoughts...
Maybe for the time being but once eve and dust economies collide all bets are off. You have alliances with trillions of isk backing them up. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1617
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:28:00 -
[170] - Quote
jackbubu wrote:Seeing how you do not continue travel costs above 7 jumps am i correct to guess that the initial launch will be limited to 1 low sec region ? (would also fit the 250 districts)
Correct. |
|
|
Alcare Xavier Golden
DUST University Ivy League
58
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:29:00 -
[171] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:jackbubu wrote:Seeing how you do not continue travel costs above 7 jumps am i correct to guess that the initial launch will be limited to 1 low sec region ? (would also fit the 250 districts) Correct.
Which region? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1617
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:30:00 -
[172] - Quote
HowDidThatTaste wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:HowDidThatTaste wrote:Say a corp owns 10 planets and staggers the attack times to defend them.
What are the chances of all 10 being attacked in a day? What happens to a district that is not attack each day? A planet is made up of many districts, 5 to 24. If a corporation owns 10 districts how many get attacked is entirely up to if others decide to attack them. To be honest I don't know how likely it will be for all 10 districts to be attacked every day, probably come down to how many other corporations hate/like you. If a district is not attacked it sits there generating clones. You can use it to attack other districts. So its like a large game of risk and the first day we all drop our flag in the country (planet/district) we want/can afford. The next day all hell breaks loose and you start acquiring your neighbor who put his flag to close to yours Question is there a strategic way to build your empire if you own all three districts around the center one. Can anyone attack any district or is there a foothold/beachead that acts like a bottelneck forcing players to acquire district a to get to district b then on to c where all the goodies are stored? I understand each is essential its own but if a corp owns a planet wouldn't it make more sense that there is only one district that someone can attack to establish a beach head?
Risk is a really good way to look at it and how we often do internally.
What districts you can attack is only limited by distance. The primary purpose of a maximum distance was to try and encourage corporations to stay sort of closer and to prevent them from just attacking anyone anywhere. |
|
OgTheEnigma
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
96
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:30:00 -
[173] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:The districts will all start unowned. So whoever buys a package of clones from Genolution and places them on a district first gets that district. Can you only buy 1 package of clones at first, or is it unlimited? For example, if you buy 5 packs for 100 million ISK then you can just conquer 5 unoccupied districts very quickly in the beginning. Or are you limited to just 1 pack of clones and 1 district attack at first? |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
646
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:30:00 -
[174] - Quote
Alcare Xavier Golden wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:jackbubu wrote:Seeing how you do not continue travel costs above 7 jumps am i correct to guess that the initial launch will be limited to 1 low sec region ? (would also fit the 250 districts) Correct. Which region?
That one. *points* |
|
Mc Ribwich
Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
104
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:30:00 -
[175] - Quote
How will Genolution transport the clones in EVE? Will there be NPC ships flying around that EVE players can destroy and loot clones from? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1617
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:31:00 -
[176] - Quote
Alcare Xavier Golden wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:jackbubu wrote:Seeing how you do not continue travel costs above 7 jumps am i correct to guess that the initial launch will be limited to 1 low sec region ? (would also fit the 250 districts) Correct. Which region?
One of these |
|
jackbubu
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
29
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:31:00 -
[177] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:jackbubu wrote:Seeing how you do not continue travel costs above 7 jumps am i correct to guess that the initial launch will be limited to 1 low sec region ? (would also fit the 250 districts) Correct. its gotta be Heimatar
honour duel amamake Planet 1 Belt 1 || planet 1 district 1
B) |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1617
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:31:00 -
[178] - Quote
Mc Ribwich wrote:How will Genolution transport the clones in EVE? Will there be NPC ships flying around that EVE players can destroy and loot clones from?
Not yet no. What we really hope is, and this is way down the road, to have EVE players moving things. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1617
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:32:00 -
[179] - Quote
OgTheEnigma wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:The districts will all start unowned. So whoever buys a package of clones from Genolution and places them on a district first gets that district. Can you only buy 1 package of clones at first, or is it unlimited? For example, if you buy 5 packs for 100 million ISK then you can just conquer 5 unoccupied districts very quickly in the beginning. Or are you limited to just 1 pack of clones and 1 district attack at first?
You buy the package from Genolution when you initiate the attack, there is no stockpiling them. So only 1. |
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:32:00 -
[180] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:Is there a max amount of clones an attacker can move? And does the amount of clones moved affect the cost of transportation or is it just distance? The maximum clones that can be moved is equal to the maximum of the district they are being moved from. The default is 300, but this can be made 450. And no, but see this table for complete details: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Distance_And_Its_Effect_On_Moves
So to be clear here. 'Clone cost' is the total amount of clones you are left with after the move?
1) So a clone cost of 20% means that if you attacked with 100 clones you would arrive on planet with 20? 2) Can multiple districts from the same corp attack the same district? 100 from A and 150 from B attacks C? 3) Can you cancel an attack. I.e. if you do an 'all in' move with all your clones from your district, and someone attacks that sending district, are you basically then screwed? |
|
Kain Spero
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1081
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:33:00 -
[181] - Quote
Are direct ISK transfers between Dusters going to be available by the time district ownership launches? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1617
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:34:00 -
[182] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:Is there a max amount of clones an attacker can move? And does the amount of clones moved affect the cost of transportation or is it just distance? The maximum clones that can be moved is equal to the maximum of the district they are being moved from. The default is 300, but this can be made 450. And no, but see this table for complete details: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Distance_And_Its_Effect_On_Moves So to be clear here. 'Clone cost' is the total amount of clones you are left with after the move? 1) So a clone cost of 20% means that if you attacked with 100 clones you would arrive on planet with 20? 2) Can multiple districts from the same corp attack the same district? 100 from A and 150 from B attacks C? 3) Can you cancel an attack. I.e. if you do an 'all in' move with all your clones from your district, and someone attacks that sending district, are you basically then screwed?
1) Correct 2) No 3) No
:) |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1617
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:34:00 -
[183] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Are direct ISK transfers between Dusters going to be available by the time district ownership launches?
No |
|
Fox Gaden
DUST University Ivy League
224
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:35:00 -
[184] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Jack Sharkey42 wrote:On the list of effects due to win or loss conditions, the victory of the attacker in destroying the defenders MCC results in the defender still retaining control of the district. What then is the purpose of destroying the MCC? It puts a time limit on the match. The only two ways to finish a match are MCC destruction and clone loss. If we did not have the MCC then the battles could go on for a very long time, the final clone could hide and prevent the match from ending, all sorts of crazy things. This also explains why 100 clones are lost even if the losing side only loses 75 clones during the battle. Clearly the clones for the battle are stored in the MCC and delivered to the Drop Uplinks or CRUGÇÖs as needed. MCC goes Boom, so do the remainder of the 100 clones. |
Nomed Deeps
The Exemplars
96
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:35:00 -
[185] - Quote
As a lot seems dependent upon alliance and corp affiliations, will there finally be alliance UI added to DUST relatively soon? |
Reav Hannari
Red Rock Outriders Red Rock Consortium
369
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:35:00 -
[186] - Quote
If I log in on the first day and immediately order my batch of clones do I immediately take ownership?
If someone wants the same district on the first day can they schedule a battle for the following day or do I have to hold that district for a day before someone can declare an attack?
Once I buy clones I have to wait for 3 days to have enough clones to start my rampage if I didn't luck out and get the SI that increases clone production?
My head hurts. |
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
87
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:38:00 -
[187] - Quote
Right now I've read the Wiki piece I have two questions at the moment.
1. What is the dispersal pattern for the initial district seeding. High, Low and Null sec? All three or just one.
2. District actions. With the complete lack of roles available to a corp, Just CEO and directors I think I can speak for what many CEO's will be thinking.
District actions should ONLY be the purview of the CEO and not directors. It's not that I don't trust the guys I've picked for directors, they do sterling work in D-UNI but they have the director role because it was the only one available to give them and it gives them nearly as much power as the CEO.
The CEO should have some definite separation of power from the rest of management other than being able to pick the logo. |
Free Beers
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
1216
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:38:00 -
[188] - Quote
Why is OB support limited to corp or alliance? Can't we have a little bit of meta gaming and sneaky going on.
Make a command group (eve fleet & and merc team) and those in the cg get to OB. |
iceyburnz
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
359
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:38:00 -
[189] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:
:D Glad to see people starting to offer suggestions on this topic. Keep them coming please.
I am not a fan of bonusing research things as the BPO's never have to be put in harms way. Manufacturing though would be a good one as things would have to go to the POS.
Well I suppose you have to reflect the fact that its a facility that does research.
Its a difficult one. Maybe you could send the BPOs/BPC to the ground via the customes office, with a greatly increased research bonus due to the increased risk. Otherwise nobody would use it, since you can literally research in low sec stations in highsec with high scientific networking.
One Idea I had before I realised it was an eve bonus was research stations accruing AURUM at maybe 1 an hour. That would shut the "pay to w(h)inners" up.
Maybe a small cummulative bonus to all research carried out in that system? |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:38:00 -
[190] - Quote
jackbubu wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:jackbubu wrote:Seeing how you do not continue travel costs above 7 jumps am i correct to guess that the initial launch will be limited to 1 low sec region ? (would also fit the 250 districts) Correct. its gotta be Heimatar honour duel amamake Planet 1 Belt 1 || planet 1 district 1 B)
Well planets will have between 4-25 districts. Lets say the median planet has 9. That means that there will probably be 25-35 planets available for battle. I think there are less than 20 temperate planets in Heimatar available as lowsec systems with temperae planets. I haven't looked where genolution is yet... |
|
Gusk Hevv
Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic
26
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:40:00 -
[191] - Quote
Note to my future neighbors don't attack us , you will only draw attention to our planet , instead let's get coordinated attacks on other planets (Alliances in Dust where are you?) |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1634
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:40:00 -
[192] - Quote
Reav Hannari wrote:If I log in on the first day and immediately order my batch of clones do I immediately take ownership?
Yes, you get it immediately.
Reav Hannari wrote:If someone wants the same district on the first day can they schedule a battle for the following day or do I have to hold that district for a day before someone can declare an attack? Someone else can attack right away.
Reav Hannari wrote:Once I buy clones I have to wait for 3 days to have enough clones to start my rampage if I didn't luck out and get the SI that increases clone production? Yes, but we hope to see other people attacking you right away. Also most things seem to go live on a Tuesday, so come the weekend...
Reav Hannari wrote:My head hurts. I hope in a good way. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1634
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:40:00 -
[193] - Quote
A correction to make, I made a mistake on the wiki article: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#District_Actions
Selling clones does NOT lock the district. I am just a fool. I have updated the wiki article to display this correctly. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1634
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:43:00 -
[194] - Quote
Kevall Longstride wrote:Right now I've read the Wiki piece I have two questions at the moment.
1. What is the dispersal pattern for the initial district seeding. High, Low and Null sec? All three or just one.
2. District actions. With the complete lack of roles available to a corp, Just CEO and directors I think I can speak for what many CEO's will be thinking.
District actions should ONLY be the purview of the CEO and not directors. It's not that I don't trust the guys I've picked for directors, they do sterling work in D-UNI but they have the director role because it was the only one available to give them and it gives them nearly as much power as the CEO.
The CEO should have some definite separation of power from the rest of management other than being able to pick the logo.
1) One specific region, we have not announced which one yet. 2) To be honest we need more roles but I don't think limiting this to CEO's will work.
Would love to hear from other CEO's though about that. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1634
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:44:00 -
[195] - Quote
I have updated the distance table on the wiki article: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Distance_And_Its_Effect_On_Moves
Renamed the Clone Cost header to Clone Survival Rate. This is more indicative of what is happening, which is the number of clones that make it to the target district. |
|
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
647
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:45:00 -
[196] - Quote
A question It states that a "Surface Research Lab Decreases the attrition of moving clones by 50%" does that apply to just the district that houses the infrastructure or all of a corps districts? and if it does apply to all districts would that allow you to stack its effects? |
Moonracer2000
Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
350
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:46:00 -
[197] - Quote
Thank you CCP, this is the kind of information we are craving.
Are there any plans for a capital installation? Something much more expensive and limited to one per corporation?
If a corporation wins a district with an existing installation does it remain or is it destroyed in the process? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1634
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:46:00 -
[198] - Quote
gbghg wrote:A question It states that a "Surface Research Lab Decreases the attrition of moving clones by 50%" does that apply to just the district that houses the infrastructure or all of a corps districts? and if it does apply to all districts would that allow you to stack its effects?
Just the district the SI is on. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1634
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:47:00 -
[199] - Quote
Moonracer2000 wrote:Thank you CCP, this is the kind of information we are craving.
Are there any plans for a capital installation? Something much more expensive and limited to one per corporation?
If a corporation wins a district with an existing installation does it remain or is it destroyed in the process?
Plenty of plans and ideas, most of which I would get shot for sharing, but they are there.
The SI remains, as it stands there is no way to destroy the SI. |
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:49:00 -
[200] - Quote
Will a corp's standing with genolution affect the cost of clone purchases from it? |
|
Forlorn Destrier
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
922
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:50:00 -
[201] - Quote
Forlorn Destrier wrote:Regarding transfer of ISK: I request that we have two wallets in Dust
1. Merc Wallet: corps can use funds from this wallet to purchase anything on the market (clones, MCC's, HAV, DS, LAV, dropsuits, guns, equipment, structure listed in the wiki, etc). Dust players can donate to this, and money can be given to players. Eve players cannot donate to this wallet.
2. Corp wallet: corps can use funds from this wallet to purchase only planetary structures, MCC's, and clones only; corps cannot purcahase HAV, LAV, DS, dropsuit, etc. Dust players can donate to this wallet, but cannot take funds from it except to make these purchases. In addiition, Eve players can donate ISK to this wallet, or take ISK out. Essentially, this gives corps with a precense in Eve the ability to more directly assist the troops on the ground even if they can't provide orbital support.
Imagine this: two corps - one with an industry presence in Eve and one with a PvP wing. The indy corp can't field OB support to their Dust merc, but they can help fortify the ground defenses in an indirect way (extra clones, for example); the PvP corp doesn't have the finances to help on with the extra clones, but can provide direct OB support during battle to balance out the wealth of the other corp.
Thoughts?
FoxFour - you can now have ice cream if you address the above suggestion |
Reav Hannari
Red Rock Outriders Red Rock Consortium
369
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:50:00 -
[202] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Kevall Longstride wrote:Right now I've read the Wiki piece I have two questions at the moment.
1. What is the dispersal pattern for the initial district seeding. High, Low and Null sec? All three or just one.
2. District actions. With the complete lack of roles available to a corp, Just CEO and directors I think I can speak for what many CEO's will be thinking.
District actions should ONLY be the purview of the CEO and not directors. It's not that I don't trust the guys I've picked for directors, they do sterling work in D-UNI but they have the director role because it was the only one available to give them and it gives them nearly as much power as the CEO.
The CEO should have some definite separation of power from the rest of management other than being able to pick the logo. 1) One specific region, we have not announced which one yet. 2) To be honest we need more roles but I don't think limiting this to CEO's will work. Would love to hear from other CEO's though about that.
If you don't trust them they shouldn't be a director. If I'm offline for a few days the corp shouldn't sit helpless without me.
It does sound like its time to stop being a friendly little squad and start recruiting though. |
Jack Sharkey42
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
44
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:51:00 -
[203] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:Is there a max amount of clones an attacker can move? And does the amount of clones moved affect the cost of transportation or is it just distance? The maximum clones that can be moved is equal to the maximum of the district they are being moved from. The default is 300, but this can be made 450. And no, but see this table for complete details: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Distance_And_Its_Effect_On_Moves So to be clear here. 'Clone cost' is the total amount of clones you are left with after the move? 1) So a clone cost of 20% means that if you attacked with 100 clones you would arrive on planet with 20? 2) Can multiple districts from the same corp attack the same district? 100 from A and 150 from B attacks C? 3) Can you cancel an attack. I.e. if you do an 'all in' move with all your clones from your district, and someone attacks that sending district, are you basically then screwed? 1) Correct 2) No 3) No :)
So this means that clones spoil?!? That's so gross! |
2-Ton Twenty-One
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
281
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:51:00 -
[204] - Quote
Mr Pwnykins wrote:Die Well.
Kill well. Leave the dying to your enemies. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1640
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:52:00 -
[205] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:Will a corp's standing with genolution affect the cost of clone purchases from it?
No |
|
Reav Hannari
Red Rock Outriders Red Rock Consortium
369
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:52:00 -
[206] - Quote
What is the thought behind making clone transportation so limited? |
Val'herik Dorn
CrimeWave Syndicate
343
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:54:00 -
[207] - Quote
I have come to the only logical conclusion after reading the wiki and this thread....
Dust has now become the worlds largest most interactive game of risk...
Now everyone's most beloved argument causing board game can be enjoyed with almost 3 dozen other players in real-time.
The tears are going to be legen.... wait for it wait for it DARY |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1640
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:54:00 -
[208] - Quote
Reav Hannari wrote:What is the thought behind making clone transportation so limited?
Preventing people from attacking anywhere. If two groups are spread out across the galaxy we don't want them able to team up on someone more local to just one of the two. If you want to work together be near each other. |
|
Kain Spero
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1082
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:54:00 -
[209] - Quote
How many planets will we be fighting over when this launches? |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
3166
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:55:00 -
[210] - Quote
1) The ownership condition for attackers is depleting the enemy clones that the district contains?
2) Is there a limit to how many clones defenders can bring to one battle? Is it automatically the amount of clones the defenders have stored on the district?
3) If you attack a district, win the battle, but didn't successfully gain control of it, do you get any sort of priority on the net window of attack? I ask because you could do like 90% of the work to take a district, and some other corp swoops in and defeats the defenders, and takes the district that would otherwise be yours. |
|
Zahle Undt
The Tritan Industries
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:56:00 -
[211] - Quote
I'm very confused (nothing new for me) and probably won't really understand things until we get to try it, but what would be the actual mechanics of attacking and defending? So lets say Tritan wants to attack a district owned by STB, STB gets a message they are being attacked and they get to set a time for the battle? Do they have a fixed time window?
The way this is sounding is, all you need is 16 awesome players and you're golden, that would be a real shame.
IMO the attack/defend system should work like this. Corp A attacks district owned by Corp B. Corp B now has 1 hour to muster its best defense. Both corps can pull in anyone willing to fight for them through squad mechanic. Any members of corp and the corp's alliance can join the battle individually. This gives corporations incentives to make allies and have their back watched at all times and to recruit from all parts of the globe.
Defenders have advantage of knowing terrain and having preset installations.
Attackers should have the advantage of timing the attack. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1640
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:56:00 -
[212] - Quote
Jack Sharkey42 wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:Is there a max amount of clones an attacker can move? And does the amount of clones moved affect the cost of transportation or is it just distance? The maximum clones that can be moved is equal to the maximum of the district they are being moved from. The default is 300, but this can be made 450. And no, but see this table for complete details: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Distance_And_Its_Effect_On_Moves So to be clear here. 'Clone cost' is the total amount of clones you are left with after the move? 1) So a clone cost of 20% means that if you attacked with 100 clones you would arrive on planet with 20? 2) Can multiple districts from the same corp attack the same district? 100 from A and 150 from B attacks C? 3) Can you cancel an attack. I.e. if you do an 'all in' move with all your clones from your district, and someone attacks that sending district, are you basically then screwed? 1) Correct 2) No 3) No :) So this means that clones spoil?!? That's so gross!
I should clarify 3. No you cannot cancel the attack. Think carefully about how many clones you want to attack with.
You can however move clones from district A (which you own) to district X (which someone else owns) and then move clones from district B (which you also own) to district A. Once another district attacks district A though you cannot move more clones to it.
|
|
Forlorn Destrier
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
922
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:56:00 -
[213] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:How many planets will we be fighting over when this launches?
If you own no districts and buy a batch of clones can you then attack anywhere? How many clones can you have if you don't own a district?
1. 250 planets 2. Yes, you can attack anywhere 3. Good question |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
650
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:57:00 -
[214] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:How many planets will we be fighting over when this launches?
Around 250 districts with 5-24 on each planet. :math:
Kain Spero wrote:If you own no districts and buy a batch of clones can you then attack anywhere? How many clones can you have if you don't own a district?
The initial deployment is 100 clones for 20 mil ISK, but you only have access to that if you don't own any districts.
|
|
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
647
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:57:00 -
[215] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:gbghg wrote:A question It states that a "Surface Research Lab Decreases the attrition of moving clones by 50%" does that apply to just the district that houses the infrastructure or all of a corps districts? and if it does apply to all districts would that allow you to stack its effects? Just the district the SI is on. so that mean's that districts with SRL's are going to be the natural staging points for the inital attacks on a planet and once you've got districts on a planet you can upgrade them for more clones...
hmm this could get interesting. also will we see some kind of planetary control mechanism that will give benefits to the SI/PI of the corp with the highest rating on that planet? |
Reav Hannari
Red Rock Outriders Red Rock Consortium
369
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:58:00 -
[216] - Quote
Let's say an ally wants help in a battle and provides a squad leader to bring in some of my guys. We use their clones for the battle? It sounds like freelance mercenaries will have it easy since our "employers" will be the ones footing the expensive part of the bill.
Will we be paying for MCCs in this release? |
Forlorn Destrier
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
922
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 19:59:00 -
[217] - Quote
Zahle Undt wrote:I'm very confused (nothing new for me) and probably won't really understand things until we get to try it, but what would be the actual mechanics of attacking and defending? So lets say Tritan wants to attack a district owned by STB, STB gets a message they are being attacked and they get to set a time for the battle? Do they have a fixed time window?
The way this is sounding is, all you need is 16 awesome players and you're golden, that would be a real shame.
IMO the attack/defend system should work like this. Corp A attacks district owned by Corp B. Corp B now has 1 hour to muster its best defense. Both corps can pull in anyone willing to fight for them through squad mechanic. Any members of corp and the corp's alliance can join the battle individually. This gives corporations incentives to make allies and have their back watched at all times and to recruit from all parts of the globe.
Defenders have advantage of knowing terrain and having preset installations.
Attackers should have the advantage of timing the attack.
The defending corp sets a reinforcement timer - attacks only happen when this timer runs out (and there is a 1 hour window until the next reinforcement stage happens). When you attack, the attack is set for the window that happens at least 24 hours from when you "attack".
So basically, you attack, then the next day there is the actual battle to give you time to organize a defense (your own players, ringers, etc). Attackers will know when the window is and can plan accordingly - so if the window is too inconvenience, you pick a different target. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1649
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:00:00 -
[218] - Quote
Reav Hannari wrote:Let's say an ally wants help in a battle and provides a squad leader to bring in some of my guys. We use their clones for the battle? It sounds like freelance mercenaries will have it easy since our "employers" will be the ones footing the expensive part of the bill.
Will we be paying for MCCs in this release?
No paying for the MCC, not yet. We are introducing enough numbers to try and tweak that I am already scared. >.< |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1649
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:02:00 -
[219] - Quote
gbghg wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:gbghg wrote:A question It states that a "Surface Research Lab Decreases the attrition of moving clones by 50%" does that apply to just the district that houses the infrastructure or all of a corps districts? and if it does apply to all districts would that allow you to stack its effects? Just the district the SI is on. so that mean's that districts with SRL's are going to be the natural staging points for the inital attacks on a planet and once you've got districts on a planet you can upgrade them for more clones... hmm this could get interesting. also will we see some kind of planetary control mechanism that will give benefits to the SI/PI of the corp with the highest rating on that planet?
That is the hope, that we see people using the different SI for different strategic purposes.
As for the planetary control mechanism, nothing yet. We are currently focusing on the ability to take and own districts which will lead to benefits for owning whole planets down the road. |
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
88
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:02:00 -
[220] - Quote
Reav Hannari wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Kevall Longstride wrote:Right now I've read the Wiki piece I have two questions at the moment.
1. What is the dispersal pattern for the initial district seeding. High, Low and Null sec? All three or just one.
2. District actions. With the complete lack of roles available to a corp, Just CEO and directors I think I can speak for what many CEO's will be thinking.
District actions should ONLY be the purview of the CEO and not directors. It's not that I don't trust the guys I've picked for directors, they do sterling work in D-UNI but they have the director role because it was the only one available to give them and it gives them nearly as much power as the CEO.
The CEO should have some definite separation of power from the rest of management other than being able to pick the logo. 1) One specific region, we have not announced which one yet. 2) To be honest we need more roles but I don't think limiting this to CEO's will work. Would love to hear from other CEO's though about that. If you don't trust them they shouldn't be a director. If I'm offline for a few days the corp shouldn't sit helpless without me. It does sound like its time to stop being a friendly little squad and start recruiting though.
Oh I do trust them, let make that clear and they are so pumped up for this I can't begin to tell you.
But the lack of roles is a worry. I just want the Dust corps to have the kind of internal compartmentalisation mechanic that Eve corps take for granted. But then I'm an Eve player and as we all know, we're completely paranoid. |
|
BursegSardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
61
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:03:00 -
[221] - Quote
Question about the matches themselves:
1) Are the maps going to correspond to the types of installations in that district?
2) Is the layout of the map for a district going to be identical every time that district is fought over?
3) Can the owners of a district place defenses as they see fit?
4) When the match starts, do the defenders already own all the null cannons by default?
|
Reav Hannari
Red Rock Outriders Red Rock Consortium
369
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:03:00 -
[222] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Reav Hannari wrote:Let's say an ally wants help in a battle and provides a squad leader to bring in some of my guys. We use their clones for the battle? It sounds like freelance mercenaries will have it easy since our "employers" will be the ones footing the expensive part of the bill.
Will we be paying for MCCs in this release? No paying for the MCC, not yet. We are introducing enough numbers to try and tweak that I am already scared. >.<
I now understand why you planned a weekend of drinking. This looks really interesting though. I do appreciate how this is designed to not require alarm clock operations for the defender too. I'm a lot more interested in trying to hold territory knowing that I'll be available when necessary. Family + Work > Planetary Defense.
|
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1030
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:04:00 -
[223] - Quote
So there's a benefit to grouping your districts and those of your alliance. That means will be choosing specific districts or planets during our initial land grab.
I can see this leading to conflict if two different alliances choose the same starting points unbeknownst to each other.
Is there going to be a turn based district claim system a in Risk(TM) or is it going to be chaos as everyone tries to stake their claim the millisecond that the land office opens? |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:05:00 -
[224] - Quote
Quick pivot reveals the following systems with the conditions (not FW system, in lowsec, has temperate planet, has Genolution Station):
Aridia (Naga, Sakht, Tisot) Genesis (Toon, Zarer) Lonetrek (Iitanmadan, Nannaras) Metropolis (Gebuladi) Placid (Grispire) Tash-Murkon (Keshirou, Ordat, Rethan) The Forge (Otsela)
Some systems have 2 planets. But, if these are the right conditions for seeded districts, most of these regions will be secluded from others (outside of 5 jumps away). So we may see 'continental domination-possibly, but unlikely universe wide since once you have a district you can't 'attack from nowhere'. Your initial location will have to be your beginning point...I assume?
Interestingly, Genolution stations were seeded in lowsec constellations near each other. There are quite a few in highsec as well. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
654
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:05:00 -
[225] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:gbghg wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:gbghg wrote:A question It states that a "Surface Research Lab Decreases the attrition of moving clones by 50%" does that apply to just the district that houses the infrastructure or all of a corps districts? and if it does apply to all districts would that allow you to stack its effects? Just the district the SI is on. so that mean's that districts with SRL's are going to be the natural staging points for the inital attacks on a planet and once you've got districts on a planet you can upgrade them for more clones... hmm this could get interesting. also will we see some kind of planetary control mechanism that will give benefits to the SI/PI of the corp with the highest rating on that planet? That is the hope, that we see people using the different SI for different strategic purposes. As for the planetary control mechanism, nothing yet. We are currently focusing on the ability to take and own districts which will lead to benefits for owning whole planets down the road. yeah I can see a control mechanism is well down the line for features to be implemented but it's the obvious evolution of the district system you're implementing. |
BGoat
DUST University Ivy League
9
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:06:00 -
[226] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:3) If you attack a district, win the battle, but didn't successfully gain control of it, do you get any sort of priority on the net window of attack? I ask because you could do like 90% of the work to take a district, and some other corp swoops in and defeats the defenders, and takes the district that would otherwise be yours.
I would also like to know the answer to this. |
Reav Hannari
Red Rock Outriders Red Rock Consortium
369
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:06:00 -
[227] - Quote
Kevall Longstride wrote:Oh I do trust them, let make that clear and they are so pumped up for this I can't begin to tell you. But the lack of roles is a worry. I just want the Dust corps to have the kind of internal compartmentalisation mechanic that Eve corps take for granted. But then I'm an Eve player and as we all know, we're completely paranoid.
My apologies, I didn't look at your corp. That's a mighty big herd of cats you have to wrangle and I imagine you have an equally big team of directors for the job.
|
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
3166
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:06:00 -
[228] - Quote
You may have missed my post, or you may be getting to it now. I understand that you're being bombarded with questions, but I hope you didn't miss my questions (post 210). Thank you.
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
650
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:06:00 -
[229] - Quote
BursegSardaukar wrote:1) Are the maps going to correspond to the types of installations in that district?
The terrain and visuals of the location are constant, but the primary building on the map is defined by what surface infrastructure is deployed. The weather and some other things can vary though.
BursegSardaukar wrote:2) Is the layout of the map for a district going to be identical every time that district is fought over?
Yes, except if the SI changes.
BursegSardaukar wrote:3) Can the owners of a district place defenses as they see fit?
Not yet.
BursegSardaukar wrote:4) When the match starts, do the defenders already own all the null cannons by default?
No, but I like the idea of original skirmish which had similar to this. So maybe in a later release.
|
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:08:00 -
[230] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:
I should clarify 3. No you cannot cancel the attack. Think carefully about how many clones you want to attack with.
You can however move clones from district A (which you own) to district X (which someone else owns) and then move clones from district B (which you also own) to district A. Once another district attacks district A though you cannot move more clones to it.
This is alot like the rules of Diplomacy. Which kind of begs the question of reinforcements...How will allies factor in to all this? |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
655
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:09:00 -
[231] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:1) The ownership condition for attackers is depleting the enemy clones that the district contains?
Yes. Although that may take multiple battles.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:2) Is there a limit to how many clones defenders can bring to one battle? Is it automatically the amount of clones the defenders have stored on the district?
The defenders get access to all of the clones on their district. Whether they choose to use them all up is up to them.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:3) If you attack a district, win the battle, but didn't successfully gain control of it, do you get any sort of priority on the net window of attack? I ask because you could do like 90% of the work to take a district, and some other corp swoops in and defeats the defenders, and takes the district that would otherwise be yours.
There is an exclusivity period for 1 hour after the battle start time to schedule a follow up attack during which the defender cannot move more clones in and other corps cannot attack it. |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
655
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:10:00 -
[232] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:
I should clarify 3. No you cannot cancel the attack. Think carefully about how many clones you want to attack with.
You can however move clones from district A (which you own) to district X (which someone else owns) and then move clones from district B (which you also own) to district A. Once another district attacks district A though you cannot move more clones to it.
This is alot like the rules of Diplomacy. Which kind of begs the question of reinforcements...How will allies factor in to all this?
I love diplomacy. It has been a big inspiration for this design. |
|
BursegSardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
62
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:10:00 -
[233] - Quote
I asked wayyyy back in this thread about OB's being decoupled from WPs to make it more valuable for Dust mercs to have EVE friends and for EVE friends to show up and help a Dust team.
Any plans for this?
|
EnIgMa99
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
239
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:11:00 -
[234] - Quote
Can I put my flag on it and beat my chest? When I mean flag I mean a tag or something that says ME! |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
655
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:12:00 -
[235] - Quote
BursegSardaukar wrote:I asked wayyyy back in this thread about OB's being decoupled from WPs to make it more valuable for Dust mercs to have EVE friends and for EVE friends to show up and help a Dust team.
Any plans for this?
Not at this stage. |
|
Kain Spero
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1082
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:13:00 -
[236] - Quote
Would it be possible to implement a way for one to abandon our district if we only own 1 district and take our 100 clones back to roam space? |
Zahle Undt
The Tritan Industries
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:15:00 -
[237] - Quote
Forlorn Destrier wrote:Zahle Undt wrote:I'm very confused (nothing new for me) and probably won't really understand things until we get to try it, but what would be the actual mechanics of attacking and defending? So lets say Tritan wants to attack a district owned by STB, STB gets a message they are being attacked and they get to set a time for the battle? Do they have a fixed time window?
The way this is sounding is, all you need is 16 awesome players and you're golden, that would be a real shame.
IMO the attack/defend system should work like this. Corp A attacks district owned by Corp B. Corp B now has 1 hour to muster its best defense. Both corps can pull in anyone willing to fight for them through squad mechanic. Any members of corp and the corp's alliance can join the battle individually. This gives corporations incentives to make allies and have their back watched at all times and to recruit from all parts of the globe.
Defenders have advantage of knowing terrain and having preset installations.
Attackers should have the advantage of timing the attack. The defending corp sets a reinforcement timer - attacks only happen when this timer runs out (and there is a 1 hour window until the next reinforcement stage happens). When you attack, the attack is set for the window that happens at least 24 hours from when you "attack". So basically, you attack, then the next day there is the actual battle to give you time to organize a defense (your own players, ringers, etc). Attackers will know when the window is and can plan accordingly - so if the window is too inconvenience, you pick a different target.
This leaves the problem I foresaw where all one really needs is 16 good players more or less. Time window for actual battles should be much shorter than 24 hours. I understand CCP wanting to give small corps a chance, but this system, as is, makes numbers mean nothing.
|
Reav Hannari
Red Rock Outriders Red Rock Consortium
369
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:15:00 -
[238] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:The defenders get access to all of the clones on their district. Whether they choose to use them all up is up to them
If a defender chooses to hold some clones back and loses then what happens? The attacker wins the district but what happens to the reserved clones?
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
655
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:15:00 -
[239] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Would it be possible to implement a way for one to abandon our district if we only own 1 district and take our 100 clones back to roam space?
You can sell all the clones on your districts. You'll get ISK for the sale and leave the district abandoned. You can then relaunch a starter pack of 100 clones somewhere else. |
|
EnIgMa99
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
239
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:16:00 -
[240] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Would it be possible to implement a way for one to abandon our district if we only own 1 district and take our 100 clones back to roam space?
Yeah can we sell districts? |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
668
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:16:00 -
[241] - Quote
Zahle Undt wrote:Forlorn Destrier wrote:Zahle Undt wrote:I'm very confused (nothing new for me) and probably won't really understand things until we get to try it, but what would be the actual mechanics of attacking and defending? So lets say Tritan wants to attack a district owned by STB, STB gets a message they are being attacked and they get to set a time for the battle? Do they have a fixed time window?
The way this is sounding is, all you need is 16 awesome players and you're golden, that would be a real shame.
IMO the attack/defend system should work like this. Corp A attacks district owned by Corp B. Corp B now has 1 hour to muster its best defense. Both corps can pull in anyone willing to fight for them through squad mechanic. Any members of corp and the corp's alliance can join the battle individually. This gives corporations incentives to make allies and have their back watched at all times and to recruit from all parts of the globe.
Defenders have advantage of knowing terrain and having preset installations.
Attackers should have the advantage of timing the attack. The defending corp sets a reinforcement timer - attacks only happen when this timer runs out (and there is a 1 hour window until the next reinforcement stage happens). When you attack, the attack is set for the window that happens at least 24 hours from when you "attack". So basically, you attack, then the next day there is the actual battle to give you time to organize a defense (your own players, ringers, etc). Attackers will know when the window is and can plan accordingly - so if the window is too inconvenience, you pick a different target. This leaves the problem I foresaw where all one really needs is 16 good players more or less. Time window for actual battles should be much shorter than 24 hours. I understand CCP wanting to give small corps a chance, but this system, as is, makes numbers mean nothing.
Bigger corps can hold more districts because they can defend simultaneous attacks. It will scale to the size of your corp. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1679
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:18:00 -
[242] - Quote
I am heading out to get some food. I shall return to the keyboard in a while and continue answering questions. Take care guys and keep the discussion going. |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
668
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:18:00 -
[243] - Quote
Reav Hannari wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:The defenders get access to all of the clones on their district. Whether they choose to use them all up is up to them If a defender chooses to hold some clones back and loses then what happens? The attacker wins the district but what happens to the reserved clones?
The defender loses at least 100 clones regardless of how many they consumed. The remaining stay at the district and the attacker can launch another attack if they wish. |
|
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
3166
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:19:00 -
[244] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:1) The ownership condition for attackers is depleting the enemy clones that the district contains? Yes. Although that may take multiple battles. KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:2) Is there a limit to how many clones defenders can bring to one battle? Is it automatically the amount of clones the defenders have stored on the district? The defenders get access to all of the clones on their district. Whether they choose to use them all up is up to them. KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:3) If you attack a district, win the battle, but didn't successfully gain control of it, do you get any sort of priority on the net window of attack? I ask because you could do like 90% of the work to take a district, and some other corp swoops in and defeats the defenders, and takes the district that would otherwise be yours. There is an exclusivity period for 1 hour after the battle start time to schedule a follow up attack during which the defender cannot move more clones in and other corps cannot attack it.
Thank you There is possible gameplay problem with this system. It prioritizes clone count over depletion over MCC destruction since MCC destruction only does 100 clone loss, while a clone count depletion has the potential to completely win a district, or to least make the enemy take a bigger clone loss. I fear Skirmish will become a glorified Ambush battle.
There needs to be more game modes or objectives associated with planetary conquest or else it will only be a glorified team-deathmatch. Here are possible ways to add complexity and variety to the actual battles: Attacking/defending clone storage to destroy clone supply. Attacking/defending to steal clones by the hundreds. |
Heinrich Jagerblitzen
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
142
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:20:00 -
[245] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Would it be possible to implement a way for one to abandon our district if we only own 1 district and take our 100 clones back to roam space?
Awww, have a little pride, Kain! Your enemies will think you lack confidence in your men.
I mean I know there's a lot of chest-puffing going on in Imperfects but you're not THAT terrible. |
Goric Rumis
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
97
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:20:00 -
[246] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:iceyburnz wrote:The Elephant in the room map question:-
Will this be released with a fully implimented - terrain unique to each planet - dynamic/procedurally generated maps
Or will it be ashland, line harvest, manus peak, skim junction, and the wards with the same old fishbowl terrain and randomly generated structues (what we sort of have now) with the SI as a central feature.
Not full unique, we don't have the art resources to make that many levels. We do go to some crazy crazy lengths though, see stars in EVE skybox actually lining up with where they will be. So while not ready to give away all the information, I am sure you can make some assumptions for now. :P Thought: Why not crowd-source the map building? Allow players to submit alternative maps, do a review and playtest in a special "map beta" mode, and then you decide where the new map goes (so players aren't creating maps for their own districts).
This would obviously require a lot of work just to set up, but I imagine it would require less work than creating however many thousands of unique maps.
Just a thought. |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
419
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:21:00 -
[247] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: There is possible gameplay problem with this system. It prioritizes clone count over depletion over MCC destruction since MCC destruction only does 100 clone loss, while a clone count depletion has the potential to completely win a district, or to least make the enemy take a bigger clone loss. I fear Skirmish will become a glorified Ambush battle.
There needs to be more game modes or objectives associated with planetary conquest or else it will only be a glorified team-deathmatch. Here are possible ways to add complexity and variety to the actual battles: Attacking/defending clone storage to destroy clone supply. Attacking/defending to steal clones by the hundreds.
The attackers would still need to focus on the objectives to win the match, because if they lose on MCC destruction they lose all the clones they brought.
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:21:00 -
[248] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:
I should clarify 3. No you cannot cancel the attack. Think carefully about how many clones you want to attack with.
You can however move clones from district A (which you own) to district X (which someone else owns) and then move clones from district B (which you also own) to district A. Once another district attacks district A though you cannot move more clones to it.
This is alot like the rules of Diplomacy. Which kind of begs the question of reinforcements...How will allies factor in to all this? I love diplomacy. It has been a big inspiration for this design.
Based off this then, may I suggest an alteration to the 'one attacker' design, which would be "The first attacker or the next attacker in that reinforcement period with the highest number of arriving clones by a 10% margin (or something)" becomes the preeminent attacker.
This could enable allied supporting actions effectively.
Defender has district X. Attacker A attacks with 450 clones but is 2 districts away so they arrive in system with 270 clones. Ally B in same system as district X sees attacker and sends 273 clones from its lab upgraded district.
This action 'blocks' Attacker A, who then returns home with his 270 clones. But the risk is that ally B was forced to be vulnerable for that period. |
EnIgMa99
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
239
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:22:00 -
[249] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:I think owning all, or most of the districts, should allow you to name the planet. Makes it a bit more of an achievement. And no one can re-name it until they take the majority of districts. Would be great fun.
The Chest beating will commence |
Heinrich Jagerblitzen
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
142
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:23:00 -
[250] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:I am heading out to get some food. I shall return to the keyboard in a while and continue answering questions. Take care guys and keep the discussion going.
CCP really needs a special assistant that just fetches food for developers on important news/patch release days. Also, old school chamber pots under the desk at the office. This is SPACE FUTURE, why should we let the needs of just one fleshy body stand in the way of PROGRESS???
o7 |
|
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
91
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:23:00 -
[251] - Quote
Reav Hannari wrote:Kevall Longstride wrote:Oh I do trust them, let make that clear and they are so pumped up for this I can't begin to tell you. But the lack of roles is a worry. I just want the Dust corps to have the kind of internal compartmentalisation mechanic that Eve corps take for granted. But then I'm an Eve player and as we all know, we're completely paranoid. My apologies, I didn't look at your corp. That's a mighty big herd of cats you have to wrangle and I imagine you have an equally big team of directors for the job.
Cats with big teeth and bigger guns.
No need to apologise. But there are bigger corps than us so I can imagine their CEO's have the same concerns as I.
I'm not the CEO by the way. I'm the clone merc/brother of Dennie Fleetfoot, the Director of Operations, in charge of the day to day running of the corp.
Any other Dust corp managers with Eve toons beginning to understand how schizophrenics feel by the way?
I'm not saying I'm jumping at small noises yet but it can't be far off...
|
Karl Koekwaus
Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic
37
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:23:00 -
[252] - Quote
In regards to possible EVE tie ins with the 3 buildings:
Cargo Hub - 100,000,000 ISK - Increases the maximum number of clones by 50%.
On Planet: The Corp or Alliance (maybe even base it on standings) who owns the POCO above the planet can store more PI products in the POCO 75Km3 instead of 37.5K and the Spaceport and other planetary storage is increased as well. If the district is lost, the POCO and storage facilities go into an Overloaded state, not accepting any more goods until enough space is made available. If the POCO is lost, good in space are lost, storage facilities will enter a Overloaded state.
In Space: Corps owning the POCO and district in a non station system have a kind of Corp Hangars which they can use to base out of. Items stored in this hangar while the district is lost, will remain planetside and can't be retrieved unless a new POCO is anchored. If this POCO has a different owner than the corp who wants to retrieve the goods, they'll have to pay export taxes according to the value of the goods stored and the export taxes set by the new owners.
Surface Research Lab - 100,000,000 ISK - Decreases the attrition of moving clones by 50%.
On Planet: Scanning Planets for Material Hotspots gets a boost for the Corp or Alliance (or base it on standings) members of 25%, making the perfect exploitation of planetary resources easier. Advanced PI production plants require 25% less CPU/PG to deploy.
In Space: Aside from the Planetary benefit, POS research times get a boost of 10%. This bonus is for all kinds of research so ME/PE/Invention and RE, due to the ability to unload some work to planetary labs, due to the nature of much of the research, it's not really effective to do so, as only basic jobs can be offloaded planetary due to atmospheric conditions adversely affecting research.
Production Facility - 100,000,000 ISK - Increase clone generation rate by 50%.
On planet: PI production gets a 25% cycle time bonus. This will cause material Hotspots to deplete faster.
In Space:
Gives POCO's 3 Production lines, these function the same as Equipment Assembly Arrays with some added bonuses. Production lines in the POCO get a 25% Production time bonus for Tech 1 Products and a 35% bonus for Tech 2 products (Compared to a standard POS equipment assembly array). This is because moon materials can be processed on the surface of planets, making it more efficient to build Tech 2 parts on planets and using a space elevator to freighter them up for further assembly in the final goods. If the POCO is destroyed the same rules as building items using a POS apply.
Since Districts are a lowsec and lower thing, giving some massive bonuses to PI when owning more than 3 districts and Production should spur more interesting gameplay for POCO shooters and Industrialists alike since the capturing of a POCO now gives more than just some PI Tax. It also gives Incentives for EVE pilots to try and be there to support their local Ground Soldiers.
It would be more awesome for Dust Corp Directors to put up Sell orders for the Clones in POCO's so EVE pilots can buy and traffic them into other systems selling them in stations to Dust corps who use them for invasions. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
655
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:24:00 -
[253] - Quote
Goric Rumis wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:iceyburnz wrote:The Elephant in the room map question:-
Will this be released with a fully implimented - terrain unique to each planet - dynamic/procedurally generated maps
Or will it be ashland, line harvest, manus peak, skim junction, and the wards with the same old fishbowl terrain and randomly generated structues (what we sort of have now) with the SI as a central feature.
Not full unique, we don't have the art resources to make that many levels. We do go to some crazy crazy lengths though, see stars in EVE skybox actually lining up with where they will be. So while not ready to give away all the information, I am sure you can make some assumptions for now. :P Thought: Why not crowd-source the map building? Allow players to submit alternative maps, do a review and playtest in a special "map beta" mode, and then you decide where the new map goes (so players aren't creating maps for their own districts). This would obviously require a lot of work just to set up, but I imagine it would require less work than creating however many thousands of unique maps. Just a thought. hmm just the terrain maybe, and then allow CCP to play around with the design to fit SI into the map. |
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1030
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:24:00 -
[254] - Quote
So the defender is limited to the clone count at the start of the timer, but what of the attacker?
As I read it, they can keep calling in follow on attacks from different districts until they whittle the defenders down to nothing. That means an attacker can almost be assured of a victory if they are willing to commit enough resources and a small corp can always be kicked back into space, correct? |
Heinrich Jagerblitzen
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
142
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:25:00 -
[255] - Quote
EnIgMa99 wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:I think owning all, or most of the districts, should allow you to name the planet. Makes it a bit more of an achievement. And no one can re-name it until they take the majority of districts. Would be great fun. The Chest beating will commence
And the TTP will be incredibly short. Surely you know this, Foxy. |
D3LTA SUP3RMAN
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
244
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:32:00 -
[256] - Quote
Heinrich Jagerblitzen wrote:EnIgMa99 wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:I think owning all, or most of the districts, should allow you to name the planet. Makes it a bit more of an achievement. And no one can re-name it until they take the majority of districts. Would be great fun. The Chest beating will commence And the TTP will be incredibly short. Surely you know this, Foxy.
Damn that corp title looks good under your name Heinrich : )
My question is that of the corp wallet. I tried to find it but because i'm on my phone i could have missed a page or so. Will we be able to purchase the clones and such from our EVE corp wallets or just our DUST corp wallet?
|
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
656
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:36:00 -
[257] - Quote
Skihids wrote:So the defender is limited to the clone count at the start of the timer, but what of the attacker?
As I read it, they can keep calling in follow on attacks from different districts until they whittle the defenders down to nothing. That means an attacker can almost be assured of a victory if they are willing to commit enough resources and a small corp can always be kicked back into space, correct? only for a set period of time, and both corps can funnel clones into that district so we're going to end up with situations like this big corp with lots of territory= more clones to throw into fights lots of territory= more attacks to beat off more attacks to beat off= less clones to be moved about to reinforce districts
this would mean that trying to win simply through attrition could be a risky strategy if the small corp got allies to attack the larger aggressor corp and prevent him from deploying his reserves |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
656
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:36:00 -
[258] - Quote
Skihids wrote:So the defender is limited to the clone count at the start of the timer, but what of the attacker?
As I read it, they can keep calling in follow on attacks from different districts until they whittle the defenders down to nothing. That means an attacker can almost be assured of a victory if they are willing to commit enough resources and a small corp can always be kicked back into space, correct? only for a set period of time, and both corps can funnel clones into that district so we're going to end up with situations like this big corp with lots of territory= more clones to throw into fights lots of territory= more attacks to beat off more attacks to beat off= less clones to be moved about to reinforce districts
this would mean that trying to win simply through attrition could be a risky strategy if the small corp got allies to attack the larger aggressor corp and prevent him from deploying his reserves |
Forlorn Destrier
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
922
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:36:00 -
[259] - Quote
D3LTA SUP3RMAN wrote:Heinrich Jagerblitzen wrote:EnIgMa99 wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:I think owning all, or most of the districts, should allow you to name the planet. Makes it a bit more of an achievement. And no one can re-name it until they take the majority of districts. Would be great fun. The Chest beating will commence And the TTP will be incredibly short. Surely you know this, Foxy. Damn that corp title looks good under your name Heinrich : ) My question is that of the corp wallet. I tried to find it but because i'm on my phone i could have missed a page or so. Will we be able to purchase the clones and such from our EVE corp wallets or just our DUST corp wallet?
I suggested this but got no reply. |
Nomed Deeps
The Exemplars
96
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:36:00 -
[260] - Quote
Quote:Will we be able to purchase the clones and such from our EVE corp wallets or just our DUST corp wallet?
From what I heard, as the economies are not yet joined, everything will still be bought in DUST. |
|
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
3167
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:37:00 -
[261] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: There is possible gameplay problem with this system. It prioritizes clone count over depletion over MCC destruction since MCC destruction only does 100 clone loss, while a clone count depletion has the potential to completely win a district, or to least make the enemy take a bigger clone loss. I fear Skirmish will become a glorified Ambush battle.
There needs to be more game modes or objectives associated with planetary conquest or else it will only be a glorified team-deathmatch. Here are possible ways to add complexity and variety to the actual battles: Attacking/defending clone storage to destroy clone supply. Attacking/defending to steal clones by the hundreds.
The attackers would still need to focus on the objectives to win the match, because if they lose on MCC destruction they lose all the clones they brought.
That is a good point, though it won't really matter if the difference in skill is great enough; with the right difference, a corp can steamroll an apposing team and wipe out their clone reserves and win faster than the MCC gets destroyed.
This may not be the case when defenders can stack their clones to large numbers, but I would still like more variety in the game modes. I don't always want to just be capturing null cannons and depleting clones. We need objectives besides null cannons, and we need attack/defend modes. |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:37:00 -
[262] - Quote
Skihids wrote:So the defender is limited to the clone count at the start of the timer, but what of the attacker?
As I read it, they can keep calling in follow on attacks from different districts until they whittle the defenders down to nothing. That means an attacker can almost be assured of a victory if they are willing to commit enough resources and a small corp can always be kicked back into space, correct?
As I read this you aren't exactly correct. If they destroy the enemy MCC they get 20% of the clones left in the MCC. So if the attackers are conservative with their clones, then the defenders could possibly end up with a net gain in clones while the attacker lost some in 'attrition' from the attack. In addition, the defender will get the attacker's loot, and also the attacker still paid to get there.
So if you are mounting a very strong defense continually, it's possible to be making isk. |
LXicon
VENGEANCE FOR HIRE
59
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:41:00 -
[263] - Quote
The revenue for a corp that owns a district is derived from the number of clones they want to sell...
With all this added revenue, will the CEO and Directors get improved ways to divvy up the ISK to the corp members? Will (non-director) corp members be able to see who is getting paid by the corp? |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
419
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:41:00 -
[264] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:Bendtner92 wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: There is possible gameplay problem with this system. It prioritizes clone count over depletion over MCC destruction since MCC destruction only does 100 clone loss, while a clone count depletion has the potential to completely win a district, or to least make the enemy take a bigger clone loss. I fear Skirmish will become a glorified Ambush battle.
There needs to be more game modes or objectives associated with planetary conquest or else it will only be a glorified team-deathmatch. Here are possible ways to add complexity and variety to the actual battles: Attacking/defending clone storage to destroy clone supply. Attacking/defending to steal clones by the hundreds.
The attackers would still need to focus on the objectives to win the match, because if they lose on MCC destruction they lose all the clones they brought. That is a good point, though it won't really matter if the difference in skill is great enough; with the right difference, a corp can steamroll an apposing team and wipe out their clone reserves and win faster than the MCC gets destroyed. This may not be the case when defenders can stack their clones to large numbers, but I would still like more variety in the game modes. I don't always want to just be capturing null cannons and depleting clones. We need objectives besides null cannons, and we need attack/defend modes. FoxFour / Nullarbor said in IRC they want to bring Skirmish 1.0 (or maybe something similar) back. Not for this build, but in the future at least.
|
Kitten Commander
Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation
31
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:42:00 -
[265] - Quote
Interesting to see how this turns out as alliances decide who owns what on planets and in systems.
The backstabbing will be Kittening fantastic. |
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
354
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:42:00 -
[266] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Reav Hannari wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:The defenders get access to all of the clones on their district. Whether they choose to use them all up is up to them If a defender chooses to hold some clones back and loses then what happens? The attacker wins the district but what happens to the reserved clones? The defender loses at least 100 clones regardless of how many they consumed. The remaining stay at the district and the attacker can launch another attack if they wish.
When you say they can launch another attack, does that battle commence immediately or does it take place again 24 hours later?
Edit- Also with the squad count going up to 6 will the WP requirement for PS/OB still remain 2500 or will it be increased? |
Forlorn Destrier
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
922
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:43:00 -
[267] - Quote
LXicon wrote:The revenue for a corp that owns a district is derived from the number of clones they want to sell...
With all this added revenue, will the CEO and Directors get improved ways to divvy up the ISK to the corp members? Will (non-director) corp members be able to see who is getting paid by the corp?
This doesn't happen in Eve so I doubt they will do it in Dust |
Forlorn Destrier
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
922
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:44:00 -
[268] - Quote
Gunner Nightingale wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:Reav Hannari wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:The defenders get access to all of the clones on their district. Whether they choose to use them all up is up to them If a defender chooses to hold some clones back and loses then what happens? The attacker wins the district but what happens to the reserved clones? The defender loses at least 100 clones regardless of how many they consumed. The remaining stay at the district and the attacker can launch another attack if they wish. When you say they can launch another attack, does that battle commence immediately or does it take place again 24 hours later? Edit- Also with the squad count going up to 6 will the WP requirement for PS/OB still remain 2500 or will it be increased?
Shhhh!! We want more OB! |
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
354
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:46:00 -
[269] - Quote
Heinrich Jagerblitzen wrote:Kain Spero wrote:Would it be possible to implement a way for one to abandon our district if we only own 1 district and take our 100 clones back to roam space? Awww, have a little pride, Kain! Your enemies will think you lack confidence in your men. I mean I know there's a lot of chest-puffing going on in Imperfects but you're not THAT terrible.
Fool if i was allowed to comment on the nature of these questions you'd **** yourself at the thought of what they would allows us to do. As it is like every other fool that dreams of being the next caeser, napolean, or kahn you lack the vision to see the bigger metagame.
In the battle of wits against the IMPS you arrive to the fight unarmed and outgunned in every way imaginable. |
Reav Hannari
Red Rock Outriders Red Rock Consortium
369
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:52:00 -
[270] - Quote
Forlorn Destrier wrote:LXicon wrote:The revenue for a corp that owns a district is derived from the number of clones they want to sell...
With all this added revenue, will the CEO and Directors get improved ways to divvy up the ISK to the corp members? Will (non-director) corp members be able to see who is getting paid by the corp? This doesn't happen in Eve so I doubt they will do it in Dust
Looks like the combatants get paid with biomass value of clones killed and loot. The corporation should keep the district earnings to help fund district upgrades and clone transportation.
CCP, will corp armories come with this build too?
|
|
Jack Sharkey42
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
45
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:54:00 -
[271] - Quote
Does anyone have a feeling that this sort of invasion process is going to turn into a huge sniper fest? |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
670
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:55:00 -
[272] - Quote
Gunner Nightingale wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:Reav Hannari wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:The defenders get access to all of the clones on their district. Whether they choose to use them all up is up to them If a defender chooses to hold some clones back and loses then what happens? The attacker wins the district but what happens to the reserved clones? The defender loses at least 100 clones regardless of how many they consumed. The remaining stay at the district and the attacker can launch another attack if they wish. When you say they can launch another attack, does that battle commence immediately or does it take place again 24 hours later? Edit- Also with the squad count going up to 6 will the WP requirement for PS/OB still remain 2500 or will it be increased?
The following day at around the same time. |
|
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
354
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:57:00 -
[273] - Quote
I know others have shot down the dummy corp idea for holding a district indefinitely given the isk cost but once EVE isk can come into play that can easily be overcome at current isk rates.
So again there needs to be some safeguard beyond ISK to prevent dummycorp to attack valuable districts, if done properly keep the dummy corps to hold no districts, buy 100 clones attack most lucrative districts and keep them perputally engaged in combat 20million isk is nothing to make that happen. |
Forlorn Destrier
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
922
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:58:00 -
[274] - Quote
Jack Sharkey42 wrote:Does anyone have a feeling that this sort of invasion process is going to turn into a huge sniper fest?
Nope |
Jack Sharkey42
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
45
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:59:00 -
[275] - Quote
Gunner Nightingale wrote:I know others have shot down the dummy corp idea for holding a district indefinitely given the isk cost but once EVE isk can come into play that can easily be overcome at current isk rates.
So again there needs to be some safeguard beyond ISK to prevent dummycorp to attack valuable districts, if done properly keep the dummy corps to hold no districts, buy 100 clones attack most lucrative districts and keep them perputally engaged in combat 20million isk is nothing to make that happen.
1984 anyone? :D |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 21:00:00 -
[276] - Quote
Success will be just as much about efficiency as it will be skill. Right now, current income levels means that if you are REALLY good you could make 1 million isk each hour you play. BUT if you are that good you really should be out in district fights. So lets say you can make 600kisk/ hour after losses. Thats about 6 clones in losses (opportunity cost of selling clone).
To sustain losses of 300 clone fights where you consistently lose you would be effectively paying 75 million isk+ per battle after other losses. Not to mention, the defender gets loot and isk from biomass. Then also, when you lose, that district that sent clones now has fewer clones so it must be considered for defensive purposes.
Sustained battles lasting weeks would be incredibly expensive and I doubt that any corp has the funds to cover something like it quite yet. |
knight of 6
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
96
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 21:05:00 -
[277] - Quote
about OB's... if in a battle determining the ownership of a district will the WP amount be reduced or removed(count down timer ect)?
when in eve there is no limits to the amount of fire power one can bring to a fight. it would seem a shame to limit (more than necessary) the amount of support that a corp can bring in, in dust. also it would promote capsuleer-merc interaction. and produce some interesting situations.
just a thought i'll reserve my judgement for the release. |
Nomed Deeps
The Exemplars
96
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 21:05:00 -
[278] - Quote
Could those actually getting answered please ask the following question:
- What's the ETA on alliance UI being available from the DUST side?
I tried twice myself without answer. |
BursegSardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
62
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 21:07:00 -
[279] - Quote
Jack Sharkey42 wrote:Does anyone have a feeling that this sort of invasion process is going to turn into a huge sniper fest?
lol Defense: sniper fest Offense: tank spam
|
knight of 6
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
96
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 21:09:00 -
[280] - Quote
BursegSardaukar wrote:Jack Sharkey42 wrote:Does anyone have a feeling that this sort of invasion process is going to turn into a huge sniper fest? lol Defense: sniper fest Offense: tank spam winner: lone scout hacking objectives. tankers don't leave their tanks snipers don't move period. |
|
Jack Sharkey42
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
46
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 21:13:00 -
[281] - Quote
knight of 6 wrote:BursegSardaukar wrote:Jack Sharkey42 wrote:Does anyone have a feeling that this sort of invasion process is going to turn into a huge sniper fest? lol Defense: sniper fest Offense: tank spam winner: lone scout hacking objectives. tankers don't leave their tanks snipers don't move period.
Actually I think tank spam might just win that one lol |
VINGTHOR LYNN
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 21:16:00 -
[282] - Quote
So far so good, and thank you for all the hard work!
Naturally there is still a lot of work ahead but of all the things that are still to come I mostly wonder about the very etheric link between EVE and DUST.
To the question about about FW you indicate "new system is coming for factional warfare". On the other hand to the question about the new PC and EVE link you answer that : "We will be posting a dev blog about that later on".
I am very curious about that link because this is what inspires many of us to form EVE/Dust alliances or even discuss unofficial coalitions with the militia pilots. So I will try to make another poke at that link:
Will there be any link between PC and FW? Or to put it in another way: if a DUST corp is a member of the militia will it be able to benefit from FW militia gains as well get clones by conquering a district in FW space in a PC battle |
Kevall Longstride
DUST University Ivy League
93
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 21:17:00 -
[283] - Quote
Another major concern is now forming in my mind. Both for the smaller corps and those that have no established links to Eve corps.
The placement of district seeding is going to be crucially important. A Dust corp with a link to a big Eve one can effectively remove any chance of their opponent using OB by blockading a planet and destroying ships that come near a district to give ground support. OB's are an important asset and to not even be even able to use them is going to put a lot of corp off even trying to set up a ground presence.
This problem will mean that it will be absolutely impossible for a small corp to establish anything by itself. They would have to join an alliance.
Those just wanting a carve a niche for themselves are going to find it next to impossible.
I'm not saying that the sandbox should be altered but the game is difficult enough for players not used to it without making it even more difficult
Is there any thinking as to changes in mechanics to stop the larger player blocs from just dominating Dust on day one, because that could lead to some real problems in trying to get players used to COD and it's shortened skill queue into Dust and staying here. |
Klivve Cussler
Ransoms Incorporated
57
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 21:17:00 -
[284] - Quote
So we have, what, six maps that have been going into and out of circulation? three installation hubs, so that's 18 different terrain combinations, plus mood-ing to increase the variation, plus vegetation will be in by then, so that's... an ok start. Implement a water level variation and about have about double the current maps, and that's better.
Question 1: Is this the beginning of the installation system descibed in the "Seeding the Universe" talk at fanfest last year? If so, are these considered the big hubs, or are they medium or small installations and will look more appropriately-sized when we get the bigger maps?
Question 2: Given that the "you'll be able to see starships in orbit over your district in the next build" is still valid, is there any chance we'll be able to see ALL the ships on-grid above the district, so we can watch the low-sec pirates blow our orbital support ships out of space?
Proposal 1: Can our corps charge a fee for Eve PI installations in our districts? This would allow a little bit of cross-game transactions, without too badly affecting either economy. It also would promote one corporation to do PI and own the planet to avoid the fees. The corp holding the majority of districts on the planet could potentially gain control of the customs office, as well.
Proposal 2: Structure construction times. Give each structure a period of time when it is under construction. Say a week. If you have a battle during that week, the structure is rendered under construction, with cranes and scaffolding, giving more variation and immersion
Proposal 3: This is a cheap, cheap one, but it would go a long way to adding immersion: Merc Quarters in a district: All you'd need is a window. Render a specific view of that district depending on the structure present (so ever MQ would have the same window in the same district). All mercs to select what district they live in. If the district falls, make them choose another. Mercs with no districts have no window (are on a station). Have the window closed during a battle within that district. |
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
3168
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 21:32:00 -
[285] - Quote
When you win a planetary conquest battle. do you personally get money, or does only your corp wallet get the money? |
Reav Hannari
Red Rock Outriders Red Rock Consortium
369
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 21:35:00 -
[286] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:When you win a planetary conquest battle. do you personally get money, or does only your corp wallet get the money?
"ISK reward is split amongst team members based on time spent in the match even if the player leaves the match; a minimum of 60 seconds must be spent in the match to qualify."
+ salvage based on a percentage of what the other team lost. |
LXicon
VENGEANCE FOR HIRE
60
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 21:40:00 -
[287] - Quote
Reav Hannari wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:When you win a planetary conquest battle. do you personally get money, or does only your corp wallet get the money? "ISK reward is split amongst team members based on time spent in the match even if the player leaves the match; a minimum of 60 seconds must be spent in the match to qualify." + salvage based on a percentage of what the other team lost. the corp will get ISK for selling excess clones produced on it's districts that it doesn't need for attacking or defending. |
Belzeebub Santana
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
441
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 21:53:00 -
[288] - Quote
Gunner Nightingale wrote:I know others have shot down the dummy corp idea for holding a district indefinitely given the isk cost but once EVE isk can come into play that can easily be overcome at current isk rates.
So again there needs to be some safeguard beyond ISK to prevent dummycorp to attack valuable districts, if done properly keep the dummy corps to hold no districts, buy 100 clones attack most lucrative districts and keep them perputally engaged in combat 20million isk is nothing to make that happen.
Ya a big corp collecting taxes from the members that just run pub matches can support a dummy corp. pretty well. But I guess this is a legitimate tactic and can see how this can be abused.
Whats stopping you having multi dummy corp. since you cant own space to buy mercs, one simply makes a dozen corps and launders money into them to have them hold hi value places? |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 22:03:00 -
[289] - Quote
Belzeebub Santana wrote:Gunner Nightingale wrote:I know others have shot down the dummy corp idea for holding a district indefinitely given the isk cost but once EVE isk can come into play that can easily be overcome at current isk rates.
So again there needs to be some safeguard beyond ISK to prevent dummycorp to attack valuable districts, if done properly keep the dummy corps to hold no districts, buy 100 clones attack most lucrative districts and keep them perputally engaged in combat 20million isk is nothing to make that happen. Ya a big corp collecting taxes from the members that just run pub matches can support a dummy corp. pretty well. But I guess this is a legitimate tactic and can see how this can be abused. Whats stopping you having multi dummy corp. since you cant own space to buy mercs, one simply makes a dozen corps and launders money into them to have them hold hi value places?
You can't transfer money from corp to corp yet. How would this happen. As soon as people move they have an employment history you can see in eve. You will be able to see the shell network system pretty quickly. |
BursegSardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
63
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 22:18:00 -
[290] - Quote
Jack Sharkey42 wrote:knight of 6 wrote:BursegSardaukar wrote:Jack Sharkey42 wrote:Does anyone have a feeling that this sort of invasion process is going to turn into a huge sniper fest? lol Defense: sniper fest Offense: tank spam winner: lone scout hacking objectives. tankers don't leave their tanks snipers don't move period. Actually I think tank spam might just win that one lol
The attackers should actually avoid taking ALL the objectives - their goal (to claim the district) is to deplete all the clones on it. This means their goal should be to win by clone destruction. They need to keep the points from being hacked from the get-go, or cap 51% of the points and hold them just so they don't lose their MCC. |
|
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
419
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 22:20:00 -
[291] - Quote
BursegSardaukar wrote:
The attackers should actually avoid taking ALL the objectives - their goal (to claim the district) is to deplete all the clones on it. This means their goal should be to win by clone destruction. They need to keep the points from being hacked from the get-go, or cap 51% of the points and hold them just so they don't lose their MCC.
The problem is that the defenders will go hide when they've lost 100 clones unless they're absolutely certain they'll win the match. |
Orin the Freak
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz
347
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 22:24:00 -
[292] - Quote
So I read most of this thread, and my only question is, what if you send the 100 clones to a district, but due to degradation, only 20, 30, whatever, make it? do you still take the unoccupied district/fight with only 20 clones? or is there a failsafe in place to prevent fewer than 100 clones from arriving (like, an error telling you you must send 300 clones to a district x jumps away) or... what? alternately, if you send 100 clones to attack a neighboring district, and it leaves 40 clones at your main base, what happens if someone attacks your main base? you don't have the 100 clones to muster. this is the only confusion for me.
other than that, as far as this "mad dash for districts" goes, on the first day, it will be one district per corp, since the minimum amount of clones you can send is 100, and if you take an unclaimed district, that is all you will have for at least one day. thus meaning it will take a week or so for any one corp to claim an entire planet uncontested. longer if someone else moves in. |
Average Joe81
Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic
23
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 22:27:00 -
[293] - Quote
What of Eve's current planetary installation system?
And also besides that, at the end of the blog it says corps will have to form armies and navies so does that mean that we are going to get boats or will we just be swimming around in a big ocean? |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 22:28:00 -
[294] - Quote
WARNING AND DOOMSAY:
The described mechanic favors exponential growth! As the ISK making through clones is not dependant on resource rarity and consumption, this can be cracked down to "attack spam 10000 districs, snowball effect and insert rapton of ISK in New Eden".
This is purely a numbers game by spam attacking, setting tedious timezones as defense and just using all manhours in district flipping.
Nullsec sov passive ISK is relying on the moon minerals as industry materials, and by bottlenecks favors defending precious ones. As explained in blog, the system is cracked and won by exponential attack growth and hence by numbers.
NOOOOoooo!
|
Goric Rumis
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
99
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 22:30:00 -
[295] - Quote
BursegSardaukar wrote:Jack Sharkey42 wrote:knight of 6 wrote:BursegSardaukar wrote:Jack Sharkey42 wrote:Does anyone have a feeling that this sort of invasion process is going to turn into a huge sniper fest? lol Defense: sniper fest Offense: tank spam winner: lone scout hacking objectives. tankers don't leave their tanks snipers don't move period. Actually I think tank spam might just win that one lol The attackers should actually avoid taking ALL the objectives - their goal (to claim the district) is to deplete all the clones on it. This means their goal should be to win by clone destruction. They need to keep the points from being hacked from the get-go, or cap 51% of the points and hold them just so they don't lose their MCC. It allows us to play a variety of goals. Maybe the attacker's objective isn't to deplete clones at all, but to stop production (e.g., you're hired by another corp to help stifle your target's clone production so they can't transfer the additional clones to defend another district). Even then, you want to maximize the number of clones you kill, but it won't be top priority.
There's also the possibility that you don't yet have enough clones to compete with your target, and you want to disable their clone production so that your total number of clones can catch up. In that case, you might be attacking with all the clones you have, and you'll want to destroy the MCC as soon as possible so that you don't lose too many and leave yourself vulnerable.
Also remember that the defender will have up to 450 clones, while you only have what you bring with you. If you lose all of your clones before you can destroy the MCC, you lose. It's a calculated risk when trying a tactic like this.
So really, there are a lot of possibilities. Yes, in general you will probably try to maximize your opponent's clone loss so you can take over the district as quickly as possible, but your opponent will be trying to prevent that. If I had a corp that was getting stomped and we hit the 100-clone minimum, I'd order everybody to sit in the MCC until it went down (if we were obviously losing anyway). |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 22:36:00 -
[296] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:WARNING AND DOOMSAY:
The described mechanic favors exponential growth! As the ISK making through clones is not dependant on resource rarity and consumption, this can be cracked down to "attack spam 10000 districs, snowball effect and insert rapton of ISK in New Eden".
This is purely a numbers game by spam attacking, setting tedious timezones as defense and just using all manhours in district flipping.
Nullsec sov passive ISK is relying on the moon minerals as industry materials, and by bottlenecks favors defending precious ones. As explained in blog, the system is cracked and won by exponential attack growth and hence by numbers.
NOOOOoooo!
The more districts you own the more places you will be able to be attacked from. The way they describe it, you will be able to be attacked at 100% efficiency from all districts in your system each day, the at decent efficiency from what will probably be like 25-30% of remaining districts. Just because you have lots of money it doesn't give you a win button. If you own 10 districts that is 10 man-hours x 16 members you will be vulnerable. You will be responsible for 160 man hours of defense time FOR DEFENSE ONLY. If you want to increase your attacking logarithmically you have to also find enough attacking teams good enough to make that pace of advance worth it. |
R F Gyro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
317
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 22:37:00 -
[297] - Quote
Average Joe81 wrote:What of Eve's current planetary installation system?
And also besides that, at the end of the blog it says corps will have to form armies and navies so does that mean that we are going to get boats or will we just be swimming around in a big ocean? lol - I get through 14.8 pages with no-one asking the question I was thinking, and then you pop up 2 posts from the end of the last page!
I too would like to know whether the planets we'll be fighting for will also have Eve PI happening on them.
I'm guessing there'd be no interaction between them anyway, but it is still interesting to think about. Maybe there could be some indication in the Eve PI interface that the planet has battles raging on it? |
Klivve Cussler
Ransoms Incorporated
59
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 22:42:00 -
[298] - Quote
Quote:Can our corps charge a fee for Eve PI installations in our districts? This would allow a little bit of cross-game transactions, without too badly affecting either economy. It also would promote one corporation to do PI and own the planet to avoid the fees. The corp holding the majority of districts on the planet could potentially gain control of the customs office, as well.
Here's my idea on PI, since it was buried in a TL;DR. |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 22:44:00 -
[299] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:Average Joe81 wrote:What of Eve's current planetary installation system?
And also besides that, at the end of the blog it says corps will have to form armies and navies so does that mean that we are going to get boats or will we just be swimming around in a big ocean? lol - I get through 14.8 pages with no-one asking the question I was thinking, and then you pop up 2 posts from the end of the last page! I too would like to know whether the planets we'll be fighting for will also have Eve PI happening on them. I'm guessing there'd be no interaction between them anyway, but it is still interesting to think about. Maybe there could be some indication in the Eve PI interface that the planet has battles raging on it?
There is no reason they won't have PI on them. What has been said before and looks like is suggested on the wiki is that PI occurring in our districts will get bonuses from our installations. Causing the owners to maybe want to support us, but if they get their bonus regardless of owner then they won't care. What we need to know is what we get out of it. This is probably news for eve players at fanfest.
As far as a navy. Your EvE pilots are the navy doof! |
crazy space 1
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
927
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 22:46:00 -
[300] - Quote
I've got a serious question, Why does the losing team get salvage? In eve if you win, you salvage your own equipment as well.
Thus the name right? Salvage? |
|
Ghural
The Southern Legion
63
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 22:49:00 -
[301] - Quote
Will EVE players be able to view ownership details of the various districts?
Will mercenary installations appear in planetary interaction?
Will there be any new skills added to the game relevant to planetary conquest? |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 22:49:00 -
[302] - Quote
Also this doesn't say what the rewards will be in FW merc battles. Just SP? |
Breakin Stuff
Immobile Infantry
708
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 22:56:00 -
[303] - Quote
What other things are being included in the next build? the conquest clone thing is cool.
But there's been new weapons promised, new dropsuits, changes in mechanics, none of which have been covered. What else is happening?
You said yer changing how laser rifles work. How?
You said heavies are being looked at. I'm rather interested here, having invested heavily in Forge AV and am pretty much expecting another nerf to enjoy. i'd like prep time to determine if I'll bother with the new heavy stuff or swap to logi entirely.
There's hundreds of questions like this floating around, many of which have been at least hinted at being in the next build.
We'll have a reason to take planets. Cool. I'm down with that. What about the rest of the build?
I want my gallente heavy suit. I realize it probably won't happen soon but still. There's a lot more information I need before i'll be happy about the introduction of this new iteration promise of the game. |
Kovak Therim
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
166
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 23:01:00 -
[304] - Quote
Kitten Commander wrote:"In an update arriving later this year, " ... at least some things never change
Still we wait. I find it very difficult to get excited about any of this. Who gives a kitten if there's no one around to see it?
|
Belzeebub Santana
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
441
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 23:11:00 -
[305] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:Gunner Nightingale wrote:I know others have shot down the dummy corp idea for holding a district indefinitely given the isk cost but once EVE isk can come into play that can easily be overcome at current isk rates.
So again there needs to be some safeguard beyond ISK to prevent dummycorp to attack valuable districts, if done properly keep the dummy corps to hold no districts, buy 100 clones attack most lucrative districts and keep them perputally engaged in combat 20million isk is nothing to make that happen. Ya a big corp collecting taxes from the members that just run pub matches can support a dummy corp. pretty well. But I guess this is a legitimate tactic and can see how this can be abused. Whats stopping you having multi dummy corp. since you cant own space to buy mercs, one simply makes a dozen corps and launders money into them to have them hold hi value places? You can't transfer money from corp to corp yet. How would this happen. As soon as people move they have an employment history you can see in eve. You will be able to see the shell network system pretty quickly.
You can with all three slots you are given and you can make more psn accounts which give you more alts to play with.
How you transfer money between corps?You make Merc A, it makes a corp, your merc B makes a corp. Merc B's corp is the real corp and merc A is the dummy corp. You make merc C the money man, he joins real corp and you give money to merc C from merc B's corp. Merc C then leaves merc B's corp and joins merc A's corp donating all the money that the main corp gave him.
Pretty simple and can be done on a mass scale, the only deterrence is the 20 mill for 100 clonesso you would dummy corp your main districts that make you the most. Who knows what will happen when eve isk get brought into play.
|
phrozen hel
SyNergy Gaming
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 23:15:00 -
[306] - Quote
Nomed Deeps wrote:Could those actually getting answered please ask the following question:
- What's the ETA on alliance UI being available from the DUST side as a lot of interactions are corp and alliance dependent?
I tried twice myself without answer.
please answer this question if possible foxxy
also seeing as we will be getting the capability to take over districts, and an increase in not only squad size, but overall size that we can take into battle, IE 16v16, are we going to be getting the VR rooms for practicing and such? As it stands now, there really isnt a cheap and effective way of doing practice outside linking up with another corp and doing corp matches repeatedly, which incurs equipment lost. |
Panther Alpha
WarRavens
114
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 23:18:00 -
[307] - Quote
What is later in the year ? and are we talking about this year or.......20 years from now ? Because i'm not getting any younger you know. |
Belzeebub Santana
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
441
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 23:25:00 -
[308] - Quote
When we do this massive land grab, what side of the globe will you be screwing over?
CCP might have to break up the land grab event to accommodate for different timezones, have half of the 250 up for EU and the other half for Americas?
Reminds me of Far and Away... |
Rubico
BetaMax. CRONOS.
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 23:31:00 -
[309] - Quote
Creating clones as a commodity implies there will be demand for that commodity. Will purchased clones be required for battles in faction war? |
kili mourn
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 23:41:00 -
[310] - Quote
stupid buttons |
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
32
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 23:48:00 -
[311] - Quote
It's time to play Slay !!! ;)
Honestly, it's sounds good to me, bring a lots of questions, but need some time to think about them...
Just one I can't give an answer : where is the FAQ please ?
Thx ;) !!! |
XXfootnoteXX
DUST University Ivy League
108
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 23:50:00 -
[312] - Quote
Kovak Therim wrote:Kitten Commander wrote:"In an update arriving later this year, " ... at least some things never change Still we wait. I find it very difficult to get excited about any of this. Who gives a kitten if there's no one around to see it?
Kind of at the point I am at right now. I am not expecting a build next week, but something would be nice, suits, maps, skills, corp interface, something |
Marston VC
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
108
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 23:54:00 -
[313] - Quote
How do corporations take districts from other corporations? The basis of it is you move clones from one of your own districts to an enemy district then battle it out with the occupant. How many clones you take dictate how many you have available for the attack, while the defender gets access to all of the clones on their district. With a fully stocked district we expect you would need to multiple successful battles over a few days to a week in order to deplete a district of its clone reserves.
If you have any additional questions then post in this thread and we'll do our best to answer them here.[/quote]
so does this mean that you can pull clones from other districts to just bulk up the one district in question? can a corp attack multiple districts all at once? or does a corp need to have a district adjacent to the district under attack for them to be allowed to attack?
The way you said it makes it sound like once a corp captures a planet all they would have to do is move clones from one district to the other until they just outlast the attackers. Or is there some sort of alternative "objective" based thing that would allow us to bi-pass this whole "massive ambush mode" that im seeing? something similar to the domination/aquisition/sabotage modes on MAG?? |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1203
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 00:06:00 -
[314] - Quote
Ok, so first of : great job on the DB and the first iteration of PC. Unlike many others, i am confident it wont suffer from much obvious flaws when it launches
Dummy Corp exploit
This is a valid point. But there are obvious flaws to using that as a valid tactic. And it's the amount of district available. Available districts will eventually run out. And to use that tactic, you need to have a district for your bogus corp to generate clones so it can fake attacks on your official corp district and avoid a real ennemy attacking it. Even then, the clone generation rate is insufficient as i think you need to have at least a 100 clones to attack a district
=> please do answer that interrogation : You need a minimumof a 100 clones to launch an attack ? Is that minimum amount pre or post attrition effect ?
So, you can either try and defend your bogus corp district from other corps attacks but as you wont focus much ressources on it so you dont lose too much money, it wont last long against a corp willing to invest 400 hundreds clones
The other solution is to have a bogus corp with no district to attack one of yours using the Genolution pack. And then it's 20 Million per day to protect one district that will generate 6 million top. So, not a valid tactic at all on the long run
Turning skirmish into a clone depletion oriented mode
I would tend to disagree there as well. If i understand correctly Defenders will be able to focus the amount they want from their available clones on the district to a fight.(please confirm or correct) With the fact that if they lose, they will AT LEAST lose 100 clones. BUT, if they only engage 100 clones in the fight, they wont lose more. Thus, attacking the MCC is as much a valid tactic as depleting clones.
Outside of extreme circumstances, sending to battle less than 100 clones or more than 120 or so wouldnt make any sense as you will risk a 100 no matter what. So, send at least a 100 and not a lot more so it is not interesting for the attacker to focus on your clone count only.
On that matter, i find this will probably make the clone count a bit low to see battles ending through MCC being destroyed (it(s already low in most pub skirmish). If i get it right, those specs mean that most battles will be 100 vs 100 for 32 player fights.
Defenders will try to limit losing way more clones than the minimal 100. Attackers will then try to attack with roughly 100 clones after attrition to minimize risk of losing way more clones than the fight can sustain. Why use 400 clones when the "MCC timer" wont allow you to use all of them. Especially when in the event of a victory without taking the district, your remaining clones go back to their home district meaning you'll have to suffer attrition again for a second attack and swarming the opponent with clones wont especially make you more succesfull.
Maybe remaining clones from an attack should be able to stay in some kind of "wait mode" in a war barge next to the district if you decide to attack again so you dont suffer attrition again, and again, and again. Making investing a large nimber of clones in an attack a more interesting tactic.
Anyway, that's how i see it after that first evening of thoughts.
Also, if this is how it goes down, it will be a very limited clone number for most battle for a 32 player skirmish. I would have raised the minimal loss of clones for defenders to 150 just to make sure most battle are fought with enough clones so that MCC destruction has a chance to happen. Even if that would have mean tweaking the base clone generation and attrition %.
y that defenders wont be able to send in some more clones from another district for one hour after an attack ?[/b] If yes, then defending is clearly doomed as the attacker will obviously end up by taking that district even if it takes him 5-6 rounds of attacking. Also, this goes back to "defending must give an edge". If you can't send reinforcements between 2 fights because the attacker swarms you, you really have no edge at all. You have a handicap. And the 20% clones gathered from destroying the ennemy MCC wont change much on the long run.
=> Do we have to pay for the MCCs ? i think not but dont think i saw the answer anywhere.
To be continued. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1203
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 00:07:00 -
[315] - Quote
Fights Dynamic
I agree with many other forumer about skirmish being a poor designed game mode for such an interesting conquest design. Skirmish 1.0 would have been way more interesting. Also, what happened to the explanations from the "seeding the universe" conference about districts being made of a main hub map and several secondary maps ?
But, as we're stuck with skirmish for now, i find it very VERY weird that the defender will start with null-cannons being neutral ! That's a huge non-sense. So what ? You're warned 24h ahead that you're gonna be attacked and nobody thought it was a good idea to turn those on ?
Defending MUST offer some kind of advantages on the battlefield. Maybe you guys could implement a kind of delay so the attackers are frozen for a minute when the fight starts. Would be a cheap way to give that edge feeling to the defenders without doing too much damage. But, i guess that could lead to other problem such as attackers starting with a too big disadvantage if they fail to conquer at least 1-2 null-C in the first 2-3 minutes of the game.
CEO \ Directors able to start fight\manage ressources
I agree with my fellow forum mates with the fact that we need more roles. A dedicated role for PC would be nice. But the worst solution would be to make it CEO only. What about dust corps with an EVE CEO ? Also, it would mean that ONE player is essential to ANY PC action. No, not a good idea.
The raw question part
=> Did i understand correctly that defenders wont be able to send in some more clones from another district for one hour after an attack ? If yes, then defending is clearly doomed as the attacker will obviously end up by taking that district even if it takes him 5-6 rounds of attacking. Also, this goes back to "defending must give an edge". If you can't send reinforcements between 2 fights because the attacker swarms you, you really have no edge at all. You have a handicap. And the 20% clones gathered from destroying the ennemy MCC wont change much on the long run.
=> Do we have to pay for the MCCs ? i think not but dont think i saw the answer anywhere.
One last suggestion
Please, do have a new sub-forum for PC discussions soon. There are so many topics, one thread can't hold everything and allow decent discussions.
Cheers and GG |
Absolute Idiom II
BetaMax. CRONOS.
68
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 00:09:00 -
[316] - Quote
What is the point of telling us the cost of the SI (100 mil) if we cannot change the SI in the district once we own it? |
Vaerana Myshtana
Bojo's School of the Trades
406
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 00:29:00 -
[317] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:jackbubu wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:jackbubu wrote:Seeing how you do not continue travel costs above 7 jumps am i correct to guess that the initial launch will be limited to 1 low sec region ? (would also fit the 250 districts) Correct. its gotta be Heimatar honour duel amamake Planet 1 Belt 1 || planet 1 district 1 B) Well planets will have between 4-25 districts. Lets say the median planet has 9. That means that there will probably be 25-35 planets available for battle. I think there are less than 20 temperate planets in Heimatar available as lowsec systems with temperae planets. I haven't looked where genolution is yet...
The Heimatar ones also appear to be almost all in FW, which would (IIUC) not be available for PC. |
S Park Finner
BetaMax. CRONOS.
99
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 00:29:00 -
[318] - Quote
Marston VC wrote:CCP wrote: How do corporations take districts from other corporations? The basis of it is you move clones from one of your own districts to an enemy district then battle it out with the occupant. How many clones you take dictate how many you have available for the attack, while the defender gets access to all of the clones on their district. With a fully stocked district we expect you would need to multiple successful battles over a few days to a week in order to deplete a district of its clone reserves.
so does this mean that you can pull clones from other districts to just bulk up the one district in question? can a corp attack multiple districts all at once? or does a corp need to have a district adjacent to the district under attack for them to be allowed to attack? If I'm reading the description correctly an enemy sending clones to an occupied district changes it's status to "under attack". A district under attack can not have actions applied to it, so sending your own clones to reinforce it after the attack has been declared would not be possible.
You could send clones beforehand up to the total the district can hold. You could also send clones after the attack was over. Both of those actions would lock the district, so no further actions could be taken on the district except an attack.
It sounds like there is a race condition after a battle ends. Both the attackers and defenders would want to take immediate action on the district -- the attackers scheduling another attack, the defenders wanting to reinforce it. Those questions may have been answered in other places in the thread but I did not find them.
The question we need and answer to if it has not been covered is ... "Immediately after a battle what is the state of the district: Online, Offline, Locked or Under Attack?" My guess is Online -- causing the race condition I talked about a moment ago. |
Vaerana Myshtana
Bojo's School of the Trades
406
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 00:32:00 -
[319] - Quote
Jack Sharkey42 wrote: So this means that clones spoil?!? That's so gross!
They're made from corpses anyway... That's not gross enough?
http://community.eveonline.com/background/cloning/clon_02.asp |
Evil-Stuffed-Animal
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
16
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:00:00 -
[320] - Quote
Has the Devs mention anything about the "Secondary Market" or whether mercs will be able to unload their salvage for trade and/or profit? |
|
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
659
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:07:00 -
[321] - Quote
Evil-Stuffed-Animal wrote:Has the Devs mention anything about the "Secondary Market" or whether mercs will be able to unload their salvage for trade and/or profit? It will not be available when faction warfare is launched, it popped up a couple of times in the thread but that's like 5 pages+ back and i can't be bothered to look for it |
Vaerana Myshtana
Bojo's School of the Trades
406
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:12:00 -
[322] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:Quick pivot reveals the following systems with the conditions (not FW system, in lowsec, has temperate planet, has Genolution Station):
Aridia (Naga, Sakht, Tisot) Genesis (Toon, Zarer) Lonetrek (Iitanmadan, Nannaras) Metropolis (Gebuladi) Placid (Grispire) Tash-Murkon (Keshirou, Ordat, Rethan) The Forge (Otsela)
Some systems have 2 planets. But, if these are the right conditions for seeded districts, most of these regions will be secluded from others (outside of 5 jumps away). So we may see 'continental domination-possibly, but unlikely universe wide since once you have a district you can't 'attack from nowhere'. Your initial location will have to be your beginning point...I assume?
Interestingly, Genolution stations were seeded in lowsec constellations near each other. There are quite a few in highsec as well.
::EDIT:: this is moot now that I read the part about it being one region. But it might be useful for speculation. Although I like the idea of there being different 'isolated continents' at first rather than a pangea of systems.
Actually, looking at Dotlan... I'm just about ready to put money on Aridia or Genesis.
Aridia is all lowsec with about 50 or so temperate planets in consecutive, non-FW lowsec. Genesis has something like 40 temperate planets in consecutive, non-FW lowsec.
I'm hoping for Genesis, since Aridia is on the far side of Genesis for everyone except Amarr and Amarr-side nullsec peeps. |
Vaerana Myshtana
Bojo's School of the Trades
406
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:13:00 -
[323] - Quote
Goric Rumis wrote:Thought: Why not crowd-source the map building? Allow players to submit alternative maps, do a review and playtest in a special "map beta" mode, and then you decide where the new map goes (so players aren't creating maps for their own districts).
This would obviously require a lot of work just to set up, but I imagine it would require less work than creating however many thousands of unique maps.
Just a thought.
This is a HUGE, awesome idea.
PLEASE do this. |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:29:00 -
[324] - Quote
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:When you win a planetary conquest battle. do you personally get money, or does only your corp wallet get the money?
The individual players on the winning side will get their share of the biomass value. |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:32:00 -
[325] - Quote
Kevall Longstride wrote:The placement of district seeding is going to be crucially important. A Dust corp with a link to a big Eve one can effectively remove any chance of their opponent using OB by blockading a planet and destroying ships that come near a district to give ground support. OB's are an important asset and to not even be even able to use them is going to put a lot of corp off even trying to set up a ground presence.
It will be in lowsec, so more accessible than null but obviously not without risk. It may become as much of a conflict driver in space as it does on the ground. |
|
crazy space 1
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
932
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:35:00 -
[326] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:When you win a planetary conquest battle. do you personally get money, or does only your corp wallet get the money? The individual players on the winning side will get their share of the biomass value. Why not the same for salvage?
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:36:00 -
[327] - Quote
Ghural wrote:Will EVE players be able to view ownership details of the various districts?
We are working on it.
Ghural wrote:Will mercenary installations appear in planetary interaction?
No.
Ghural wrote:Will there be any new skills added to the game relevant to planetary conquest?
Not initially, although I'd be interested in hearing ideas on what the skills might affect and who should be responsible for training them. |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:37:00 -
[328] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:Also this doesn't say what the rewards will be in FW merc battles. Just SP?
The same as Instant Battle. We may decide to scale them differently later on though. |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:38:00 -
[329] - Quote
Breakin Stuff wrote:What other things are being included in the next build? the conquest clone thing is cool.
But there's been new weapons promised, new dropsuits, changes in mechanics, none of which have been covered. What else is happening?
You said yer changing how laser rifles work. How?
You said heavies are being looked at. I'm rather interested here, having invested heavily in Forge AV and am pretty much expecting another nerf to enjoy. i'd like prep time to determine if I'll bother with the new heavy stuff or swap to logi entirely.
There's hundreds of questions like this floating around, many of which have been at least hinted at being in the next build.
We'll have a reason to take planets. Cool. I'm down with that. What about the rest of the build?
I want my gallente heavy suit. I realize it probably won't happen soon but still. There's a lot more information I need before i'll be happy about the introduction of this new iteration promise of the game.
That's not for us to say or related to this thread. There will be more information from other teams as we get closer to launch though. |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:39:00 -
[330] - Quote
Panther Alpha wrote:What is later in the year ? and are we talking about this year or.......20 years from now ? Because i'm not getting any younger you know.
It will be in the next build (ie an update via PSN) but we have not announced a date for that yet. |
|
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:41:00 -
[331] - Quote
Rubico wrote:Creating clones as a commodity implies there will be demand for that commodity. Will purchased clones be required for battles in faction war?
The demand is from NPCs for now. We would like to introduce them and potentially other district related resources into industry in EVE. Planetary Conquest is a stepping stone to realizing that vision. |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:43:00 -
[332] - Quote
Absolute Idiom II wrote:What is the point of telling us the cost of the SI (100 mil) if we cannot change the SI in the district once we own it?
You can. |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:50:00 -
[333] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Did i understand correctly that defenders wont be able to send in some more clones from another district for one hour after an attack ?
Correct, the attacker has an hour exclusivity period from the time the attack started to decide to launch a new attack. During this time it is not possible for the defender to move more clones in or for anyone else to attack it. Remember though, if you win the defence your district will regenerate clones before the next attack, plus you get the biomass payment and the 20% bonus on remaining clones so it is possible to actually come out ahead after a successful defence.
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Do we have to pay for the MCCs ? i think not but dont think i saw the answer anywhere.
No.
|
|
NIKIA BETHUNE
Ill Omens
24
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:50:00 -
[334] - Quote
I read most posts but I may have over looked if anyone asked this critical question. Will there be fronts? Do you have to be touching a district to attack it? What if I'm using want to use a district to supply my war front is that possible? Or can u attack anyone anywhere..... |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:51:00 -
[335] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:You need a minimumof a 100 clones to launch an attack ? Is that minimum amount pre or post attrition effect ?
Pre-attrition.
|
|
XXfootnoteXX
DUST University Ivy League
111
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:52:00 -
[336] - Quote
NIKIA BETHUNE wrote:I read most posts but I may have over looked if anyone asked this critical question. Will there be fronts? Do you have to be touching a district to attack it? What if I'm using want to use a district to supply my war front is that possible? Or can u attack anyone anywhere.....
Part of me wants to be a smartass saying if you actually read them, you will find your answer, but there is a lot of pages.
You can attack within a range, farther away you attack the less clones you will have. |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:55:00 -
[337] - Quote
NIKIA BETHUNE wrote:I read most posts but I may have over looked if anyone asked this critical question. Will there be fronts? Do you have to be touching a district to attack it? What if I'm using want to use a district to supply my war front is that possible? Or can u attack anyone anywhere.....
There will be fronts in that the further you move clones the less will make it, encouraging conflict to be localized. This will create a landscape of sorts but no clear war line or anything. We don't want to artificially limit the combat too much, who you attack, when and where should be a decision for the corp directors. |
|
NIKIA BETHUNE
Ill Omens
24
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:55:00 -
[338] - Quote
XXfootnoteXX wrote:NIKIA BETHUNE wrote:I read most posts but I may have over looked if anyone asked this critical question. Will there be fronts? Do you have to be touching a district to attack it? What if I'm using want to use a district to supply my war front is that possible? Or can u attack anyone anywhere..... Part of me wants to be a smartass saying if you actually read them, you will find your answer, but there is a lot of pages. You can attack within a range, farther away you attack the less clones you will have. Thanks for not being a smartass let me be clear. I know the system thing lose clone depending on how far u move what I mean is if I jump to a planet can I attack the middle where they storage the most clones or do I have to make a beach head and work my way in.. I.e basically do u need to be touching to attack |
XXfootnoteXX
DUST University Ivy League
111
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 01:59:00 -
[339] - Quote
NIKIA BETHUNE wrote:XXfootnoteXX wrote:NIKIA BETHUNE wrote:I read most posts but I may have over looked if anyone asked this critical question. Will there be fronts? Do you have to be touching a district to attack it? What if I'm using want to use a district to supply my war front is that possible? Or can u attack anyone anywhere..... Part of me wants to be a smartass saying if you actually read them, you will find your answer, but there is a lot of pages. You can attack within a range, farther away you attack the less clones you will have. Thanks for not being a smartass let me be clear. I know the system thing lose clone depending on how far u move what I mean is if I jump to a planet can I attack the middle where they storage the most clones or do I have to make a beach head and work my way in.. I.e basically do u need to be touching to attack
I only have my own guesses on that. |
Vaerana Myshtana
Bojo's School of the Trades
406
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 02:03:00 -
[340] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Not initially, although I'd be interested in hearing ideas on what the skills might affect and who should be responsible for training them.
Well, just off of the current devblog, I suggest the following skills:
Science (x1) - Allows training of Science skills -#- Biomass Recycling (x2) - 2% bonus to biomass payouts per level. (Individual character) -#- Clone Storage (x6) - 2% bonus to max clone storage in districts per level. (CEO or COO) -#- Clone Transportation (x6) - 3% reduction in clone loss from transit per level. (CEO or CTO)
Trade (x1) - Allows training of Trade skills -#- Clone Marketing (x6) - 3% bonus to sale price of clones sold to NPCs per level. (CEO or CMO) -#- Clone Purchasing (x2) - 5% discount on price of clones bought from NPCs per level. (CEO or COO)
Industry (x1) - Allows training of Industry skills -#- Construction Management (x4) - 2% discount on SI building costs per level. (CEO or COO) -#- Clone Production (x6) - 2% bonus to clone production in districts per level. (CEO or CRO)
Social (x1) - Allows training of Social skills. -#- Negotiation (x4) - 2% bonus to ISK payout for Instant Battles and FW (Individual Character) -#- Transport Negotiation (x4) - 2% discount on NPC transit costs (CEO or CTO)
Definitions: -#- CEO: Chief Executive Officer (current role) -#- CMO: Chief Marketing Officer (new role) -#- CRO: Chief Research Officer (new role) -#- COO: Chief Operations Officer (new role) -#- CTO: Chief Transport Officer (new role) |
|
Vaeul
XERCORE E X T E R M I N A T U S
38
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 02:04:00 -
[341] - Quote
Quote: DEV BLOG: Friendly fire? Yes, friendly fire will be enabled but only for corporation battles not faction warfare or instant battles. This means if you have a problem with someone shooting friendlies you can have them removed from the corporation.
This essentially acknowledged that a system of social justice has been deemed as the means to deal with violators of friendly fire.
That is good and welcomed news that some consideration about friendly fire and social justice is happening. However the format of social justice in the current suggestion is going to be decided and dispensed by a select few. There are shortcomings of not fully enabling friendly fire and not allowing everyone to partake in social justice.
When the Directors and CEO goes offline to partake in their normal everyday lives the system fails.
Far as I know there is nothing a Director or CEO can do to exclude eligibility from joining corporation battles. If the offender had corporate roles he or she will be immune from consequence for about 24 hours.
GÇ£you can have them removed from the corporationGÇ¥ translates as an action taken well after the battle is over.
If getting kicked out of a corporation is the worse consequence possible for friendly fire well then we are all screwed. Friendly fire would fail and probably disabled for a long time. All those who do want it will be sorely disappointed in Dust 514. I have not come across a player that has not noticed the immersion breaking moment of being able to survive a friendly precision strike.
Directors and CEOs will inadvertently do volunteer GÇ£socialGÇ¥ work that the game will depend upon for success. Due to a lack of a kill/loss tracking these moderators will not always have clear evidence to make informed decisions.
There seems to be a huge assumption that all player will seek out a moderator.
Absent are mentions of any option for individual Players to deal with the offender without need of Director or a CEO to intervene.
No mention of real time Field Command or Squad Leader options to remove someone from a corporation battle.
The developer will remain a silent juror in social justice. This is made obvious by the fact that friendly fire is enabled in one instance of the game but players in faction warfare and instant battle matches will be shielded.
Dust 514 with friendly fire disabled in one shard and enabled another would divide the game and the player base into split expectations. As people spend real money and settle into these expectations the divide will deepen. Each caste will advocate versions of what should had been the same game.
Instant battles are where Players learn the game and where corporations recruit. Sharding the universe in order to accommodate [friendly fire YES] and [friendly fire NO] will create a learning curve. In this divided universe access to training for corporation battles is denied.
Helping a blueberry transition from spraying all over the place and not killing friendlies will be done in corporation battles. Removed will be the opportunity to try out a recruits potential before inviting them to the team.
In a universe in which friendly fire is disabled there are no such concerns. It is a boring safe place without consequences in which I can call in a friendly precision strike on my position without a care.
I actually want friendly fire. I want it to succeed.
Fully enabled friendly fire backed by a game mechanic that enables all players to partake and enact social justice would work in Dust 514 because we all play in the same universe.
I have been suggesting STANDINGS and a MATCH FILTER based on standings for a while now. It is simple concept CCP owns, has already implemented in EVE Online that would not divide game content or require waiting around for a Director or CEO to moderate an issue. All players would be empowered to make choices as to who not to play with.
All players would be learning the same game and tactics. Which means recruits can hone their skills using militia gear in instant matches and not get rolled by players who would surely be wearing prototypes in corporate battles.
At the very least, there should be a DEV BLOG and Discussion on just Friendly Fire alone. |
hershman001
Creepers Corp. Creepers Alliance
32
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 02:04:00 -
[342] - Quote
You say youre turning your attention to the planets...
CCP, shouldnt you turn your attention to the broken game mechanics?
- Terrible Hit detection
- Unable to traverse uneven terrain
- Poor controls all around for vehicles, dropsuits and interfaces.
- Text, font, icons, reticule, and other HUD items that are color washed invisible half the time.
- Ridiculous low fov for an fps.
- Invisible walls in every map
This is only the beginning. What is being done to fix these issues? |
Absolute Idiom II
BetaMax. CRONOS.
68
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 02:07:00 -
[343] - Quote
So after you initiate an attack on a district, you then have an hour to start the battles. If you go quickly, you could start 2 or maybe 3 battles in this period? As long as you START the each corp battle within the hour, then you you get to complete them? |
SERPENT-Adamapple
Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire
14
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 02:11:00 -
[344] - Quote
How many planets will the Genolution corp. have on initial launch? |
Vaerana Myshtana
Bojo's School of the Trades
406
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 02:13:00 -
[345] - Quote
SERPENT-Adamapple wrote:How many planets will the Genolution corp. have on initial launch?
They have said 250 districts on some number of planets in a single region. |
Vaerana Myshtana
Bojo's School of the Trades
406
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 02:14:00 -
[346] - Quote
Absolute Idiom II wrote:So after you initiate an attack on a district, you then have an hour to start the battles. If you go quickly, you could start 2 or maybe 3 battles in this period? As long as you START the each corp battle within the hour, then you you get to complete them?
If I understand correctly, there can only be one battle per day. The attackers have a one hour window after the battle to initiate a battle for the following day (same time) before another corp could do so. |
Citpaan Hacos
BetaMax. CRONOS.
25
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 02:15:00 -
[347] - Quote
I have a question regarding exactly how the in-match clone count will go.
As far as I've observed it in the current matches, clone count increments down as a dead body dissolves. What I'm not so sure about is exactly how the match ends. I've seen the match both go on a bit when the number is zero, and sometimes ends instantly. Is the trigger when the count is zero and someone attempts to spawn? I've never been unable to spawn, but the match ends when there are still live players on the field, so it's not particularly clear.
Also, since the counter increments with death, not spawn (I've never seen it deplete at the start of the match when the team spawns in), what exactly happens if a district's defender clone count is less than sixteen at the start of a match? Will some people be unable to spawn in, or will it work like current and be more based on deaths/respawns? (Meaning the defender force isn't actually restricted by clone count.) |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 02:16:00 -
[348] - Quote
hershman001 wrote:You say youre turning your attention to the planets... CCP, shouldnt you turn your attention to the broken game mechanics?
- Terrible Hit detection
- Unable to traverse uneven terrain
- Poor controls all around for vehicles, dropsuits and interfaces.
- Text, font, icons, reticule, and other HUD items that are color washed invisible half the time.
- Ridiculous low fov for an fps.
- Invisible walls in every map
This is only the beginning. What is being done to fix these issues?
That line may be a bit misleading, there is only one team working on this feature. We have many other teams working on polishing and iterating on the things you mentioned, but that is not the focus of this blog or the forum discussion.
|
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 02:16:00 -
[349] - Quote
Vaerana Myshtana wrote:Absolute Idiom II wrote:So after you initiate an attack on a district, you then have an hour to start the battles. If you go quickly, you could start 2 or maybe 3 battles in this period? As long as you START the each corp battle within the hour, then you you get to complete them? If I understand correctly, there can only be one battle per day. The attackers have a one hour window after the battle to initiate a battle for the following day (same time) before another corp could do so.
Correct. |
|
S Park Finner
BetaMax. CRONOS.
99
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 02:52:00 -
[350] - Quote
OK -- no wise comments -- If you don't like it just ignore it
District State ---- Legal Action ------------------------- Next State ----- Next State Change
Offline --------- Move Clones In -------------------- Online ---------- Immediately
Online ------------ Owner Moves Clones In ---------- Locked -------- After reinforcement timer --------------------- Owner Places PI ------------------- Locked ---------- After reinforcement timer --------------------- Owner Moves Clones Out -------- Online ---------- Immediately --------------------- Owner Moves All Clones Out ----- Offline ----- Immediately --------------------- Change Reinforcement Timer ----- Locked ------- 24 hours after new reinforcement timer --------------------- Enemy Moves Clones In ---------- Under Attack/Generating Clones -- 24 hours after beginning of next reinforcement timer plus 1 hour from start of battle --------------------- Corp Dissolves ---------------------- Offline -------- Immediately
Locked ----------- Enemy Moves Clones In ------------ Under Attack -- 24 hours after beginning of next reinforcement timer plus 1 hour from start of battle --------------------- Corp Dissolves ---------------------- Offline -------- Immediately
Under Attack/ Generating Clones ---- Corp Dissolves ------------------------ Online (under new owner) ---- At beginning of existing reinforcement period
Under Attack/ Not Generating Clones ---- Corp Dissolves ------------------------ Online (under new owner) ---- At beginning of existing reinforcement period
Battle Starts: Within One Hour -- -- Mini-game starts: ---- Enemy wins battle, does not exhaust district clones ------- Enemy chooses not to move clones in -- Online -- One hour from battle start --------Enemy Moves Clones In ----------------------- Under Attack/Not Generating Clones --- 24 hours after beginning of current reinforcement period plus 1 hour from start of battle --------Enemy Kills all clones in District -------------- Online (under new owner) ----- Immediately ---- Enemy looses battle ------- Enemy chooses not to move clones in -- Online -- One hour from battle start --------Enemy Moves Clones In ----------------------- Under Attack/Generating Clones --- 24 hours after beginning of current reinforcement period plus 1 hour from start of battle ---- Corp Dissolves --------------------------------------Online (under new owner) -- At beginning of existing reinforcement period
I think this is what we know so far. So questions...
- Are all the state transitions correct? (Not answered yet)
- If the attacker wins the match but does not take the district and chooses to move clones in is it true that the defender gets no chance to reinforce from outside the district? (This is what happens)
- Does the district continue to produce clones while under attack? (Yes before the first attack and if the attack fails, No if the attack succeeds but the district is not taken over and the attacker chooses to attack again)
- To make this work I had to create the new state "Within one hour of Battle Start" -- is that legitimate? (Looks like yes, during the period when attacks can take place there is a mini-game depending on the outcome of the attack and state changes appropriately)
- The "offline" state is the one where no one owns the district? So the only thing that can be done to it is to move clones into it and bring it online? (Modified question, not answered yet)
- Created two more new states, Under Attack / Generating Clones and Under Attack / Not Generating Clones -- Is this accurate? (Not answered yet)
- What is the default reinforcement period (right after the district is first taken over)? (New question, not answered yet)
|
|
Garth Mandra
The Southern Legion
3
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 02:53:00 -
[351] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:jackbubu wrote:Also what about downtime, will you block 11:00-12:00 as a reinforcement timer? Yes the hours either side of downtime are not available for setting the reinforcement window.
So for a normal DT there is a total of 2.5 hours where battles won't be happening.
Right in the middle of AU primetime. Understandable but still a pain in the bum for us.
What happens with abnormal DTs? I guess that is why there is a whole hour to either side.
What abou super-extended DTs? |
Absolute Idiom II
BetaMax. CRONOS.
68
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 03:01:00 -
[352] - Quote
From the notes here: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Possible_Conflict_Resolutions
There is a note that reads "Clones not lost in combat but destroyed in MCC destruction do not get biomassed and sold." This only applies to defenders destroying the attackers' MCC, but not vice versa.
When the defenders destroy the attackers' MCC, the clones within DO NOT count towards the biomass payout award for the defenders.
But when the attackers destroy the defenders' MCC, the clones within DO count towards the biomass payout award for the attackers.
Is this true? And why are the rules different for each side here? |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 03:02:00 -
[353] - Quote
S Park Finner wrote:Are all the state transitions correct?
It is far too late to decipher that
S Park Finner wrote:If the attacker wins the match but does not take the district and chooses to move clones in is it true that the defender gets no chance to reinforce from outside the district?
Correct, the attacker gets an hour window after the battle starts to attack again before reinforcement can move in or other corporations can attack.
S Park Finner wrote:Does the district continue to produce clones while under attack (I think the answer is yes)
The district will produce clones just before an attack unless they had previously lost an attack the day before in which case it is stalled and not producing any.
S Park Finner wrote:To make this work I had to create the new state "Within one hour of Battle Start" -- is that legitimate?
Yes, 1 hour after the battle start is the attacker exclusivity period.
S Park Finner wrote:I have not seen any place where the "offline" state is reached. Is that correct?
A corporation can sell all of its clones abandoning the district. It then goes offline. |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 03:04:00 -
[354] - Quote
Garth Mandra wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:jackbubu wrote:Also what about downtime, will you block 11:00-12:00 as a reinforcement timer? Yes the hours either side of downtime are not available for setting the reinforcement window. So for a normal DT there is a total of 2.5 hours where battles won't be happening. Right in the middle of AU primetime. Understandable but still a pain in the bum for us. What happens with abnormal DTs? I guess that is why there is a whole hour to either side. What abou super-extended DTs?
It's a 2 hour window from 10-12 and being an expat Aussie myself I feel your pain. For now though it is a safety measure against DT related exploits. We may reduce the window or remove it entirely in the future.
Extended downtime or unexpected server outages have a fall back scenario which just reverts all of the state before the conflict was scheduled. |
|
HowDidThatTaste
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
2316
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 03:07:00 -
[355] - Quote
On day one how many districts can corporation buy clones for? If money wasn't the limiting factor.
It seems that you can only advance after the initial purchase 1 district a day if they are unoccupied.? |
Vaerana Myshtana
Bojo's School of the Trades
406
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 03:10:00 -
[356] - Quote
Dumb question on behalf of my relatives in EVE:
Does invading a district automatically create a wardec in EVE? If members of my corp/alliance can OB my enemies and vice versa, shooting a potential OBer would carry a security status penalty unless there is a wardec or limited engagement created automatically. |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 03:14:00 -
[357] - Quote
HowDidThatTaste wrote:On day one how many districts can corporation buy clones for? If money wasn't the limiting factor.
It seems that you can only advance after the initial purchase 1 district a day if they are unoccupied.?
You can only buy the initial deployment pack if your corporation does not already own districts. So 1 starting district per corp. |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
711
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 03:15:00 -
[358] - Quote
Vaerana Myshtana wrote:Dumb question on behalf of my relatives in EVE:
Does invading a district automatically create a wardec in EVE? If members of my corp/alliance can OB my enemies and vice versa, shooting a potential OBer would carry a security status penalty unless there is a wardec or limited engagement created automatically.
No this does not affect wardecs, however the battles will take place in lowsec so you can shoot them above the planets all be it with a security status hit.
Or you can choose to wardec the corporation in EVE as well. |
|
Absolute Idiom II
BetaMax. CRONOS.
68
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 03:25:00 -
[359] - Quote
So FW plexing opens up FW battles in Dust. Is this offensive plexing, defensive plexing or both? |
BetterHideGood
Galactic Alliance 514
40
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 03:30:00 -
[360] - Quote
I gotta say I'm very impressed and excited for the upcoming changes!! Just hope they come soon!! But this gives us plenty of time to work at getting all pro'd out.... Two thumbs up from me if I have any complaints they will be saved for after I try these new changes!! |
|
S Park Finner
BetaMax. CRONOS.
99
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 03:56:00 -
[361] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Was nice enough to answer some of the questions I had. So I modified the original post and asked a few more!
When you are a bit less blurry eyed I hope you get a chance to revisit it and answer the new questions. Many thanks for all the effort you guys have put into this so far.
|
Grimmiers
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
159
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 04:05:00 -
[362] - Quote
Are there any plans to make owned districts provide manufacturing, mining, or salvaging missions for dust related content? Lets say a corporation owns a certain percent of the planet, it would be cool if you could make a capital district that does a major job like manufacturing and other districts that would mine, or provide new salvage locations on post battled maps.
I like how you can currently sell access clones for money, but I'm hoping for more player controlled perks and a way to produce shiny corporation equipment. |
Enalie
Gentlemen's Foreign Legion Gentlemen's Agreement
4
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 04:26:00 -
[363] - Quote
Just some general thoughts to prevent potential exploits:
1) Can only buy clones from genolution once in a given time period. Victory without capturing a district would result in resetting this lockout period. Prevents:
- Attacking a location, capturing it and immediately disbanding it to purchase clones again in another location, while having another friendly corporation immediately snatch up the abandoned district. This would fundamentally circumvent the attrition mechanic for attacking distant locations.
- A dummy corp purchasing clones everyday to assault a district, and intentionally failing as a method of protecting a district.
2) Minimum age of a corporation before they can buy clones from genolution. Prevents circumventing the above rule. |
Jathniel
G I A N T
87
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 04:41:00 -
[364] - Quote
SoLJae wrote:CCP, thanks for the exciting news.
I just have one question: When will we get this?
I know you mentioned that it will be later this year, but can you at least estimate it down to a month, if not a specific date?
This^
Can we please know WHEN?
Should we expect it before FanFest? |
Yemi Shakor
Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 04:55:00 -
[365] - Quote
I hope sometimes in the future that alliances and corps will have to build or buy their own MCC in order to launch an invasion of a district.
Instead of being provided with a MCC by NPC corps like Genolution Corporation ...
Oh by the way, building said vehicles should only be able to be done by SI.. |
Winsaucerer
The Southern Legion
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 05:02:00 -
[366] - Quote
Apologies if this has been addressed. My main concern or question is about the income being balanced with EVE Online. I want this balanced so that we can hurry up and allow ISK transfers between the economies!
It seems that there is some sort of built in limit to how much corporations can control (which I think is great in principle!). Let us say that a corporation on average can maintain N districts per player (where very likely N < 1). Number of districts that can be controlled will be limited by at least these two factors, though they are probably the most important: 1. How many fronts the corporation can manage to fight on simultaneously 2. How many clones are produced in order to be able to attack other districts
So what is a reasonable estimate for N? Perhaps you guys have estimated this already, in which case you can plug that value in. Let's say a corporation can manage 1 district per 30 or so players. This is probably optimistic for your average corp, but pessimistic for a very active corp. That is, from 30 or so players, this means you will have enough numbers to be able to form a full defence squad each day, with reasonable quality players. This gives us an estimate of N = 1/30.
Each district produces 40 clones, or 60 with an upgrade, so let's set it optimistically to an average of 50 clones per district per day. Each clone has a sale price (if I understand correctly) of 100,000 ISK, or 0.1 mil ISK.
That gives us a profit per player in the corporation of around (N * 50 * 0.1) in millions. Other sources of income include public battles, though the income here is negligible compared to EVE Online profits. There are also the profits from winning district control battles, but I will exclude these from the estimate for a simple reason -- profits gained in district control battles are taken from other players. This does not represent increased wealth in either ISK injections OR item injections (by contrast, mining in EVE adds minerals to the game, missions add ISK and salvage). It merely shuffles around (with attrition) the wealth in a part of the game. So I think we can reasonably estimate an average income per player by excluding this. In fact, since wealth is removed from the game due to a battle, the estimate I provide will I expect be higher than the actual. That is, the estimate of wealth per player per day is a maximum for a well chosen N.
Now for some incomes: N = 1/30 = 167k per player per day N = 1/16 (for your more active corp) = 313k per player per day
Perhaps we need to be more optimistic and estimate a tight knit group of 16 players that's available for two or three battles a day, fighting a defensive war on a few fronts, allowing them to control upwards of 10 districts (since they don't get attacked at all districts at once). In this case:
N = 10/16 = 3.13 mil per player per day
Remember that this is a maximum estimate for the chosen N. Of course, there will be anomalous corporations that do particularly well, but as I mentioned this success will involve wealth transfer rather than creation.
So in summary, it seems to me that these profits are woefully inadequate to compete with EVE Online. Planetary Interaction in EVE Online (pessimistically) can generate perhaps 1 mil per planet in high sec for very minimal work, and let's say 4 planets for a relatively unskilled player. That's 4 mil per day for one character that has no risk involved, and takes nowhere near the skill or effort that district control will take. Have I missed something? Or misunderstood something important?
I want ISK transfer between these games, so if my analysis is right, let's please get the profits higher :) |
DJINN leukoplast
Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy
333
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 05:10:00 -
[367] - Quote
In the spirit of attacking and defending in real life, whose 'soil' will the battles be fought on?
For example, say a EU corp attacks a US corps district, will the server for that battle be located in the US, EU, or some other 'neutral' server somewhere in-between?
Would make sense if the attackers had to play on servers closest to the defenders location. Because after all this is the defenders district, they know the lay of the land best and should get the lag advantage when facing foreign intruders
|
RINON114
B.S.A.A.
41
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 05:44:00 -
[368] - Quote
So what if I just want to do this kind of thing as a solo player or someone in a very small corp? If I lose do I need to reconquer the district and will it still have my upgrades? |
Jungian
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
9
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 06:32:00 -
[369] - Quote
DJINN leukoplast wrote:In the spirit of attacking and defending in real life, whose 'soil' will the battles be fought on? For example, say a EU corp attacks a US corps district, will the server for that battle be located in the US, EU, or some other 'neutral' server somewhere in-between? Would make sense if the attackers had to play on servers closest to the defenders location. Because after all this is the defenders district, they know the lay of the land best and should get the lag advantage when facing foreign intruders
With the epic match of Fischer vs Spassky still in mind, I would say Iceland is the perfect neutral arena |
Dalton Smithe
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
64
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 07:07:00 -
[370] - Quote
So, I was reading the wiki on planetary conquest. One of the conflict resolutions is attacker kills MCC. I take from this that both sides have to field an MCC to defend a district in a skirmish, is this true or am I reading into it. I remember back when in September that we had skirmishes where only 1 MCC was in play and it was a matter of the MCC either docking with the base or being destroyed. Are those going to come back or are they gone forever like the dinosaurs? I really enjoyed those matches, being on either the defenders or attackers. It was quite a bit of fun |
|
Dalton Smithe
OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention
64
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 07:08:00 -
[371] - Quote
Jungian wrote:DJINN leukoplast wrote:In the spirit of attacking and defending in real life, whose 'soil' will the battles be fought on? For example, say a EU corp attacks a US corps district, will the server for that battle be located in the US, EU, or some other 'neutral' server somewhere in-between? Would make sense if the attackers had to play on servers closest to the defenders location. Because after all this is the defenders district, they know the lay of the land best and should get the lag advantage when facing foreign intruders With the epic match of Fischer vs Spassky still in mind, I would say Iceland is the perfect neutral arena
I thought the servers were in a central location. If not that is a very good question. |
Soozu
5o1st
16
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 07:13:00 -
[372] - Quote
Will you make the starmaps, clone pre orders etc. available before the mad dash land grabs or is this all going to be in one shot? One big Garfield download? |
Druk Spyker
DUST University Ivy League
4
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 07:23:00 -
[373] - Quote
Poor clones. My cousins secure containers all have central heating, plumbing and enough food for a month. If he was flying them they would all survive. |
Druk Spyker
DUST University Ivy League
4
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 08:22:00 -
[374] - Quote
For all those with questions about map generation, watch this: Fanfest 2012 presentation |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 08:24:00 -
[375] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:trollsroyce wrote:WARNING AND DOOMSAY:
The described mechanic favors exponential growth! As the ISK making through clones is not dependant on resource rarity and consumption, this can be cracked down to "attack spam 10000 districs, snowball effect and insert rapton of ISK in New Eden".
This is purely a numbers game by spam attacking, setting tedious timezones as defense and just using all manhours in district flipping.
Nullsec sov passive ISK is relying on the moon minerals as industry materials, and by bottlenecks favors defending precious ones. As explained in blog, the system is cracked and won by exponential attack growth and hence by numbers.
NOOOOoooo!
The more districts you own the more places you will be able to be attacked from. The way they describe it, you will be able to be attacked at 100% efficiency from all districts in your system each day, the at decent efficiency from what will probably be like 25-30% of remaining districts. Just because you have lots of money it doesn't give you a win button. If you own 10 districts that is 10 man-hours x 16 members you will be vulnerable. You will be responsible for 160 man hours of defense time FOR DEFENSE ONLY. If you want to increase your attacking logarithmically you have to also find enough attacking teams good enough to make that pace of advance worth it.
You are forgetting the obvious solution of "do not defend, just flip more and more, get clones to flip faster". |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1203
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 08:41:00 -
[376] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Did i understand correctly that defenders wont be able to send in some more clones from another district for one hour after an attack ? Correct, the attacker has an hour exclusivity period from the time the attack started to decide to launch a new attack. During this time it is not possible for the defender to move more clones in or for anyone else to attack it. Remember though, if you win the defence your district will regenerate clones before the next attack, plus you get the biomass payment and the 20% bonus on remaining clones so it is possible to actually come out ahead after a successful defence.
In case you win a defense. Does the attacker still gets that "prime hour" during which he has dibs on attacking you and you cannot send in reinforcements from another district ?
Would make sense that the winning side gets an edge.
Attacker wins => "Dibs" Hour + no clone generated for defenders + no possible backup for defenders
Defender wins => "Dibs Hours" can remain so the attacker can take its revenge BUT Defenders do generate clones and can send in more clones.
Would be a good bargain.
Also, a question i didnt get an answer for. More of a precision tbh:
Say a defender has 350 clones in its district and is under attack. Do ALL the clones get automatically involved in the battle ? Or do the defender decide how much he wants to commit ?
I understand the defender chooses to send 50/100/200 or more as he sees fits |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1203
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 08:44:00 -
[377] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:
You are forgetting the obvious solution of "do not defend, just flip more and more, get clones to flip faster".
You're wrong on that one Trolls. It all comes down to how many districts are available. And the fact that even a 20 man corp can hold one or two district without that much problem means it's gonna be pretty crowded, pretty fast.
So, flipping districts and dont care about fights wont work as at some point, there wont be any district left to flip.
|
Himalayan Mashface
Kittycat Company
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 09:01:00 -
[378] - Quote
Icy Tiger wrote:Worth it. This will be so bad ass. Now we need an ETA.
Seconding the level of badassery. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
165
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 09:23:00 -
[379] - Quote
How does the clone Reinforcement timer work?
Is it a lump of clones in the beginning (or end) of the 1-hour period that gives you all of them at once? Or is it gradual, where if you were getting, say 60 clones, you'd get one per minute for the full hour? Or some other way?
When you move clones to a district you own from one you own, do the clones arrive immediately or do they wait until the Reinforcement timer to actually show up? |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 09:34:00 -
[380] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:trollsroyce wrote:
You are forgetting the obvious solution of "do not defend, just flip more and more, get clones to flip faster".
You're wrong on that one Trolls. It all comes down to how many districts are available. And the fact that even a 20 man corp can hold one or two district without that much problem means it's gonna be pretty crowded, pretty fast. So, flipping districts and dont care about fights wont work as at some point, there wont be any district left to flip.
The numbers here might be off by a lot: GÇó at the league of 10000 atmospheric nullsec planets GÇó lets approximate that to 10 districts per, resulting 100000 to grow exponentially in.
Give a no-show rate of 10%, and flipping 1000 per day using afk loners to flip after no show, you gain 100. Will you lose that daily? Perhaps, probably not if the attackers are roleplaying with 16 man squads.
In any case the exponential growth in beginning gives a massive clone advantage, as well as isk. Being able to hold 10000 districts by just attacking and setting nasty reinforce timexones seems viable, but:
GÇóGÇóGÇó it all comes down to CEO and clone seller clickfest. you want to win this game? prepare for burn outs. this will be worse than planeteering in EVE |
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 09:43:00 -
[381] - Quote
The reason EVE nullsec is defended are moon minerals. The high end ones are valuable and defended. EVE nullsec has no direct passive isk generator like dust will. Dust planets, according to given info, are equal: they make isk from clones. Local identity matters little if you can make potentially 100x isk by spam attacking everywhere and taking passive isk for a week per planet in average, but from 1000 planets instead of 10. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 09:52:00 -
[382] - Quote
Lets think of it as manpower efficiency: do you choose to attack or to defend?
GÇó defense 16 man: clones are lost, over 100 if you lose. GÇó defense no-show: 100 clones lost GÇó no-show takes 3 fights to flip. bad defense takes 2
GÇó attacking 3 fight timeframe, GÇó split 16 players on 16 planets, run from defended and only afk farm non defended. you can roll approx 5 min per fight to see if defended. 1player kills 100 clones when no show happens.
In any case, directors die to the probing attacks clickfest. |
R F Gyro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
318
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:02:00 -
[383] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote: GÇó attacking 3 fight timeframe, GÇó split 16 players on 16 planets, run from defended and only afk farm non defended. you can roll approx 5 min per fight to see if defended. 1player kills 100 clones when no show happens.
When you run from the defenders, don't you lose 100 clones? So if 14 of those 16 planets are defended, won't you lose 1400 clones? More if you lost some when moving them. You'll also have given those 14 defending corps a load of biomass income so they can fight you better in future.
|
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
419
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:04:00 -
[384] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Lets think of it as manpower efficiency: do you choose to attack or to defend?
GÇó defense 16 man: clones are lost, over 100 if you lose. GÇó defense no-show: 100 clones lost GÇó no-show takes 3 fights to flip. bad defense takes 2
GÇó attacking 3 fight timeframe, GÇó split 16 players on 16 planets, run from defended and only afk farm non defended. you can roll approx 5 min per fight to see if defended. 1player kills 100 clones when no show happens.
In any case, directors die to the probing attacks clickfest. You can't really keep that up clonewise.
That's also assuming you're winning every match. What happens when you run into defenders that kill more of your clones than you kill of theirs?
Add to that that when you're out attacking districts someone (else) might be attacking yours, taking out 100 of your clones each time (or less if there aren't 100 there, but then they take the district as well).
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:05:00 -
[385] - Quote
Now for the simple fix: steady, cumulative growth on clone production on owned disticts. Starts from 0, ends up 1000 clones per day on year held ones. This makes it worth keeping few over spam attacking based on probabilities of flipping. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:09:00 -
[386] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:trollsroyce wrote: GÇó attacking 3 fight timeframe, GÇó split 16 players on 16 planets, run from defended and only afk farm non defended. you can roll approx 5 min per fight to see if defended. 1player kills 100 clones when no show happens.
When you run from the defenders, don't you lose 100 clones? So if 14 of those 16 planets are defended, won't you lose 1400 clones? More if you lost some when moving them. You'll also have given those 14 defending corps a load of biomass income so they can fight you better in future. This is passed by bringing 16 and leaving one behind, but you are right in that I am slipping from the growth period where planets are empty. My main concern is the exponential gold rush in start.
|
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1203
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:14:00 -
[387] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:trollsroyce wrote:
You are forgetting the obvious solution of "do not defend, just flip more and more, get clones to flip faster".
You're wrong on that one Trolls. It all comes down to how many districts are available. And the fact that even a 20 man corp can hold one or two district without that much problem means it's gonna be pretty crowded, pretty fast. So, flipping districts and dont care about fights wont work as at some point, there wont be any district left to flip. The numbers here might be off by a lot: GÇó at the league of 10000 atmospheric nullsec planets GÇó lets approximate that to 10 districts per, resulting 100000 to grow exponentially in. Give a no-show rate of 10%, and flipping 1000 per day using afk loners to flip after no show, you gain 100. Will you lose that daily? Perhaps, probably not if the attackers are roleplaying with 16 man squads. In any case the exponential growth in beginning gives a massive clone advantage, as well as isk. Being able to hold 10000 districts by just attacking and setting nasty reinforce timexones seems viable, but: GÇóGÇóGÇó it all comes down to CEO and clone seller clickfest. you want to win this game? prepare for burn outs. this will be worse than planeteering in EVE
You're thinking way too far ahead. Things will obviously evolve. This is planetary conquest 0.1. Only 250 districts. No room for much flipping and no fighting.
Do make feedback and have thoughts with the current data. It's absolutely impossible to figure out the big big picture immediatly. Steps are required. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:14:00 -
[388] - Quote
You see, if there was accumulative value in keeping planets long, small groups would have their place in holding very valuable ones. Now the corps with more players grow exponentially and there is no reason to care about which planets you own - just use the clone numbers and player number advantage to spam attack weaklings. |
R F Gyro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
318
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:33:00 -
[389] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:R F Gyro wrote:trollsroyce wrote: GÇó attacking 3 fight timeframe, GÇó split 16 players on 16 planets, run from defended and only afk farm non defended. you can roll approx 5 min per fight to see if defended. 1player kills 100 clones when no show happens.
When you run from the defenders, don't you lose 100 clones? So if 14 of those 16 planets are defended, won't you lose 1400 clones? More if you lost some when moving them. You'll also have given those 14 defending corps a load of biomass income so they can fight you better in future. This is passed by bringing 16 and leaving one behind, but you are right in that I am slipping from the growth period where planets are empty. My main concern is the exponential gold rush in start.
From the Wiki...
Quote: Minimum of 100 clones must be moved at a time
The attacker will have committed at least 100 clones to the attack (before attrition), and will lose at least 100.
That actually raises another question, which I'll direct to CCP in another post. |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
419
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:36:00 -
[390] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:You see, if there was accumulative value in keeping planets long, small groups would have their place in holding very valuable ones. Now the corps with more players grow exponentially and there is no reason to care about which planets you own - just use the clone numbers and player number advantage to spam attack weaklings. There are only about 250 districts to start with, so I don't see how a corp like PRO will hold many districts.
They will take one to start with (if they're quick enough that is, 250 other corps might take all the districts before them).
After that 3 things can happen.
1. PRO doesn't attack anyone and nobody attacks them. Very unlikely.
2. PRO attacks someone with their 100 clones (that's all they have to begin with). The defender also have 100 clones. PRO will lose. They don't get the district and they lost all of their clones, so their own district is practically up for grabs.
3. PRO doesn't attack anyone, but is being attacked themself. Both sides have again 100 clones each. PRO will lose the match and the district as well.
If 2 or 3 happens PRO is left without districts and will have to attack someone buying a pack of 100 clones. They will not win any attack they make, so they will have to take out more than 40 of the defender's clones (or more than 60 if the defender has the SI that produces 60 clones each day) because when they lose the defender will produce 40 clones more for the attack from PRO the next day. If they only take out 30 clones the defender will have 10 clones more than in the first match.
In a 16 vs 16 battle I can see a lot of corps winning over PRO without losing more than 40 clones. How will PRO ever get any districts then?
|
|
R F Gyro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
318
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:38:00 -
[391] - Quote
If you move 100 clones to attack a district on a planet 2 jumps away, but only 60 survive the travel, then you lose the battle, what happens? You are supposed to lose a minimum of 100 clones.
Do you only lose the 60 surviving ones?
Or does the attacker need to send enough clones to ensure that at least 100 arrive safely?
Sorry if this has been answered already. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:39:00 -
[392] - Quote
Excellent!
Thanks for shooting down the sidetrack on 1 clone rushing. It was a waste of thought.
The core issue I'm concerned about is still exponential growth: the only thing that matters is controlling a lot of districts. These generate more clones, allowing you to attack and defend more. This leads to the whole thing being a numbers game.
There needs to be massive value in controlling key planets, something that excellent small groups can do. A specific resource, or an empire wide boost prehaps. E.g. empire wide clone deployment speed boosting district, empire wide clone storage boost etc. Prehaps only as little as 5% per district, and rentable.
In addition to the previous, empires need to have a diminishing returns from controlling lots of stuff. Prehaps skillpoint modulated for director char.
I'm not giving this much thought as you can spot, keep shooting them down and taking them over. As is, the equal district system promotes exponential growth and numbers over strategic control. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:41:00 -
[393] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:If you move 100 clones to attack a district on a planet 2 jumps away, but only 60 survive the travel, then you lose the battle, what happens? You are supposed to lose a minimum of 100 clones.
Do you only lose the 60 surviving ones?
Or does the attacker need to send enough clones to ensure that at least 100 arrive safely?
Sorry if this has been answered already.
The 100 are lost: some to casuality from travel. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1790
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:41:00 -
[394] - Quote
Hey guys sorry about the slacking in response to the thread. I am back in the office and will be responding to posts now. Since I am so far behind though I am probably going to work backwards from this point, so sorry if I miss your question. |
|
dust badger
BetaMax. CRONOS.
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:42:00 -
[395] - Quote
it states if you loose you get no isk
But what about loot ?
|
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
420
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:42:00 -
[396] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:If you move 100 clones to attack a district on a planet 2 jumps away, but only 60 survive the travel, then you lose the battle, what happens? You are supposed to lose a minimum of 100 clones.
Do you only lose the 60 surviving ones?
Or does the attacker need to send enough clones to ensure that at least 100 arrive safely?
Sorry if this has been answered already. I think this was answered already (sorry, can't be bothered to look through the thread for the quote ).
You just need to move 100 clones, no matter how many make it to the fight. So you can show up to a district with only 20 clones for example. If you lose you would actually have lost 100 in total (80 by the move and 20 in the match). |
R F Gyro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
318
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:43:00 -
[397] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote:PRO will lose Are you suggesting that PRO won't be able to field any teams that are capable of beating any other corp? That sounds unlikely.
They may need a few starts to make it happen, but eventually they'll win a couple, and once their ball starts rolling their size will become more and more of a factor.
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:44:00 -
[398] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote:trollsroyce wrote:You see, if there was accumulative value in keeping planets long, small groups would have their place in holding very valuable ones. Now the corps with more players grow exponentially and there is no reason to care about which planets you own - just use the clone numbers and player number advantage to spam attack weaklings. There are only about 250 districts to start with, so I don't see how a corp like PRO will hold many districts. They will take one to start with (if they're quick enough that is, 250 other corps might take all the districts before them). After that 3 things can happen. 1. PRO doesn't attack anyone and nobody attacks them. Very unlikely. 2. PRO attacks someone with their 100 clones (that's all they have to begin with). The defender also have 100 clones. PRO will lose. They don't get the district and they lost all of their clones, so their own district is practically up for grabs. 3. PRO doesn't attack anyone, but is being attacked themself. Both sides have again 100 clones each. PRO will lose the match and the district as well. If 2 or 3 happens PRO is left without districts and will have to attack someone buying a pack of 100 clones. They will not win any attack they make, so they will have to take out more than 40 of the defender's clones (or more than 60 if the defender has the SI that produces 60 clones each day) because when they lose the defender will produce 40 clones more for the attack from PRO the next day. If they only take out 30 clones the defender will have 10 clones more than in the first match. In a 16 vs 16 battle I can see a lot of corps winning over PRO without losing more than 40 clones. How will PRO ever get any districts then?
Thanks for the 250 district clarification. I missed that one, and this changes the picture. The core issue with exponential growth, because of planet equality and just general interest to capture more, is still there. Diminishing returns?
Exponential growth leads to the only solution being numbers, and clickfest, if all planets are equal. This is with small amount of planets as well as big amount, though small keeps it capped to skill levels in keeping clones more. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:45:00 -
[399] - Quote
dust badger wrote:it states if you loose you get no isk
But what about loot ?
Salvage should go to the winner, the one left on field. It's generated from the items equipped with a twist of adding stuff, from what I read quickly. |
dust badger
BetaMax. CRONOS.
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:48:00 -
[400] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:dust badger wrote:it states if you loose you get no isk
But what about loot ?
Salvage should go to the winner, the one left on field. It's generated from the items equipped with a twist of adding stuff, from what I read quickly.
yeah i thought it would just wanted clarification hopefully FoxFour will get to it |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1791
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:50:00 -
[401] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:R F Gyro wrote:If you move 100 clones to attack a district on a planet 2 jumps away, but only 60 survive the travel, then you lose the battle, what happens? You are supposed to lose a minimum of 100 clones.
Do you only lose the 60 surviving ones?
Or does the attacker need to send enough clones to ensure that at least 100 arrive safely?
Sorry if this has been answered already. The 100 are lost: some to casuality from travel.
If you send 100, 60 make it to the planet, then you lose the battle you lose all 60. In the end our goal of ensuring a minimum of 100 clones lost is met, so we will not enforce 100 clones making it to the planet. |
|
5Y5T3M 3RR0R
The Southern Legion
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:54:00 -
[402] - Quote
What I just want to confirm is:
If I get one spy into another corp he could pull in 5 other guys for my side and because of friendly fire make it essentially 22 vs 10 and any kills they got on my 'commandos' would come out of their pocket?
This is going to be a murder fest :) |
Axirts
Misfits of Mayhem
31
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:55:00 -
[403] - Quote
Tried to read the whole thread and I didn't see it here or the wiki pages but I may have just missed it:
Conquest will be in the next build. Will we be notified long before the update or will it be more of a "Extended server downtime, oh also expect to download this giant update." |
R F Gyro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
318
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:57:00 -
[404] - Quote
Here's a question for the leaders of the larger corps with a global (RL multi-timezone) presence...
Will you set your districts to always defend at the time your corp is strongest, or will you spread them out?
If you spread them out then you'll often be fighting without your strongest team. If you always set them to the same time, your strongest team will risk burnout and the other timezones risk withering away as they feel they aren't contributing.
|
R F Gyro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
318
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:57:00 -
[405] - Quote
5Y5T3M 3RR0R wrote:What I just want to confirm is:
If I get one spy into another corp he could pull in 5 other guys for my side and because of friendly fire make it essentially 22 vs 10 and any kills they got on my 'commandos' would come out of their pocket?
This is going to be a murder fest :) Welcome to New Eden |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1791
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:57:00 -
[406] - Quote
dust badger wrote:trollsroyce wrote:dust badger wrote:it states if you loose you get no isk
But what about loot ?
Salvage should go to the winner, the one left on field. It's generated from the items equipped with a twist of adding stuff, from what I read quickly. yeah i thought it would just wanted clarification hopefully FoxFour will get to it
ISK goes to the winning side based on the total number of clones killed in the match. Loot goes to both sides. Side A gets stuff from side B, side B gets stuff from side A.
We discussed this a lot internally, which one of the two rewards should only go to the winner, and we ended up with ISK going to the winner. We really want one of the two to go to the loser as incentive to show up and fight even if they know they are going to lose. |
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:59:00 -
[407] - Quote
5Y5T3M 3RR0R wrote:What I just want to confirm is:
If I get one spy into another corp he could pull in 5 other guys for my side and because of friendly fire make it essentially 22 vs 10 and any kills they got on my 'commandos' would come out of their pocket?
This is going to be a murder fest :)
Don't need a dev to confirm this, it follows from the mechanics and is wholly accepted in New Eden. It won't make sense burning spies over districts, though. Possibly over lots of them by the insurgence stirring like you mentioned, but still probably not worth it. Doing the social engineering for what you describe would take you near to doing the engineering to kill a corporation from the inside: getting 5 on your side will have nasty internal struggles started, and soon more will follow or just quit. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1792
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 10:59:00 -
[408] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:5Y5T3M 3RR0R wrote:What I just want to confirm is:
If I get one spy into another corp he could pull in 5 other guys for my side and because of friendly fire make it essentially 22 vs 10 and any kills they got on my 'commandos' would come out of their pocket?
This is going to be a murder fest :) Welcome to New Eden
Not included in the release with this feature, but something we want to do is create a new role that allows people to kick other people from matches. So without giving people full director roles you can select people you trust and let them sort of help control matches.
For this release though, yes that is very much a possibility. |
|
dust badger
BetaMax. CRONOS.
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:00:00 -
[409] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:dust badger wrote:trollsroyce wrote:dust badger wrote:it states if you loose you get no isk
But what about loot ?
Salvage should go to the winner, the one left on field. It's generated from the items equipped with a twist of adding stuff, from what I read quickly. yeah i thought it would just wanted clarification hopefully FoxFour will get to it ISK goes to the winning side based on the total number of clones killed in the match. Loot goes to both sides. Side A gets stuff from side B, side B gets stuff from side A. We discussed this a lot internally, which one of the two rewards should only go to the winner, and we ended up with ISK going to the winner. We really want one of the two to go to the loser as incentive to show up and fight even if they know they are going to lose.
Cheers man |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1792
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:00:00 -
[410] - Quote
Axirts wrote:Tried to read the whole thread and I didn't see it here or the wiki pages but I may have just missed it:
Conquest will be in the next build. Will we be notified long before the update or will it be more of a "Extended server downtime, oh also expect to download this giant update."
Trust me, you will know. We will be making a very large fuss about this release, talking about it at Fanfest, and it will involve an extended downtime. So long as you follow dev blogs, the forums, twitter, or Facebook you will know. |
|
|
R F Gyro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
318
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:00:00 -
[411] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:If you send 100, 60 make it to the planet, then you lose the battle you lose all 60. In the end our goal of ensuring a minimum of 100 clones lost is met, so we will not enforce 100 clones making it to the planet. Thanks for the clarification.
I can see the corps with better KDRs specialising in long range attacks: only 20 clones arrive safely to fight the 100+ defenders, but that is enough to do the job. Larger corps with lower KDRs would specialise in short range attacks. Room for everyone.
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:01:00 -
[412] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:dust badger wrote:trollsroyce wrote:dust badger wrote:it states if you loose you get no isk
But what about loot ?
Salvage should go to the winner, the one left on field. It's generated from the items equipped with a twist of adding stuff, from what I read quickly. yeah i thought it would just wanted clarification hopefully FoxFour will get to it ISK goes to the winning side based on the total number of clones killed in the match. Loot goes to both sides. Side A gets stuff from side B, side B gets stuff from side A. We discussed this a lot internally, which one of the two rewards should only go to the winner, and we ended up with ISK going to the winner. We really want one of the two to go to the loser as incentive to show up and fight even if they know they are going to lose.
The salvage dev blog along with current suggests that it's all added in a pool and divided to players standing on field to me; good clarification and thanks for that :)
(makes more BPO fits) |
Winsaucerer
The Southern Legion
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:03:00 -
[413] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Hey guys sorry about the slacking in response to the thread. I am back in the office and will be responding to posts now. Since I am so far behind though I am probably going to work backwards from this point, so sorry if I miss your question.
Please don't miss mine, then :) https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=618829#post618829 |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:04:00 -
[414] - Quote
Can I get short clarification on the worth of specific planets, or how to combat exponential growth?
Since the ISK generator mechanics is equal to districts, it only makes sense to try and control as many of possible, instead of strategic ones (except for locations). In EVE, you have moon minerals that make locations worth defending over others. Is there a mechanic in place to make for strategic conquest, e.g. bottleneck systems allowing access to attack a region? |
Citpaan Hacos
BetaMax. CRONOS.
25
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:08:00 -
[415] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:We will be making a very large fuss about this release, talking about it at Fanfest, and it will involve an extended downtime.
So, patch confirmed for after Fanfest! XP |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1793
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:11:00 -
[416] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Can I get short clarification on the worth of specific planets, or how to combat exponential growth?
Since the ISK generator mechanics is equal to districts, it only makes sense to try and control as many of possible, instead of strategic ones (except for locations). In EVE, you have moon minerals that make locations worth defending over others. Is there a mechanic in place to make for strategic conquest, e.g. bottleneck systems allowing access to attack a region?
Different planets will have different numbers of districts, some systems will be right next to other systems with temperate planets, some systems will only have 1 temperate planet and be behind 2 or more systems with no temperate planets; which means to attack you from outside the system people needed to travel more systems which means more attrition. |
|
5Y5T3M 3RR0R
The Southern Legion
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:12:00 -
[417] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:R F Gyro wrote:5Y5T3M 3RR0R wrote:What I just want to confirm is:
If I get one spy into another corp he could pull in 5 other guys for my side and because of friendly fire make it essentially 22 vs 10 and any kills they got on my 'commandos' would come out of their pocket?
This is going to be a murder fest :) Welcome to New Eden Not included in the release with this feature, but something we want to do is create a new role that allows people to kick other people from matches. So without giving people full director roles you can select people you trust and let them sort of help control matches. For this release though, yes that is very much a possibility.
I'm quite fine for that, it makes trust and loyalty a lot more important in game!!
Anyone want to employ any ex-southern Legion into their corp ??
I'm sure we have a few spare... |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:12:00 -
[418] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:If you send 100, 60 make it to the planet, then you lose the battle you lose all 60. In the end our goal of ensuring a minimum of 100 clones lost is met, so we will not enforce 100 clones making it to the planet. Thanks for the clarification. I can see the corps with better KDRs specialising in long range attacks: only 20 clones arrive safely to fight the 100+ defenders, but that is enough to do the job. Larger corps with lower KDRs would specialise in short range attacks. Room for everyone.
This is particularly awesome, as the good outfits can be hired to flip a projection district deep behind enemy lines, allowing attacks on multiple planets. A mechanic that helps combat the inevitable blob conquest by making big empires have a small weakness internally, asides from constant frontier struggles.
Still I think strategic resources are needed. Hoping the EVE link will be a PI boosting one, or even a moon mineral yield boosting one. This would make it worth defending a particular district to the last man, instead of just taking one from some weaklings to replace the lost one. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:13:00 -
[419] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Can I get short clarification on the worth of specific planets, or how to combat exponential growth?
Since the ISK generator mechanics is equal to districts, it only makes sense to try and control as many of possible, instead of strategic ones (except for locations). In EVE, you have moon minerals that make locations worth defending over others. Is there a mechanic in place to make for strategic conquest, e.g. bottleneck systems allowing access to attack a region? Different planets will have different numbers of districts, some systems will be right next to other systems with temperate planets, some systems will only have 1 temperate planet and be behind 2 or more systems with no temperate planets; which means to attack you from outside the system people needed to travel more systems which means more attrition.
Thanks! Now fingers crossed for a moon mineral yield booster structure to make some planets really coveted :) |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
260
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:13:00 -
[420] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:If you send 100, 60 make it to the planet, then you lose the battle you lose all 60. In the end our goal of ensuring a minimum of 100 clones lost is met, so we will not enforce 100 clones making it to the planet. Thanks for the clarification. I can see the corps with better KDRs specialising in long range attacks: only 20 clones arrive safely to fight the 100+ defenders, but that is enough to do the job. Larger corps with lower KDRs would specialise in short range attacks. Room for everyone.
I'm sure I read somewhere that you can take up to 300 clones for an attack. Also, you don't have to go 2 jumps for an attack. You could just attack districts on the same planet and take 100% of your clones. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1793
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:14:00 -
[421] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:R F Gyro wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:If you send 100, 60 make it to the planet, then you lose the battle you lose all 60. In the end our goal of ensuring a minimum of 100 clones lost is met, so we will not enforce 100 clones making it to the planet. Thanks for the clarification. I can see the corps with better KDRs specialising in long range attacks: only 20 clones arrive safely to fight the 100+ defenders, but that is enough to do the job. Larger corps with lower KDRs would specialise in short range attacks. Room for everyone. This is particularly awesome, as the good outfits can be hired to flip a projection district deep behind enemy lines, allowing attacks on multiple planets. A mechanic that helps combat the inevitable blob conquest by making big empires have a small weakness internally, asides from constant frontier struggles. Still I think strategic resources are needed. Hoping the EVE link will be a PI boosting one, or even a moon mineral yield boosting one. This would make it worth defending a particular district to the last man, instead of just taking one from some weaklings to replace the lost one.
We are currently thinking PI bonuses, POS fuel reduction, POS manufacturing bonus, and more but only for corporation and alliance members on the planet or the moons of that planet. Would love to hear more suggestions though. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1793
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:15:00 -
[422] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:R F Gyro wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:If you send 100, 60 make it to the planet, then you lose the battle you lose all 60. In the end our goal of ensuring a minimum of 100 clones lost is met, so we will not enforce 100 clones making it to the planet. Thanks for the clarification. I can see the corps with better KDRs specialising in long range attacks: only 20 clones arrive safely to fight the 100+ defenders, but that is enough to do the job. Larger corps with lower KDRs would specialise in short range attacks. Room for everyone. I'm sure I read somewhere that you can take up to 300 clones for an attack. Also, you don't have to go 2 jumps for an attack. You could just attack districts on the same planet and take 100% of your clones.
The really cool thing will be seeing people trying to take whole planets when they are in isolated systems so attacking HAS to go through multiple empty systems. |
|
dust badger
BetaMax. CRONOS.
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:17:00 -
[423] - Quote
so i take it these districts will be like the customs office in eve, to start off with they are owned by an NPC corp, and you have to destroy them to plant your own.
would this mean you will have to fight some NPCs to take over the planet initially ? or would you just have an empty corp battle ?
or did i completly miss read something and jumped to a conclusion?
|
VINGTHOR LYNN
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:19:00 -
[424] - Quote
Sadly my question from p15 was omitted so I doggedly try again
Do you plan any link between PC and FW? |
Ghural
The Southern Legion
64
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:26:00 -
[425] - Quote
It's bloody annoying that Aussies are at a disadvantage due to downtime being during our peak play times.
Here's a question. Will ownership of an entire planet allow dust players to take over the orbital customs office and therefor gain the ability to tax planetary imports/exports.
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
260
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:29:00 -
[426] - Quote
dust badger wrote:so i take it these districts will be like the customs office in eve, to start off with they are owned by an NPC corp, and you have to destroy them to plant your own.
would this mean you will have to fight some NPCs to take over the planet initially ? or would you just have an empty corp battle ?
or did i completly miss read something and jumped to a conclusion?
You've obviously not read the bit that says unowned districts can be claimed without battle. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
32
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:29:00 -
[427] - Quote
Possible scenario :
Corp A with 100 members split and make 100 corp. They put in the same alliance. Each corp take a distric. Then, they all going back to the 1st corp --> they own 100 district the first day.
I know that districts are own by the corp, and not the alliance. Just to be sure that you thought about this ;) !!!
Edit :
Can be extend :
Corp A with 100 members. Make 20 corps with 5 members. Take 20 district in the same system. Let principal corp attack all the district and make back the original corp.
Is it intended ? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
260
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:29:00 -
[428] - Quote
VINGTHOR LYNN wrote:Sadly my question from p15 was omitted so I doggedly try again Do you plan any link between PC and FW?
PC is outside FW space. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
260
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:31:00 -
[429] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Possible scenario :
Corp A with 100 members split and make 100 corp. They put in the same alliance. Each corp take a distric. Then, they all going back to the 1st corp --> they own 100 district the first day.
I know that districts are own by the corp, and not the alliance. Just to be sure that you thought about this ;) !!!
If Corp A has 100 * 20,000,000 isk to be able to buy the mercs required for such a feat, fair play. I don't see this being plausible though. |
5Y5T3M 3RR0R
The Southern Legion
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:33:00 -
[430] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Possible scenario :
Corp A with 100 members split and make 100 corp. They put in the same alliance. Each corp take a distric. Then, they all going back to the 1st corp --> they own 100 district the first day.
I know that districts are own by the corp, and not the alliance. Just to be sure that you thought about this ;) !!!
that would only work if you could merge corps, instead you would need to abandon the corp freeing the territory. |
|
dust badger
BetaMax. CRONOS.
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:33:00 -
[431] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:dust badger wrote:so i take it these districts will be like the customs office in eve, to start off with they are owned by an NPC corp, and you have to destroy them to plant your own.
would this mean you will have to fight some NPCs to take over the planet initially ? or would you just have an empty corp battle ?
or did i completly miss read something and jumped to a conclusion?
You've obviously not read the bit that says unowned districts can be claimed without battle.
yeah i missed that bit thank you |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1796
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:33:00 -
[432] - Quote
Winsaucerer wrote:Apologies if this has been addressed. My main concern or question is about the income being balanced with EVE Online. I want this balanced so that we can hurry up and allow ISK transfers between the economies!
It seems that there is some sort of built in limit to how much corporations can control (which I think is great in principle!). Let us say that a corporation on average can maintain N districts per player (where very likely N < 1). Number of districts that can be controlled will be limited by at least these two factors, though they are probably the most important: 1. How many fronts the corporation can manage to fight on simultaneously 2. How many clones are produced in order to be able to attack other districts
So what is a reasonable estimate for N? Perhaps you guys have estimated this already, in which case you can plug that value in. Let's say a corporation can manage 1 district per 30 or so players. This is probably optimistic for your average corp, but pessimistic for a very active corp. That is, from 30 or so players, this means you will have enough numbers to be able to form a full defence squad each day, with reasonable quality players. This gives us an estimate of N = 1/30.
Each district produces 40 clones, or 60 with an upgrade, so let's set it optimistically to an average of 50 clones per district per day. Each clone has a sale price (if I understand correctly) of 100,000 ISK, or 0.1 mil ISK.
That gives us a profit per player in the corporation of around (N * 50 * 0.1) in millions. Other sources of income include public battles, though the income here is negligible compared to EVE Online profits. There are also the profits from winning district control battles, but I will exclude these from the estimate for a simple reason -- profits gained in district control battles are taken from other players. This does not represent increased wealth in either ISK injections OR item injections (by contrast, mining in EVE adds minerals to the game, missions add ISK and salvage). It merely shuffles around (with attrition) the wealth in a part of the game. So I think we can reasonably estimate an average income per player by excluding this. In fact, since wealth is removed from the game due to a battle, the estimate I provide will I expect be higher than the actual. That is, the estimate of wealth per player per day is a maximum for a well chosen N.
Now for some incomes: N = 1/30 = 167k per player per day N = 1/16 (for your more active corp) = 313k per player per day
Perhaps we need to be more optimistic and estimate a tight knit group of 16 players that's available for two or three battles a day, fighting a defensive war on a few fronts, allowing them to control upwards of 10 districts (since they don't get attacked at all districts at once). In this case:
N = 10/16 = 3.13 mil per player per day
Remember that this is a maximum estimate for the chosen N. Of course, there will be anomalous corporations that do particularly well, but as I mentioned this success will involve wealth transfer rather than creation.
So in summary, it seems to me that these profits are woefully inadequate to compete with EVE Online. Planetary Interaction in EVE Online (pessimistically) can generate perhaps 1 mil per planet in high sec for very minimal work, and let's say 4 planets for a relatively unskilled player. That's 4 mil per day for one character that has no risk involved, and takes nowhere near the skill or effort that district control will take. Have I missed something? Or misunderstood something important?
I want ISK transfer between these games, so if my analysis is right, let's please get the profits higher :)
Before we start just pumping more money into DUST we need to take other measures to balance the value of ISK. While we have ideas and plans for this we are not ready to share them. So you are aware though we are thinking a lot about it. :)
I know that is maybe not the answer you wanted but i hope it helps. |
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:35:00 -
[433] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote: We are currently thinking PI bonuses, POS fuel reduction, POS manufacturing bonus, and more but only for corporation and alliance members on the planet or the moons of that planet. Would love to hear more suggestions though.
Sweet! Now we're lookign at interesting things here.
- PI bonus: scales with nullsec PI scaling, making low truesec planets coveted. This is the best proposed bonus, as it scales with truesec.
- POS fuel reduction: if linked with the clone reserve mod, makes otherwise worthless frontier systems easier to defend on dust side while making them easier to fuel on EVE side.
- POS manufacturing bonus: absolutely lovely link to EVE. This could be related to specific reactions by planet, in order to make some planets coveted reaction POS planets. E.g. the POS manufacturing bonus for a specific reaction could be 500% so, that it makes sense to control that particular planet in order to make that particular reaction.
- Moon mineral yield increaser could be added. This would scale with the moons, becoming very valuable. The percentage should be minimal though, prehaps 5%. This mechanic would also allow for more vivid moon mineral market, as the valuable ones would be pumped with yield increasing planets first, and the next bottleneck would follow afterwards.
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1796
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:36:00 -
[434] - Quote
5Y5T3M 3RR0R wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Possible scenario :
Corp A with 100 members split and make 100 corp. They put in the same alliance. Each corp take a distric. Then, they all going back to the 1st corp --> they own 100 district the first day.
I know that districts are own by the corp, and not the alliance. Just to be sure that you thought about this ;) !!! that would only work if you could merge corps, instead you would need to abandon the corp freeing the territory.
Honestly if someone wants to go through that effort fine. They are going to need to defend those districts though as others will be buying clone packages and launching attacks. The defenders are now at a huge disadvantage as well as it requires even more coordination in getting people into the battles, know which ones are being attacked, and just all sorts of logistical effort. Hey, if one group wants to spend that much money, let them. |
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:36:00 -
[435] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Possible scenario :
Corp A with 100 members split and make 100 corp. They put in the same alliance. Each corp take a distric. Then, they all going back to the 1st corp --> they own 100 district the first day.
I know that districts are own by the corp, and not the alliance. Just to be sure that you thought about this ;) !!! If Corp A has 100 * 20,000,000 isk to be able to buy the mercs required for such a feat, fair play. I don't see this being plausible though.
100 members donating 20M isk. Not a big deal, I have 150M isk currently put aside for donations to PC personally, and I get it from afk farming casually. |
VINGTHOR LYNN
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:37:00 -
[436] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:VINGTHOR LYNN wrote:Sadly my question from p15 was omitted so I doggedly try again Do you plan any link between PC and FW? PC is outside FW space.
I know, that is why I asked are there any PLANS to connect those two features. We have heard so much talk about FW being the first deployment link between EVE and DUST. So far that link is almost non existent and there is too little incentive for militia to work with us. Especially since targeting specific systems is not easy...
Some of us have been preparing for the FW link with DUST for a while now, engaging in diplomacy etc. Where is it?
I love the PC feature and I hope that something like that will be connected to FW at some point. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
260
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:39:00 -
[437] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Django Quik wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Possible scenario :
Corp A with 100 members split and make 100 corp. They put in the same alliance. Each corp take a distric. Then, they all going back to the 1st corp --> they own 100 district the first day.
I know that districts are own by the corp, and not the alliance. Just to be sure that you thought about this ;) !!! If Corp A has 100 * 20,000,000 isk to be able to buy the mercs required for such a feat, fair play. I don't see this being plausible though. 100 members donating 20M isk. Not a big deal, I have 150M isk currently put aside for donations to PC personally, and I get it from afk farming casually.
I highly doubt the average player has 20M isk. You are obviously way way way above the average isk. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1798
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:39:00 -
[438] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote: We are currently thinking PI bonuses, POS fuel reduction, POS manufacturing bonus, and more but only for corporation and alliance members on the planet or the moons of that planet. Would love to hear more suggestions though.
Sweet! Now we're lookign at interesting things here.
- PI bonus: scales with nullsec PI scaling, making low truesec planets coveted. This is the best proposed bonus, as it scales with truesec.
- POS fuel reduction: if linked with the clone reserve mod, makes otherwise worthless frontier systems easier to defend on dust side while making them easier to fuel on EVE side.
- POS manufacturing bonus: absolutely lovely link to EVE. This could be related to specific reactions by planet, in order to make some planets coveted reaction POS planets. E.g. the POS manufacturing bonus for a specific reaction could be 500% so, that it makes sense to control that particular planet in order to make that particular reaction.
- Moon mineral yield increaser could be added. This would scale with the moons, becoming very valuable. The percentage should be minimal though, prehaps 5%. This mechanic would also allow for more vivid moon mineral market, as the valuable ones would be pumped with yield increasing planets first, and the next bottleneck would follow afterwards.
One of the things that makes this far more difficult is the EVE bonuses need to be stack-able. The possibility of one corporation, or alliance, owning more than 3 districts on one planet is very high. Each SI bonus for DUST is per district, so no problem, but the EVE bonuses are much broader. If we don't let them stack there is no point, EVE side, for owning more than 3 districts and one of each SI. Any stacking we do though would obviously have stacking penalties just like modules in EVE. |
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
32
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:39:00 -
[439] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Possible scenario :
Corp A with 100 members split and make 100 corp. They put in the same alliance. Each corp take a distric. Then, they all going back to the 1st corp --> they own 100 district the first day.
I know that districts are own by the corp, and not the alliance. Just to be sure that you thought about this ;) !!! If Corp A has 100 * 20,000,000 isk to be able to buy the mercs required for such a feat, fair play. I don't see this being plausible though.
I know, it was an example.
But admit that it's not really difficult to do this for 20-30 corp/districts...
You take position, then you let the principal corp deplete clones, join back the mother corp and hold all the districs... If you need to defense it, then make squads with "ringers". Just need 2-3-4-5 members in famtom corps... |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:40:00 -
[440] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Possible scenario :
Corp A with 100 members split and make 100 corp. They put in the same alliance. Each corp take a distric. Then, they all going back to the 1st corp --> they own 100 district the first day.
I know that districts are own by the corp, and not the alliance. Just to be sure that you thought about this ;) !!!
Edit :
Can be extend :
Corp A with 100 members. Make 20 corps with 5 members. Take 20 district in the same system. Let principal corp attack all the district and make back the original corp.
Is it intended ?
I think this requires some looking into, because the initial boost from this uncontrolled clone amount growth allows for insane expansion speed. If someone does this and others don't, the someone will have all the clones required to defend whatever they please. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1798
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:40:00 -
[441] - Quote
VINGTHOR LYNN wrote:Django Quik wrote:VINGTHOR LYNN wrote:Sadly my question from p15 was omitted so I doggedly try again Do you plan any link between PC and FW? PC is outside FW space. I know, that is why I asked are there any PLANS to connect those two features. We have heard so much talk about FW being the first deployment link between EVE and DUST. So far that link is almost non existent and there is too little incentive for militia to work with us. Especially since targeting specific systems is not easy... Some of us have been preparing for the FW link with DUST for a while now, engaging in diplomacy etc. Where is it? I love the PC feature and I hope that something like that will be connected to FW at some point.
No, planetary conquest is a separate feature from factional warfare. We do have plans to completely change how FW battles are done, plans we will be talking about later but that will launch with planetary conquest. |
|
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
165
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:42:00 -
[442] - Quote
How does the clone Reinforcement timer work?
Is it a lump of clones in the beginning (or end) of the 1-hour period that gives you all of them at once? Or is it gradual, where if you were getting, say 60 clones, you'd get one per minute for the full hour? Or some other way?
When you move clones to a district you own from one you own, do the clones arrive immediately or do they wait until the Reinforcement timer to actually show up?
Also, how will attacks during the Reinforcement timer work? Can someone set an attack to hit 1 minute before the timer ends? Or does the attack need to be completed before the 1-hour period is up? |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
32
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:45:00 -
[443] - Quote
Well, that's true when you add all the ISK you need for SI, management, etc... it's a lot of work and money...
But it looks like an issue. You avoid direct conflicts, you're working on economy without deploying expensive clones/vehicules, easy conquest.
With an active corp and a lots of members, ISK is not really the big deal... |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
210
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:47:00 -
[444] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:
One of the things that makes this far more difficult is the EVE bonuses need to be stack-able. The possibility of one corporation, or alliance, owning more than 3 districts on one planet is very high. Each SI bonus for DUST is per district, so no problem, but the EVE bonuses are much broader. If we don't let them stack there is no point, EVE side, for owning more than 3 districts and one of each SI. Any stacking we do though would obviously have stacking penalties just like modules in EVE.
Thanks for the time! I like where this is going, because there could be that El Dorado planet with 24 districts located in a -1.0 truesec PI system generating 1 billion weekly. A 1% stacking PI booster would provide 24% more from that planet, which would have an impact.
This is why I also don't like the stacking penalties here. If there were none, but the bonus would be minimal, some planets would become very valuable to hold because of the 24 districts providing a stacked bonus. I suggest looking into that one and coming up with a median to make some planets very coveted as resource generators. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1798
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:47:00 -
[445] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Well, that's true when you add all the ISK you need for SI, management, etc... it's a lot of work and money...
But it looks like an issue. You avoid direct conflicts, you're working on economy without deploying expensive clones/vehicules, easy conquest.
With an active corp and a lots of members, ISK is not really the big deal...
I don't follow, what looks like an issue? |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
262
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:49:00 -
[446] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Possible scenario :
Corp A with 100 members split and make 100 corp. They put in the same alliance. Each corp take a distric. Then, they all going back to the 1st corp --> they own 100 district the first day.
I know that districts are own by the corp, and not the alliance. Just to be sure that you thought about this ;) !!!
Edit :
Can be extend :
Corp A with 100 members. Make 20 corps with 5 members. Take 20 district in the same system. Let principal corp attack all the district and make back the original corp.
Is it intended ? I think this requires some looking into, because the initial boost from this uncontrolled clone amount growth allows for insane expansion speed. If someone does this and others don't, the someone will have all the clones required to defend whatever they please.
20 corps would still require an absolute shed load of isk because you also need (not certain on this number?) 15M isk to start a corp. That makes it 20 * (20M+15M) = 700M isk. I can only imagine less than a handful of the mega corps being able to pull that off.
However, if managed, there'd be so many other corps attacking every one of those districts every day, there's no way Corp A would be able to defend them all.
Also, Corp A won't be able to attack those fake-corp districts until they have generated enough clones, so nobody will be able to grow fast enough to grow 'exponentially'. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
211
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:50:00 -
[447] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Well, that's true when you add all the ISK you need for SI, management, etc... it's a lot of work and money...
But it looks like an issue. You avoid direct conflicts, you're working on economy without deploying expensive clones/vehicules, easy conquest.
With an active corp and a lots of members, ISK is not really the big deal... I don't follow, what looks like an issue?
A corp splitting into 100 corps to each pick an initial district with player donated clones, then merging into a megacorp starting from day one with a major clone advantage from 100 districts. I think this really is a mechanic that needs to be regulated. |
KEROSIINI-TERO
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
258
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:51:00 -
[448] - Quote
Thinking about the district and clone count mechanic vividly reminds me of these simple clever games: Phage War 1 & 2
http://armorgames.com/play/2675/phage-wars (On that link you get to test the game with fewer clicks but AI is very passive in the beginning)
and
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/502416 (The better of the two, good action from the beginning but you have to suffer some fantasy game ad and the game menu UI you have to find the 'start experiment' to begin game)
I wonder how hectic the dust clone movements will be. At least in the beginning the land grab could very well be intense as these...
Worth checking anyways as many mechanics seem similar. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
262
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:52:00 -
[449] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Well, that's true when you add all the ISK you need for SI, management, etc... it's a lot of work and money...
But it looks like an issue. You avoid direct conflicts, you're working on economy without deploying expensive clones/vehicules, easy conquest.
With an active corp and a lots of members, ISK is not really the big deal... I don't follow, what looks like an issue? A corp splitting into 100 corps to each pick an initial district with player donated clones, then merging into a megacorp starting from day one with a major clone advantage from 100 districts. I think this really is a mechanic that needs to be regulated.
You can't merge corps.
Corp A would have to produce enough clones to be able to attack/claim the fake-corp's districts. This would take days/weeks. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1799
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:52:00 -
[450] - Quote
Moving clones to any district that does not belong to your corporation will start a conflict. There is no way to "donate" clones to someone else. |
|
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
32
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:53:00 -
[451] - Quote
Ok, we'll start with 250 districts.
Take the 12 first corps. All of them make 20 corps each with 5 members in it, and a 20M wallet. 20x12 = 240
The first day, the all district will be "own" by 12 corps.
400M ISK ? WTF already have them today, and build is expect after fanfest. We've got all the time to make more and more ISK. Just a little logistic management...
Mayeb I'm going too far, but if the defenser choose the time for attacks ... Well, hope you see what I'm pointing out... |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
211
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:55:00 -
[452] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:trollsroyce wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Well, that's true when you add all the ISK you need for SI, management, etc... it's a lot of work and money...
But it looks like an issue. You avoid direct conflicts, you're working on economy without deploying expensive clones/vehicules, easy conquest.
With an active corp and a lots of members, ISK is not really the big deal... I don't follow, what looks like an issue? A corp splitting into 100 corps to each pick an initial district with player donated clones, then merging into a megacorp starting from day one with a major clone advantage from 100 districts. I think this really is a mechanic that needs to be regulated. You can't merge corps. Corp A would have to produce enough clones to be able to attack/claim the fake-corp's districts. This would take days/weeks.
Thanks for the clarification. Is there a limit in place on how many clones the corporation can buy from day1? If there is, it makes sense to split corps into smaller ones to bypass this limit and fast expand. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
262
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:56:00 -
[453] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Django Quik wrote:trollsroyce wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Well, that's true when you add all the ISK you need for SI, management, etc... it's a lot of work and money...
But it looks like an issue. You avoid direct conflicts, you're working on economy without deploying expensive clones/vehicules, easy conquest.
With an active corp and a lots of members, ISK is not really the big deal... I don't follow, what looks like an issue? A corp splitting into 100 corps to each pick an initial district with player donated clones, then merging into a megacorp starting from day one with a major clone advantage from 100 districts. I think this really is a mechanic that needs to be regulated. You can't merge corps. Corp A would have to produce enough clones to be able to attack/claim the fake-corp's districts. This would take days/weeks. Thanks for the clarification. Is there a limit in place on how many clones the corporation can buy from day1? If there is, it makes sense to split corps into smaller ones to bypass this limit and fast expand.
You can only buy a single pack of 100 clones and only if you don't own a district. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
32
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:56:00 -
[454] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:trollsroyce wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Well, that's true when you add all the ISK you need for SI, management, etc... it's a lot of work and money...
But it looks like an issue. You avoid direct conflicts, you're working on economy without deploying expensive clones/vehicules, easy conquest.
With an active corp and a lots of members, ISK is not really the big deal... I don't follow, what looks like an issue? A corp splitting into 100 corps to each pick an initial district with player donated clones, then merging into a megacorp starting from day one with a major clone advantage from 100 districts. I think this really is a mechanic that needs to be regulated. You can't merge corps. Corp A would have to produce enough clones to be able to attack/claim the fake-corp's districts. This would take days/weeks.
Doesn't matter, as a CEO/director you can choose to produce or not clones... And it would takes 2 days to split 20 corps to 10. Another 2 days from 10 to 5 ...
Well, one week and you get it. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
262
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:00:00 -
[455] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Django Quik wrote: You can't merge corps.
Corp A would have to produce enough clones to be able to attack/claim the fake-corp's districts. This would take days/weeks.
Doesn't matter, as a CEO/director you can choose to produce or not clones... And it would takes 2 days to split 20 corps to 10. Another 2 days from 10 to 5 ... Well, one week and you get it.
You can only produce a max of 60 clones per district. You have to take at least 100 to attack another district. So, you'd only be able to take a new district every other day. In the meantime, you're being attacked by the other 50+ corps that want in on the action on your current districts. It won't be sustainable. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
211
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:01:00 -
[456] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Ok, we'll start with 250 districts.
Take the 12 first corps. All of them make 20 corps each with 5 members in it, and a 20M wallet. 20x12 = 240
The first day, the all district will be "own" by 12 corps.
400M ISK ? WTF already have them today, and build is expect after fanfest. We've got all the time to make more and more ISK. Just a little logistic management...
Mayeb I'm going too far, but if the defenser choose the time for attacks ... Well, hope you see what I'm pointing out...
Absolutely, this is why there should not be a limit in place on how many clones a corporation can buy from day1 - otherwise it can be circumvented by making many small corps, which feels dull.
Day1) Alliance makes ton of small crops and flips a few regions. Day2) Small corps move to bottleneck systems and merge by dropping slowly to 1 member corps that are left holding planets in deep region fortresses. Day3) Merged big corps slowly take over the 1 member corp planets, while the small corps sell clones to make isk and ease the planet flip. Day4) Alliance holds a few regions bastion by bottleneck systems and massive clone production from fastly flipped planets.
Bit excaggerated, but definitely better than having one corp slowly expand.
EDIT: so, in order not to make this the preferred gold rush method, remove the cap on clone purchase and let corps rush freely instead of going around it by splitting. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
32
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:03:00 -
[457] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Django Quik wrote: You can't merge corps.
Corp A would have to produce enough clones to be able to attack/claim the fake-corp's districts. This would take days/weeks.
Doesn't matter, as a CEO/director you can choose to produce or not clones... And it would takes 2 days to split 20 corps to 10. Another 2 days from 10 to 5 ... Well, one week and you get it. You can only produce a max of 60 clones per district. You have to take at least 100 to attack another district. So, you'd only be able to take a new district every other day. In the meantime, you're being attacked by the other 50+ corps that want in on the action on your current districts. It won't be sustainable.
Yes, this... That's true... |
bolsh lee
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
43
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:04:00 -
[458] - Quote
How will attacks during the Reinforcement timer work? Can someone set an attack to hit 1 minute before the timer ends? Or does the attack need to be completed at a certain time before the 1-hour period is up? |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
270
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:04:00 -
[459] - Quote
Are you guys ready to make any guarantees to corps about losses based on bugs? I.E. What happens if I attack, something is totally glitched and all of a sudden I land on planet with 50% of the clones I know I sent.? I imagine you don't want people to be too reserved at the beginning. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
262
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:06:00 -
[460] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Ok, we'll start with 250 districts.
Take the 12 first corps. All of them make 20 corps each with 5 members in it, and a 20M wallet. 20x12 = 240
The first day, the all district will be "own" by 12 corps.
400M ISK ? WTF already have them today, and build is expect after fanfest. We've got all the time to make more and more ISK. Just a little logistic management...
Mayeb I'm going too far, but if the defenser choose the time for attacks ... Well, hope you see what I'm pointing out... Absolutely, this is why there should not be a limit in place on how many clones a corporation can buy from day1 - otherwise it can be circumvented by making many small corps, which feels dull. Day1) Alliance makes ton of small crops and flips a few regions. Day2) Small corps move to bottleneck systems and merge by dropping slowly to 1 member corps that are left holding planets in deep region fortresses. Day3) Merged big corps slowly take over the 1 member corp planets, while the small corps sell clones to make isk and ease the planet flip. Day4) Alliance holds a few regions bastion by bottleneck systems and massive clone production from fastly flipped planets. Bit excaggerated, but definitely better than having one corp slowly expand.
The big corp wouldn't just absorb all the small corps' clone. Big Corp would have to attack and kill all those small corps and produce enough clones to do so. As I said to Gloo Gloo, there's nothing stopping all the other smaller corps that aren't fake from jumping in and stealing from the fake-corps before your big corp can get there. And it will be dead abvious which corps are unable to defend themselves because their player counts will be tiny. |
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
211
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:06:00 -
[461] - Quote
bolsh lee wrote:How will attacks during the Reinforcement timer work? Can someone set an attack to hit 1 minute before the timer ends? Or does the attack need to be completed at a certain time before the 1-hour period is up?
Hehe, 1) set attack period to hour before downtime 2) go flip a null cannon by attacking 2 minutes before DT ??? 3) Profit |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
262
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:09:00 -
[462] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:bolsh lee wrote:How will attacks during the Reinforcement timer work? Can someone set an attack to hit 1 minute before the timer ends? Or does the attack need to be completed at a certain time before the 1-hour period is up? Hehe, 1) set attack period to hour before downtime 2) go flip a null cannon by attacking 2 minutes before DT ??? 3) Profit
You're assuming the defender won't do the same, having had at least 24 hours to prepare? |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
33
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:11:00 -
[463] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Ok, we'll start with 250 districts.
Take the 12 first corps. All of them make 20 corps each with 5 members in it, and a 20M wallet. 20x12 = 240
The first day, the all district will be "own" by 12 corps.
400M ISK ? WTF already have them today, and build is expect after fanfest. We've got all the time to make more and more ISK. Just a little logistic management...
Mayeb I'm going too far, but if the defenser choose the time for attacks ... Well, hope you see what I'm pointing out... Absolutely, this is why there should not be a limit in place on how many clones a corporation can buy from day1 - otherwise it can be circumvented by making many small corps, which feels dull. Day1) Alliance makes ton of small crops and flips a few regions. Day2) Small corps move to bottleneck systems and merge by dropping slowly to 1 member corps that are left holding planets in deep region fortresses. Day3) Merged big corps slowly take over the 1 member corp planets, while the small corps sell clones to make isk and ease the planet flip. Day4) Alliance holds a few regions bastion by bottleneck systems and massive clone production from fastly flipped planets. Bit excaggerated, but definitely better than having one corp slowly expand. The big corp wouldn't just absorb all the small corps' clones. Big Corp would have to attack and kill all those small corps and produce enough clones to do so. As I said to Gloo Gloo, there's nothing stopping all the other smaller corps that aren't fake from jumping in and stealing from the fake-corps before your big corp can get there. And it will be dead obvious which corps are unable to defend themselves because their player counts will be tiny.
Yes, and :
Day 1 : you put 100 clones on a district Day 2 : you attack the fake corp but you loose MINIMUM 100 clones
So you need all of them, and then need to produce more...
Ok I get it... Really really difficult btw :)
But not so stupid for 2 or 3 districts... |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
211
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:12:00 -
[464] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Ok, we'll start with 250 districts.
Take the 12 first corps. All of them make 20 corps each with 5 members in it, and a 20M wallet. 20x12 = 240
The first day, the all district will be "own" by 12 corps.
400M ISK ? WTF already have them today, and build is expect after fanfest. We've got all the time to make more and more ISK. Just a little logistic management...
Mayeb I'm going too far, but if the defenser choose the time for attacks ... Well, hope you see what I'm pointing out... Absolutely, this is why there should not be a limit in place on how many clones a corporation can buy from day1 - otherwise it can be circumvented by making many small corps, which feels dull. Day1) Alliance makes ton of small crops and flips a few regions. Day2) Small corps move to bottleneck systems and merge by dropping slowly to 1 member corps that are left holding planets in deep region fortresses. Day3) Merged big corps slowly take over the 1 member corp planets, while the small corps sell clones to make isk and ease the planet flip. Day4) Alliance holds a few regions bastion by bottleneck systems and massive clone production from fastly flipped planets. Bit excaggerated, but definitely better than having one corp slowly expand. The big corp wouldn't just absorb all the small corps' clones. Big Corp would have to attack and kill all those small corps and produce enough clones to do so. As I said to Gloo Gloo, there's nothing stopping all the other smaller corps that aren't fake from jumping in and stealing from the fake-corps before your big corp can get there. And it will be dead obvious which corps are unable to defend themselves because their player counts will be tiny.
There is, regional bottleneck systems and travel mechanics. Also, which would you prefer?
10x 16man corp able to defend during one hour timeframe daily, flipping with 1000 initial clones from day one and starting with 10 districts
1x 160man corp flipping with 100 initial clones, starting with one district
^ The obvious winner is the 10 corps, because their initial pace is 10 times more and they can set defense to keep a few places daily with small numbers. The 10 corps will have 10 times the initial clone production as opposed to the one corp.
This is why the 100 clone cap needs to go IMHO. It makes no sense to have a big corp in the beginning, in relation to this. Corps can be merged by giving off the districts when there is spare time, in the meanwhile you are generating isk from them as you would on the big corp. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
33
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:14:00 -
[465] - Quote
Or need a delay when you leave a corp, join another, and be able to engage in PC.
Don't really know, but it looks like an exploit (not an issue, sorry ;)) |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
270
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:17:00 -
[466] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote: We are currently thinking PI bonuses, POS fuel reduction, POS manufacturing bonus, and more but only for corporation and alliance members on the planet or the moons of that planet. Would love to hear more suggestions though.
Sweet! Now we're lookign at interesting things here.
- PI bonus: scales with nullsec PI scaling, making low truesec planets coveted. This is the best proposed bonus, as it scales with truesec.
- POS fuel reduction: if linked with the clone reserve mod, makes otherwise worthless frontier systems easier to defend on dust side while making them easier to fuel on EVE side.
- POS manufacturing bonus: absolutely lovely link to EVE. This could be related to specific reactions by planet, in order to make some planets coveted reaction POS planets. E.g. the POS manufacturing bonus for a specific reaction could be 500% so, that it makes sense to control that particular planet in order to make that particular reaction.
- Moon mineral yield increaser could be added. This would scale with the moons, becoming very valuable. The percentage should be minimal though, prehaps 5%. This mechanic would also allow for more vivid moon mineral market, as the valuable ones would be pumped with yield increasing planets first, and the next bottleneck would follow afterwards.
What about local faction standings increases for the owners and actions performed in that system. It could make it easier for players to improve their market effieciency and spin off side benefits. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
211
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:18:00 -
[467] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Or need a delay when you leave a corp, join another, and be able to engage in PC.
Don't really know, but it looks like an exploit (not an issue, sorry ;))
Yep, it needs some looking at.
Solution1: let corps buy as many clones as they want and attack as many districts as they want in the first day, to put all on equal footing not requiring split corps. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
33
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:19:00 -
[468] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Or need a delay when you leave a corp, join another, and be able to engage in PC.
Don't really know, but it looks like an exploit (not an issue, sorry ;)) Yep, it needs some looking at. Solution1: let corps buy as many clones as they want and attack as many districts as they want in the first day, to put all on equal footing not requiring split corps. The quality over quantity issue is better addressed by making a few planets 100 times more valuable than others by Dust-EVE planet value mechanics, making them the elite playground.
Don't know if this is the solution, but it needs at least a simulation... |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
262
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:21:00 -
[469] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote: There is, regional bottleneck systems and travel mechanics. Also, which would you prefer?
10x 16man corp able to defend during one hour timeframe daily, flipping with 1000 initial clones from day one and starting with 10 districts
1x 160man corp flipping with 100 initial clones, starting with one district
^ The obvious winner is the 10 corps, because their initial pace is 10 times more and they can set defense to keep a few places daily with small numbers. The 10 corps will have 10 times the initial clone production as opposed to the one corp.
This is why the 100 clone cap needs to go IMHO. It makes no sense to have a big corp in the beginning, in relation to this. Corps can be merged by giving off the districts when there is spare time, in the meanwhile you are generating isk from them as you would on the big corp.
Okay, you're getting more realistic now - yes a 16 man corp may be able to adequately defend a planet every single day. However, that is still a separate corp. You couldn't count all the clones of 10 separate corps as one total for the big corp because you'd have 10 * 100 clones, not 1 * 1000. That's not a corporation, that's effectively an alliance.
In order to eventually become one big corp again, the main corp would have to attack 9 districts - in order to produce that many clones you're talking probably 18 days, depending on attrition for how spread out all those districts are. In that time you may also lose many clones from being attacked by other corps and your fake corps may also lose their districts too.
Your numbers are slowly wittling down and eventually you will see that what you are concerned about isn't realistic. |
Kovinis Sparagas
Final Fortress Happy Tree Fiends
60
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:22:00 -
[470] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Muchomojo wrote:Will we have access these districts outside of battle? Would it be logical that the defender has some sort of advantage in terms of knowing the terrain etc? Not at this time no. But t would be really cool to walk in terrain outside battle... It will be more open world, than just battle arena
And why I cant walk in my own territory? Do I not own this land?
P.S. GREAT stuff with planetary conquest! looking forward to it! |
|
Oxskull Duncarino
Shadow Company HQ
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:23:00 -
[471] - Quote
bolsh lee wrote:How will attacks during the Reinforcement timer work? Can someone set an attack to hit 1 minute before the timer ends? Or does the attack need to be completed at a certain time before the 1-hour period is up? If you attack before the 1 hour Reinforcement Phase, the actual battle doesn't happen till 24 hours have passed and the next Reinforcement Phase happens. By attacking before the Reinforcement Phase you can battle the next day.
If you attack after the Reinforcement Phase the actual battle won't happen till 24 hours have passed and you come to the next Reinforcement Phase, so the actual battle could be nearly 2 days after the attack started.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest
Attack Scenario 01:
Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Attacker launches an attack at 11:00 on Monday Defending district set as "under attack" Battle happens in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Tuesday
Attack Scenario 02:
Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Attacker launches an attack at 14:00 on Monday Defending district set as "under attack" Battle happens in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Wednesday |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
211
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:31:00 -
[472] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:trollsroyce wrote: There is, regional bottleneck systems and travel mechanics. Also, which would you prefer?
10x 16man corp able to defend during one hour timeframe daily, flipping with 1000 initial clones from day one and starting with 10 districts
1x 160man corp flipping with 100 initial clones, starting with one district
^ The obvious winner is the 10 corps, because their initial pace is 10 times more and they can set defense to keep a few places daily with small numbers. The 10 corps will have 10 times the initial clone production as opposed to the one corp.
This is why the 100 clone cap needs to go IMHO. It makes no sense to have a big corp in the beginning, in relation to this. Corps can be merged by giving off the districts when there is spare time, in the meanwhile you are generating isk from them as you would on the big corp.
Okay, you're getting more realistic now - yes a 16 man corp may be able to adequately defend a planet every single day. However, that is still a separate corp. You couldn't count all the clones of 10 separate corps as one total for the big corp because you'd have 10 * 100 clones, not 1 * 1000. That's not a corporation, that's effectively an alliance. In order to eventually become one big corp again, the main corp would have to attack 9 districts - in order to produce that many clones you're talking probably 18 days, depending on attrition for how spread out all those districts are. In that time you may also lose many clones from being attacked by other corps and your fake corps may also lose their districts too. Your numbers are slowly wittling down and eventually you will see that what you are concerned about isn't realistic.
You are missing the obvious scenario of taking a 10x lead start in clone production by splitting into 10 corps, as opposed to slowly growing. This is a massive advantage, and there is no reason to start off 10x slower than you could by splitting. Corp mergers will happen by moving mercs between corps, selling clones off district and attacking with time frame play, giving easy access to the planets.
Now the thing gets viable by bottleneck systems allowing holding of these fortress regions from the external boundary. Give a month, and split corps will have taken a region, are sitting in bottlenecks making it impossible for external attack, and are slowly flipping over the planets inside deep region protection to form the megacorp.
Splitting is an artificial and utterly stupid mechanic, opposed to just doign the same thing with one corporation like intended. It still gives such a huge speed advantage to alliances it will be the way to expand, if this goes through as is. If you play a game of production and expansion, and have the choise to 10x your first weeks production speed and initial resources, you either take it or lose.
10x is of course just an arbitrary number. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
34
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:36:00 -
[473] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Django Quik wrote:trollsroyce wrote: There is, regional bottleneck systems and travel mechanics. Also, which would you prefer?
10x 16man corp able to defend during one hour timeframe daily, flipping with 1000 initial clones from day one and starting with 10 districts
1x 160man corp flipping with 100 initial clones, starting with one district
^ The obvious winner is the 10 corps, because their initial pace is 10 times more and they can set defense to keep a few places daily with small numbers. The 10 corps will have 10 times the initial clone production as opposed to the one corp.
This is why the 100 clone cap needs to go IMHO. It makes no sense to have a big corp in the beginning, in relation to this. Corps can be merged by giving off the districts when there is spare time, in the meanwhile you are generating isk from them as you would on the big corp.
Okay, you're getting more realistic now - yes a 16 man corp may be able to adequately defend a planet every single day. However, that is still a separate corp. You couldn't count all the clones of 10 separate corps as one total for the big corp because you'd have 10 * 100 clones, not 1 * 1000. That's not a corporation, that's effectively an alliance. In order to eventually become one big corp again, the main corp would have to attack 9 districts - in order to produce that many clones you're talking probably 18 days, depending on attrition for how spread out all those districts are. In that time you may also lose many clones from being attacked by other corps and your fake corps may also lose their districts too. Your numbers are slowly wittling down and eventually you will see that what you are concerned about isn't realistic. You are missing the obvious scenario of taking a 10x lead start in clone production by splitting into 10 corps, as opposed to slowly growing. This is a massive advantage, and there is no reason to start off 10x slower than you could by splitting. Corp mergers will happen by moving mercs between corps, selling clones off district and attacking with time frame play, giving easy access to the planets. Now the thing gets viable by bottleneck systems allowing holding of these fortress regions from the external boundary. Give a month, and split corps will have taken a region, are sitting in bottlenecks making it impossible for external attack, and are slowly flipping over the planets inside deep region protection to form the megacorp. Splitting is an artificial and utterly stupid mechanic, opposed to just doign the same thing with one corporation like intended. It still gives such a huge speed advantage to alliances it will be the way to expand, if this goes through as is. If you play a game of production and expansion, and have the choise to 10x your first weeks production speed and initial resources, you either take it or lose. 10x is of course just an arbitrary number.
You can produce, and sell any clone you want...
So take 10 district, day 1 sell 90% on 5 district, with the other 5, attack, capture, sell clones, attack, capture...
Ok we need 100 clones to attack each time, but it's realistic btw... |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
262
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:38:00 -
[474] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote: You are missing the obvious scenario of taking a 10x lead start in clone production by splitting into 10 corps, as opposed to slowly growing. This is a massive advantage, and there is no reason to start off 10x slower than you could by splitting. Corp mergers will happen by moving mercs between corps, selling clones off district and attacking with time frame play, giving easy access to the planets.
Now the thing gets viable by bottleneck systems allowing holding of these fortress regions from the external boundary. Give a month, and split corps will have taken a region, are sitting in bottlenecks making it impossible for external attack, and are slowly flipping over the planets inside deep region protection to form the megacorp.
Splitting is an artificial and utterly stupid mechanic, opposed to just doign the same thing with one corporation like intended. It still gives such a huge speed advantage to alliances it will be the way to expand, if this goes through as is. If you play a game of production and expansion, and have the choise to 10x your first weeks production speed and initial resources, you either take it or lose.
10x is of course just an arbitrary number.
Corp mergers won't work as you've suggested because even if the district is left empty, you still need an extra 100 clones to be able to claim it. You can't sell clones between corps, only back to Genolution, so your main corp would still be left with a slow initial clone production and it'd take around 18 days to get all of your corps 'merged' again.
If you use all your 10 mini-corps to take over an entire region of the map, that's great but it's still 10 corps in an effective alliance, not a megacorp. You won't be sharing your clones or your isk - eventually if you want to be a single corp again, you will have to go through and slowly attack each of those districts your mini-corps have taken.
As previously stated - in the meantime you also have to contend with other corps attacking you. Even if you manage to corner off a bottleneck region, someone could come into PC for the first time with their 100 clones and attack one of your districts wherever it may be. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
211
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:41:00 -
[475] - Quote
Edited above to include this: have an example of 1000 player corp and think what you want to do with one.
1) Start with 100 clones, 1000 idle mercs and 1 fight on day one, taking 1 district. 2) Split start with thousands of clones and dozens of fights on day one, taking dozens of districts which produce multiple times the clones you would from that one district.
Now figure how many of the corps will take option 1, especially when their district can be attacked day2 by a better corp and their 1000 players can't do jack **** about it as it relies on the 16 in match, as that's all that a corp can field, no matter the merc numbers.
Large corps are just better off splitting by all means. Which is not ideal. |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
257
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:43:00 -
[476] - Quote
I have corp X with 200 members.
Day of release each of my 10 directors create their own 1 man corps. Each of them and the "mother corp" takes a district (11 total)
The sub corps sell any created clones, the mother corp slowly builds clones and "buys out" each sub. (abandoned and instantly retaken by mother corp) If attacked the sub corps pulls in the mother corp to help defend.
corp will have 10 districts in 8 days... |
HowDidThatTaste
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
2316
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:44:00 -
[477] - Quote
And remember your split corps can remove their clones the day before the main corp expands into that district. Allowing no loss to the alt corp and no loss to the main corp cause all they have to do is put 100 clones in there to claim it. If another coro tries to swoop in and take it the battle in sues.
This makes having your 10 smaller corps the advanced conquerers, then each day the main corp comes in behind the smaller corps as they abondon the district and keep advancing. The main coro is just acquiring each district that was left abondoned the day before.
And the corps would require 3 mercs so they could pull in the rest from the main corp as battles are required |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
165
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:47:00 -
[478] - Quote
Oxskull Duncarino wrote:If you attack before the 1 hour Reinforcement Phase, the actual battle doesn't happen till 24 hours have passed and the next Reinforcement Phase happens. By attacking before the Reinforcement Phase you can battle the next day. If you attack after the Reinforcement Phase the actual battle won't happen till 24 hours have passed and you come to the next Reinforcement Phase, so the actual battle could be nearly 2 days after the attack started. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_ConquestAttack Scenario 01: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Attacker launches an attack at 11:00 on Monday Defending district set as "under attack" Battle happens in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Tuesday Attack Scenario 02: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Attacker launches an attack at 14:00 on Monday Defending district set as "under attack" Battle happens in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Wednesday
The question, which is mine too, is if a corp can decide to have the attack actually start to take place 1 minute prior to that reinforcement timer ending (it's understood they must set the attack 24hours+ beforehand), or if the entire battle must be completed before that 1-hour window is up, meaning the latest you could safely set the beginning of the attack for would be with about 25 minutes left in the window. |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
421
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:51:00 -
[479] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:The question, which is mine too, is if a corp can decide to have the attack actually start to take place 1 minute prior to that reinforcement timer ending (it's understood they must set the attack 24hours+ beforehand), or if the entire battle must be completed before that 1-hour window is up, meaning the latest you could safely set the beginning of the attack for would be with about 25 minutes left in the window. You don't set the time yourself. It's randomly chosen within the 1-hour window. And I think it can start in the last minute of the window.
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
34
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:52:00 -
[480] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:trollsroyce wrote: You are missing the obvious scenario of taking a 10x lead start in clone production by splitting into 10 corps, as opposed to slowly growing. This is a massive advantage, and there is no reason to start off 10x slower than you could by splitting. Corp mergers will happen by moving mercs between corps, selling clones off district and attacking with time frame play, giving easy access to the planets.
Now the thing gets viable by bottleneck systems allowing holding of these fortress regions from the external boundary. Give a month, and split corps will have taken a region, are sitting in bottlenecks making it impossible for external attack, and are slowly flipping over the planets inside deep region protection to form the megacorp.
Splitting is an artificial and utterly stupid mechanic, opposed to just doign the same thing with one corporation like intended. It still gives such a huge speed advantage to alliances it will be the way to expand, if this goes through as is. If you play a game of production and expansion, and have the choise to 10x your first weeks production speed and initial resources, you either take it or lose.
10x is of course just an arbitrary number.
Corp mergers won't work as you've suggested because even if the district is left empty, you still need an extra 100 clones to be able to claim it. You can't sell clones between corps, only back to Genolution, so your main corp would still be left with a slow initial clone production and it'd take around 18 days to get all of your corps 'merged' again. If you use all your 10 mini-corps to take over an entire region of the map, that's great but it's still 10 corps in an effective alliance, not a megacorp. You won't be sharing your clones or your isk - eventually if you want to be a single corp again, you will have to go through and slowly attack each of those districts your mini-corps have taken. As previously stated - in the meantime you also have to contend with other corps attacking you. Even if you manage to corner off a bottleneck region, someone could come into PC for the first time with their 100 clones and attack one of your districts wherever it may be.
Ok, let's do this with 5...
Take 5 guys, give them 30M each. They take 3-4 more active guys... They create a new corp. With 5 corp + 1 mother corp, take 6 circle district on the same planet on day 1. 1 fake corp sell clone day 1, mother corp and others produce. Day 2, mother corp attack and capture the selling fake corp. Others produce. Day 3, 1 fake corp sell clone, mother corp with 2 distric produce and others. Day 4, mother corp attack and capture the selling fake corp. Others produce. Day 5, mother corp produce with 3 districts, or and here is the best, the first fake corp took buy mother corp send reinforcement to first mother corp district...
Do you see what I try to explain ? (and sorry for my english, i use the easiest to be sure I'm understandable)
You produce on your fake corp, ok they can be attack, but they produce, and ringers are available. The only weak district during 2 days, is the first mother's one. But if some people here played Travian, it we won't be a problem for some players to plan this.
Edit : forgot the step where you need to set the reinforcement timer day 1 for each district, so they're lock and they produce !!! Easy to set this up... |
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
211
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:52:00 -
[481] - Quote
HowDidThatTaste wrote:And remember your split corps can remove their clones the day before the main corp expands into that district. Allowing no loss to the alt corp and no loss to the main corp cause all they have to do is put 100 clones in there to claim it. If another coro tries to swoop in and take it the battle in sues.
This makes having your 10 smaller corps the advanced conquerers, then each day the main corp comes in behind the smaller corps as they abondon the district and keep advancing. The main coro is just acquiring each district that was left abondoned the day before.
And the corps would require 3 mercs so they could pull in the rest from the main corp as battles are required
As a side product you can drop 1 player to afk "defend" the districts from the flip. This gives you double the salvage officer loot random generator (nullsec was mentioned to have a better chance of rare loot bonus in a devblog), and some exp, for not fighting a battle. |
Kovinis Sparagas
Final Fortress Happy Tree Fiends
60
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:52:00 -
[482] - Quote
Kaeralli Sturmovos wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Jack Sharkey42 wrote:Two questions;
1. Will we be able to name our own districts or change their names or anything like that?
2. Will defender or attackers have the option to withdraw or surrender to avoid continued loss of clones in a fight? No and no although both of those are ideas we have in our head and are thinking about. please let us be able to name things and hopefully with some sort of item you have to buy to change it. it would make for a great insult for our enemies.
Yeah you can change the name with AUR - more income for CCP and not a game changer or Pay 2 Win. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
34
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:54:00 -
[483] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:HowDidThatTaste wrote:And remember your split corps can remove their clones the day before the main corp expands into that district. Allowing no loss to the alt corp and no loss to the main corp cause all they have to do is put 100 clones in there to claim it. If another coro tries to swoop in and take it the battle in sues.
This makes having your 10 smaller corps the advanced conquerers, then each day the main corp comes in behind the smaller corps as they abondon the district and keep advancing. The main coro is just acquiring each district that was left abondoned the day before.
And the corps would require 3 mercs so they could pull in the rest from the main corp as battles are required As a side product you can drop 1 player to afk "defend" the districts from the flip. This gives you double the salvage officer loot random generator (nullsec was mentioned to have a better chance of rare loot bonus in a devblog), and some exp, for not fighting a battle.
Exploit spot, now I'm sure ;) !!! |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
262
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:57:00 -
[484] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:I have corp X with 200 members.
Day of release each of my 10 directors create their own 1 man corps. Each of them and the "mother corp" takes a district (11 total)
The sub corps sell any created clones, the mother corp slowly builds clones and "buys out" each sub. (abandoned and instantly retaken by mother corp) If attacked the sub corps pulls in the mother corp to help defend.
corp will have 10 districts in 8 days...
at least i think?????? or can you only take 1 district a day?
There's nothing to stop another corp jumping in on your sub-corp's land. You may be able to bring in enough people to fight the battle and win but the attacker can keep attacking every day, as long as they have the clones to do so. I predict there will be very little peace in PC.
Anyone know how many corps exist right now? |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
165
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:01:00 -
[485] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:The question, which is mine too, is if a corp can decide to have the attack actually start to take place 1 minute prior to that reinforcement timer ending (it's understood they must set the attack 24hours+ beforehand), or if the entire battle must be completed before that 1-hour window is up, meaning the latest you could safely set the beginning of the attack for would be with about 25 minutes left in the window. You don't set the time yourself. It's randomly chosen within the 1-hour window. And I think it can start in the last minute of the window.
Just what I wanted to know. Where did you get that information? I don't remember that on the wiki page. |
HowDidThatTaste
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
2316
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:05:00 -
[486] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:I have corp X with 200 members.
Day of release each of my 10 directors create their own 1 man corps. Each of them and the "mother corp" takes a district (11 total)
The sub corps sell any created clones, the mother corp slowly builds clones and "buys out" each sub. (abandoned and instantly retaken by mother corp) If attacked the sub corps pulls in the mother corp to help defend.
corp will have 10 districts in 8 days...
at least i think?????? or can you only take 1 district a day? There's nothing to stop another corp jumping in on your sub-corp's land. You may be able to bring in enough people to fight the battle and win but the attacker can keep attacking every day, as long as they have the clones to do so. I predict there will be very little peace in PC. Anyone know how many corps exist right now?
I imagine the mother corp would come in and dominate those that took advantage of the smaller corp so the smaller corp may loose here and the but the main force is a few districts away and now holds a grudge |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
211
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:08:00 -
[487] - Quote
It'll be cluttered, sorry about this as im poasting bored from work. So, solutions in this gap...
Solution 1: Remove clone and attack limits from corps to even the gold rush playground. Better than promoting split corp advance.
Solution 2: Rethink the timers. Defender set timers are not good in the first attack, instead, the offender should be given first shot. So, free attack time for first offense, AFTER THAT the district goes to reinforce timer set by defender. This makes it slightly harder to play with the flipping timers and clone removal using sold clones as fast flip mechanic. Issue with this is that defense needs to have an advantage, not offense.
Sub solution 2.1: To give defenders an intrinsic advantage, they have all the null cannons in the start of every fight (obvious really). Make defender null cannons do more damage than attacker (targeting facilities). First reinforce timer has a boosted clone reproduction, to offset the initial attack that can result in no show defense because of timezones.
Solution 3: make corporation size affect the number of clones you can purchase from NPC and number of districts you can attack, e.g. 1 clone per member, 1 attack per 100 members daily. Better than solution 1, but has issues with numbers game.
Subsolution 3.1: Planet worth gives an edge to elite mercenary outfits, that can control the really valuable ones. Reinforce planet worth differences! Stacking district mods that affect eve moon mineral harvesting and PI are one solution; having 24 districts to boost mineral yield from would make some planets very coveted and fought over, and only controllable by the best of the best. You could rent the boosts to EVE alliances. |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
257
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:13:00 -
[488] - Quote
HowDidThatTaste wrote:Django Quik wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:I have corp X with 200 members.
Day of release each of my 10 directors create their own 1 man corps. Each of them and the "mother corp" takes a district (11 total)
The sub corps sell any created clones, the mother corp slowly builds clones and "buys out" each sub. (abandoned and instantly retaken by mother corp) If attacked the sub corps pulls in the mother corp to help defend.
corp will have 10 districts in 8 days...
at least i think?????? or can you only take 1 district a day? There's nothing to stop another corp jumping in on your sub-corp's land. You may be able to bring in enough people to fight the battle and win but the attacker can keep attacking every day, as long as they have the clones to do so. I predict there will be very little peace in PC. Anyone know how many corps exist right now? I imagine the mother corp would come in and dominate those that took advantage of the smaller corp so the smaller corp may loose here and the but the main force is a few districts away and now holds a grudge
This is in the first few days, people wont be able to keep up a sustained attack. By the time they can the mother corp will be in control |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
262
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:15:00 -
[489] - Quote
HowDidThatTaste wrote:Django Quik wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:I have corp X with 200 members.
Day of release each of my 10 directors create their own 1 man corps. Each of them and the "mother corp" takes a district (11 total)
The sub corps sell any created clones, the mother corp slowly builds clones and "buys out" each sub. (abandoned and instantly retaken by mother corp) If attacked the sub corps pulls in the mother corp to help defend.
corp will have 10 districts in 8 days...
at least i think?????? or can you only take 1 district a day? There's nothing to stop another corp jumping in on your sub-corp's land. You may be able to bring in enough people to fight the battle and win but the attacker can keep attacking every day, as long as they have the clones to do so. I predict there will be very little peace in PC. Anyone know how many corps exist right now? I imagine the mother corp would come in and dominate those that took advantage of the smaller corp so the smaller corp may loose here and the but the main force is a few districts away and now holds a grudge
Just having a mother corp in the wings doesn't mean anything. The attackers may have been another of the big corps and even if not, they may still be very good players. What you'll be needing is clones (as opposed to mercs) and there is no way to get lots of them quickly (max 60 per district per day if you're lucky).
I envisage a mad land grab on day 1 in which every district goes. Every corp will have just 1 district and will fight like hell to keep it, while every corp that didn't manage to get one will be battling like hell to get one. If you're lucky enough to not be attacked in the first few days, you might just be able to produce enough clones to be able to attack someone else next door to you in 2 days but that's no guarantee of winning. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
211
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:23:00 -
[490] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:
I envisage a mad land grab on day 1 in which every district goes. Every corp will have just 1 district and will fight like hell to keep it, while every corp that didn't manage to get one will be battling like hell to get one. If you're lucky enough to not be attacked in the first few days, you might just be able to produce enough clones to be able to attack someone else next door to you in 2 days but that's no guarantee of winning.
I envisage the bigger corps split into multiple smaller ones to take multiple districts at neighboring systems initially. They will be on the same line with 16 members as the 1000 member corp from day one, since the battle is only going to be 16vs16. These split corps will expand to take over a region with its bottleneck systems, pushing everyone else out and holding it. The mother corp will slowly flip the burgers and hold the region afterwards. While they do the flipping, they simultaneously gain tons of isk from clone production as opposed to the 1000 man corp sitting on one district and expanding slowly.
The 1000 players in unexpanded corp will afk farm pubs in insane boredom. Morale will shatter, as the A-team of 16 players gets picked for every fight and the core member gets to fight once during the first month, if lucky. The 1000 man corp will disband or move to steamrolling FW, wishing they had done the corp split exploit like the entities now holding all of nullsec in a blue donut.
|
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
263
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:27:00 -
[491] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Django Quik wrote:
I envisage a mad land grab on day 1 in which every district goes. Every corp will have just 1 district and will fight like hell to keep it, while every corp that didn't manage to get one will be battling like hell to get one. If you're lucky enough to not be attacked in the first few days, you might just be able to produce enough clones to be able to attack someone else next door to you in 2 days but that's no guarantee of winning.
I envisage the bigger corps split into multiple smaller ones to take multiple districts at neighboring systems initially. They will be on the same line with 16 members as the 1000 member corp from day one, since the battle is only going to be 16vs16. These split corps will expand to take over a region with its bottleneck systems, pushing everyone else out and holding it. The mother corp will slowly flip the burgers and hold the region afterwards. While they do the flipping, they simultaneously gain tons of isk from clone production as opposed to the 1000 man corp sitting on one district and expanding slowly. The 1000 players in unexpanded corp will afk farm pubs in insane boredom. Morale will shatter, as the A-team of 16 players gets picked for every fight and the core member gets to fight once during the first month, if lucky. The 1000 man corp will disband or move to steamrolling FW, wishing they had done the corp split exploit like the entities now holding all of nullsec in a blue donut.
Won't happen because there will be constant attacks on all districts, even in bottleneck systems. You won't be safe. |
Soozu
5o1st
16
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:31:00 -
[492] - Quote
There is some flawed logic in the splitting up a corp scenario.
For one, there might be a long line of people lining up to attack the sub corps districts, who is to say the "mothercorp" will even get a chance to attack? There are well over a 1000 corps and only 250 districts to start. Not only will there be a mad dash to grab land but all out war before corps can produce and stockpile clones.
Two, if a sub corp sells its clones for profit instead of saving them, anyone can swoop in and grab it on day two or three, it's easy prey.
Three, the mothercorp must bring 100 clones to battle to take the sub corp's land, meanwhile, they too are under attack and defending. Remember, they can't purchase them once they own a district, but must produce them.
Maybe someone could make it work if they stomped the field and demolished their own attackers, but I just don't see it as feasible or easy. The 100 clones max per corp (that must be lost to boot) is a great fail-safe. Allowing any number to be purchased as suggested??? Crazy talk... sways all favour to large and rich corps. |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
257
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:40:00 -
[493] - Quote
Soozu wrote:There is some flawed logic in the splitting up a corp scenario.
For one, there might be a long line of people lining up to attack the sub corps districts, who is to say the "mothercorp" will even get a chance to attack? There are well over a 1000 corps and only 250 districts to start. Not only will there be a mad dash to grab land but all out war before corps can produce and stockpile clones.
Two, if a sub corp sells its clones for profit instead of saving them, anyone can swoop in and grab it on day two or three, it's easy prey.
Three, the mothercorp must bring 100 clones to battle to take the sub corp's land, meanwhile, they too are under attack and defending. Remember, they can't purchase them once they own a district, but must produce them.
Maybe someone could make it work if they stomped the field and demolished their own attackers, but I just don't see it as feasible or easy. The 100 clones max per corp (that must be lost to boot) is a great fail-safe. Allowing any number to be purchased as suggested??? Crazy talk... sways all favour to large and rich corps.
There is only an hour window to attack, each day, and all those corps have to save up clones to attack too
The corps that start getting large clone numbers are going to start steam rolling the little guys |
martinofski
Rebelles A Quebec
31
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:44:00 -
[494] - Quote
So after a week playing skirmish, I'll get the chance to play a 16vs16 skirmish over a district, exactly like a Corp battle with twice the Mercs in it. I understand we might win or lose the district, but not sure I want to play skirmish for the next year.
I am exited about FW and PC too , but I sure hope there will be more content regarding game modes, maps, installation and such. Being able to call installation in your district to defend the various "point of interest" would make the defending team able to prepare a incoming fight better against a Top ranked corp you know you wouldn't get a chance other than crazy defence preparation.
I know I am not playing as much as most right now, and I will never have the time to do so. I am just afraid PC wont be for me since I will : get attacked when I can't play or get into fights why Corps which are already owning everything (and we know who they will be).
Will it feel more "with a purpose" then the actual corp battle? I know it will have more purpose, but will the merc will fell it?
You said we are going to see this happen later, and we would learn about when later. Does that mean we will have to wait until it is release to know when it is going to be released?
I am concerned. What's the next devblog about so we can get hyped. Look at all the guess we made in the other topic, those are people wishes. Can we expect some of those "wishes" to be in there at the same time as FW and PC? |
Halador Osiris
Dead Six Initiative
63
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:44:00 -
[495] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Jack Sharkey42 wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Gridboss wrote:How is initial ownership of districts decided? Is it whoever plants a flag first gets it at the beginning? First corporation to buy a pack of clones from Genolution and place them on a district get it. Behold the maddest of the mad scrambles! Pretty much this. Going to be interesting. Sounds like something I've heard of before. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:46:00 -
[496] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:Soozu wrote:There is some flawed logic in the splitting up a corp scenario.
For one, there might be a long line of people lining up to attack the sub corps districts, who is to say the "mothercorp" will even get a chance to attack? There are well over a 1000 corps and only 250 districts to start. Not only will there be a mad dash to grab land but all out war before corps can produce and stockpile clones.
Two, if a sub corp sells its clones for profit instead of saving them, anyone can swoop in and grab it on day two or three, it's easy prey.
Three, the mothercorp must bring 100 clones to battle to take the sub corp's land, meanwhile, they too are under attack and defending. Remember, they can't purchase them once they own a district, but must produce them.
Maybe someone could make it work if they stomped the field and demolished their own attackers, but I just don't see it as feasible or easy. The 100 clones max per corp (that must be lost to boot) is a great fail-safe. Allowing any number to be purchased as suggested??? Crazy talk... sways all favour to large and rich corps. There is only an hour window to attack, each day, and all those corps have to save up clones to attack too The corps that start getting large clone numbers are going to start steam rolling the little guys
Anyone can buy the starter pack of 100 clones and launch an attack in 24 hours on any district. There'll be 750 corps with no districts who will want one because it will be the new thing to do. That's 3 corps wanting to attack every 1 district that's already owned.
I repeat - there will be no peace. You will be lucky to be making any extra clones ever. |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
257
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:50:00 -
[497] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:Soozu wrote:There is some flawed logic in the splitting up a corp scenario.
For one, there might be a long line of people lining up to attack the sub corps districts, who is to say the "mothercorp" will even get a chance to attack? There are well over a 1000 corps and only 250 districts to start. Not only will there be a mad dash to grab land but all out war before corps can produce and stockpile clones.
Two, if a sub corp sells its clones for profit instead of saving them, anyone can swoop in and grab it on day two or three, it's easy prey.
Three, the mothercorp must bring 100 clones to battle to take the sub corp's land, meanwhile, they too are under attack and defending. Remember, they can't purchase them once they own a district, but must produce them.
Maybe someone could make it work if they stomped the field and demolished their own attackers, but I just don't see it as feasible or easy. The 100 clones max per corp (that must be lost to boot) is a great fail-safe. Allowing any number to be purchased as suggested??? Crazy talk... sways all favour to large and rich corps. There is only an hour window to attack, each day, and all those corps have to save up clones to attack too The corps that start getting large clone numbers are going to start steam rolling the little guys Anyone can buy the starter pack of 100 clones and launch an attack in 24 hours on any district. There'll be 750 corps with no districts who will want one because it will be the new thing to do. That's 3 corps wanting to attack every 1 district that's already owned. I repeat - there will be no peace. You will be lucky to be making any extra clones ever.
It wont be even, some districts will be missed, some corp will get ahead and then out produce the others.
|
Soozu
5o1st
17
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:52:00 -
[498] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:Soozu wrote:There is some flawed logic in the splitting up a corp scenario.
For one, there might be a long line of people lining up to attack the sub corps districts, who is to say the "mothercorp" will even get a chance to attack? There are well over a 1000 corps and only 250 districts to start. Not only will there be a mad dash to grab land but all out war before corps can produce and stockpile clones.
Two, if a sub corp sells its clones for profit instead of saving them, anyone can swoop in and grab it on day two or three, it's easy prey.
Three, the mothercorp must bring 100 clones to battle to take the sub corp's land, meanwhile, they too are under attack and defending. Remember, they can't purchase them once they own a district, but must produce them.
Maybe someone could make it work if they stomped the field and demolished their own attackers, but I just don't see it as feasible or easy. The 100 clones max per corp (that must be lost to boot) is a great fail-safe. Allowing any number to be purchased as suggested??? Crazy talk... sways all favour to large and rich corps. There is only an hour window to attack, each day, and all those corps have to save up clones to attack too The corps that start getting large clone numbers are going to start steam rolling the little guys Anyone can buy the starter pack of 100 clones and launch an attack in 24 hours on any district. There'll be 750 corps with no districts who will want one because it will be the new thing to do. That's 3 corps wanting to attack every 1 district that's already owned. I repeat - there will be no peace. You will be lucky to be making any extra clones ever.
Ahh I step away from the computer and you beat me to the proper reply. Which was that.^^
|
martinofski
Rebelles A Quebec
31
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:52:00 -
[499] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:
Anyone can buy the starter pack of 100 clones and launch an attack in 24 hours on any district. There'll be 750 corps with no districts who will want one because it will be the new thing to do. That's 3 corps wanting to attack every 1 district that's already owned.
I repeat - there will be no peace. You will be lucky to be making any extra clones ever.
Dust will never settle down until there is more Districts than Corporation.
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
34
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:54:00 -
[500] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:Soozu wrote:There is some flawed logic in the splitting up a corp scenario.
For one, there might be a long line of people lining up to attack the sub corps districts, who is to say the "mothercorp" will even get a chance to attack? There are well over a 1000 corps and only 250 districts to start. Not only will there be a mad dash to grab land but all out war before corps can produce and stockpile clones.
Two, if a sub corp sells its clones for profit instead of saving them, anyone can swoop in and grab it on day two or three, it's easy prey.
Three, the mothercorp must bring 100 clones to battle to take the sub corp's land, meanwhile, they too are under attack and defending. Remember, they can't purchase them once they own a district, but must produce them.
Maybe someone could make it work if they stomped the field and demolished their own attackers, but I just don't see it as feasible or easy. The 100 clones max per corp (that must be lost to boot) is a great fail-safe. Allowing any number to be purchased as suggested??? Crazy talk... sways all favour to large and rich corps. There is only an hour window to attack, each day, and all those corps have to save up clones to attack too The corps that start getting large clone numbers are going to start steam rolling the little guys Anyone can buy the starter pack of 100 clones and launch an attack in 24 hours on any district. There'll be 750 corps with no districts who will want one because it will be the new thing to do. That's 3 corps wanting to attack every 1 district that's already owned. I repeat - there will be no peace. You will be lucky to be making any extra clones ever.
No no no...
You take a district, and you set the reinforcement timer --> the district is lock for 24h. Just need to sync it well, as in Travian with sync attack ;) !! No one will attack us, except us ;) !!!
|
|
Sentient Archon
Red Star.
804
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:55:00 -
[501] - Quote
A quick question about the player owned districts;- will they be in 0.0 or will we have some in high sec? |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
257
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:55:00 -
[502] - Quote
Sentient Archon wrote:A quick question about the player owned districts;- will they be in 0.0 or will we have some in high sec?
A single lowsec region |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
421
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:57:00 -
[503] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:No no no...
You take a district, and you set the reinforcement timer --> the district is lock for 24h. Just need to sync it well, as in Travian with sync attack ;) !! No one will attack us, except us ;) !!!
It can still be attacked if it's locked.
Edit: The only way for a district to not get attacked is to be under attack from someone else. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
264
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:58:00 -
[504] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:Django Quik wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:Soozu wrote:There is some flawed logic in the splitting up a corp scenario.
For one, there might be a long line of people lining up to attack the sub corps districts, who is to say the "mothercorp" will even get a chance to attack? There are well over a 1000 corps and only 250 districts to start. Not only will there be a mad dash to grab land but all out war before corps can produce and stockpile clones.
Two, if a sub corp sells its clones for profit instead of saving them, anyone can swoop in and grab it on day two or three, it's easy prey.
Three, the mothercorp must bring 100 clones to battle to take the sub corp's land, meanwhile, they too are under attack and defending. Remember, they can't purchase them once they own a district, but must produce them.
Maybe someone could make it work if they stomped the field and demolished their own attackers, but I just don't see it as feasible or easy. The 100 clones max per corp (that must be lost to boot) is a great fail-safe. Allowing any number to be purchased as suggested??? Crazy talk... sways all favour to large and rich corps. There is only an hour window to attack, each day, and all those corps have to save up clones to attack too The corps that start getting large clone numbers are going to start steam rolling the little guys Anyone can buy the starter pack of 100 clones and launch an attack in 24 hours on any district. There'll be 750 corps with no districts who will want one because it will be the new thing to do. That's 3 corps wanting to attack every 1 district that's already owned. I repeat - there will be no peace. You will be lucky to be making any extra clones ever. It wont be even, some districts will be missed, some corp will get ahead and then out produce the others.
Eventually the bigger corps will be dominating, just as they do in pub games atm but no one corp will dominate entirely. When it eventually gets to the point of the big corps dominating, they will be fighting amongst themselves too. There will be no chance to out-produce each other. |
Sentient Archon
Red Star.
804
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:58:00 -
[505] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:Sentient Archon wrote:A quick question about the player owned districts;- will they be in 0.0 or will we have some in high sec? A single lowsec region
Thank You! Will there be any docking stations for the Eve pilots? It would be really nice to me to have a ship and a jump clone there. |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
270
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:02:00 -
[506] - Quote
One bonus that planetary ownership could do is increase alchemy rates of moon materials, to the point where local moons become amazingly productive. |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
258
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:03:00 -
[507] - Quote
Sentient Archon wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:Sentient Archon wrote:A quick question about the player owned districts;- will they be in 0.0 or will we have some in high sec? A single lowsec region Thank You! Will there be any docking stations for the Eve pilots? It would be really nice to me to have a ship and a jump clone there.
Will have to be neutral space (no FW) so yes, tho you might have to tweak your standings if you want a jump clone |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
34
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:04:00 -
[508] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:Django Quik wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:Soozu wrote:There is some flawed logic in the splitting up a corp scenario.
For one, there might be a long line of people lining up to attack the sub corps districts, who is to say the "mothercorp" will even get a chance to attack? There are well over a 1000 corps and only 250 districts to start. Not only will there be a mad dash to grab land but all out war before corps can produce and stockpile clones.
Two, if a sub corp sells its clones for profit instead of saving them, anyone can swoop in and grab it on day two or three, it's easy prey.
Three, the mothercorp must bring 100 clones to battle to take the sub corp's land, meanwhile, they too are under attack and defending. Remember, they can't purchase them once they own a district, but must produce them.
Maybe someone could make it work if they stomped the field and demolished their own attackers, but I just don't see it as feasible or easy. The 100 clones max per corp (that must be lost to boot) is a great fail-safe. Allowing any number to be purchased as suggested??? Crazy talk... sways all favour to large and rich corps. There is only an hour window to attack, each day, and all those corps have to save up clones to attack too The corps that start getting large clone numbers are going to start steam rolling the little guys Anyone can buy the starter pack of 100 clones and launch an attack in 24 hours on any district. There'll be 750 corps with no districts who will want one because it will be the new thing to do. That's 3 corps wanting to attack every 1 district that's already owned. I repeat - there will be no peace. You will be lucky to be making any extra clones ever. It wont be even, some districts will be missed, some corp will get ahead and then out produce the others. Eventually the bigger corps will be dominating, just as they do in pub games atm but no one corp will dominate entirely. When it eventually gets to the point of the big corps dominating, they will be fighting amongst themselves too. There will be no chance to out-produce each other.
Ok, won't be able to dominate everything, but possible idea to get a good start... |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
258
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:05:00 -
[509] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:No no no...
You take a district, and you set the reinforcement timer --> the district is lock for 24h. Just need to sync it well, as in Travian with sync attack ;) !! No one will attack us, except us ;) !!!
It can still be attacked if it's locked. Edit: The only way for a district to not get attacked is to be under attack from someone else.
1 hr attack window per day |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
421
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:08:00 -
[510] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:Bendtner92 wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:No no no...
You take a district, and you set the reinforcement timer --> the district is lock for 24h. Just need to sync it well, as in Travian with sync attack ;) !! No one will attack us, except us ;) !!!
It can still be attacked if it's locked. Edit: The only way for a district to not get attacked is to be under attack from someone else. 1 hr attack window per day Yes, I know but I think Gloo Gloo meant that if he changed the reinforcement window the district couldn't be attacked for 24 hours. I think that's what he meant at least.
|
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
211
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:11:00 -
[511] - Quote
Contest this thought, please: GÇó ringers are allowed GÇó you don't need to flip districts for mother corp GÇó mother corp just means the ringer community for split corps
GÇó results in that splitting corp ONLY expands possibilities, gives more attack chances, and speeds clone production to attack. why flip them for one corp? make a swam of corps, its even thief and disband proof.
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
270
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:13:00 -
[512] - Quote
If anyone still reading is not an Eve player...
One thing that DUST players may not know about eve is that the linkage between planets and space goes through POCOs. So even if a DUST corp manages to control a few systems worth of districts, someone will also have to protect these fairly weak (has no guns) structures.
What does this mean?
Well, POCOs are basically shipping stations that set tax rates on goods shipped from the surface of a planet, and if they aren't on the planet, producers on the surface can only export in very small and expensive amounts that are fairly easy to steal. So say you have 4-5 different groups battling on a planet, and 3-4 big investors harvesting off of that planet. The Customs Office has just one owner. He is setting the tax rates of anything coming off that planet. Too high, and people won't make money, if its too low, he could be missing out on profits, but will likely draw many more producers.
The more productive a planet gets from Eve PI, the more attractive it gets to attack the POCO and its users. And it becomes THE place that the industrialists will be going to to pick up their goods. So what we will be looking at likely, is escorts for industrial ships picking up PI materials at these POCOs, since pilots will know where they will be and that their cargo could be very valuable (100s of millions in isk in fairly weak ships).
So as stacked advantages on the EVE side of Planetary Infrastructure happens, unless they have some sort of defensive impact on POCOs, you will need a group of pilots to match the strength and ability of your ground force if you want to fully reap the benefits of your ground dominance.
So to me this means it may be just as advantageous to spread yourself out a bit if you have the ability so that you can be diversified in terms of POCO owners and not beholden to the politics of a single planetary tax.
So I haven't seen much talk in Eve about this, but I'm guessing that once this really starts to trickle in, and the Region is announced all temperate POCOs in those systems will be targets. |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
259
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:20:00 -
[513] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Contest this thought, please: GÇó ringers are allowed GÇó you don't need to flip districts for mother corp GÇó mother corp just means the ringer community for split corps
GÇó results in that splitting corp ONLY expands possibilities, gives more attack chances, and speeds clone production to attack. why flip them for one corp? make a swam of corps, its even thief and disband proof.
You cant transfer clones between corps so each would be even until one produces more. 1 corp with 1 district (no upgrades) can attack once every 3 days (40Cl a day, 100Cl needed). 1 corp with 3 districts can attack everyday with spare.
Its economically and tactically better to have more districts as you can attack, and enforce your own districts, more effectively. But you need to have more districts which is how this convo started |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
259
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:28:00 -
[514] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:If anyone still reading is not an Eve player... One thing that DUST players may not know about eve is that the linkage between planets and space goes through POCOs. So even if a DUST corp manages to control a few systems worth of districts, someone will also have to protect these fairly weak (has no guns) structures. What does this mean? Well, POCOs are basically shipping stations that set tax rates on goods shipped from the surface of a planet, and if they aren't on the planet, producers on the surface can only export in very small and expensive amounts that are fairly easy to steal. So say you have 4-5 different groups battling on a planet, and 3-4 big investors harvesting off of that planet. The Customs Office has just one owner. He is setting the tax rates of anything coming off that planet. Too high, and people won't make money, if its too low, he could be missing out on profits, but will likely draw many more producers. The more productive a planet gets from Eve PI, the more attractive it gets to attack the POCO and its users. And it becomes THE place that the industrialists will be going to to pick up their goods. So what we will be looking at likely, is escorts for industrial ships picking up PI materials at these POCOs, since pilots will know where they will be and that their cargo could be very valuable (100s of millions in isk in fairly weak ships). So as stacked advantages on the EVE side of Planetary Infrastructure happens, unless they have some sort of defensive impact on POCOs, you will need a group of pilots to match the strength and ability of your ground force if you want to fully reap the benefits of your ground dominance. So to me this means it may be just as advantageous to spread yourself out a bit if you have the ability so that you can be diversified in terms of POCO owners and not beholden to the politics of a single planetary tax. So I haven't seen much talk in Eve about this, but I'm guessing that once this really starts to trickle in, and the Region is announced all temperate POCOs in those systems will be targets.
So far there hasn't been any confirmation on what or when the eve dust economic transfers will happen... no point worrying about it till then |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
271
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:39:00 -
[515] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:If anyone still reading is not an Eve player... One thing that DUST players may not know about eve is that the linkage between planets and space goes through POCOs. So even if a DUST corp manages to control a few systems worth of districts, someone will also have to protect these fairly weak (has no guns) structures. What does this mean? Well, POCOs are basically shipping stations that set tax rates on goods shipped from the surface of a planet, and if they aren't on the planet, producers on the surface can only export in very small and expensive amounts that are fairly easy to steal. So say you have 4-5 different groups battling on a planet, and 3-4 big investors harvesting off of that planet. The Customs Office has just one owner. He is setting the tax rates of anything coming off that planet. Too high, and people won't make money, if its too low, he could be missing out on profits, but will likely draw many more producers. The more productive a planet gets from Eve PI, the more attractive it gets to attack the POCO and its users. And it becomes THE place that the industrialists will be going to to pick up their goods. So what we will be looking at likely, is escorts for industrial ships picking up PI materials at these POCOs, since pilots will know where they will be and that their cargo could be very valuable (100s of millions in isk in fairly weak ships). So as stacked advantages on the EVE side of Planetary Infrastructure happens, unless they have some sort of defensive impact on POCOs, you will need a group of pilots to match the strength and ability of your ground force if you want to fully reap the benefits of your ground dominance. So to me this means it may be just as advantageous to spread yourself out a bit if you have the ability so that you can be diversified in terms of POCO owners and not beholden to the politics of a single planetary tax. So I haven't seen much talk in Eve about this, but I'm guessing that once this really starts to trickle in, and the Region is announced all temperate POCOs in those systems will be targets. So far there hasn't been any confirmation on what or when the eve dust economic transfers will be or will happen... no point worrying about it till then edit: that's awful English sorry, but you get the idea...
You must not be an eve player...But I'm glad you are still interested in these details. My post has nothing to do with transfers. If you read the wiki it talks about bonuses that our SI will have on Eve PI. When this becomes known, hopefully it will be attractive enough to make people want to work together with us near our districts, maybe Eve players in our corps, maybe friendlies, maybe just nuetral investors. Everyone though will ship stuff through POCOs and thus there will be multiple parties interested in the happenings of who owns what districts on a planet because it will affect their bottom line.
What I'm saying is that when planets could be making billions of isk in products each week after the stacked multipliers, and they are making hundreds of millions in POCO taxes, people in the air will want to continue to see those stacked multipliers. But more people will want to end that profit as well. the average FPSer could just forget about all this and remain stupidly ignorant, but I'm just saying all this so that hopefully some of you guys will start to figure out who to be talking to and make friends with. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1830
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:44:00 -
[516] - Quote
Sentient Archon wrote:A quick question about the player owned districts;- will they be in 0.0 or will we have some in high sec?
For now they are going to be in one low security region. We will expand it as needed and hope that when we get to null sec we have different gameplay to offer for that. |
|
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
259
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:46:00 -
[517] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:If anyone still reading is not an Eve player... One thing that DUST players may not know about eve is that the linkage between planets and space goes through POCOs. So even if a DUST corp manages to control a few systems worth of districts, someone will also have to protect these fairly weak (has no guns) structures. What does this mean? Well, POCOs are basically shipping stations that set tax rates on goods shipped from the surface of a planet, and if they aren't on the planet, producers on the surface can only export in very small and expensive amounts that are fairly easy to steal. So say you have 4-5 different groups battling on a planet, and 3-4 big investors harvesting off of that planet. The Customs Office has just one owner. He is setting the tax rates of anything coming off that planet. Too high, and people won't make money, if its too low, he could be missing out on profits, but will likely draw many more producers. The more productive a planet gets from Eve PI, the more attractive it gets to attack the POCO and its users. And it becomes THE place that the industrialists will be going to to pick up their goods. So what we will be looking at likely, is escorts for industrial ships picking up PI materials at these POCOs, since pilots will know where they will be and that their cargo could be very valuable (100s of millions in isk in fairly weak ships). So as stacked advantages on the EVE side of Planetary Infrastructure happens, unless they have some sort of defensive impact on POCOs, you will need a group of pilots to match the strength and ability of your ground force if you want to fully reap the benefits of your ground dominance. So to me this means it may be just as advantageous to spread yourself out a bit if you have the ability so that you can be diversified in terms of POCO owners and not beholden to the politics of a single planetary tax. So I haven't seen much talk in Eve about this, but I'm guessing that once this really starts to trickle in, and the Region is announced all temperate POCOs in those systems will be targets. So far there hasn't been any confirmation on what or when the eve dust economic transfers will be or will happen... no point worrying about it till then edit: that's awful English sorry, but you get the idea... You must not be an eve player...But I'm glad you are still interested in these details. My post has nothing to do with transfers. If you read the wiki it talks about bonuses that our SI will have on Eve PI. When this becomes known, hopefully it will be attractive enough to make people want to work together with us near our districts, maybe Eve players in our corps, maybe friendlies, maybe just nuetral investors. Everyone though will ship stuff through POCOs and thus there will be multiple parties interested in the happenings of who owns what districts on a planet because it will affect their bottom line. What I'm saying is that when planets could be making billions of isk in products each week after the stacked multipliers, and they are making hundreds of millions in POCO taxes, people in the air will want to continue to see those stacked multipliers. But more people will want to end that profit as well. the average FPSer could just forget about all this and remain stupidly ignorant, but I'm just saying all this so that hopefully some of you guys will start to figure out who to be talking to and make friends with.
Link?
Im a long time eve player, but until this goes global (universal?) ie not a single region, my point stands that its not worth worrying about until specifics and dates are released.
Pi is profitable as it is, suddenly pumping more materials out will crash the economy and not make it worth it. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1837
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:49:00 -
[518] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Contest this thought, please: GÇó ringers are allowed GÇó you don't need to flip districts for mother corp GÇó mother corp just means the ringer community for split corps
GÇó results in that splitting corp ONLY expands possibilities, gives more attack chances, and speeds clone production to attack. why flip them for one corp? make a swam of corps, its even thief and disband proof.
You cant transfer clones between corps so each would be even until one produces more. 1 corp with 1 district (no upgrades) can attack once every 3 days (40Cl a day, 100Cl needed). 1 corp with 3 districts can attack everyday with spare. Its economically and tactically better to have more districts as you can attack, and enforce your own districts, more effectively. But you need to have more districts which is how this convo started
It is only an advantage on day one where you can buy lots of starter packs and try and take a bunch of unowned districts. Once things get past that initial flash point it will be far better to be in one corporation and having the ability to transfer clones between districts. |
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2036
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:49:00 -
[519] - Quote
If a corp with no districts attacks a district with 450 clones, and wins by blitzing the objectives, what happens? They (probably) won't have a full 100 clones in the district any more. Do they lose the lot and have to buy a new batch? Do they keep what they have, but get the option to buy another batch to put them above the 100-clone attack requirement? Can they press the attack with whatever's left?
If they get to buy another batch, then win with more than 100 clones left from the partial batches, still without reducing the defenders to 0 clones, will they be eligible (since they still don't own a district yet) to buy ANOTHER 100 clones when they attack again? If that's possible, will it mean that a Corporation can attack a high-value district and start off with over 200 clones when they take over?
Also, if you attack and win, then choose to continue, can you make another attack somewhere else? If your corporation is attacking a district, you don't have control of one yet, does that mean you're still eligible for a Genolution pack for an attack somewhere else? Or are you limited to only having one attack at a time when you don't own any territory.
On a totally separate aspect of the topic, we need more freedom to assign roles (whether we can name those roles or not) to corp members. And this WILL be needed for Planetary Conquest to be viable with large Corporations where there's a hierarchy and members are given specialised roles within the corporate structure.
At the moment, there are 3 tiers.
1. CEO 2. Director 3. Member
There's VERY little that a CEO can do which isn't also available to all Directors. Members effectively have no say in how the Corporation is run as far as game mechanics go. The former is a problem, the latter is fine for MOST Corporations, but it would be nice to have some flexibility on that. CEOs need more control over the organisation and the access they give Corp members (including Directors). This should include freedom to not only remove or limit certain access, but also to add certain access that currently only the CEO is given. In effect, if not name, it should be possible to have a Corporation run by 2 (or more) characters with full CEO access.
Keeping members as a baseline with no access level is a fair starting point. Eventually, being able to give members limited access to certain functions would be nice, but unnecessary.
Directors are currently always given full access to everything. So far, there hasn't been enough freedom within the system for this to become a problem, but with the introduction of PC, this would be too easy to exploit in the name of trolling, espionage or general silliness. The easiest (though not ideal) fix would be to add a "Board Member" tier between Directors and Members. This new tier could have limited access to the Corp Wallet (able to move X amount of ISK per day from the wallet) instead of full access, and wouldn't be able to interact with the planetary conquest system directly. No moving of clones, and thus no declaring of attacks, no purchasing of SI or Genolution clones, etc.
A better option would be to give the CEO (and anyone he designates) the ability to alter access on an individual level. As a base, when a CEO is naming a Corp Member as a Director, they can just go with the default "all access" or they can restrict certain areas to define a Director's role within the Corporation. Combining this with the "Board Member" idea would make for a relatively easy system to manage, but still give significant control to the CEO and anyone who's able to access this system.
Eventually, it would be good to have a variable "Corp wallet access" setting so individuals could be given the right to draw limited funds from the Wallet without needing a title, and the level to which they can do so would be variable from one member to the next depending on their role and importance to the corp. And even better options would be if you could set a "retainer" where you pay your members to remain in the Corp (either per battle or for duration of service), and set taxes based on time (1% of current ISK per day) or activity (1% of ISK earned per battle). Another thing that would be nice - unnecessary, but useful - is the option to create custom titles. Either working within the established framework of CEO/Director/Member (and maybe adding the "Board Member" title as well) and allowing you to rename those positions, or allowing CEOs (and authorised personnel) to create titles and access levels as they see fit and assign them to members of the Corp. |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
259
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:53:00 -
[520] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Contest this thought, please: GÇó ringers are allowed GÇó you don't need to flip districts for mother corp GÇó mother corp just means the ringer community for split corps
GÇó results in that splitting corp ONLY expands possibilities, gives more attack chances, and speeds clone production to attack. why flip them for one corp? make a swam of corps, its even thief and disband proof.
You cant transfer clones between corps so each would be even until one produces more. 1 corp with 1 district (no upgrades) can attack once every 3 days (40Cl a day, 100Cl needed). 1 corp with 3 districts can attack everyday with spare. Its economically and tactically better to have more districts as you can attack, and enforce your own districts, more effectively. But you need to have more districts which is how this convo started It is only an advantage on day one where you can buy lots of starter packs and try and take a bunch of unowned districts. Once things get past that initial flash point it will be far better to be in one corporation and having the ability to transfer clones between districts.
\o/ pff devs explain it better thanks |
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
271
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:54:00 -
[521] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Contest this thought, please: GÇó ringers are allowed GÇó you don't need to flip districts for mother corp GÇó mother corp just means the ringer community for split corps
GÇó results in that splitting corp ONLY expands possibilities, gives more attack chances, and speeds clone production to attack. why flip them for one corp? make a swam of corps, its even thief and disband proof.
You cant transfer clones between corps so each would be even until one produces more. 1 corp with 1 district (no upgrades) can attack once every 3 days (40Cl a day, 100Cl needed). 1 corp with 3 districts can attack everyday with spare. Its economically and tactically better to have more districts as you can attack, and enforce your own districts, more effectively. But you need to have more districts which is how this convo started It is only an advantage on day one where you can buy lots of starter packs and try and take a bunch of unowned districts. Once things get past that initial flash point it will be far better to be in one corporation and having the ability to transfer clones between districts.
Wait how many starter packs can a single corp buy on day one then? I thought it was just one...? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1837
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:55:00 -
[522] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:\o/ pff devs explain it better thanks
My pleasure. :D |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1837
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:55:00 -
[523] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Contest this thought, please: GÇó ringers are allowed GÇó you don't need to flip districts for mother corp GÇó mother corp just means the ringer community for split corps
GÇó results in that splitting corp ONLY expands possibilities, gives more attack chances, and speeds clone production to attack. why flip them for one corp? make a swam of corps, its even thief and disband proof.
You cant transfer clones between corps so each would be even until one produces more. 1 corp with 1 district (no upgrades) can attack once every 3 days (40Cl a day, 100Cl needed). 1 corp with 3 districts can attack everyday with spare. Its economically and tactically better to have more districts as you can attack, and enforce your own districts, more effectively. But you need to have more districts which is how this convo started It is only an advantage on day one where you can buy lots of starter packs and try and take a bunch of unowned districts. Once things get past that initial flash point it will be far better to be in one corporation and having the ability to transfer clones between districts. Wait how many starter packs can a single corp buy on day one then? I thought it was just one...?
It is, but there is a lot of talk about corporations splitting into multiple corporations to get around that. |
|
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
259
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:56:00 -
[524] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Contest this thought, please: GÇó ringers are allowed GÇó you don't need to flip districts for mother corp GÇó mother corp just means the ringer community for split corps
GÇó results in that splitting corp ONLY expands possibilities, gives more attack chances, and speeds clone production to attack. why flip them for one corp? make a swam of corps, its even thief and disband proof.
You cant transfer clones between corps so each would be even until one produces more. 1 corp with 1 district (no upgrades) can attack once every 3 days (40Cl a day, 100Cl needed). 1 corp with 3 districts can attack everyday with spare. Its economically and tactically better to have more districts as you can attack, and enforce your own districts, more effectively. But you need to have more districts which is how this convo started It is only an advantage on day one where you can buy lots of starter packs and try and take a bunch of unowned districts. Once things get past that initial flash point it will be far better to be in one corporation and having the ability to transfer clones between districts. Wait how many starter packs can a single corp buy on day one then? I thought it was just one...?
1 pack/ corp/ day... multiple sister corps |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
259
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:57:00 -
[525] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:
It is, but there is a lot of talk about corporations splitting into multiple corporations to get around that.
Bah you did it again!!!! |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
35
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:00:00 -
[526] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Contest this thought, please: GÇó ringers are allowed GÇó you don't need to flip districts for mother corp GÇó mother corp just means the ringer community for split corps
GÇó results in that splitting corp ONLY expands possibilities, gives more attack chances, and speeds clone production to attack. why flip them for one corp? make a swam of corps, its even thief and disband proof.
You cant transfer clones between corps so each would be even until one produces more. 1 corp with 1 district (no upgrades) can attack once every 3 days (40Cl a day, 100Cl needed). 1 corp with 3 districts can attack everyday with spare. Its economically and tactically better to have more districts as you can attack, and enforce your own districts, more effectively. But you need to have more districts which is how this convo started It is only an advantage on day one where you can buy lots of starter packs and try and take a bunch of unowned districts. Once things get past that initial flash point it will be far better to be in one corporation and having the ability to transfer clones between districts. \o/ pff devs explain it better thanks
Of course the final effect is to be in the same corp asap...
Well, it doesn't seem to worry you more than this... |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2036
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:01:00 -
[527] - Quote
In addition to my previous (already huge - sorry) post, there are also the problems with Alliances and EVE Interaction to be considered.
How long before we get Alliance tools in DUST?
And more importantly, will a Corporation with no assets in EVE, and no affiliation with any EVE-based Corp, have access to any form of Orbital Strike? I'm hoping we're going to at least be given a Precision Strike from our Warbarge. We DO get to bring a Warbarge, right? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1841
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:06:00 -
[528] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:If a corp with no districts attacks a district with 450 clones, and wins by blitzing the objectives, what happens? They (probably) won't have a full 100 clones in the district any more. Do they lose the lot and have to buy a new batch? Do they keep what they have, but get the option to buy another batch to put them above the 100-clone attack requirement? Can they press the attack with whatever's left? As it stands the spare clones would be sold at the sell value of 100,000 ISK and the corporation would have to buy another starter pack.
Garrett Blacknova wrote:If they get to buy another batch, then win with more than 100 clones left from the partial batches, still without reducing the defenders to 0 clones, will they be eligible (since they still don't own a district yet) to buy ANOTHER 100 clones when they attack again? If that's possible, will it mean that a Corporation can attack a high-value district and start off with over 200 clones when they take over? I think my answer to the first paragraph answers this, but because the remainder clones are sold the most a district can have after being taken over with a starter pack of clones is 100 clones. This may even mean that the attacking corporation decides "hey, if we win this right now we will only have like 10 clones at the district. Maybe we should lose and attack again tomorrow with a fresh 100."
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Also, if you attack and win, then choose to continue, can you make another attack somewhere else? If your corporation is attacking a district, you don't have control of one yet, does that mean you're still eligible for a Genolution pack for an attack somewhere else? Or are you limited to only having one attack at a time when you don't own any territory. Having that pending conflict means you won't be able to buy a starter pack either. So yes, if you don't have any districts only one attack at a time.
Garrett Blacknova wrote:On a totally separate aspect of the topic, we need more freedom to assign roles (whether we can name those roles or not) to corp members. And this WILL be needed for Planetary Conquest to be viable with large Corporations where there's a hierarchy and members are given specialised roles within the corporate structure.
At the moment, there are 3 tiers.
1. CEO 2. Director 3. Member
There's VERY little that a CEO can do which isn't also available to all Directors. Members effectively have no say in how the Corporation is run as far as game mechanics go. The former is a problem, the latter is fine for MOST Corporations, but it would be nice to have some flexibility on that. CEOs need more control over the organisation and the access they give Corp members (including Directors). This should include freedom to not only remove or limit certain access, but also to add certain access that currently only the CEO is given. In effect, if not name, it should be possible to have a Corporation run by 2 (or more) characters with full CEO access.
Keeping members as a baseline with no access level is a fair starting point. Eventually, being able to give members limited access to certain functions would be nice, but unnecessary.
Directors are currently always given full access to everything. So far, there hasn't been enough freedom within the system for this to become a problem, but with the introduction of PC, this would be too easy to exploit in the name of trolling, espionage or general silliness. The easiest (though not ideal) fix would be to add a "Board Member" tier between Directors and Members. This new tier could have limited access to the Corp Wallet (able to move X amount of ISK per day from the wallet) instead of full access, and wouldn't be able to interact with the planetary conquest system directly. No moving of clones, and thus no declaring of attacks, no purchasing of SI or Genolution clones, etc.
A better option would be to give the CEO (and anyone he designates) the ability to alter access on an individual level. As a base, when a CEO is naming a Corp Member as a Director, they can just go with the default "all access" or they can restrict certain areas to define a Director's role within the Corporation. Combining this with the "Board Member" idea would make for a relatively easy system to manage, but still give significant control to the CEO and anyone who's able to access this system.
Eventually, it would be good to have a variable "Corp wallet access" setting so individuals could be given the right to draw limited funds from the Wallet without needing a title, and the level to which they can do so would be variable from one member to the next depending on their role and importance to the corp. And even better options would be if you could set a "retainer" where you pay your members to remain in the Corp (either per battle or for duration of service), and set taxes based on time (1% of current ISK per day) or activity (1% of ISK earned per battle). Another thing that would be nice - unnecessary, but useful - is the option to create custom titles. Either working within the established framework of CEO/Director/Member (and maybe adding the "Board Member" title as well) and allowing you to rename those positions, or allowing CEOs (and authorised personnel) to create titles and access levels as they see fit and assign them to members of the Corp. We are very aware of this and have corporation roles on our roadmap of things to look at and improve. No promise as to when that happens right now but we are aware of it and are looking into it. :) |
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
271
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:06:00 -
[529] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:
Link?
Im a long time eve player, but until this goes global (universal?) ie not a single region, my point stands that its not worth worrying about until specifics and dates are released.
Pi is profitable as it is, suddenly pumping more materials out will crash the economy and not make it worth it.
My assumption was that these temperate planets would be the best place to start making P4 goods hopefully for the stacking. It could be faster, it could take less energy so that you can make more with a single character. And if a lot of the bonuses had to do with infrastructure efficiency, P3s may also be attractive to make here. For that reason, if lowsec planets became primarily important for production efficiency and not harvesting efficiency, they would still be advantageous for the marketplace even if there was no net increase on demand for P3s and P4s.
However I can speculate that P3s and P4s increase in importance as a lot of P3s sound like materials that Dusters would use, and POSs may now become more ubiquitous in lowsec as a result of planetary colonization because of the bonuses that these temperate planets would provide.
There could be a temperate planet with only 3 districts, but 25 moons, which means that the per capita effect on production from those districts could be so much more powerful than planets with many districts with contant fights and only a few moons. There will be a lot more to do in lowsec now. |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
259
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:07:00 -
[530] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:In addition to my previous (already huge - sorry) post, there are also the problems with Alliances and EVE Interaction to be considered.
How long before we get Alliance tools in DUST?
And more importantly, will a Corporation with no assets in EVE, and no affiliation with any EVE-based Corp, have access to any form of Orbital Strike? I'm hoping we're going to at least be given a Precision Strike from our Warbarge. We DO get to bring a Warbarge, right?
bombardments are eve based... you would have to hire/ recruit an eve corp/members you already get precision strikes from the warbarge... |
|
BursegSardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
64
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:08:00 -
[531] - Quote
How often can you set your reinforcement timer?
I may be reading this incorrectly, but the wiki states that just the act of setting a timer makes your district invulnerable, whats to to stop someone from bouncing it around the clock and live permanently invulnerable? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1850
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:09:00 -
[532] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:In addition to my previous (already huge - sorry) post, there are also the problems with Alliances and EVE Interaction to be considered.
Don't be sorry, I have responded to your previous post already and am more than happy to keep doing so. Love the feedback and questions you guys have.
Garrett Blacknova wrote:How long before we get Alliance tools in DUST?
Not yet, but it is on our road map. If you have a EVE CEO you can take your corporation into an alliance and anyone from that alliance can provide orbital bombardments.
Garrett Blacknova wrote:And more importantly, will a Corporation with no assets in EVE, and no affiliation with any EVE-based Corp, have access to any form of Orbital Strike? I'm hoping we're going to at least be given a Precision Strike from our Warbarge. We DO get to bring a Warbarge, right?
Precision Strikes will be available, but if the corporation has 0 EVE pilots and is not in an alliance with EVE pilots they will not have access to orbital bombardments.
Hope that answers your questions. :D |
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
271
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:09:00 -
[533] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:
1 pack/ corp/ day... multiple sister corps
Okay cool, I can see the other people's points though, that the stacking properties on the eve side would be better if districts were united under 1 corp.
But i've been thinking about a valid strategy with sister groups where you have a shell group take a planet, fill up their clones, and then sell them all right before parent attacks them. Not sure how mechanics affect this...does it become locked after you sell? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1850
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:10:00 -
[534] - Quote
BursegSardaukar wrote:How often can you set your reinforcement timer?
I may be reading this incorrectly, but the wiki states that just the act of setting a timer makes your district invulnerable, whats to to stop someone from bouncing it around the clock and live permanently invulnerable?
Changing the reinforcement timer locks the district. A locked district can be attacked.
See Move Clones To Hostile District here: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#District_Actions
Does that answer your question? |
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
271
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:11:00 -
[535] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:The whole team will be around for some time answering questions in this thread. We are really looking forward to getting your feedback on this and discussing it with you. What you are getting now is very nuts and bolts type information. We will have more information to give you between now and Fanfest, and more at Fanfest. We wanted to get this out ASAP to get your feedback though.
I think you edited out your link to the wiki page here for some reason? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1850
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:11:00 -
[536] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:
1 pack/ corp/ day... multiple sister corps
Okay cool, I can see the other people's points though, that the stacking properties on the eve side would be better if districts were united under 1 corp. But i've been thinking about a valid strategy with sister groups where you have a shell group take a planet, fill up their clones, and then sell them all right before parent attacks them. Not sure how mechanics affect this...does it become locked after you sell?
Selling does not lock the district, but a locked district can still be attacked, |
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2036
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:15:00 -
[537] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:If a corp with no districts attacks a district with 450 clones, and wins by blitzing the objectives, what happens? They (probably) won't have a full 100 clones in the district any more. Do they lose the lot and have to buy a new batch? Do they keep what they have, but get the option to buy another batch to put them above the 100-clone attack requirement? Can they press the attack with whatever's left? As it stands the spare clones would be sold at the sell value of 100,000 ISK and the corporation would have to buy another starter pack. That's a very... elegant solution, and answered most of the other questions nicely.
Thank you.
Also, glad to hear that the corp management side is being looked at, although I think some of the larger Corporations may see it as a higher priority than it is for someone in my position right now.
As for the Orbital Strikes, I'm glad there will be some form of support available to those Corporations without EVE connections. While less powerful, I think a Precision Strike will probably be sufficient - particularly with FF being turned on (finally). |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2036
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:17:00 -
[538] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:edit: no ones said anything about warbarge logistics... This is, in fact, a completely separate question that I was working towards, but not really sure how to phrase.
I'm still not entirely sure what to say about this.
At present, it seems like MCCs will be free, and Warbarges will be a source of free off-map support for those without EVE-based assets.
For an initial rollout, I don't have a problem with this, but I'll be expecting that setup to change eventually. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1850
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:17:00 -
[539] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:The whole team will be around for some time answering questions in this thread. We are really looking forward to getting your feedback on this and discussing it with you. What you are getting now is very nuts and bolts type information. We will have more information to give you between now and Fanfest, and more at Fanfest. We wanted to get this out ASAP to get your feedback though. I think you edited out your link to the wiki page here for some reason?
It has been fixed, there was some confusion here at the office about if that wiki should be up. Sorry about that! Got it all sorted out. |
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:21:00 -
[540] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:
1 pack/ corp/ day... multiple sister corps
Okay cool, I can see the other people's points though, that the stacking properties on the eve side would be better if districts were united under 1 corp. But i've been thinking about a valid strategy with sister groups where you have a shell group take a planet, fill up their clones, and then sell them all right before parent attacks them. Not sure how mechanics affect this...does it become locked after you sell? Selling does not lock the district, but a locked district can still be attacked, I'm confused...The wiki says "The specific action of selling clones will cause the source district to be locked. " but also the table says that the ending state of selling clones' source district is still online. Maybe the table should read "locked, online" for source district new state, then? |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1850
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:22:00 -
[541] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:If a corp with no districts attacks a district with 450 clones, and wins by blitzing the objectives, what happens? They (probably) won't have a full 100 clones in the district any more. Do they lose the lot and have to buy a new batch? Do they keep what they have, but get the option to buy another batch to put them above the 100-clone attack requirement? Can they press the attack with whatever's left? As it stands the spare clones would be sold at the sell value of 100,000 ISK and the corporation would have to buy another starter pack. That's a very... elegant solution, and answered most of the other questions nicely. Thank you. Also, glad to hear that the corp management side is being looked at, although I think some of the larger Corporations may see it as a higher priority than it is for someone in my position right now. As for the Orbital Strikes, I'm glad there will be some form of support available to those Corporations without EVE connections. While less powerful, I think a Precision Strike will probably be sufficient - particularly with FF being turned on (finally).
Personally, and exactly how this gets prioritized against everything else is not just about my opinion, but corporation management is critical as the people managing corporations are the ones really providing content to our players. We provide tools, you guys provide the content. If the tools to create content are no good, then either the content will be ****/there will be no content/or those doing it will get burned out quickly.
So yea, we shall see where it all lands though. :) So much we all want to do prioritizing this stuff is hard. :( |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1850
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:23:00 -
[542] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:
1 pack/ corp/ day... multiple sister corps
Okay cool, I can see the other people's points though, that the stacking properties on the eve side would be better if districts were united under 1 corp. But i've been thinking about a valid strategy with sister groups where you have a shell group take a planet, fill up their clones, and then sell them all right before parent attacks them. Not sure how mechanics affect this...does it become locked after you sell? Selling does not lock the district, but a locked district can still be attacked, I'm confused...The wiki says "The specific action of selling clones will cause the source district to be locked. " but also the table says that the ending state of selling clones' source district is still online. Maybe the table should read "locked, online" for source district new state, then?
My fault and I take full responsibility for that. It would be because I wrote it in a bit of a sleep deprived state. I have removed that line entirely it was from an old design document. Sorry about that! :) |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1850
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:25:00 -
[543] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:edit: no ones said anything about warbarge logistics... This is, in fact, a completely separate question that I was working towards, but not really sure how to phrase. I'm still not entirely sure what to say about this. At present, it seems like MCCs will be free, and Warbarges will be a source of free off-map support for those without EVE-based assets. For an initial rollout, I don't have a problem with this, but I'll be expecting that setup to change eventually.
For now the concept of war barges and MCC are very simple, they are there and exist. We want to get this out an working before we expand on those two concepts. There is a lot that can be done with them but this whole feature is so big already we want to focus our balancing and development efforts. |
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:29:00 -
[544] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote: ...I'm cool and I recognize when I've made a small mistake and I fix it quickly...
...Not too much of a mixup. I was hoping that was how it was anyway because I wanted to be the first to coin this term (or something like it):
Biomasscade (B-scade)- Biomass + cascade. When a spy or disturbed director sells all of the clones in all of a corporation's districts causing complete vulnerability to be taken over, and then runs away with the profits. It's bound to happen...
For those who don't know a 'failscade' in Eve is when an alliance loses ownership of all of or much of their soveriegnty because of the maintenance bills that they do not, can not, or forget to pay out of wallets that often are stolen from. |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
260
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:29:00 -
[545] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:edit: no ones said anything about warbarge logistics... This is, in fact, a completely separate question that I was working towards, but not really sure how to phrase. I'm still not entirely sure what to say about this. At present, it seems like MCCs will be free, and Warbarges will be a source of free off-map support for those without EVE-based assets. For an initial rollout, I don't have a problem with this, but I'll be expecting that setup to change eventually. For now the concept of war barges and MCC are very simple, they are there and exist. We want to get this out an working before we expand on those two concepts. There is a lot that can be done with them but this whole feature is so big already we want to focus our balancing and development efforts.
Just change EVERYTHING push the on button and hope for the best |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1857
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:36:00 -
[546] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:edit: no ones said anything about warbarge logistics... This is, in fact, a completely separate question that I was working towards, but not really sure how to phrase. I'm still not entirely sure what to say about this. At present, it seems like MCCs will be free, and Warbarges will be a source of free off-map support for those without EVE-based assets. For an initial rollout, I don't have a problem with this, but I'll be expecting that setup to change eventually. For now the concept of war barges and MCC are very simple, they are there and exist. We want to get this out an working before we expand on those two concepts. There is a lot that can be done with them but this whole feature is so big already we want to focus our balancing and development efforts. Just change EVERYTHING push the on button and hope for the best
Amazing how many people would want us to do that. Eh, iteration is king! :D |
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:37:00 -
[547] - Quote
When you want to start letting players trade clones one infrastructure could be a 'clone trade port' Allows transfer and trade of this cargo to and from up to 5 systems away. Users have to pay a transportation tax which partially then also goes to the owners. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1857
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:38:00 -
[548] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote: ...I'm cool and I recognize when I've made a small mistake and I fix it quickly... ...Not too much of a mixup. I was hoping that was how it was anyway because I wanted to be the first to coin this term (or something like it): Biomasscade (B-scade)- Biomass + cascade. When a spy or disturbed director sells all of the clones in all of a corporation's districts causing complete vulnerability to be taken over, and then runs away with the profits. It's bound to happen... For those who don't know a 'failscade' in Eve is when an alliance loses ownership of all of or much of their soveriegnty because of the maintenance bills that they do not, can not, or forget to pay out of wallets that often are stolen from.
Any action that leaves a district with 0 clones causes it to be abandoned. So if you sell all the clones or move them all to another district you abandon the source district. |
|
LXicon
VENGEANCE FOR HIRE
62
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:40:00 -
[549] - Quote
Could you make a single page version of this thread with only the Dev posts? Or, could you compile a Q&A thread that has all the questions asked and answers given?
The Devs tend to quote the question they are currently answering and having a single page with all the Dev posts would make it much easier to search for an answer that might have been on page 5 or 17 or 22.
Thanks.
|
BursegSardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
64
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:40:00 -
[550] - Quote
Thanks for answering these questions, its definitely making a lot more sense now.
I have another:
What happens if two corps in the same Alliance try to move onto each other's spaces?
IF they can fight, can the Alliance then bombard the match for either side? |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1858
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:42:00 -
[551] - Quote
LXicon wrote:Could you make a single page version of this thread with only the Dev posts? Or, could you compile a Q&A thread that has all the questions asked and answers given?
The Devs tend to quote the question they are currently answering and having a single page with all the Dev posts would make it much easier to search for an answer that might have been on page 5 or 17 or 22.
Thanks.
This will take a lot of effort but I shall poke some people and see if we can maybe look at updating the FAQ on the first page. We did reserve a second post for that purpose. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1858
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:43:00 -
[552] - Quote
BursegSardaukar wrote:Thanks for answering these questions, its definitely making a lot more sense now.
I have another:
What happens if two corps in the same Alliance try to move onto each other's spaces?
IF they can fight, can the Alliance then bombard the match for either side?
It would result in a fight, as for the orbital bombardment... we are still working on that. >.< |
|
Klivve Cussler
Ransoms Incorporated
62
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:45:00 -
[553] - Quote
Reposting questions now that the devs are awake...
Klivve Cussler wrote:
Question 1: Is this the beginning of the installation system descibed in the "Seeding the Universe" talk at fanfest last year? If so, are these considered the big hubs, or are they medium or small installations and will look more appropriately-sized when we get the bigger maps? t Question 2: Given that the "you'll be able to see starships in orbit over your district in the next build" is still valid, is there any chance we'll be able to see ALL the ships on-grid above the district, so we can watch the low-sec pirates blow our orbital support ships out of space?
Proposal 1: Can our corps charge a fee for Eve PI installations in our districts? This would allow a little bit of cross-game transactions, without too badly affecting either economy. It also would promote one corporation to do PI and own the planet to avoid the fees. The corp holding the majority of districts on the planet could potentially gain control of the customs office, as well.
Proposal 2: Structure construction times. Give each structure a period of time when it is under construction. Say a week. If you have a battle during that week, the structure is rendered under construction, with cranes and scaffolding, giving more variation and immersion
Proposal 3: This is a cheap, cheap one, but it would go a long way to adding immersion: Merc Quarters in a district: All you'd need is a window. Render a specific view of that district depending on the structure present (so ever MQ would have the same window in the same district). All mercs to select what district they live in. If the district falls, make them choose another. Mercs with no districts have no window (are on a station). Have the window closed during a battle within that district.
|
Maximus Stryker
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
397
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:46:00 -
[554] - Quote
This all sound very exciting, a big thank you for Fox Four for a 28 page (and counting) Q&A!
A) Do the defenders have an MCC as well or only the attackers (aka original skirmish/skirmish 1.0)? B) Is there a match timer (what if no one did anything during a match, what would happen)?
Is the following scenario accurate? Defenders have 200 clones in a district. Attackers land 250. Monday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Tuesday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Attackers have 50 remaining clones on the district so it becomes their's Wednesday, the former attackers and now district owners have 90 clones on the district |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
260
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:46:00 -
[555] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:BursegSardaukar wrote:Thanks for answering these questions, its definitely making a lot more sense now.
I have another:
What happens if two corps in the same Alliance try to move onto each other's spaces?
IF they can fight, can the Alliance then bombard the match for either side? It would result in a fight, as for the orbital bombardment... we are still working on that. >.<
MURDER EVERYONE!!!!! |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1866
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:50:00 -
[556] - Quote
Maximus Stryker wrote:This all sound very exciting, a big thank you for Fox Four for a 28 page (and counting) Q&A!
A) Do the defenders have an MCC as well or only the attackers (aka original skirmish/skirmish 1.0)? B) Is there a match timer (what if no one did anything during a match, what would happen)?
Is the following scenario accurate? Defenders have 200 clones in a district. Attackers land 250. Monday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Tuesday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Attackers have 50 remaining clones on the district so it becomes their's Wednesday, the former attackers and now district owners have 90 clones on the district
The matches will use the new skirmish match system, so both sides have an MCC. There is no timer, only MCC destruction or clone depletion will end the match.
After each fight the clones for the attacker are sent home. They will need to send them again. |
|
martinofski
Rebelles A Quebec
31
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:54:00 -
[557] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Maximus Stryker wrote:This all sound very exciting, a big thank you for Fox Four for a 28 page (and counting) Q&A!
A) Do the defenders have an MCC as well or only the attackers (aka original skirmish/skirmish 1.0)? B) Is there a match timer (what if no one did anything during a match, what would happen)?
Is the following scenario accurate? Defenders have 200 clones in a district. Attackers land 250. Monday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Tuesday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Attackers have 50 remaining clones on the district so it becomes their's Wednesday, the former attackers and now district owners have 90 clones on the district The matches will use the new skirmish match system, so both sides have an MCC. There is no timer, only MCC destruction or clone depletion will end the match. After each fight the clones for the attacker are sent home. They will need to send them again.
Can you develop a little on the "new" skirmish match system? |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:56:00 -
[558] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:LXicon wrote:Could you make a single page version of this thread with only the Dev posts? Or, could you compile a Q&A thread that has all the questions asked and answers given?
The Devs tend to quote the question they are currently answering and having a single page with all the Dev posts would make it much easier to search for an answer that might have been on page 5 or 17 or 22.
Thanks.
This will take a lot of effort but I shall poke some people and see if we can maybe look at updating the FAQ on the first page. We did reserve a second post for that purpose.
Can't you just go through the Dev-posts forum tab...? |
Alcare Xavier Golden
DUST University Ivy League
65
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:57:00 -
[559] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Maximus Stryker wrote:This all sound very exciting, a big thank you for Fox Four for a 28 page (and counting) Q&A!
A) Do the defenders have an MCC as well or only the attackers (aka original skirmish/skirmish 1.0)? B) Is there a match timer (what if no one did anything during a match, what would happen)?
Is the following scenario accurate? Defenders have 200 clones in a district. Attackers land 250. Monday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Tuesday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Attackers have 50 remaining clones on the district so it becomes their's Wednesday, the former attackers and now district owners have 90 clones on the district The matches will use the new skirmish match system, so both sides have an MCC. There is no timer, only MCC destruction or clone depletion will end the match. After each fight the clones for the attacker are sent home. They will need to send them again. So w'e're going to have stacked attrition costs? |
Maximus Stryker
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
397
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:57:00 -
[560] - Quote
martinofski wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Maximus Stryker wrote:This all sound very exciting, a big thank you for Fox Four for a 28 page (and counting) Q&A!
A) Do the defenders have an MCC as well or only the attackers (aka original skirmish/skirmish 1.0)? B) Is there a match timer (what if no one did anything during a match, what would happen)?
Is the following scenario accurate? Defenders have 200 clones in a district. Attackers land 250. Monday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Tuesday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Attackers have 50 remaining clones on the district so it becomes their's Wednesday, the former attackers and now district owners have 90 clones on the district The matches will use the new skirmish match system, so both sides have an MCC. There is no timer, only MCC destruction or clone depletion will end the match. After each fight the clones for the attacker are sent home. They will need to send them again. Can you develop a little on the "new" skirmish match system? The one we are currently using. Some closed beta testers remember a different skirmish. Nothing will change for you. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1872
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:58:00 -
[561] - Quote
Klivve Cussler wrote:Question 1: Is this the beginning of the installation system descibed in the "Seeding the Universe" talk at fanfest last year? If so, are these considered the big hubs, or are they medium or small installations and will look more appropriately-sized when we get the bigger maps?
The surface infrastructure are considered to be entire regions, the whole district. Right now yes what you will be fighting on is just the main building of a district. This will become far more clear when you start playing and changing the SI as the only thing to change will be the big building. The rest of the landscape and smaller buildings all stay the same.
Klivve Cussler wrote:Question 2: Given that the "you'll be able to see starships in orbit over your district in the next build" is still valid, is there any chance we'll be able to see ALL the ships on-grid above the district, so we can watch the low-sec pirates blow our orbital support ships out of space?
No, you will only see the ships connected, and even then it is limited to a maximum. We can't really technically connect all 2,000 ships to a district, things start falling apart, servers start burning, people start going grey, and just bad things happen.
Klivve Cussler wrote:Proposal 1: Can our corps charge a fee for Eve PI installations in our districts? This would allow a little bit of cross-game transactions, without too badly affecting either economy. It also would promote one corporation to do PI and own the planet to avoid the fees. The corp holding the majority of districts on the planet could potentially gain control of the customs office, as well.
As PI does not really recognize districts this is really hard. We are looking at things like an SI that is equivalent to the POCO and that there can only be one on the planet, and that the owning corporation can charge a tax for usage on. Not sure yet though, we are not done yet.
Klivve Cussler wrote:Proposal 2: Structure construction times. Give each structure a period of time when it is under construction. Say a week. If you have a battle during that week, the structure is rendered under construction, with cranes and scaffolding, giving more variation and immersion
Thought has been, and is still being put into this.
Klivve Cussler wrote:Proposal 3: This is a cheap, cheap one, but it would go a long way to adding immersion: Merc Quarters in a district: All you'd need is a window. Render a specific view of that district depending on the structure present (so ever MQ would have the same window in the same district). All mercs to select what district they live in. If the district falls, make them choose another. Mercs with no districts have no window (are on a station). Have the window closed during a battle within that district.
Not as cheap as you might think, as each district has a unique level assigned to it and lots of other unique attributes. Plus it would be really immersion breaking if you were in your MQ and didn't see everyone running around outside during a battle. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1872
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:59:00 -
[562] - Quote
Maximus Stryker wrote:martinofski wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Maximus Stryker wrote:This all sound very exciting, a big thank you for Fox Four for a 28 page (and counting) Q&A!
A) Do the defenders have an MCC as well or only the attackers (aka original skirmish/skirmish 1.0)? B) Is there a match timer (what if no one did anything during a match, what would happen)?
Is the following scenario accurate? Defenders have 200 clones in a district. Attackers land 250. Monday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Tuesday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Attackers have 50 remaining clones on the district so it becomes their's Wednesday, the former attackers and now district owners have 90 clones on the district The matches will use the new skirmish match system, so both sides have an MCC. There is no timer, only MCC destruction or clone depletion will end the match. After each fight the clones for the attacker are sent home. They will need to send them again. Can you develop a little on the "new" skirmish match system? The one we are currently using. Some closed beta testers remember a different skirmish. Nothing will change for you.
Yes sorry, I meant the one currently in the game. |
|
Maximus Stryker
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
397
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:59:00 -
[563] - Quote
Alcare Xavier Golden wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Maximus Stryker wrote:This all sound very exciting, a big thank you for Fox Four for a 28 page (and counting) Q&A!
A) Do the defenders have an MCC as well or only the attackers (aka original skirmish/skirmish 1.0)? B) Is there a match timer (what if no one did anything during a match, what would happen)?
Is the following scenario accurate? Defenders have 200 clones in a district. Attackers land 250. Monday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Tuesday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Attackers have 50 remaining clones on the district so it becomes their's Wednesday, the former attackers and now district owners have 90 clones on the district The matches will use the new skirmish match system, so both sides have an MCC. There is no timer, only MCC destruction or clone depletion will end the match. After each fight the clones for the attacker are sent home. They will need to send them again. So w'e're going to have stacked attrition costs? Sounds like it |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1872
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 15:59:00 -
[564] - Quote
Alcare Xavier Golden wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Maximus Stryker wrote:This all sound very exciting, a big thank you for Fox Four for a 28 page (and counting) Q&A!
A) Do the defenders have an MCC as well or only the attackers (aka original skirmish/skirmish 1.0)? B) Is there a match timer (what if no one did anything during a match, what would happen)?
Is the following scenario accurate? Defenders have 200 clones in a district. Attackers land 250. Monday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Tuesday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Attackers have 50 remaining clones on the district so it becomes their's Wednesday, the former attackers and now district owners have 90 clones on the district The matches will use the new skirmish match system, so both sides have an MCC. There is no timer, only MCC destruction or clone depletion will end the match. After each fight the clones for the attacker are sent home. They will need to send them again. So w'e're going to have stacked attrition costs?
You will need to pay the attrition cost for every battle, yes. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1872
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:01:00 -
[565] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:LXicon wrote:Could you make a single page version of this thread with only the Dev posts? Or, could you compile a Q&A thread that has all the questions asked and answers given?
The Devs tend to quote the question they are currently answering and having a single page with all the Dev posts would make it much easier to search for an answer that might have been on page 5 or 17 or 22.
Thanks.
This will take a lot of effort but I shall poke some people and see if we can maybe look at updating the FAQ on the first page. We did reserve a second post for that purpose. Can't you just go through the Dev-posts forum tab...?Not the prettiest, but you can subscribe to it. It's a search query so it will give you all dev responses. Someone could spend a couple hours summarizing everything that has been said, but there is still a lot between the lines that we will need to reason out.
I really need to stop having quotes the first thing said in my posts. The dev post thing does not show what is a quote and what is not. :( |
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2036
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:03:00 -
[566] - Quote
Can a Corp choose to NOT use all their clones in defense of a district?
Say you have 300 clones when the district is attacked, would it be possible to only fight with 200? And if so, would that mean a loss by cloning out would forfeit the district? And in turn from there, would the surviving unused clones be sold on, or would you be able to move them to another district? |
Alcare Xavier Golden
DUST University Ivy League
65
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:06:00 -
[567] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Alcare Xavier Golden wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Maximus Stryker wrote:This all sound very exciting, a big thank you for Fox Four for a 28 page (and counting) Q&A!
A) Do the defenders have an MCC as well or only the attackers (aka original skirmish/skirmish 1.0)? B) Is there a match timer (what if no one did anything during a match, what would happen)?
Is the following scenario accurate? Defenders have 200 clones in a district. Attackers land 250. Monday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Tuesday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Attackers have 50 remaining clones on the district so it becomes their's Wednesday, the former attackers and now district owners have 90 clones on the district The matches will use the new skirmish match system, so both sides have an MCC. There is no timer, only MCC destruction or clone depletion will end the match. After each fight the clones for the attacker are sent home. They will need to send them again. So w'e're going to have stacked attrition costs? You will need to pay the attrition cost for every battle, yes. I could see that slowing things down for the first week or so...lol |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:07:00 -
[568] - Quote
Maximus Stryker wrote:This all sound very exciting, a big thank you for Fox Four for a 28 page (and counting) Q&A!
A) Do the defenders have an MCC as well or only the attackers (aka original skirmish/skirmish 1.0)? B) Is there a match timer (what if no one did anything during a match, what would happen)?
Is the following scenario accurate? Defenders have 200 clones in a district. Attackers land 250. Monday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Tuesday's battle: defenders lose 100 clones and attackers lose 100 clones Attackers have 50 remaining clones on the district so it becomes their's Wednesday, the former attackers and now district owners have 90 clones on the district
Also that scenario would work differently in that the third attack would not be possible because the attacker needs at least 100 clones. However, if the defending district did not reinforce after the first attack and did lose their last 100 clones, and the attacker won, but lost all 100 clones due to minimum clone loss, I'm not sure who wins or the state of the district...Is it reabandoned?
This might have been answered before... |
Khalid Iunnrais
Immobile Infantry
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:09:00 -
[569] - Quote
Question: In a large clone-count battle, is there any disadvantage to having your MCC destroyed after you've already lost 100 clones?
For example, defender has 500 clones, fights until they lose 100 clones, then sits behind the redline, allowing the attacker to end the match, forcing them to retry tomorrow.
Anything to discourage that, and to encourage actually duking it out further? Because it sounds to me like once the 100 clone mark is hit, the defender has no incentive to fight more if they want to stall. |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:09:00 -
[570] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:LXicon wrote:Could you make a single page version of this thread with only the Dev posts? Or, could you compile a Q&A thread that has all the questions asked and answers given?
The Devs tend to quote the question they are currently answering and having a single page with all the Dev posts would make it much easier to search for an answer that might have been on page 5 or 17 or 22.
Thanks.
This will take a lot of effort but I shall poke some people and see if we can maybe look at updating the FAQ on the first page. We did reserve a second post for that purpose. Can't you just go through the Dev-posts forum tab...?Not the prettiest, but you can subscribe to it. It's a search query so it will give you all dev responses. Someone could spend a couple hours summarizing everything that has been said, but there is still a lot between the lines that we will need to reason out. I really need to stop having quotes the first thing said in my posts. The dev post thing does not show what is a quote and what is not. :(
The RSS Feed (my link) does show it, but in an HTML sort of raw format, so quick editing of it could yield you helpful results. |
|
Absolute Idiom II
BetaMax. CRONOS.
68
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:10:00 -
[571] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:If they get to buy another batch, then win with more than 100 clones left from the partial batches, still without reducing the defenders to 0 clones, will they be eligible (since they still don't own a district yet) to buy ANOTHER 100 clones when they attack again? If that's possible, will it mean that a Corporation can attack a high-value district and start off with over 200 clones when they take over? I think my answer to the first paragraph answers this, but because the remainder clones are sold the most a district can have after being taken over with a starter pack of clones is 100 clones. This may even mean that the attacking corporation decides "hey, if we win this right now we will only have like 10 clones at the district. Maybe we should lose and attack again tomorrow with a fresh 100."
Why not allow any corp with no districts AND less than 100 clones be able to buy another 100 from Genelution? That way they wont have to throw those 10 clones away.
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:12:00 -
[572] - Quote
Khalid Iunnrais wrote:Question: In a large clone-count battle, is there any disadvantage to having your MCC destroyed after you've already lost 100 clones?
For example, defender has 500 clones, fights until they lose 100 clones, then sits behind the redline, allowing the attacker to end the match, forcing them to retry tomorrow.
Anything to discourage that, and to encourage actually duking it out further? Because it sounds to me like once the 100 clone mark is hit, the defender has no incentive to fight more if they want to stall.
Well in a way it would sort of be imposed clone loss of 40 for the defender, because if the attacker kills the MCC, then clone production stops. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2036
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:15:00 -
[573] - Quote
Absolute Idiom II wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:If they get to buy another batch, then win with more than 100 clones left from the partial batches, still without reducing the defenders to 0 clones, will they be eligible (since they still don't own a district yet) to buy ANOTHER 100 clones when they attack again? If that's possible, will it mean that a Corporation can attack a high-value district and start off with over 200 clones when they take over? I think my answer to the first paragraph answers this, but because the remainder clones are sold the most a district can have after being taken over with a starter pack of clones is 100 clones. This may even mean that the attacking corporation decides "hey, if we win this right now we will only have like 10 clones at the district. Maybe we should lose and attack again tomorrow with a fresh 100." Why not allow any corp with no districts AND less than 100 clones be able to buy another 100 from Genelution? That way they wont have to throw those 10 clones away. He explained they DON'T "throw the clones away" though. They SELL them after the battle if the district isn't captured.
What this part was saying is that if you get worn down to 10 or 20 clones, it might be worth throwing the match even if you could win, because you'll come into the district with only those 10 or 20 clones you have left. Losing the battle and letting the defenders hold their ground might give you an easier fight next time around. |
Booker DaFooker
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
69
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:16:00 -
[574] - Quote
well, fantastic stuff, it's the start of what I have been waiting for since start of closed beta. It's taken me all day to read throught he thread and I have a couple of Q's
As a defender or holder of a district can you move clones out of your district to another that you own and leave less than 100 clones in the original district?
As I understand it, a corp that does not own a district buys a pack to fight for a district they want. This may take several days of clone attrition to achieve. The attacking side has it's surviving clones sold back at half price after the battle. In order to continue they will have to buy another pack to continue the attack the next day and so on until success. Is it viable to expect that small corps will be able to afford up to a potential 100 mil ISK expense to take a district?
If true this may spark some interesting tactics, such as the attacking side preventing the hacking of null cannons to prevent MCC destruction on either side while attempting to kill as many enemy clones as possible. Mind you, the defending side may exploit this by retreating and making the battle last over an hour so they could reinforce, an unlikely scenario but possible!
Defending side may also know that attacking corp is small so they remain in Mcc and sacrifice 100 clones knowing attackers cant afford to come back, assuming thay had plenty more in storage of course! lol |
ChromeBreaker
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
260
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:17:00 -
[575] - Quote
Can you buy/sell single clones? or will they be in batches of 10-100-200? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1880
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:20:00 -
[576] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Can a Corp choose to NOT use all their clones in defense of a district?
Say you have 300 clones when the district is attacked, would it be possible to only fight with 200? And if so, would that mean a loss by cloning out would forfeit the district? And in turn from there, would the surviving unused clones be sold on, or would you be able to move them to another district?
Yes, you can just stop fighting. Just keep in mind that there is a minimum of 100 clones lost. |
|
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:20:00 -
[577] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:Can you buy/sell single clones? or will they be in batches of 10-100-200?
Buy in batches of 100. Sell what you choose, and whatever is over the amount your district can hold.
It should be noted that this is how the market is being created, eventually players will somehow completely control clone generation, and then you'll probably be able to buy one at a time. That's why I suggested a Clone Shipping/Trade Hub as infrastructure. It'd basically be a marketplace for buying/selling clones and delivering them a limited distance. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
267
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:21:00 -
[578] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:Can you buy/sell single clones? or will they be in batches of 10-100-200?
You can only buy one pack of 100 clones, that's it. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1880
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:21:00 -
[579] - Quote
ChromeBreaker wrote:Can you buy/sell single clones? or will they be in batches of 10-100-200?
The only way to buy clones is from Genolution and they only sell packs of 100 for 20 million ISK. Genolution also will only sell to you if you don't own a district. You can sell them from districts you own in whatever quantities you want. |
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2036
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:23:00 -
[580] - Quote
Booker DaFooker wrote:As a defender or holder of a district can you move clones out of your district to another that you own and leave less than 100 clones in the original district? They've confirmed that you can sell off ALL the clones in a district, or move ALL the clones out of one, and in doing so, it will revert to being unclaimed territory.
I'd say that's a pretty clear "yes" on being allowed less than 100 clones.
You need to move 100 in at a time when claiming territory, but if most of them die in transit or battle, you'll have less than the baseline100 you were meant to "need" as well. |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
267
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:23:00 -
[581] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:Can you buy/sell single clones? or will they be in batches of 10-100-200? The only way to buy clones is from Genolution and they only sell packs of 100 for 20 million ISK. Genolution also will only sell to you if you don't own a district. You can sell them from districts you own in whatever quantities you want.
Wait, does that mean you can buy multiple packs as long as you don't have a district? |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2036
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:24:00 -
[582] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Can a Corp choose to NOT use all their clones in defense of a district?
Say you have 300 clones when the district is attacked, would it be possible to only fight with 200? And if so, would that mean a loss by cloning out would forfeit the district? And in turn from there, would the surviving unused clones be sold on, or would you be able to move them to another district? Yes, you can just stop fighting. Just keep in mind that there is a minimum of 100 clones lost. If you "just stop fighting" in this scenario, what happens? Does the enemy team have to kill your MCC to end the battle? Is there some form of penalty for a "surrender" decision? Or would something else happen? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1880
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:28:00 -
[583] - Quote
Booker DaFooker wrote:well, fantastic stuff, it's the start of what I have been waiting for since start of closed beta. It's taken me all day to read throught he thread and I have a couple of Q's
As a defender or holder of a district can you move clones out of your district to another that you own and leave less than 100 clones in the original district?
You can move as many clones as you want, but you must move at LEAST 100 clones.
Booker DaFooker wrote:As I understand it, a corp that does not own a district buys a pack to fight for a district they want. This may take several days of clone attrition to achieve. The attacking side has it's surviving clones sold back at half price after the battle. In order to continue they will have to buy another pack to continue the attack the next day and so on until success. Is it viable to expect that small corps will be able to afford up to a potential 100 mil ISK expense to take a district?
Based on the statistics we have yes, the bigger concern is if it is worth it to commit that much money. Meaning will the districts be generating enough money. We are starting small as it is a lot easier for us to up these numbers than it is for us to lower them. We also don't expect people trying to get in to target districts that are maxed out on clone count, so I don't think corporations will have to spend 100 million ISK to get their first district.
Booker DaFooker wrote:If true this may spark some interesting tactics, such as the attacking side preventing the hacking of null cannons to prevent MCC destruction on either side while attempting to kill as many enemy clones as possible. Mind you, the defending side may exploit this by retreating and making the battle last over an hour so they could reinforce, an unlikely scenario but possible!
Keep in mind that if the defending side loses their district will not generate new clones on the next cycle and if another attack is launched they won't be able to move new clones in.
Booker DaFooker wrote:Defending side may also know that attacking corp is small so they remain in Mcc and sacrifice 100 clones knowing attackers cant afford to come back, assuming thay had plenty more in storage of course! lol
A possibility, we will have to monitor the situation when it goes live. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1883
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:30:00 -
[584] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Can a Corp choose to NOT use all their clones in defense of a district?
Say you have 300 clones when the district is attacked, would it be possible to only fight with 200? And if so, would that mean a loss by cloning out would forfeit the district? And in turn from there, would the surviving unused clones be sold on, or would you be able to move them to another district? Yes, you can just stop fighting. Just keep in mind that there is a minimum of 100 clones lost. If you "just stop fighting" in this scenario, what happens? Does the enemy team have to kill your MCC to end the battle? Is there some form of penalty for a "surrender" decision? Or would something else happen?
As it stands they just have to kill the MCC to end the battle. We hope to incentivise the defenders with the loot to keep them fighting. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1883
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:31:00 -
[585] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:Can you buy/sell single clones? or will they be in batches of 10-100-200? The only way to buy clones is from Genolution and they only sell packs of 100 for 20 million ISK. Genolution also will only sell to you if you don't own a district. You can sell them from districts you own in whatever quantities you want. Wait, does that mean you can buy multiple packs as long as you don't have a district?
You can't buy them and store them, you buy them by selecting to attack. Having an attack pending will also prevent you from buying more. |
|
LXicon
VENGEANCE FOR HIRE
63
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:35:00 -
[586] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:LXicon wrote:Could you make a single page version of this thread with only the Dev posts? Or, could you compile a Q&A thread that has all the questions asked and answers given?
The Devs tend to quote the question they are currently answering and having a single page with all the Dev posts would make it much easier to search for an answer that might have been on page 5 or 17 or 22.
Thanks.
This will take a lot of effort but I shall poke some people and see if we can maybe look at updating the FAQ on the first page. We did reserve a second post for that purpose. Can't you just go through the Dev-posts forum tab...?Not the prettiest, but you can subscribe to it. It's a search query so it will give you all dev responses. Someone could spend a couple hours summarizing everything that has been said, but there is still a lot between the lines that we will need to reason out. I really need to stop having quotes the first thing said in my posts. The dev post thing does not show what is a quote and what is not. :(
actually, Beren Hurin's link is great. i can use [ctrl]+[F] to find instances of a word or phrase and then click the link to see the post proper for the correct formatting.
THANKS! |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
273
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:36:00 -
[587] - Quote
Booker DaFooker wrote:If true this may spark some interesting tactics, such as the attacking side preventing the hacking of null cannons to prevent MCC destruction on either side while attempting to kill as many enemy clones as possible. Mind you, the defending side may exploit this by retreating and making the battle last over an hour so they could reinforce, an unlikely scenario but possible! quote]
Also I've done the math on MCC/null cannon damage mechanics, and unless they start to tweak them it is not possible for matches to last that long, UNLESS we can have the single objective map and the mechanics work different on them (I haven't actually tested them).
MCC missiles and null cannons do ~500 damage per second to somebody and MCCs have ~2.3 million HP. That means if you have JUST the enemy MCC on you and ONE Null cannon half of the time (750 HP/s note: it would be splitting its damage with the other MCC) then it would take about 51 minutes for your or your enemies MCC to go down.
So there is no way to stall and reinforce as far as I know. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2036
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:42:00 -
[588] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:If true this may spark some interesting tactics, such as the attacking side preventing the hacking of null cannons to prevent MCC destruction on either side while attempting to kill as many enemy clones as possible. Mind you, the defending side may exploit this by retreating and making the battle last over an hour so they could reinforce, an unlikely scenario but possible! Also I've done the math on MCC/null cannon damage mechanics, and unless they start to tweak them it is not possible for matches to last that long, UNLESS we can have the single objective map and the mechanics work different on them (I haven't actually tested them on that map). MCC missiles and null cannons do ~500 damage per second to somebody and MCCs have ~2.3 million HP. That means if you have JUST the enemy MCC on you and ONE Null cannon half of the time ([750 HP/s] & note: it would be splitting its damage with the other MCC) then it would take about 51 minutes for either you or your enemies MCC to go down. So there is no way to stall and reinforce as far as I know. So what happens when nobody captures ANY of the cannons? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1888
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:45:00 -
[589] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:If true this may spark some interesting tactics, such as the attacking side preventing the hacking of null cannons to prevent MCC destruction on either side while attempting to kill as many enemy clones as possible. Mind you, the defending side may exploit this by retreating and making the battle last over an hour so they could reinforce, an unlikely scenario but possible! Also I've done the math on MCC/null cannon damage mechanics, and unless they start to tweak them it is not possible for matches to last that long, UNLESS we can have the single objective map and the mechanics work different on them (I haven't actually tested them on that map). MCC missiles and null cannons do ~500 damage per second to somebody and MCCs have ~2.3 million HP. That means if you have JUST the enemy MCC on you and ONE Null cannon half of the time ([750 HP/s] & note: it would be splitting its damage with the other MCC) then it would take about 51 minutes for either you or your enemies MCC to go down. So there is no way to stall and reinforce as far as I know. So what happens when nobody captures ANY of the cannons?
The MCCs still shoot at each other and because the defenders do have at least 100 clones I assume they will at least try and capture the null cannons which will force the other team to take them back if they want them. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1888
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:46:00 -
[590] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:If true this may spark some interesting tactics, such as the attacking side preventing the hacking of null cannons to prevent MCC destruction on either side while attempting to kill as many enemy clones as possible. Mind you, the defending side may exploit this by retreating and making the battle last over an hour so they could reinforce, an unlikely scenario but possible! Also I've done the math on MCC/null cannon damage mechanics, and unless they start to tweak them it is not possible for matches to last that long, UNLESS we can have the single objective map and the mechanics work different on them (I haven't actually tested them on that map). MCC missiles and null cannons do ~500 damage per second to somebody and MCCs have ~2.3 million HP. That means if you have JUST the enemy MCC on you and ONE Null cannon half of the time ([750 HP/s] & note: it would be splitting its damage with the other MCC) then it would take about 51 minutes for either you or your enemies MCC to go down. The way to make a match last the longest is completely splitting NC damage. As a result all maps have a maximum and minimum length. 5 objective maps are the shortest because they have the most 'stuff' doing damage. But basically HP/s damage for longest times on maps is (# of Objectives)/2*500+500. So 5 objective limit is 22 mins, 4= 26 mins 3= 31 mins 2= 38 mins 1= 51 mins So there is no way to stall and reinforce as far as I know.
The MCC's shoot each other as well yea?
|
|
|
Brush Master
HavoK Core
251
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:47:00 -
[591] - Quote
I am interested in the jump mechanics, maybe I missed where you have answered this but when moving clones, can you only move clones to attack? Meaning the only way to move them is to move them to a district that is unowned or controlled by someone else?
So is the journey outward (towards low/null sec) a very long journey and if while you moving out, say only taking one district at a time in an effort to go somewhere, not really interested in districts along the way and get destroyed on the move, you have to start all over at the base that we are current set at or what are the plans to allow us to set our HQ? |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2036
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:48:00 -
[592] - Quote
My point there was that if the attackers control the battle so well they can keep the defenders away from the NULL Cannons and not have to cap any themselves, they could drag out the battle WAY past an hour... |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
273
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:49:00 -
[593] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote: The MCC's shoot each other as well yea?
They do. MCC HP starts to go down as soon as you start a battle.
I edited for MCC only damage (76 minutes total time). But you can really mitigate for a stall fast.
But It looks possible to go over an hour now that he brought that up and coders probably should figure out what that will do. |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
273
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:51:00 -
[594] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:My point there was that if the attackers control the battle so well they can keep the defenders away from the NULL Cannons and not have to cap any themselves, they could drag out the battle WAY past an hour...
If they tried to use that strategy, that's 5-6 people they'd probably have at each objective, and is pretty easy to over power. Like I said, all you would need to do is have 8-9 minutes worth of time any objective is hacked for the game to be under an hour with MCC damage. But your instincts were correct that it looks POSSIBLE to make it last a bit over an hour. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1888
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:52:00 -
[595] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:My point there was that if the attackers control the battle so well they can keep the defenders away from the NULL Cannons and not have to cap any themselves, they could drag out the battle WAY past an hour...
I guess if they wanted to. If they are controlling it that well though the defenders are probably going to stop fighting at the 100 lost clone count. I kind of expect some of the really good corporations baiting the defenders into fighting so they lose more than 100 clones. |
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
35
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:53:00 -
[596] - Quote
I'm coming back with my projection on the first day.
LetGÇÖs do this properly.
Mother corp = A Sister corps = B1-B2-B3-B4-B5
A need to provide at least 21.6M ISK to each sister corps nâá 108M ISK, and 3 members each to prepare defenses nâá 15 people.
Day 1 : Every corps take 1 district on the same planet, A in the middle (just for the style ;)) Reinforcement timer set (for an EU corp as us) EVE time : A : 20.00 B1 : 21.00 B2 : 22.00 B3 : 23.00 B4 : 0.00 B5 : 1.00 [District are locked, but they can be attack. If they are lock, you canGÇÖt build a SI. So 24h later, each district will have 140 clones (x6 = 840) Suppose that a corp attack one of the district, we can defend it easily with the ringer system. Just need to count on our tactical and FPS skills. But on day after, just the corp that attacked has a prerogative to attack again. But they canGÇÖt buy another clone set to attack the day after. So youGÇÖll have a window to interact. Well, just for the example, no one attack us during a week.]
Day 2 : A build Production Facility nâá up to 60 clones a day. Attack on B1. B1 sell 139 clones. B2-B3-B4-B5 no moves
Day 3 : A has 2 districts with 100 clones on each (follow me ;)), and build a production facility on the new district. B2-B3-B4-B5 have now 180 clones No moves at all (A canGÇÖt empty a district) If we are attack on others districts, we have enough clones to defend it (suppose ;)) : ringer system
Day 4 : A attack B2 nâá 60 clones left on the first district, the new one has 160 clones. B2 sell 219 clones (100,000 ISK each) B3-B4-B5 no moves.
Etc, etc, etcGǪ
So for each sister corp, itGÇÖs 2 days to capture their district, keeping enough clones on each to defend them, earning ISK for A selling clones, capturing new district without fighting, members of sister corp wait 24h until join mother corp (what else ?).
So ok, this system is weak the 1st day. After that, itGÇÖs just syncGǪ
Once again, donGÇÖt really know if itGÇÖs realistic (at least, it is to me), but it does need a simulationGǪ
|
LXicon
VENGEANCE FOR HIRE
63
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 16:59:00 -
[597] - Quote
Brush Master wrote:I am interested in the jump mechanics, maybe I missed where you have answered this but when moving clones, can you only move clones to attack? Meaning the only way to move them is to move them to a district that is unowned or controlled by someone else?
So is the journey outward (towards low/null sec) a very long journey and if while you moving out, say only taking one district at a time in an effort to go somewhere, not really interested in districts along the way and get destroyed on the move, you have to start all over at the base that we are current set at or what are the plans to allow us to set our HQ?
you can move clones from one of your own districts to another district you own (Move Clones To Friendly District) in addition to just attacking or taking unclaimed territory: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#District_Actions * if you move all your clones out of a district it become unoccupied.
you can move clones within the same system or jump them directly to other systems but you lose clones the further you travel: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Distance_And_Its_Effect_On_Moves |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
274
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 17:04:00 -
[598] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:My point there was that if the attackers control the battle so well they can keep the defenders away from the NULL Cannons and not have to cap any themselves, they could drag out the battle WAY past an hour... I guess if they wanted to. If they are controlling it that well though the defenders are probably going to stop fighting at the 100 lost clone count. I kind of expect some of the really good corporations baiting the defenders into fighting so they lose more than 100 clones.
I was thinking about though, and if as an attacker you knew you were going to lose, you could still 'win' with extremely cheap militia fits, and doing as much damage as you could especially if the other team brought out plenty of proto gear and vehicles. You COULD essentially force a pyhhric victory as their loot would hopefully not be worth next to anything, and the damage you inflict on them could be equal to what you lost.
This would still be very difficult as every kill the defender (winner) gets nets them 50k at least, and every loss you get is basically -100k+. IOW you'd have to do more than one of the following:
1) Die an optimal amount of times preventing them from collecting your biomass and clones. 2) Kill more defender material in isk than the clone worth of the attackers. 3) Attack in such a way that you are preventing them from another more crucial supporting manuever of another district. |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
422
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 17:07:00 -
[599] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:I'm coming back with my projection on the first day.
LetGÇÖs do this properly.
Mother corp = A Sister corps = B1-B2-B3-B4-B5
A need to provide at least 21.6M ISK to each sister corps nâá 108M ISK, and 3 members each to prepare defenses nâá 15 people.
Day 1 : Every corps take 1 district on the same planet, A in the middle (just for the style ;)) Reinforcement timer set (for an EU corp as us) EVE time : A : 20.00 B1 : 21.00 B2 : 22.00 B3 : 23.00 B4 : 0.00 B5 : 1.00 [District are locked, but they can be attack. If they are lock, you canGÇÖt build a SI. So 24h later, each district will have 140 clones (x6 = 840) Suppose that a corp attack one of the district, we can defend it easily with the ringer system. Just need to count on our tactical and FPS skills. But on day after, just the corp that attacked has a prerogative to attack again. But they canGÇÖt buy another clone set to attack the day after. So youGÇÖll have a window to interact. Well, just for the example, no one attack us during the first day.]
Day 2 : A build Production Facility nâá up to 60 clones a day. Attack on B1. B1 sell 139 clones. B2-B3-B4-B5 no moves
Day 3 : A has 2 districts with 100 clones on each (follow me ;)), and build a production facility on the new district. B2-B3-B4-B5 have now 180 clones No moves at all (A canGÇÖt empty a district) If we are attack on others districts, we have enough clones to defend it (suppose ;)) : ringer system
Day 4 : A attack B2 nâá 60 clones left on the first district, the new one has 160 clones. B2 sell 219 clones (100,000 ISK each) B3-B4-B5 no moves.
Etc, etc, etcGǪ
So for each sister corp, itGÇÖs 2 days to capture their district, keeping enough clones on each to defend them, earning ISK for A selling clones, capturing new district without fighting, members of sister corp wait 24h until join mother corp (what else ?).
So ok, this system is weak the 1st day, and maybe the third. After that, itGÇÖs just syncGǪ
Once again, donGÇÖt really know if itGÇÖs realistic (at least, it is to me), but it does need a simulationGǪ
Edit : on day 4, A become A1 and A2... A week or 10 days max to have 6 district without fighting... I guess this would work if you aren't attacked, but I can guarantee that you will be attacked on most of those districts from day 1.
If say B1 to B4 are attacked from the first day this plan will already be ruined. Even if you manage to win all those 4 battles, you should end up with less than 100 clones. The next day the same districts would be attacked by the same / another corp.
In the end you can't keep up with the ongoing attacks. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2036
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 17:11:00 -
[600] - Quote
Assuming that 100 clones is enough to defend might also be a liability with teams frequently being cloned out in Skirmish right now - and we have more than 100 clones per side in the current iteration of the mode.
If someone attacks with 200 or more clones, your 100 will turn into a TDM where you're outnumbered 2:1. Good luck? |
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
35
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 17:23:00 -
[601] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:I'm coming back with my projection on the first day.
LetGÇÖs do this properly.
Mother corp = A Sister corps = B1-B2-B3-B4-B5
A need to provide at least 21.6M ISK to each sister corps nâá 108M ISK, and 3 members each to prepare defenses nâá 15 people.
Day 1 : Every corps take 1 district on the same planet, A in the middle (just for the style ;)) Reinforcement timer set (for an EU corp as us) EVE time : A : 20.00 B1 : 21.00 B2 : 22.00 B3 : 23.00 B4 : 0.00 B5 : 1.00 [District are locked, but they can be attack. If they are lock, you canGÇÖt build a SI. So 24h later, each district will have 140 clones (x6 = 840) Suppose that a corp attack one of the district, we can defend it easily with the ringer system. Just need to count on our tactical and FPS skills. But on day after, just the corp that attacked has a prerogative to attack again. But they canGÇÖt buy another clone set to attack the day after. So youGÇÖll have a window to interact. Well, just for the example, no one attack us during the first day.]
Day 2 : A build Production Facility nâá up to 60 clones a day. Attack on B1. B1 sell 139 clones. B2-B3-B4-B5 no moves
Day 3 : A has 2 districts with 100 clones on each (follow me ;)), and build a production facility on the new district. B2-B3-B4-B5 have now 180 clones No moves at all (A canGÇÖt empty a district) If we are attack on others districts, we have enough clones to defend it (suppose ;)) : ringer system
Day 4 : A attack B2 nâá 60 clones left on the first district, the new one has 160 clones. B2 sell 219 clones (100,000 ISK each) B3-B4-B5 no moves.
Etc, etc, etcGǪ
So for each sister corp, itGÇÖs 2 days to capture their district, keeping enough clones on each to defend them, earning ISK for A selling clones, capturing new district without fighting, members of sister corp wait 24h until join mother corp (what else ?).
So ok, this system is weak the 1st day, and maybe the third. After that, itGÇÖs just syncGǪ
Once again, donGÇÖt really know if itGÇÖs realistic (at least, it is to me), but it does need a simulationGǪ
Edit : on day 4, A become A1 and A2... A week or 10 days max to have 6 district without fighting... I guess this would work if you aren't attacked, but I can guarantee that you will be attacked on most of those districts from day 1. If say B1 to B4 are attacked from the first day this plan will already be ruined. Even if you manage to win all those 4 battles, you should end up with less than 100 clones on each district. The next day the same districts would be attacked by the same / another corp. In the end you can't keep up with the ongoing attacks.
Corp C attack A with a 100 clones stack bought to Genolution. C failed, can't buy another stack BEFORE the starting game so CAN'T attack the day after (and C is the only corp who can attack the same district on 2 days if I understood all well)... There is a window ;) !!! |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
274
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 17:26:00 -
[602] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Assuming that 100 clones is enough to defend might also be a liability with teams frequently being cloned out in Skirmish right now - and we have more than 100 clones per side in the current iteration of the mode.
If someone attacks with 200 or more clones, your 100 will turn into a TDM where you're outnumbered 2:1. Good luck?
Well the liability with having less than 100 clones as a defender is that the attacker has 2 ways of winning (clones or MCC). If you have more than 100 clones, as soon as you lose your 100th, if it looks close, it'd be better to hide than lose everything. Then you get one more round, can be supported by friendly clones, and maybe have allies counter attack a hostile/aggresor district. That would only apply though if you have a way of sending more clones to the district and/or you know what kind of follow-up attack you could face.
I really encourage people to read the rules/strategy of the game diplomacy as a lot of supporting/blocking/defending/attacking sorts of strategies will be similar.
One example would be that you could organize a chain of more efficient attacks so that your enemy 5 jumps away, could be degraded by an ally who is in his system. But in order for that player to be confident in his attack, you attack his most likely threat that is 2 jumps from you and 3 jumps from him. |
Brush Master
HavoK Core
252
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 17:28:00 -
[603] - Quote
LXicon wrote:Brush Master wrote:I am interested in the jump mechanics, maybe I missed where you have answered this but when moving clones, can you only move clones to attack? Meaning the only way to move them is to move them to a district that is unowned or controlled by someone else?
So is the journey outward (towards low/null sec) a very long journey and if while you moving out, say only taking one district at a time in an effort to go somewhere, not really interested in districts along the way and get destroyed on the move, you have to start all over at the base that we are current set at or what are the plans to allow us to set our HQ? you can move clones from one of your own districts to another district you own (Move Clones To Friendly District) in addition to just attacking or taking unclaimed territory: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#District_Actions* if you move all your clones out of a district it become unoccupied. you can move clones within the same system or jump them directly to other systems but you lose clones the further you travel: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Distance_And_Its_Effect_On_Moves
I guess I am basically asking, how far will a jump take you? Not being in Eve, the term jump needs defined in terms of Dust mercs. I have a target goal for a system and just want to figure out how I can get there with the least amount of conflict to setup a base. |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
422
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 17:28:00 -
[604] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Bendtner92 wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:I'm coming back with my projection on the first day.
LetGÇÖs do this properly.
Mother corp = A Sister corps = B1-B2-B3-B4-B5
A need to provide at least 21.6M ISK to each sister corps nâá 108M ISK, and 3 members each to prepare defenses nâá 15 people.
Day 1 : Every corps take 1 district on the same planet, A in the middle (just for the style ;)) Reinforcement timer set (for an EU corp as us) EVE time : A : 20.00 B1 : 21.00 B2 : 22.00 B3 : 23.00 B4 : 0.00 B5 : 1.00 [District are locked, but they can be attack. If they are lock, you canGÇÖt build a SI. So 24h later, each district will have 140 clones (x6 = 840) Suppose that a corp attack one of the district, we can defend it easily with the ringer system. Just need to count on our tactical and FPS skills. But on day after, just the corp that attacked has a prerogative to attack again. But they canGÇÖt buy another clone set to attack the day after. So youGÇÖll have a window to interact. Well, just for the example, no one attack us during the first day.]
Day 2 : A build Production Facility nâá up to 60 clones a day. Attack on B1. B1 sell 139 clones. B2-B3-B4-B5 no moves
Day 3 : A has 2 districts with 100 clones on each (follow me ;)), and build a production facility on the new district. B2-B3-B4-B5 have now 180 clones No moves at all (A canGÇÖt empty a district) If we are attack on others districts, we have enough clones to defend it (suppose ;)) : ringer system
Day 4 : A attack B2 nâá 60 clones left on the first district, the new one has 160 clones. B2 sell 219 clones (100,000 ISK each) B3-B4-B5 no moves.
Etc, etc, etcGǪ
So for each sister corp, itGÇÖs 2 days to capture their district, keeping enough clones on each to defend them, earning ISK for A selling clones, capturing new district without fighting, members of sister corp wait 24h until join mother corp (what else ?).
So ok, this system is weak the 1st day, and maybe the third. After that, itGÇÖs just syncGǪ
Once again, donGÇÖt really know if itGÇÖs realistic (at least, it is to me), but it does need a simulationGǪ
Edit : on day 4, A become A1 and A2... A week or 10 days max to have 6 district without fighting... I guess this would work if you aren't attacked, but I can guarantee that you will be attacked on most of those districts from day 1. If say B1 to B4 are attacked from the first day this plan will already be ruined. Even if you manage to win all those 4 battles, you should end up with less than 100 clones on each district. The next day the same districts would be attacked by the same / another corp. In the end you can't keep up with the ongoing attacks. Corp C attack A with a 100 clones stack bought to Genolution. C failed, can't buy another stack BEFORE the starting game so CAN'T attack the day after (and C is the only corp who can attack the same district on 2 days if I understood all well)... There is a window ;) !!! The corp has a 1-hour window from the start of the battle where they can initiate an attack the following day. If they're using the pack of clones to attack you I would assume that after they after the battle can buy another and attack you the following day again. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2036
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 17:34:00 -
[605] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Assuming that 100 clones is enough to defend might also be a liability with teams frequently being cloned out in Skirmish right now - and we have more than 100 clones per side in the current iteration of the mode.
If someone attacks with 200 or more clones, your 100 will turn into a TDM where you're outnumbered 2:1. Good luck? Well the liability with having less than 100 clones as a defender is that the attacker has 2 ways of winning (clones or MCC). If you have more than 100 clones, as soon as you lose your 100th, if it looks close, it'd be better to hide than lose everything. Then you get one more round, can be supported by friendly clones, and maybe have allies counter attack a hostile/aggresor district. That would only apply though if you have a way of sending more clones to the district and/or you know what kind of follow-up attack you could face. I really encourage people to read the rules/strategy of the game diplomacy as a lot of supporting/blocking/defending/attacking sorts of strategies will be similar. One example would be that you could organize a chain of more efficient attacks so that your enemy 5 jumps away, could be degraded by an ally who is in his system. But in order for that player to be confident in his attack, you attack his most likely threat that is 2 jumps from you and 3 jumps from him. If you get down to those last clones and hide, the enemy victory by MCC will clone you out, because you only had 100 clones, and a territory that's dropped to 0 clones reverts to unclaimed or falls into the attacker's hands when they win. |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
274
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 17:36:00 -
[606] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote: If you get down to those last clones and hide, the enemy victory by MCC will clone you out, because you only had 100 clones, and a territory that's dropped to 0 clones reverts to unclaimed or falls into the attacker's hands when they win.
I meant if you had 105 clones as defender, they killed 100, then you have 5 left. Those 5 hide. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2036
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 17:40:00 -
[607] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote: If you get down to those last clones and hide, the enemy victory by MCC will clone you out, because you only had 100 clones, and a territory that's dropped to 0 clones reverts to unclaimed or falls into the attacker's hands when they win.
I meant if you had 105 clones as defender, they killed 100, then you have 5 left. Those 5 hide. We were specifically talking about an early-game scenario where that isn't an option though.
It REQUIRES you to buildup to 200 and IMMEDIATELY send 100 to "attack" a district your dummy corp has just abandoned, otherwise the "strategy" has to basically double the timeframe it's working under. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
35
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 17:44:00 -
[608] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote: The corp has a 1-hour window from the start of the battle where they can initiate an attack the following day. If they're using the pack of clones to attack you I would assume that they after the battle can buy another and attack you the following day again.
Does anyone know if that's correct?
This why I keep pointing this ;) !!!
As an around 150 members corp, it looks like easy to do this for a few district. I can't imagine with the 1000+ members corps...
I'm repeating, but it is TRAVIAN way (MMO/Strategy online). I was part of a "merveille" during a speed server. I know what is a time sync, and with 1h parameter, that you can deal with friends in sister corp, if you don't block some things, it is easy way !!! (with a weakness during 2-3 days...) |
S Park Finner
BetaMax. CRONOS.
99
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 17:47:00 -
[609] - Quote
Some questions from my post lost in the mists of the thread...
I think the original post represents what we know so far.
Outstanding questions...- Are all the state transitions in the original post correct? (Not answered yet)
- if the attacker chooses to pursue the attack for another day (win or loose) can they do it with as many clones as they have available to move? (Not answered yet)
- The "offline" state is the one where no one owns the district? So the only thing that can be done to it is to move clones into it and bring it online? (Modified question, not answered yet)
- Created two more new states, Under Attack / Generating Clones and Under Attack / Not Generating Clones -- Is this accurate? (Not answered yet)
- What is the default reinforcement period (right after the district is first taken over)? (New question, not answered yet)
- Can you take over a district and NOT set/reset the reinforcement period thus leaving it online?
|
Halador Osiris
Dead Six Initiative
63
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 17:49:00 -
[610] - Quote
Brush Master wrote:LXicon wrote:Brush Master wrote:I am interested in the jump mechanics, maybe I missed where you have answered this but when moving clones, can you only move clones to attack? Meaning the only way to move them is to move them to a district that is unowned or controlled by someone else?
So is the journey outward (towards low/null sec) a very long journey and if while you moving out, say only taking one district at a time in an effort to go somewhere, not really interested in districts along the way and get destroyed on the move, you have to start all over at the base that we are current set at or what are the plans to allow us to set our HQ? you can move clones from one of your own districts to another district you own (Move Clones To Friendly District) in addition to just attacking or taking unclaimed territory: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#District_Actions* if you move all your clones out of a district it become unoccupied. you can move clones within the same system or jump them directly to other systems but you lose clones the further you travel: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Distance_And_Its_Effect_On_Moves I guess I am basically asking, how far will a jump take you? Not being in Eve, the term jump needs defined in terms of Dust mercs. I have a target goal for a system and just want to figure out how I can get there with the least amount of conflict to setup a base. Also note, is there travel time? If I am jumping to an unclaimed district, do I have to wait to get there and claim it? any details on that In EVE there are solar systems much like our own (star, planets, moons, etc.). To get from one solar system to the next, you get shot through these giant space guns. This is referred to as a jump. To navigate, you warp to one of these "jump gates" and activate it. You appear at the corresponding jump gate in the system that gate is aimed at. Then you would warp to the next gate within that system, jump again, etc. Each solar system you arrive in is an additional jump.
Going from Jita (high security market system) to Amarr (capital of the Amarr empire), you have to make roughly 20 jumps. It really depends on where you are trying to get to, but honestly 6 jumps won't get you too far, and after that your clones are all dead. |
|
Telcontar Dunedain
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
361
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 17:52:00 -
[611] - Quote
I'm concerned that the economics won't back the amount of warfare I want, Beers has a good thread going on some of those bits.
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=63845&find=unread
One of the tunables is the Looting which comes from the battlefield.
I think this is what should be tuned upwards first and foremost.
Looting gear directly from the field as an income stream has all kind of secondary benefits and would help the game a lot. |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
274
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:05:00 -
[612] - Quote
Will you buy clones from
A) a disembodied genolution contact and not have to transport them, but just 'claim' a district with them on day one?
Or
B) will there be seeded stations you buy clones from, that then suffer movement penalties for getting clones to target districts? |
Disturbingly Bored
Universal Allies Inc.
149
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:07:00 -
[613] - Quote
Telcontar Dunedain wrote:I'm concerned that the economics won't back the amount of warfare I want, Beers has a good thread going on some of those bits. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=63845&find=unreadOne of the tunables is the Looting which comes from the battlefield. I think this is what should be tuned upwards first and foremost. Looting gear directly from the field as an income stream has all kind of secondary benefits and would help the game a lot.
On a related note: given the nature of the new loot, will we be able finally send loot to corp mates that can use it?
Increasing the loot reward to offset financial balance is meaningless if you can't put it to good use. |
YourDeadAgain76
Red Star.
139
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:13:00 -
[614] - Quote
Questions.
1. Are these districs gona be "stocked" with defences like turret installations, resupply, bunkers, sniper towers, buildings, etc in random areas or premade maps like minus peak etc... Or are we gonna be able to buy these buildings, installations, cru's, turrets, etc. from the marketplace and in the 24 hour window after we plant our flag, will we be able to plant our defencive structures were we want with an RDV. ??
2. Will we be able to fight with our alliance corporations if they need help or if we do. Or will we be able to hire mercanaries to help us out?
3. If the player/squad limit is increased is the vehicle limit also increased.
4. If we get 100 clones for 20 milion isk for a 1 time only at the start to take a district, then we defend the distric the next day and lose 20 clones in the process and the attacking team looses all 100. Do we then have 80 clones remaining, and how do we create more.?
5. Are the distric maps allready made up and set in stone, or will we be able to change the map we want to defend for that district.?
6. Will Dust514 be available on the PS4 at launch.?
Thanks CCP love the info and this bad a$$ game is gonna blow any other console game out of the water. This is what all us dudes and dudettes have been waiting for since the first build. |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
274
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:13:00 -
[615] - Quote
Telcontar Dunedain wrote:I'm concerned that the economics won't back the amount of warfare I want, Beers has a good thread going on some of those bits. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=63845&find=unreadOne of the tunables is the Looting which comes from the battlefield. I think this is what should be tuned upwards first and foremost. Looting gear directly from the field as an income stream has all kind of secondary benefits and would help the game a lot.
I was enveloping the economics here, and wont disclose what I've figured out so far, but what it sounds like is that much of the profit will be split between eve and dust with maximal profit coming from people who can tie both together the best.
But basically the lowsec Dust economy will only grow IF both A) more money is being brought in than destroyed, which is especially more easy if B) more clones are being produced from planets than are being lost to death and bought from Genolution.
IOW : Genolution purchases are isk sinks. MCC clone losses are unrecoverable resource sinks. Player kills by winning teams are a conservative resource loss, but isk fountain. Planetary clone production are resource fountains. Genolution clone sales are resource sinks, but isk fountains. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1903
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:20:00 -
[616] - Quote
You and your long posts... :P I kid, bring them on. :D
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:I'm coming back with my projection on the first day.
LetGÇÖs do this properly.
Mother corp = A Sister corps = B1-B2-B3-B4-B5
So far I follow...
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:A need to provide at least 21.6M ISK to each sister corps nâá 108M ISK, and 3 members each to prepare defenses nâá 15 people. Why at least 21.6 million ISK? Clone starter packs are 20 million and they can be deployed anywhere. No fee for distance on those.
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Day 1 : Every corps take 1 district on the same planet, A in the middle (just for the style ;)) Reinforcement timer set (for an EU corp as us) EVE time : A : 20.00 B1 : 21.00 B2 : 22.00 B3 : 23.00 B4 : 0.00 B5 : 1.00 District are locked, but they can be attack. If they are lock, you canGÇÖt build a SI. So 24h later, each district will have 140 clones (x6 = 840)
All of the districts will be seeded with a random SI and at no time can a district not have an SI.
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Suppose that a corp attack one of the district, we can defend it easily with the ringer system. Just need to count on our tactical and FPS skills. But on day after, just the corp that attacked has a prerogative to attack again. But they canGÇÖt buy another clone set to attack the day after. So youGÇÖll have a window to interact.
Just so I can go and clarify it, where did you get the idea that the attacking corporation won't be able to do a follow up attack? They won't own a district, the battle will be over, they can immediately launch another attack.
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Well, just for the example, no one attack us during the first day. OK
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Day 2 : A build Production Facility nâá up to 60 clones a day. Attack on B1. B1 sell 139 clones. B2-B3-B4-B5 no moves
Assuming you sell the clones on B1 and then attack it, yes.
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Day 3 : A has 2 districts with 100 clones on each (follow me ;)), and build a production facility on the new district. B2-B3-B4-B5 have now 180 clones No moves at all (A canGÇÖt empty a district) If we are attack on others districts, we have enough clones to defend it (suppose ;)) : ringer system
Day 4 : A attack B2 nâá 60 clones left on the first district, the new one has 160 clones. B2 sell 219 clones (100,000 ISK each) B3-B4-B5 no moves.
Etc, etc, etcGǪ
All if this logic follows the rules we have laid out, but it also relies entirely on no one attacking your districts. If that happens we have failed. Either we have released to many districts or the cost is to prohibitive.
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:So for each sister corp, itGÇÖs 2 days to capture their district, keeping enough clones on each to defend them, earning ISK for A selling clones, capturing new district without fighting, members of sister corp wait 24h until join mother corp (what else ?).
So ok, this system is weak the 1st day, and maybe the third. After that, itGÇÖs just syncGǪ
Once again, donGÇÖt really know if itGÇÖs realistic (at least, it is to me), but it does need a simulationGǪ
Edit : on day 4, A become A1 and A2... A week or 10 days max to have 6 district without fighting...
As my previous comment said, yes this would work but relies on no on attacking. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1903
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:24:00 -
[617] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:I was enveloping the economics here, and wont disclose what I've figured out so far, but what it sounds like is that much of the profit will be split between eve and dust with maximal profit coming from people who can tie both together the best.
But basically the lowsec Dust economy will only grow IF both A) more money is being brought in than destroyed, which is especially more easy if B) more clones are being produced from planets than are being lost to death and bought from Genolution.
IOW : Genolution purchases are isk sinks. MCC clone losses are unrecoverable resource sinks. Player kills by winning teams are a conservative resource loss, but isk fountain. Planetary clone production are resource fountains. Genolution clone sales are resource sinks, but isk fountains.
Generally speaking we prefer faucet over fountain, fits with sink more. :P Other then that looks about right. |
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
35
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:29:00 -
[618] - Quote
LetGÇÖs take it on the other way.
1 corp takes 1 district.
Day 1 : Build a Production Facility Reinforcement Timer set nâá District lock Can be Attack. 100 clones on it.
Day 2 : 160 clones on the district District is not under attack Take 100 clones and take the neighbor district. Instant capture Build a Production Facility Reinforcement timer set District lock Can be attack 100 clones on it Always 160 total clones (I remember that in the other scenario, the corp has a theory 840 clones)
Day 3 : 120 clones on the first district (A) 160 on the second (B) Only B can capture an unoccupied district (leave 20 clones on a district is a big risk for A) Repeat 3 district at the end of the day A : 120 clones B : 60 clones C : 100 clones
Day 4 : In a peace world you can capture 2 new unoccupied district with A and C.
So, ok my first scenario is not so smart btw ...
PS : 21,6M is 20M for clones and 1.6M to create a new corp. But well, it was stupid, and as you said, if we don't fight each other corps between the 1st and the 2nd day you failed
Last edit ;) : sorry for all thoose long things to read... Thought a lot today about this system... |
LXicon
VENGEANCE FOR HIRE
63
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:33:00 -
[619] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:Will you buy clones from A) a disembodied genolution contact and not have to transport them, but just 'claim' a district with them on day one? Or B) will there be seeded stations you buy clones from, that then suffer movement penalties for getting clones to target districts?
if you don't have a district yet, you select the district you want to claim or attack and that counts as your Genolution purchase : reference * if you have a district, you can't buy from Genolution
the clones are transported instantly by Genolution, but they hope to eventually have Eve pilots doing this. just not yet : reference
|
EnIgMa99
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
239
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:33:00 -
[620] - Quote
I think an important thing is that 1 its worth fighting for, for instance: you get cool stuff you would otherwise have no access too, bragging rights a cool patch you can wear or a planet you can name and 2 its not so large that fighting becomes unfocused and we are just playing marry-go-round with districts. I really look forward to something deep engaging and rewarding.
there is not enough stuff to spend isk on right now for me either |
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2040
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:35:00 -
[621] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:A need to provide at least 21.6M ISK to each sister corps nâá 108M ISK, and 3 members each to prepare defenses nâá 15 people. Why at least 21.6 million ISK? Clone starter packs are 20 million and they can be deployed anywhere. No fee for distance on those. Pretty sure this is counting the cost of establishing each new Corp, since they're "child" Corps created from the main one |
YourDeadAgain76
Red Star.
139
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:41:00 -
[622] - Quote
When FW/PC takes affect will we be given a corporation warehouse for all the equipment we cant use but others can for a price, Or will we be able to trade with other merc's.? |
first sgt cotman
501st LEGION CLONE TROOPER
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:44:00 -
[623] - Quote
When this comes out will there be anything else thats new like a better orbital strike something new in are mec quarters. |
Fox Gaden
DUST University Ivy League
226
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:45:00 -
[624] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:As PI does not really recognize districts this is really hard. We are looking at things like an SI that is equivalent to the POCO and that there can only be one on the planet, and that the owning corporation can charge a tax for usage on. Not sure yet though, we are not done yet. Make it a special type of District. You can only attack it if you own the majority of the districts on the planet. If the owner no longer owns the majority of the districts on the planet the POCO district is locked. It would be unlocked again if the owner once more takes the majority of the districts, or if another Corp conquers a majority of districts on the planet and then conquers the POCO district. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
215
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:48:00 -
[625] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Contest this thought, please: GÇó ringers are allowed GÇó you don't need to flip districts for mother corp GÇó mother corp just means the ringer community for split corps
GÇó results in that splitting corp ONLY expands possibilities, gives more attack chances, and speeds clone production to attack. why flip them for one corp? make a swam of corps, its even thief and disband proof.
You cant transfer clones between corps so each would be even until one produces more. 1 corp with 1 district (no upgrades) can attack once every 3 days (40Cl a day, 100Cl needed). 1 corp with 3 districts can attack everyday with spare. Its economically and tactically better to have more districts as you can attack, and enforce your own districts, more effectively. But you need to have more districts which is how this convo started It is only an advantage on day one where you can buy lots of starter packs and try and take a bunch of unowned districts. Once things get past that initial flash point it will be far better to be in one corporation and having the ability to transfer clones between districts.
How about a big corp that makes a lot of 1 person corps and uses them to generate more ringer fights? Consider this carefully, because creating ton of corps to use as boost (not detaching anything from main) seems pretty powerful to me, especially since all of those corps are just extra clones for the main corp use. Sure, on another corp, but extra clones still. |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
275
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:55:00 -
[626] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Contest this thought, please: GÇó ringers are allowed GÇó you don't need to flip districts for mother corp GÇó mother corp just means the ringer community for split corps
GÇó results in that splitting corp ONLY expands possibilities, gives more attack chances, and speeds clone production to attack. why flip them for one corp? make a swam of corps, its even thief and disband proof.
You cant transfer clones between corps so each would be even until one produces more. 1 corp with 1 district (no upgrades) can attack once every 3 days (40Cl a day, 100Cl needed). 1 corp with 3 districts can attack everyday with spare. Its economically and tactically better to have more districts as you can attack, and enforce your own districts, more effectively. But you need to have more districts which is how this convo started It is only an advantage on day one where you can buy lots of starter packs and try and take a bunch of unowned districts. Once things get past that initial flash point it will be far better to be in one corporation and having the ability to transfer clones between districts. How about a big corp that makes a lot of 1 person corps and uses them to generate more ringer fights? Consider this carefully, because creating ton of corps to use as boost (not detaching anything from main) seems pretty powerful to me, especially since all of those corps are just extra clones for the main corp use. Sure, on another corp, but extra clones still.
If you are talking 'ringer' fights based on clones purchased from genolution, the clones themselves will effectively cost 2x those that come produced from districts. So (depending on the cost of your total attack) Genolution based attacks will be more expensive than district based attacks. |
Soozu
5o1st
18
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:56:00 -
[627] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:ChromeBreaker wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Contest this thought, please: GÇó ringers are allowed GÇó you don't need to flip districts for mother corp GÇó mother corp just means the ringer community for split corps
GÇó results in that splitting corp ONLY expands possibilities, gives more attack chances, and speeds clone production to attack. why flip them for one corp? make a swam of corps, its even thief and disband proof.
You cant transfer clones between corps so each would be even until one produces more. 1 corp with 1 district (no upgrades) can attack once every 3 days (40Cl a day, 100Cl needed). 1 corp with 3 districts can attack everyday with spare. Its economically and tactically better to have more districts as you can attack, and enforce your own districts, more effectively. But you need to have more districts which is how this convo started It is only an advantage on day one where you can buy lots of starter packs and try and take a bunch of unowned districts. Once things get past that initial flash point it will be far better to be in one corporation and having the ability to transfer clones between districts. How about a big corp that makes a lot of 1 person corps and uses them to generate more ringer fights? Consider this carefully, because creating ton of corps to use as boost (not detaching anything from main) seems pretty powerful to me, especially since all of those corps are just extra clones for the main corp use. Sure, on another corp, but extra clones still.
Extra clones for who? The one man corp? I don't get it, what is it you don't get? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1920
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:04:00 -
[628] - Quote
YourDeadAgain76 wrote:Questions.
Answers... OK fine, I will actually continue...
YourDeadAgain76 wrote:1. Are these districs gona be "stocked" with defences like turret installations, resupply, bunkers, sniper towers, buildings, etc in random areas or premade maps like minus peak etc... Or are we gonna be able to buy these buildings, installations, cru's, turrets, etc. from the marketplace and in the 24 hour window after we plant our flag, will we be able to plant our defencive structures were we want with an RDV. ??
For now our focus has been the gameplay of taking districts and what goes on outside of actual battles. Planetary Conquest is not changing, well we are adding friendly fire :D, how the actual fighting works. You will not be able to place your own instilations or anything like that... yes...
YourDeadAgain76 wrote:2. Will we be able to fight with our alliance corporations if they need help or if we do. Or will we be able to hire mercanaries to help us out?
When a squad leader joins a battle, they will take with them everyone in the squad. So yes.
YourDeadAgain76 wrote:3. If the player/squad limit is increased is the vehicle limit also increased.
I don't know...
YourDeadAgain76 wrote:4. If we get 100 clones for 20 milion isk for a 1 time only at the start to take a district, then we defend the distric the next day and lose 20 clones in the process and the attacking team looses all 100. Do we then have 80 clones remaining, and how do we create more.?
If you take the unowned district at the beginning of the first battle you will actually have 140 due to the district generating clones. Yes you will have 80 clones. You get more every day at the beginning of the reinforcement cycle assuming you didn't lose a battle during the previous days reinforcement cycle.
YourDeadAgain76 wrote:5. Are the distric maps allready made up and set in stone, or will we be able to change the map we want to defend for that district.?
You will not be able to choose, but the SI choice will make a difference.
YourDeadAgain76 wrote:6. Will Dust514 be available on the PS4 at launch.?
I like my job to much to tell you.
YourDeadAgain76 wrote:Thanks CCP love the info and this bad a$$ game is gonna blow any other console game out of the water. This is what all us dudes and dudettes have been waiting for since the first build.
:D |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
268
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:13:00 -
[629] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Suppose that a corp attack one of the district, we can defend it easily with the ringer system. Just need to count on our tactical and FPS skills. But on day after, just the corp that attacked has a prerogative to attack again. But they canGÇÖt buy another clone set to attack the day after. So youGÇÖll have a window to interact. Just so I can go and clarify it, where did you get the idea that the attacking corporation won't be able to do a follow up attack? They won't own a district, the battle will be over, they can immediately launch another attack.Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Day 3 : A has 2 districts with 100 clones on each (follow me ;)), and build a production facility on the new district. B2-B3-B4-B5 have now 180 clones No moves at all (A canGÇÖt empty a district) If we are attack on others districts, we have enough clones to defend it (suppose ;)) : ringer system
Day 4 : A attack B2 nâá 60 clones left on the first district, the new one has 160 clones. B2 sell 219 clones (100,000 ISK each) B3-B4-B5 no moves.
Etc, etc, etcGǪ All if this logic follows the rules we have laid out, but it also relies entirely on no one attacking your districts. If that happens we have failed. Either we have released to many districts or the cost is to prohibitive.
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:So for each sister corp, itGÇÖs 2 days to capture their district, keeping enough clones on each to defend them, earning ISK for A selling clones, capturing new district without fighting, members of sister corp wait 24h until join mother corp (what else ?).
So ok, this system is weak the 1st day, and maybe the third. After that, itGÇÖs just syncGǪ
Once again, donGÇÖt really know if itGÇÖs realistic (at least, it is to me), but it does need a simulationGǪ
Edit : on day 4, A become A1 and A2... A week or 10 days max to have 6 district without fighting... As my previous comment said, yes this would work but relies on no on attacking.
Congratulations to CCP FoxFour for rebuttal of the day. This should put all these ridiculous exponential growth concerns to bed. TrollsRoyce, please read this reply carefully because your entire premise of exploit concern is based upon the idea that your districts will never be attacked and you'll never lose clones. This I can guarantee will not happen. |
R F Gyro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
325
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:20:00 -
[630] - Quote
Can I interject at this point and mention that this thread has gone on far too long without degenerating into mindless drivel and the same tired stereotypes. If we aren't careful the Dust forum's immune system will soon begin to reject it.
|
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1921
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:23:00 -
[631] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:Can I interject at this point and mention that this thread has gone on far too long without degenerating into mindless drivel and the same tired stereotypes. If we aren't careful the Dust forum's immune system will soon begin to reject it.
You may, but I will ignore you. :P |
|
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
359
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:23:00 -
[632] - Quote
My main question is on ISK payout
The wiki say the biomass value of damaged clones is 50K and with a minimum 100 clone loss regardless of true clone loss means 5 Million ISK payout to winning team? Is that number correct (will fitting cost of the clones lost also be factored in or will that be apart of the salvage portion?)
Additionally
So this is the layout im trying to understand.
Currently its skirmish 2.0 correct?
Also when you face a district the attackers have x clones to use and the defenders have a max of 300-450 or less depending on how many clones are set on the district correct?
So the battle hud would show
Health from Attacker MCC and Defender MCC. The attackers would have x clones and Defenders would have Y clone(= to the number on district left up to a max of 450)
So in theory if a defender is foolish enough keep respawning we could in theory flip the district in one battle by cloning out all 450 clones before we destroy the MCC correct?
granted this would be very foolish of the defenders to allow for this.
However i think skirmish 1.0 would be perfect for allowing single attack flips while giving a strategic defense to defenders by having multiple null cannons console that have to be deactivated by attackers.
I think the win conditions could be destroy MCC/clone enemy for defenders or get cloned for attackers but make it so there is a timer limit on the match 60mins in which if the defender hasnt repelled the invasion it result in a victory for the attackers (however then it may be worth considering uping the numbers for defenders because its not hard to maintain a corp KDR of >4.5 and wipe out the clones before MCC gets wiped out.
It would obviously necessitate tweaks but it allows for single district flips but require a lot more fortification for the defense so that attrition can occur due player skill a very important aspect of flipping districts in a single attack. While corps with large player bases will still be able to control large district territories and reenforce.(assuming you allow for reenforcements despite an attack condition to protect them)
Basically large player corp can funnel a ton of clones and try to win the fight by attrition by maintaining a large clone count during real time while a small skilled corp can commit forces and try to flip a district through player skill and control. But this scenario only works in skirmish 1.0 where there isnt a constant attack on the attacker MCC by the defender MCC.
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1921
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:24:00 -
[633] - Quote
YourDeadAgain76 wrote: When FW/PC takes affect will we be given a corporation warehouse for all the equipment we cant use but others can for a price, Or will we be able to trade with other merc's.?
No, but it is on our roadmap and something we want to get done. Before that though I think we need player trading of items and such. Maybe not a full market, but the ability to transfer assets between characters. If we get both at the same time great. |
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
215
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:25:00 -
[634] - Quote
What I want to understand is this:
(another example so people see my concern)
Option A: Corp of 200 members (random number) starts off by getting 1 district. They expand from there on normally. Option B: Same corp makes 4 alt corps with 5 squad leaders each. These alt corps do the excact same thing as the mother corp would, and they bring mercenaries into fight from mother corp. The 200 member corp reaches its peak districts 5 times faster, creating clones 5 times faster, being able to attack 5 times faster etc.
The only limit here is merc number in both cases, BUT as you have 5 corps you reach the limit divided to those corps 5 times faster. You stomp all competition, because you are able to attack with 5 corps bringing ringers while the single corp would just do its thing slowly.
The thing is, the main corp can still do its thing normally. They just bring ringers from the alt corps, since the player base is the same. So the same 200 players get 5 times more stuff done by making 5 corps so they can utilize their mercs fully from the start.
Now the 200 player corp would die of boredom trying to get fights for all the members, with clone amount being the cap. With 5 corps, you have 5 times the clones to get fights with for a good long while.
It feels intuitively very broken. I don't think the CCP posters have fully gotten an idea of how important it is to start off with alt corps and cross ringer fighting, if not for anything else than getting more fights. The base corp still builds at its pace, while the bonus corps are extra. And they can be eventually merged by giving free wins to base corp. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
35
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:32:00 -
[635] - Quote
Just to be clear.
I didn't mean to troll the dev blog and planetary conquest system, and didn't want to find a way to exploit it for me and my corp especially. If I play DUST today, it's for what is coming ;) !!! Just want to be sure that some corp don't fin a way to not just play the game.
All I want is a fair game, and I'm still not 100% convince. If every defenses are win, we can imagine a lots of things... And the economic/clone production system. In my 1st scenario, a theory 840 clones for 1 corp (84M ISK), the 108M to form childs corp will be reimburse in 2 days....
Well, it's just theory.... |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
268
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:35:00 -
[636] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:What I want to understand is this:
(another example so people see my concern)
Option A: Corp of 200 members (random number) starts off by getting 1 district. They expand from there on normally. Option B: Same corp makes 4 alt corps with 5 squad leaders each. These alt corps do the excact same thing as the mother corp would, and they bring mercenaries into fight from mother corp. The 200 member corp reaches its peak districts 5 times faster, creating clones 5 times faster, being able to attack 5 times faster etc.
The only limit here is merc number in both cases, BUT as you have 5 corps you reach the limit divided to those corps 5 times faster. You stomp all competition, because you are able to attack with 5 corps bringing ringers while the single corp would just do its thing slowly.
The thing is, the main corp can still do its thing normally. They just bring ringers from the alt corps, since the player base is the same. So the same 200 players get 5 times more stuff done by making 5 corps so they can utilize their mercs fully from the start.
Now the 200 player corp would die of boredom trying to get fights for all the members, with clone amount being the cap. With 5 corps, you have 5 times the clones to get fights with for a good long while.
It feels intuitively very broken. I don't think the CCP posters have fully gotten an idea of how important it is to start off with alt corps and cross ringer fighting, if not for anything else than getting more fights. The base corp still builds at its pace, while the bonus corps are extra. And they can be eventually merged by giving free wins to base corp.
EDIT: in other words, this effectively bypasses the limit put on purchasing NPC clones by just doing it on alt corps.
How are you still not getting this? Having 5 corps does not give you 5 times the number of clones to use on any attack. You could still only attack with the same number of clones as a single corp. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1928
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:36:00 -
[637] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Just to be clear.
I didn't mean to troll the dev blog and planetary conquest system, and didn't want to find a way to exploit it for me and my corp especially. If I play DUST today, it's for what is coming ;) !!! Just want to be sure that some corp don't fin a way to not just play the game.
All I want is a fair game, and I'm still not 100% convince. If every defenses are win, we can imagine a lots of things... And the economic/clone production system. In my 1st scenario, a theory 840 clones for 1 corp (84M ISK), the 108M to form childs corp will be reimburse in 2 days....
Well, it's just theory....
O_O Was someone upset about your post? I have not been keeping track of all the posts but your last one was really good. I even spent time responding to it. :P I hope my random sarcasm didn't come off wrong, I love the discussion going on here. |
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
215
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:41:00 -
[638] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:trollsroyce wrote:What I want to understand is this:
(another example so people see my concern)
Option A: Corp of 200 members (random number) starts off by getting 1 district. They expand from there on normally. Option B: Same corp makes 4 alt corps with 5 squad leaders each. These alt corps do the excact same thing as the mother corp would, and they bring mercenaries into fight from mother corp. The 200 member corp reaches its peak districts 5 times faster, creating clones 5 times faster, being able to attack 5 times faster etc.
The only limit here is merc number in both cases, BUT as you have 5 corps you reach the limit divided to those corps 5 times faster. You stomp all competition, because you are able to attack with 5 corps bringing ringers while the single corp would just do its thing slowly.
The thing is, the main corp can still do its thing normally. They just bring ringers from the alt corps, since the player base is the same. So the same 200 players get 5 times more stuff done by making 5 corps so they can utilize their mercs fully from the start.
Now the 200 player corp would die of boredom trying to get fights for all the members, with clone amount being the cap. With 5 corps, you have 5 times the clones to get fights with for a good long while.
It feels intuitively very broken. I don't think the CCP posters have fully gotten an idea of how important it is to start off with alt corps and cross ringer fighting, if not for anything else than getting more fights. The base corp still builds at its pace, while the bonus corps are extra. And they can be eventually merged by giving free wins to base corp.
EDIT: in other words, this effectively bypasses the limit put on purchasing NPC clones by just doing it on alt corps. How are you still not getting this? Having 5 corps does not give you 5 times the number of clones to use on any attack. You could still only attack with the same number of clones as a single corp.
...
it gives you 5 times the clones to hold more planets and attack different locations simultaneously. it makes your empire big 5 times faster. its the only way to utilize a lot of mercs early. |
Marston VC
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
112
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:42:00 -
[639] - Quote
Soooooo heres a few questions about sov warfare and other things
1.) So when can defenders reinforce their district? and where/how many times can they reinforce their district? Whats to stop defenders from massing up 300 clones on one district at all times? is it possible for attackers to go through 300 clones in an hour?
1/b.) You've mentioned 1 hour exclusivity, Does this mean the first corp to attack in that time period gets the rights to continue scheduling attacks during that time period? Do we even need to reschedule matches in that window? or will the matches automatically start back to back with each other within that hour? (so like at max having 3 skirmish matches a day?)
2.) Can a corp launch mulitple attacks on every district at once if they want to? or do they need to own a district adjacent to whatever district they want to attack?
3.) NULL only mentioned winning a district by out grinding the other teams clones, ok thats fine but what if the other team just doesn't show up? You cant grind out their clones if nobody is there to die...
3/b.) so you mentioned they can still lose the match, if nobody is brought to the match and their MCC is destroyed does this mean they loose 100 clones? or does it mean they loose all the clones they have on the district? So lets say a corp has 300 clones on a district and they loose their MCC do they just loose 100 of them then?
4.) so that leads up to me asking if theres going to be some other method of taking a district.... like via objectives or something?? Do the defenders have to actaully..... defend an objective? like a massive console that just blows up their mcc if we capture it? or perhaps like the current skirmish?? (i hope not).
5.) also regarding the whole market/selling clones. Is the market regional? does it work like how eve does where you have to pick up the items bought at the station it was sold at? Or will it all be just one massive market? If it is a regional system then how will that work? what type of transport can dust players used? Personally i would like the regional system as it makes the market more complex, but i could understand if thats just not something we want to do with dust. I read throught the forums and understand that its all mostly NPC for now, but that doesn't mean this doesn't pertain to the future right?
6.) I read something about a clone cost to attacking hostile planets, it being set to 20% and all. Does this mean that if you attack with 100 clones only 20 show up? or 80? If its 20 then that means corps would have to bring in 500 clones just to match the 100 a defender could have. And if they have 300 we would need 1500 over the course of a few days.
6/b.) Wouldn't it make sense if that 20% penalty was negated if corps are attacking a district from an adjacent district? The difference between an orbital invasion and a land invasion is that your clones just have to walk or be driven across a border where as the orbital method just turns your clones into meteorites (justifying the loss of clones upon landing). I would like to see this because it would discourage a big corp from just launching several attacks on each district of an opposing corp, and encourage a somewhat slower but more efficient land based war.
7.) will there be any sort of trading feature between players? and can a corp sell clones to another corp? |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
215
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:43:00 -
[640] - Quote
and stalling hat empire growth is one key reason why the initial clone cap is in place. multicorp bypasses it. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1941
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:49:00 -
[641] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:What I want to understand is this:
(another example so people see my concern)
Option A: Corp of 200 members (random number) starts off by getting 1 district. They expand from there on normally. Option B: Same corp makes 4 alt corps with 5 squad leaders each. These alt corps do the excact same thing as the mother corp would, and they bring mercenaries into fight from mother corp. The 200 member corp reaches its peak districts 5 times faster, creating clones 5 times faster, being able to attack 5 times faster etc.
This again assumes no one is attacking your districts, really it kind of does. With one corporation you have your directors and CEO to do all the logistics and take care of the money. Once you start creating these alt corporations you need to trust them with the ISK, trust them to do the right things in managing the districts, and most importantly to log on EVERYDAY to check if their district is under attack. If the district is under attack those people from that alt corporation have to be on. So for every alt corp you make is more people you have to have logging on.
That being said the idea that 1 corp creating alt corps for the initial seizure of districts is a possibility.
trollsroyce wrote:The only limit here is merc number in both cases, BUT as you have 5 corps you reach the limit divided to those corps 5 times faster. You stomp all competition, because you are able to attack with 5 corps bringing ringers while the single corp would just do its thing slowly.
There are other disadvantages, like the fact that you cannot move clones between your own districts.
trollsroyce wrote:The thing is, the main corp can still do its thing normally. They just bring ringers from the alt corps, since the player base is the same. So the same 200 players get 5 times more stuff done by making 5 corps so they can utilize their mercs fully from the start.
Yes this is true, but especially at the beginning districts will be the least profitable. When they first go out is when the most people will be trying it which means the highest chance of you getting attacked. Once people settle down and start to make decisions about if they want to play this gameplay we will see a slump in the number of people playing it and money making goes up with less fights. So your splitting of corporations is the worst at the beginning as you are most likely to be attacked on all fronts and have increased your logistical needs while decreasing your logistical capacity.
trollsroyce wrote:Now the 200 player corp would die of boredom trying to get fights for all the members, with clone amount being the cap. With 5 corps, you have 5 times the clones to get fights with for a good long while.
This is something we will have to balance as time goes on.
trollsroyce wrote:It feels intuitively very broken. I don't think the CCP posters have fully gotten an idea of how important it is to start off with alt corps and cross ringer fighting, if not for anything else than getting more fights. The base corp still builds at its pace, while the bonus corps are extra. And they can be eventually merged by giving free wins to base corp.
EDIT: in other words, this effectively bypasses the limit put on purchasing NPC clones by just doing it on alt corps.
While I agree that the alt corporations will offer an increase in the number of possible fights, there are so many disadvantages to it I can't see it being a way for corporations to make money. If players want to do it to get fights, great, let them. Why would we want to stop you from fighting? We may want to slow things down a bit (hence the 24 hour timer), but not stop it. The ISK is what we worry about. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1941
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:51:00 -
[642] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:and stalling hat empire growth is one key reason why the initial clone cap is in place. multicorp bypasses it.
Actually, you are wrong. The key reason for the limit on Genolution purposes is not to stall empire growth, but to prevent an organization that has a strong foundation from attacking all the way across the galaxy. Maybe they can take their members through the squads thing, but the logistical advantages of their existing infrastructure do not apply. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
1941
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:57:00 -
[643] - Quote
I am off for now, shall try and be back later to answer more questions. Keep the awesome discussion going though guys! :D I have been having a blast in this thread. |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
269
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 19:59:00 -
[644] - Quote
CCP Fox Four knocks it out of the park again! Someone get this man a medal (assuming he's not a futuristic robot with super question answering abilities, which I deeply suspect). |
Kain Spero
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1090
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 20:02:00 -
[645] - Quote
My question is if we are going to be limited to one region of low-sec to start is it going to be owned by a particular faction? (Gallente, Minmatar, Amarr, etc.)? That could end up tipping this in favor of folks involved FW for that Empire. |
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
359
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 20:04:00 -
[646] - Quote
Also previously you noted that a corp that owns no districts will sell back remaining clones back to genolution at a cost of 100K ISK.
It seems they are better business men then we thought.
No in seriousness why 100K: thats the sale value of a clone generated from a district. I understand that this may serve as a check on a corp from attacking anywhere they want but they are limited already because they own no districts.
I think if you allow the resale value of clones sold back after a battle can be a bit higher under the condition that the corp doing so has no districts since thats the only condition where a sale would occur following battle as all other conditions would result in a return to district and if the district being returned to has max clones then the district will auto sell which would allow for the 100k sale price.
TL:DR: Why cant unused clones that are sold back be a higher ISK sale price for a corp that owns no districts since its a one off scenario, it also makes hiring/using merc corps more econimically feasible.
Also could you answer the first part of this and if able to comment on the second part please?
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=620517#post620517
Thanks. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
269
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 20:05:00 -
[647] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:My question is if we are going to be limited to one region of low-sec to start is it going to be owned by a particular faction? (Gallente, Minmatar, Amarr, etc.)? That could end up tipping this in favor of folks involved FW for that Empire.
It was mentioned earlier today that FW and PC do not interact at this stage. |
Halador Osiris
Dead Six Initiative
63
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 20:06:00 -
[648] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:CCP Fox Four knocks it out of the park again! Someone get this man a medal (assuming he's not a futuristic robot with super question answering abilities, which I deeply suspect). CCP FoxFour on the weekends. |
Kain Spero
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
1090
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 20:10:00 -
[649] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Kain Spero wrote:My question is if we are going to be limited to one region of low-sec to start is it going to be owned by a particular faction? (Gallente, Minmatar, Amarr, etc.)? That could end up tipping this in favor of folks involved FW for that Empire. It was mentioned earlier today that FW and PC do not interact at this stage.
The issue is if you are in an opposing faction's space their NPC faction forces will still attack you, regardless if you are doing Dust FW at the time. You also can't cloak in opposing faction space, which would give an advantage to FW players that are in the region of their aligned faction. |
Evicer
Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 20:11:00 -
[650] - Quote
Right on fellas...lookin forward to that merc market cue too......
greatness is what you are achieving here gentlemen |
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
215
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 20:13:00 -
[651] - Quote
The first to do it grabs a region and foritfies the bottlenecks with said alt corps. Then expands safely inside the region by giving it over to main corp by selling clones before fight, which is forfeited. If planets are anything like current nullsec with bottleneck, the alt corps allows a delve-style fortress creation within weeks.
Its the only way to make use of a lot of members.
The whole shenanigans is that a big corp will be held back severely by starting in one location with very limited expansion, capped by bringing 16 people in fights with limited clones. it only makes sense to split it into multiples, which means more work but is the only efficient way to start out. With multiple corps, you use multiple times the clones to be able to multiply your offensive fronts and clone production. Using only one starting point, a large corp can be shut down by just shutting down the one starting point from day2.
Logistically, the main corp doesnt change at any point. The main corp grows just as quickly as it would otherwise, if you have numbers to defend and attack. You just dump the numbers into alt corps in same real empire. Which is just odd, why not give big corps the same opportunity without forcing them to split for it?
At least thats what i get from the info we have. It feels potentially devastating.
Long example, no need to quote, just to put the point in numbers. A: 1 corp B: 4 corps who just bring mercs from main corp to fights
Flip1 (get clones, get district): A = 100 clones and district B = 400 clones and 4 districts
Flip2 (first expansion attack): A = 200 clones and 2 districts B = 800 clones and 8 districts
And so forth. Soon you reach the cap of how many fights your mercs can do in a big corp. However, you have now the option of letting the main corp leech from the others if you want, or just to continue growing all of the corps. Remember, the mercs are same - you just artificially have more options by putting more people into logistics. Why can you not do this on one corp, though? It's a bit odd to make the big entities split like this.
Now, if entity C in above example had done the normal thing.
Flip3 (first attack on C): A attacks C with potentially 200 clones. B attacks C in 2 places with potentially 800 clones.
Now A and B are just the options for a large corp. The second case is more powerful, and C is completely tied clone wise to defend vs. that. By splitting, B has won the expansion race vs. C, as B can use the 8 fast districts to produce clones for multiple front fight. THE BIG CORP THAT CHOSE OPTION A CANNOT DO IT.
In order to use numbers, you need to split unless im mistaken. |
Klivve Cussler
Ransoms Incorporated
62
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 20:13:00 -
[652] - Quote
I have been following the sub-corp ideas with great interest. They remind me of how Eve was played before the official alliance system was added to the system. There are a great many methods of organizing our little feudal kingdoms (including actual feudalism, which has worked quite well in Eve), but at the end of the day, there are only two fundamental forces affecting the politics of the game:
1. War is expensive 2. Peace is boring
If an alliance is too successful, it will crumble, if only because some CEO of a sister-corp will go "The only person I can attack is my sister-corp. Yeah, I could take them. It would be fun. Game on!" These sorts of betrayals are inevitable as soon as there aren't enough "goodfights" and people get bored of growing clones for isk.
I'm not saying this is a bad thing. In fact, I think it's a very good thing, but it's also why I'm not terribly worried about people trying to game the system by splitting into multiple corps. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
215
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 20:17:00 -
[653] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:trollsroyce wrote:and stalling hat empire growth is one key reason why the initial clone cap is in place. multicorp bypasses it. Actually, you are wrong. The key reason for the limit on Genolution purposes is not to stall empire growth, but to prevent an organization that has a strong foundation from attacking all the way across the galaxy. Maybe they can take their members through the squads thing, but the logistical advantages of their existing infrastructure do not apply.
Splitting corps allows a big corp to attack all the way across the galaxy on multiple fronts from the get go, though. This is vastly better than getting stalled on just going 1 corp. |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
425
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 20:21:00 -
[654] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:The first to do it grabs a region and foritfies the bottlenecks with said alt corps. Then expands safely inside the region by giving it over to main corp by selling clones before fight, which is forfeited. If planets are anything like current nullsec with bottleneck, the alt corps allows a delve-style fortress creation within weeks. I'm just quoting this part and not the entire post
What will you do when, and I say when because that will happen, most / all of your initial districts get attacked on day 1 / 2 / 3?
You can't keep all of your districts (or maybe any at all) when corps are attacking them again and again by buying 100 clone packs. Unless you're a supercorp that only loses 40 clones or less (or 60 with the right SI) every battle. |
Citrutex
The High and Mighty
80
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 20:22:00 -
[655] - Quote
How will orbital bombardment be iterated on with this new system? Would it be unreasonable to expect the party with strong orbital support to make a sizable impact on the results of the match? Will there be a planetary siege module like we saw during the last fanfest? Will we be able to siege planets without any troops on the ground? Can eve players force a 'win'?
In other words, why/how and will eve players care? |
Evicer
Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 20:29:00 -
[656] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote:trollsroyce wrote:The first to do it grabs a region and foritfies the bottlenecks with said alt corps. Then expands safely inside the region by giving it over to main corp by selling clones before fight, which is forfeited. If planets are anything like current nullsec with bottleneck, the alt corps allows a delve-style fortress creation within weeks. I'm just quoting this part and not the entire post What will you do when, and I say when because that will happen, most / all of your initial districts get attacked on day 1 / 2 / 3? You can't keep all of your districts (or maybe any at all) when corps are attacking them again and again by buying 100 clone packs. Unless you're a supercorp that only loses 40 clones or less (or 60 with the right SI) every battle.
Bendtender is right and thats why logistically as the dev stated there would be literally to much going on for 16 guys to do at once and so this multi alt corp idea really doesnt fly much.We have to remember that All the districts one corp has are All the time open season.Not to be an ass but ask H it ler and Napoleon about multiple front wars.Just sayin.
While typing this I was also imagining Local with some dude Instead of typing LFS hell be typing LFR(looking for ringers) but we all know how blue berries are.If thats how somebody wants to run there corp,well have fun with that. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
269
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 20:32:00 -
[657] - Quote
Trolls, what you keep describing is an alliance, not a corp. As soon as you split into more than one corp, regardless of true affiliation or using 'ringers' as back up in battles, you are putting both isk and mercs into a separate entity that will need to be constantly monitored and administered. You will have to take people you trust to do the job properly out of your main corp and give them tens of millions of isk and that person will have to log in every day without fail in order to see if an attack is coming, then be able to contact the main corp to ask for 'ringers' to help in the defense. You might be able to keep this up with 2 or 3 sub corps but any more and you'll soon run into problems.
Also, you'll have to keep in mind that any corp could lose their initial district on day 2 or 3 to another corp (no corp is invincible) and that's instantly 21.6M isk down the drain. How much isk do you want to risk throwing away? |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
215
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 20:53:00 -
[658] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Trolls, what you keep describing is an alliance, not a corp. As soon as you split into more than one corp, regardless of true affiliation or using 'ringers' as back up in battles, you are putting both isk and mercs into a separate entity that will need to be constantly monitored and administered. You will have to take people you trust to do the job properly out of your main corp and give them tens of millions of isk and that person will have to log in every day without fail in order to see if an attack is coming, then be able to contact the main corp to ask for 'ringers' to help in the defense. You might be able to keep this up with 2 or 3 sub corps but any more and you'll soon run into problems.
Also, you'll have to keep in mind that any corp could lose their initial district on day 2 or 3 to another corp (no corp is invincible) and that's instantly 21.6M isk down the drain. How much isk do you want to risk throwing away?
Alliance or corp is just semantics. It's a loose gathering of players.
What's the price of having a large corp's players held back by an artificial limiting factor of a clone supply, when you could bypass it by splitting into multicorp? PC as is sounds to me like a very much split promoting thing. The only way to bypass it.
Now what happens if your large corp loses the initial district over and over, never making it into a phase where you can afford to send in any other players than your A team? The rest leave. You actually ELIMINATE the risk of this by splitting, instead of "risking more". You see which one of the corps takes off best and make it your main corp eventually.
|
Shadowswipe
WarRavens
21
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:00:00 -
[659] - Quote
Whats to stop a corp making a dummy corp to attack a bottleneck time and time again and auto losing. If you want to lock one district, it would cost a net 9 million a day to lock one district. Which if it is the right planet, it would be protecting other planets through attrition and the real enemy wouldn't be able to launch an attack, because the dummy corp gets an hour to re-queue up a fight. Thus delaying death through using a 1 man corp that dies 100 times a day.
What if the attacking force losses, other corps can queue an assault? Or does the hour to start another fight only happen if you win?
Maybe a queue system for attackers, once an attacker loses a fight, the next attacker in the queue gets the option to attack and so on. Or maybe a silent bid system where corps put forth extra funds that no one can see, whoever puts forth the highest silent amount gets the right to attack that district. The bid system could be isk or clones, any clones used in the bid get lost as a "side" conflict on who gets to attack. Only losing the difference of the side bid verse the second highest bidder. |
Disturbingly Bored
Universal Allies Inc.
149
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:08:00 -
[660] - Quote
Shadowswipe wrote:Or maybe a silent bid system where corps put forth extra funds that no one can see, whoever puts forth the highest silent amount gets the right to attack that district. The bid system could be isk or clones, any clones used in the bid get lost as a "side" conflict on who gets to attack. Only losing the difference of the side bid verse the second highest bidder.
That actually sounds pretty balanced.
It introduces a small advantage for the defender (by making attacking more of an economic investment), but also guarantees the defender can't game the system to cowardly ends.
You're going to get attacked either way, but it ensures that the person who wants the attack most pays the dearest price. |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
271
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:09:00 -
[661] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote: Alliance or corp is just semantics. It's a loose gathering of players.
What's the price of having a large corp's players held back by an artificial limiting factor of a clone supply, when you could bypass it by splitting into multicorp? PC as is sounds to me like a very much split promoting thing. The only way to bypass it.
Now what happens if your large corp loses the initial district over and over, never making it into a phase where you can afford to send in any other players than your A team? The rest leave. You actually ELIMINATE the risk of this by splitting, instead of "risking more". You see which one of the corps takes off best and make it your main corp eventually.
But it's a separate corp. You then have two completely separate entities that can not ever transfer or merge resources (isk or clones). The people you put into your other corps are stuck there because it needs constant maintenance.
Alliance or Corp is more than just semantics - at the moment in Dust alliance means nothing. You have no control or power over the other corps other than trusting that they will respect and listen to their alliance leader.
Also, (forgot about this) to add to your isk costs, if you want to change the default SI on your district, that costs another 100M isk. If you run out of clones, that's another 20M isk. If you go out on day 1 and claim 5 districts but lose 3 of them a few days later, that's a lot of isk gone (not that you have to change the SI but it's still 20M per district lost). In order for your idea to be successful, you're going to need at least double figures of sub-corps and that's a lot of isk and a lot of trust to a lot of people.
Don't get me wrong, you are welcome to try but that 150M (or whatever number you said) you have saved up will be disappearing pretty rapidly. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2045
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:09:00 -
[662] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Long example, no need to quote, just to put the point in numbers. A: 1 corp B: 4 corps who just bring mercs from main corp to fights
Flip1 (get clones, get district): A = 100 clones and district B = 400 clones and 4 districts
Flip2 (first expansion attack): A = 200 clones and 2 districts B = 800 clones and 8 districts Problem with your numbers.
400 clones and 4 districts in the first instance, yes.
BUT where are you getting the next step from?
You have to produce the clones, independently within each Corp, to fight with. They aren't magically handed to you because you're attacking again. It takes time to build the numbers up so you have 800 clones, and even then, if you attack from all 4 districts, you're spreading your forces too thin and leaving EVERYWHERE vulnerable to being cloned out. And you're STILL assuming that you're always on the offense and never on the defense in both scenarios.
Any territory you decide to sell off and give to the primary corp is a vulnerability, and if another Corp happens to be online and looking in the right place at the right time (luck or a well-placed spy), they can get a free starting foothold in your territory. Also, you're ignoring the fact that the 100-attacker number is a MINIMUM, not the only option, and that Corps without any territory can attack you ANYWHERE AT ALL. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
271
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:12:00 -
[663] - Quote
Shadowswipe wrote:Whats to stop a corp making a dummy corp to attack a bottleneck time and time again and auto losing. If you want to lock one district, it would cost a net 9 million a day to lock one district. Which if it is the right planet, it would be protecting other planets through attrition and the real enemy wouldn't be able to launch an attack, because the dummy corp gets an hour to re-queue up a fight. Thus delaying death through using a 1 man corp that dies 100 times a day.
What if the attacking force losses, other corps can queue an assault? Or does the hour to start another fight only happen if you win?
Maybe a queue system for attackers, once an attacker loses a fight, the next attacker in the queue gets the option to attack and so on. Or maybe a silent bid system where corps put forth extra funds that no one can see, whoever puts forth the highest silent amount gets the right to attack that district. The bid system could be isk or clones, any clones used in the bid get lost as a "side" conflict on who gets to attack. Only losing the difference of the side bid verse the second highest bidder.
A dummy corp attacking just to lose will be instantly down 20M isk. How long can anyone keep up throwing 20M isk around every day just to keep a district locked? |
Shadowswipe
WarRavens
22
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:15:00 -
[664] - Quote
Disturbingly Bored wrote:Shadowswipe wrote:Or maybe a silent bid system where corps put forth extra funds that no one can see, whoever puts forth the highest silent amount gets the right to attack that district. The bid system could be isk or clones, any clones used in the bid get lost as a "side" conflict on who gets to attack. Only losing the difference of the side bid verse the second highest bidder. That actually sounds pretty balanced. It introduces a small advantage for the defender (by making attacking more of an economic investment), but also guarantees the defender can't game the system to cowardly ends. You're going to get attacked either way, but it ensures that the person who wants the attack most pays the dearest price.
Hell, if you made a skill for it, it would reduce the total isk needed to outbid someone else that doesn't have the skill. "Political Ties" or something... lol |
Shadowswipe
WarRavens
22
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:16:00 -
[665] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Shadowswipe wrote:Whats to stop a corp making a dummy corp to attack a bottleneck time and time again and auto losing. If you want to lock one district, it would cost a net 9 million a day to lock one district. Which if it is the right planet, it would be protecting other planets through attrition and the real enemy wouldn't be able to launch an attack, because the dummy corp gets an hour to re-queue up a fight. Thus delaying death through using a 1 man corp that dies 100 times a day.
What if the attacking force losses, other corps can queue an assault? Or does the hour to start another fight only happen if you win?
Maybe a queue system for attackers, once an attacker loses a fight, the next attacker in the queue gets the option to attack and so on. Or maybe a silent bid system where corps put forth extra funds that no one can see, whoever puts forth the highest silent amount gets the right to attack that district. The bid system could be isk or clones, any clones used in the bid get lost as a "side" conflict on who gets to attack. Only losing the difference of the side bid verse the second highest bidder. A dummy corp attacking just to lose will be instantly down 20M isk. How long can anyone keep up throwing 20M isk around every day just to keep a district locked?
20 million for the starter pack. 5 million if you kill all 100 clones and let none get wasted in the MCC. The final 6 mil comes from the district producing at max cap 60 extra clones, cause if it lost the fight, it would lose those clones and the dummy corp is preventing the district from losing. Total net lose. 20 - 5 - 6 = 9. |
Vaerana Myshtana
Bojo's School of the Trades
410
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:22:00 -
[666] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Django Quik wrote:Kain Spero wrote:My question is if we are going to be limited to one region of low-sec to start is it going to be owned by a particular faction? (Gallente, Minmatar, Amarr, etc.)? That could end up tipping this in favor of folks involved FW for that Empire. It was mentioned earlier today that FW and PC do not interact at this stage. The issue is if you are in an opposing faction's space their NPC faction forces will still attack you, regardless if you are doing Dust FW at the time. You also can't cloak in opposing faction space, which would give an advantage to FW players that are in the region of their aligned faction.
Setting aside the FW issues, there is still an issue with empire control- standing.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Standings_mechanics
Standing affects the economic costs of doing business for EVE pilots, in particular missioning and refining. So if an corp wants to keep its EVE pilots close by, those pilots need a way to make money while they are not OBing the corp's enemies.
Someone who has been busy raising their Amarr (and Caldari) standing is losing Minmatar (and Gallente) standing at the same time. As your standing goes up, you gain access to better missions and discounted refining. As it goes down, you get crummier missions and pay higher taxes.
Furthermore, an EVE corp can establish Player-Owned Structures (POSs) in systems where the members have good standing with the controlling faction. This is potentially another source of income (or at least a place to keep ships) but you need to have the correct faction standing to do it. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2045
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:26:00 -
[667] - Quote
Shadowswipe wrote:Django Quik wrote:Shadowswipe wrote:Whats to stop a corp making a dummy corp to attack a bottleneck time and time again and auto losing. If you want to lock one district, it would cost a net 9 million a day to lock one district. Which if it is the right planet, it would be protecting other planets through attrition and the real enemy wouldn't be able to launch an attack, because the dummy corp gets an hour to re-queue up a fight. Thus delaying death through using a 1 man corp that dies 100 times a day.
What if the attacking force losses, other corps can queue an assault? Or does the hour to start another fight only happen if you win?
Maybe a queue system for attackers, once an attacker loses a fight, the next attacker in the queue gets the option to attack and so on. Or maybe a silent bid system where corps put forth extra funds that no one can see, whoever puts forth the highest silent amount gets the right to attack that district. The bid system could be isk or clones, any clones used in the bid get lost as a "side" conflict on who gets to attack. Only losing the difference of the side bid verse the second highest bidder. A dummy corp attacking just to lose will be instantly down 20M isk. How long can anyone keep up throwing 20M isk around every day just to keep a district locked? 20 million for the starter pack. 5 million if you kill all 100 clones and let none get wasted in the MCC. The final 6 mil comes from the district producing at max cap 60 extra clones, cause if it lost the fight, it would lose those clones and the dummy corp is preventing the district from losing. Total net lose. 20 - 5 - 6 = 9. EDIT: Note this scenario could be used to protect a money farm located behind the district being locked and/or delay while reinforcements showed up. And then they target another district on the planet instead for the same price because there aren't any real "bottlenecks" as such in the way you're thinking. Or someone else attacks one of your other districts. Or you realise that you didn't have your full clone count for the district yet and that 6 million you're earning back doesn't count. Or you realise that there's no efficient method of transferring that money between Corps so while your Alliance as a whole isn't losing money, the "defender" Corp is. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:30:00 -
[668] - Quote
The 5 million goes to the main corp, not the dummy corp. There's no way to put more money into the dummy corp from the main corp's winnings (actually, just thought of an exploit that would allow this - damn!). And yes you're assuming the district has the SI that increases production - without it you'd only earn 4 million worth of clones, making potential lose of 11M by your maths.
Also, remember that you can only attack if you have 100 clones to move. If the dummy corp loses, they need to either buy (-20M isk) or produce another 2 days (3 days without the production SI, which costs 100M isk) worth of clones before they can attack again. By that time I can assure you another corp has been waiting to jump on the bandwagon and attack for real in the period that your dummy corp is restocking clones.
Now, as for the exploit of actually being able to transfer isk between corps (and I can't see a way to stop this) - corp A gives one merc lots of isk, that merc quits corp A and joins corp B, then donates that lots of isk to new corp. Pretty simple really; can't be detected, can't be stopped, not even really an exploit.
The problem with being attacked before restocking clones still stands. |
Shadowswipe
WarRavens
22
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:34:00 -
[669] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Shadowswipe wrote:Django Quik wrote:Shadowswipe wrote:Whats to stop a corp making a dummy corp to attack a bottleneck time and time again and auto losing. If you want to lock one district, it would cost a net 9 million a day to lock one district. Which if it is the right planet, it would be protecting other planets through attrition and the real enemy wouldn't be able to launch an attack, because the dummy corp gets an hour to re-queue up a fight. Thus delaying death through using a 1 man corp that dies 100 times a day.
What if the attacking force losses, other corps can queue an assault? Or does the hour to start another fight only happen if you win?
Maybe a queue system for attackers, once an attacker loses a fight, the next attacker in the queue gets the option to attack and so on. Or maybe a silent bid system where corps put forth extra funds that no one can see, whoever puts forth the highest silent amount gets the right to attack that district. The bid system could be isk or clones, any clones used in the bid get lost as a "side" conflict on who gets to attack. Only losing the difference of the side bid verse the second highest bidder. A dummy corp attacking just to lose will be instantly down 20M isk. How long can anyone keep up throwing 20M isk around every day just to keep a district locked? 20 million for the starter pack. 5 million if you kill all 100 clones and let none get wasted in the MCC. The final 6 mil comes from the district producing at max cap 60 extra clones, cause if it lost the fight, it would lose those clones and the dummy corp is preventing the district from losing. Total net lose. 20 - 5 - 6 = 9. EDIT: Note this scenario could be used to protect a money farm located behind the district being locked and/or delay while reinforcements showed up. And then they target another district on the planet instead for the same price because there aren't any real "bottlenecks" as such in the way you're thinking. Or someone else attacks one of your other districts. Or you realise that you didn't have your full clone count for the district yet and that 6 million you're earning back doesn't count. Or you realise that there's no efficient method of transferring that money between Corps so while your Alliance as a whole isn't losing money, the "defender" Corp is.
Ok, there are some bottlenecks, so a planet with 5 districts would lose 45 mil isk a day, but could be protecting a 25 district planet, so the costs could be worth it. Also, a big corp could make 45 million in a day easy through instant battle matches..
As for transferring funds, its easy. Give 20 million to a corp mate through the give money from the corp menu, and then have that guy leave and join the other corp. Once he is there, he gives the money through donate, and heads back to the main corp to get more money for the next day.
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2045
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:34:00 -
[670] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:The 5 million goes to the main corp, not the dummy corp. There's no way to put more money into the dummy corp from the main corp's winnings (actually, just thought of an exploit that would allow this - damn!). And yes you're assuming the district has the SI that increases production - without it you'd only earn 4 million worth of clones, making potential lose of 11M by your maths.
Also, remember that you can only attack if you have 100 clones to move. If the dummy corp loses, they need to either buy (-20M isk) or produce another 2 days (3 days without the production SI, which costs 100M isk) worth of clones before they can attack again. By that time I can assure you another corp has been waiting to jump on the bandwagon and attack for real in the period that your dummy corp is restocking clones.
Now, as for the exploit of actually being able to transfer isk between corps (and I can't see a way to stop this) - corp A gives one merc lots of isk, that merc quits corp A and joins corp B, then donates that lots of isk to new corp. Pretty simple really; can't be detected, can't be stopped, not even really an exploit.
The problem with being attacked before restocking clones still stands. It CAN potentially be broken if you have a spy in the enemy corp's ranks, and they get the job of delivering the money.
Your plant could "accidentally" join the wrong corp and give you all the money. |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:36:00 -
[671] - Quote
Shadowswipe wrote: Ok, there are some bottlenecks, so a planet with 5 districts would lose 45 mil isk a day, but could be protecting a 25 district planet, so the costs could be worth it. Also, a big corp could make 45 million in a day easy through instant battle matches..
As for transferring funds, its easy. Give 20 million to a corp mate through the give money from the corp menu, and then have that guy leave and join the other corp. Once he is there, he gives the money through donate, and heads back to the main corp to get more money for the next day.
If a corp has no district, it can buy 100 clones and attack absolutely anywhere it wants, thus circumventing any potential bottlenecks. |
Shadowswipe
WarRavens
22
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:41:00 -
[672] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Shadowswipe wrote: Ok, there are some bottlenecks, so a planet with 5 districts would lose 45 mil isk a day, but could be protecting a 25 district planet, so the costs could be worth it. Also, a big corp could make 45 million in a day easy through instant battle matches..
As for transferring funds, its easy. Give 20 million to a corp mate through the give money from the corp menu, and then have that guy leave and join the other corp. Once he is there, he gives the money through donate, and heads back to the main corp to get more money for the next day.
If a corp has no district, it can buy 100 clones and attack absolutely anywhere it wants, thus circumventing any potential bottlenecks.
Except if its another decent sized corp that doesn't feel right about making a dummy corp and moving members. They are stuck going through the bottleneck. I for one will never leave my corp. But I would pay isk to another corp to cause havoc on the back lines of said corp. But I would prefer to do the dirty work myself. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2045
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:43:00 -
[673] - Quote
Shadowswipe wrote:Ok, there are some bottlenecks, so a planet with 5 districts would lose 45 mil isk a day, but could be protecting a 25 district planet, so the costs could be worth it. Also, a big corp could make 45 million in a day easy through instant battle matches..
As for transferring funds, its easy. Give 20 million to a corp mate through the give money from the corp menu, and then have that guy leave and join the other corp. Once he is there, he gives the money through donate, and heads back to the main corp to get more money for the next day. With the starting scenario, unless there's a single, lone 5-district planet in a system that's the only route to 25-district one more than a jump "behind" it, that bottleneck can be bypassed by someone attacking from a territory with a Research Lab with minimal trouble.
And in that scenario, you're still vulnerable to new corps, or those with "lesser morals" than yourself (which is almost everyone in New Eden). |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
426
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:43:00 -
[674] - Quote
Shadowswipe wrote:20 million for the starter pack. 5 million if you kill all 100 clones and let none get wasted in the MCC. The final 6 mil comes from the district producing at max cap 60 extra clones, cause if it lost the fight, it would lose those clones and the dummy corp is preventing the district from losing. Total net lose. 20 - 5 - 6 = 9.
EDIT: Note this scenario could be used to protect a money farm located behind the district being locked and/or delay while reinforcements showed up. In fact it's actually a 7 million net lost isn't it?
5 million from winning + 6 million from the production of 60 clones + 2 million due to 20% of the attacker's clones being transferred to the defender = 13 million. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:44:00 -
[675] - Quote
Shadowswipe wrote: Except if its another decent sized corp that doesn't feel right about making a dummy corp and moving members. They are stuck going through the bottleneck. I for one will never leave my corp. But I would pay isk to another corp to cause havoc on the back lines of said corp. But I would prefer to do the dirty work myself.
Someone earlier said there are over 1000 corps right now. With only 250 districts, chances are every single one will be contested every single day. Especially for the first few weeks or months while it's the only fun new thing to play. |
Shadowswipe
WarRavens
22
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:54:00 -
[676] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote:Shadowswipe wrote:20 million for the starter pack. 5 million if you kill all 100 clones and let none get wasted in the MCC. The final 6 mil comes from the district producing at max cap 60 extra clones, cause if it lost the fight, it would lose those clones and the dummy corp is preventing the district from losing. Total net lose. 20 - 5 - 6 = 9.
EDIT: Note this scenario could be used to protect a money farm located behind the district being locked and/or delay while reinforcements showed up. In fact it's actually a 7 million net lost isn't it? 5 million from winning + 6 million from the production of 60 clones + 2 million due to 20% of the attacker's clones being transferred to the defender = 13 million. Nope, the 20% is only for the close left in the MCC when it dies. So 20% of 0 since you want full mitigation, you want to lose all 100 on the field and not in the MCC.
Django: As for the first few weeks or months, I don't care about short term, I am a Duster for life. It could also happen on a small scale though, where one strong isk corp denies a large corp that one last district to complete a planet and move on. Instead they stuck trying to kill a small corp they could easily take out if not for a the loophole of attackers right to launch another attack back to back to back. Theoretically, a bunch of small corps could work together to do this to a large corp and the large corp could never fight back. Unless the small corps run out of money, but 9 mil, like I said before, is nothing for a decent corp to pull down in a day if they really wanted to. |
LXicon
VENGEANCE FOR HIRE
64
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 21:55:00 -
[677] - Quote
Shadowswipe wrote:... I for one will never leave my corp. But I would pay isk to another corp to cause havoc on the back lines of said corp. But I would prefer to do the dirty work myself.
VENGEANCE FOR HIRE would like to offer our services. Contact TheBLAZZED or one of our Directors to discuss rates :) * Please be sure to let them know that LXicon referred you, I'll get a commission. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 22:02:00 -
[678] - Quote
Shadowswipe wrote: Django: As for the first few weeks or months, I don't care about short term, I am a Duster for life. It could also happen on a small scale though, where one strong isk corp denies a large corp that one last district to complete a planet and move on. Instead they stuck trying to kill a small corp they could easily take out if not for a the loophole of attackers right to launch another attack back to back to back. Theoretically, a bunch of small corps could work together to do this to a large corp and the large corp could never fight back. Unless the small corps run out of money, but 9 mil, like I said before, is nothing for a decent corp to pull down in a day if they really wanted to.
The short term matters a lot because those big corps need to be able to gain that foothold in order to be able to block off a 'bottleneck'. The short term matters also because this is only the first iteration of PC and things will be changing every few months when more new elements are introduced.
Furthermore consider this - with only 250 districts and at least 25 (maybe 50) properly organised decent sized corps out there, you're talking an average of 10 districts each (if not 5). Trust me, everyone's going to be fighting all the time because peace is boring and war makes money (and more importantly loot!). |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
215
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 22:07:00 -
[679] - Quote
Where am I assuming no defense? This is a separate matter from the first, which can happily be put to rest (exp growth non issue with 250 planets).
The issue is (read carefully): Big corp cannot use numbers advantage because it only gets 100 clones to start with. Lot of small corps can use numbers because they each get a start. Big corp can become lot of small corps and for most purposes merge by ringing players regardless of which small corp is fighting.
With this in place, do you think it's wise for a corp like PRO with 900 members to rely in 1 starting location and 100 starting clones? They could split and profit: GÇó if one start fails, they have more to switch to GÇó by having more attack opportunities they can put many players in use GÇó the players that aren't their prime have their place, as fights abound. less fights that are more important (one corp needs to win, if you have multiple corps a loss won't bring the whole thing down) would mean that only the elite are allowed to fight for the few district fights (few because of clone amount)
This makes splitting a rather mandatory practise for big corps. In fact most corps would be best off with alternate starts just to see which one takes off best. Trust issues? Use alts as directors. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 22:17:00 -
[680] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Where am I assuming no defense? This is a separate matter from the first, which can happily be put to rest (exp growth non issue with 250 planets).
The issue is (read carefully): Big corp cannot use numbers advantage because it only gets 100 clones to start with. Lot of small corps can use numbers because they each get a start. Big corp can become lot of small corps and for most purposes merge by ringing players regardless of which small corp is fighting.
With this in place, do you think it's wise for a corp like PRO with 900 members to rely in 1 starting location and 100 starting clones? They could split and profit: GÇó if one start fails, they have more to switch to GÇó by having more attack opportunities they can put many players in use GÇó the players that aren't their prime have their place, as fights abound. less fights that are more important (one corp needs to win, if you have multiple corps a loss won't bring the whole thing down) would mean that only the elite are allowed to fight for the few district fights (few because of clone amount)
This makes splitting a rather mandatory practise for big corps. In fact most corps would be best off with alternate starts just to see which one takes off best. Trust issues? Use alts as directors.
What do you do if you main corp doesn't manage to hold it's starting district (by whatever small possibility this could happen)? You just have sub-corps fighting PC instead of your main force?
Also, if you're using alts to run 10 different corps, that's a hell of a lot of logging in and switching characters. It'd also be a hell of a lot of organisation if you manage to take a few more districts and need to defend them all every day. If (and this is a massive IF) you manage to take 23 districts between all your corps, either you've got to be doubling up on teams defending districts simultaneously or you've got to have teams on every hour of the day (bar downtime).
Now, as previously stated, the big corps will still likely eventually dominate but there are enough big corps that conflict will still be continuous on all districts. It only takes 25 corps to own 10 districts each for this to happen in a way that won't result in one corp steamrolling the entire region. |
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
215
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 22:22:00 -
[681] - Quote
Main corp loses - alt corp that's doing better becomes main corp.
As opposed to only corp fails - restart.
In the alt scenario you are playing multiple times more players, too. This makes corp members stay. A month of not being allowed in PC because A-team needs to use clones makes members leave. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 22:26:00 -
[682] - Quote
It's just not sustainable when you consider how many other corps will be battling against you. Make as many alt corps as you like, even if you held all 250 districts you wouldn't be able to field enough good teams to defend all of them all the time. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2045
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 22:26:00 -
[683] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Where am I assuming no defense? This is a separate matter from the first, which can happily be put to rest (exp growth non issue with 250 planets).
The issue is (read carefully): Big corp cannot use numbers advantage because it only gets 100 clones to start with. Lot of small corps can use numbers because they each get a start. Big corp can become lot of small corps and for most purposes merge by ringing players regardless of which small corp is fighting.
With this in place, do you think it's wise for a corp like PRO with 900 members to rely in 1 starting location and 100 starting clones? They could split and profit: GÇó if one start fails, they have more to switch to GÇó by having more attack opportunities they can put many players in use GÇó the players that aren't their prime have their place, as fights abound. less fights that are more important (one corp needs to win, if you have multiple corps a loss won't bring the whole thing down) would mean that only the elite are allowed to fight for the few district fights (few because of clone amount)
This makes splitting a rather mandatory practise for big corps. In fact most corps would be best off with alternate starts just to see which one takes off best. Trust issues? Use alts as directors. A large corp could split into a series of smaller corps where everyone (or at least the majority) share the same (or similar) timezones/sleep patterns. This would allow for several tight-knit coordinated groups to form and work together for a common goal - TRY TO TAKE OVER THE (insert scale of claim here). As part of an Alliance (whether formalised in-game or not), this group wouldn't be attacking their "partners", at least to begin with. It's conceivable that a large enough group dividing like this would end up functioning better as a series of small groups, and yes, they could use one another's members as "ringers" where they needed to make up the numbers, but the majority of their activities would have to be based around having the right players in the right corp based on when they're available.
You could essentially achieve the same result in a more easily-managed way by having a single corp and spreading out slowly from a stable beginning.
Claim a district using your "best" players, and set the reinforcement window for the "best" players to be as likely as possible to show up in defense of the district. Some of your "lesser" players will be there to fill in as needed during defense battles, but the primary goal will NOT be to expand as fast as possible and be initiating attacks all the time. It will be to SOLIDIFY your control of the district, then expand gradually. Initially, you'll want to try for a territory with either the Cargo Hub (higher max clone count) or the Production Facility (faster clone production). The second district, if possible, should be the other of these two if possible. Once you have a district with a Cargo Hub, that will be the primary region you're attacking from to try and secure your entire chosen planet. Why? Because you can send 150 clones out and still have 300 in reserve in the district. Send 200, keep 250 on-site, and when you take the district, move another 50 from another district you control to further reinforce your control of the area. When a defense isn't critical (you have 200+ clones on-site), you can let the lower-skilled players in the Corp take a more prominent role in your defense. When you're making an initial "probe" attack, you can bring more of these lesser-skilled players as well. It won't be limited to only using your "A-team" for Conquest battles, although you'll want a couple of them in the battle to see what you're going up against. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
272
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 22:28:00 -
[684] - Quote
And another point - you're just going to move everyone in your corp to another corp? Yeah, can't see that going wrong at all... because people love having to move around a lot... |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2045
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 22:41:00 -
[685] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Main corp loses - alt corp that's doing better becomes main corp.
As opposed to only corp fails - restart.
In the alt scenario you are playing multiple times more players, too. This makes corp members stay. A month of not being allowed in PC because A-team needs to use clones makes members leave. Lets look at the problem with this argument:
One corp gets a solid base: Lets say you hold 2 planets in a system, but they're small, with only 5 districts each.
That's 10 districts held by a single corp.
An enemy attacks one of your districts, and manages to win the battle. In the next battle, you bring your a-game and win, giving yourself the chance to restock your clones in that district. Because you're a single corp, there are 4 districts on the planet from which you can draw reinforcements in small numbers. If you need more than that, you can use the Research Lab on your other planet as a staging point for cross-world transfers with no (or at least minimal, if the numbers change from their current values) clone loss. You have NINE districts that can be used to reinforce the weakened location when attacked. Because you're not moving significant numbers of clones from each district, you're retaining a viable defense in the reinforcing districts as well as securing the weakened position totally (or almost so).
Lets look at the same scenario, but with a 5-corp Alliance instead of a centralised Corporation. The Corporations here are all the same players, but divided across several Corps that are working together. Each one holds 2 of the Alliance's territorries.
Now, when a Corp is losing ground, they only have one territory to help mitigate the losses. If they win that second defense battle, they can reinforce, but reinforcing will still be limited by the lack of Districts that individual Corp has access to. As such, they can't reinforce as completely, because of the risk that the enemy will look at the other district and attack it while it's weakened. You can't reinforce as totally, so when the enemy returns, both your districts are in a weakened state. Each victory for the enemy whittles your strength away more, and eventually they wear you down and claim a district. Because of the continued partial reinforcements, the Corp's other district is also in a weakened state, making it an easy target now that there's nobody to reinforce them.
An Alliance of this kind MIGHT let you expand faster, but it leaves your divided Corp far more vulnerable to being pulled apart and losing it all much faster than you would as a unified force. |
R F Gyro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
328
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 22:52:00 -
[686] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Lets look at the problem with this argument: I don't think there's a problem here at all. I see a trade-off, which is exactly what we want from the game.
As I understand the argument, large corps have to decide between alt corp (high admin, fast expansion, weak defense) or single corp (low admin, slow expansion, stronger defense once established) strategy. Smaller corps don't really have this problem.
That's wonderful isn't it?
No right answer, and bigger isn't entirely better.
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2046
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 22:58:00 -
[687] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Lets look at the problem with this argument: I don't think there's a problem here at all. I see a trade-off, which is exactly what we want from the game. As I understand the argument, large corps have to decide between alt corp (high admin, fast expansion, weak defense) or single corp (low admin, slow expansion, stronger defense once established) strategy. Smaller corps don't really have this problem. That's wonderful isn't it? No right answer, and bigger isn't entirely better. This is a very good point.
There are strengths and weaknesses to both approaches. Thanks to reminding me of that fact.
+1. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
276
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 23:00:00 -
[688] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Lets look at the problem with this argument: I don't think there's a problem here at all. I see a trade-off, which is exactly what we want from the game. As I understand the argument, large corps have to decide between alt corp (high admin, fast expansion, weak defense) or single corp (low admin, slow expansion, stronger defense once established) strategy. Smaller corps don't really have this problem. That's wonderful isn't it? No right answer, and bigger isn't entirely better.
You've it the nail on the head there - Trolls is trying to say this is a potential exploit that will make large corps want to split and become unbeatable but this is not the case and it has been repeatedly and conclusively refuted. His idea can be done but it won't be productive and will not last. |
Shadowswipe
WarRavens
22
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 23:36:00 -
[689] - Quote
What happens if PSN goes down during a combat window, but not DUST 514?
I could see this happening and messing up lots of plans and timing. Maybe some get in before PSN goes down, but not kicked out of game, and get to attack a district without the defenders being able to log in to put up a fight. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
278
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 23:38:00 -
[690] - Quote
Shadowswipe wrote:What happens if PSN goes down during a combat window, but not DUST 514?
I could see this happening and messing up lots of plans and timing. Maybe some get in before PSN goes down, but not kicked out of game, and get to attack a district without the defenders being able to log in to put up a fight.
Yeah, this could be an issue. Also how about extended downtimes too? Anyone setting the attack window to 2 hours after DT (hour either side has already been confirmed as unsettable) could regularly see this coincide with extended DT beyond an extra hour. |
|
Shadowswipe
WarRavens
22
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 23:42:00 -
[691] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Shadowswipe wrote:What happens if PSN goes down during a combat window, but not DUST 514?
I could see this happening and messing up lots of plans and timing. Maybe some get in before PSN goes down, but not kicked out of game, and get to attack a district without the defenders being able to log in to put up a fight. Yeah, this could be an issue. Also how about extended downtimes too? Extended down times hopefully will fit into the 2 hours they have blocked out for. Their words, too lazy to find it in this monster 30+ page thread. :)
If it goes over 2 hours... who knows. |
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
361
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 00:50:00 -
[692] - Quote
Shadowswipe wrote:Django Quik wrote:Shadowswipe wrote:What happens if PSN goes down during a combat window, but not DUST 514?
I could see this happening and messing up lots of plans and timing. Maybe some get in before PSN goes down, but not kicked out of game, and get to attack a district without the defenders being able to log in to put up a fight. Yeah, this could be an issue. Also how about extended downtimes too? Extended down times hopefully will fit into the 2 hours they have blocked out for. Their words, too lazy to find it in this monster 30+ page thread. :) If it goes over 2 hours... who knows.
Smart play for CCP is to simply disable the system during those extended periods to keep it fair
Though i rarely see downtimes go longer than 24 hours which means at most a district is vulnerable to 100 clone loss at most/day psn network is down. |
Soozu
5o1st
19
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 01:06:00 -
[693] - Quote
I'm pretty sure that it was posted somewhere that if there was server downtime or network issues everything would revert back to before the outage. |
Commander Dizzle
Closed For Business
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 04:33:00 -
[694] - Quote
So from what I have gathered, there will be nothing in the Corporation Contracts. Only Instant Battles? At least until the next build drops? |
From Costa Rica
Grupo de Asalto Chacal CRONOS.
71
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 05:00:00 -
[695] - Quote
So just to be sure, the table/ map on the war room will still do nothing on the next build?? |
Odiain Suliis
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
132
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 05:19:00 -
[696] - Quote
From Costa Rica wrote:So just to be sure, the table/ map on the war room will still do nothing on the next build??
As far as I know, this is Planetary Concuest thread, not a thread where next expansions features are discussed. Only one feature.
So it might be on the table, but we'll see. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
217
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 06:48:00 -
[697] - Quote
Good morning! New day, new effort. All in good spirit :)
Since I haven't really gotten answers to the core issue I think I see with this split corps thing, I'll further elaborate by posting what I feel is an issue. I'll start with two analogies to explain what I feel is wrong or possibly just bad design. The core issue is capping the usage of manpower through an artificial limit that can be bypassed. Possibly this only applies to the first month of the game, I haven't run any simulations on clone numbers. If it's a negligible thing, then excellent, but I want to be sure this is not the inevitable short cut to dominance of a few planets. I want to be sure it won't be that when nullsec planets are opened for PC.
Analogy from imaginary RL: You take your 30 friends on a trip to a strange country. The legislation of the hotels there says, that you can rent one room for one group signing in for the first week, two rooms beginning from the second week and four rooms after the first month. This feels very bad and you rent a room for the 30 people group, allowing eight of them to sleep inside while the rest have to get drunk and sleep in toilet or hallway. One day, a friend of yours gets an idea, though. Let's just sign in as multiple groups to get a room for everyone from the first day. Will you do it, or will you force the others to sleep in the hallway while you make sweet love to your A-girlfriend?
Analogy from EVE Online: CCP decides to put in place a limit on ships a corp can undock in nullsec. They figure, the more POS'es you set up, the more command structure points you generate to use ships. In order to further limit this, there will be a 24h cooldown after installing POS, and the POS will start to generate command points for which you can buy ships. Now your corp of 400 newly gathered pod pilots has an issue. They want ships, but the rules dictate your corp can only undock in 40 ships and 10 ships for each POS in system. Then, one day, a corp member comes up with an idea. Let's bypass this by splitting the corp into 10 corps so that everyone can fly a ship in your nullsec system. Will you consider it, or just tell him to HTFU and go set more POS up, or go back to highsec?
Situation in Dust514 A corporation can have up to 100 NPC clones from day one, restockable to that limit. You have corporations with 700 mercs. The only way for such a big corp to put those mercs into play is to split into corps so that you have more NPC clones to play with, gaining multiple districts and fighting on multiple fronts - because that is the only thing that you can do with the 700 players when fights are 16vs16. In order to have fun for the players, uncapped by artificial clone limit, is to split into fighting for alternate corps made just to remove the clone cap.
And this doesn't detach from the main corporation at all. In fact, you are just multiplying what you do in the beginning, because it is otherwise hugely capped to what you could potentially be doing. The corporations you make don't need members of their own, since you just bring members from the main corp. All of the corporations can expand at the speed of the main corp, given you have enough mercs for it. You are taking a short cut into controlling all the space your player number allows you to, be it 3-10 districts.
Let's say you can control 6 districts. You put 3 corps in to take 2 districts each, defend the spots, and eventually give them over to the main corp by a timeframe play. This way you make sure you won't need to fight an attacking battle for them. The main corp gets a clone advantage, since it won't lose any to capturing the districts from sister corps.
Let's say you can control a bottlenecked constellation with 20 districts in the endgame, if you get a superior clone production going there. Do the same: expand with sister corps, hold the bottleneck with main, defend with sister clones from the NPC clone attacks and let one corp slowly flip it over without losing clones to attack in the process.
Not only this. The 700 member corp could be average in it's member skill. There is a big risk, that every time you try to settle a district, someone comes and roflstomps you. After a month of trying in vain, the corp leadership decides to skip PC and go back to FW, where they can use the numbers without artificial clone limits. This can be circumvented by probability spamming. You spam five start districts and see which one of them gets some wind under its wings. You play every district start up to holding 3 for every corp normally, because you have the spare manpower to do so. The ones that failure cascade are left behind, and you focus in the developing ones that become strong enough to sustain an attack. If some entity is griefing you, you attack him from the five corporations to nuke down his clones so that he can't keep up the attack on the developing one. If four of the five start rolls fail, you still have one alive and kicking, and you didn't get booted out of PC in the first month. As a bonus, you can even manage to spam all the districts on a planet and eventually flip them over to the winning corp without clone loss by defending them from everyone except the winner corp. You can possibly even sell out clones and make the district easy to take over with timeframe play.
All of this has a price in management and clickfest time. But for the big corps, I see no other choice than splitting to be sure they don't lose every start and to use a good number of their player base. This is bad design, because they should be able to do it with the one big corp instead of expanding command structure artificially (this is debateable and just my opinion). The players don't want to be left without ships because of artificial POS limits. The players would want a hotel room. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
217
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 06:57:00 -
[698] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Lets look at the problem with this argument: I don't think there's a problem here at all. I see a trade-off, which is exactly what we want from the game. As I understand the argument, large corps have to decide between alt corp (high admin, fast expansion, weak defense) or single corp (low admin, slow expansion, stronger defense once established) strategy. Smaller corps don't really have this problem. That's wonderful isn't it? No right answer, and bigger isn't entirely better.
Having alt corps doesn't detach from making a corp bigger. In fact, you can make all of them big and see which survives to be your main.
On top of that, you can defend all the corps that you play as you would play one corp up to a point. When the time is right, you can choose NOT TO DEFEND from the main corp so that the main corp can expand without losing any clones to attack. |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
430
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 07:12:00 -
[699] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Good morning! New day, new effort. All in good spirit :)
Since I haven't really gotten answers to the core issue I think I see with this split corps thing, I'll further elaborate by posting what I feel is an issue. I'll start with two analogies to explain what I feel is wrong or possibly just bad design. The core issue is capping the usage of manpower through an artificial limit that can be bypassed. Possibly this only applies to the first month of the game, I haven't run any simulations on clone numbers. If it's a negligible thing, then excellent, but I want to be sure this is not the inevitable short cut to dominance of a few planets. I want to be sure it won't be that when nullsec planets are opened for PC. They want this game to cater to relatively small corps (first and foremost). If they allow big corps to take as many districts as they possibly can on day one, the small corps won't have a chance.
Splitting up into smaller corps and you're no longer a single corp but an alliance of small corps (even though 90% of your members are still in the same corp). There's no problem with an alliance of small corps, they encourage that I believe.
This idea of splitting the corp and trying to get all the districts taken on day one into the mother corp requires you to not be attacked from the get go, which just won't happen. If you take a lot of districts, and there's others doing the same, there's a lot of corps left without a district at all, and they'll come for yours from day one.
It can also succeed if you're a supercorp that only loses 40 clones or less (or 60 clones if you have a Production Facility) every battle no matter the opponent. That's unlikely though.
Edit: And for being worried about 90% of the players in a big corp to never get to play, that's in my opinion entirely your own fault for not having good enough players all around. They can also always play FW battles, which will be in the Mercenary tab in the Battle finder. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
217
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 07:22:00 -
[700] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote: They want this game to cater to relatively small corps (first and foremost). If they allow big corps to take as many districts as they possibly can on day one, the small corps won't have a chance.
Splitting up into smaller corps and you're no longer a single corp but an alliance of small corps (even though 90% of your members are still in the same corp). There's no problem with an alliance of small corps, they encourage that I believe.
This idea of splitting the corp and trying to get all the districts taken on day one into the mother corp requires you to not be attacked from the get go, which just won't happen. If you take a lot of districts, and there's others doing the same, there's a lot of corps left without a district at all, and they'll come for yours from day one.
It can also succeed if you're a supercorp that only loses 40 clones or less (or 60 clones if you have a Production Facility) every battle no matter the opponent. That's unlikely though.
Edit: And for being worried about 90% of the players in a big corp to never get to play, that's in my opinion entirely your own fault for not having good enough players all around. They can also always play FW battles, which will be in the Mercenary tab in the Battle finder.
Thanks for the response.
1) My issue with catering to small corps, leading to alternate corps etc. is just that every big corp that wants to play big needs to do it to stay in pace.
2) I don't get the getting attacked part. Of course you will, and that's where you can use your merc numbers. That's the whole point: to not have 16 mercs fighting a 700 merc's battle, but instead have multiple fights going to expand quicker. The main corp can eventually tip off the districts from the placeholder expansions you managed to secure after the initial struggle, without clone loss to main corp doing so.
3) I must be missing a mechanic that's in place. Defender gets to choose timeframe, and you get the empty district you land on. Spam corps, get districts, put timeframe to when you will defend them. Instead of using 16 players at a time, you can use multiple times that if your corp's numbers allow.
4) EDIT: the day one into mother corp part doesnt exist. You play multiple corps normally, and eventually give over to mother corp so that it wont lose clones on expansions. You play multiple corps, because your size allows it and it's the reasonable thing to do with the mechanics. |
|
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
431
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 07:30:00 -
[701] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Bendtner92 wrote: They want this game to cater to relatively small corps (first and foremost). If they allow big corps to take as many districts as they possibly can on day one, the small corps won't have a chance.
Splitting up into smaller corps and you're no longer a single corp but an alliance of small corps (even though 90% of your members are still in the same corp). There's no problem with an alliance of small corps, they encourage that I believe.
This idea of splitting the corp and trying to get all the districts taken on day one into the mother corp requires you to not be attacked from the get go, which just won't happen. If you take a lot of districts, and there's others doing the same, there's a lot of corps left without a district at all, and they'll come for yours from day one.
It can also succeed if you're a supercorp that only loses 40 clones or less (or 60 clones if you have a Production Facility) every battle no matter the opponent. That's unlikely though.
Edit: And for being worried about 90% of the players in a big corp to never get to play, that's in my opinion entirely your own fault for not having good enough players all around. They can also always play FW battles, which will be in the Mercenary tab in the Battle finder.
Thanks for the response. 1) My issue with catering to small corps, leading to alternate corps etc. is just that every big corp that wants to play big needs to do it to stay in pace. 2) I don't get the getting attacked part. Of course you will, and that's where you can use your merc numbers. That's the whole point: to not have 16 mercs fighting a 700 merc's battle, but instead have multiple fights going to expand quicker. The main corp can eventually tip off the districts from the placeholder expansions you managed to secure after the initial struggle, without clone loss to main corp doing so. 3) I must be missing a mechanic that's in place. Defender gets to choose timeframe, and you get the empty district you land on. Spam corps, get districts, put timeframe to when you will defend them. Instead of using 16 players at a time, you can use multiple times that if your corp's numbers allow. 4) EDIT: the day one into mother corp part doesnt exist. You play multiple corps normally, and eventually give over to mother corp so that it wont lose clones on expansions. You play multiple corps, because your size allows it and it's the reasonable thing to do with the mechanics. On point 4. Yes, it's the reasonable thing to do with the mechanics because there's no problem with alliances of small corps. So if you're a big corp that is a good thing to do. You'll be an alliance though, and not a single corp.
On the other points. If you're a big corp (splitting into smaller corps), and you take 25 districts on day one. How many of those do you think you have on day 2 / 3 / 4 when they're being attacked and you have to use all of your mercs in your corp to defend them? With a lot of work in doing so as well, since you have 25 different corps and have to manage them all, get ringers into all the battles using people in the subcorps, dealing with disconnections where you have to get new guys into the battle. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
217
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 07:42:00 -
[702] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote: On the other points. If you're a big corp (splitting into smaller corps), and you take 25 districts on day one. How many of those do you think you have on day 2 / 3 / 4 when they're being attacked and you have to use all of your mercs in your corp to defend them? With a lot of work in doing so as well, since you have 25 different corps and have to manage them all, get ringers into all the battles using people in the subcorps, dealing with disconnections where you have to get new guys into the battle.
My initial reaction was really megalomaniac. The numbers I gave in this mornings post were 3 corps to start with to triple your expansion. 25 is not really applicaple.
I can see it being viable on spamming 2-10 alternate corps given your mercenary numbers. Even if you get one extra start, it's worth it for a big corp. It doubles your initial attack strenght (by allowing successive attacks from 2 bases) and allows you to tip over the other expansion in the long run. Now if you spam 10 initial corps and cherry pick the ones that gain most strenght, then combining them over the long course, you're well off as a big alliance. If you have a strong rival, you can burn one or two of the alt corps in killing off their clone reserve during the initial rush as a sacrificial offense.
I think you should be able to do it without all the hassle, though. Limiting big corps artificially is just... artificial. Prehaps there is a smarter way of doing it that actually puts a limit in place, or prehaps the limit needs to be lifted? |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
217
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 08:49:00 -
[703] - Quote
SKETCH SOLUTION TO THE POSSIBLE ISSUE DESCRIBED IN POST #697 (Concerning large corporations being possibly driven towards expanding via alt corporations to boost start.)
Introduce a new module (I hate solutions that add new stuff, but this might address the core issue and expand possibilities in a reasonable way):
Genolution Outpost Module Cost: 50 million ISK Launches a new separate colony with 100 clones on a district, or attacks a district in effort to do it (same mechanic as creating alt corp and buying clone pack). Upgrades to a linked district hub using Infrastructure link that costs 50 million isk per district, requires at least 220 clones in storage, drops clone count to 100 in it and makes the colony into a district linked to your main clone infrastructure. Includes all districts linked to the Outpost.
With this expensive module in place, large corporations could use their player base and donations/tax to expand faster, allowing more fighting chances to the numbers. The isk cost would be substantial, but you won't need to do it using alt corps for the same result. The clone disintegration would balance the potential expansion to put it in line with "free flipping" districts from your alt corp by invading without defense. |
Bren Butchman
Tgrad Mercs
5
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 09:15:00 -
[704] - Quote
You should take into consideration the influx of isk that'll come in when dust economy will be linked with the eve one. The idea isn't bad per se, but the price tag should be closer to the 5 billion isk mark, imho. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
279
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 09:18:00 -
[705] - Quote
Trolls, anything you do to cater to the size of big corps will just make them instantly dominate as one instead of dominating as separate smaller corps that are vulnerable because you can't share clones between them.
If you want to go through the hassle and expense of splitting into many smaller corps to try to gain an advantage, that's fine. You're definitely going to lose a lot of isk and not necessarily going to be able to expand or consolidate as fast as you can. Let's say on day 1 you split into 10 corps and claim 10 districts without conflict. Day 2 every single one of your districts is attacked. You manage to successfully defend all 10 of them but lose 60 clones on each. Not only can none of your districts move clones (each could possibly recover to 100 but you need more than that to launch an attack), people will see that they're vulnerable and have low merc numbers in their corps and you will definitely be attacked again the next day, whether by the same attackers or new ones with another bunch of 100 clones. Unless you're doing well enough in every battle to lose less than 60 clones (40 without the prod SI), you won't be able to expand at all and your empire of small corps will slowly wittle away.
In fact this scenario is true in the case of single corps too. Every corp, no matter of size or splitting will find it difficult to maintain clones enough to be able to expand because it will be constant war.
As for your analogy - CCP Fox Four earlier said that you can only buy 100 mercs because you have nowhere to store more without a district. This makes sense. It's like the hotel owner telling you, sorry we've only got one room and due to insurance purposes only 4 people can stay in there tonight (this actually happened to me and my friends roadtripping the southern states a few years back and we had 10 people!). |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
279
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 09:20:00 -
[706] - Quote
Bren Butchman wrote:You should take into consideration the influx of isk that'll come in when dust economy will be linked with the eve one. The idea isn't bad per se, but the price tag should be closer to the 5 billion isk mark, imho.
They've already said that the economies won't be linked before PC comes in. By the time that happens there'll be plenty of other things to spend your billions of isk on and the prices quoted here are always subject to change. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
218
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 10:59:00 -
[707] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Trolls, anything you do to cater to the size of big corps will just make them instantly dominate as one instead of dominating as separate smaller corps that are vulnerable because you can't share clones between them.
If you want to go through the hassle and expense of splitting into many smaller corps to try to gain an advantage, that's fine. You're definitely going to lose a lot of isk and not necessarily going to be able to expand or consolidate as fast as you can. Let's say on day 1 you split into 10 corps and claim 10 districts without conflict. Day 2 every single one of your districts is attacked. You manage to successfully defend all 10 of them but lose 60 clones on each. Not only can none of your districts move clones (each could possibly recover to 100 but you need more than that to launch an attack), people will see that they're vulnerable and have low merc numbers in their corps and you will definitely be attacked again the next day, whether by the same attackers or new ones with another bunch of 100 clones. Unless you're doing well enough in every battle to lose less than 60 clones (40 without the prod SI), you won't be able to expand at all and your empire of small corps will slowly wittle away.
In fact this scenario is true in the case of single corps too. Every corp, no matter of size or splitting will find it difficult to maintain clones enough to be able to expand because it will be constant war.
As for your analogy - CCP Fox Four earlier said that you can only buy 100 mercs because you have nowhere to store more without a district. This makes sense. It's like the hotel owner telling you, sorry we've only got one room and due to insurance purposes only 4 people can stay in there tonight (this actually happened to me and my friends roadtripping the southern states a few years back and we had 10 people!).
I'll show the arguments and their weaknesses imho:
1) Catering to big corps, sharing clones between: The mechanic described by my solution of making outposts that you need to attach to your reserve by paying a lot in all practises simulates making an alt corp and flipping the planets over time. This can be done with current mechanics, and it caters to the big corps organized enough to exploit it. I'd rather have the option out in the open, with mechanics in place to hold it back.
2) Going through the hassle and using a shady mechanic is left for those who figure out to do it. This is unnecessary, IMHO. It creates unnecessary placeholder corps. Everyone should be on even ground here, and this mechanic should be pre thought and diminished.
3) You point out that all corps need to go through the test of fire. I have addressed this and I claim, that if you have manpower, it only makes sense to do it on multiple fronts in order for some of them to succeed. The current mechanics will have large corps stacked with manpower to do so, and to effectively improve their chance of getting through the purification. In fact, the harshness of initial struggle ONLY makes it more worth to try out many starts because you have a better chance of getting a good one. In the beginning, you have a vast surplus of players and a vast lack of clones.
4) The RL analogy means, that the situation you were in sucks, and should not happen in game. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2048
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:12:00 -
[708] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:R F Gyro wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Lets look at the problem with this argument: I don't think there's a problem here at all. I see a trade-off, which is exactly what we want from the game. As I understand the argument, large corps have to decide between alt corp (high admin, fast expansion, weak defense) or single corp (low admin, slow expansion, stronger defense once established) strategy. Smaller corps don't really have this problem. That's wonderful isn't it? No right answer, and bigger isn't entirely better. Having alt corps doesn't detach from making a corp bigger. In fact, you can make all of them big and see which survives to be your main. On top of that, you can defend all the corps that you play as you would play one corp up to a point. When the time is right, you can choose NOT TO DEFEND from the main corp so that the main corp can expand without losing any clones to attack. You can choose not to defend and automatically lose 100 clones and a district's worth of clone production per attack you ignore, you mean?
If someone attacks, you HAVE to be there to defend, or they get an empty battlefield to play with, and they kill your MCC. Because you lost, you lose 100 clones. And because you lost by MCC destruction, that also shuts down clone production for the next cycle.
And did you even read my comment that RF Gyro was replying to? Because that details pretty clearly why, while this "tactic" might work, it's not an "exploit" and has significant enough drawbacks to be totally fair play. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2048
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:23:00 -
[709] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Analogy from imaginary RL: You take your 30 friends on a trip to a strange country. The legislation of the hotels there says, that you can rent one room for one group signing in for the first week, two rooms beginning from the second week and four rooms after the first month. This feels very bad and you rent a room for the 30 people group, allowing eight of them to sleep inside while the rest have to get drunk and sleep in toilet or hallway. One day, a friend of yours gets an idea, though. Let's just sign in as multiple groups to get a room for everyone from the first day. Will you do it, or will you force the others to sleep in the hallway while you make sweet love to your A-girlfriend? Except that the hotel also has regular VIP customers who come along, and groups are bumped off the list on a "smallest group first" basis and thrown out of their rooms on a regular basis, so you're actually playing a balancing act between being the too-big-for-our-room group or being the too-small-and-thrown-out group.
Quote:Analogy from EVE Online: CCP decides to put in place a limit on ships a corp can undock in nullsec. They figure, the more POS'es you set up, the more command structure points you generate to use ships. In order to further limit this, there will be a 24h cooldown after installing POS, and the POS will start to generate command points for which you can undock ships. Now your corp of 400 newly gathered pod pilots has an issue. They want ships, but the rules dictate your corp can only undock in 40 ships and 10 ships for each POS in system. Then, one day, a corp member comes up with an idea. Let's bypass this by splitting the corp into 10 corps so that everyone can fly a ship in your nullsec system. Will you consider it, or just tell him to HTFU and go set more POS up, or go back to highsec? And this comparison would only work if, when your POS is attacked, the defending fleet - even though it can include other members of your Alliance as well as the Corp being attacked, is limited to the numbers the POS under attack is capable of launching. That limiting mechanic (which doesn't exist in EVE, but which is alive and well in DUST, balances the advantage with a significant drawback. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
218
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:28:00 -
[710] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote: You can choose not to defend and automatically lose 100 clones and a district's worth of clone production per attack you ignore, you mean?
If someone attacks, you HAVE to be there to defend, or they get an empty battlefield to play with, and they kill your MCC. Because you lost, you lose 100 clones. And because you lost by MCC destruction, that also shuts down clone production for the next cycle.
And did you even read my comment that RF Gyro was replying to? Because that details pretty clearly why, while this "tactic" might work, it's not an "exploit" and has significant enough drawbacks to be totally fair play.
Yes. You are looking at wrong circumstances:
When you defend FROM YOUR MAIN CORP on your alt corp, you can choose not to show up - in which case main corp wins, and gets district which is the whole point. You can even push all the clones out from there to attack a rival just before you do that, in order to quicken the flip.
So, you can: 1) get some districts on alt corps 2) defend them normally 3) give them over to main corp when the time comes. Main corp wont lose clones to attack, making it stronger. You make sure nobody builds up a defense at the districts by having placeholders there. |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
280
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:28:00 -
[711] - Quote
The RL analogy applies to the game because you have nowhere to store more than 100 clones without a district.
Honestly, I'm not quite sure I entirely follow your outposts idea - are you saying you could just spend some isk and create a new district to own? If so, this is just allowing anyone with enough isk to create their own empire from scratch without anyone being able to stop them.
Everyone starts with only 100 clones. Yes making many corps will give you the best chance of getting one of the lucky district with the prod SI but you're always going to struggle to expand because you'll be under constant attack.
There really is nothing wrong with your splitting idea if you want to do it - I'm sure many of the big corps will try because they have enough isk to throw away but no one will be able to expand enough to dominate early on because of what I've already said about being under constant attack on all fronts. If you really want to throw away hundreds of millions of isk, be my guest, it won't guarantee you the expansion you're predicting.
I suppose what you could do is anytime you're attacked you just hide and don't lose any clones, except for the 20% that are turned over to the attackers for winning. However, losing stops you being able to produce any new clones and after a few days your district becomes virtually indefensible and unreinforcable. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
218
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:33:00 -
[712] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote: Except that the hotel also has regular VIP customers who come along, and groups are bumped off the list on a "smallest group first" basis and thrown out of their rooms on a regular basis, so you're actually playing a balancing act between being the too-big-for-our-room group or being the too-small-and-thrown-out group.
And this comparison would only work if, when your POS is attacked, the defending fleet - even though it can include other members of your Alliance as well as the Corp being attacked, is limited to the numbers the POS under attack is capable of launching. That limiting mechanic (which doesn't exist in EVE, but which is alive and well in DUST, balances the advantage with a significant drawback.
Not relevant to my argument. My argument is that it's bad you can't use all the numbers and get people to play, which is why people will circumvent it by using the mechanics that are currently in place - by making alt corps.
Single fight balance is in place. The war balance is not, as you can expand by using alt corps. This will be exploited, which is why it should just be used as a normal mechanic or effectively limited. Right now its neither, its a shady mechanic that circumvents expansion limitation on big groups by what feels like a significant degree.
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2048
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:34:00 -
[713] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Situation in Dust514 A corporation can have up to 100 NPC clones from day one, restockable to that limit. You have corporations with 700 mercs. The only way for such a big corp to put those mercs into play is to split into corps so that you have more NPC clones to play with, gaining multiple districts and fighting on multiple fronts - because that is the only thing that you can do with the 700 players when fights are 16vs16. In order to have fun for the players, uncapped by artificial clone limit, the corp needs to split into fighting for alternate corps made just to remove the clone cap. Alternatively, you could swap mercs out during the battle if it's dragging on, giving players a break from an intense battle and substiituting other players in. Or, when you've got multiple districts, designate different Corp members to defend different districts at different times or on different days, so you have a 7-day rotation (or longer) of members based on availability. You'd alos be able to set different reinforcement timers for different districts to work around the various timezone/sleep patterns of your Corp members.
Quote:And this doesn't detach from the main corporation at all. In fact, you are just multiplying what you do in the beginning, because it is otherwise hugely capped to what you could potentially be doing. The corporations you make don't need members of their own, since you just bring members from the main corp. All of the corporations can expand at the speed of the main corp, given you have enough mercs for it. You are taking a short cut into controlling all the space your player number allows you to, be it 3-10 districts. It doesn't detach from the main Corporation until you're trying to hold onto your territory. You HAVE to win a fight if you want to have a chance at reinforcing a district, and you HAVE to have a safe district with enough clones to make a delivery (and not leave the district providing those clones vulnerable) and it has to be a district controlled by the same corporation. If you have 5 corporations with territory, that means you have 1/5 as much territory that's available to provide reinforcements.
Quote:Let's say you can control 6 districts. You put 3 corps in to take 2 districts each, defend the spots, and eventually give them over to the main corp by a timeframe play. This way you make sure you won't need to fight an attacking battle for them. The main corp gets a clone advantage, since it won't lose any to capturing the districts from sister corps. How does the main corp get a clone advantage? You have to take the previous Corp's district over by cloning them out, which means all their clones are sold off (no longer available to you) or destroyed (still no longer available to you). Your main corp will only have the clones that it's managed to produce in either scenario, they just have more territory.
Quote:Let's say you can control a bottlenecked constellation with 20 districts in the endgame, if you get a superior clone production going there. Do the same: expand with sister corps, hold the bottleneck with main, defend with sister clones from the NPC clone attacks and let one corp slowly flip it over without losing clones to attack in the process. But you're still going to have to sacrifice clones in the attack.
Not only this. The 700 member corp could be average in it's member skill. There is a big risk, that every time you try to settle a district, someone comes and roflstomps you. After a month of trying in vain, the corp leadership decides to skip PC and go back to FW, where they can use the numbers without artificial clone limits. This can be circumvented by probability spamming. You spam five start districts and see which one of them gets some wind under its wings. You play every district start up to holding 3 for every corp normally, because you have the spare manpower to do so. The ones that failure cascade are left behind, and you focus in the developing ones that become strong enough to sustain an attack. If some entity is griefing you, you attack him from the five corporations to nuke down his clones so that he can't keep up the attack on the developing one. If four of the five start rolls fail, you still have one alive and kicking, and you didn't get booted out of PC in the first month. As a bonus, you can even manage to spam all the districts on a planet and eventually flip them over to the winning corp without clone loss by defending them from everyone except the winner corp. You can possibly even sell out clones and make the district easy to take over with timeframe play.
All of this has a price in management and clickfest time. But for the big corps, I see no other choice than splitting to be sure they don't lose every start and to use a good number of their player base. This is bad design, because they should be able to do it with the one big corp instead of expanding command structure artificially (this is debateable and just my opinion). The players don't want to be left without ships because of artificial POS limits. The players would want a hotel room.[/quote] And as mentioned, the collection of smaller corps WOULD be a useful short-term strategy, but it's ALSO an additional layer of vulnerability when you're attacked - and you WILL be attacked, frequently and potentially very hard. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
218
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:38:00 -
[714] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:The RL analogy applies to the game because you have nowhere to store more than 100 clones without a district.
Honestly, I'm not quite sure I entirely follow your outposts idea - are you saying you could just spend some isk and create a new district to own? If so, this is just allowing anyone with enough isk to create their own empire from scratch without anyone being able to stop them.
Everyone starts with only 100 clones. Yes making many corps will give you the best chance of getting one of the lucky district with the prod SI but you're always going to struggle to expand because you'll be under constant attack.
There really is nothing wrong with your splitting idea if you want to do it - I'm sure many of the big corps will try because they have enough isk to throw away but no one will be able to expand enough to dominate early on because of what I've already said about being under constant attack on all fronts. If you really want to throw away hundreds of millions of isk, be my guest, it won't guarantee you the expansion you're predicting.
I suppose what you could do is anytime you're attacked you just hide and don't lose any clones, except for the 20% that are turned over to the attackers for winning. However, losing stops you being able to produce any new clones and after a few days your district becomes virtually indefensible and unreinforcable.
Spot on topic, thanks :)
The outposts idea is a mechanic put in place to open this shady alt corp business for all and make it public with significant drawbacks, still on line with the exploit power. This way people would stick with one corp and the ground would be even for all the large ones to do it.
The idea is: you defend normally when attacked. You just have the clones to defend individually each expansion, just like you get them for the main base. You just multiply your bases. This requires mercenary numbers, which is what being in 1 corp wont allow to put in usage.
Later on, you give the expansions you have as free victories to main corp and boost it by giving expansion without clone loss. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
37
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:39:00 -
[715] - Quote
Well, Trollsroyce keep going on this subject, I keep reading all of this, and I still think that there is a problem in this system, as it offers an advantage to big, really good and rich corps...
If we take off the good arguments from Django Quik, FoxFour and others, the only thing we need to set up is how much you trust in your corpm8.
So, a district NEED a SI... So each group of people need at least 121.6M ISK (20M clones + 100M SI + 1.6M corp creation).
As I said, and we've got time to farm ISK before PC release, it's still represent a lots of ISK in DUST, but less and less everyday.
I think it is a good investment. And what is the problem to have REAL sister corps, and not fake ones...
In the other hand, you can try to exploit this, with a lots of ISK at the beginning. This could work with really really really good corp. Just play the game during a while with all the fake sister corps. Let other corps braking their teeths on your district. When the storm goes away, sell your clones, and "friendly attack".
You'll have a lots of good wars for all your corpm8 excites by this new feature (and not 1 battle per day...). The first investment will be reimburse pretty easily, and you'll have a good foot in PC.
The real risk, is community management : no corp channel (ok, custom channels exists, but it's not the same...), risk to leave one of the territory to another, members of the first one could be mad...
It is maybe the bigger risk, but the only problem is people management... |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2048
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:43:00 -
[716] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote: You can choose not to defend and automatically lose 100 clones and a district's worth of clone production per attack you ignore, you mean?
If someone attacks, you HAVE to be there to defend, or they get an empty battlefield to play with, and they kill your MCC. Because you lost, you lose 100 clones. And because you lost by MCC destruction, that also shuts down clone production for the next cycle.
And did you even read my comment that RF Gyro was replying to? Because that details pretty clearly why, while this "tactic" might work, it's not an "exploit" and has significant enough drawbacks to be totally fair play.
Yes. You are looking at wrong circumstances: When you defend FROM YOUR MAIN CORP on your alt corp, you can choose not to show up - in which case main corp wins, and gets district which is the whole point. You can even push all the clones out from there to attack a rival just before you do that, in order to quicken the flip. So, you can: 1) get some districts on alt corps 2) defend them normally 3) give them over to main corp when the time comes. Main corp wont lose clones to attack, making it stronger. You make sure nobody builds up a defense at the districts by having placeholders there. You attack, and if you lose, all those clones are gone. Or you don't attack and you lose, and your main corp gains the district, thus further "centralising" your Corp structure and un-doing the division of the Corp. But it leaves you vulnerable, because if someone else happens to look in the right place when you sell, they can drop into the district without having to fight for it (because you just unloaded all the clones). And you CAN'T circumvent that risk - small as it is - because as soon as you attack, the district is locked into "under attack" state and can't move more clones in or out. |
Gusk Hevv
Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic
32
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:46:00 -
[717] - Quote
How will PC in dust go along with PI in EVE , Let's just think about planet A district 3 where Corp X has conquered And there a pod pilot who has PI in the very same district will dust players be able to push them off planet so friendly pilots can establish a colony there? |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2048
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:53:00 -
[718] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:I suppose what you could do is anytime you're attacked you just hide and don't lose any clones, except for the 20% that are turned over to the attackers for winning. However, losing stops you being able to produce any new clones and after a few days your district becomes virtually indefensible and unreinforcable. Actually, you always lose a minimum of 100 clones for losing, so you get 4 days at most for non-defense of a district assuming it has a Cargo Hub, and that will take 10 days of unbroken defense to replenish its numbers if you assume the losses and the winnings balance out.
trollsroyce wrote:The idea is: you defend normally when attacked. You just have the clones to defend individually each expansion, just like you get them for the main base. You just multiply your bases. This requires mercenary numbers, which is what being in 1 corp wont allow to put in usage. Actually, a single corp allows you - once established - to BETTER put your numbers to good use than with split Corps. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
281
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 11:54:00 -
[719] - Quote
The big problem suggested here is that you guys think that one corp (split into many smaller corps) will become invulnerable because they can claim large areas of space and then outproduce any other corp in terms of clones.
The big rebuttal is that you will be under constant attack on all fronts from day one. Even if you make a circle of self-attacks/district sacrifices against your own sub-corps to keep your districts locked, you'll never be able to produce any extra clones to be able to expand from your initial positions.
As previously stated many times now - you will struggle to even produce enough clones to attack a 2nd district from any of your sub-corps, when under constant attack from external corps. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
37
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 12:35:00 -
[720] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:The big problem suggested here is that you guys think that one corp (split into many smaller corps) will become invulnerable because they can claim large areas of space and then outproduce any other corp in terms of clones.
The big rebuttal is that you will be under constant attack on all fronts from day one. Even if you make a circle of self-attacks/district sacrifices against your own sub-corps to keep your districts locked, you'll never be able to produce any extra clones to be able to expand from your initial positions.
As previously stated many times now - you will struggle to even produce enough clones to attack a 2nd district from any of your sub-corps, when under constant attack from external corps.
Your description works as well for 1 corp = 1 district... So why not multiply the chances, the battles per day, the "fake" production clones for the MOTHER corp (even if you can't share the clones between all the corps), possibility to lock districts from other attack with your own corps (if you have good sync, other corps won't be able to attack you !!!)
Organization, management, logistic, but still a kind of "exploit" in my mind... |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
281
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 12:41:00 -
[721] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Django Quik wrote:The big problem suggested here is that you guys think that one corp (split into many smaller corps) will become invulnerable because they can claim large areas of space and then outproduce any other corp in terms of clones.
The big rebuttal is that you will be under constant attack on all fronts from day one. Even if you make a circle of self-attacks/district sacrifices against your own sub-corps to keep your districts locked, you'll never be able to produce any extra clones to be able to expand from your initial positions.
As previously stated many times now - you will struggle to even produce enough clones to attack a 2nd district from any of your sub-corps, when under constant attack from external corps. Your description works as well for 1 corp = 1 district... So why not multiply the chances, the battles per day, the "fake" production clones for the MOTHER corp (even if you can't share the clones between all the corps), possibility to lock districts from other attack with your own corps (if you have good sync, other corps won't be able to attack you !!!) Organization, management, logistic, but still a kind of "exploit" in my mind...
If you attack your own districts in order to lock them, you have to be using all your available clones to attack all your districts everyday (leave one district unattacked and someone else will attack it). You'd never be able to produce more clones because the districts would be constantly 'flipped' by your own sub-corps, so you'd never be able to have enough clones to expand further than the few districts you claimed on day 1. You'd never build up clones and never earn any isk and never expand. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
37
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 12:49:00 -
[722] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Django Quik wrote:The big problem suggested here is that you guys think that one corp (split into many smaller corps) will become invulnerable because they can claim large areas of space and then outproduce any other corp in terms of clones.
The big rebuttal is that you will be under constant attack on all fronts from day one. Even if you make a circle of self-attacks/district sacrifices against your own sub-corps to keep your districts locked, you'll never be able to produce any extra clones to be able to expand from your initial positions.
As previously stated many times now - you will struggle to even produce enough clones to attack a 2nd district from any of your sub-corps, when under constant attack from external corps. Your description works as well for 1 corp = 1 district... So why not multiply the chances, the battles per day, the "fake" production clones for the MOTHER corp (even if you can't share the clones between all the corps), possibility to lock districts from other attack with your own corps (if you have good sync, other corps won't be able to attack you !!!) Organization, management, logistic, but still a kind of "exploit" in my mind... If you attack your own districts in order to lock them, you have to be using all your available clones to attack all your districts everyday (leave one district unattacked and someone else will attack it). You'd never be able to produce more clones because the districts would be constantly 'flipped' by your own sub-corps, so you'd never be able to have enough clones to expand further than the few districts you claimed on day 1. You'd never build up clones and never earn any isk and never expand.
Just play the game on multiple districts. Wait for a window. When you've got one, you take a district for your mother corp...
Take it for 2 or 3 sister corps. Don't tell me that some corp won't never find 4-6 really active guys and confidence to hold the scuad leader role in sister corp. And who will attack everyday the "bigger and better" corp ?
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
281
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 12:53:00 -
[723] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote: Just play the game on multiple districts. Wait for a window. When you've got one, you take a district for your mother corp...
Take it for 2 or 3 sister corps. Don't tell me that some corp won't never find 4-6 really active guys and confidence to hold the scuad leader role in sister corp. And who will attack everyday the "bigger and better" corp ?
With more than 1000 corps and PC being the only new and fun thing to do, every district will be constantly under threat. And what about the other bigger and better corps? No one corp wins 100% of games. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
218
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 12:54:00 -
[724] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:The big problem suggested here is that you guys think that one corp (split into many smaller corps) will become invulnerable because they can claim large areas of space and then outproduce any other corp in terms of clones.
The big rebuttal is that you will be under constant attack on all fronts from day one. Even if you make a circle of self-attacks/district sacrifices against your own sub-corps to keep your districts locked, you'll never be able to produce any extra clones to be able to expand from your initial positions.
As previously stated many times now - you will struggle to even produce enough clones to attack a 2nd district from any of your sub-corps, when under constant attack from external corps.
Invulnerable, by all means nope. Just bigger and capable of attacking multiple targets.
What is "constant attack"? An 1 hour timeframe, when you can be attacked. 1 hour daily. How does a big corp utilize numbers in this 1 hour timeframe? By having many districts to multiply the usage of numbers.
There is no circle exploit or such, just plain and simple: GÇó put placeholders on districts and play them as normal corps GÇó instead of fighting for expansion, you remove placeholders and will not lose the attack clones GÇó the above fortifies one corp in relation to the same corp fighting for districts and losing clones on hard attack
Again, think of the corps in relation to same corp not split placeholder expanding. The 1 hour daily fight goes for the good players that put the clones to best use. If you have a ton of members, you can just do many corps and feed the strongest child. Players are same - they just join as ringers.
To me, from the given info it follows that split expand is vastly easier and moresustainable than trying to eek out clones to exp.
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
281
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 12:59:00 -
[725] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote: Invulnerable, by all means nope. Just bigger and capable of attacking multiple targets.
What is "constant attack"? An 1 hour timeframe, when you can be attacked. 1 hour daily. How does a big corp utilize numbers in this 1 hour timeframe? By having many districts to multiply the usage of numbers.
There is no circle exploit or such, just plain and simple: GÇó put placeholders on districts and play them as normal corps GÇó instead of fighting for expansion, you remove placeholders and will not lose the attack clones GÇó the above fortifies one corp in relation to the same corp fighting for districts and losing clones on hard attack
Again, think of the corps in relation to same corp not split placeholder expanding. The 1 hour daily fight goes for the good players that put the clones to best use. If you have a ton of members, you can just do many corps and feed the strongest child. Players are same - they just join as ringers.
To me, from the given info it follows that split expand is vastly easier and moresustainable than trying to eek out clones to exp.
By constant attack I mean every district being attacked in its window every day.
If you leave any district open to attack, it will be attacked by an external corp. Guaranteed. You will lose some clones - maybe not the entire district but enough to stop you from being able to expand beyond most if not all of your districts. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
37
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 13:15:00 -
[726] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:trollsroyce wrote: Invulnerable, by all means nope. Just bigger and capable of attacking multiple targets.
What is "constant attack"? An 1 hour timeframe, when you can be attacked. 1 hour daily. How does a big corp utilize numbers in this 1 hour timeframe? By having many districts to multiply the usage of numbers.
There is no circle exploit or such, just plain and simple: GÇó put placeholders on districts and play them as normal corps GÇó instead of fighting for expansion, you remove placeholders and will not lose the attack clones GÇó the above fortifies one corp in relation to the same corp fighting for districts and losing clones on hard attack
Again, think of the corps in relation to same corp not split placeholder expanding. The 1 hour daily fight goes for the good players that put the clones to best use. If you have a ton of members, you can just do many corps and feed the strongest child. Players are same - they just join as ringers.
To me, from the given info it follows that split expand is vastly easier and moresustainable than trying to eek out clones to exp.
By constant attack I mean every district being attacked in its window every day. If you leave any district open to attack, it will be attacked by an external corp. Guaranteed. You will lose some clones - maybe not the entire district but enough to stop you from being able to expand beyond most if not all of your districts.
1000 corp ? And how many real threat for the best corps ? So how many time will they really loose clone ?
I know what you mean, it's just not enough for me. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
218
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 13:27:00 -
[727] - Quote
I don't think the constant attack is actually related to the subject of split expand. Surely it makes expansion hard. Splitting makes it easier but won't ultimately allow you to hold any more (I never claimed this). What I claim is that split expand is a fast shortcut to your maximum districts.
The reason it makes expanding easy is that the expander corp will not need to waste clones on attack. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
281
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 13:31:00 -
[728] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote: 1000 corp ? And how many real threat for the best corps ? So how many time will they really loose clone ?
I know what you mean, it's just not enough for me.
There are at least 25 if not up to 50 decent corps out there. Even if the smaller less able clones can't beat your clone counts down a lot, they'll still be able to take out a few. On a district without the prod SI, you need to lose less than 20 clones over the course of 3 matches in order to be able to expand to another district. If you lose more than 60 clones in a match on one of these districts, even if you win, you're down clones and worse off than when you started. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
281
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 13:36:00 -
[729] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:I don't think the constant attack is actually related to the subject of split expand. Surely it makes expansion hard. Splitting makes it easier but won't ultimately allow you to hold any more (I never claimed this). What I claim is that split expand is a fast shortcut to your maximum districts.
The reason it makes expanding easy is that the expander corp will not need to waste clones on attack.
You may be able to get a 'shortcut to you maximum districts' but this won't be sustainable, so your shortcut will ultimately fail.
The 'expander corp' will instead waste clones on defense while hoping that the sub-corps' districts last long enough to be 'absorbed' into the main. |
Geth Massredux
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
99
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 14:14:00 -
[730] - Quote
Will these structures on planets cost ISK from our corp?
GÇóCargo Hub: Provides a 50% bonus to clone storage GÇóProduction Facility: Provides a 50% bonus to clone production GÇóResearch Lab: Provides a 50% bonus to clone travel efficiency
Just wondering because some of us will have to pay taxes since there is no option. Giving a lot of isk to the corp so we can provide these structures. |
|
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
431
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 14:17:00 -
[731] - Quote
Geth Massredux wrote:Will these structures on planets cost ISK from our corp?
GÇóCargo Hub: Provides a 50% bonus to clone storage GÇóProduction Facility: Provides a 50% bonus to clone production GÇóResearch Lab: Provides a 50% bonus to clone travel efficiency
Just wondering because some of us will have to pay taxes since there is no option. Giving a lot of isk to the corp so we can provide these structures. There will be a SI preplaced on every district. You can change that SI to a different one for 100 mill ISK.
As I understand it at least.
|
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
361
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 14:37:00 -
[732] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:I don't think the constant attack is actually related to the subject of split expand. Surely it makes expansion hard. Splitting makes it easier but won't ultimately allow you to hold any more (I never claimed this). What I claim is that split expand is a fast shortcut to your maximum districts.
The reason it makes expanding easy is that the expander corp will not need to waste clones on attack.
EDIT: I'm sorry for the unclear discussion, the potential of splitting is just getting clearer while at it. Right now what I see happening is: 1) corp splits based on how many fights they can sustain merc number wise. E.g. having 64 active every day at your defense frame allows 4 districts. 2) corp takes said 4 to start with, possibly more to narrow down the chances of failure and to get 4 good starts. 3) one of the 4, the main corp, expands to the pre defended districts by yielding fights on alt corps.
Gains as opposed to going 1 corp "as supposed": GÇó fighting no show, one fight district flips as opposed to 300 clone districts with reinforcements that fight back. this for all your expansions, since they were pre taken and defended as individual corps GÇó any spare clones on the alt corps can be used to counter attack (clone wars) GÇó you can put more of your mercs in nullsec fights, providing content GÇó if one of the starts fails, hop on another instead of trying to restart with pitiful 100 clones
Losses as opposed to 1 corp: GÇó costs isk to set up GÇó is tedious to manage GÇó requires planning
The outposts mechanic could make this less tedious and public, widely used as opposed to shady try hard game. Still the issue of attack spam by making satellite 100 cloners and dropping them on distant enemies exists. You can do that by alt corps currently; outposts would be more expensive in isk, less on metagame and alt creation.
If you're a large corp with large numbers you are NOT limited from the INITIAL LAND GRAB.
It's just logistically more complicated to pull off. But it is 100% doable. In fact ive worked out the logistics to make it happen. Obviously im keeping mum on how to do it but honestly the whole catering to small vs large corp is nonsense.
It caters to small corps on the initial land grab because it puts all corps on equal footing. Large corps suffer on the initial land grab as a single entitiy. Splitting is the answer and then knowing how to stabliize that over the next few days is entirely your logistical issue but entirely doable.
Im not trolling you but im just saying you cant ask CCP to allow you to grab as much land as you want on DAY 1. But they have given you a back door to do so but with the sheer numbers a large corp has if you properly plan the DAY 1 logistics you can execute a massive land grab.
It is entirely logistically possible to make a large day 1 land grab. The tools are all in place, its just up to you to make the logistics happen. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
284
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 15:02:00 -
[733] - Quote
You can't just say 'I know how this exploit could work but I'm not telling any of you' and claim something needs to be fixed or addressed. I thought this was supposed to be a constructive debate?
I'm still solidly of the opinion that you will never have the opportunity to consolidate either as a single big corp or multiple small corps because your districts will rarely if ever have the peace required to expand. Your sub corps will look small and weak, making them targets. Your main corp will be the target of larger corps who want to take you out of the picture early on. Mid-sized corps that try to fly under the radar may fair okay but with the corps:districts ratio so high nobody will be safe, especially early on. Who knows what might happen after everything settles down a few months later. |
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
361
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 15:22:00 -
[734] - Quote
It isn't an exploit by any means, all the info to do this has been postulated and confirmed by foxfour that it is doable but likely to result in ISK loss, but thats the point of any sort of business model theres an initial cost and ledgers get balanced over time.
Corp splitting is part of the answer, fox four said it thats something a corp can choose to do.
How to then consolidate is entirely up to the the corp, it is doable but logistically a lot of planning and effort. I see the big picture and know it can be done,
How much it will cost is a different story. I wont even go any further ive given more than i should. Seriously this is the metagame part of the game and i shouldnt have to and wont tell anyone how to logistically accomplish this thats not my problem.
All ill say is reread the wiki and the dev posts, all the info and the postulations are there. Do the homework and crunch numbers beyond that splitting corps is not an exploit and structurally completely doable, but as everything CCP its going to be player driven they have given us the basic foundations to make it happen within the game.
/c |
R F Gyro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
334
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 15:24:00 -
[735] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:I don't think the constant attack is actually related to the subject of split expand. Surely it makes expansion hard. Splitting makes it easier but won't ultimately allow you to hold any more (I never claimed this). What I claim is that split expand is a fast shortcut to your maximum districts.
The reason it makes expanding easy is that the expander corp will not need to waste clones on attack.
EDIT: I'm sorry for the unclear discussion, the potential of splitting is just getting clearer while at it. Right now what I see happening is: 1) corp splits based on how many fights they can sustain merc number wise. E.g. having 64 active every day at your defense frame allows 4 districts. 2) corp takes said 4 to start with, possibly more to narrow down the chances of failure and to get 4 good starts. 3) one of the 4, the main corp, expands to the pre defended districts by yielding fights on alt corps.
Gains as opposed to going 1 corp "as supposed": GÇó fighting no show, one fight district flips as opposed to 300 clone districts with reinforcements that fight back. this for all your expansions, since they were pre taken and defended as individual corps GÇó any spare clones on the alt corps can be used to counter attack (clone wars) GÇó you can put more of your mercs in nullsec fights, providing content GÇó if one of the starts fails, hop on another instead of trying to restart with pitiful 100 clones
Losses as opposed to 1 corp: GÇó costs isk to set up GÇó is tedious to manage GÇó requires planning
The outposts mechanic could make this less tedious and public, widely used as opposed to shady try hard game. Still the issue of attack spam by making satellite 100 cloners and dropping them on distant enemies exists. You can do that by alt corps currently; outposts would be more expensive in isk, less on metagame and alt creation. I don't disagree with any of this apart from the view that CCP should spend development time addressing it.
This is at worst a short term issue caused by the initial conditions, and will sort itself out relatively quickly. Yes, large corps will probably use alt corps to increase their share of the initial 250 districts. These large corps will end up with more districts than small ones, but the increased admin & trust requirements will mean it won't scale linearly. All good imho.
Once the alt corps have handed their districts back over to their parent, in a few days or weeks at most, everyone will forget about all of this. |
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
361
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 15:27:00 -
[736] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:You can't just say 'I know how this exploit could work but I'm not telling any of you' and claim something needs to be fixed or addressed. I thought this was supposed to be a constructive debate?
I'm still solidly of the opinion that you will never have the opportunity to consolidate either as a single big corp or multiple small corps because your districts will rarely if ever have the peace required to expand. Your sub corps will look small and weak, making them targets. Your main corp will be the target of larger corps who want to take you out of the picture early on. Mid-sized corps that try to fly under the radar may fair okay but with the corps:districts ratio so high nobody will be safe, especially early on. Who knows what might happen after everything settles down a few months later.
Edit--That kind of the point it becomes boring if day 1 eveyone just plants a flag and peace and stability is achieved. Who the wants that? Every corp right now is planning their strategies but at the end of the day war is coming and peace and stability will have to be earned not given. I for one can't wait for the conflict to begin, damnit CCP hurry up ive got ppl on my hit list. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
285
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 16:03:00 -
[737] - Quote
Just to clarify my argument here - I'm not saying this is a problem and I'm not saying this can't be done; clearly it can (whether or not it will be productive remains to be seen and my opinion is it won't) but I don't see it as something needs to be addressed, as Trolls has suggested. That is my argument. |
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1032
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 17:43:00 -
[738] - Quote
Missing from this discussion of mechanics is any mention of motivation.
Why as a corporation would I want to plunk down that first 20M ISK? What am I getting for my money? Is this a wise business decision? Is there sufficient ROI to warrant this action?
As described so far the only advantage of PC is to produce ISK, so I am buying future ISK with current ISK. There are two cases, either PC is an ISK fountain pumping more money into the DUST universe, or it is an ISK sink. From what IGÇÖve read so far CCP wants constant warfare so itGÇÖs going to be a sink. Each battle will see significant clone and equipment loss. Sure, the winning side might break even or come out ahead slightly, but in aggregate there will be a loss with CCP raking its take off the top of each battle. By definition the average corp is going to lose half its battles and therefore end up with an overall ISK loss.
With no EVE link all that money is coming from corp members farming public matches for ISK. ThatGÇÖs a lot of farming, especially if you donGÇÖt get picked to join the A-Team for the actual battle. How long are members going to contribute? This feels like the current corp battle system with some window dressing. The only motivation to run them is relief from constant public matches.
The level of conflict has to be fairly low for PC to be an ISK faucet for a corp, and that means constant expansion of the frontier. If you make the districts worth too much you will motivate more corps to fight for them until they are once again unprofitable. As I see it you just canGÇÖt balance it on an ISK basis. You have to be buying something else for your money than more ISK. What is that, and is it enough?
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 17:54:00 -
[739] - Quote
Gunner Nightingale wrote:It isn't an exploit by any means, all the info to do this has been postulated and confirmed by foxfour that it is doable but likely to result in ISK loss, but thats the point of any sort of business model theres an initial cost and ledgers get balanced over time.
Corp splitting is part of the answer, fox four said it thats something a corp can choose to do.
How to then consolidate is entirely up to the the corp, it is doable but logistically a lot of planning and effort. I see the big picture and know it can be done,
How much it will cost is a different story. I wont even go any further ive given more than i should. Seriously this is the metagame part of the game and i shouldnt have to and wont tell anyone how to logistically accomplish this thats not my problem.
All ill say is reread the wiki and the dev posts, all the info and the postulations are there. Do the homework and crunch numbers beyond that splitting corps is not an exploit and structurally completely doable, but as everything CCP its going to be player driven they have given us the basic foundations to make it happen within the game.
/c
Nice to read that I'm not the only one to think this ... And btw, you use a better english than me
Ok, so this isn't an exploit... It is a way to conquer.
BUT, where is the balance now between small-medium-big corps, with 250 districts at the beginning ? Some of you/us need to be honest : if, as Django said, there are 25-50 competitive corps today, the alliances running around, what do you think will happen ?
OOOOooooohhhhhhh YES, a damn *****ng WAR !!!! But no place for rookie or advance corps.... |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
286
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 18:14:00 -
[740] - Quote
Rookie corps will always struggle due to both ability and numbers but advanced corps can be just as competitive as the mega corps if they have the ability and numbers. If a corp can perform well enough to win every defense of their starter district without losing 40-60 clones, anyone can retain their position. The longer you retain your initial position, the more chance you have to gain a positive clone production rate and be able to expand. Try to expand too fast and you'll end up losing everything.
To be honest, everyone, even the mega corps, will struggle to expand, let alone 'conquer', even using the proposed mother/sister corp suggested above. If any one corp does manage to do well enough to hold more than 21 districts, it instantly has to double up on a attack windows, meaning 32 players needed online at that time to defend and enough competent players for every other hour of the day, unless they double up more. This will be difficult to maintain (massive understatement). |
|
Raze Minhaven
Caffeine Commodities Company
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 18:16:00 -
[741] - Quote
Can we please have an API available to us BEFORE this gets released? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
286
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 18:23:00 -
[742] - Quote
Skihids wrote:Missing from this discussion of mechanics is any mention of motivation.
Why as a corporation would I want to plunk down that first 20M ISK? What am I getting for my money? Is this a wise business decision? Is there sufficient ROI to warrant this action?
As described so far the only advantage of PC is to produce ISK, so I am buying future ISK with current ISK. There are two cases, either PC is an ISK fountain pumping more money into the DUST universe, or it is an ISK sink. From what IGÇÖve read so far CCP wants constant warfare so itGÇÖs going to be a sink. Each battle will see significant clone and equipment loss. Sure, the winning side might break even or come out ahead slightly, but in aggregate there will be a loss with CCP raking its take off the top of each battle. By definition the average corp is going to lose half its battles and therefore end up with an overall ISK loss.
With no EVE link all that money is coming from corp members farming public matches for ISK. ThatGÇÖs a lot of farming, especially if you donGÇÖt get picked to join the A-Team for the actual battle. How long are members going to contribute? This feels like the current corp battle system with some window dressing. The only motivation to run them is relief from constant public matches.
The level of conflict has to be fairly low for PC to be an ISK faucet for a corp, and that means constant expansion of the frontier. If you make the districts worth too much you will motivate more corps to fight for them until they are once again unprofitable. As I see it you just canGÇÖt balance it on an ISK basis. You have to be buying something else for your money than more ISK. What is that, and is it enough?
What you are getting for your money is a first glimpse of the Dust 514 end-game. One day this will be huge and hopefully encompass the entire of New Eden. It also gives you and your mercs something tangible to play for, instead of simply running the same old random matchmade blueberry-ful pub games.
You're right that it could be either a big sink or faucet but that is entirely dependent on how well your corp does. Manage to hold a district for a week or so and you're suddenly earning 100k isk for every extra clone produced. What else do you get? Loot! The best loot because it'll come from players you kill, unlike pub games atm. You could even earn aurum gear! Awesome tanks! Whatever you've seen other people using, that could be yours. I'd say loot alone is more valuable than any isk you'll potentially earn.
And you don't need to be constantly expanding to be profitable. Smaller corps won't be able to protect more than a handful of districts because of numbers but if you manage to hold them, you're in. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
286
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 18:25:00 -
[743] - Quote
Raze Minhaven wrote:Can we please have an API available to us BEFORE this gets released?
What do you want an API for? I can't see anything like that being released before full launch (which can't really be anymore than 6 months away really). |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
286
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 18:26:00 -
[744] - Quote
@CCP Fox Four - With the whole loot system in mind, are we expecting to have corp armories in place by the time this launches? So we can move our loot around the corp and give it to people who can actually use it. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 18:27:00 -
[745] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Rookie corps will always struggle due to both ability and numbers but advanced corps can be just as competitive as the mega corps if they have the ability and numbers. If a corp can perform well enough to win every defense of their starter district without losing 40-60 clones, anyone can retain their position. The longer you retain your initial position, the more chance you have to gain a positive clone production rate and be able to expand. Try to expand too fast and you'll end up losing everything.
To be honest, everyone, even the mega corps, will struggle to expand, let alone 'conquer', even using the proposed mother/sister corp suggested above. If any one corp does manage to do well enough to hold more than 21 districts, it instantly has to double up on a attack windows, meaning 32 players needed online at that time to defend and enough competent players for every other hour of the day, unless they double up more. This will be difficult to maintain (massive understatement).
It is just all about this. And with a reinforcement timer set by the defender, and the possibility to bring any ringer (mercenaries ?), it is all about management and logistic. It is New Eden position, and we have to deal with it.
I can understand that CCP can't deploy DUST mercenaries on the all new eden's regions for PC. But they can't promote it available for everyone at build's release with 250 districts...
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
287
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 18:42:00 -
[746] - Quote
I think the 20M isk requirement is prohibitive enough to prevent rookie corps from trying to get in on the action and will make advanced corps think that they need to be very very prepared to take the chance.
What's been suggested is obviously possible but it's not going to be such a problem that it needs to be addressed now. Clearly if by some miracle somehow one corp manages to take over the entirety of PC, CCP's many many man hours of planning has failed somewhere and something will need to be changed but this is the whole point of testing it before full launch, right? |
Kristoff Atruin
Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
371
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:12:00 -
[747] - Quote
Here's a question I haven't seen asked yet. I've missed the last 15 pages of posts, but hell if I'm going to read all of that. So here it is: have we already seen the in-game assets for the three surface installations that have been described to us? Or in other words, are the structures themselves ones we've already fought around in instant battles or are they entirely new artwork? |
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1032
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:27:00 -
[748] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Skihids wrote:Missing from this discussion of mechanics is any mention of motivation.
Why as a corporation would I want to plunk down that first 20M ISK? What am I getting for my money? Is this a wise business decision? Is there sufficient ROI to warrant this action?
As described so far the only advantage of PC is to produce ISK, so I am buying future ISK with current ISK. There are two cases, either PC is an ISK fountain pumping more money into the DUST universe, or it is an ISK sink. From what IGÇÖve read so far CCP wants constant warfare so itGÇÖs going to be a sink. Each battle will see significant clone and equipment loss. Sure, the winning side might break even or come out ahead slightly, but in aggregate there will be a loss with CCP raking its take off the top of each battle. By definition the average corp is going to lose half its battles and therefore end up with an overall ISK loss.
With no EVE link all that money is coming from corp members farming public matches for ISK. ThatGÇÖs a lot of farming, especially if you donGÇÖt get picked to join the A-Team for the actual battle. How long are members going to contribute? This feels like the current corp battle system with some window dressing. The only motivation to run them is relief from constant public matches.
The level of conflict has to be fairly low for PC to be an ISK faucet for a corp, and that means constant expansion of the frontier. If you make the districts worth too much you will motivate more corps to fight for them until they are once again unprofitable. As I see it you just canGÇÖt balance it on an ISK basis. You have to be buying something else for your money than more ISK. What is that, and is it enough?
What you are getting for your money is a first glimpse of the Dust 514 end-game. One day this will be huge and hopefully encompass the entire of New Eden. It also gives you and your mercs something tangible to play for, instead of simply running the same old random matchmade blueberry-ful pub games. You're right that it could be either a big sink or faucet but that is entirely dependent on how well your corp does. Manage to hold a district for a week or so and you're suddenly earning 100k isk for every extra clone produced. What else do you get? Loot! The best loot because it'll come from players you kill, unlike pub games atm. You could even earn aurum gear! Awesome tanks! Whatever you've seen other people using, that could be yours. I'd say loot alone is more valuable than any isk you'll potentially earn. And you don't need to be constantly expanding to be profitable. Smaller corps won't be able to protect more than a handful of districts because of numbers but if you manage to hold them, you're in.
So if your corp is good enough to discourage attacks you can make money, otherwise your districts are a PeacocksGÇÖ tail, funded by contributions from public matches. Yes, you get loot, but the average team is going to lose more than they get in return because a certain amount is destroyed in battle. ItGÇÖs a zero sum game as the only assets in play other than the clones produced in district are those the players bring themselves. If clone production isnGÇÖt more lucrative than your battle losses you have an ISK sink that you need to support from pub match ISK farming. 40 clones is 4M. How much gear is that going to buy if you have to fight every day? One tank and a few proto dropsuit fittings? Can the average corp keep their losses down to that level? WeGÇÖve already heard complaints from some corps that 5M ISK contracts arenGÇÖt enough to make up their losses in the current corp match system. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
670
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:37:00 -
[749] - Quote
Skihids wrote:Django Quik wrote:Skihids wrote:Missing from this discussion of mechanics is any mention of motivation.
Why as a corporation would I want to plunk down that first 20M ISK? What am I getting for my money? Is this a wise business decision? Is there sufficient ROI to warrant this action?
As described so far the only advantage of PC is to produce ISK, so I am buying future ISK with current ISK. There are two cases, either PC is an ISK fountain pumping more money into the DUST universe, or it is an ISK sink. From what IGÇÖve read so far CCP wants constant warfare so itGÇÖs going to be a sink. Each battle will see significant clone and equipment loss. Sure, the winning side might break even or come out ahead slightly, but in aggregate there will be a loss with CCP raking its take off the top of each battle. By definition the average corp is going to lose half its battles and therefore end up with an overall ISK loss.
With no EVE link all that money is coming from corp members farming public matches for ISK. ThatGÇÖs a lot of farming, especially if you donGÇÖt get picked to join the A-Team for the actual battle. How long are members going to contribute? This feels like the current corp battle system with some window dressing. The only motivation to run them is relief from constant public matches.
The level of conflict has to be fairly low for PC to be an ISK faucet for a corp, and that means constant expansion of the frontier. If you make the districts worth too much you will motivate more corps to fight for them until they are once again unprofitable. As I see it you just canGÇÖt balance it on an ISK basis. You have to be buying something else for your money than more ISK. What is that, and is it enough?
What you are getting for your money is a first glimpse of the Dust 514 end-game. One day this will be huge and hopefully encompass the entire of New Eden. It also gives you and your mercs something tangible to play for, instead of simply running the same old random matchmade blueberry-ful pub games. You're right that it could be either a big sink or faucet but that is entirely dependent on how well your corp does. Manage to hold a district for a week or so and you're suddenly earning 100k isk for every extra clone produced. What else do you get? Loot! The best loot because it'll come from players you kill, unlike pub games atm. You could even earn aurum gear! Awesome tanks! Whatever you've seen other people using, that could be yours. I'd say loot alone is more valuable than any isk you'll potentially earn. And you don't need to be constantly expanding to be profitable. Smaller corps won't be able to protect more than a handful of districts because of numbers but if you manage to hold them, you're in. So if your corp is good enough to discourage attacks you can make money, otherwise your districts are a PeacocksGÇÖ tail, funded by contributions from public matches. Yes, you get loot, but the average team is going to lose more than they get in return because a certain amount is destroyed in battle. ItGÇÖs a zero sum game as the only assets in play other than the clones produced in district are those the players bring themselves. If clone production isnGÇÖt more lucrative than your battle losses you have an ISK sink that you need to support from pub match ISK farming. 40 clones is 4M. How much gear is that going to buy if you have to fight every day? One tank and a few proto dropsuit fittings? Can the average corp keep their losses down to that level? WeGÇÖve already heard complaints from some corps that 5M ISK contracts arenGÇÖt enough to make up their losses in the current corp match system. Then that means they are using gear beyond their means to support, if you're making a loss because you're fielding proto fittings in every battle the answer is obvious, use less expenisve fittings whenever you can and only use proto when you absolutely have too |
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1032
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:39:00 -
[750] - Quote
gbghg wrote:Skihids wrote:Django Quik wrote:Skihids wrote:Missing from this discussion of mechanics is any mention of motivation.
Why as a corporation would I want to plunk down that first 20M ISK? What am I getting for my money? Is this a wise business decision? Is there sufficient ROI to warrant this action?
As described so far the only advantage of PC is to produce ISK, so I am buying future ISK with current ISK. There are two cases, either PC is an ISK fountain pumping more money into the DUST universe, or it is an ISK sink. From what IGÇÖve read so far CCP wants constant warfare so itGÇÖs going to be a sink. Each battle will see significant clone and equipment loss. Sure, the winning side might break even or come out ahead slightly, but in aggregate there will be a loss with CCP raking its take off the top of each battle. By definition the average corp is going to lose half its battles and therefore end up with an overall ISK loss.
With no EVE link all that money is coming from corp members farming public matches for ISK. ThatGÇÖs a lot of farming, especially if you donGÇÖt get picked to join the A-Team for the actual battle. How long are members going to contribute? This feels like the current corp battle system with some window dressing. The only motivation to run them is relief from constant public matches.
The level of conflict has to be fairly low for PC to be an ISK faucet for a corp, and that means constant expansion of the frontier. If you make the districts worth too much you will motivate more corps to fight for them until they are once again unprofitable. As I see it you just canGÇÖt balance it on an ISK basis. You have to be buying something else for your money than more ISK. What is that, and is it enough?
What you are getting for your money is a first glimpse of the Dust 514 end-game. One day this will be huge and hopefully encompass the entire of New Eden. It also gives you and your mercs something tangible to play for, instead of simply running the same old random matchmade blueberry-ful pub games. You're right that it could be either a big sink or faucet but that is entirely dependent on how well your corp does. Manage to hold a district for a week or so and you're suddenly earning 100k isk for every extra clone produced. What else do you get? Loot! The best loot because it'll come from players you kill, unlike pub games atm. You could even earn aurum gear! Awesome tanks! Whatever you've seen other people using, that could be yours. I'd say loot alone is more valuable than any isk you'll potentially earn. And you don't need to be constantly expanding to be profitable. Smaller corps won't be able to protect more than a handful of districts because of numbers but if you manage to hold them, you're in. So if your corp is good enough to discourage attacks you can make money, otherwise your districts are a PeacocksGÇÖ tail, funded by contributions from public matches. Yes, you get loot, but the average team is going to lose more than they get in return because a certain amount is destroyed in battle. ItGÇÖs a zero sum game as the only assets in play other than the clones produced in district are those the players bring themselves. If clone production isnGÇÖt more lucrative than your battle losses you have an ISK sink that you need to support from pub match ISK farming. 40 clones is 4M. How much gear is that going to buy if you have to fight every day? One tank and a few proto dropsuit fittings? Can the average corp keep their losses down to that level? WeGÇÖve already heard complaints from some corps that 5M ISK contracts arenGÇÖt enough to make up their losses in the current corp match system. Then that means they are using gear beyond their means to support, if you're making a loss because you're fielding proto fittings in every battle the answer is obvious, use less expenisve fittings whenever you can and only use proto when you absolutely have too
That's just it though. You have to or you lose to the attacker who brings high end gear. Using milita gear on a 200K ISK clone is like fitting a Sagaris with militia mods. False economy. If your clone costs far more than your fitting you aren't protecting it well enough. |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
288
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:49:00 -
[751] - Quote
Skihids wrote: That's just it though. You have to or you lose to the attacker who brings high end gear. Using milita gear on a 200K ISK clone is like fitting a Sagaris with militia mods. False economy. If your clone costs far more than your fitting you aren't protecting it well enough.
If you're losing that much isk in corp matches, you need to realise your corp probably isn't ready for corp battles and will be even less ready for PC unless you get a lot better before it comes in. Seeing as you're in Tritan, I can't see how this could be the case but I rarely play against you guys, so couldn't say for sure.
The costs involved are going to mean people will have to play carefully and strategically instead of just running and gunning like teams of rambos. If the attacker is bringing in high end gear, they also have a lot to lose in the battle, so it's a double edged sword for all involved. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
288
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:51:00 -
[752] - Quote
And I really don't think any corp name will 'discourage' attacks on their districts because the shortage of districts will mean that there will be very few that aren't attacked on a daily basis.
You've also missed that you get isk per player killed too, which will help fund you further. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
670
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 19:53:00 -
[753] - Quote
Skihids wrote:gbghg wrote:Skihids wrote:Django Quik wrote:Skihids wrote:Missing from this discussion of mechanics is any mention of motivation.
Why as a corporation would I want to plunk down that first 20M ISK? What am I getting for my money? Is this a wise business decision? Is there sufficient ROI to warrant this action?
As described so far the only advantage of PC is to produce ISK, so I am buying future ISK with current ISK. There are two cases, either PC is an ISK fountain pumping more money into the DUST universe, or it is an ISK sink. From what IGÇÖve read so far CCP wants constant warfare so itGÇÖs going to be a sink. Each battle will see significant clone and equipment loss. Sure, the winning side might break even or come out ahead slightly, but in aggregate there will be a loss with CCP raking its take off the top of each battle. By definition the average corp is going to lose half its battles and therefore end up with an overall ISK loss.
With no EVE link all that money is coming from corp members farming public matches for ISK. ThatGÇÖs a lot of farming, especially if you donGÇÖt get picked to join the A-Team for the actual battle. How long are members going to contribute? This feels like the current corp battle system with some window dressing. The only motivation to run them is relief from constant public matches.
The level of conflict has to be fairly low for PC to be an ISK faucet for a corp, and that means constant expansion of the frontier. If you make the districts worth too much you will motivate more corps to fight for them until they are once again unprofitable. As I see it you just canGÇÖt balance it on an ISK basis. You have to be buying something else for your money than more ISK. What is that, and is it enough?
What you are getting for your money is a first glimpse of the Dust 514 end-game. One day this will be huge and hopefully encompass the entire of New Eden. It also gives you and your mercs something tangible to play for, instead of simply running the same old random matchmade blueberry-ful pub games. You're right that it could be either a big sink or faucet but that is entirely dependent on how well your corp does. Manage to hold a district for a week or so and you're suddenly earning 100k isk for every extra clone produced. What else do you get? Loot! The best loot because it'll come from players you kill, unlike pub games atm. You could even earn aurum gear! Awesome tanks! Whatever you've seen other people using, that could be yours. I'd say loot alone is more valuable than any isk you'll potentially earn. And you don't need to be constantly expanding to be profitable. Smaller corps won't be able to protect more than a handful of districts because of numbers but if you manage to hold them, you're in. So if your corp is good enough to discourage attacks you can make money, otherwise your districts are a PeacocksGÇÖ tail, funded by contributions from public matches. Yes, you get loot, but the average team is going to lose more than they get in return because a certain amount is destroyed in battle. ItGÇÖs a zero sum game as the only assets in play other than the clones produced in district are those the players bring themselves. If clone production isnGÇÖt more lucrative than your battle losses you have an ISK sink that you need to support from pub match ISK farming. 40 clones is 4M. How much gear is that going to buy if you have to fight every day? One tank and a few proto dropsuit fittings? Can the average corp keep their losses down to that level? WeGÇÖve already heard complaints from some corps that 5M ISK contracts arenGÇÖt enough to make up their losses in the current corp match system. Then that means they are using gear beyond their means to support, if you're making a loss because you're fielding proto fittings in every battle the answer is obvious, use less expenisve fittings whenever you can and only use proto when you absolutely have too That's just it though. You have to or you lose to the attacker who brings high end gear. Using milita gear on a 200K ISK clone is like fitting a Sagaris with militia mods. False economy. If your clone costs far more than your fitting you aren't protecting it well enough. true but then as your gear upgrades so does your survivability proto suits with complex mods tend to die far less than standard suits and mods, if you played smart and minimised your losses it would take far longer to loss a district, and the longer you hold a district the more isk you make from it. and there will almost certainly be planets far enough away to make attacks uneconomical that will serve as the main isk generators for corps while they maintain other districts which take the majority of attacks. |
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1032
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 20:09:00 -
[754] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Skihids wrote: That's just it though. You have to or you lose to the attacker who brings high end gear. Using milita gear on a 200K ISK clone is like fitting a Sagaris with militia mods. False economy. If your clone costs far more than your fitting you aren't protecting it well enough.
If you're losing that much isk in corp matches, you need to realise your corp probably isn't ready for corp battles and will be even less ready for PC unless you get a lot better before it comes in. Seeing as you're in Tritan, I can't see how this could be the case but I rarely play against you guys, so couldn't say for sure. The costs involved are going to mean people will have to play carefully and strategically instead of just running and gunning like teams of rambos. If the attacker is bringing in high end gear, they also have a lot to lose in the battle, so it's a double edged sword for all involved.
I'm speaking in general here, not about Tritan Industries. This is a discussion about the mechanics, and average profitability is a very important factor in the success of PC.
We arenGÇÖt playing with free clones anymore. Each death is a 200K loss over and above the fitting. Payouts are half that for the clones you kill, resulting in a 100K loss for an even KDR (which by definition your average corp will have). Likewise you donGÇÖt get all your equipment losses back in loot as a percentage is destroyed in battle.
So the question is, just how much will an average PC battle cost, and will a districtGÇÖs production be worth it?
|
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
671
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 20:29:00 -
[755] - Quote
Skihids wrote:Django Quik wrote:Skihids wrote: That's just it though. You have to or you lose to the attacker who brings high end gear. Using milita gear on a 200K ISK clone is like fitting a Sagaris with militia mods. False economy. If your clone costs far more than your fitting you aren't protecting it well enough.
If you're losing that much isk in corp matches, you need to realise your corp probably isn't ready for corp battles and will be even less ready for PC unless you get a lot better before it comes in. Seeing as you're in Tritan, I can't see how this could be the case but I rarely play against you guys, so couldn't say for sure. The costs involved are going to mean people will have to play carefully and strategically instead of just running and gunning like teams of rambos. If the attacker is bringing in high end gear, they also have a lot to lose in the battle, so it's a double edged sword for all involved. I'm speaking in general here, not about Tritan Industries. This is a discussion about the mechanics, and average profitability is a very important factor in the success of PC. We arenGÇÖt playing with free clones anymore. Each death is a 200K loss over and above the fitting. Payouts are half that for the clones you kill, resulting in a 100K loss for an even KDR (which by definition your average corp will have). Likewise you donGÇÖt get all your equipment losses back in loot as a percentage is destroyed in battle. So the question is, just how much will an average PC battle cost, and will a districtGÇÖs production be worth it? well a quick calculation shows that with the default production rates and the default clone storage it would take 5 days to start making money assuming you buy a clone pack and take over a abandoned district, and then you would make roughly 4 million isk a day from 1 district. so long as the total battle price doesn't exceed 4 million isk your going to make a profit. |
Flint Beastgood III
RED COLONIAL MARINES Covert Intervention
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 20:49:00 -
[756] - Quote
Disturbingly Bored wrote:Shadowswipe wrote:Or maybe a silent bid system where corps put forth extra funds that no one can see, whoever puts forth the highest silent amount gets the right to attack that district. The bid system could be isk or clones, any clones used in the bid get lost as a "side" conflict on who gets to attack. Only losing the difference of the side bid verse the second highest bidder. That actually sounds pretty balanced. It introduces a small advantage for the defender (by making attacking more of an economic investment), but also guarantees the defender can't game the system to cowardly ends. You're going to get attacked either way, but it ensures that the person who wants the attack most pays the dearest price.
+1
|
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1032
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 21:13:00 -
[757] - Quote
gbghg wrote:Skihids wrote:Django Quik wrote:Skihids wrote: That's just it though. You have to or you lose to the attacker who brings high end gear. Using milita gear on a 200K ISK clone is like fitting a Sagaris with militia mods. False economy. If your clone costs far more than your fitting you aren't protecting it well enough.
If you're losing that much isk in corp matches, you need to realise your corp probably isn't ready for corp battles and will be even less ready for PC unless you get a lot better before it comes in. Seeing as you're in Tritan, I can't see how this could be the case but I rarely play against you guys, so couldn't say for sure. The costs involved are going to mean people will have to play carefully and strategically instead of just running and gunning like teams of rambos. If the attacker is bringing in high end gear, they also have a lot to lose in the battle, so it's a double edged sword for all involved. I'm speaking in general here, not about Tritan Industries. This is a discussion about the mechanics, and average profitability is a very important factor in the success of PC. We arenGÇÖt playing with free clones anymore. Each death is a 200K loss over and above the fitting. Payouts are half that for the clones you kill, resulting in a 100K loss for an even KDR (which by definition your average corp will have). Likewise you donGÇÖt get all your equipment losses back in loot as a percentage is destroyed in battle. So the question is, just how much will an average PC battle cost, and will a districtGÇÖs production be worth it? well a quick calculation shows that with the default production rates and the default clone storage it would take 5 days to start making money assuming you buy a clone pack and take over a abandoned district, and then you would make roughly 4 million isk a day from 1 district. so long as the total battle price doesn't exceed 4 million isk your going to make a profit.
Ok, so what does 4M ISK buy us?
A clone costs 200K, a decent fitting will add another 100K. That gives us 13 deaths for the team before it goes negative, and that doesnGÇÖt count any vehicles.
My concern is that it just isnGÇÖt nearly enough return to make PC a wining business strategy for the average corp, and that will shrink participation to a small percentage of the corps. Not only that, but only the cream of that corp will be able to participate due to the high stakes, and those not involved with become disaffected |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
673
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 21:29:00 -
[758] - Quote
Skihids wrote:gbghg wrote:Skihids wrote:Django Quik wrote:Skihids wrote: That's just it though. You have to or you lose to the attacker who brings high end gear. Using milita gear on a 200K ISK clone is like fitting a Sagaris with militia mods. False economy. If your clone costs far more than your fitting you aren't protecting it well enough.
If you're losing that much isk in corp matches, you need to realise your corp probably isn't ready for corp battles and will be even less ready for PC unless you get a lot better before it comes in. Seeing as you're in Tritan, I can't see how this could be the case but I rarely play against you guys, so couldn't say for sure. The costs involved are going to mean people will have to play carefully and strategically instead of just running and gunning like teams of rambos. If the attacker is bringing in high end gear, they also have a lot to lose in the battle, so it's a double edged sword for all involved. I'm speaking in general here, not about Tritan Industries. This is a discussion about the mechanics, and average profitability is a very important factor in the success of PC. We arenGÇÖt playing with free clones anymore. Each death is a 200K loss over and above the fitting. Payouts are half that for the clones you kill, resulting in a 100K loss for an even KDR (which by definition your average corp will have). Likewise you donGÇÖt get all your equipment losses back in loot as a percentage is destroyed in battle. So the question is, just how much will an average PC battle cost, and will a districtGÇÖs production be worth it? well a quick calculation shows that with the default production rates and the default clone storage it would take 5 days to start making money assuming you buy a clone pack and take over a abandoned district, and then you would make roughly 4 million isk a day from 1 district. so long as the total battle price doesn't exceed 4 million isk your going to make a profit. Ok, so what does 4M ISK buy us? A clone costs 200K, a decent fitting will add another 100K. That gives us 13 deaths for the team before it goes negative, and that doesnGÇÖt count any vehicles. My concern is that it just isnGÇÖt nearly enough return to make PC a wining business strategy for the average corp, and that will shrink participation to a small percentage of the corps. Not only that, but only the cream of that corp will be able to participate due to the high stakes, and those not involved with become disaffected That's one district with an SRL as the SI, a production facility would make 6m isk a day and we're assuming a corp has one district that is being attacked every day. The simple fact is that it would be uneconomic for a corp to attack someone everyday as a loss guarentee's at least 2 mil isk lost, so some days you're unlikely to be attacked at all. And you're assuming that the corp will pay for every fitting fielded in the battle, in practice most people fund their own fittings as much as possible and they'll be able to because the players not the corps will get the money and salvage from these battles. As for your last point the a team is unlikely to be on every time a district is vulnerable and a good ceo will make sure to rotate participation of every battle that isn't an absolutely must win |
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1032
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 21:43:00 -
[759] - Quote
Another major question that crops up is the nature of our equipment.
Is it physical or virtual?
The current precedent is virtual. We purchase a certain number of licenses to produce copies of a specific item, be it a gun, dropsuit, or nano-injector. Walk up to a supply depot in battle and it will manufacture a fitting for you and disassemble your current fitting and give you a credit for it.
That means we will not require a physical warehouse to store all our loot. It's all stored in digital form in our online accounts. That in turn means we don't have to worry about transporting equipment to an attack site. Just have the clones delivered along with an MCC that can make everything else on site (one reason defenders will need an MCC).
So after a battle you just process all the stuff not deemed destroyed and get a credit for it. There won't be any physical corporate warehouse to attack and loot. The only way to get anything out of it is to have digital authorization to check out the blueprint original or copy. As far as I know there is no way in New Eden to hack the system, do its safe from pirates. |
R F Gyro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
334
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 21:44:00 -
[760] - Quote
I'd be willing to wager that most corps will make a significant loss from planetary conquest, and will fund it by running instant battle ambush maps. A few of the better corps will make an income from it I'm sure, but it won't be the norm.
There's no problem with this, of course. PvP in Eve is only profitable for a tiny fraction of players, but that doesn't stop everyone else. You grind to make ISK, you spend the ISK on ships which you lose while trying to find "good fights". |
|
Belzeebub Santana
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
444
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 22:09:00 -
[761] - Quote
What I haven't read is the 20% of left over clones given to the defenders and how this could help with the mega corp. splitting to smaller ones to get more land off the initial land grab.
If your sister corp. goes to attack your mother corp. and doesn't use a single clone 20 out of the 100 go to the mother, this is half a day production.
As I understand a corp. can do both attack and defend as long as they have the clones to do it.
Mother corp. is locked by a sister corp attacking it. Sister corp doesn't deploy anyone and mother corp. has 1 player sign on and cap all null cannons destroying sister corp. mcc with 100 clones left giving mother corp 20 additional clones. For only 20 mill more sister corp can do it again locking up mother corp. from other attackers, while mother corp can go on to attack other corps not worrying about it.
The whole grudge thing between corps will only happen as long as they are within a couple of jumps of each other or one decides to stay homeless. If the two corps.that don't like each other are too far apart you won't see them attacking each other because of attrition cost. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
673
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 22:19:00 -
[762] - Quote
Belzeebub Santana wrote:What I haven't read is the 20% of left over clones given to the defenders and how this could help with the mega corp. splitting to smaller ones to get more land off the initial land grab.
If your sister corp. goes to attack your mother corp. and doesn't use a single clone 20 out of the 100 go to the mother, this is half a day production.
As I understand a corp. can do both attack and defend as long as they have the clones to do it.
Mother corp. is locked by a sister corp attacking it. Sister corp doesn't deploy anyone and mother corp. has 1 player sign on and cap all null cannons destroying sister corp. mcc with 100 clones left giving mother corp 20 additional clones. For only 20 mill more sister corp can do it again locking up mother corp. from other attackers, while mother corp can go on to attack other corps not worrying about it.
The whole grudge thing between corps will only happen as long as they are within a couple of jumps of each other or one decides to stay homeless. If the two corps.that don't like each other are too far apart you won't see them attacking each other because of attrition cost. or you're going to see a corp migrate across systems to get into range of the other. and your point about sister corps is unworkable, you would make such a large isk loss doing that it would be unsustainable. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
673
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 22:19:00 -
[763] - Quote
stupid double post |
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1032
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 22:23:00 -
[764] - Quote
gbghg wrote: That's one district with an SRL as the SI, a production facility would make 6m isk a day and we're assuming a corp has one district that is being attacked every day. The simple fact is that it would be uneconomic for a corp to attack someone everyday as a loss guarentee's at least 2 mil isk lost, so some days you're unlikely to be attacked at all. And you're assuming that the corp will pay for every fitting fielded in the battle, in practice most people fund their own fittings as much as possible and they'll be able to because the players not the corps will get the money and salvage from these battles. As for your last point the a team is unlikely to be on every time a district is vulnerable and a good ceo will make sure to rotate participation of every battle that isn't an absolutely must win
You are correct in that any one corp won't be able to fund a 20M attack every day, but you forget that there will be alot of landless corps that can take turns attacking you. To take that into account you need to assume a large enough district supply that there isn't a steady stream of landless corps queuing up to attack every existing district every day.
It also assumes that the players will be paying the cost of their own gear which is to say they are funding PC from farming public matches for ISK and PC won't be paying for itself. That makes PC a Peacocks' tail. Something that you spend resources on to show off how capable you are, but not something that generates worth on its own.
That brag is certainly a valid driver and recruitment tool. It offers non-pub matches which is a big draw. I just want to point out that it likely isn't going to pay for itself, and in that way it's just like our current corp battle system. |
Belzeebub Santana
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
444
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 22:31:00 -
[765] - Quote
gbghg wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:What I haven't read is the 20% of left over clones given to the defenders and how this could help with the mega corp. splitting to smaller ones to get more land off the initial land grab.
If your sister corp. goes to attack your mother corp. and doesn't use a single clone 20 out of the 100 go to the mother, this is half a day production.
As I understand a corp. can do both attack and defend as long as they have the clones to do it.
Mother corp. is locked by a sister corp attacking it. Sister corp doesn't deploy anyone and mother corp. has 1 player sign on and cap all null cannons destroying sister corp. mcc with 100 clones left giving mother corp 20 additional clones. For only 20 mill more sister corp can do it again locking up mother corp. from other attackers, while mother corp can go on to attack other corps not worrying about it.
The whole grudge thing between corps will only happen as long as they are within a couple of jumps of each other or one decides to stay homeless. If the two corps.that don't like each other are too far apart you won't see them attacking each other because of attrition cost. or you're going to see a corp migrate across systems to get into range of the other. and your point about sister corps is unworkable, you would make such a large isk loss doing that it would be unsustainable.
A large enough corp taxing their members I think could easily cover the costs, you get around 200 k a pub match with enough members and the time until this launches it might not be sustainable forever but it could help the mother corp gain a strong foothold immediately and then once they are sustainable by themselves the sister corp doesn't need to be funded. So it isn't a tactic that you would continue just use at the beginning. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
674
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 22:37:00 -
[766] - Quote
Skihids wrote:gbghg wrote: That's one district with an SRL as the SI, a production facility would make 6m isk a day and we're assuming a corp has one district that is being attacked every day. The simple fact is that it would be uneconomic for a corp to attack someone everyday as a loss guarentee's at least 2 mil isk lost, so some days you're unlikely to be attacked at all. And you're assuming that the corp will pay for every fitting fielded in the battle, in practice most people fund their own fittings as much as possible and they'll be able to because the players not the corps will get the money and salvage from these battles. As for your last point the a team is unlikely to be on every time a district is vulnerable and a good ceo will make sure to rotate participation of every battle that isn't an absolutely must win
You are correct in that any one corp won't be able to fund a 20M attack every day, but you forget that there will be alot of landless corps that can take turns attacking you. To take that into account you need to assume a large enough district supply that there isn't a steady stream of landless corps queuing up to attack every existing district every day. It also assumes that the players will be paying the cost of their own gear which is to say they are funding PC from farming public matches for ISK and PC won't be paying for itself. That makes PC a Peacocks' tail. Something that you spend resources on to show off how capable you are, but not something that generates worth on its own. That brag is certainly a valid driver and recruitment tool. It offers non-pub matches which is a big draw. I just want to point out that it likely isn't going to pay for itself, and in that way it's just like our current corp battle system. well I was always under the understanding that dust was meant to be an isk sink for EVE so isk won't be a problem when they finally merge economies, but your also going to have to rely on that brag to protect you, tell me honestly how many corps landless or not are going to throw themselves at the imperfect or their allies? The more matches you fight and the better you do, the more people will know that you aren't an easy target and they should be prepared to take significant losses going up against you. This means we're going to end up with the corps at the top almost exclusively targeting each other and occasionally a weaker corp if they want the territory, while the lower level corps will fight amongst themselves and beat off attacks from landless corps. so some of the best corps will probably end up making a profit for a couple of days, loss a load of isk as they beat off an attack and then generate more isk. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
674
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 22:39:00 -
[767] - Quote
Belzeebub Santana wrote:gbghg wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:What I haven't read is the 20% of left over clones given to the defenders and how this could help with the mega corp. splitting to smaller ones to get more land off the initial land grab.
If your sister corp. goes to attack your mother corp. and doesn't use a single clone 20 out of the 100 go to the mother, this is half a day production.
As I understand a corp. can do both attack and defend as long as they have the clones to do it.
Mother corp. is locked by a sister corp attacking it. Sister corp doesn't deploy anyone and mother corp. has 1 player sign on and cap all null cannons destroying sister corp. mcc with 100 clones left giving mother corp 20 additional clones. For only 20 mill more sister corp can do it again locking up mother corp. from other attackers, while mother corp can go on to attack other corps not worrying about it.
The whole grudge thing between corps will only happen as long as they are within a couple of jumps of each other or one decides to stay homeless. If the two corps.that don't like each other are too far apart you won't see them attacking each other because of attrition cost. or you're going to see a corp migrate across systems to get into range of the other. and your point about sister corps is unworkable, you would make such a large isk loss doing that it would be unsustainable. A large enough corp taxing their members I think could easily cover the costs, you get around 200 k a pub match with enough members and the time until this launches it might not be sustainable forever but it could help the mother corp gain a strong foothold immediately and then once they are sustainable by themselves the sister corp doesn't need to be funded. So it isn't a tactic that you would continue just use at the beginning. please look at the current discussion about whether or not PW is sustainable |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2048
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 22:39:00 -
[768] - Quote
gbghg wrote:well a quick calculation shows that with the default production rates and the default clone storage it would take 5 days to start making money assuming you buy a clone pack and take over a abandoned district, and then you would make roughly 4 million isk a day from 1 district. so long as the total battle price doesn't exceed 4 million isk your going to make a profit. How so?
20 milliion out.
Lets, for the sake of argument, assume no incoming attacks from anyone, which means no clone losses for the duration of the attempt to earn money.
You have 100 clones.
Lets assume a best-case scenario of taking a region with a Production Facility, meaning you're producing 60 clones a day.
Day 1: 60 clones. You now have 160, and are still 20 million down. Day 2: 60 clones. You now have 220, and are still 20 million down. Day 3: 60 clones. You now have 280, and are still 20 million down. Day 4: 60 clones. You now have 300, and 40 clones to sell. 16 million down. Day 5: 60 clones. Still maxed at 300, with 60 clones to sell. 10 million down. Day 6: 60 clones. Still maxed at 300, with 60 clones to sell. 4 million down.
It takes a week to see a profit given the best-case scenario for fast earnings. And that best-case scenario is a district that's more vulnerable to attack than a well-stocked world with a Cargo Hub. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
674
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 22:43:00 -
[769] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:gbghg wrote:well a quick calculation shows that with the default production rates and the default clone storage it would take 5 days to start making money assuming you buy a clone pack and take over a abandoned district, and then you would make roughly 4 million isk a day from 1 district. so long as the total battle price doesn't exceed 4 million isk your going to make a profit. How so? 20 milliion out. Lets, for the sake of argument, assume no incoming attacks from anyone, which means no clone losses for the duration of the attempt to earn money. You have 100 clones. Lets assume a best-case scenario of taking a region with a Production Facility, meaning you're producing 60 clones a day. Day 1: 60 clones. You now have 160, and are still 20 million down. Day 2: 60 clones. You now have 220, and are still 20 million down. Day 3: 60 clones. You now have 280, and are still 20 million down. Day 4: 60 clones. You now have 300, and 40 clones to sell. 16 million down. Day 5: 60 clones. Still maxed at 300, with 60 clones to sell. 10 million down. Day 6: 60 clones. Still maxed at 300, with 60 clones to sell. 4 million down. It takes a week to see a profit given the best-case scenario for fast earnings. And that best-case scenario is a district that's more vulnerable to attack than a well-stocked world with a Cargo Hub. gah I wasn't counting the price of the pack, i was making the assumption you just dropped 100 clones you had generated yourself on a district. the 5 days was how long it would take you to reach the storage cap with no storage increase or production bonus |
miso crazy
Forgotten Militia
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 22:53:00 -
[770] - Quote
I am very confused why the debate is over whether or not creating dummy corps and sister corps to speed up your expansion is better than just increasing the size of a single corp. I also realize that the object here is to find the exploits well before anything is published.
What are Alliances for ?
I think the reality that is being missed is that you are injecting an entirely different demographic than the very eccentric EVE players are used to. Suddenly I find myself in voice chat with a 16 year old Zit faced punk that thinks he can rap and talks in ebonics... Sorry, I just canGÇÖt even be in a corp that lets that kid in it. I am kinda old and set in my ways. I am quite sure that guy will find his place in the universe and I look forward to meeting him on the battlefield again.
So these dust corps will only work long term if they build bonds and stay small, random invite corps always seem to splinter and fail eventually. So an alliance of smaller corps that coordinate cycle times is what this system is catering to... The more logistics you add by trying to make a 3 person corp the more difficult it will be to control and it will wreck hard and fast. Imagine with friendly fire active, say you are trying to fill your squads in a hurry and the 2 random guys you picked up waste like 30 clones before you can bump them from the squad...
I foresee a massive land grab at the launch, I see many planets just off the radar to some degree and expanding uncontested for a short period of time. Possibly allowed to expand way beyond their means if only to get that clone surplus to market. I see certain systems constantly at battle and a major drain on the corp or alliances resources.
I see exciting battles where a squad of only 6 guys in militia gear fends of a full strength attack and humiliates the attacking corp, into looking elsewhere for their next fight.
Then there is EVE. You will need to control the space above your planet at least as long as your battles are on or you donGÇÖt get no stinking Orbital Strikes and your oponent will. That can easily decide a battle and from day to day who owns the space has a distinct advantage. I assume eventually the capsuleers will be pumping out all the resources their Dust guys could possibly want. A strong corp could easily fund an all GÇ£ProtoGÇ¥ fit for hours of curb stomping fun.
Does your splinter corp plan factor any of this ? |
|
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
674
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 22:57:00 -
[771] - Quote
miso crazy wrote:I am very confused why the debate is over whether or not creating dummy corps and sister corps to speed up your expansion is better than just increasing the size of a single corp. I also realize that the object here is to find the exploits well before anything is published.
What are Alliances for ?
I think the reality that is being missed is that you are injecting an entirely different demographic than the very eccentric EVE players are used to. Suddenly I find myself in voice chat with a 16 year old Zit faced punk that thinks he can rap and talks in ebonics... Sorry, I just canGÇÖt even be in a corp that lets that kid in it. I am kinda old and set in my ways. I am quite sure that guy will find his place in the universe and I look forward to meeting him on the battlefield again.
So these dust corps will only work long term if they build bonds and stay small, random invite corps always seem to splinter and fail eventually. So an alliance of smaller corps that coordinate cycle times is what this system is catering to... The more logistics you add by trying to make a 3 person corp the more difficult it will be to control and it will wreck hard and fast. Imagine with friendly fire active, say you are trying to fill your squads in a hurry and the 2 random guys you picked up waste like 30 clones before you can bump them from the squad...
I foresee a massive land grab at the launch, I see many planets just off the radar to some degree and expanding uncontested for a short period of time. Possibly allowed to expand way beyond their means if only to get that clone surplus to market. I see certain systems constantly at battle and a major drain on the corp or alliances resources.
I see exciting battles where a squad of only 6 guys in militia gear fends of a full strength attack and humiliates the attacking corp, into looking elsewhere for their next fight.
Then there is EVE. You will need to control the space above your planet at least as long as your battles are on or you donGÇÖt get no stinking Orbital Strikes and your oponent will. That can easily decide a battle and from day to day who owns the space has a distinct advantage. I assume eventually the capsuleers will be pumping out all the resources their Dust guys could possibly want. A strong corp could easily fund an all GÇ£ProtoGÇ¥ fit for hours of curb stomping fun.
Does your splinter corp plan factor any of this ? splinter corps would only work at the very start and even then you're going to make a loss, some people are still probably going to try it though |
Belzeebub Santana
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
444
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 23:02:00 -
[772] - Quote
Sorry I'm a simple person please tell me what PW is and where you would find said discussion?
I've read through this thread and see where this cant be sustainable but it does seem like an advantage that can be used. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
675
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 23:15:00 -
[773] - Quote
Belzeebub Santana wrote:Sorry I'm a simple person please tell me what PW is and where you would find said discussion?
I've read through this thread and see where this cant be sustainable but it does seem like an advantage that can be used. Sorry I meant PC and I've now fixed the post |
slypie11
Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 23:17:00 -
[774] - Quote
I heard in a video that eve players will be able to give dust players contracts. What will the eve players have to gain. Will they get some of the isk, or will they need clones too. Also, I'd like to see eve players participating more in battles. Also, maybe some kind of faction hub would be cool |
Belzeebub Santana
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
444
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 00:12:00 -
[775] - Quote
gbghg wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:Sorry I'm a simple person please tell me what PW is and where you would find said discussion?
I've read through this thread and see where this cant be sustainable but it does seem like an advantage that can be used. Sorry I meant PC and I've now fixed the post
Thanks, was scratching my head on that one. I'm just saying with enough members and steady tax income I think a large corp can fund a couple sister corps for a little bit in the beginning where it seems it would be most beneficial, no reason to self lock a district once you have enough clones to sustain an attack from an organized corp. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
677
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 01:11:00 -
[776] - Quote
True it could work well in certain situations but as you said there's no need for it once you have enough clones/isk to take the attacks, but your still losing isk somewhere so it's not the most efficient strategy |
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
453
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 04:29:00 -
[777] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Beren Hurin wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:
I should clarify 3. No you cannot cancel the attack. Think carefully about how many clones you want to attack with.
You can however move clones from district A (which you own) to district X (which someone else owns) and then move clones from district B (which you also own) to district A. Once another district attacks district A though you cannot move more clones to it.
This is alot like the rules of Diplomacy. Which kind of begs the question of reinforcements...How will allies factor in to all this? I love diplomacy. It has been a big inspiration for this design. This is a little off-topic but pertinent to your post.
Been thinking about posting this for a while.
If I was pondering the design of deep, meaningful, smart planetary content, I would want to have a serious bull session with Brian Reynolds.
That's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Reynolds_%28game_designer%29 just in case there's any confusion, but i'm sure you CCP devs know exactly who I mean.
Here's the reason: Brian Reynolds understood New Eden intimately - long before it was born.
Case in point(there's many, but this is close to our clone hearts): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGCaACqy1Ro
and for kicks, Ammarian laser tech: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwqN3Ur-wP0
And if you recall the masterful knowledge of science and history that was displayed in all those in-game quotes you'll see my motivation here.
P.S. Cage match: Jamyl Sarum or Corazon Santiago? |
Doc Kok
Internal Error. Negative-Feedback
91
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 06:54:00 -
[778] - Quote
I roll till I drop and ride till I die. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 10:09:00 -
[779] - Quote
slypie11 wrote:I heard in a video that eve players will be able to give dust players contracts. What will the eve players have to gain. Will they get some of the isk, or will they need clones too. Also, I'd like to see eve players participating more in battles. Also, maybe some kind of faction hub would be cool
This is off topic and won't be factoring into this iteration of PC (for now at least).
The EvE interaction at this point will still be OBs but they are working on PI bonuses for EvE players in orbit above an owned or alliance district. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 10:11:00 -
[780] - Quote
@Skihids and anyone else concerned about the isk situation, it is true that PC probably won't be a profitable venture but it will be immensely fun and people are going to want to do it.
The fact that you're only going to be fighting 1 battle per district per day (at most) means that there's still going to be plenty of time to earn isk from random pub matches, hopefully funding your war efforts. |
|
KEROSIINI-TERO
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
258
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 10:22:00 -
[781] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:It'll be cluttered, sorry about this as im poasting bored from work. So, solutions in this gap...
Solution 1: Remove clone and attack limits from corps to even the gold rush playground. Better than promoting split corp advance.
Solution 2: Rethink the timers. Defender set timers are not good in the first attack, instead, the offender should be given first shot. So, free attack time for first offense, AFTER THAT the district goes to reinforce timer set by defender. This makes it slightly harder to play with the flipping timers and clone removal using sold clones as fast flip mechanic. Issue with this is that defense needs to have an advantage, not offense.
Sub solution 2.1: To give defenders an intrinsic advantage, they have all the null cannons in the start of every fight (obvious really). Make defender null cannons do more damage than attacker (targeting facilities). First reinforce timer has a boosted clone reproduction, to offset the initial attack that can result in no show defense because of timezones.
Solution 3: make corporation size affect the number of clones you can purchase from NPC and number of districts you can attack, e.g. 1 clone per member, 1 attack per 100 members daily. Better than solution 1, but has issues with numbers game.
Subsolution 3.1: Planet worth gives an edge to elite mercenary outfits, that can control the really valuable ones. Reinforce planet worth differences! Stacking district mods that affect eve moon mineral harvesting and PI are one solution; having 24 districts to boost technetium yield from an orbital moon would make some planets very coveted and fought over, and only controllable by the best of the best. You could rent the boosts to EVE alliances.
1: maybe that's needed.
2: Definate no. Defender set timer (windows) are better. If we need to give attackers some timers of their choosing, it MUST not be the first. Reason: otherwise all the initial attacks would be at uncomfortable tz, it would make sense to spam with attacks on many districts and as the deffers are more likely to give noshow, it would be too easy to enter the district. And to control several districts would be pain. So the first has to be deffers timer. If succesful, the NEXT could very well be attackers timer! They've made their beach head and earned some initiative as deffers are yanked off from their optimal status.
3: The numbers game... I don't like it as filling nonplayed alts would be the solution to bolster the numbers and gain advantage.
3.1: yes, something like this. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 10:38:00 -
[782] - Quote
I really don't see why the whole split corp thing is an issue. Each of your splits is just as vulnerable as any other single corp out there in PC. If instead you just give single mega corps the option to use their size to an advantage, they will become unbeatable. At least this way every corp (or split) corp has just as good a chance to survive.
Anyone in an alliance (or split corp) will be at a slight advantage because that'll be less other corps to attack them but there's still going to be plenty of other corps attacking you to worry about. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
165
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 12:53:00 -
[783] - Quote
How will taking your first district work? I understand you buy the clone package, and take an unoccupied district, but what happens after that?
Are you allowed to set the first Reinforcement timer without the penalty of locking the district, thereby allowing you to attack again? Or is the Reinforcement timer already set? Or do you get the first batch of clone reinforcements as soon as you take an unoccupied district and thus don't need to worry about the Reinforcement timer right away? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
289
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 13:36:00 -
[784] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:How will taking your first district work? I understand you buy the clone package, and take an unoccupied district, but what happens after that?
Are you allowed to set the first Reinforcement timer without the penalty of locking the district, thereby allowing you to attack again? Or is the Reinforcement timer already set? Or do you get the first batch of clone reinforcements as soon as you take an unoccupied district and thus don't need to worry about the Reinforcement timer right away?
How can you reinforce when you only have one district? Where are these reinforcements coming from? You can only buy one pack of clones before you have a district and can buy no more after.
If you have no district, you select where you want to go and then buy your 100 clones and they get sent there. If it's unoccupied, you instantly claim it and can set your defense window time. If it's occupied and no one else is already set to attack it, you lock it in for attack at its next window after the next 24 hours. |
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
453
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 13:55:00 -
[785] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:How will taking your first district work? I understand you buy the clone package, and take an unoccupied district, but what happens after that?
Are you allowed to set the first Reinforcement timer without the penalty of locking the district, thereby allowing you to attack again? Or is the Reinforcement timer already set? Or do you get the first batch of clone reinforcements as soon as you take an unoccupied district and thus don't need to worry about the Reinforcement timer right away? How can you reinforce when you only have one district? Where are these reinforcements coming from? You can only buy one pack of clones before you have a district and can buy no more after. If you have no district, you select where you want to go and then buy your 100 clones and they get sent there. If it's unoccupied, you instantly claim it and can set your defense window time. If it's occupied and no one else is already set to attack it, you lock it in for attack at its next window after the next 24 hours. ^ This is how I read it also. I'm only on page 15 of this thread atm, but if we haven't been told the intimate details of the timer rules yet we definitely need to be. |
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1032
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 15:04:00 -
[786] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:@Skihids and anyone else concerned about the isk situation, it is true that PC probably won't be a profitable venture but it will be immensely fun and people are going to want to do it.
The fact that you're only going to be fighting 1 battle per district per day (at most) means that there's still going to be plenty of time to earn isk from random pub matches, hopefully funding your war efforts.
If we are correct about this, the whole argument about splitting corps to get a head start is moot.
Get a head start on what? A money losing venture?
More likely most corps will have one district that they battle over daily because these battles will be extremely expensive at an estimated cost of 350-450k ISK per death (200k for the clone and 150-250k for proto gear and vehicles).
Assuming CCP is extremely generous and awards us half the enemy losses in equipment, suits, modules, and vehicles you will need a KDR of 2 to break even. By definition the average is 1.
A lot of folks are now thinking, "I've got better KDR than that!", but they aren't thinking that everyone will be hand picked for these battles and will be running full proto with some officer weapons. The groups that do this will be getting better fast so the battles won't be so one sided as pub stomps are today. Even the winners may be losing money a good deal of the time because anything less than a 2:1 stomp won't break even (for the attackers, the defenders get the small stipend from clone production).
It will be a hell of a lot of fun for those who can afford to play the PC game, but it's a hobby, not a business venture. |
LT Dans Legs
The Tritan Industries
75
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 15:40:00 -
[787] - Quote
Yes, but dont forget about the resources gained by owning a planet. If you have good Eve support then you should be ok right? |
Meconium Blue
REGULATORS OF VALOR Orion Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 15:41:00 -
[788] - Quote
Forgive me if this has been asked already I stopped reading about page 25. I also admit that I do not fully understand the WP system....But Q(1. With friendly fire would it be possible to have logi's shoot each other than repair in order to boost WP so that orbital strikes can be called in? Q(2. Are clones only for corp use? Or will the "Lone Ranger's" of the game get there chance in black market clone sale's? |
DUST Fiend
Immobile Infantry
2077
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 16:36:00 -
[789] - Quote
This was likely already asked, but if not:
Will the free precision strikes be removed from these battles?
If not, what is the actual benefit of maintaining orbital superiority? |
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1032
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 16:37:00 -
[790] - Quote
Meconium Blue wrote:Forgive me if this has been asked already I stopped reading about page 25. I also admit that I do not fully understand the WP system....But Q(1. With friendly fire would it be possible to have logi's shoot each other than repair in order to boost WP so that orbital strikes can be called in? Q(2. Are clones only for corp use? Or will the "Lone Ranger's" of the game get there chance in black market clone sale's?
Triage points can only be earned by repairing someone who has recently damaged an enemy unit. |
|
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1033
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 16:38:00 -
[791] - Quote
LT Dans Legs wrote:Yes, but dont forget about the resources gained by owning a planet. If you have good Eve support then you should be ok right?
What, the 40 clones produced per day by an unlocked district? I've taken that into account. |
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1033
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 16:51:00 -
[792] - Quote
The basic problem with PC as a business venture is that the rewards of district ownership are dwarfed by the cost of maintaining that ownership.
If you win every battle your corp earns 4M/day (assuming you are selling all clones manufactured. In reality you will lose most of that number in battle). Lose some battles and that production figure goes down. You can't reimburse your members for losses out of that tiny sum, so the real burden of ownership is paid by the mercs who volunteer to defend your district.
At the point you own a single district your clones are literally priceless because you can't buy any more. That means you aren't going to invite anyone into battle who isn't running full proto gear and knows how to use it. That makes the fight expensive for your members. |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
780
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 17:12:00 -
[793] - Quote
This is fantastic discussion guys, we are loving the breakdown and perspectives people are providing.
Regarding the proposed numbers, if it turns out that owning districts is not worthwhile and corporations are not motivated to fight over them then we will very likely re-balance things so that they are. |
|
Ares Lawrens
Phoenix Security Solutions
4
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 17:49:00 -
[794] - Quote
why squads of 6? four people are left out
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2048
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 17:49:00 -
[795] - Quote
DUST Fiend wrote:This was likely already asked, but if not:
Will the free precision strikes be removed from these battles?
If not, what is the actual benefit of maintaining orbital superiority? Have you seen EVE-based Orbital Bombardments in comparison with the Precision Strike? It's the difference between 2 - 4 kills and wiping out the entire enemy team, Proto tanks and all, with a single shot. |
slypie11
Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 17:50:00 -
[796] - Quote
At this point, I don't see the reasoning behind defending your district. Defenders have no advantage, and you can always take it back. But if you do decide to defend it, what if you are in a small corp and everyone is offline? Will the enemy just take it for free |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
686
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 18:11:00 -
[797] - Quote
slypie11 wrote:At this point, I don't see the reasoning behind defending your district. Defenders have no advantage, and you can always take it back. But if you do decide to defend it, what if you are in a small corp and everyone is offline? Will the enemy just take it for free the point is too cost the enemy as many clones as you can, the more clones you kill, the more isk you cost the attacker, the harder it makes for him to attack you again. also it builds up your reputation as a corp that will fight not dodge battles as some corps are getting a reputation for doing. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
290
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 18:12:00 -
[798] - Quote
slypie11 wrote:At this point, I don't see the reasoning behind defending your district. Defenders have no advantage, and you can always take it back. But if you do decide to defend it, what if you are in a small corp and everyone is offline? Will the enemy just take it for free
If you lose, you lose 100 clones (or whatever number you've got left if less than that). If you choose not to defend, you still lose 100 clones. If you lose all your clones on a district, you lose the district. The only way to get more clones if you've lost all your districts, is to buy new ones at a cost of 20M isk.
If you are a small corp and no one is online, you lose 100 clones. But you get to set the time that people can attack your districts at, so set it when most of your corp is likely to be online. If you have less than 16 online at the time of the battle, you could squad up with people outside your corp and bring them into the battle but unless they're people you know and trust, this may be more of a hindrance than a benefit.
For small corps with only just 16 players in, I would probably advise that you are too small to really be doing PC. By all means, you're welcome to try your hand at it but likelihood is you'll struggle. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
290
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 18:15:00 -
[799] - Quote
Skihids wrote:LT Dans Legs wrote:Yes, but dont forget about the resources gained by owning a planet. If you have good Eve support then you should be ok right? What, the 40 clones produced per day by an unlocked district? I've taken that into account.
I think LT Dans Legs is referring to the profit that EvE pilots could potentially make from PI (that is as yet undefined). However, as isk transfer between EvE and Dust will still not be available when this is launched, his point is null. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
290
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 18:18:00 -
[800] - Quote
DUST Fiend wrote:This was likely already asked, but if not:
Will the free precision strikes be removed from these battles?
If not, what is the actual benefit of maintaining orbital superiority?
Precision strikes aren't and won't be free - you'll still have to earn 2500 WP to get a strike and you'll need an EvE ship in orbit with the right equipment to do a strike, otherwise you get nought. No warbarge strikes in PC - pretty sure CCP Fox Four said this earlier but I may be misquoting...
The attacker can also bring in their own EvE ship to launch strikes but if there are opposing EvE ships in the same district, I imagine they'll be fighting too. This could be awesome! OMG this could be awesome! |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
781
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 18:37:00 -
[801] - Quote
slypie11 wrote:At this point, I don't see the reasoning behind defending your district. Defenders have no advantage, and you can always take it back. But if you do decide to defend it, what if you are in a small corp and everyone is offline? Will the enemy just take it for free
If you choose not to defend you will lose 100 clones and stop production for the day. Those clones and the production cycle equate to ISK you could have had in the corp wallet instead.
Also you need to keep in mind the winner of the battle gets biomass which at the moment is 50% of the value of all the clones destroyed including your own, paid directly to the people participating. Combined with salvage from the enemy team you have every reason to show up to a defense and may in fact make a profit from it. |
|
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
453
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 19:06:00 -
[802] - Quote
hershman001 wrote:You say youre turning your attention to the planets... CCP, shouldnt you turn your attention to the broken game mechanics?
- Terrible Hit detection
- Unable to traverse uneven terrain
- Poor controls all around for vehicles, dropsuits and interfaces.
- Text, font, icons, reticule, and other HUD items that are color washed invisible half the time.
- Ridiculous low fov for an fps.
- Invisible walls in every map
This is only the beginning. What is being done to fix these issues? +1 for the forst three points. Other points have validity too.
Hate to keep on this, but it's a stark reality and not really being publicly addressed by CCP, in spite of their stated commitment to prioritize core mechanics.
OK, i'll shut up about it. For now. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
166
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 19:32:00 -
[803] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:How will taking your first district work? I understand you buy the clone package, and take an unoccupied district, but what happens after that?
Are you allowed to set the first Reinforcement timer without the penalty of locking the district, thereby allowing you to attack again? Or is the Reinforcement timer already set? Or do you get the first batch of clone reinforcements as soon as you take an unoccupied district and thus don't need to worry about the Reinforcement timer right away? How can you reinforce when you only have one district? Where are these reinforcements coming from? You can only buy one pack of clones before you have a district and can buy no more after. If you have no district, you select where you want to go and then buy your 100 clones and they get sent there. If it's unoccupied, you instantly claim it and can set your defense window time. If it's occupied and no one else is already set to attack it, you lock it in for attack at its next window after the next 24 hours.
The Reinforcement timer is what determines not only when you're allowing people to attack the district, but also when you receive clones. In other words, you'd be getting the clones from whatever produces them in each district.
The wiki says you get clones at the beginning of the reinforcement timer, but it also says changing that timer locks the district. That means, if on the first day of PC, you take an unoccupied district, then if you have to set the Reinforcement timer and thus lock your district, there's nothing you can do for the next 24 hours, since locking a district means you can't attack from it, correct?
If this is the case, then it seems to me that doing the sub-corp strategy of taking a district and then just abandoning it right before your mother corp attacks it is going to be the only truly viable way of expanding quickly in the beginning. Otherwise, you'll have to fight not only the 100 clones someone has in a district, but also whatever clones they've produced through the Reinforcement timer, plus the fact that you have to wait 24+ hours to actually be able to attack.
In other words, the earliest you could take another district (assuming it's occupied after those first 24 hours, which I'm guessing almost all will be) would be a full 3 days later--one to wait for lockdown to turn off, one to announce you're attacking and hit the first time, and one to kill off all the clones during the second attack (since the district would have more than 100 clones in it by that time). |
R F Gyro
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
336
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 19:37:00 -
[804] - Quote
Vrain Matari wrote:hershman001 wrote:You say youre turning your attention to the planets... CCP, shouldnt you turn your attention to the broken game mechanics?
- Terrible Hit detection
- Unable to traverse uneven terrain
- Poor controls all around for vehicles, dropsuits and interfaces.
- Text, font, icons, reticule, and other HUD items that are color washed invisible half the time.
- Ridiculous low fov for an fps.
- Invisible walls in every map
This is only the beginning. What is being done to fix these issues? +1 for the forst three points. Other points have validity too. Hate to keep on this, but it's a stark reality and not really being publicly addressed by CCP, in spite of their stated commitment to prioritize core mechanics. OK, i'll shut up about it. For now. Somewhere back in the threadmonster there's a statement from the devs that there will be lots of stuff in the next release other than PC, including core gameplay changes/fixes. There's a regular pattern over Eve-side of the devs releasing details of some minor changes for the next release, the community then saying "is that all?" and getting all worked up, then finding out that there is way more to it than that. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
291
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 20:31:00 -
[805] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Django Quik wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:How will taking your first district work? I understand you buy the clone package, and take an unoccupied district, but what happens after that?
Are you allowed to set the first Reinforcement timer without the penalty of locking the district, thereby allowing you to attack again? Or is the Reinforcement timer already set? Or do you get the first batch of clone reinforcements as soon as you take an unoccupied district and thus don't need to worry about the Reinforcement timer right away? How can you reinforce when you only have one district? Where are these reinforcements coming from? You can only buy one pack of clones before you have a district and can buy no more after. If you have no district, you select where you want to go and then buy your 100 clones and they get sent there. If it's unoccupied, you instantly claim it and can set your defense window time. If it's occupied and no one else is already set to attack it, you lock it in for attack at its next window after the next 24 hours. The Reinforcement timer is what determines not only when you're allowing people to attack the district, but also when you receive clones. In other words, you'd be getting the clones from whatever produces them in each district. The wiki says you get clones at the beginning of the reinforcement timer, but it also says changing that timer locks the district. That means, if on the first day of PC, you take an unoccupied district, then if you have to set the Reinforcement timer and thus lock your district, there's nothing you can do for the next 24 hours, since locking a district means you can't attack from it, correct? If this is the case, then it seems to me that doing the sub-corp strategy of taking a district and then just abandoning it right before your mother corp attacks it is going to be the only truly viable way of expanding quickly in the beginning. Otherwise, you'll have to fight not only the 100 clones someone has in a district, but also whatever clones they've produced through the Reinforcement timer, plus the fact that you have to wait 24+ hours to actually be able to attack. In other words, the earliest you could take another district (assuming it's occupied after those first 24 hours, which I'm guessing almost all will be) would be a full 3 days later--one to wait for lockdown to turn off, one to announce you're attacking and hit the first time, and one to kill off all the clones during the second attack (since the district would have more than 100 clones in it by that time). As opposed to requiring 1 day (for expansion) for the sub-corp strategy since you won't have to wait the additional 24+ hours it would normally take to announce you're attacking and another additional 24+ hours to hit the district the second time to drive off any remaining clones.
You can't move for an attack on the first day anyway because you need to move a minimum of 100 clones and if you moved 100 clones when that is all you have, you'd be abandoning your initial district anyway. This is the same whether you have 1 corp or many sub-corps and a mother corp. The mother corp would also have to wait until it had enough clones to launch an attack on a sub-corp, even if the sub-corp had abandoned it. Also since abandoning a district causes the reinforcement timer to be removed, any corp with no district could just swoop in and claim it straight away because the mother corp would have to wait until it's own timer had gone 24 hours to have more clones to move there.
Nobody will be able to claim a 2nd district within the first few days, especially since the lack of districts compared to the number of corps means that everyone will be under attack everyday for the first few days if not weeks. There will be no way to expand quickly. |
ca ronic
Moffit Bros
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 20:53:00 -
[806] - Quote
If my district is going to be attacked and I cant find anyone in my corp to fight, can you just invite 16 players in from other corps. Or does the squad leader have to be in my corp and then go out and fill a squad with players outside the corp? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
291
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 21:04:00 -
[807] - Quote
ca ronic wrote:If my district is going to be attacked and I cant find anyone in my corp to fight, can you just invite 16 players in from other corps. Or does the squad leader have to be in my corp and then go out and fill a squad with players outside the corp?
From the outset you can only bring people into the battle if the squad leader is in the corp - squad size is going up to 6, so that means you only technically need 3 corpmates online at the time of the attack.
That said, you get to choose what time each day you want to defend, so just set it for when you're most likely to have plenty of your corp online.
Eventually the plan is to be able to put the contracts up for the public to defend your districts but given the state of blueberries, would you really feel safer doing that? |
ca ronic
Moffit Bros
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 21:16:00 -
[808] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:ca ronic wrote:If my district is going to be attacked and I cant find anyone in my corp to fight, can you just invite 16 players in from other corps. Or does the squad leader have to be in my corp and then go out and fill a squad with players outside the corp? From the outset you can only bring people into the battle if the squad leader is in the corp - squad size is going up to 6, so that means you only technically need 3 corpmates online at the time of the attack. That said, you get to choose what time each day you want to defend, so just set it for when you're most likely to have plenty of your corp online. Eventually the plan is to be able to put the contracts up for the public to defend your districts but given the state of blueberries, would you really feel safer doing that?
Thanks. Speaking as a blueberry, I hear ya. Better than nothing though, you might get lucky. I was thinking of something like having a chat channel with full squads looking for a fight, if you see a name you recognize then send them an invite to fight to defend your district. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
293
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 21:22:00 -
[809] - Quote
ca ronic wrote:Django Quik wrote:ca ronic wrote:If my district is going to be attacked and I cant find anyone in my corp to fight, can you just invite 16 players in from other corps. Or does the squad leader have to be in my corp and then go out and fill a squad with players outside the corp? From the outset you can only bring people into the battle if the squad leader is in the corp - squad size is going up to 6, so that means you only technically need 3 corpmates online at the time of the attack. That said, you get to choose what time each day you want to defend, so just set it for when you're most likely to have plenty of your corp online. Eventually the plan is to be able to put the contracts up for the public to defend your districts but given the state of blueberries, would you really feel safer doing that? Thanks. Speaking as a blueberry, I hear ya. Better than nothing though, you might get lucky. I was thinking of something like having a chat channel with full squads looking for a fight, if you see a name you recognize then send them an invite to fight to defend your district.
Yeah, that's a great idea and something I'm sure people will set up when this comes. |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
783
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 21:30:00 -
[810] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:ca ronic wrote:If my district is going to be attacked and I cant find anyone in my corp to fight, can you just invite 16 players in from other corps. Or does the squad leader have to be in my corp and then go out and fill a squad with players outside the corp? From the outset you can only bring people into the battle if the squad leader is in the corp - squad size is going up to 6, so that means you only technically need 3 corpmates online at the time of the attack. That said, you get to choose what time each day you want to defend, so just set it for when you're most likely to have plenty of your corp online. Eventually the plan is to be able to put the contracts up for the public to defend your districts but given the state of blueberries, would you really feel safer doing that?
Actually technically you only need 1 person online because you can have them create the squad of 6, pull the outside corp members in to the battle then drop squad and repeat for the remaining squads. |
|
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
294
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 21:40:00 -
[811] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Django Quik wrote:ca ronic wrote:If my district is going to be attacked and I cant find anyone in my corp to fight, can you just invite 16 players in from other corps. Or does the squad leader have to be in my corp and then go out and fill a squad with players outside the corp? From the outset you can only bring people into the battle if the squad leader is in the corp - squad size is going up to 6, so that means you only technically need 3 corpmates online at the time of the attack. That said, you get to choose what time each day you want to defend, so just set it for when you're most likely to have plenty of your corp online. Eventually the plan is to be able to put the contracts up for the public to defend your districts but given the state of blueberries, would you really feel safer doing that? Actually technically you only need 1 person online because you can have them create the squad of 6, pull the outside corp members in to the battle then drop squad and repeat for the remaining squads.
Aha! Smart man this CCP Nullarbor ;) |
Free Healing
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
249
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 22:18:00 -
[812] - Quote
Vrain Matari wrote:hershman001 wrote:You say youre turning your attention to the planets... CCP, shouldnt you turn your attention to the broken game mechanics?
- Terrible Hit detection
- Unable to traverse uneven terrain
- Poor controls all around for vehicles, dropsuits and interfaces.
- Text, font, icons, reticule, and other HUD items that are color washed invisible half the time.
- Ridiculous low fov for an fps.
- Invisible walls in every map
This is only the beginning. What is being done to fix these issues? +1 for the forst three points. Other points have validity too. Hate to keep on this, but it's a stark reality and not really being publicly addressed by CCP, in spite of their stated commitment to prioritize core mechanics. OK, i'll shut up about it. For now.
1. The Hit detection has improved greatly over the long term of the Closed Beta. Currently, there is no problem with an accurate shot connecting with your target. Failure to do so is either on YOU, your weapons range, or the Terrain Bug that causes your target to "Blue Shield". If you wish to test this, you and a friend go stand out in the middle of an open field and shoot each other 100 times. If, either of you fails to take damage during those 100 bullets your post will THEN become valid. Don't forget the recording.
2. The Terrain Bug your mentioning, i'm guessing, is the one where if you approach an incline on a hill you sometimes become unable to move correct? That bug doesn't seem to be caused by "Uneven" terrain but by those specific areas. You can pretty much climb up any "Uneven" mountain without getting stuck till it becomes so steep you fall, yet when you move across one of these FEW area's you seem to get stuck. This is an issue, if i recall correctly, with the way your Character model interacts with that specific area of the Map. They keep fixing it, and the issue keeps coming back. However, it is a minor issue.
3. The Vehicle Controls are not broken, neither are they terrible. They're simply different. Whether or not you can control them is dependent again upon you. I used to be terrible at driving an LAV. After MUCH practice I've become quite good at it. The Dropsuit interface is fine. It does take a while to load but there is nothing wrong with it's functionality so I fail to see your point there. The UI, which is what i'm assuming you meant by "interfaces", could definitely use improvement but the Core Functions of which you speak are fine and work properly.
4. There is only ONE map, or rather map type, where that is an issue and that is the "High Sun" map type which causes the sun to be brighter or "Closer" than normal depending on the planets proximity to the sun. Even then, a simple solution is to go to your "OPTIONS" in your NEOCOM and make sure you have the right level of "Brightness" for your TV. If you follow the instructions the Bright Sun won't be a problem anymore.
5. It is my belief that the FoV is fine. Your Clone is wearing a Helmet. You try putting on a helmet and see if your FoV doesn't get altered. The FoV seems fine in comparison. An increased FoV would also decrease the usefulness of Scout and Logistics Dropsuits who thrive on exploiting blindsides in order to get a kill. If CCP decides to increase the FoV then that's fine. But honestly it seems fine to me as is.
6. The only "invisible wall" i know of is the Sky Ceiling and I believe we all know what that is there. Other than that i've never seen an invisible wall. I'd imagine they exist to keep us locked in the engagement area but usually they exist near the redline so that we don't even get to them. Further clarification on your point is needed.
and Mr. Matari, CCP DID publicly state that they intend to "CONSTANTLY" improve on the Core Game play mechanics throughout the life of DUST 514, during an Interview with CCP SmartyPantz on the Dusters Blog, and they have been doing it, via the extended server downtime. What it seems your asking them to do is mention "we have also improved Core Game Play Mechanics" in all of their Downtime posts. I am seeing a surprising lack of faith in these posts. CCP has done nothing to disprove, except maybe "NEO" Vk.0 Aurum Suits, that they plan to provide as many improvements, and information on said improvements, as possible... for FREE.
All you gotta do is Keep the faith. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
294
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 22:22:00 -
[813] - Quote
Can we please just ignore all the posts that don't actually pertain directly to Planetary Conquest, rather than bringing up other stuff that people might be concerned about. |
Pryke Bastion
GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 22:47:00 -
[814] - Quote
Well in the interests of PC, I'm curious if these districts that we control would allow any other industrial production facilities besides the clone affecting ones. With the economies split there isn't much drawing the average EVE player to PC besides good will toward alliances with the hope that one day all these manic ground troops might prove useful.
I suggest that CCP allow industrialism on these districts to be tied in. Gives the EVE players an incentive to set roots in these systems with increased production capabilities and output. Might get the industrialist corps interested at any rate.
Another idea to bring more interactivity. An EVE fleet could install a satellite defense system geo-synchronous with their favoured district. This would allow the district the ability to destroy or damage incoming clone assault packets sent by Genolution, Increasing the attrition rate by a modest percentile. These satellite defense networks could be destroyed by a hostile fleet, but it would be necessary to hold the system for a period long enough to root out all the cloaked satellites. This would allow more context and purpose for fleet involvement other than, "Nuke the CLONES!"
Pryke out. |
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1034
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 23:01:00 -
[815] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:This is fantastic discussion guys, we are loving the breakdown and perspectives people are providing.
Regarding the proposed numbers, if it turns out that owning districts is not worthwhile and corporations are not motivated to fight over them then we will very likely re-balance things so that they are.
I imagine the more profitable a district is the more it will be fought over, maintaining a balance.
Taking a district is like buying a trophy that yields a certain payback. Part of he payback is monetary, part is the prestige of owning it, and part is the opportunity for non-pub matches.
The amount of prestige is proportional to the difficulty of keeping hold of it. The money is self explanatory, and the value of non-pub matches is proportional to the availability of other non-pub matches. FW would devalue it by being cheaper.
As long as you managed to keep the prestige high you wouldn't have to make them ISK positive. If you try to make districts ISK positive they will just get fought over harder. You would end up having to make the supply of districts large enough to satisfy demand and that would reduce conflict.
|
Free Healing
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
253
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 23:02:00 -
[816] - Quote
Will Orbital Batteries, also known as "Skyfire Cannons", be added as an Infrastructure at some point? or do you, CCP, have other plans for those?
Keep the faith. |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
276
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 23:20:00 -
[817] - Quote
I think a big part of the balance will be how much salvage returns back to you. If two teams lost the same amount in clones (100 per side) and in salvage 2 million each, then the winning team would have lost 5 million in clones. They would have to get back in salvage 10 million even. In other words each clone they lost/killed would have to be wearing 100k+ isk suits in addition they could also lose some vehicles if they killed some. |
gbghg
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
690
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 23:25:00 -
[818] - Quote
Beren Hurin wrote:I think a big part of the balance will be how much salvage returns back to you. If two teams lost the same amount in clones (100 per side) and in salvage 2 million each, then the winning team would have lost 5 million in clones. They would have to get back in salvage 10 million even. In other words each clone they lost/killed would have to be wearing 100k+ isk suits in addition they could also lose some vehicles if they killed some. is that taking into account reclaimed biomass? the percentage of clones the winner takes |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
166
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 23:32:00 -
[819] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:
You can't move for an attack on the first day anyway because you need to move a minimum of 100 clones and if you moved 100 clones when that is all you have, you'd be abandoning your initial district anyway. This is the same whether you have 1 corp or many sub-corps and a mother corp. The mother corp would also have to wait until it had enough clones to launch an attack on a sub-corp, even if the sub-corp had abandoned it. Also since abandoning a district causes the reinforcement timer to be removed, any corp with no district could just swoop in and claim it straight away because the mother corp would have to wait until it's own timer had gone 24 hours to have more clones to move there.
Maybe I'm not being clear enough. So let's take an example:
Corp A takes their first district at 1:35pm. They then set their Reinforcement timer for 2:00-3:00pm. Now Corp A has 140 clones and could theoretically take another unoccupied district, except for the fact that the first district may be Locked, preventing an attacking action.
The question is basically, what is the Reinforcement timer set to when you first conquer an unoccupied district? And if the first Reinforcement timer on any unoccupied district recently occupied didn't come with the Lock penalty, then PC would be interesting during the first few days. Instead it looks like nothing is going to happen for 3 days. 1 to set the timer and wait to get out of Locked status, 1 to set an attack and wait for the 24 hour notice, and possibly 1 needed to attack again to defeat any remaining clones if there were more than 100 the first time you attacked.
Quote:Nobody will be able to claim a 2nd district within the first few days, especially since the lack of districts compared to the number of corps means that everyone will be under attack everyday for the first few days if not weeks. There will be no way to expand quickly.
I think you're wrong here. If a mother corp coordinates well enough, they'll only have to wait that initial 24 hours during which their district will be Locked due to the Reinforcement timer. After that, the sub-corp can simply abandon the district a minute before the mother corp sets an attack on the district. The mother corp will be able to take over the district immediately because it's unoccupied. In another 24 hours they can do the same thing with another district one of their sub-corps own. 3 districts in as many days without having to fight one battle (though they may have to defend once or twice if one of their sub-corps gets hit).
(Depending on what Surface Infrastructure they have, it could actually be 4 districts in 3 days, because they could launch another 100 from their very first district on day 3, due to clone accumulation in the first district.) |
Finde R
Formosa Research Center Apocalypse Now.
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 01:09:00 -
[820] - Quote
If corp A have 450 clones, can A move 100,100,100,100 clones to four hostiles districts on the same day?
How to change offline to online ? I mean if defender lost MCC, how can defender change the offline state ?
When corp A keep attacking corp B district, can corp B attack corp A district on the same day or the following day ?
How long will the locked state keep ? 1 hour at most ?
What is called friendly corp ? in same Alliance ?
http://i.imgur.com/tcoH7Bi.png Is this correct or wrong?
http://i.imgur.com/pq84I96.png Is this wrong ? |
|
Harken Torkal
Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 02:26:00 -
[821] - Quote
Are there any plans for clone transportation to be done via spaceships rather than magic?
Hint of an answer at #63 in this thread.
Hint about the consequences of this in #166. |
Harken Torkal
Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 02:55:00 -
[822] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Kevall Longstride wrote:District actions should ONLY be the purview of the CEO and not directors. It's not that I don't trust the guys I've picked for directors, they do sterling work in D-UNI but they have the director role because it was the only one available to give them and it gives them nearly as much power as the CEO.
The CEO should have some definite separation of power from the rest of management other than being able to pick the logo. 1) One specific region, we have not announced which one yet. 2) To be honest we need more roles but I don't think limiting this to CEO's will work. Would love to hear from other CEO's though about that.
I would like to see every responsibility able to be delegated. It should be possible for me to have a "right hand" who is the executor of all military actions, while my "left hand" is responsible for the number crunching, setting up timers, installing upgrades, managing taxes and mercenary contracts, while my "gripping hand" is busy doing recruitment (and termination), vetting, ship toasting and basically ensuring that the corporation stays alive.
Just don't put Dust Bunnies in a situation like R&D corps in EVE: where in order to cancel our own research job we have to have privileges to cancel all research jobs. |
Harken Torkal
Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 03:19:00 -
[823] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Klivve Cussler wrote:Proposal 1: Can our corps charge a fee for Eve PI installations in our districts? This would allow a little bit of cross-game transactions, without too badly affecting either economy. It also would promote one corporation to do PI and own the planet to avoid the fees. The corp holding the majority of districts on the planet could potentially gain control of the customs office, as well. As PI does not really recognize districts this is really hard. We are looking at things like an SI that is equivalent to the POCO and that there can only be one on the planet, and that the owning corporation can charge a tax for usage on. Not sure yet though, we are not done yet.
The obvious solution being to have PI recognise which district-controlled portion of the planet surface certain infrastructure is installed on
The SI equivalent to a POCO? That would be the beanstalk, no?
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
296
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 09:45:00 -
[824] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Django Quik wrote:
You can't move for an attack on the first day anyway because you need to move a minimum of 100 clones and if you moved 100 clones when that is all you have, you'd be abandoning your initial district anyway. This is the same whether you have 1 corp or many sub-corps and a mother corp. The mother corp would also have to wait until it had enough clones to launch an attack on a sub-corp, even if the sub-corp had abandoned it. Also since abandoning a district causes the reinforcement timer to be removed, any corp with no district could just swoop in and claim it straight away because the mother corp would have to wait until it's own timer had gone 24 hours to have more clones to move there.
Maybe I'm not being clear enough. So let's take an example: Corp A takes their first district at 1:35pm. They then set their Reinforcement timer for 2:00-3:00pm. Now Corp A has 140 clones and could theoretically take another unoccupied district, except for the fact that the first district may be Locked, preventing an attacking action. The question is basically, what is the Reinforcement timer set to when you first conquer an unoccupied district? And if the first Reinforcement timer on any unoccupied district recently occupied didn't come with the Lock penalty, then PC would be interesting during the first few days. Instead it looks like nothing is going to happen for 3 days. 1 to set the timer and wait to get out of Locked status, 1 to set an attack and wait for the 24 hour notice, and possibly 1 needed to attack again to defeat any remaining clones if there were more than 100 the first time you attacked. Quote:Nobody will be able to claim a 2nd district within the first few days, especially since the lack of districts compared to the number of corps means that everyone will be under attack everyday for the first few days if not weeks. There will be no way to expand quickly. I think you're wrong here. If a mother corp coordinates well enough, they'll only have to wait that initial 24 hours during which their district will be Locked due to the Reinforcement timer. After that, the sub-corp can simply abandon the district a minute before the mother corp sets an attack on the district. The mother corp will be able to take over the district immediately because it's unoccupied. In another 24 hours they can do the same thing with another district one of their sub-corps own. 3 districts in as many days without having to fight one battle (though they may have to defend once or twice if one of their sub-corps gets hit). (Depending on what Surface Infrastructure they have, it could actually be 4 districts in 3 days, because they could launch another 100 from their very first district on day 3, due to clone accumulation.)
Firstly, I get the impression from the current info that you'd get your first set of clones produced 24 hours after you set the reinforcement timer - I may be wrong here but that's how I read it. During that first 24 hours of setting the timer you are locked, so can not move anything but can still be attacked when the timer comes around (this I see as very likely to happen).
Theoretically, you could take a 2nd unoccupied district as soon as you get your first set of reinforcements but chances are all 250 districts will be taken in a mad land grab immediately when PC launches. Furthermore, you would be leaving only 40 clones on your initial district, which is then extremely vulnerable to being not only attacked but completely taken by an enemy corp with no guarantee you'll win your own attack.
The first few days will be manic because people who manage to claim a district won't be able to expand but will likely be attacked at every opportunity by corps who didn't manage to get a district. Locking a district with the reinforcement timer doesn't stop other corps from attacking you, so you could (and probably will) be attacked on day 2.
As for you last paragraph about the mother corp situation - they suffer the same vulnerability as anyone trying to attack early on: you could take 100 clones to claim an abandoned district but that leaves only 40 (60 with the prod PI) clones to defend with. This also hinges on the mother corp not being attacked itself (unlikely) because when someone sets up to attack you, your district becomes locked until the battle has completed, so you can't launch your own attack elsewhere.
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
296
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 09:59:00 -
[825] - Quote
Finde R wrote:If corp A have 450 clones, can A move 100,100,100,100 clones to four hostiles districts on the same day? How to change offline to online ? I mean if defender lost MCC, how can defender change the offline state ? When corp A keep attacking corp B district, can corp B attack corp A district on the same day or the following day ? How long will the locked state keep ? 1 hour at most ? What is called friendly corp ? in same Alliance ? http://i.imgur.com/tcoH7Bi.png Is this correct or wrong? http://i.imgur.com/pq84I96.png Is this wrong ?
1) Correct, you can move as many times as you like, as long as each move is at least 100 clones.
2) Losing your MCC but not all your clones means you don't produce any new clones on that district at the next reinforcement timer. If you are not attacked at the next timer or you win your next defense, only then does the district come online again.
3) If corp B has a district that is not locked and enough clones at said district, they can attack corp A. All the time a district is being attacked, you can not move clones from that district, so can not launch an attack. If you are not locked by an attack (or by changing your reinforcement timer) you can move clones for an attack.
4) Locked status lasts until the district reaches its reinforcement timer. A district becomes locked immediately when an attack is set for your next reinforcement timer - if someone launches an attack 22 hours before your timer, you can not move anything to or from that district until that battle has taken place 22 hours later.
5) A friendly corp is anyone you can get to agree not to attack you.
Sorry, can't see those pics properly, so can't comment on them. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
296
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 10:31:00 -
[826] - Quote
Now I actually have realised that there is a potential kinda loophole that could be exploited by the really rich corps out there and I think this needs to be addressed:
A corp could set up a single 1 man sub corp to constantly attack and lose against the main corp without the sub corp ever having a district themself. The main corp gets extra income from killing 100 clones and 20 extra clones every day as well as ensuring they are locked from attack by other corps. Each time the sub-corp loses, it can immediately buy a new pack of clones and launch an attack during its 1 hour exclusivity window.
Depending on the SI, the main corp could potentially be gaining a lot of clones really really fast. Here's the numbers:
With research SI -
Day 1 +100 clones for main corp +100 clones for sub-corp -20M isk * 2 = -40M isk
Day 2 +40 clones from production +20 clones from winning 100-0 +5M isk from biomass -20M isk from sub-corps for new clone pack Total main corp clones 160 Net isk -55M
Day 3 Total clones 220 Net isk -70M
Day 4 clones 280 isk - 85M
Day 5 clones 300 (reach max) sell 40 clones for 4M isk isk - 96M
Now this is a fair sum of money but pocket change compared to what some people have saved up already and it gives a corp the potential to max out its clones by day 5 or be able to launch an attack on a neighbouring district on day 2 without any fear of losing their initial district.
If we do the numbers for a cargo hub, it's pretty much the same pattern as the research one but up to 450 clones in 6 days at a cost of 114M isk.
The scary part is if the main corp happens to get a production SI and then the numbers are max 300 clones in 4 days for just 81M isk.
And this is absolutely guaranteed to work if you have the money. Obviously it's not a long term plan because you net lose isk even when you hit the max with a prod SI but it means a corp with the cash could get a massive and uninterruptible headstart on clone production. I would definitely go as far as to say this is an exploit that requires addressing. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
296
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 10:47:00 -
[827] - Quote
double post |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2045
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 11:39:00 -
[828] - Quote
Your math appears to be off. You say you can lock a district for, assuming you have a production facility, 2 million ISK.
Starter pack costs 20 million ISK, gives 100 clones District defender wins, gets 20 clones Total clones sold is 80 (60 from production facility and 20 from starter clones), or 8 million ISK. You lose 12 million ISK.
If you try and lock the district by attacking from another district you are paying the fee in ISK and clones to move, you have to do a minimum of 100 clones, and at most you produce 60 clones so it is not sustainable that way.
|
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
297
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 11:48:00 -
[829] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Your math appears to be off. You say you can lock a district for, assuming you have a production facility, 2 million ISK.
Starter pack costs 20 million ISK, gives 100 clones District defender wins, gets 20 clones Total clones sold is 80 (60 from production facility and 20 from starter clones), or 8 million ISK. You lose 12 million ISK.
If you try and lock the district by attacking from another district you are paying the fee in ISK and clones to move, you have to do a minimum of 100 clones, and at most you produce 60 clones so it is not sustainable that way.
You also get 50k isk per clone killed, which is an extra 5M isk. Yes, my maths is still off but 7-9M isk per day is still not a lot for these megacorps
If you use my idea of only attacking yourself using a corp without a district, you don't have to worry about production rates and can buy a new pack of clones straight after an attack has been lost for the next attack. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2047
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 11:50:00 -
[830] - Quote
If you kill them you don't get the 20 from them at the end though. |
|
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
221
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 11:50:00 -
[831] - Quote
Django's method here is kind of feasible; lockdown from attacks while gaining clones. Kind of a corp "reinforce mode" burning isk. Taking notes... |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
298
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 11:56:00 -
[832] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:If you kill them you don't get the 20 from them at the end though.
Ah right okay - that fixes that then.
It's still a sustainable tactic at least in the short term though. The richest corps could easily lose a few hundred million isk to secure a handful of districts in the first few weeks and be happy with the outcome. |
KatanaPT
Tech Guard
10
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 11:59:00 -
[833] - Quote
Quick idea, and im sorry if this was already suggested or mentioned:
What if the surplus clones produced in the districts can be sold to eve players to crew their ships? Afterall the ships arent only comprised of the pilot but of hundreds of individuals serving as crew, just look at all those carriers, battleships, etc, think of it as something similar to Frontier:Elite, in that game we would have to get some crew going so the ship would be flyable. What if buying those clones to crew the ship would add some kinda bonus to the eve player? It can become one of the most important reasons for a eve player to buy the surplus clones of any dust corporation. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
221
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:05:00 -
[834] - Quote
Couple of questions, sorry if I missed an earlier answer:
1) An important mechanic will be the queue on "who gets to attack". How would this be iterated? 2) Will the maps be enlarged from the skirmish of present, or perhaps in later versions of PC? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2048
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:12:00 -
[835] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:If you kill them you don't get the 20 from them at the end though. Ah right okay - that fixes that then. It's still a sustainable tactic at least in the short term though. The richest corps could easily lose a few hundred million isk to secure a handful of districts in the first few weeks and be happy with the outcome.
I had to edit that post, I kind of lied. Well, was wrong anyways.
What can actually happen with the way things are coded:
Defending district is maxed out with 300 clones. Defending district has PF producing 60 clones. +6 million ISK = +6 million ISK
Starter pack launched against defending district. -20 million ISK = -14 million ISK
No attackers show up, MCC destroyed. Defenders get the 20 clones. +2 million ISK = -12 million ISK
Defenders get the value of ALL 100 clones (we always give the minimum clone loss value as a minimum) +5 million ISK = -7 million ISK
|
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2054
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:12:00 -
[836] - Quote
With Django's exploit, you'd want to be running a 1 man Corp with a go-between delivering money so he doesn't have to earn all the costs for himself.
And you have to choose between the extra 20 clones/2 million ISK, or the extra 5 million from clone destruction.
So you're 20M down, and another 11 million (at most) up after each day. 9 million ISK a day may not be huge by EVE standards, but it's definitely not sustainable on its own, and the more territory you hold, the worse it becomes. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
221
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:13:00 -
[837] - Quote
So, the extent of alt corp usage for the very wealthy big corp looking to safe expand:
1) create enough 1man ringer corps to claim a planet. 2) settle main corp on planet. 3) reinforce main district by burning new alt corp genolution packs for 20 clone steady growth during lockdown. 4) continuously defend on alt placeholder districts 5) claim placeholder districts without losing clones on main corp eventually
Costs isk, but should be doable for a big corp if they were capable of holding the planet in the first place.
Skill applies, isk is burned, not too harsh exploit to me. Should not have discussed, as its on the open now (though all corps have ran this through by themselves anyhow) :D |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2048
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:14:00 -
[838] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Couple of questions, sorry if I missed an earlier answer:
1) An important mechanic will be the queue on "who gets to attack". How would this be iterated? 2) Will the maps be enlarged from the skirmish of present, or perhaps in later versions of PC?
1) When someone attacks a district it is set as under attack and cannot be attacked by anyone else. To avoid district sniping for 1 hour from the time a battle starts only the currently attacking corporation can launch another attack. This means they can ensure they are the ones to grind a district down.
2) No comment on this. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2048
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:17:00 -
[839] - Quote
I want to open this up for discussion, we are currently thinking of increasing the clone starter pack to 200 clones. This also means an increase from 20 million to 40 million ISK in cost.
There are a few reasons for this, but before I go into that I want to hear your opinions and thoughts without influencing them. |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:22:00 -
[840] - Quote
Would other clone numbers stay the same? Minimum movement of 100 clones? Max clones without cargo 300? etc. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2048
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:23:00 -
[841] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Would other clone numbers stay the same? Minimum movement of 100 clones? Max clones without cargo 300? etc.
For the current train of thought, yes. |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:25:00 -
[842] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:With Django's exploit, you'd want to be running a 1 man Corp with a go-between delivering money so he doesn't have to earn all the costs for himself.
And you have to choose between the extra 20 clones/2 million ISK, or the extra 5 million from clone destruction.
So you're 20M down, and another 11 million (at most) up after each day. 9 million ISK a day may not be huge by EVE standards, but it's definitely not sustainable on its own, and the more territory you hold, the worse it becomes.
You could just give each sub corp 100M isk to start with.
And CCP Fox Four retracted his previous statement, so you could only spend 7M per day. With some corps supposedly holding 700M isk, this isn't unimagineable.
Also, it's not a sustainable longterm strategy but could definitely be used in the first few weeks to take a small planet of say 5 districts. |
Mavado V Noriega
SyNergy Gaming
2463
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:25:00 -
[843] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:I want to open this up for discussion, we are currently thinking of increasing the clone starter pack to 200 clones. This also means an increase from 20 million to 40 million ISK in cost.
There are a few reasons for this, but before I go into that I want to hear your opinions and thoughts without influencing them.
cant u sell in packs of 100 or 200? also if ur raising starter packs to 200 will the base clone count on districts and regen rate be upped as well?? |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:26:00 -
[844] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:I want to open this up for discussion, we are currently thinking of increasing the clone starter pack to 200 clones. This also means an increase from 20 million to 40 million ISK in cost.
There are a few reasons for this, but before I go into that I want to hear your opinions and thoughts without influencing them.
Damn no !!!
You will increase the splits corp "issue" ... If you stil need a minimum of 100 clones to attack...
Or it could be a real big war on day 1 !!! Well, we had rest enough, let's do some sport !!! |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2048
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:27:00 -
[845] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:You will increase the splits corp "issue" ... If you stil need a minimum of 100 clones to attack...
How so?
|
|
Booby Tuesdays
THE DOLLARS
38
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:33:00 -
[846] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:I want to open this up for discussion, we are currently thinking of increasing the clone starter pack to 200 clones. This also means an increase from 20 million to 40 million ISK in cost.
There are a few reasons for this, but before I go into that I want to hear your opinions and thoughts without influencing them.
Why stop there? Make 300 clones the only option, that way a Corp is forced to max out their clones from the get go, and any PF's become pure profit as well. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:34:00 -
[847] - Quote
I can't personally see the immediate advantages to the system of giving people more clones from the outset.
Let's see - things that could now be possible: -On day 1 each corp could claim 1 district with a decent number of 200 clones. -On day 1 each corp could claim 2 districts with 100 clones each. -Corps with no district could attack with greater numbers on day 2 but still less than a corp with a district that's produced clones since day 1. -Corps with no district could attack 2 districts with 100 clones each.
Erm, anything else different?
I guess the big change is the cost involved. It would mean any kind of corp-splitting system would be significantly more expensive, ruling out all but the richest of richness corps. I think it would also likely be a massive turn off for any corp less than a hundred or so members. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:36:00 -
[848] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:I want to open this up for discussion, we are currently thinking of increasing the clone starter pack to 200 clones. This also means an increase from 20 million to 40 million ISK in cost.
There are a few reasons for this, but before I go into that I want to hear your opinions and thoughts without influencing them. Damn no !!! You will increase the splits corp "issue" ... If you stil need a minimum of 100 clones to attack... Or it could be a real big war on day 1 !!! Well, we had rest enough, let's do some sport !!!
Let's not forget that you need to wait until your district unlocks from setting the initial reinforcement timer on day 1, so still no attacking from your first district until day 2. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:37:00 -
[849] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:You will increase the splits corp "issue" ... If you stil need a minimum of 100 clones to attack... How so?
Day 1
Take one district with main corp. x districts with sisters. 1 sister attack a district (empty or not ?) with 199 clones, is that possible ? Main attack the 1st sister with 100 clones.
It could be 3 districts for main on day 1.
Or as I said, a damn war .... |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:38:00 -
[850] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:You will increase the splits corp "issue" ... If you stil need a minimum of 100 clones to attack... How so?
Not really changing anything in respect to that. You'd still be spending the same amount of isk to fake attack 2 districts with 1 sub-corp instead of 2. |
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:38:00 -
[851] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:I want to open this up for discussion, we are currently thinking of increasing the clone starter pack to 200 clones. This also means an increase from 20 million to 40 million ISK in cost.
There are a few reasons for this, but before I go into that I want to hear your opinions and thoughts without influencing them. Damn no !!! You will increase the splits corp "issue" ... If you stil need a minimum of 100 clones to attack... Or it could be a real big war on day 1 !!! Well, we had rest enough, let's do some sport !!! Let's not forget that you need to wait until your district unlocks from setting the initial reinforcement timer on day 1, so still no attacking from your first district until day 2.
This ok, noted... |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:41:00 -
[852] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:You will increase the splits corp "issue" ... If you stil need a minimum of 100 clones to attack... How so? Day 1 Take one district with main corp. x districts with sisters. 1 sister attack a district (empty or not ?) with 199 clones, is that possible ? Main attack the 1st sister with 100 clones. It could be 3 districts for main on day 1. Or as I said, a damn war ....
Careful, you're in danger of going back down the route we earlier debunked as unsustainable.
As far as I can see, the only real split corp problem is the one I outlined here |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:50:00 -
[853] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:You will increase the splits corp "issue" ... If you stil need a minimum of 100 clones to attack... How so? Day 1 Take one district with main corp. x districts with sisters. 1 sister attack a district (empty or not ?) with 199 clones, is that possible ? Main attack the 1st sister with 100 clones. It could be 3 districts for main on day 1. Or as I said, a damn war .... Careful, you're in danger of going back down the route we earlier debunked as unsustainable. As far as I can see, the only real split corp problem is the one I outlined here
And what if money is not a problem ? And this will be interesting to have a lots of battles day 1. We are hungry !!! ;) |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:54:00 -
[854] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote: And what if money is not a problem ? And this will be interesting to have a lots of battles day 1. We are hungry !!! ;)
First line is exactly my point and why this needs to be addressed. Second line is going to happen anyway. 1000+ corps to 250 districts? Granted a lot will be turned off by an even higher starting price of 40M isk but I'd say you're still looking at 500+ corps.
BTW, I have no idea where the 1000+ corps number came from - someone said that a few pages back and I've just been running with it ever since. Still, seems like a plausible number. |
Mavado V Noriega
SyNergy Gaming
2463
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:58:00 -
[855] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote: And what if money is not a problem ? And this will be interesting to have a lots of battles day 1. We are hungry !!! ;)
First line is exactly my point and why this needs to be addressed. Second line is going to happen anyway. 1000+ corps to 250 districts? Granted a lot will be turned off by an even higher starting price of 40M isk but I'd say you're still looking at 500+ corps. BTW, I have no idea where the 1000+ corps number came from - someone said that a few pages back and I've just been running with it ever since. Still, seems like a plausible number.
there are 1000 corps on this game? corps that actually fight too? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 12:59:00 -
[856] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Couple of questions, sorry if I missed an earlier answer:
1) An important mechanic will be the queue on "who gets to attack". How would this be iterated? 2) Will the maps be enlarged from the skirmish of present, or perhaps in later versions of PC? 1) When someone attacks a district it is set as under attack and cannot be attacked by anyone else. To avoid district sniping for 1 hour from the time a battle starts only the currently attacking corporation can launch another attack. This means they can ensure they are the ones to grind a district down. 2) No comment on this.
Just to go back to this point quickly - Am I understanding correctly that attacking an unlocked district works on a first come first serve basis? So should an attacker choose not to continue attacking, the attack will go to whoever launches an attack first after the exclusivity hour is up? |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:01:00 -
[857] - Quote
Tbh, 40M is a bigger cost with ISK value today, that's for sure...
Much more difficult to deploy this with 10+ districts, even with a huge and well organize corp as we don't have access to the corporation taxe today ... So it will decrease the massive effect that we could see with 100 clones = 20M. |
Starfire Revo
Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
32
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:03:00 -
[858] - Quote
Is there a possibility of giving corps a choice between 100 clones for 20 mil and 200 for 40? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:04:00 -
[859] - Quote
Mavado V Noriega wrote:Django Quik wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote: And what if money is not a problem ? And this will be interesting to have a lots of battles day 1. We are hungry !!! ;)
First line is exactly my point and why this needs to be addressed. Second line is going to happen anyway. 1000+ corps to 250 districts? Granted a lot will be turned off by an even higher starting price of 40M isk but I'd say you're still looking at 500+ corps. BTW, I have no idea where the 1000+ corps number came from - someone said that a few pages back and I've just been running with it ever since. Still, seems like a plausible number. there are 1000 corps on this game? corps that actually fight too?
There are over 1200 threads in the corporation recruitment forum section - granted a decent number of them may be old and defunct or duplicates but there are also many corps who don't use that section too. 1000 functioning corps seems reasonable with maybe 500 able and willing to take part in PC; I can see that being the case. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:06:00 -
[860] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Tbh, 40M is a bigger cost with ISK value today, that's for sure...
Much more difficult to deploy this with 10+ districts, even with a huge and well organize corp as we don't have access to the corporation taxe today ... So it will decrease the massive effect that we could see with 100 clones = 20M.
Meh, not really because you could split your starting number to cover 2 districts (claiming or attacking). The costs in terms of splitting would be the same really. |
|
Mavado V Noriega
SyNergy Gaming
2464
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:10:00 -
[861] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Mavado V Noriega wrote:Django Quik wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote: And what if money is not a problem ? And this will be interesting to have a lots of battles day 1. We are hungry !!! ;)
First line is exactly my point and why this needs to be addressed. Second line is going to happen anyway. 1000+ corps to 250 districts? Granted a lot will be turned off by an even higher starting price of 40M isk but I'd say you're still looking at 500+ corps. BTW, I have no idea where the 1000+ corps number came from - someone said that a few pages back and I've just been running with it ever since. Still, seems like a plausible number. there are 1000 corps on this game? corps that actually fight too? There are over 1200 threads in the corporation recruitment forum section - granted a decent number of them may be old and defunct or duplicates but there are also many corps who don't use that section too. 1000 functioning corps seems reasonable with maybe 500 able and willing to take part in PC; I can see that being the case.
i see the vast majority of those corps being turned off after the initial failed attempt to take districts off someone and head back to IB or FW tbh
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:12:00 -
[862] - Quote
Mavado V Noriega wrote:Django Quik wrote:
There are over 1200 threads in the corporation recruitment forum section - granted a decent number of them may be old and defunct or duplicates but there are also many corps who don't use that section too. 1000 functioning corps seems reasonable with maybe 500 able and willing to take part in PC; I can see that being the case.
i see the vast majority of those corps being turned off after the initial failed attempt to take districts off someone and head back to IB or FW tbh
Yeh, totally true but the first few days everyone's going to want to try at least. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
221
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:13:00 -
[863] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:I want to open this up for discussion, we are currently thinking of increasing the clone starter pack to 200 clones. This also means an increase from 20 million to 40 million ISK in cost.
There are a few reasons for this, but before I go into that I want to hear your opinions and thoughts without influencing them.
- This would open up options and remain balanced in general purposes. Good premise.
- The alt corp lockdown play would be reinforced by this providing more clones daily. You would not lose in growth speed by doing it, only in isk. This is not an issue, if the lockdown spam is addressed otherwise.
- The long distance clone drop attack would be much stronger with 200 clones. I'm talking about a scenario, where a wealthy corp chooses to burn ISK and project force by dropping clone bombs on remote enemies from alt corps. If you have 100 clones in such an attack it's easy to defend it by cloning the enemy team. I think this could be the main gameplay balance thing of the mechanic: the remote genolution attack (whatever you want to call it) might become the bread and butter mechanic for a mercenary outfit hired to harass a competitor. If they have 100 clones to do so, they need to be really good. If they have 200, they can do with less skill. Whether this is a good thing should be pondered. I don't like the mechanic, as it allows bypassing the clone projection jump cost by just spending ISK.
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2050
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:18:00 -
[864] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Couple of questions, sorry if I missed an earlier answer:
1) An important mechanic will be the queue on "who gets to attack". How would this be iterated? 2) Will the maps be enlarged from the skirmish of present, or perhaps in later versions of PC? 1) When someone attacks a district it is set as under attack and cannot be attacked by anyone else. To avoid district sniping for 1 hour from the time a battle starts only the currently attacking corporation can launch another attack. This means they can ensure they are the ones to grind a district down. 2) No comment on this. Just to go back to this point quickly - Am I understanding correctly that attacking an unlocked district works on a first come first serve basis? So should an attacker choose not to continue attacking, the attack will go to whoever launches an attack first after the exclusivity hour is up?
Correct |
|
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
167
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:27:00 -
[865] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Django Quik wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Couple of questions, sorry if I missed an earlier answer:
1) An important mechanic will be the queue on "who gets to attack". How would this be iterated? 2) Will the maps be enlarged from the skirmish of present, or perhaps in later versions of PC? 1) When someone attacks a district it is set as under attack and cannot be attacked by anyone else. To avoid district sniping for 1 hour from the time a battle starts only the currently attacking corporation can launch another attack. This means they can ensure they are the ones to grind a district down. 2) No comment on this. Just to go back to this point quickly - Am I understanding correctly that attacking an unlocked district works on a first come first serve basis? So should an attacker choose not to continue attacking, the attack will go to whoever launches an attack first after the exclusivity hour is up? Correct
I don't quite understand the exclusivity period. I realize the corp that attacks gets first dibs to attack again, but does that 1-hour exclusivity period include the attack itself or just setting the attack?
In other words, if we attack at 2:00-3:00pm, and want to attack again, will we be attacking at 3:00-4:00pm or will we have to set an attack and it will launch at 2:00-3:00pm the following day?
Also, does having your district in a state of Under Attack prevent that district from attacking anyone else? |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
221
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:28:00 -
[866] - Quote
Hey, was the remote clone bomb topic beat to death already? Has it been discussed?
Planned mechanic loveliness: Attacking 6 clone jumps gives a survival rate of 20%, making this the business of the very best out there. The clone projection makes logistical borders and creates local empires.
Metagame problem: The above cool thing is ruined by dropping genolution clone bombs from alt corps, giving 100 (or 200) clones instantly anywhere on the map. Metagaming around clone projection breaks logistical borders and would be pretty shattering when thought in the grand New Eden future nullsec content.
Solutions?
- Make this an acceptable form of force projection and limit the strenght by sticking with a low genolution clone pack amount.
- System upgrades resembling cynosural jammers, that limit the genolution attack strenght on districts or remove the possibility.
- Genolution clones cannot be used in nullsec; you need to expand to nullsec from lowsec.
|
BursegSardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
65
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:33:00 -
[867] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:I want to open this up for discussion, we are currently thinking of increasing the clone starter pack to 200 clones. This also means an increase from 20 million to 40 million ISK in cost.
There are a few reasons for this, but before I go into that I want to hear your opinions and thoughts without influencing them.
I think options in a sandbox are important. So maybe have two choices? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:38:00 -
[868] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Django Quik wrote: Just to go back to this point quickly - Am I understanding correctly that attacking an unlocked district works on a first come first serve basis? So should an attacker choose not to continue attacking, the attack will go to whoever launches an attack first after the exclusivity hour is up?
Correct I don't quite understand the exclusivity period. I realize the corp that attacks gets first dibs to attack again, but does that 1-hour exclusivity period include the attack itself or just setting the attack? In other words, if we attack at 2:00-3:00pm, and want to attack again, will we be attacking at 3:00-4:00pm or will we have to set an attack and it will launch at 2:00-3:00pm the following day? Also, does having your district in a state of Under Attack prevent your district from attacking anyone else?
The attack is always during the reinforcement time set by the defender, so in your scenario would be the same time the next day. The exclusivity window just allows the attackers to ensure they get to attack again without someone else trying to snipe the spot from them.
And to your last point - correct. As soon as you are 'under attack' your district is locked. You can't move clones in to defend or out to attack. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2050
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:38:00 -
[869] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Django Quik wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:trollsroyce wrote:Couple of questions, sorry if I missed an earlier answer:
1) An important mechanic will be the queue on "who gets to attack". How would this be iterated? 2) Will the maps be enlarged from the skirmish of present, or perhaps in later versions of PC? 1) When someone attacks a district it is set as under attack and cannot be attacked by anyone else. To avoid district sniping for 1 hour from the time a battle starts only the currently attacking corporation can launch another attack. This means they can ensure they are the ones to grind a district down. 2) No comment on this. Just to go back to this point quickly - Am I understanding correctly that attacking an unlocked district works on a first come first serve basis? So should an attacker choose not to continue attacking, the attack will go to whoever launches an attack first after the exclusivity hour is up? Correct I don't quite understand the exclusivity period. I realize the corp that attacks gets first dibs to attack again, but does that 1-hour exclusivity period include the attack itself or just setting the attack? In other words, if we attack at 2:00-3:00pm, and want to attack again, will we be attacking at 3:00-4:00pm or will we have to set an attack and it will launch at 2:00-3:00pm the following day? Also, does having your district in a state of Under Attack prevent your district from attacking anyone else?
Take a read through this, it should answer most those questions: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest
I will however try and answer them again here for you. As seen in the Reinforcement timers section (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Reinforcement_Timers):
Specifically take a look at the attack scenarios. You seem to be mixing up the launch attack time and the time when attacks actually happen, the reinforcement time.
So in attack scenario 01: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Attacker launches an attack at 11:00 on Monday Defending district set as "under attack" Battle happens in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Tuesday
For arguments sake lets say the battle ends up being at 12:30. The attackers have from 12:30 until 13:30 to launch another attack on the district. If they choose to do so the battle will happen in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Wednesday. Does that make sense? |
|
Kristoff Atruin
Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
376
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:44:00 -
[870] - Quote
Confirming that there has already been talk in Test of using alt corps to troll district owners. |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:45:00 -
[871] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Hey, was the remote clone bomb topic beat to death already? Has it been discussed? Planned mechanic loveliness:Attacking 6 clone jumps gives a survival rate of 20%, making this the business of the very best out there. The clone projection makes logistical borders and creates local empires. Metagame problem:The above cool thing is ruined by dropping genolution clone bombs from alt corps, giving 100 (or 200) clones instantly anywhere on the map. Metagaming around clone projection breaks logistical borders and would be pretty shattering when thought in the grand New Eden future nullsec content. Solutions?
- Make this an acceptable form of force projection and limit the strenght by sticking with a low genolution clone pack amount.
- System upgrades resembling cynosural jammers, that limit the genolution attack strenght on districts or remove the possibility.
- Genolution clones cannot be used in nullsec; you need to expand to nullsec from lowsec.
It's a bit of a double edged sword. In the long term, once everything's settled, the only way to get into PC if you've not already, is to use a genolution pack. If you only get 100 clones, that's not going to be enough to take on a lot of districts that will already probably be well stocked up to the 300 mark. With 200 you have a much better chance at succeeding. Otherwise we'd be effectively shutting out anyone who doesn't get in at the start but wants to have a go later on.
Your gen-bombing idea would be good to harass distant enemies with but wouldn't really achieve much long term because even if your alt-corp managed to take a district, it's totally isolated and will likely get horrendously counter attacked. It would distract your target for sure and maybe use up some of their resources but the result would be negligible.
Let's not get into supposition on null-sec just yet; we have no idea what's planned for that. |
Soozu
5o1st
24
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:46:00 -
[872] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:I want to open this up for discussion, we are currently thinking of increasing the clone starter pack to 200 clones. This also means an increase from 20 million to 40 million ISK in cost.
There are a few reasons for this, but before I go into that I want to hear your opinions and thoughts without influencing them.
If you do this the destruction of the MCC will be the deciding factor in the outcome of most of these early matches, if not all. I suppose that's OK, however, I recall it being said that it was to be skirmish mode for the sake of a timer ending the match in due course so that a lone remaining clone couldn't hide out and prolong the match or other strange scenarios ensuing.
It's all fine and dandy I suppose but it does seem a bit odd somehow.
Skirmish for the larger map (I assume) and a timer. But clone count is what really matters in a battle.. But most battles will end with the destruction of the MCC if put at 200 clones. Which is just there for the sake of the timer.
How about removing all but one hackable points but leaving in the MCCs to fire at each other and just increase their damage? You still have your timer. Possible destruction of the MC Puts the focus on fighting and clone count. Keeps the better, larger maps with the good (safer) spawn points and lines to launch the initial attack.
Just a thought.
Very curious as to your reasoning for the 200 clone count. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
167
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:48:00 -
[873] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Take a read through this, it should answer most those questions: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_ConquestI will however try and answer them again here for you. As seen in the Reinforcement timers section (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Reinforcement_Timers): Specifically take a look at the attack scenarios. You seem to be mixing up the launch attack time and the time when attacks actually happen, the reinforcement time. So in attack scenario 01: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Attacker launches an attack at 11:00 on Monday Defending district set as "under attack" Battle happens in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Tuesday For arguments sake lets say the battle ends up being at 12:30. The attackers have from 12:30 until 13:30 to launch another attack on the district. If they choose to do so the battle will happen in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Wednesday. Does that make sense?
Yea, that last paragraph is what I was wondering (I've read the wiki multiple times). I sort of changed the terminology to easily distinguish between Setting an Attack (deciding you want to attack a district and waiting the 24 hours) and Launching an Attack (when you're actually doing the fighting itself).
The 1-hour exclusivity means you get to Set an Attack, but have to wait those 24 hours again to actually fight the battle--okay I get it. Thanks.
How does the Reinforcement timer on the first day work? If I set it for the next full hour after taking my first district, would I get those clones that same day? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:50:00 -
[874] - Quote
Soozu wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:I want to open this up for discussion, we are currently thinking of increasing the clone starter pack to 200 clones. This also means an increase from 20 million to 40 million ISK in cost.
There are a few reasons for this, but before I go into that I want to hear your opinions and thoughts without influencing them. If you do this the destruction of the MCC will be the deciding factor in the outcome of most of these early matches, if not all. I suppose that's OK, however, I recall it being said that it was to be skirmish mode for the sake of a timer ending the match in due course so that a lone remaining clone couldn't hide out and prolong the match or other strange scenarios ensuing. It's all fine and dandy I suppose but it does seem a bit odd somehow. Skirmish for the larger map (I assume) and a timer. But clone count is what really matters in a battle.. But most battles will end with the destruction of the MCC if put at 200 clones. Which is just there for the sake of the timer. How about removing all but one hackable points but leaving in the MCCs to fire at each other and just increase their damage? You still have your timer. Possible destruction of the MC Puts the focus on fighting and clone count. Keeps the better, larger maps with the good (safer) spawn points and lines to launch the initial attack. Just a thought. Very curious as to your reasoning for the 200 clone count.
Early on most attacks will result in loss of MCC but that is why you must sustain an attack over several days. If the attacker wins, the defender loses 100 clones and can't produce more, so you go back the next day and wittle them down further until you finally wipe them out entirely. |
Soozu
5o1st
24
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:53:00 -
[875] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Soozu wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:I want to open this up for discussion, we are currently thinking of increasing the clone starter pack to 200 clones. This also means an increase from 20 million to 40 million ISK in cost.
There are a few reasons for this, but before I go into that I want to hear your opinions and thoughts without influencing them. If you do this the destruction of the MCC will be the deciding factor in the outcome of most of these early matches, if not all. I suppose that's OK, however, I recall it being said that it was to be skirmish mode for the sake of a timer ending the match in due course so that a lone remaining clone couldn't hide out and prolong the match or other strange scenarios ensuing. It's all fine and dandy I suppose but it does seem a bit odd somehow. Skirmish for the larger map (I assume) and a timer. But clone count is what really matters in a battle.. But most battles will end with the destruction of the MCC if put at 200 clones. Which is just there for the sake of the timer. How about removing all but one hackable points but leaving in the MCCs to fire at each other and just increase their damage? You still have your timer. Possible destruction of the MC Puts the focus on fighting and clone count. Keeps the better, larger maps with the good (safer) spawn points and lines to launch the initial attack. Just a thought. Very curious as to your reasoning for the 200 clone count. Early on most attacks will result in loss of MCC but that is why you must sustain an attack over several days. If the attacker wins, the defender loses 100 clones and can't produce more, so you go back the next day and wittle them down further until you finally wipe them out entirely.
I had to edit my post as I messed up a bit,,, about amount of MCC damage,
But anyway. 200 clones attacking everyday but the district still only produces a base 40? Is that right??? |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:58:00 -
[876] - Quote
Question :
Still a minimum of 100 clones loss ?
Cause with a 200 stack, what happen if game ends at MCC destruction and not clone depletion ? Does the attacker get any refund or something ? |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2056
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 13:59:00 -
[877] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:I want to open this up for discussion, we are currently thinking of increasing the clone starter pack to 200 clones. This also means an increase from 20 million to 40 million ISK in cost.
There are a few reasons for this, but before I go into that I want to hear your opinions and thoughts without influencing them. I'd say yes.
As a few people have suggested, an option to buy either 100 or 200 clones would be great, but if the current implementation only supports one purchase option, I can think of a few reasons to go with the 200 clones pack instead of only 100. The biggest argument is that you want it to feel like a Skirmish, and with the current Skirmish mechanics, 100 vs. 100 is just going to turn into a clone count battle. 200 vs. 200 would potentially make for much harder-fought battles, and the numbers would make it more sensible to risk pushing a little past that basline 100 clones if you've got a good chance of collecting 20% of something more than 0 clones at the end of the battle if you win by objectives. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
221
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:02:00 -
[878] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:I want to open this up for discussion, we are currently thinking of increasing the clone starter pack to 200 clones. This also means an increase from 20 million to 40 million ISK in cost.
There are a few reasons for this, but before I go into that I want to hear your opinions and thoughts without influencing them. I'd say yes. As a few people have suggested, an option to buy either 100 or 200 clones would be great, but if the current implementation only supports one purchase option, I can think of a few reasons to go with the 200 clones pack instead of only 100. The biggest argument is that you want it to feel like a Skirmish, and with the current Skirmish mechanics, 100 vs. 100 is just going to turn into a clone count battle. 200 vs. 200 would potentially make for much harder-fought battles, and the numbers would make it more sensible to risk pushing a little past that basline 100 clones if you've got a good chance of collecting 20% of something more than 0 clones at the end of the battle if you win by objectives.
Oh, it would be 100 vs. 300 or 200 vs. 300 in the case of genolution bombing later on. There is a major difference in how hard it is to defend; with the 100 clone setup you could try and clone the offender with your advantage. If there are 200 clones, it would be a different story.
In the start, the mechanics would be more balanced in any case. |
Kristoff Atruin
Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
376
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:03:00 -
[879] - Quote
Here's a problem with the 200 clone pack - it doesn't really allow you to take a district that is well defended (nor should it). Say you attack a district with 300 clones in it. You're not going to lose all 200 in a single battle, but you could very well lose a good portion of them. In the meantime if one of your attacks is unsuccessful the defender reinforces from a nearby district or gets a round of production. You don't get any reinforcement at all. A 100 clone pack forces you to look for the low hanging fruit.
You can do that with the 200 pack as well, but I think it would draw a lot of new players into overreaching. Not necessarily a bad thing. On the other hand, having 200 clones could mean you're more likely to hold on to what you take. It would allow you to lose your first battle and still have a second chance to keep your territory. It would also allow larger entities to expand more quickly. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2051
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:03:00 -
[880] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Take a read through this, it should answer most those questions: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_ConquestI will however try and answer them again here for you. As seen in the Reinforcement timers section (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Reinforcement_Timers): Specifically take a look at the attack scenarios. You seem to be mixing up the launch attack time and the time when attacks actually happen, the reinforcement time. So in attack scenario 01: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Attacker launches an attack at 11:00 on Monday Defending district set as "under attack" Battle happens in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Tuesday For arguments sake lets say the battle ends up being at 12:30. The attackers have from 12:30 until 13:30 to launch another attack on the district. If they choose to do so the battle will happen in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Wednesday. Does that make sense? Yea, that last paragraph is what I was wondering (I've read the wiki multiple times). I sort of changed the terminology to easily distinguish between Setting an Attack (deciding you want to attack a district and waiting the 24 hours) and Launching an Attack (when you're actually doing the fighting itself). The 1-hour exclusivity means you get to Set an Attack, but have to wait those 24 hours again to actually fight the battle--okay I get it. Thanks. How does the Reinforcement timer on the first day work? If I set it for the next full hour after taking my first district, would I get those clones that same day?
The reinforcement timer can never go backwards. So RT set for 15:00. It is currently 01:00 on Monday. You change the RT to 02:00. The district is locked until 02:00 on Tuesday and you don't get clones until 02:00 Tuesday. |
|
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2051
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:05:00 -
[881] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Question :
Still a minimum of 100 clones loss ?
Cause with a 200 stack, what happen if game ends at MCC destruction and not clone depletion ? Does the attacker get any refund or something ?
Still 100 minimum, any spare clones would get sold at the 100,000 ISK price, versus the 200,000 ISK price Genolution sells them to you at. |
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:06:00 -
[882] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Take a read through this, it should answer most those questions: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_ConquestI will however try and answer them again here for you. As seen in the Reinforcement timers section (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Reinforcement_Timers): Specifically take a look at the attack scenarios. You seem to be mixing up the launch attack time and the time when attacks actually happen, the reinforcement time. So in attack scenario 01: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Attacker launches an attack at 11:00 on Monday Defending district set as "under attack" Battle happens in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Tuesday For arguments sake lets say the battle ends up being at 12:30. The attackers have from 12:30 until 13:30 to launch another attack on the district. If they choose to do so the battle will happen in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Wednesday. Does that make sense? Yea, that last paragraph is what I was wondering (I've read the wiki multiple times). I sort of changed the terminology to easily distinguish between Setting an Attack (deciding you want to attack a district and waiting the 24 hours) and Launching an Attack (when you're actually doing the fighting itself). The 1-hour exclusivity means you get to Set an Attack, but have to wait those 24 hours again to actually fight the battle--okay I get it. Thanks. How does the Reinforcement timer on the first day work? If I set it for the next full hour after taking my first district, would I get those clones that same day? The reinforcement timer can never go backwards. So RT set for 15:00. It is currently 01:00 on Monday. You change the RT to 02:00. The district is locked until 02:00 on Tuesday and you don't get clones until 02:00 Tuesday.
So the first RT depends on the district 1st capture ? |
Yosef Autaal
Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic
62
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:07:00 -
[883] - Quote
The one problem I have with this purchasing clone system is by using alt corps this is a quick and easy way for a corp to purchase clones of the npc market although at a hefty price of 1mil a pop so by using an alt corp and consitantly attacking a district until corp supplies are full is going to be a common practice when a corp takes over a district/
while expensive a large corp will not care. For example corp A captures district B (either at beginning first come first serve or by depleting the opponents clone count). corp A has a alt corp C set up and ready soon as the system becomes unlocked they attack with corp C after 24hours and a battle they instantly win the stock of the system has gone up by 40-60 from district and 40 from the battle if they have not reached cap yet they attack again for another 40mil and another 24hours of invun means after the auto win battle corp A now has a district that is fully supplied in clones without the need of any moving of clones around districts,
so using this system they can keep all districts at max clones never having move around clones causing districts to have less then max apart from when a district attacks.
though saying all this i understand this will cost corp A a lot isk to maintain (which large corps will have either way) and apart from making it more difficult for a corp to attack a district it has lost agaisnt multiple times one idea could be as every battle lost causes clone attrition for example
Corp B attacks corp A with 200 clones after first attack corp B was defeated, in the hour exclusive period they select to battle again with 200 clones in this next battle due to the first loss the clones suffer attrition and 10% are lost before the battle starts meaning clone count for next battle is 180
if corp B is defeated again and choose to attack in the exclusive period again the attrition is 20% (two consecutive losses) resulting in only 160 out of 200 clones availble for battle (SI upgrades could be used to reduce attrition amount)
With this system a corp will have a limit to many losses they can suffer before the match is unable to take part (after 5 consecutive losses corp B is no longer able to supply the 100 clone minumum count) meaning corps have to carefully decide if they want to keep pushing an attack even though they are loosing or retreat for a time and attack once penalty is lifted (if they attack outside of the exclusive timezone)
A single win could either reduce the attrition or cancel it all together. this would stop Corp A from using an alt corp to keep there district safe using exclusive timer as there is a limit to how many battles can be thought this way and with reduced clones earned from each fight makes it more expensive to keep this up.
although it is possible for Corp to switch between multiple alt corps it would mean the district would at some point become accessable to another corp at some point rather then at current where a district may never become at risk if the isk supply is large enough |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:07:00 -
[884] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Question :
Still a minimum of 100 clones loss ?
Cause with a 200 stack, what happen if game ends at MCC destruction and not clone depletion ? Does the attacker get any refund or something ? Still 100 minimum, any spare clones would get sold at the 100,000 ISK price, versus the 200,000 ISK price Genolution sells them to you at.
So you can't use the rest to attack the second day. You only sell them half the price ? |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
221
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:10:00 -
[885] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:
It's a bit of a double edged sword. In the long term, once everything's settled, the only way to get into PC if you've not already, is to use a genolution pack. If you only get 100 clones, that's not going to be enough to take on a lot of districts that will already probably be well stocked up to the 300 mark. With 200 you have a much better chance at succeeding. Otherwise we'd be effectively shutting out anyone who doesn't get in at the start but wants to have a go later on.
Your gen-bombing idea would be good to harass distant enemies with but wouldn't really achieve much long term because even if your alt-corp managed to take a district, it's totally isolated and will likely get horrendously counter attacked. It would distract your target for sure and maybe use up some of their resources but the result would be negligible.
Let's not get into supposition on null-sec just yet; we have no idea what's planned for that.
Background info: The preliminary leaked Dust-EVE bonuses were into POS production (days off supercapital cooking times?), PI (low truesec planet booster for isk generation) and a seemingly meaningless POS fuel reduction.
With that in place, if gen-bombing would be allowed in nullsec later on, or if lowsec got a meaningful Dust-EVE mechanic, it would make a lot of sense to shut down remote places to e.g. stall supercapital production. This would be a possible link for EVE alliances to hire Dust mercenaries.
This is why the instant clone bombing from alt corps needs to be looked carefully so, that the mechanic fits EVE. After all, what happens in Dust is relatively meaningless - the rewards for owning planets will come mainly from EVE for those of us who play both games.
Now the mechanic that allows behind the lines work is an enriching one for the EVE link, so there should definitely be one. I'd have it rely on EVE eventually, and I'm sure the genolution pack is just a placeholder as far as nullsec is concerned. Still, it's good to get it right from the get go so that CCP won't need to change it drastically later on. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2051
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:18:00 -
[886] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Take a read through this, it should answer most those questions: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_ConquestI will however try and answer them again here for you. As seen in the Reinforcement timers section (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Reinforcement_Timers): Specifically take a look at the attack scenarios. You seem to be mixing up the launch attack time and the time when attacks actually happen, the reinforcement time. So in attack scenario 01: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Attacker launches an attack at 11:00 on Monday Defending district set as "under attack" Battle happens in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Tuesday For arguments sake lets say the battle ends up being at 12:30. The attackers have from 12:30 until 13:30 to launch another attack on the district. If they choose to do so the battle will happen in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Wednesday. Does that make sense? Yea, that last paragraph is what I was wondering (I've read the wiki multiple times). I sort of changed the terminology to easily distinguish between Setting an Attack (deciding you want to attack a district and waiting the 24 hours) and Launching an Attack (when you're actually doing the fighting itself). The 1-hour exclusivity means you get to Set an Attack, but have to wait those 24 hours again to actually fight the battle--okay I get it. Thanks. How does the Reinforcement timer on the first day work? If I set it for the next full hour after taking my first district, would I get those clones that same day? The reinforcement timer can never go backwards. So RT set for 15:00. It is currently 01:00 on Monday. You change the RT to 02:00. The district is locked until 02:00 on Tuesday and you don't get clones until 02:00 Tuesday. So the first RT depends on the district 1st capture ?
No, they are randomly seeded at launch. |
|
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
167
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:19:00 -
[887] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Take a read through this, it should answer most those questions: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_ConquestI will however try and answer them again here for you. As seen in the Reinforcement timers section (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Reinforcement_Timers): Specifically take a look at the attack scenarios. You seem to be mixing up the launch attack time and the time when attacks actually happen, the reinforcement time. So in attack scenario 01: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Attacker launches an attack at 11:00 on Monday Defending district set as "under attack" Battle happens in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Tuesday For arguments sake lets say the battle ends up being at 12:30. The attackers have from 12:30 until 13:30 to launch another attack on the district. If they choose to do so the battle will happen in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Wednesday. Does that make sense? Yea, that last paragraph is what I was wondering (I've read the wiki multiple times). I sort of changed the terminology to easily distinguish between Setting an Attack (deciding you want to attack a district and waiting the 24 hours) and Launching an Attack (when you're actually doing the fighting itself). The 1-hour exclusivity means you get to Set an Attack, but have to wait those 24 hours again to actually fight the battle--okay I get it. Thanks. How does the Reinforcement timer on the first day work? If I set it for the next full hour after taking my first district, would I get those clones that same day? The reinforcement timer can never go backwards. So RT set for 15:00. It is currently 01:00 on Monday. You change the RT to 02:00. The district is locked until 02:00 on Tuesday and you don't get clones until 02:00 Tuesday.
Good to know, thanks.
And just to clarify, a district keeps producing clones during the Reinforcement timer even if the status is "Under Attack", right (assuming they haven't had their MCC destroyed in an earlier battle)? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2051
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:20:00 -
[888] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Question :
Still a minimum of 100 clones loss ?
Cause with a 200 stack, what happen if game ends at MCC destruction and not clone depletion ? Does the attacker get any refund or something ? Still 100 minimum, any spare clones would get sold at the 100,000 ISK price, versus the 200,000 ISK price Genolution sells them to you at. So you can't use the rest to attack the second day. You only sell them half the price ?
Correct, they get automatically sold. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2051
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:21:00 -
[889] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Take a read through this, it should answer most those questions: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_ConquestI will however try and answer them again here for you. As seen in the Reinforcement timers section (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Reinforcement_Timers): Specifically take a look at the attack scenarios. You seem to be mixing up the launch attack time and the time when attacks actually happen, the reinforcement time. So in attack scenario 01: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Attacker launches an attack at 11:00 on Monday Defending district set as "under attack" Battle happens in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Tuesday For arguments sake lets say the battle ends up being at 12:30. The attackers have from 12:30 until 13:30 to launch another attack on the district. If they choose to do so the battle will happen in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Wednesday. Does that make sense? Yea, that last paragraph is what I was wondering (I've read the wiki multiple times). I sort of changed the terminology to easily distinguish between Setting an Attack (deciding you want to attack a district and waiting the 24 hours) and Launching an Attack (when you're actually doing the fighting itself). The 1-hour exclusivity means you get to Set an Attack, but have to wait those 24 hours again to actually fight the battle--okay I get it. Thanks. How does the Reinforcement timer on the first day work? If I set it for the next full hour after taking my first district, would I get those clones that same day? The reinforcement timer can never go backwards. So RT set for 15:00. It is currently 01:00 on Monday. You change the RT to 02:00. The district is locked until 02:00 on Tuesday and you don't get clones until 02:00 Tuesday. Good to know, thanks. And just to clarify, a district keeps producing clones during the Reinforcement timer even if the status is "Under Attack", right (assuming they haven't had their MCC destroyed in an earlier battle)?
Indeed, as an attacker you will have to fight through the clones produced that reinforcement cycle when you attack.
|
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
221
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:22:00 -
[890] - Quote
Also, with the mechanics currently in place, there will be Bounty Hunter(z) corporations in PC that will be using the genolution mechanic if it goes live as is. They will be hired to shut down competition or just to cause issues to certain unwanted parties. This will be abundant at launch. E.g. I could hire a quality mercenary corporation to genolution bomb some big corporation out of the PC for ***** and giggles: I'd just pay them 100 mill to sweep off the first couple efforts the big corp makes into settling a district.
If you haven't got a top quality team and are hated, your only chance of reaching a defendable clone count is to lock down your district with alt corp play.
This would be boosted by the 200 clone genolution pack, be it good or bad. I personally lean towards mercenary outfits having to prove their worth with low clone count: being mercs should, to me, be a quality game whereas building an empire should be more of a numbers game. |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:23:00 -
[891] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Take a read through this, it should answer most those questions: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_ConquestI will however try and answer them again here for you. As seen in the Reinforcement timers section (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Reinforcement_Timers): Specifically take a look at the attack scenarios. You seem to be mixing up the launch attack time and the time when attacks actually happen, the reinforcement time. So in attack scenario 01: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Attacker launches an attack at 11:00 on Monday Defending district set as "under attack" Battle happens in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Tuesday For arguments sake lets say the battle ends up being at 12:30. The attackers have from 12:30 until 13:30 to launch another attack on the district. If they choose to do so the battle will happen in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Wednesday. Does that make sense? Yea, that last paragraph is what I was wondering (I've read the wiki multiple times). I sort of changed the terminology to easily distinguish between Setting an Attack (deciding you want to attack a district and waiting the 24 hours) and Launching an Attack (when you're actually doing the fighting itself). The 1-hour exclusivity means you get to Set an Attack, but have to wait those 24 hours again to actually fight the battle--okay I get it. Thanks. How does the Reinforcement timer on the first day work? If I set it for the next full hour after taking my first district, would I get those clones that same day? The reinforcement timer can never go backwards. So RT set for 15:00. It is currently 01:00 on Monday. You change the RT to 02:00. The district is locked until 02:00 on Tuesday and you don't get clones until 02:00 Tuesday. Good to know, thanks. And just to clarify, a district keeps producing clones during the Reinforcement timer even if the status is "Under Attack", right (assuming they haven't had their MCC destroyed in an earlier battle)?
No. If you're under attack you produce no clones unless you defend successfully. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:24:00 -
[892] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Take a read through this, it should answer most those questions: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_ConquestI will however try and answer them again here for you. As seen in the Reinforcement timers section (http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Reinforcement_Timers): Specifically take a look at the attack scenarios. You seem to be mixing up the launch attack time and the time when attacks actually happen, the reinforcement time. So in attack scenario 01: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Attacker launches an attack at 11:00 on Monday Defending district set as "under attack" Battle happens in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Tuesday For arguments sake lets say the battle ends up being at 12:30. The attackers have from 12:30 until 13:30 to launch another attack on the district. If they choose to do so the battle will happen in the 12:00 - 13:00 window on Wednesday. Does that make sense? Yea, that last paragraph is what I was wondering (I've read the wiki multiple times). I sort of changed the terminology to easily distinguish between Setting an Attack (deciding you want to attack a district and waiting the 24 hours) and Launching an Attack (when you're actually doing the fighting itself). The 1-hour exclusivity means you get to Set an Attack, but have to wait those 24 hours again to actually fight the battle--okay I get it. Thanks. How does the Reinforcement timer on the first day work? If I set it for the next full hour after taking my first district, would I get those clones that same day? The reinforcement timer can never go backwards. So RT set for 15:00. It is currently 01:00 on Monday. You change the RT to 02:00. The district is locked until 02:00 on Tuesday and you don't get clones until 02:00 Tuesday. Good to know, thanks. And just to clarify, a district keeps producing clones during the Reinforcement timer even if the status is "Under Attack", right (assuming they haven't had their MCC destroyed in an earlier battle)? Indeed, as an attacker you will have to fight through the clones produced that reinforcement cycle when you attack.
Wait, what? I thought you only produce clones if you win? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:27:00 -
[893] - Quote
Yosef Autaal wrote:The one problem I have with this purchasing clone system is by using alt corps this is a quick and easy way for a corp to purchase clones of the npc market although at a hefty price of 1mil a pop so by using an alt corp and consitantly attacking a district until corp supplies are full is going to be a common practice when a corp takes over a district/
while expensive a large corp will not care. For example corp A captures district B (either at beginning first come first serve or by depleting the opponents clone count). corp A has a alt corp C set up and ready soon as the system becomes unlocked they attack with corp C after 24hours and a battle they instantly win the stock of the system has gone up by 40-60 from district and 40 from the battle if they have not reached cap yet they attack again for another 40mil and another 24hours of invun means after the auto win battle corp A now has a district that is fully supplied in clones without the need of any moving of clones around districts,
so using this system they can keep all districts at max clones never having move around clones causing districts to have less then max apart from when a district attacks.
though saying all this i understand this will cost corp A a lot isk to maintain (which large corps will have either way) and apart from making it more difficult for a corp to attack a district it has lost agaisnt multiple times one idea could be as every battle lost causes clone attrition for example
Corp B attacks corp A with 200 clones after first attack corp B was defeated, in the hour exclusive period they select to battle again with 200 clones in this next battle due to the first loss the clones suffer attrition and 10% are lost before the battle starts meaning clone count for next battle is 180
if corp B is defeated again and choose to attack in the exclusive period again the attrition is 20% (two consecutive losses) resulting in only 160 out of 200 clones availble for battle (SI upgrades could be used to reduce attrition amount)
With this system a corp will have a limit to many losses they can suffer before the match is unable to take part (after 5 consecutive losses corp B is no longer able to supply the 100 clone minumum count) meaning corps have to carefully decide if they want to keep pushing an attack even though they are loosing or retreat for a time and attack once penalty is lifted (if they attack outside of the exclusive timezone)
A single win could either reduce the attrition or cancel it all together. this would stop Corp A from using an alt corp to keep there district safe using exclusive timer as there is a limit to how many battles can be thought this way and with reduced clones earned from each fight makes it more expensive to keep this up.
although it is possible for Corp to switch between multiple alt corps it would mean the district would at some point become accessable to another corp at some point rather then at current where a district may never become at risk if the isk supply is large enough
Your whole post is pretty much covered in a less cluttered way here |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
438
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:29:00 -
[894] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Wait, what? I thought you only produce clones if you win? The district is still in the "online" state when being attacked and thus still generating clones. The district only goes into "offline" state after a loss, which lasts until after the next reinforcement window.
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2051
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:33:00 -
[895] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Wait, what? I thought you only produce clones if you win?
The next day. |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:34:00 -
[896] - Quote
Ah okay, yeah that makes sense - read it wrong there. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:36:00 -
[897] - Quote
Right, so assuming the 200 clone pack goes ahead - how many of you guys planning to play PC would go for 200 to secure one district or 100 to grab 2 districts but leave them vulnerable?
(also assuming the self-locking loophole is tied off) |
Soozu
5o1st
24
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:37:00 -
[898] - Quote
Ok, so the 200 clone count makes it more expensive to attempt to lock down your district with alt corps. If this is the reasoning behind it then I'm happy. Perhaps there are other ways to reduce the alt corp abuse.
Limiting: How often you can switch corps How often you can create a corp How often an individual merc can unsuccessfully attack a district.
Just thinking out loud.
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:45:00 -
[899] - Quote
So, another question : We will be able to choose a district for his localisation, his default SI and a default RT ?
Or the RT will be randomly seeded after the capture ?
And I'll ask my last question in this post : after that, we'll be able to change the RT 1 hour by 1 hour every day, so the district is lock during the operation that could take 1 day to 23 ? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
301
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:45:00 -
[900] - Quote
Soozu wrote:
Ok, so the 200 clone count makes it more expensive to attempt to lock down your district with alt corps. If this is the reasoning behind it then I'm happy. Perhaps there are other ways to reduce the alt corp abuse.
Limiting: How often you can switch corps How often you can create a corp How often an individual merc can unsuccessfully attack a district.
Just thinking out loud.
I can't see any of them stopping this exploit because you could just have alts creating and controlling the sub-corps.
And what if it is a legitimate continuous attack from an external corp? You could really really want to take that district but keep failing over and over but keep trying (unlikely but could happen). |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
302
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:47:00 -
[901] - Quote
I'd like to know what sort of information we'll be able to see on districts before attacking: e.g. current owner? current clone count? current SI? |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
167
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:48:00 -
[902] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:So, another question : We will be able to choose a district for his localisation, his default SI and a default RT ?
Or the RT will be randomly seeded after the capture ?
I'd like to know this as well. I know you said earlier that we'd get to see who owns it and how many clones they have, but have you guys decided what the full amount of information shown is going to be?
EDIT: It seems we'll be able to check the Reinforcement timer before we take a district.
Quote:And I'll ask my last question in this post : after that, we'll be able to change the RT 1 hour by 1 hour every day, so the district is lock during the operation that could take 1 day to 23 ?
Locking it just means you can't attack from it or reinforce it from your other districts, it doesn't mean people can't attack you. You'd only be pushing your Reinforcement window back further and further for no real reason, while at the same time preventing yourself from attacking anyone, unless I don't understand what you're saying. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
302
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:50:00 -
[903] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Soozu wrote:
Ok, so the 200 clone count makes it more expensive to attempt to lock down your district with alt corps. If this is the reasoning behind it then I'm happy. Perhaps there are other ways to reduce the alt corp abuse.
Limiting: How often you can switch corps How often you can create a corp How often an individual merc can unsuccessfully attack a district.
Just thinking out loud.
I can't see any of them stopping this exploit because you could just have alts creating and controlling the sub-corps. And what if it is a legitimate continuous attack from an external corp? You could really really want to take that district but keep failing over and over but keep trying (unlikely but could happen).
I'm thinking that monitoring would be the only way to prevent it - have a flag raised to CCP every time a district is attacked and the attacker doesn't get any WP or kills. It should be made clear to everyone that this is a known exploit and will be punished in some way. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2054
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:51:00 -
[904] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:Background info: The preliminary leaked Dust-EVE bonuses were into POS production (days off supercapital cooking times?), PI (low truesec planet booster for isk generation) and a seemingly meaningless POS fuel reduction.
With that in place, if gen-bombing would be allowed in nullsec later on, or if lowsec got a meaningful Dust-EVE mechanic, it would make a lot of sense to shut down remote places to e.g. stall supercapital production. This would be a possible link for EVE alliances to hire Dust mercenaries.
This is why the instant clone bombing from alt corps needs to be looked carefully so, that the mechanic fits EVE. After all, what happens in Dust is relatively meaningless - the rewards for owning planets will come mainly from EVE for those of us who play both games.
Now the mechanic that allows behind the lines work is an enriching one for the EVE link, so there should definitely be one. I'd have it rely on EVE eventually, and I'm sure the genolution pack is just a placeholder as far as nullsec is concerned. Still, it's good to get it right from the get go so that CCP won't need to change it drastically later on.
Um, not sure where this "leaked" information comes from, but our internal documents don't even list the bonuses because not only have we not done them yet we don't know for sure what they are. So, OK.
While I can't promise anything, our hope is that all of this NPC stuff, the moving and selling of clones and resources, is not done by NPC in null sec but by players. We shall see though how that ends up actually hell maybe we remove NPC interaction from low sec as well. |
|
Soozu
5o1st
26
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:52:00 -
[905] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Soozu wrote:
Ok, so the 200 clone count makes it more expensive to attempt to lock down your district with alt corps. If this is the reasoning behind it then I'm happy. Perhaps there are other ways to reduce the alt corp abuse.
Limiting: How often you can switch corps How often you can create a corp How often an individual merc can unsuccessfully attack a district.
Just thinking out loud.
I can't see any of them stopping this exploit because you could just have alts creating and controlling the sub-corps. And what if it is a legitimate continuous attack from an external corp? You could really really want to take that district but keep failing over and over but keep trying (unlikely but could happen).
Bah, I never was a fan of having alt toons anyway feel free to do away with them CCP. Just give us a heads up, |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2057
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:53:00 -
[906] - Quote
Kristoff Atruin wrote:Here's a problem with the 200 clone pack - it doesn't really allow you to take a district that is well defended (nor should it). Say you attack a district with 300 clones in it. You're not going to lose all 200 in a single battle, but you could very well lose a good portion of them. In the meantime if one of your attacks is unsuccessful the defender reinforces from a nearby district or gets a round of production. You don't get any reinforcement at all. A 100 clone pack forces you to look for the low hanging fruit.
You can do that with the 200 pack as well, but I think it would draw a lot of new players into overreaching. Not necessarily a bad thing. On the other hand, having 200 clones could mean you're more likely to hold on to what you take. It would allow you to lose your first battle and still have a second chance to keep your territory. It would also allow larger entities to expand more quickly. Actually, the 200 clone pack gives you MORE options. Even if you're losing and obviously can't turn the battle around, you can push for a pyrrhic victory, forcing the enemy team to sacrifice a LOT more clones than they're getting back (40 - 60 from production if they win, plus 20% of your survivors).
Also, I'm under the impression that the one hour attack option is valid even after a loss, so you could keep the district locked into that "under attack" state, which I'm pretty sure means they can't reinforce from another district.
If the defenders are losing enough clones in an otherwise winning battle, they might have a tough decision between pulling out to avoid too many losses, but sacrificing the battle, or staying and winning, but having the district weakened enough to be vulnerable against a follow-up attack.
While still retaining several advantages on the defenders' side, a 200 clone pack makes attacking a much more viable strategy.
Also, there's a bigger chance that you'll push the enemy clone count low enough that when you take over the district, you'll be in a strong enough position to actually stand a chance of holding onto it. |
Soozu
5o1st
26
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:55:00 -
[907] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:I'd like to know what sort of information we'll be able to see on districts before attacking: e.g. current owner? current clone count? current SI?
And map? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2054
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:55:00 -
[908] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:I'd like to know what sort of information we'll be able to see on districts before attacking: e.g. current owner? current clone count? current SI?
All of it. You don't know who is attacking a district though unless you are one of the two participating corporations. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2054
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:56:00 -
[909] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Also, I'm under the impression that the one hour attack option is valid even after a loss, so you could keep the district locked into that "under attack" state, which I'm pretty sure means they can't reinforce from another district.
This is indeed correct. |
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:56:00 -
[910] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:So, another question : We will be able to choose a district for his localisation, his default SI and a default RT ?
Or the RT will be randomly seeded after the capture ? I'd like to know this as well. I know you said earlier that we'd get to see who owns it and how many clones they have, but have you guys decided what the full amount of information shown is going to be? EDIT: It seems we'll be able to check the Reinforcement timer before we take a district.
The question is for empty districts... |
|
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
167
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 14:59:00 -
[911] - Quote
It's unclear to me whether or not we will be able to have more than one SI building in the same district. I saw somewhere that the main building will be the fighting area for battles, which seems to indicate we'll only get to have one. But if that's the case, can we sell/do we get any ISK for selling off the SI already seeded? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
302
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:00:00 -
[912] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:It's unclear to me whether or not we will be able to have more than one SI building in the same district. I saw somewhere that the main building will be the fighting area for battles, which seems to indicate we'll only get to have one. But if that's the case, can we sell/do we get any ISK for selling off the SI already seeded?
One SI per district. 100M isk to replace the seeded one. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
167
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:01:00 -
[913] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:So, another question : We will be able to choose a district for his localisation, his default SI and a default RT ?
Or the RT will be randomly seeded after the capture ? I'd like to know this as well. I know you said earlier that we'd get to see who owns it and how many clones they have, but have you guys decided what the full amount of information shown is going to be? EDIT: It seems we'll be able to check the Reinforcement timer before we take a district. The question is for empty districts...
Then who owns it and clones would just be blank
Also, he said just a few pages ago that Reinforcement timers are seeded randomly, I assume that means before you take a district. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2057
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:01:00 -
[914] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:So, another question : We will be able to choose a district for his localisation, his default SI and a default RT ?
Or the RT will be randomly seeded after the capture ? I'd like to know this as well. I know you said earlier that we'd get to see who owns it and how many clones they have, but have you guys decided what the full amount of information shown is going to be? EDIT: It seems we'll be able to check the Reinforcement timer before we take a district. The question is for empty districts...
At launch all the new districts will get a randomly seeded with reinforcement timers and SI. If a district is abandoned it will keep the SI and RT it had, they will not change just because it was abandoned. |
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:08:00 -
[915] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:So, another question : We will be able to choose a district for his localisation, his default SI and a default RT ?
Or the RT will be randomly seeded after the capture ? I'd like to know this as well. I know you said earlier that we'd get to see who owns it and how many clones they have, but have you guys decided what the full amount of information shown is going to be? EDIT: It seems we'll be able to check the Reinforcement timer before we take a district. The question is for empty districts... At launch all the new districts will get a randomly seeded with reinforcement timers and SI. If a district is abandoned it will keep the SI and RT it had, they will not change just because it was abandoned.
Ok, so here we can see all the problem with multiple corp thing.
The main and a second one ? Yes, but it is a long term solution. What I was thinking here was for short term, and I think it won't be possible with all thoose parameters now ... |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
168
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:11:00 -
[916] - Quote
I guess I'll just keep asking questions.
I see that sending reinforcements to your districts Locks it, but it doesn't prevent any clones from being produced does it?
Like if I send Reinforcements at 01:00 and the Reinforcement timer is set to 02:00, I'll still get all those clones the district would normally produce at 02:00 right? Also, the clones I'm using to reinforce arrive immediately, right? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
302
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:19:00 -
[917] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:I guess I'll just keep asking questions.
I see that sending reinforcements to your districts Locks it, but it doesn't prevent any clones from being produced does it?
Like if I send Reinforcements at 01:00 and the Reinforcement timer is set to 02:00, I'll still get all those clones the district would normally produce at 02:00 right? Also, the clones I'm using to reinforce arrive immediately, right?
I think it all happens at the next RT. I don't know what difference this would make though, apart from the stats changing when someone checks on your districts. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
171
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:23:00 -
[918] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:I guess I'll just keep asking questions.
I see that sending reinforcements to your districts Locks it, but it doesn't prevent any clones from being produced does it?
Like if I send Reinforcements at 01:00 and the Reinforcement timer is set to 02:00, I'll still get all those clones the district would normally produce at 02:00 right? Also, the clones I'm using to reinforce arrive immediately, right? I think it all happens at the next RT. I don't know what difference this would make though, apart from the stats changing when someone checks on your districts.
Yea it's more of a "I'd like the information just to have it, in case I think of something", but the changing of stats might have its uses. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2063
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:25:00 -
[919] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:I guess I'll just keep asking questions.
I see that sending reinforcements to your districts Locks it, but it doesn't prevent any clones from being produced does it?
Like if I send Reinforcements at 01:00 and the Reinforcement timer is set to 02:00, I'll still get all those clones the district would normally produce at 02:00 right? Also, the clones I'm using to reinforce arrive immediately, right?
Locking the district does not put it offline so you will still get the clones it would generate. The only thing that offlines a district is losing a battle.
They show as having arrived right away. |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
302
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:27:00 -
[920] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Django Quik wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:I guess I'll just keep asking questions.
I see that sending reinforcements to your districts Locks it, but it doesn't prevent any clones from being produced does it?
Like if I send Reinforcements at 01:00 and the Reinforcement timer is set to 02:00, I'll still get all those clones the district would normally produce at 02:00 right? Also, the clones I'm using to reinforce arrive immediately, right? I think it all happens at the next RT. I don't know what difference this would make though, apart from the stats changing when someone checks on your districts. Yea it's more of a "I'd like the information just to have it, in case I think of something", but the changing of stats might have its uses.
It'd be good to get confirmation on this actually. If your reinforcements did arrive immediately, you could move them multiple times in 24 hours. I'm honestly not sure if this would ever be of use or a problem at all but it is a point nonetheless.
And also to answer your first question from that post - locked or unlocked doesn't affect production, only online/offline status.
Edit - CCP Fox Four answered as I typed! Wiley fox that one ;) |
|
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
171
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:32:00 -
[921] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:Django Quik wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:I guess I'll just keep asking questions.
I see that sending reinforcements to your districts Locks it, but it doesn't prevent any clones from being produced does it?
Like if I send Reinforcements at 01:00 and the Reinforcement timer is set to 02:00, I'll still get all those clones the district would normally produce at 02:00 right? Also, the clones I'm using to reinforce arrive immediately, right? I think it all happens at the next RT. I don't know what difference this would make though, apart from the stats changing when someone checks on your districts. Yea it's more of a "I'd like the information just to have it, in case I think of something", but the changing of stats might have its uses. It'd be good to get confirmation on this actually. If your reinforcements did arrive immediately, you could move them multiple times in 24 hours. I'm honestly not sure if this would ever be of use or a problem at all but it is a point nonetheless. And also to answer your first question from that post - locked or unlocked doesn't affect production, only online/offline status. Edit - CCP Fox Four answered as I typed! Wiley fox that one ;)
You can't move them multiple times, I don't think. At least not from the district they move to, because Locking a district is defined by "Not able to have actions applied to it but can be attacked by others."
In other words, you couldn't move 200 clones from District A to District B and then 100 from District B to District C all within 24 hours, I don't think. Though you could move 100 from District A to District B and 100 from District A to District C all within the 24 hours since the district that sends the clones doesn't lock, only the one that receives them (link) |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2057
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:36:00 -
[922] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:You can't move them multiple times, I don't think. At least not from the district they move to, because Locking a district is defined by "Not able to have actions applied to it but can be attacked by others." In other words, you couldn't move 200 clones from District A to District B and then 100 from District B to District C in 24 hours, I don't think. Though you could move 100 from District A to District B and 100 from District A to District C all within the 24 hours since the district that sends the clones doesn't lock, only the one that receives them ( link) If your RT is set at, for example, 12:00, you could move clones to the district at 11:00, then do so again at 13:00. That's 2 hours apart. Not within the same 24-hour RT cycle, but still well within 24 hours.
The only problem is if any of the districts involved are attacked during that time, because the "under attack" state blocks them from reinforcing or being reinforced. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
171
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:38:00 -
[923] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:You can't move them multiple times, I don't think. At least not from the district they move to, because Locking a district is defined by "Not able to have actions applied to it but can be attacked by others." In other words, you couldn't move 200 clones from District A to District B and then 100 from District B to District C in 24 hours, I don't think. Though you could move 100 from District A to District B and 100 from District A to District C all within the 24 hours since the district that sends the clones doesn't lock, only the one that receives them ( link) If your RT is set at, for example, 12:00, you could move clones to the district at 11:00, then do so again at 13:00. That's 2 hours apart. Not within the same 24-hour RT cycle, but still well within 24 hours. The only problem is if any of the districts involved are attacked during that time, because the "under attack" state blocks them from reinforcing or being reinforced.
Oh that's interesting, so the Lock timer is directly related to the Reinforcement timer? I thought it was in Lock status for 24 hours regardless of when you do something that Locks it. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
302
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:40:00 -
[924] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:You can't move them multiple times, I don't think. At least not from the district they move to, because Locking a district is defined by "Not able to have actions applied to it but can be attacked by others." In other words, you couldn't move 200 clones from District A to District B and then 100 from District B to District C all within 24 hours, I don't think. Though you could move 100 from District A to District B and 100 from District A to District C all within the 24 hours since the district that sends the clones doesn't lock, only the one that receives them ( link)
Hmm, okay, so there's no way to cancel a move or move clones back or elsewhere within 24 hours. So if had 2 districts and you moved a bunch of clones from A to B, then A you realise you moved too many and left yourself vulnerable, you can't move some back to fix your error.
Lore wise this seems a little contradictory to be honest. You can move from A to B instantly but once at B you have to wait to move again.
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
302
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:42:00 -
[925] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:You can't move them multiple times, I don't think. At least not from the district they move to, because Locking a district is defined by "Not able to have actions applied to it but can be attacked by others." In other words, you couldn't move 200 clones from District A to District B and then 100 from District B to District C in 24 hours, I don't think. Though you could move 100 from District A to District B and 100 from District A to District C all within the 24 hours since the district that sends the clones doesn't lock, only the one that receives them ( link) If your RT is set at, for example, 12:00, you could move clones to the district at 11:00, then do so again at 13:00. That's 2 hours apart. Not within the same 24-hour RT cycle, but still well within 24 hours. The only problem is if any of the districts involved are attacked during that time, because the "under attack" state blocks them from reinforcing or being reinforced. Oh that's interesting, so the Lock timer is directly related to the Reinforcement timer? I thought it was in Lock status for 24 hours regardless of when you do something that Locks it.
I was under the impression that it locks until the RT at least 24 hours later. No? |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2058
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:45:00 -
[926] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:You can't move them multiple times, I don't think. At least not from the district they move to, because Locking a district is defined by "Not able to have actions applied to it but can be attacked by others." In other words, you couldn't move 200 clones from District A to District B and then 100 from District B to District C in 24 hours, I don't think. Though you could move 100 from District A to District B and 100 from District A to District C all within the 24 hours since the district that sends the clones doesn't lock, only the one that receives them ( link) If your RT is set at, for example, 12:00, you could move clones to the district at 11:00, then do so again at 13:00. That's 2 hours apart. Not within the same 24-hour RT cycle, but still well within 24 hours. The only problem is if any of the districts involved are attacked during that time, because the "under attack" state blocks them from reinforcing or being reinforced. Oh that's interesting, so the Lock timer is directly related to the Reinforcement timer? I thought it was in Lock status for 24 hours regardless of when you do something that Locks it. Sorry, I missed a line. I was SO wrong.
MINIMUM 24 hours, AND it unlocks in the reinforcement window. So if you had your RT set to that 12:00 time I specified, and reinforced it at 13:00, you'd end up waiting through 24 hours, just past your next RT, then have another 23 hours (total of 47) before the district unlocks. Ouch. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
171
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:46:00 -
[927] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:You can't move them multiple times, I don't think. At least not from the district they move to, because Locking a district is defined by "Not able to have actions applied to it but can be attacked by others." In other words, you couldn't move 200 clones from District A to District B and then 100 from District B to District C in 24 hours, I don't think. Though you could move 100 from District A to District B and 100 from District A to District C all within the 24 hours since the district that sends the clones doesn't lock, only the one that receives them ( link) If your RT is set at, for example, 12:00, you could move clones to the district at 11:00, then do so again at 13:00. That's 2 hours apart. Not within the same 24-hour RT cycle, but still well within 24 hours. The only problem is if any of the districts involved are attacked during that time, because the "under attack" state blocks them from reinforcing or being reinforced. Oh that's interesting, so the Lock timer is directly related to the Reinforcement timer? I thought it was in Lock status for 24 hours regardless of when you do something that Locks it. I was under the impression that it locks until the RT at least 24 hours later. No?
I'm not sure why everyone thinks the RT is the deciding factor in everything. All I take away from the RT is:
That's when you get your produced clones That's when you let people attack your district
I was never under the impression doing stuff that locks the district is somehow contingent upon when the RT is set for.
Garrett Blacknova wrote: Sorry, I missed a line. I was SO wrong.
MINIMUM 24 hours, AND it unlocks in the reinforcement window. So if you had your RT set to that 12:00 time I specified, and reinforced it at 13:00, you'd end up waiting through 24 hours, just past your next RT, then have another 23 hours (total of 47) before the district unlocks. Ouch.
Is that in the wiki? Can you link where you found that? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2064
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:49:00 -
[928] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:You can't move them multiple times, I don't think. At least not from the district they move to, because Locking a district is defined by "Not able to have actions applied to it but can be attacked by others." In other words, you couldn't move 200 clones from District A to District B and then 100 from District B to District C in 24 hours, I don't think. Though you could move 100 from District A to District B and 100 from District A to District C all within the 24 hours since the district that sends the clones doesn't lock, only the one that receives them ( link) If your RT is set at, for example, 12:00, you could move clones to the district at 11:00, then do so again at 13:00. That's 2 hours apart. Not within the same 24-hour RT cycle, but still well within 24 hours. The only problem is if any of the districts involved are attacked during that time, because the "under attack" state blocks them from reinforcing or being reinforced.
See this link: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Reinforcement_Timers
Change Surface Infrastructure Scenario 01:
Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Corporation changes SI at 11:00 on Monday District state changed to locked District unlocks at 12:00 on Tuesday
Change Surface Infrastructure Scenario 02:
Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Corporation changes SI at 14:00 on Monday District state changed to locked District unlocks at 12:00 on Wednesday |
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2058
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:50:00 -
[929] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:You can't move them multiple times, I don't think. At least not from the district they move to, because Locking a district is defined by "Not able to have actions applied to it but can be attacked by others." In other words, you couldn't move 200 clones from District A to District B and then 100 from District B to District C all within 24 hours, I don't think. Though you could move 100 from District A to District B and 100 from District A to District C all within the 24 hours since the district that sends the clones doesn't lock, only the one that receives them ( link) Hmm, okay, so there's no way to cancel a move or move clones back or elsewhere within 24 hours. So if had 2 districts and you moved a bunch of clones from A to B, then A you realise you moved too many and left yourself vulnerable, you can't move some back to fix your error. Lore wise this seems a little contradictory to be honest. You can move from A to B instantly but once at B you have to wait to move again. Lore-wise, it makes sense that the travel time is short enough that they're definitely going to show up during the next reinforcement window, and because of that, travel time is negligible. Also, it's possible to handwave with the explanation that preparations for transport will be known about in advance, hence why the starmap updates as if the transport happens instantly.
It also makes sense that when transported, the clones need to be transferred to on-site storage facilities, thus necessitating a delay before they can be repackaged to be shipped elsewhere. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
302
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:51:00 -
[930] - Quote
Ah no, we don't think the RT is a big deciding factor in everything, it's just an interesting thing to discuss around. For instance, if you do as Garrett just said and moved some clones at the wrong time, they (and the clones already at the receiving district) get tied up for 47 hours! That's a pretty significant length of time. |
|
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
172
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:52:00 -
[931] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:You can't move them multiple times, I don't think. At least not from the district they move to, because Locking a district is defined by "Not able to have actions applied to it but can be attacked by others." In other words, you couldn't move 200 clones from District A to District B and then 100 from District B to District C in 24 hours, I don't think. Though you could move 100 from District A to District B and 100 from District A to District C all within the 24 hours since the district that sends the clones doesn't lock, only the one that receives them ( link) If your RT is set at, for example, 12:00, you could move clones to the district at 11:00, then do so again at 13:00. That's 2 hours apart. Not within the same 24-hour RT cycle, but still well within 24 hours. The only problem is if any of the districts involved are attacked during that time, because the "under attack" state blocks them from reinforcing or being reinforced. See this link: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Reinforcement_TimersChange Surface Infrastructure Scenario 01: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Corporation changes SI at 11:00 on Monday District state changed to locked District unlocks at 12:00 on Tuesday Change Surface Infrastructure Scenario 02: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Corporation changes SI at 14:00 on Monday District state changed to locked District unlocks at 12:00 on Wednesday
That's SI though, are we to assume clone reinforcements work the same way?
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
302
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:53:00 -
[932] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote: Lore-wise, it makes sense that the travel time is short enough that they're definitely going to show up during the next reinforcement window, and because of that, travel time is negligible. Also, it's possible to handwave with the explanation that preparations for transport will be known about in advance, hence why the starmap updates as if the transport happens instantly.
It also makes sense that when transported, the clones need to be transferred to on-site storage facilities, thus necessitating a delay before they can be repackaged to be shipped elsewhere.
Okay, good reasoning there.
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2064
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 15:59:00 -
[933] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:You can't move them multiple times, I don't think. At least not from the district they move to, because Locking a district is defined by "Not able to have actions applied to it but can be attacked by others." In other words, you couldn't move 200 clones from District A to District B and then 100 from District B to District C in 24 hours, I don't think. Though you could move 100 from District A to District B and 100 from District A to District C all within the 24 hours since the district that sends the clones doesn't lock, only the one that receives them ( link) If your RT is set at, for example, 12:00, you could move clones to the district at 11:00, then do so again at 13:00. That's 2 hours apart. Not within the same 24-hour RT cycle, but still well within 24 hours. The only problem is if any of the districts involved are attacked during that time, because the "under attack" state blocks them from reinforcing or being reinforced. See this link: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Reinforcement_TimersChange Surface Infrastructure Scenario 01: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Corporation changes SI at 11:00 on Monday District state changed to locked District unlocks at 12:00 on Tuesday Change Surface Infrastructure Scenario 02: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Corporation changes SI at 14:00 on Monday District state changed to locked District unlocks at 12:00 on Wednesday That's SI though, are we to assume clone reinforcements work the same way?
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#District_States
The locking and unlocking of districts works the same yes. |
|
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
172
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 16:02:00 -
[934] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:You can't move them multiple times, I don't think. At least not from the district they move to, because Locking a district is defined by "Not able to have actions applied to it but can be attacked by others." In other words, you couldn't move 200 clones from District A to District B and then 100 from District B to District C in 24 hours, I don't think. Though you could move 100 from District A to District B and 100 from District A to District C all within the 24 hours since the district that sends the clones doesn't lock, only the one that receives them ( link) If your RT is set at, for example, 12:00, you could move clones to the district at 11:00, then do so again at 13:00. That's 2 hours apart. Not within the same 24-hour RT cycle, but still well within 24 hours. The only problem is if any of the districts involved are attacked during that time, because the "under attack" state blocks them from reinforcing or being reinforced. See this link: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Reinforcement_TimersChange Surface Infrastructure Scenario 01: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Corporation changes SI at 11:00 on Monday District state changed to locked District unlocks at 12:00 on Tuesday Change Surface Infrastructure Scenario 02: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Corporation changes SI at 14:00 on Monday District state changed to locked District unlocks at 12:00 on Wednesday That's SI though, are we to assume clone reinforcements work the same way? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#District_StatesThe locking and unlocking of districts works the same yes.
Yea, I was just going to edit my post because I saw that and the one line under RT that I must have missed earlier "Any action that causes a district to be locked will cause said district to be locked following these rules for length of time."
Anyway, thanks for all the answers, I'm off for a while. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2058
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 16:04:00 -
[935] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:See this link: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Reinforcement_TimersChange Surface Infrastructure Scenario 01: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Corporation changes SI at 11:00 on Monday District state changed to locked District unlocks at 12:00 on Tuesday Change Surface Infrastructure Scenario 02: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Corporation changes SI at 14:00 on Monday District state changed to locked District unlocks at 12:00 on Wednesday As mentioned in my post a couple above yours, I got it wrong in the post you quoted (although this answers the question posed by the post immediately before mine).
But it also brings up another question I'm curious about.
What happens with reinforcements or other actions that occur DURING the RT window?
With that 12:00 to 13:00 window, when would a district unlock if you shipped clones to it at 12:30? Would it unlock in the middle of the RT the following day, or do unlocks like this only happen at the beginning of the RT? |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1210
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 16:14:00 -
[936] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:I want to open this up for discussion, we are currently thinking of increasing the clone starter pack to 200 clones. This also means an increase from 20 million to 40 million ISK in cost.
There are a few reasons for this, but before I go into that I want to hear your opinions and thoughts without influencing them.
Sounds good. Makes first district more populated. Even allows for quick rush on an empty district. May avoid a mass split of big corporations. But may make splitting much more interesting.
I'll have to think of it after swallowing the past pages of this thread |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2064
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 16:23:00 -
[937] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:See this link: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Reinforcement_TimersChange Surface Infrastructure Scenario 01: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Corporation changes SI at 11:00 on Monday District state changed to locked District unlocks at 12:00 on Tuesday Change Surface Infrastructure Scenario 02: Reinforcement timer set to 12:00 - 13:00 Corporation changes SI at 14:00 on Monday District state changed to locked District unlocks at 12:00 on Wednesday As mentioned in my post a couple above yours, I got it wrong in the post you quoted (although this answers the question posed immediately after my post). But it also brings up another question I'm curious about. What happens with reinforcements or other actions that occur DURING the RT window? With that 12:00 to 13:00 window, when would a district unlock if you shipped clones to it at 12:30? Would it unlock in the middle of the RT the following day, or do unlocks like this only happen at the beginning of the RT?
When considering the minimum of 24 hours we look specifically at the beginning of the selected RT window. So if it is 12:00 - 13:00 we check against 12:00.
|
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:02:00 -
[938] - Quote
Is this scenario possible ?
Day 1 :
200 stack on a district. Move 100 clones to the district next to the first one build a SI on each They are both lock
--> 2 districts on day 1 ? Cause attack an empty district is an imediate capture... |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2059
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:09:00 -
[939] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Is this scenario possible ?
Day 1 :
200 stack on a district. Move 100 clones to the district next to the first one build a SI on each They are both lock
--> 2 districts on day 1 ? Cause attack an empty district is an imediate capture... From the info we have, while not practical, it looks like this would be not only possible, but possibly easier and cheaper than you're making it sound. Districts all start with randomly-seeded SIs built on-site. You pay to CHANGE the SI, not to build it from empty. If there are a couple of unclaimed districts on a planet yu want, it sounds like you'll be able to do this pretty easily.
But if anyone without a district sees those districts with only 100 clones each when they sign in on day 2, I think their first response will be "Easy target" followed by dropping their 200 clones in so they can afford to run at almost 1:2 K/D average and still come out on top.
EDIT: In response to the above edit, the RTs are also randomly seeded, if you get really lucky, it might be an option to have these handed to you on a silver platter as well... |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2066
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:10:00 -
[940] - Quote
OK, so BLARGITY!
Now that we have that out of the way lets look at the state of things and where we are going to go with this.
Actually before I go on with this lets be clear, these changes have not been made yet, we are posting them here to have a discussion.
There has been a LOT of really good discussion in this thread and elsewhere about the Planetary Conquest gameplay feature. We cannot thank you enough for this. The feedback and discussion has been so helpful. Simply talking about this has helped us fix defects that would have slipped through the cracks and helped us make changes to provide a better experience for you guys when this goes live.
Of all the discussion some of the hottest topics have been the talk of "ringer corps" or using alts in alt corps to take districts on day one, the economics of playing this gameplay, and winning districts through "zerging" or just by having more numbers but less skill winning the game.
Based on all the discussion we are looking at making these changes to some of the numbers and would love to get your feedback on it. We are not set on any of this, we are still doing calculations (need to try and close exploits), but I wanted to get your feedback ASAP.
So without further rambling, NUMBERS AND STUFF!
Genolution clone package We are looking at changing the number of clones offered by Genolution in its package from 100 to 200. This would also mean an increase in price from 20M ISK to 40M ISK.
Our view on the clone packages is that they should be something used to break into the game but not something that should be used for everyday battles. While their very existence means people will be able to use them, we want to discourage it from being used for things like district locking and such.
While ISK is never a good blocker, *cough* Titans *cough*, our objective here is looking further down the road. For launch this should hopefully mean less alt corporations trying to take districts or using clone packages from Genolution to speed up the filling of a district. More long term we also hope it means a bit less harassment through them.
Clone generation rate An increase in base clone generation rate from 40 to 100 and a production facility bonused production rate of 150 instead of 60.
First this is because we already think this needs to be more profitable, but by increasing the clone generation rate instead of the clone value it means we put more clones into the system for you guys to fight with. More fights = more good times.
On top of the more money this helps counter the large organizations picking on the small organization and using numbers instead of skill to win. By giving the owners of a district more clones so long as they are able to win more battles than they lose they should be able to hold the district. The idea is that you should own a district because of skill, not numbers, or at least not just numbers.
Minimum clone loss Increased to 150 from 100.
We are only slightly increasing this and we are doing so for two reasons, it means the winners of a battle get slightly more ISK and that hopefully we will see less instances of people giving up part way through the match. The main purpose of this minimum loss was so that even when a corporation knows that their chances of winning are low they can still go fight because they are going to lose these clones no matter what. We don't want them to just give up however when there is still a long way to go. So by increasing this we hopefully ensure seeing little to no giving up of a battle, at least not because people say "well we lost the minimum clones, lets stop losing clones and go home."
You will notice however that we only increased this by 50% where as we are increasing the clone generation rate by more than 100%.
Also increasing the minimum clone loss will help negate the prolonged grind of grinding down a district you are trying to take that bumping clone generation rate up will do.
Clone value We are not currently going to be changing the value of the clones but I want to emphasis the fact that we can easily adjust this value once this goes live and will be keeping an eye on it once it is live.
Minimum clone move We are not looking at changing this at this time.
Numbers in a simple list: Genolution starter package clones: 100 -> 200 Genolution starter package ISK: 20M ISK -> 40M ISK Clone generation rate: 40 -> 100 PF clone generation rate: 60 -> 150 Minimum clone loss: 100 -> 150 Clone sell value: No change Minimum clone movement: No change
So, DISCUSSION TIME!
p.s. hahaha and you thought I would let this thread die... |
|
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
302
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:22:00 -
[941] - Quote
Die? This thread? Never? It is perpetuated by immortal clones! mwahahaha
In regards to your changes, I think I like them all, especially the increase in clone production. It would make a massive difference to the potential profitability of PC in general at the same time as likely instigating more and more battles as successful corps get greedier. I like it lots.
I still think something will need to be done beyond just the price increase to prevent the alt/sub/sister-corp self-locking thingy but I trust you're fully aware of this now and will have something in the works to counter it. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2059
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:24:00 -
[942] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Genolution starter package clones: 100 -> 200 Genolution starter package ISK: 20M ISK -> 40M ISK Awesome, my reasons for agreeing are already stated.
Quote:Clone generation rate: 40 -> 100 PF clone generation rate: 60 -> 150 Interesting. Very interesting. This is something that was feeling a little "off" for me before. It seemed like production was a little slow for 100-clone attacks if you want to maintain active battlefronts. Bumping this number looks like it will tie in well with the other changes, especially...
Quote:Minimum clone loss: 100 -> 150 ...this one. This is what holds the entire thing together, imo.
This SEEMS like it will mean, though, that if someone claims a district, moves 100 clones from it (as in the example used above) to another, they'll effectively have 200 clones on each - possibly 250 if they have the right SI. Taking a region over will mean they start producing clones immediately on capture, right? Because that means they'll be producing a wave of 100 or 150 clones (again, depending on SI) when the first attacks come in on the district.. That gives a new "landowner" Corp a pretty solid and secure starting point to defend from. Possibly a hole to be plugged?
Quote:Clone sell value: No change Minimum clone movement: No change Definitely seems right to me. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
172
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:30:00 -
[943] - Quote
Does such a dramatic increase in clone generation also come with some increase in max number of clones you can have in a district? It seems like unless you have a cargo hub, you would lose even a fully-stocked district in 2 waves. Is more shifting of district ownership one of the goals here?
Otherwise, I like the changes a lot, especially being able to make more money per district. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2059
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:34:00 -
[944] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Does such a dramatic increase in clone generation also come with some increase in max number of clones you can have in a district? It seems like unless you have a cargo hub, you would lose even a fully-stocked district in 2 waves. Is more shifting of district ownership one of the goals here?
Otherwise, I like the changes a lot, especially being able to make more money per district. If they attack, and win, then you'll be losing a fully-stocked district in 2 waves.
The point seems to be that an attack from a skilled corp will have a high probability of success with only a couple of attacks instead of needing to "grind" a well-defended district. You'll still need to have the skill to win two consecutive battles though, because your surviving clones will count towards the enemy team's clone recovery post-battle, and on top of that, the victory means they'll be seeing another 100 or 150 clones coming back to them by the time your next attack hits.
Seems to me that this will encourage a lot more fights coming down to objectives rather than clone counts. |
S Park Finner
BetaMax. CRONOS.
102
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:41:00 -
[945] - Quote
I noticed the states a district can be in are online, offline, locked and under attack. Are they mutually exclusive or can a district be in several states at once?
Also, what state is a district in if it is abandoned or before it has been taken the first time?
Are those different from each other in some way? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2068
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:41:00 -
[946] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Does such a dramatic increase in clone generation also come with some increase in max number of clones you can have in a district? It seems like unless you have a cargo hub, you would lose even a fully-stocked district in 2 waves. Is more shifting of district ownership one of the goals here?
Otherwise, I like the changes a lot, especially being able to make more money per district.
We kind of wanted to give more value to the cargo hub, so no changes to maximum clone storage. |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2068
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:41:00 -
[947] - Quote
S Park Finner wrote:I noticed the states a district can be in are online, offline, locked and under attack. Are they mutually exclusive or can a district be in several states at once?
Also, what state is a district in if it is abandoned or before it has been taken the first time?
Are those different from each other in some way?
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#District_States
"Both locked and under attack attack have two variations, the online and offline version. A district can be locked-offline or locked-online."
An unowned district is in the state of unowned. Which is not listed there... woops. |
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2059
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:45:00 -
[948] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:S Park Finner wrote:I noticed the states a district can be in are online, offline, locked and under attack. Are they mutually exclusive or can a district be in several states at once?
Also, what state is a district in if it is abandoned or before it has been taken the first time?
Are those different from each other in some way? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#District_States"Both locked and under attack attack have two variations, the online and offline version. A district can be locked-offline or locked-online." An unowned district is in the state of unowned. Which is not listed there... woops. Is "unowned" functionally different from "offline" in any way? |
Brush Master
HavoK Core
254
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 17:59:00 -
[949] - Quote
Just something I want to note. I hope the regeneration timer has some nice helpful timezone features. Right now corp battles are just confusing with figuring out what the time in GMZ is right then and figuring out how long until that battle happen. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2059
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:05:00 -
[950] - Quote
Brush Master wrote:Just something I want to note. I hope the regeneration timer has some nice helpful timezone features. Right now corp battles are just confusing with figuring out what the time in GMZ is right then and figuring out how long until that battle happen. Or an in-game clock that's consistently and easily acessible and shows up on the starmap while you're looking at the reinforcement timer. |
|
Soozu
5o1st
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:11:00 -
[951] - Quote
I like the new numbers as they give a better monetary incentive to actually holding districts. On the battle front however the focus changes from cloning out the enemy [100] to win via MCC. [200] Have you considered tweaking anything on the battle side to sway it back toward cloning out? Or is this strictly skirmish for now?
Also. Will we be able to see what map we are attacking / claiming?
Also will this come in a single update, or will you launch the starmaps and things previously for PS3 users? [I ask this for people who do not play EVE as they may have a disadvantage on the day one mad scramble]
|
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
173
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:15:00 -
[952] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:Does such a dramatic increase in clone generation also come with some increase in max number of clones you can have in a district? It seems like unless you have a cargo hub, you would lose even a fully-stocked district in 2 waves. Is more shifting of district ownership one of the goals here?
Otherwise, I like the changes a lot, especially being able to make more money per district. We kind of wanted to give more value to the cargo hub, so no changes to maximum clone storage.
I must be missing something, because it seems to be that they sort of have less value:
New System: Max Clones = 300 (450 with Cargo Hub) Min Clones lost per battle = 150 Min turns to take district = 2 (3 with CH)
Old System: Max clones = 300 (450 with CH) Min Clones lost per battle = 100 Min turns to take district = 3 (5 with CH)
Sure, you can't get pushed out in 2 days, but with the old system, you had 2 additional waves as a buffer as opposed to 1 in the new system. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
304
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:16:00 -
[953] - Quote
Soozu wrote:I like the new numbers as they give a better monetary incentive to actually holding districts. On the battle front however the focus changes from cloning out the enemy [100] to win via MCC. [200] Have you considered tweaking anything on the battle side to sway it back toward cloning out? Or is this strictly skirmish for now?
Also. Will we be able to see what map we are attacking / claiming?
Also will this come in a single update, or will you launch the starmaps and things previously for PS3 users? [I ask this for people who do not play EVE as they may have a disadvantage on the day one mad scramble]
It didn't say anywhere that you lose 200 clones if you lose the MCC. Minimum loss is 150, so if you lose 0 clones but your MCC dies, you lose 150 clones. |
Soozu
5o1st
27
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:19:00 -
[954] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Soozu wrote:I like the new numbers as they give a better monetary incentive to actually holding districts. On the battle front however the focus changes from cloning out the enemy [100] to win via MCC. [200] Have you considered tweaking anything on the battle side to sway it back toward cloning out? Or is this strictly skirmish for now?
Also. Will we be able to see what map we are attacking / claiming?
Also will this come in a single update, or will you launch the starmaps and things previously for PS3 users? [I ask this for people who do not play EVE as they may have a disadvantage on the day one mad scramble]
It didn't say anywhere that you lose 200 clones if you lose the MCC. Minimum loss is 150, so if you lose 0 clones but your MCC dies, you lose 150 clones.
Oh I know, but with bringing in 200 clones to attack, it's almost certain the MCC will be destroyed before getting cloned out. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2070
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:20:00 -
[955] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:S Park Finner wrote:I noticed the states a district can be in are online, offline, locked and under attack. Are they mutually exclusive or can a district be in several states at once?
Also, what state is a district in if it is abandoned or before it has been taken the first time?
Are those different from each other in some way? http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#District_States"Both locked and under attack attack have two variations, the online and offline version. A district can be locked-offline or locked-online." An unowned district is in the state of unowned. Which is not listed there... woops. Is "unowned" functionally different from "offline" in any way?
... yes the way you take it. Taking an offline district requires a fight. |
|
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
174
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:23:00 -
[956] - Quote
Shouldn't you also change the minimum amount of clones to send to 150 as well? It seems like an attack only has to risk 100 whereas a defender has to risk 150. It's not like you can attack with 100 clones and lose a minimum of 150. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2070
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:25:00 -
[957] - Quote
Brush Master wrote:Just something I want to note. I hope the regeneration timer has some nice helpful timezone features. Right now corp battles are just confusing with figuring out what the time in GMZ is right then and figuring out how long until that battle happen.
We have attempted to say "battle in X hours" for a lot of things along with the exact time. |
|
S Park Finner
BetaMax. CRONOS.
102
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:30:00 -
[958] - Quote
FoxFour, are you modelling districts as state machines, agents, traditional objects or something else? If something else, what? It's almost certainly my lack of understanding but I'm having trouble matching the discussion to an underlying philosophy and I'm really curious. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
305
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:32:00 -
[959] - Quote
Erm, just realised, you'll need to make some sort of adjustment to account for min clone loss, since taking only 100 to battle won't meet the minimum loss number. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 18:40:00 -
[960] - Quote
It sounds like a better system like this.
With the increase of clone generation per day, you can attack an conquer more districts in few days, so you avoid the multiple corp system, it's not valuable anymore. So all the other changes come ?
But yes, there's a problem in this system : minium loss of 150 clones and a minimum to send at 100 ? |
|
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#post627150One 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. |
|
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1039
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 04:51:00 -
[991] - Quote
You have a problem when a corp can win every battle but still lose their district.
With a minimum clone loss of 150, the attackers won't bring any less. That means the defenders would lose 75 clones if they managed a win with a 2:1 KDR. That's what you need to just break even (assuming you don't have other clones available to move).
So less than a 2:1 ratio will result in a whittling down of available clones even if every battle is won. Eventually the defender will be cloned out of their district.
Things will go better for the defenders if they can win by MCC destruction, but I don't think by much.
You need to balance the replacement rate against expected losses at a decent KDR. Demanding 2:1 is a bit much. |
5Y5T3M 3RR0R
The Southern Legion
5
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 05:30:00 -
[992] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote: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.
I understand how that works for EVE and in that environment it makes sense because EVE has periods of both peace and war. This is because EVE has other things to do. In DUST 514 there is nothing but war... |
Rubico
BetaMax. CRONOS.
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 06:05:00 -
[993] - Quote
Random question that i cant find the answer to:
It seems that there is no real value of clones outside of planetary conquest. Is CCP going to create a demand for these surplus clones to be of value? Will these clones initially be sold back to NPCs?
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2060
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 07:04:00 -
[994] - Quote
Skihids wrote:You have a problem when a corp can win every battle but still lose their district.
With a minimum clone loss of 150, the attackers won't bring any less. That means the defenders would lose 75 clones if they managed a win with a 2:1 KDR. That's what you need to just break even (assuming you don't have other clones available to move).
So less than a 2:1 ratio will result in a whittling down of available clones even if every battle is won. Eventually the defender will be cloned out of their district.
Things will go better for the defenders if they can win by MCC destruction, but I don't think by much.
You need to balance the replacement rate against expected losses at a decent KDR. Demanding 2:1 is a bit much. I'm going to build an example using the following list of criteria:
1. Both teams are similarly equipped and have equal skill at killing other players. This means there should be approximately a 1:1 K/D during each battle.
2. The attacker holds their own district, thus allowing them to send only 150 clones (instead of the 200 you'd be sending in a Genolution pack).
3. The attacker's district isn't under attack, but they only hold one district.
4. The Defenders are holding a district with a Research Lab, meaning they get no bonuses that relate to defense of the district.
5. The attackers are on the same planet as the defenders, meaning no clone loss on their attack.
Using these criteria, it's obvious that a defender who is winning has all the advantages. I'm going to present two scenarios below, working with the above criteria, one where the attacker has a Cargo Hub, and one where they have a Production Facility. For simplicity's sake, we'll assume the defender is winning the battle by MCC destruction, but after killing 100 clones and losing 100 of their own.
Cargo Hub:
Day 1: Attacker starts with 450 clones. Sends 150 to attack defender. Defender has 300 clones, and loses 100. Attacker loses 150 clones, 50 of which survive the battle. Of those 50 survivors, 20% are given to the defenders.
Day 2: Attacker has only 300 clones left, meaning 150 left after launching the attack. Their 75 clone production means they have 225 left in the district post-battle. Defender recovered 10 clones from the enemy, and 75 clones are produced on-site. They have 285 clones remaining.
Day 3: Attacker has 225 clones left. That leaves 75 after launching the attack, plus the 75 being produced that day. This means you only have 150 clones left. If you attack again on day 4, you will be abandoning your current district to do so. I wouldn't call that a viable strategy when you've been destroying the profitability of your own district to inflict minimal damage against the defenders.
Day 4: No attack happens, but a new one is scheduled for day 5. Now-stalled attacker has 225 clones again, but the defender has a full 300 based on only 45 of their 75 clones produced. That means they get PROFIT from the remaining 30 while the attacker is earning NOTHING because they're spending all their clones on attacks.
Production Facility:
Day 1: Attacker starts with 300 clones. Sends 150 to attack defender. Defender has 300 clones, and loses 100. Attacker loses 150 clones, 50 of which survive the battle. Of those 50 survivors, 20% are given to the defenders. Because there are only 15 clones left, launching an immediate follow-up attack will result in the attackers cloning themselves out of their own district before they produce enough clones to retain the territory.
Day 2: No attack happens, but a follow-up is scheduled for the following day. The defenders are only down 15 clones, and that means they make a profit from selling the other 60. Attacker has 225 clones after production.
Day 3: Attacker sends 150 clones from their district. After production, they only have 150 clones, meaning they lose the district if they follow up with another attack. Obviously, this means the attacker can lock down an enemy district on alternating days as long as they manage to go without any need to defend their territory.
Conclusion:
Attacking and NOT winning in Planetary Conquest will quickly become unsustainable, and achieves too little to be a cost-effective way to "grind" an enemy district down. I don't see this being much of an exploit, if at all. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2060
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 07:05:00 -
[995] - Quote
Rubico wrote:Random question that i cant find the answer to:
It seems that there is no real value of clones outside of planetary conquest. Is CCP going to create a demand for these surplus clones to be of value? Will these clones initially be sold back to NPCs? Clones are going to be (initially) sold back to Genolution. So yes, NPC Corp.
And probably will only be useful to Corps going into NullSec, where (hopefully) Genolution won't be operating so you'll be relying purely on player-sold clones. |
The Black Jackal
The Southern Legion
306
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 07:07:00 -
[996] - Quote
5Y5T3M 3RR0R wrote:Maken Tosch wrote: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. I understand how that works for EVE and in that environment it makes sense because EVE has periods of both peace and war. This is because EVE has other things to do. In DUST 514 there is nothing but war...
There will be areas that are more peaceful... and you primarily sell off excess clones, not the ones you plan to attack with. Border zones will likely be under constant attack, whereas a district 2-4 jumps from the front lines wont likely see as much action due to clone attrition.
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 08:37:00 -
[997] - Quote
Question :
What will happen if defenders stay all the time in the MCC without fighting ?
Take a 300 clones district being attack. The attacker send the minimum : 150 clones. Defenders dont want to fight Attackers win by MCC destruction, and lost 150 clones. Defenders loose 20% of their clones --> 240 clones still on the district.
Attack day 2 : 240 - 48 = 192 Attack day 3 : 154 Attack day 4 : 124 Attack day 5 : 100 etc... etc...
It cost 75M to the attackers in clone value (150 clones per attack, 5 attack, 100,000 ISK per clone) on day 5, and they still don't have the district. So ok, defenders don't win any ISK or loots, but they don't loose district, and it's impossible for attackers to sustain this with a 100 clones production per day with a SI (and it's fu*king boring...)
We need a way to FORCE people to play the game, and not just reward them for playing it. A redline countdown ? Need to be enough, and Bolas stop drinking ;) I don't have the solution for this, but it needs to be adress. |
Korvin Lomont
United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 08:45:00 -
[998] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Question :
What will happen if defenders stay all the time in the MCC without fighting ?
Take a 300 clones district being attack. The attacker send the minimum : 150 clones. Defenders dont want to fight Attackers win by MCC destruction, and lost 150 clones. Defenders loose 20% of their clones --> 240 clones still on the district.
Attack day 2 : 240 - 48 = 192 Attack day 3 : 154 Attack day 4 : 124 Attack day 5 : 100 etc... etc...
It cost 75M to the attackers in clone value (150 clones per attack, 5 attack, 100,000 ISK per clone) on day 5, and they still don't have the district. So ok, defenders don't win any ISK or loots, but they don't loose district, and it's impossible for attackers to sustain this with a 100 clones production per day with a SI (and it's fu*king boring...)
We need a way to FORCE people to play the game, and not just reward them for playing it. A redline countdown ? Need to be enough, and Bolas stop drinking ;) I don't have the solution for this, but it needs to be adress.
The attacking sides don't lose their clones. Their clones will be send home. If there is no home the clones will be sold for 100k each. The defender will indeed loose all clones. Thats how I understand the scenario. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 08:47:00 -
[999] - Quote
Korvin Lomont wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Question :
What will happen if defenders stay all the time in the MCC without fighting ?
Take a 300 clones district being attack. The attacker send the minimum : 150 clones. Defenders dont want to fight Attackers win by MCC destruction, and lost 150 clones. Defenders loose 20% of their clones --> 240 clones still on the district.
Attack day 2 : 240 - 48 = 192 Attack day 3 : 154 Attack day 4 : 124 Attack day 5 : 100 etc... etc...
It cost 75M to the attackers in clone value (150 clones per attack, 5 attack, 100,000 ISK per clone) on day 5, and they still don't have the district. So ok, defenders don't win any ISK or loots, but they don't loose district, and it's impossible for attackers to sustain this with a 100 clones production per day with a SI (and it's fu*king boring...)
We need a way to FORCE people to play the game, and not just reward them for playing it. A redline countdown ? Need to be enough, and Bolas stop drinking ;) I don't have the solution for this, but it needs to be adress. The attacking sides don't lose their clones. Their clones will be send home. If there is no home the clones will be sold for 100k each. The defender will indeed loose all clones. Thats how I understand the scenario.
No, because you a a MINIMUM loose of 150 clones, whatever happen. |
Shaze 'Jazz' Sovatsor
R.I.f.t
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 08:54:00 -
[1000] - Quote
Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Korvin Lomont wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Question :
What will happen if defenders stay all the time in the MCC without fighting ?
Take a 300 clones district being attack. The attacker send the minimum : 150 clones. Defenders dont want to fight Attackers win by MCC destruction, and lost 150 clones. Defenders loose 20% of their clones --> 240 clones still on the district.
Attack day 2 : 240 - 48 = 192 Attack day 3 : 154 Attack day 4 : 124 Attack day 5 : 100 etc... etc...
It cost 75M to the attackers in clone value (150 clones per attack, 5 attack, 100,000 ISK per clone) on day 5, and they still don't have the district. So ok, defenders don't win any ISK or loots, but they don't loose district, and it's impossible for attackers to sustain this with a 100 clones production per day with a SI (and it's fu*king boring...)
We need a way to FORCE people to play the game, and not just reward them for playing it. A redline countdown ? Need to be enough, and Bolas stop drinking ;) I don't have the solution for this, but it needs to be adress. The attacking sides don't lose their clones. Their clones will be send home. If there is no home the clones will be sold for 100k each. The defender will indeed loose all clones. Thats how I understand the scenario. No, because you have a MINIMUM loose of 150 clones, whatever happen.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest
Please check the Possible Conflict Resolutions
First Conflict Resolution: Attacker kills MCC -> Remaining Attacker Clones Go Home
"Please note: The losing side of a battle will lose a minimum of 100 clones. If they lose 125 during the fight that is what they lose. If they lose 75 during the fight then they will lose a total of 100 at the end. " (The mininum has been changed to 150)
|
|
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 08:56:00 -
[1001] - Quote
Shaze 'Jazz' Sovatsor wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Korvin Lomont wrote:Mr Gloo Gloo wrote:Question :
What will happen if defenders stay all the time in the MCC without fighting ?
Take a 300 clones district being attack. The attacker send the minimum : 150 clones. Defenders dont want to fight Attackers win by MCC destruction, and lost 150 clones. Defenders loose 20% of their clones --> 240 clones still on the district.
Attack day 2 : 240 - 48 = 192 Attack day 3 : 154 Attack day 4 : 124 Attack day 5 : 100 etc... etc...
It cost 75M to the attackers in clone value (150 clones per attack, 5 attack, 100,000 ISK per clone) on day 5, and they still don't have the district. So ok, defenders don't win any ISK or loots, but they don't loose district, and it's impossible for attackers to sustain this with a 100 clones production per day with a SI (and it's fu*king boring...)
We need a way to FORCE people to play the game, and not just reward them for playing it. A redline countdown ? Need to be enough, and Bolas stop drinking ;) I don't have the solution for this, but it needs to be adress. The attacking sides don't lose their clones. Their clones will be send home. If there is no home the clones will be sold for 100k each. The defender will indeed loose all clones. Thats how I understand the scenario. No, because you have a MINIMUM loose of 150 clones, whatever happen. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_ConquestPlease check the Possible Conflict Resolutions First Conflict Resolution: Attacker kills MCC -> Remaining Attacker Clones Go Home "Please note: The losing side of a battle will lose a minimum of 100 clones. If they lose 125 during the fight that is what they lose. If they lose 75 during the fight then they will lose a total of 100 at the end. " (The mininum has been changed to 150)
Ok, didn't note this, thanks for the explanation. |
Korvin Lomont
United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 08:57:00 -
[1002] - Quote
Where did you get this Info from. Referring to the EVELopedia site under the topic possible conflict resulution I find the following.
Attacker destroys MCC Defender ISK Reward: 0 ISK Attacker ISK Reward: Biomass of Clones destroyed Remaining Attacker Clones : Go home Who Owns The District : Defender District Penalty: Not generating clones.
And somewhere a Dev statet not defending a district will result in a loss of clones for the defender. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2060
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 09:13:00 -
[1003] - Quote
The minimum 150 clone loss is for the loser of the battle, not for everyone involved, and not for the attacker every time.
Attacking and winning is viable and practical.
Attacking and losing (see my previous post) isn't sustainable long-term. |
5Y5T3M 3RR0R
The Southern Legion
5
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 09:49:00 -
[1004] - Quote
The Black Jackal wrote:5Y5T3M 3RR0R wrote:Maken Tosch wrote: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. I understand how that works for EVE and in that environment it makes sense because EVE has periods of both peace and war. This is because EVE has other things to do. In DUST 514 there is nothing but war... There will be areas that are more peaceful... and you primarily sell off excess clones, not the ones you plan to attack with. Border zones will likely be under constant attack, whereas a district 2-4 jumps from the front lines wont likely see as much action due to clone attrition.
Will you really be selling them? Wouldn't you instead be moving them to the front lines to bolster your forces for other attacks and defences? I mean the average front line territory under sustained assault needs between 2 and 5 territories to support it depending on which currently suggested system you choose..
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
311
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 10:05:00 -
[1005] - Quote
SHANN da MAN wrote: 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 it 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.
Minimum movement is for any movement whether it's attacking or just reinforcing another district you own. You're correct about it being a severe drain on the donating district and that's all part of the game - strategy. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
311
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 10:09:00 -
[1006] - Quote
5Y5T3M 3RR0R wrote: Will you really be selling them? Wouldn't you instead be moving them to the front lines to bolster your forces for other attacks and defences? I mean the average front line territory under sustained assault needs between 2 and 5 territories to support it depending on which currently suggested system you choose..
If you're winning the defense of your border systems, as Garrett described earlier, you won't need to send reinforcements to them. Also though, if your border systems are under constant attack, they're locked and you can't send reinforcements (but they will still be producing their own clones as long as you win the defenses). |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
311
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 10:10:00 -
[1007] - Quote
Django Quik wrote: What's this new number? 'Genolution base cost to move: 500,000 -> 3M ISK'
Can anyone explain what this number is please? I think I've missed something somewhere... |
Korvin Lomont
United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 10:15:00 -
[1008] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Django Quik wrote: What's this new number? 'Genolution base cost to move: 500,000 -> 3M ISK'
Can anyone explain what this number is please? I think I've missed something somewhere...
That should be the cost you have to pay to move your clones from one district to another on the same planet |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2060
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 10:27:00 -
[1009] - Quote
5Y5T3M 3RR0R wrote:The Black Jackal wrote:5Y5T3M 3RR0R wrote:Maken Tosch wrote: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. I understand how that works for EVE and in that environment it makes sense because EVE has periods of both peace and war. This is because EVE has other things to do. In DUST 514 there is nothing but war... There will be areas that are more peaceful... and you primarily sell off excess clones, not the ones you plan to attack with. Border zones will likely be under constant attack, whereas a district 2-4 jumps from the front lines wont likely see as much action due to clone attrition. Will you really be selling them? Wouldn't you instead be moving them to the front lines to bolster your forces for other attacks and defences? I mean the average front line territory under sustained assault needs between 2 and 5 territories to support it depending on which currently suggested system you choose.. When a territory is full (300 or 450), selling off the clones is the only option. If you want to use them to reinforce, you send your 150 men forward right before the RT, so that the replacement clones (75 or 100) will fill out the reduced numbers. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2060
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 10:34:00 -
[1010] - Quote
Korvin Lomont wrote:Django Quik wrote:Django Quik wrote: What's this new number? 'Genolution base cost to move: 500,000 -> 3M ISK'
Can anyone explain what this number is please? I think I've missed something somewhere... That should be the cost you have to pay to move your clones from one district to another on the same planet http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Distance_And_Its_Effect_On_Moves
It's that, I think.
Would be nice to know if the ISK prices are all being scaled up to match, or if they're just putting a minimum cap on the transport price... |
|
Korvin Lomont
United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 10:51:00 -
[1011] - Quote
Yepp that would be good to know. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
2091
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 10:51:00 -
[1012] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Korvin Lomont wrote:Django Quik wrote:Django Quik wrote: What's this new number? 'Genolution base cost to move: 500,000 -> 3M ISK'
Can anyone explain what this number is please? I think I've missed something somewhere... That should be the cost you have to pay to move your clones from one district to another on the same planet http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_Conquest#Distance_And_Its_Effect_On_MovesIt's that, I think. Would be nice to know if the ISK prices are all being scaled up to match, or if they're just putting a minimum cap on the transport price...
The primary thing is bumping up the base cost, how much we bump up the rest has not been decided but I think it will probably just be by how much we did the base. In other words I would expect it to look like:
Planet: 3M System: 3.5M 1J: 4.5M 2J: 5.5M And so on... |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
311
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 11:01:00 -
[1013] - Quote
Ah right, all this time I'd missed that you have to pay to move clones... makes sense but doesn't having it so high provide a massive disincentive to sending an attack? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
311
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 11:05:00 -
[1014] - Quote
Also, I've been thinking that currently the Research SI is the weakest of the three available and could do with a bit of a buff in some way. I understand that the Production and Cargo SIs are good for bolstering your defense and profit margins; how about if the Research SI as well as decreasing attrition, also decreased the cost of moving clones? |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2061
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 11:25:00 -
[1015] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Also, I've been thinking that currently the Research SI is the weakest of the three available and could do with a bit of a buff in some way. I understand that the Production and Cargo SIs are good for bolstering your defense and profit margins; how about if the Research SI as well as decreasing attrition, also decreased the cost of moving clones? This is a brilliant idea.
Especially if it's something big like a 50% reduction in base cost.
So that 3 million becomes a much more manageable 1.5 million ISK. 2 Million to move to another planet in the system, then the other costs as advertised. |
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1042
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 12:24:00 -
[1016] - Quote
The defender losing the district even when winning each battle can happen when they are constanty attacked by starter packs.
A corp with deep pockets can wipe out a smaller corp simply by outspending them. This can be done via a splinter corp if they currently own a district.
It's expensive, but not prohibitively so if you manage to keep it close to 1:1. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
313
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 12:32:00 -
[1017] - Quote
Skihids wrote:The defender losing the district even when winning each battle can happen when they are constanty attacked by starter packs.
A corp with deep pockets can wipe out a smaller corp simply by outspending them. This can be done via a splinter corp if they currently own a district.
It's expensive, but not prohibitively so if you manage to keep it close to 1:1.
It's possible but only if you lose more than 95 clones and win each time. And even then, in order to lose the district the defenders do actually need to lose a battle. If you're losing that many clones each game, you're probably not going to survive that long anyway. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
314
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 12:39:00 -
[1018] - Quote
Here's another suggestion: How about some sort of retreat mechanic for abandoning a district under attack (but not during a battle). Say you survive the first wave of an attack from a much bigger better corp on one of your districts; you are locked because they have decided they'll come back to finish you off tomorrow. You know you're probably going to lose but can move your remaining clones to another nearby district to save the lose of (clone) lives. The district remains attack locked, so no one else can swoop in to claim it (as if it were abandoned) and the attackers still have to wait until the next RT to find out the defenders have left and the district is turned over to them.
This could only be done after losing a defense and only if you have more than one district, so you have somewhere to move your clones to. What do you all think? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
314
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 12:41:00 -
[1019] - Quote
Another thought on the minimum movement amount - what happens if you've only got 50 clones left on a district but you want to abandon the district and move all those clones to another district you own? Can you move less if that's all there is to move? |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2066
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 12:42:00 -
[1020] - Quote
Skihids wrote:The defender losing the district even when winning each battle can happen when they are constanty attacked by starter packs.
A corp with deep pockets can wipe out a smaller corp simply by outspending them. This can be done via a splinter corp if they currently own a district.
It's expensive, but not prohibitively so if you manage to keep it close to 1:1. Using a 1:1 ratio and a blitz on the MCC against a bad team that's just trying to grind/outspend you, it's reasonable that you could keep losses to a minimum, you can come out with a net GAIN in clones instead of a loss (meaning you're still running a profit if you're already at the clone cap).
For a district with a Production Facility, you can comfortably lose 100 clones and still more than cover your losses. If you can keep the clone loss below 85, then you'll make those back no matter what SI your district runs.
Firstly, you gain 75 clones. If the attackers' MCC is killed, they lose 150 clones. Unless you've killed more than that, you'll get 10 clones back from the attackers (50 remaining clones x 20% = 10). That means that with 85 clones lost, you made back your losses.
For an attack like this to be practical, the defenders basically have to be running negative consistently, and even then, the attackers will need to pour impractical amounts of money given the profits they'll see in return. |
|
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 14:02:00 -
[1021] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:I'm going to build an example using the following list of criteria: 1. Both teams are similarly equipped and have equal skill at killing other players. This means there should be approximately a 1:1 K/D during each battle. 2. The attacker holds their own district, thus allowing them to send only 150 clones (instead of the 200 you'd be sending in a Genolution pack). 3. The attacker's district isn't under attack, but they only hold one district. 4. The Defenders are holding a district with a Research Lab, meaning they get no bonuses that relate to defense of the district. 5. The attackers are on the same planet as the defenders, meaning no clone loss on their attack. Using these criteria, it's obvious that a defender who is winning has all the advantages. I'm going to present two scenarios below, working with the above criteria, one where the attacker has a Cargo Hub, and one where they have a Production Facility. For simplicity's sake, we'll assume the defender is winning the battle by MCC destruction, but after killing 100 clones and losing 100 of their own. Cargo Hub:Day 1: Attacker starts with 450 clones. Sends 150 to attack defender. Defender has 300 clones, and loses 100. Attacker loses 150 clones, 50 of which survive the battle. Of those 50 survivors, 20% are given to the defenders. Day 2: Attacker has only 300 clones left, meaning 150 left after launching the attack. Their 75 clone production means they have 225 left in the district post-battle. Defender recovered 10 clones from the enemy, and 75 clones are produced on-site. They have 285 clones remaining. Day 3: Attacker has 225 clones left. That leaves 75 after launching the attack, plus the 75 being produced that day. This means you only have 150 clones left. If you attack again on day 4, you will be abandoning your current district to do so. I wouldn't call that a viable strategy when you've been destroying the profitability of your own district to inflict minimal damage against the defenders. Day 4: No attack happens, but a new one is scheduled for day 5. Now-stalled attacker has 225 clones again, but the defender has a full 300 based on only 45 of their 75 clones produced. That means they get PROFIT from the remaining 30 while the attacker is earning NOTHING because they're spending all their clones on attacks. Production Facility:Day 1: Attacker starts with 300 clones. Sends 150 to attack defender. Defender has 300 clones, and loses 100. Attacker loses 150 clones, 50 of which survive the battle. Of those 50 survivors, 20% are given to the defenders. Because there are only 15 clones left, launching an immediate follow-up attack will result in the attackers cloning themselves out of their own district before they produce enough clones to retain the territory. Day 2: No attack happens, but a follow-up is scheduled for the following day. The defenders are only down 15 clones, and that means they make a profit from selling the other 60. Attacker has 225 clones after production. Day 3: Attacker sends 150 clones from their district. After production, they only have 150 clones, meaning they lose the district if they follow up with another attack. Obviously, this means the attacker can lock down an enemy district on alternating days as long as they manage to go without any need to defend their territory. Conclusion:Attacking and NOT winning in Planetary Conquest will quickly become unsustainable, and achieves too little to be a cost-effective way to "grind" an enemy district down. I don't see this being much of an exploit, if at all. EDIT: Just re-read the wiki page, and spotted something I forgot in the "notes" section of the combat resolution. Quote:Clones not lost in combat but destroyed in MCC destruction do not get biomassed and sold. If clone count reaches 0 due to minimum clone loss, conflict resolution is considered to be "Defender kills all clones" ...oops. So you're going to be wearing down the defending territory at a rate of 25 per attack if they win with 100 deaths each time.
There's one major flaw with your example, and that's the fact that, given your criterion of equal skill level, the attackers should be winning as much as the defenders are. In other words, every other attack should be successful and therefore would not only reduce the clones of the defender by 150, but also wouldn't allow them to produce any more, bring in any reinforcements, nor would they bolster their reserves by stealing clones from the attacker's left-over supply.
I'm not going to run any numbers because I think it'll turn out whoever wins the first battle is going to probably end up winning overall or it may end up that defenders have a slight advantage because of the 20% thing (although the attacking district never stops producing clones regardless of outcome), but that's sort of how it should be. If the attacks were hitting with 2 districts, it would be a completely different story. I don't see a problem with that mechanic. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1219
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 14:16:00 -
[1022] - Quote
Hmm ok. Tough getting back in that thread. My head is buzzing from all those new informations and previous post i'd want to comment. Btw guys, great talks. Even if sometimes some people tends to go in very weird place of thought, let's just blame it on being tired of looking at all that text and numbers.
So now about those new numbers :
Raising minimum clone loss to 150 (+50%)
This is probably the best move to me. I was really afraid of corps dropping battle as soon as they reached 100 clone loss. Any smart defender never would go above the minimal clone loss on one fight UNLESS the rest of its clone stock is ridiculously low.
So, having that minimal clone loss being at least as high as it is in pub game was mandatory to avoid frustrating battles ending as sniper fest or hide and seek in the MCC.
GOOD POINT !
PS: Setting minimal clone movement to 150 kinda make sense but wasnt that much needed. If a corp thinks it can attack with 100 clone and win, or just want to send back up to another district with 100 clone, it should be able to.
Raising starter packs price and clone amount (+100%)
Ok, so to me, this wont change much when PC starts but it is still a good move for further down the line as many of you already pointed out. A corp that would wish to enter PC 6 month after it started cant possibily run fights with only 100 clones. And that, even if they can still attack over and over with Genolution pack using the "priority hour" or "dibs hour" as i like to call it. By the way, it should definitely have an official name.
Raising starter packs doesnt really stop people from using Genolution Bomb to harass an ennemy through an alt corp. And all those talks about a mechanic not being sustainable is a waste of time. ANY conquest is by essence unsustainable if you dont end up winning and collecting ISK from your conquered territory.
But, spending a ton of money because you're pretty sure you'll be able to defend your new owned territory long enough that it will be in the end a good operation ISK wise is the definition of "conquest".
Raising Clone regeneration rate (+250% then ~+100% compared to original number)
This adresses one the other concern is discussed for quite a while on IRC with both null and foxfour. With the old numbers, it was obvious that spamming attacks with the dibs hour was the definition of a mandatory win. Especially in the case of a corp with say 5 districts vs a corp with only 1.
When i saw the numbers suggested in the first post ( 100 native, 150 with PF), i thought "dude, snooze fest, attacking is now a drag... The low generation rate was probably there to balance the loss of clones through attrition that implies a heavier investment of the attacking corp to field the minimal clone loss compared to the defender.
With the first suggested numbers, attacking would have become a massive pain in the ass and big corps would all have known that counter attack was the best way to go to conquer and defending a solid decision. With attrition, 20% bonus and everything, 100/150 regeneration rate was way too high. Simple math could confirm that :
Day 1 : Attacking corp : Cargo Hub - 450 clones Defending corp : Production Facility - 300 clones 1 jump away.
Attackers sends 188 clones, fields 150 post-attrition and wins. Defenders stops when reaching 150 clone loss and watch MCC blow up. Attacker still has 40 clones left. A good victory.
Day 2 : Attacking corp : Cargo Hub - 302 clones left after battle - 402 clones post RT. Defending corp : Production Facility - 150 clones
Attackers sends another 188 clones. Win, 20 clones left = district taken. Total cost of conquest : 316 clones. If the defender wins on the other hand and manages to save 40 clones. Attacker loses all clones.
Day 3 Attacking corp : Cargo Hub - 214 clones post battle - 314 Clones post RT Defending corp : Production Facility - 150-110+150 = 190 clones.
In that case, a draw game for a 1 jump away fight ends up : Attackers 336 clones lost || Defenders 260 clones lost Base population loss post RT : Attacker 31% || Defender 37%
Same draw scenario but with latest numbers : Total clone loss : Attacker loss : 336 (unchanged) || Defenders : 260 (unchanged) District population left post RT: Attacker : 264 || Defender : 140 Base population loss post RT : Attacker 42% || Defender 54%
The first number gives us a very minimal difference in base population loss post RT in case of a draw game. When the attacker had two clone generation and the defender only one. It doesnt feel like a good enough difference and it's just a 1 jump away fight. For a 2 jump fight, the defender may have lost less clones in % than the attacker who got 2 clones reinforcement.
Results with 75 native and 100 with PF look way better. Garret's maths were already good but it though i might add another example ( https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=628857#post628857) Cheers.
Now, to go further with those explanation : Obviously, if the attacking corp has 3 districts from which it sends an attack every other 3 days and the defender only has one districts, it gets way more difficult for the defender as its regeneration rate when winning wont benefit from any break coming from the attacking district wearing off of clones to use. (garret example)
So yeah, defending your only district against a strong attacker with multiple base district for attacking will be tough. But again, that's what alliances are for. And even if the defender isn't the one counter attacking to avoid the enemy forces of focusing all its strength on this one district, others in the universe wont hesitate in backstabbing the attacker.
So overall, the tweaking of the regeneration rate sounds good.
Will write about other stuff in next post. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
226
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 14:28:00 -
[1023] - Quote
An important question:
Defender positioning. Will defenders start with NULL cannon control? Will they start at a near location to bases as opposed to attackers who need to find a way in? Will defenders control all installations in the beginning of skirmish?
Anything else than the above scenario feels unintuitive and odd to me. |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
440
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 14:34:00 -
[1024] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:An important question:
Defender positioning. Will defenders start with NULL cannon control? Will they start at a near location to bases as opposed to attackers who need to find a way in? Will defenders control all installations in the beginning of skirmish?
Anything else than the above scenario feels unintuitive and odd to me. It's the current Skirmish mode being used, so I would guess no to those questions (although some of the current maps favor one side to a certain point, Manus Peak for instance).
But I agree that we need actual defender vs attacker modes soon, but I think they are aware of that. |
Meeko Fent
Kinsho Swords Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 14:43:00 -
[1025] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Muchomojo wrote:Will we have access these districts outside of battle? Would it be logical that the defender has some sort of advantage in terms of knowing the terrain etc? Not at this time no. Aww. How about being able to see a map on that Hologram table in the warbarge if the warbarge is made into something of a corp hall? |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 14:43:00 -
[1026] - Quote
Quote:An important question:
Defender positioning. Will defenders start with NULL cannon control? Will they start at a near location to bases as opposed to attackers who need to find a way in? Will defenders control all installations in the beginning of skirmish?
Anything else than the above scenario feels unintuitive and odd to me.
Would be a great way to bring Skirmish 1.0 back...hint hint... |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
318
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 14:46:00 -
[1027] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote:trollsroyce wrote:An important question:
Defender positioning. Will defenders start with NULL cannon control? Will they start at a near location to bases as opposed to attackers who need to find a way in? Will defenders control all installations in the beginning of skirmish?
Anything else than the above scenario feels unintuitive and odd to me. It's the current Skirmish mode being used, so I would guess no to those questions (although some of the current maps favor one side to a certain point, Manus Peak for instance). But I agree that we need actual defender vs attacker modes soon, but I think they are aware of that.
Yeah, I'm sure CCP Fox Four confirmed this earlier. No null canons held at start. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 14:49:00 -
[1028] - Quote
Alright I ran some numbers just to see how it would turn out.
Assuming loss of 100 clones by attacker and defender every battle, meaning 50 left over for stealing by the defender if they win. Roughly the same criteria as Blacknova earlier. A is attackers, D is defenders. The first numbers after each day is the starting forces(after clone reinforcements), the second line is the outcome of the battle, and the third line is the aftermath.
Cargo Hub for A, Cargo Hub for D, A wins first:
Day 1: A-450, D-450 A wins A-350 (450-100), D-300 (450-150)
Day 2: A-425 (350+75), D-300 D wins A-275 (425-150), D-210 (300-100+10)
Day 3: A-350 (275+75), D-285 (210+75) A wins A-250 (350-100), D-135 (285-150)
Day 4: A-325 (250+75), D-135 D wins A-175 (325-150), D-45 (135-100+10)
Day 5: A-250 (175+75), D-120 (45+75) A wins A takes over district by cloning out D.
CH for A, CH for D, D wins first:
Day 1: A-450, D-450 D wins A-300 (450-150), D-360 (450-100+10)
Day 2: A-375 (300+75), D-435 (360+75) A wins A-275 (375-100), D-285 (435-150)
Day 3: A-350 (275+75), D-285 D wins A-200 (350-150), D-195 (285-100+10)
Day 4: A-275 (200+75), D-270 (195+75) A wins A-175 (275-100), D-120 (270-150)
Day 5: A-250 (175+75), D-120 D wins A-100 (250-150), D-30 (120-100+10)
Day 5 (this is assuming A wants to attack, despite knowing even a win will leave them with only 25 clones in the district they're attacking from): A-175 (100+75), D-105 (30+75) A wins A takes over district by cloning out D.
CH for A, Production Facility for D, A wins first:
Day 1: A-450, D-300 A wins A-350 (450-100), D-150
Day 2: A-425 (350+75), D-150 D wins A-275 (425-150), D-60 (150-100+10)
Day 3: A-350 (275+75), D-160 (60+100) A wins A-250 (350-100), D-10 (160-150)
At this point it's basically impossible for D to win on Day 4 since they only have 10 clones.
CH for A, PF for D, D wins first:
Day 1: A-450, D-300 D wins A-300, D-210 (200+10)
Day 2: A-375, D-300 (210+100-10(clones sold over maximum)) A wins A-275 (375-100), D-150 (300-150)
Day 3: A-350 (275+75), D-150 D wins A-200, D-60 (150-100+10)
Day 4: A-275 (200+75), D-160 (60+100) A wins A-175 (275-100), D-10 (160-150)
At this point it's basically impossible for D to win Day 4 because they only have 10 clones.
It seems like D needs a CH to even have a chance of defending against a similarly skilled opponent. Also, this only takes into account 1 district attacking a defending district.
Another thing, is even when A loses, they only effectively lose 75 clones, because they'll get 75 back later from RT. If they win, they only lose 25. However, when D loses, they effectively lose 225 clones (150 for battle, 75 for no RT) which is devastating. Even with a win, they'll run negative because 75+10 is still less than the 100 they'll lose in battle. Not to mention they can't get any outside reinforcements, and will really have to rely upon someone attacking their attackers (I guess that's where allies/other districts come in).
Obviously a lot of this is academic and relies on some pretty consistent and unlikely stuff to happen, like A and D going back and forth in wins and always losing 100, but I think it still points out the problem that D is going to have a hard time defending, since even in the best case scenario for them here, they still lose. |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
39
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 14:55:00 -
[1029] - Quote
Conclusion for me on the move, and the all system btw.
Rising the prices are a good thing : every corps can't claim to participate to PC. And the top corps can't really rush all districts on day 1.
BUT, you won't solve any "exploit" issue (with biggest and richest corps...) without ban the ringer system, or apply the alliance one...
I can understand why you don't want the alliance system in DUST on day 1. You can make it very very expensive for example (1 billion to create it or maybe more) because if it's free, back to the "exploit" system... So let us farm clones for weeks, and be rich enough to form an alliance, something like that...
So if you don't want to apply alliance system, do not allow ringer one.
You want a Corp Planetary Conquest, let corps do the job for the first days/weeks/months ... |
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
454
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 15:00:00 -
[1030] - 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. Agreed. The supernatural force projection allowed by the Genolution Pack is immersion breaking - this way at least it's balanced.
And the raiding playstyle is still supported, with the caveat that you will need you own industrial base to make the raiding economically viable. This makes a lot of historical sense - the last great raiding force we've seen in RL had a serious industrial infrastructure.
[Polemics] I believe an important point to keep in mind is the caution to avoid balancing using ISK, as FoxFour has stressed. The way to do this is make everything associated with PC cost 0 ISK, as well as reversing losses of equipment upon match completion. For the purposes of this phase of the beta content-starved corps will fight for pride, and everybody will be able to play, contingent only on player numbers and logistical issues.
This provides the freedom the players need to test the entire state-space of solutions, limited only by imagination. The dynamics this reveals are the pure dynamics inherent in your ruleset, the fundametal 'geometry' of your game, so-to-speak. These dynamics/geometry are always present in any game ruleset, ISK or no ISK. At the beginning it's judicious to test for pathologies in the ruleset before adding on a secondary consideration, namely ISK.
Testing pure game mechanics is an especially valid approach in this case, since the design of Planetary Conquest is taking a lot from Diplomacy, which has no currency and is basically a zero-sum game, as is this proposed PC game mode(any resource you control was taken from another player).
It is also an important case-in-point for the day when ISK flows freely between DUST and EVE. [/Polemics] |
|
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1220
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 15:16:00 -
[1031] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Alright I ran some numbers just to see how it would turn out.
Assuming loss of 100 clones by attacker and defender every battle, meaning 50 left over for stealing by the defender if they win. Roughly the same criteria as Blacknova earlier. A is attackers, D is defenders. The first numbers after each day is the starting forces(after clone reinforcements), the second line is the outcome of the battle, and the third line is the aftermath.
Those numbers are not surprising at all. For the sole fact that even when attacker and defender both win a game, attacker gets 2 clone reinforcement when defender only gets one (check my post above). And you're forgetting the fact that most fight wont play out on the same planet and that includes attrition. Also, what are the odds that this attacking corp isnt attacked at the same time while committing all those clones in the conquest of one district.
FInally, it only makes sense that a corp attacking over and over and over again a district ends up wearing out the defenders clones if they cant manage to win more games that their assailants. It's called a "siege" situation. And in most historical cases, it never ends well.
Now, i would like to suggest something for discussion. What if an attacker couldnt attack the same district for 24h when losing a fight ? Or could still attack it but not using the same base district to move the clones for 24h ? Adding some kind of cool down.
I havent thought this through but could be an interesting talk.
Corp 1) (District A B C) vs Corp 2) (District D E F) 1) District A attacks 2) District D and loses.
Either 1) cannot attack any of 2) districts => Sounds lame. But had to list it Or 1) cannot attack 2) District D => Kind of the opposite of the "Dibs Hour" offered to the attacker. Or 1) cannot attack with District A any of 2) District => Losing kinda locks the base district actions. Or 1) cannot attack with District A 2) District D => Only a specific lock between the two incriminated districts.
The whole point behind that idea is the fact that the attacker seems to have a nice upper hand on the defender. Yeah attrition will hurt when attacking very remote district but the "Dibs Hour" and the fact that you can prevent the defender from generating clones while you still generate yours if you're not under attack is a lot.
Against that, the sole perk for defending is the 20% "cashback" on the unused clones the attacker brought to the fight. And i wouldnt be surprised to see attackers ruin on purpose all of their clones when a game seems lost. Using militia gear and killing themselves just to avoid offering clones to the enemy.
Or, what about offering a deal for defenders through the reward system ? When winning, defender could choose to process used biomass into new clones instead of getting full ISK reward ?
Just to keep the discussion going. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 15:36:00 -
[1032] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote: Those numbers are not surprising at all. For the sole fact that even when attacker and defender both win a game, attacker gets 2 clone reinforcement when defender only gets one (check my post above). And you're forgetting the fact that most fight wont play out on the same planet and that includes attrition. Also, what are the odds that this attacking corp isnt attacked at the same time while committing all those clones in the conquest of one district.
I don't think the attrition penalties are going to be entirely significant until you start talking about 2 jumps or more (and I'm guessing because of those attrition rates, we won't see massive jumping for some time). Only in the case of D winning first and having a CH would attrition affect A's ability to attack on the very last day.
As for A getting attacked, I mentioned that it was really the only chance for D, but by the same token, even if A is hit and stops attacking, D is still left severely diminished and is just as likely (actually more so in every day after 3 in any scenario, and after Day 2 in most scenarios) to be hit because they have fewer clones.
Quote:FInally, it only makes sense that a corp attacking over and over and over again a district ends up wearing out the defenders clones if they cant manage to win more games that their assailants. It's called a "siege" situation. And in most historical cases, it never ends well.
I don't ever liked to get too bogged down in "is this realistic enough" especially in Sci-Fi games. It usually doesn't make for great gameplay. Also, siege situations happen when A has a very large advantage in attacking numbers--that isn't the case here.
Quote:Now, i would like to suggest something for discussion. What if an attacker couldnt attack the same district for 24h when losing a fight ? Or could still attack it but not using the same base district to move the clones for 24h ? Adding some kind of cool down.
I don't generally like the idea of anything that further de-incentivizes attacking or makes it harder to do so. I do think the Defenders should get more than 20% of unused clones, though. Closer to 40%, maybe. If that means letting them reuse biomass instead of selling it, okay.The attackers not only have several means by which to deplete their own clone reserves if needed, but also decide exactly how many clones they send to a battle (with a minimum of 150, obviously). |
LXicon
VENGEANCE FOR HIRE
69
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 15:58:00 -
[1033] - Quote
5Y5T3M 3RR0R wrote:The Black Jackal wrote:...There will be areas that are more peaceful... and you primarily sell off excess clones, not the ones you plan to attack with. Border zones will likely be under constant attack, whereas a district 2-4 jumps from the front lines wont likely see as much action due to clone attrition.
Will you really be selling them? Wouldn't you instead be moving them to the front lines to bolster your forces for other attacks and defences? I mean the average front line territory under sustained assault needs between 2 and 5 territories to support it depending on which currently suggested system you choose..
Just to be clear, there are no "Front Lines" ... anyone can attack ANY of your districts regardless of who owns the adjacent districts. Even if an attacker jumped in from another system to a planet you owned outright, they could attack any district they choose on the planet.
You don't need to "support the front lines". All your districts should be battle ready at all times.
|
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1221
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 16:21:00 -
[1034] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote: Now, i would like to suggest something for discussion. What if an attacker couldnt attack the same district for 24h when losing a fight ? Or could still attack it but not using the same base district to move the clones for 24h ? Adding some kind of cool down.
I don't generally like the idea of anything that further de-incentivizes attacking or makes it harder to do so. I do think the Defenders should get more than 20% of unused clones, though. Closer to 40%, maybe. If that means letting them reuse biomass instead of selling it (or instead of stealing 40% of remaining clones), okay.The attackers not only have several means by which to deplete their own clone reserves if needed, but also decide exactly how many clones they send to a battle (with a minimum of 150, obviously).
This doesnt de-incentive attacking. Some mechanic could just add a feelin of "set-back" just like losing as a defender gives you that feeling as you dont generate any clone.
In fact, all those talks about defenders vs attackers balance only comes from one main issue : The fight itself. Defending should give you an upper hand by having more defensive positions, turrets, etc... Thus implying less clone loss than the enemy when winning, making the whole system solid.
Aaaahh. Skirmish 1.0 i miss you so bad. |
KEROSIINI-TERO
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
260
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 16:27:00 -
[1035] - Quote
Pryke Bastion wrote:Well in the interests of PC, I'm curious if these districts that we control would allow any other industrial production facilities besides the clone affecting ones. With the economies split there isn't much drawing the average EVE player to PC besides good will toward alliances with the hope that one day all these manic ground troops might prove useful.
I suggest that CCP allow industrialism on these districts to be tied in. Gives the EVE players an incentive to set roots in these systems with increased production capabilities and output. Might get the industrialist corps interested at any rate.
Another idea to bring more interactivity. An EVE fleet could install a satellite defense system geo-synchronous with their favoured district. This would allow the district the ability to destroy or damage incoming clone assault packets sent by Genolution, Increasing the attrition rate by a modest percentile. These satellite defense networks could be destroyed by a hostile fleet, but it would be necessary to hold the system for a period long enough to root out all the cloaked satellites. This would allow more context and purpose for fleet involvement other than, "Nuke the CLONES!"
Pryke out.
Awesome idea! |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2070
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 16:46:00 -
[1036] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:There's one major flaw with your example, and that's the fact that, given your criterion of equal skill level, the attackers should be winning as much as the defenders are. In other words, every other attack should be successful and therefore would not only reduce the clones of the defender by 150, but also wouldn't allow them to produce any more, bring in any reinforcements, nor would they bolster their reserves by stealing clones from the attacker's left-over supply.
I'm not going to run any numbers because I think it'll turn out whoever wins the first battle is going to probably end up winning overall or it may end up that defenders have a slight advantage because of the 20% thing (although the attacking district never stops producing clones regardless of outcome), but that's sort of how it should be. If the attacks were hitting with 2 districts, it would be a completely different story. I don't see a problem with that mechanic. The established premise I was replying to was one where the defender was consistently winning, but still supposedly gtting worn down by an attacker sending the minimum number of clones (150). I was taking a worst-case scenario for the defender in which that would happen.
Equal skill in direct combat, meaning a 1:1 K/D, but with the attackers not focusing on obkectives, meaning the defenders win by MCC destruction. |
EnIgMa99
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
242
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:05:00 -
[1037] - Quote
Telcontar Dunedain 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. 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.
Give us moon goo to fight over or something equivalent that everyone wants. Some reward that simulates conflict.
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2070
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:05:00 -
[1038] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Alright I ran some numbers just to see how it would turn out.
Assuming loss of 100 clones by attacker and defender every battle, meaning 50 left over for stealing by the defender if they win. Roughly the same criteria as Blacknova earlier. You appear to have missed the edit on my post that you're referring: Here, I'll repost the quote that I got from the Wiki where this scenario doesn't play out quite how I said it would originally...
Quote:Clones not lost in combat but destroyed in MCC destruction do not get biomassed and sold. If clone count reaches 0 due to minimum clone loss, conflict resolution is considered to be "Defender kills all clones" If you only send the minimum 150 clones into battle and you lose, any survivors are killed off instead of letting the winners sell off the excess.
Also, both of our examples were assuming, at best, attacking from a district on the same planet, and at worst, attacking from another planet in the same system, but with a Research Lab to negate the clone losses. If you want to have 150 soldiers on the ground a couple of systems away, you're going to be sending more than 200 clones. That's going to have a HUGE impact on how fights play out when this goes live.
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:This doesnt de-incentive attacking. Some mechanic could just add a feelin of "set-back" just like losing as a defender gives you that feeling as you dont generate any clone. How about this for an disincentive/setback when losing?
Quote:Clones not lost in combat but destroyed in MCC destruction do not get biomassed and sold. If clone count reaches 0 due to minimum clone loss, conflict resolution is considered to be "Defender kills all clones" Oh. RIght. They already did that. Winning means you EITHER have your remaining clones in the district if you clone out the defenders, or you get to sell off the surviving clones, thus recovering some of the investment cost required for the attack. Losing means you lose all the clones, regardless of whether you ACTUALLY lose all your clones or not. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
321
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:12:00 -
[1039] - Quote
Equal skill in combat suggests a 50/50 chance of either side winning. Sometimes this will happen and the defenders will burn out the attackers and sometimes vice versa. That's the very nature of the game. I think what will end up happening a lot though is that the attackers will have a couple of goes and either burn out or decide they probably need to save some clones for their own defense and then some other corp will jump in and finish the job, seeing that the defenders clone count has already been reduced somewhat. Ooooor even if the attacker manages to take the district, they'll have reduced clone numbers from hard fighting, leaving the district vulnerable to another attacker in the same manner.
I imagine some corps having set intelligence snipers just scouring the region looking for districts under attack, so they can target them as soon as the attack is over. Man I'm gonna spend even more of my life on this game when this comes out...
This raises another point for CCP Fox Four: can anyone look at the stats for any district at any time? If a district is under attack, external parties will still be able to see the clone counts? Maybe some sort of recon mechanic could be added, whereby you have to spend isk to get a scouting report or it takes a certain length of time to get stats on a district depending on how far away it is. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2070
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:17:00 -
[1040] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Equal skill in combat suggests a 50/50 chance of either side winning. Equal skill in DIRECT combat means that face-to-face on the battlefield, there's a 50/50 chance of either side winning the encounter. But in an objective-based game mode, the focus is no longer on direct combat, and because the suggested scenario I was working with had been a scenario where the attackers were LOSING EVERY TIME, I was suggesting a worst-case scenario in which this would actually be a logical scenario to see happening. |
|
Booker DaFooker
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
74
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:20:00 -
[1041] - Quote
Sorry if this has been covered but just got in from work after thinking about this and wanted to get it down while on my mind
Surely there should be a mechanic in place to allow defenders to reinforce to at least their pre attack levels with some room to also increase numbers if they successfully defend their district. Otherwise there is a possibility that corps will just abandon districts if they know that a large corp/ alliance has targeted them and may even be coerced into doing so by prior arrangement.
A big alliance with big resources can basically guarantee victory through attrition even if they lose some battles. It doesn't seem right that a defender may win a hard fought victory but with significant clone losses which under the current system it can't replace in 24 hrs if a well stocked alliance continues its attack with a restocked clone attack force.
In this scenario the defenders could lose their district even though they win every battle!
A small corps that realizes this in a fully stocked district can abandon and receive either 30 mil or 45 mil for selling their clones which gets them a new clone pack. They are not in as great a position as they were but better than kicked from district with all clones destroyed and they now have the means to go and try and usurp someone they have a chance against with a clone pack.
Big corps that know this can sweeten the deal by prior arrangement with some extra isk and why would the little corps refuse? they can't win over time as a defender and its cheaper for a big corp to part fund an abandonment.
The 100 clone production rate would partly mitigates this and it is almost solved if on a PF but it seems that it will go down to 75 and 100 which would not be enough so I think this is a real issue.
Under current proposals, district defenders are 100% doomed to fail if up against well stocked rivals even if they win all their battles.
Thoughts? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
321
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:32:00 -
[1042] - Quote
Booker DaFooker wrote:Sorry if this has been covered but just got in from work after thinking about this and wanted to get it down while on my mind Surely there should be a mechanic in place to allow defenders to reinforce to at least their pre attack levels with some room to also increase numbers if they successfully defend their district. Otherwise there is a possibility that corps will just abandon districts if they know that a large corp/ alliance has targeted them and may even be coerced into doing so by prior arrangement. A big alliance with big resources can basically guarantee victory through attrition even if they lose some battles. It doesn't seem right that a defender may win a hard fought victory but with significant clone losses which under the current system it can't replace in 24 hrs if a well stocked alliance continues its attack with a restocked clone attack force. In this scenario the defenders could lose their district even though they win every battle! A small corps that realizes this in a fully stocked district can abandon and receive either 30 mil or 45 mil for selling their clones which gets them a new clone pack. They are not in as great a position as they were but better than kicked from district with all clones destroyed and they now have the means to go and try and usurp someone they have a chance against with a clone pack. Big corps that know this can sweeten the deal by prior arrangement with some extra isk and why would the little corps refuse? they can't win over time as a defender and its cheaper for a big corp to part fund an abandonment. The 100 clone production rate partly mitigates this and it is almost solved if on a PF but otherwise I think this is a real issue. Under current proposals, district defenders are 100% doomed to fail if up against well stocked rivals even if they win all their battles. Thoughts?
If the defender wins, they get their next batch of clones produced (75 or 100 with the Production SI). If a corp (not necessarily a big one) has enough districts and clones to be launching attacks from multiple locations on a single district, yes that district will be in trouble but if you win your defenses repeatedly, you'll still likely burn out the attacker's clones to the point that their own districts become very vulnerable. |
Booker DaFooker
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
74
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:38:00 -
[1043] - Quote
true but the situation still stands, you could be small but pretty good, win all your defensive battles but still lose your district in a few days depending on your clone losses in battle. A well stocked corp/alliance may well choose to continue on the offensive even if they are not winning battles because they know that eventually they will get the district. If the defending district is restocked after winning then it is much less likely to be bullied off it's district by corps who are just bigger but not better
Of course, if you lose then you lose your clones and your new total is the new maximum you can be re-stocked to, but I'm also still inclined to allow a mechanic that allows some guaranteed increase in clone stocks if you keep winning consecutive attacks |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:59:00 -
[1044] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote: This doesnt de-incentive attacking. Some mechanic could just add a feelin of "set-back" just like losing as a defender gives you that feeling as you dont generate any clone.
I also said "or makes it harder to do so." A couple of your suggestions make it impossible to attack the same district again from the one you originally attacked from, which seems silly. I don't think it's going to be the case where people are attacking haphazardly every district they can find, so if you lose once and can't attack the same district again from the one you just used, it's going to feel really slow and boring.
In fact, for any Corp that only owns one district, it's going to feel like every game is a must-win for fear of losing both the Lock-out period you had established (which means someone else can swoop in on the district you're hitting) or the defenders are going to be able to restock their losses. I just think the defenders need to be able to recoup more of their losses from a victory (fair to defenders) without preventing the attackers from continuing their effort to take the district (fair to attackers).
Garrett Blacknova wrote:You appear to have missed the edit on my post that you're referring: Here, I'll repost the quote that I got from the Wiki where this scenario doesn't play out quite how I said it would originally... Quote:Clones not lost in combat but destroyed in MCC destruction do not get biomassed and sold. If clone count reaches 0 due to minimum clone loss, conflict resolution is considered to be "Defender kills all clones" If you only send the minimum 150 clones into battle and you lose, any survivors are killed off instead of letting the winners sell off the excess.
I'm 99% sure that quote refers directly to the ISK gain from damaged/destroyed clones in a fight, ie 50,000 ISK per clone. It does not mean that any clones left over aren't stolen (20% anyway) by the defending team. In other words, the defender will get the ISK for the 100 clones destroyed and biomassed in the match (not 150), but will still get 20% of the 50 remaining clones as reinforcements (though not ISK), so mathematically, 140 clones were destroyed on the attacking side (100 biomassed for ISK), with 10 defecting to the defenders.
Quote:Also, both of our examples were assuming, at best, attacking from a district on the same planet, and at worst, attacking from another planet in the same system, but with a Research Lab to negate the clone losses. If you want to have 150 soldiers on the ground a couple of systems away, you're going to be sending more than 200 clones. That's going to have a HUGE impact on how fights play out when this goes live.
Yes, it will have a big impact, but until we know exactly how many systems it's going to be spread across, and how many districts are going to be in each system (not just on one planet), plus the fact that districts and planets don't have unique bonuses, then there may not be much reason to ever expand out of your own system. You can only hold so many districts effectively. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:59:00 -
[1045] - Quote
Double post because it won't let me quote more than 5 times in a single response...
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Django Quik wrote:Equal skill in combat suggests a 50/50 chance of either side winning. Equal skill in DIRECT combat means that face-to-face on the battlefield, there's a 50/50 chance of either side winning the encounter. But in an objective-based game mode, the focus is no longer on direct combat, and because the suggested scenario I was working with had been a scenario where the attackers were LOSING EVERY TIME, I was presenting a defender's worst-case scenario in which this would actually logically happen.
You can't say equal skill and then give one side an advantage in combat, whether it's objective-based combat or not. Equal skill means equal skill in everything. Gun game, players, strategy, etc. Limiting the scenario to direct combat for the purposes of PC-related discussion is pointless considering all of the matches are going to be objective-based.
Django Quik wrote: think what will end up happening a lot though is that the attackers will have a couple of goes and either burn out or decide they probably need to save some clones for their own defense and then some other corp will jump in and finish the job, seeing that the defenders clone count has already been reduced somewhat. Ooooor even if the attacker manages to take the district, they'll have reduced clone numbers from hard fighting, leaving the district vulnerable to another attacker in the same manner.
Let's not forget, as with my examples on the previous page, the defender is going to be the more appetizing target in almost every scenario after Day 2. Your very last sentence is the only thing I imagine will keep people from attacking 4 days in a row (but that's only if they only own 1 district, if they own 2 or more, they can simply reinforce the first or attack from the second). |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2071
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 18:10:00 -
[1046] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:I'm 99% sure that quote refers directly to the ISK gain from damaged/destroyed clones in a fight, ie 50,000 ISK per clone. It does not mean that any clones left over aren't stolen (20% anyway) by the defending team. In other words, the defender will get the ISK for the 100 clones destroyed and biomassed in the match (not 150), but will still get 20% of the 50 remaining clones as reinforcements (though not ISK), so mathematically, 140 clones were destroyed on the attacking side (100 biomassed for ISK), with 10 defecting to the defenders. That would be good logic, apart from the fact that this addresses a very specific scenario:
Quote:If clone count reaches 0 due to minimum clone loss, conflict resolution is considered to be "Defender kills all clones" That says you're wrong. It's the same part I missed the first time I read it.
Parson Atreides wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Equal skill in DIRECT combat means that face-to-face on the battlefield, there's a 50/50 chance of either side winning the encounter. But in an objective-based game mode, the focus is no longer on direct combat, and because the suggested scenario I was working with had been a scenario where the attackers were LOSING EVERY TIME, I was presenting a defender's worst-case scenario in which this would actually logically happen. You can't say equal skill and then give one side an advantage in combat, whether it's objective-based combat or not. Equal skill means equal skill in everything. Gun game, players, strategy, etc. Limiting the scenario to direct combat for the purposes of PC-related discussion is pointless considering all of the matches are going to be objective-based. Which is why I was emphasising that I was working with the presented scenario where the defender always won the battle, but lost their district through attrition anyway. That was the scenario presented, and what I was providing is a situation by which that could happen in basically the worst possible way for the defenders. It's also why I specifically emphasised equal skill in DIRECT combat, not equal skill in all areas. That argument is a completely separate one to what I was actually addressing. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2071
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 18:27:00 -
[1047] - Quote
Booker DaFooker wrote:true but the situation still stands, you could be small but pretty good, win all your defensive battles but still lose your district in a few days depending on your clone losses in battle. A well stocked corp/alliance may well choose to continue on the offensive even if they are not winning battles because they know that eventually they will get the district. If the defending district is restocked after winning then it is much less likely to be bullied off it's district by corps who are just bigger but not better
Of course, if you lose then you lose your clones and your new total is the new maximum you can be re-stocked to, but I'm also still inclined to allow a mechanic that allows some guaranteed increase in clone stocks if you keep winning consecutive attacks If you're small and good, winning every battle, I've shown the numbers in a particularly bad situation where you're suffering 100 clone deaths per battle, and you're still only suffering a net loss of 25 clones - less if the attackers brought more than 150 clones per attack and you win by MCC destruction, or if you have the Production Facility SI.
It would require a minimum of 4 districts to sustain attacks like for any length of time, and it would require more than a week of constant attacking to grind the target district down in this manner.
7 days x 3 million ISK = 21 million if you hold the required number of districts and can go for a week without ANY of your districts being attacked at the wrong moment, and assuming any attacks that do happen are repelled with minimal losses on your part.
7 days x 40 million ISK = 280 million ISK if you hold no districts and are really, REALLY serious about wanting that particular district and money is no object.
Either way, the defenders spend a grand total of 0 ISK making you fight for it for over a week. Who's really getting the better deal here? |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 18:42:00 -
[1048] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:I'm 99% sure that quote refers directly to the ISK gain from damaged/destroyed clones in a fight, ie 50,000 ISK per clone. It does not mean that any clones left over aren't stolen (20% anyway) by the defending team. In other words, the defender will get the ISK for the 100 clones destroyed and biomassed in the match (not 150), but will still get 20% of the 50 remaining clones as reinforcements (though not ISK), so mathematically, 140 clones were destroyed on the attacking side (100 biomassed for ISK), with 10 defecting to the defenders. That would be good logic, apart from the fact that this addresses a very specific scenario: Quote:If clone count reaches 0 due to minimum clone loss, conflict resolution is considered to be "Defender kills all clones" That says you're wrong. It's the same part I missed the first time I read it.
I see what you're saying now. They're going to have to tweak that, since the only time I imagine someone sending so many clones that more than 150 will reach the district is when they're confident they'll take it. It's interesting, though, if they send 200 (none lost on transport), and lose 100 in the battle and lose the battle itself, does the 20% get taken away from the remaining 100 or only 50 because they have to lose 150 minimum?
Regardless, I'm pretty sure after you take a hostile district, it becomes Unlocked, meaning you could just reinforce it if needed, giving even less reason to send more than 150.
Quote:Parson Atreides wrote: You can't say equal skill and then give one side an advantage in combat, whether it's objective-based combat or not. Equal skill means equal skill in everything. Gun game, players, strategy, etc. Limiting the scenario to direct combat for the purposes of PC-related discussion is pointless considering all of the matches are going to be objective-based.
Which is why I was emphasising that I was working with the presented scenario where the defender always won the battle, but lost their district through attrition anyway. That was the scenario presented, and what I was providing is a situation by which that could happen in basically the worst possible way for the defenders. It's also why I specifically emphasised equal skill in DIRECT combat, not equal skill in all areas. That argument is a completely separate one to what I was actually addressing.
Ah, I missed the very first line of Skihids post, which says the defender wins every battle. The more interesting question is why the defender loses the district every time even with the same skill level and number of victories (with in many cases relative-little clone loss by the attackers), which is what my long post in the previous page is about. |
Thor Odinson42
Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore
32
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 19:15:00 -
[1049] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote: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.
I don't think anybody that sells their clones in the beginning is going to find a ton of success. The isk farming will occur after you've obtained a firm foothold.
I don't even think it should be something worth contemplating for a while. |
Booker DaFooker
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
74
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 19:16:00 -
[1050] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:true but the situation still stands, you could be small but pretty good, win all your defensive battles but still lose your district in a few days depending on your clone losses in battle. A well stocked corp/alliance may well choose to continue on the offensive even if they are not winning battles because they know that eventually they will get the district. If the defending district is restocked after winning then it is much less likely to be bullied off it's district by corps who are just bigger but not better
Of course, if you lose then you lose your clones and your new total is the new maximum you can be re-stocked to, but I'm also still inclined to allow a mechanic that allows some guaranteed increase in clone stocks if you keep winning consecutive attacks If you're small and good, winning every battle, I've shown the numbers in a particularly bad situation where you're suffering 100 clone deaths per battle, and you're still only suffering a net loss of 25 clones - less if the attackers brought more than 150 clones per attack and you win by MCC destruction, or if you have the Production Facility SI. It would require a minimum of 4 districts to sustain attacks like for any length of time, and it would require more than a week of constant attacking to grind the target district down in this manner. 7 days x 3 million ISK = 21 million if you hold the required number of districts and can go for a week without ANY of your districts being attacked at the wrong moment, and assuming any attacks that do happen are repelled with minimal losses on your part. 7 days x 40 million ISK = 280 million ISK if you hold no districts and are really, REALLY serious about wanting that particular district and money is no object. Either way, the defenders spend a grand total of 0 ISK making you fight for it for over a week. Who's really getting the better deal here?
Your point is good and obviously we are talking about the big corps being very determined in it's task but 150 clones a day is the product of two districts or less which doesn't seem to me to be a big drain if you have many districts and the little guy has no ally's to lock reinforcing district.
This also brings me back to my previous point that small corps could be bought out of a no win situation for them and abandon to order at a preset time allowing big corps in hassle free for a price plus whatever the small corps gets for its clone sale |
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2073
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 19:25:00 -
[1051] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:I see what you're saying now. They're going to have to tweak that, since the only time I imagine someone sending so many clones that more than 150 will reach the district is when they're confident they'll take it. It's interesting, though, if they send 200 (none lost on transport), and lose 100 in the battle and lose the battle itself, does the 20% get taken away from the remaining 100 or only 50 because they have to lose 150 minimum? That's a VERY good question. But if you're wanting to grind down a defender's forces heavily, a 200 or even 250 clone attack would be a practical option if you can be sure of losing enough clones - and killing enough - to balance out the numbers in your favour. Unless you get totally dominated, the worst-case scenario is that the defenders see through the plan, retreat, and let you lock the district down with 150 clones killed.
Quote:Regardless, it's possible after you take a hostile district, it becomes Unlocked, meaning you could just reinforce it if needed, giving even less reason to send more than 150. And this MIGHT be countered by someone following your victory up with an immediate attack if they're watching for the battle results and set the attack before your corp can send those reinforcements.
Quote:Ah, I missed the very first line of Skihids post, which says the defender wins every battle. The more interesting question is why the defender loses the district every time even with the same skill level and number of victories (with in many cases relative-little clone loss by the attackers), which is what my long post in the previous page is about. And that IS a big question... and I THINK I have an answer... Or at least part of one.
Instead of biomassed clones being 50,000 ISK each, you get a choice. Either you can sell them, or you can rebuild clones from them. Because of all the processes involved in recovering viable parts and actually reclaiming them, it should be at a MASSIVE loss in numbers - even worse than the 20% you get back from capturing clones that survive a battle. I'm leaning towards maybe a 5 or 10% reclamation rate, and because you've taken the most intact - and therefore valuable - parts from the biomass, the remainder is only going to have enough resale value to cover the cost of producing those extra clones. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2074
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 19:32:00 -
[1052] - Quote
Booker DaFooker wrote:Your point is good and obviously we are talking about the big corps being very determined in it's task but 150 clones a day is the product of two districts or less which doesn't seem to me to be a big drain if you have many districts and the little guy has no ally's to lock reinforcing district.
This also brings me back to my previous point that small corps could be bought out of a no win situation for them and abandon to order at a preset time allowing big corps in hassle free for a price plus whatever the small corps gets for its clone sale While it's true that 150 clones a day can be produced by a single district, that's NOT how it works out when you're calculating an attack on an enemy district.
EDIT: Also, if you get your corp paid off, what's to stop you from using that huge wad of cash to launch a war of attrition against the district you just sold and reclaim it? Because if you could negotiate the kind of payout that would support it, why not? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
321
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 19:39:00 -
[1053] - Quote
@Garrett - just wanted to say thanks for helping me field some of these questions lately; it's really good to see someone else helping out who has a real good grasp of the whole thing too. There are still a few niggling little bits and bobs to iron out but we've really ground this whole PC thing to the bones.
Also props to everyone who's been posting their insights and contributing to the debate. Most thorough analysis I've seen on the forums ever I think. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
321
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 19:42:00 -
[1054] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:Your point is good and obviously we are talking about the big corps being very determined in it's task but 150 clones a day is the product of two districts or less which doesn't seem to me to be a big drain if you have many districts and the little guy has no ally's to lock reinforcing district.
This also brings me back to my previous point that small corps could be bought out of a no win situation for them and abandon to order at a preset time allowing big corps in hassle free for a price plus whatever the small corps gets for its clone sale While it's true that 150 clones a day can be produced by a single district, that's NOT how it works out when you're calculating an attack on an enemy district. EDIT: Also, if you get your corp paid off, what's to stop you from using that huge wad of cash to launch a war of attrition against the district you just sold and reclaim it? Because if you could negotiate the kind of payout that would support it, why not?
I wouldn't ever take or offer a payout when one of the big corps is involved - because you can't guarantee either will happen, you're trusting that either the money will be paid when you hand over the district, or that the district will be handed over when you pay the money. There aren't any corps I'd trust that would hold me to ransom and then give me a good deal. |
Musta Tornius
BetaMax. CRONOS.
278
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 19:44:00 -
[1055] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:Your point is good and obviously we are talking about the big corps being very determined in it's task but 150 clones a day is the product of two districts or less which doesn't seem to me to be a big drain if you have many districts and the little guy has no ally's to lock reinforcing district.
This also brings me back to my previous point that small corps could be bought out of a no win situation for them and abandon to order at a preset time allowing big corps in hassle free for a price plus whatever the small corps gets for its clone sale While it's true that 150 clones a day can be produced by a single district, that's NOT how it works out when you're calculating an attack on an enemy district. EDIT: Also, if you get your corp paid off, what's to stop you from using that huge wad of cash to launch a war of attrition against the district you just sold and reclaim it? Because if you could negotiate the kind of payout that would support it, why not? I wouldn't ever take or offer a payout when one of the big corps is involved - because you can't guarantee either will happen, you're trusting that either the money will be paid when you hand over the district, or that the district will be handed over when you pay the money. There aren't any corps I'd trust that would hold me to ransom and then give me a good deal.
This is where good escrow services come in, they already function fine in eve so why not in dust too? |
Booker DaFooker
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
74
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 19:54:00 -
[1056] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:Your point is good and obviously we are talking about the big corps being very determined in it's task but 150 clones a day is the product of two districts or less which doesn't seem to me to be a big drain if you have many districts and the little guy has no ally's to lock reinforcing district.
This also brings me back to my previous point that small corps could be bought out of a no win situation for them and abandon to order at a preset time allowing big corps in hassle free for a price plus whatever the small corps gets for its clone sale While it's true that 150 clones a day can be produced by a single district, that's NOT how it works out when you're calculating an attack on an enemy district. EDIT: Also, if you get your corp paid off, what's to stop you from using that huge wad of cash to launch a war of attrition against the district you just sold and reclaim it? Because if you could negotiate the kind of payout that would support it, why not? I wouldn't ever take or offer a payout when one of the big corps is involved - because you can't guarantee either will happen, you're trusting that either the money will be paid when you hand over the district, or that the district will be handed over when you pay the money. There aren't any corps I'd trust that would hold me to ransom and then give me a good deal.
YUP!
As ever, welcome to new eden!
Well maybe it just adds to the meta game and should be left alone
Still feel that a successful defence should carry a reward rather than be barely compensated. 50+ clone winning margins are common place with blueberries in pubs but not so likely in PC IMHO. This leaves even good corps vulnerable to a no win situation even when they beat their opponents regularly and that just doesnt seem fair.
|
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 20:07:00 -
[1057] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote: That's a VERY good question. But if you're wanting to grind down a defender's forces heavily, a 200 or even 250 clone attack would be a practical option if you can be sure of losing enough clones - and killing enough - to balance out the numbers in your favour. Unless you get totally dominated, the worst-case scenario is that the defenders see through the plan, retreat, and let you lock the district down with 150 clones killed.
Unless these battles are supposed to take a decent bit longer than the average skirmish today, then I sort of doubt you'd ever end up losing more than 150 on either side. Really the only way that happens now is if one side is just completely crushing the other side. Every so often you'll have a really good game that comes down to clones on both sides (in a skirmish), but I'm not sure you'd ever base a strategy off that rarity knowing that if you fail to kill enough, or fail to get killed enough yourself, you're going to end up bolstering their clone count moderately. Also, these will be Corp vs Corp, so those several blue dots that just run into the open to die really won't exist.
Quote: And this MIGHT be countered by someone following your victory up with an immediate attack if they're watching for the battle results and set the attack before your corp can send those reinforcements.
Eh, technically that's possible, but since you know exactly when and how (clone count) the battle will end, you really shouldn't have trouble sending reinforcements before anyone sees that the district is occupied by very few clones. If/when districts/planets provide unique bonuses, I think your caution would be warranted.
Quote:Ah, I missed the very first line of Skihids post, which says the defender wins every battle. The more interesting question is why the defender loses the district every time even with the same skill level and number of victories (with in many cases relative-little clone loss by the attackers), which is what my long post in the previous page is about. That IS a big question... and I THINK I have an answer... Or at least part of one.
Instead of biomassed clones being 50,000 ISK each, you get a choice. Either you can sell them, or you can rebuild clones from them. Because of all the processes involved in recovering viable parts and actually reclaiming them, it should be at a MASSIVE loss in numbers - even worse than the 20% you get back from capturing clones that survive a battle. I'm leaning towards maybe a 5 or 10% reclamation rate, and because you've taken the most intact - and therefore valuable - parts from the biomass, the remainder is only going to have enough resale value to cover the cost of producing those extra clones.[/quote]
I like the idea that you can use different parts to create another clone--and I think it solves, in some way, the problem of people treating these as Ambush instead of Skirmish when they just to try kill clones. I don't think you need to sacrifice the 50,000 ISK, though. It could easily be explained that 10% of clones killed in battle goes directly to the defenders as new clones, and the 90% of biomass left over gets sold off as a rough average of 50,000 ISK per clone killed. You should also get 20% of attacking clones not killed in combat--and that's under the 150 minimum. So if 50 survive, you get 10, regardless of whether or not they're all killed because of the minimum. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1222
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 20:25:00 -
[1058] - Quote
Something obvious just crossed my mind and kinda invalidates any calculation of clone count for 1vs1 district battle in the previous math i've seen in this thread.
And it's about the RT.
Let's say both district engage in the fight have a RT set between 12h00-13h00pm.And both have a cargo hub. Same planet. No attacks on district A.
District A (attackers) 450 clones District B (defenders) 450 clones. Regen rate 75 clones per RT.
Day 1 District A attacks District B at 9h00 am with 150 clones. Come RT. No fight. Excess clone is sold for district B District A is at 375 clones.
Day 2 12h00. RT starts, both district generate clones District A is at 450 clones District B sells the excess of clones. Fight happens. Attackers win through MCC destruction. Defenders lose 150 clones. Attackers lose 140 clones. 10 clones sold.
District A sets another attack with 150 clones at 12h45 once battle is over.
District A : 300 clones District B : 300 Clones
Day 3 12h00
District B doesnt generate clones. District A does.
District A : 375 clones District B : 300 Clones
NO BATTLE happens as it's not been a full 24h since the first fight Don't know if you guys took that into account but it's important. Or at least that's the way i understood that part of the wiki
Quote:The biggest takeaway from the above examples is that when a district looks at the reinforcement timer to determine when the battle will happen or when to unlock it always happens on or in the reinforcement window after a minimum of 24 hours.
It would be nice to know if what matters is the overall RT or the beginning of the RT regarding that rule. If it has been answered before then my bad but i dont think so. Let's move on.
Day 4 12h00. Clone generation for district A District A : 450 clones District B : 300 Clones Fight happens. Defenders win, attackers lose all 150 clones. Defenders lose 120.
District A : 300 clones District B : 180 clones.
Attackers decides to keep attacking at 12h50.
Day 5 12h00
Both district generates clones. No fight happens (still depending on the previous rule) District A : 375 clones District B : 255 clones
Day 6 12h00
Clone generation etc.. District A : 450 clones District B : 330 clones
Fight happens and so on.
Overall, if there's actually almost 48h between two fights, an attacking district will replenish its 150 lost clones automatically between 2 fights no matter if it's a win or a loss. When a defender will automatically be wronged even if he manages to keep a 1:1 W\L ratio. And i really dont think the 20% "stealing" of clones from the rest of the attacker clone stock will ever be enough to compensate that.
Though that fact would be a massive incentive to attack as it would be pretty easy to get back the lost clone even when losing, this tends to go in the way of the "defender doesnt stand a chance" fact. Obviously, this leaves out all the other variable such as potential foes for the attacker, attrition, and base cost for clone movement.
I'm starting to think that maybe the "not generating clones" for defenders when losing a battle may not be a good way to go. Perhaps a 50% reduction ?
But first things first, anyone knows for sure how the 24h rule works out when the action is taken during RT ? Foxfour ? Nullarbor ?
Thoughts people ? And garret, i well know the drawbacks of attacking that are already in place. I was just pointing out that they dont seem as significant as the ones the defender has to deal with |
Bojo The Mighty
Bojo's School of the Trades
604
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 20:26:00 -
[1059] - Quote
Will Planetary Conquest signal the arrival of new maps? If so, can we expect them to be Dev Originals or based off of the Ideas/Themes for Maps Sticky?
If so, I nominate this bad boy: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=448435#post448435 |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1222
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 20:37:00 -
[1060] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:
Or, what about offering a deal for defenders through the reward system ? When winning, defender could choose to process used biomass into new clones instead of getting full ISK reward ?
Just to keep the discussion going.
Garrett Blacknova wrote:
Instead of biomassed clones being 50,000 ISK each, you get a choice. Either you can sell them, or you can rebuild clones from them. Because of all the processes involved in recovering viable parts and actually reclaiming them, it should be at a MASSIVE loss in numbers - even worse than the 20% you get back from capturing clones that survive a battle. I'm leaning towards maybe a 5 or 10% reclamation rate, and because you've taken the most intact - and therefore valuable - parts from the biomass, the remainder is only going to have enough resale value to cover the cost of producing those extra clones.
At least we agree on that being a possible solution. I guess a 25-30% clone recuperation could be a decent choice. Either cash in, or reinforce your clone stock. For a battle with 200 clones killed on the BF (leaving MCC loss aside as they arent taken into account in the reward system) it would be 50-60 clones as insta reinforcement.
Which would make the cost of one of those clone :
ISK reward for 200 clones killed : 10 000 000 25% clone generation instead : 50 clones. 200K Which is the price of a Genolution clone.
Yet, this solution could be used to create clones easily when PC launches.
Create alt corp, buy Genolution pack. Attack Mother corp district with 200 Clones. Lose them all in the fight on purpose => Mother Corp chooses to get clones and not ISK => 50 clones for 40 Millions. 800K each. => Could be used by very rich corp but still remains way too pricy to be a valid daily tactic. |
|
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
440
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 20:51:00 -
[1061] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:NO BATTLE happens as it's not been a full 24h since the first fight Don't know if you guys took that into account but it's important. Or at least that's the way i understood that part of the wiki I think that if the attacking corp attacks again the attack occur the next day (23 hours later), and not 47 hours later. That's how I understand some of the answers from FoxFour in this thread.
|
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1222
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 21:28:00 -
[1062] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:NO BATTLE happens as it's not been a full 24h since the first fight Don't know if you guys took that into account but it's important. Or at least that's the way i understood that part of the wiki I think that if the attacking corp attacks again the attack occur the next day (23 hours later), and not 47 hours later. That's how I understand some of the answers from FoxFour in this thread.
Yeah ? so it would be the sole exception ? TBH, i'd rather not have 47h delay between 2 fights on the same district |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 21:46:00 -
[1063] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote: Let's say both district engage in the fight have a RT set between 12h00-13h00pm.And both have a cargo hub. Same planet. No attacks on district A.
District A (attackers) 450 clones District B (defenders) 450 clones. Regen rate 75 clones per RT.
Day 1 District A attacks District B at 9h00 am with 150 clones. Come RT. No fight. Excess clone is sold for district B District A is at 375 clones.
You've already lost me. District A would have to wait, in the case of this example, 27 hours after Setting an Attack against B to actually Launch it. If the RT is at 1200-1300, then no fight can happen at any other time. Also, how is District A at 375 clones without fighting? Unless you mean that 150 is somewhere in limbo between Districts A and B and A doesn't need to account for them when accumulating clones, which I'm almost positive is incorrect. The clones themselves don't move out of the district until the actual fight, and therefore you can't send 150 off right before your RT and get 75 back while keeping the 150 in limbo.
Quote:Day 2 12h00. RT starts, both district generate clones District A is at 450 clones District B sells the excess of clones. Fight happens. Attackers win through MCC destruction. Defenders lose 150 clones. Attackers lose 140 clones. 10 clones sold.
Clones from the attacker wouldn't be sold, they'd just go back to District A, because, again, you would be down 150 (or in this case 75 because your RT is at the same time as theirs) and those 10 would go back.
Quote:District A sets another attack with 150 clones at 12h45 once battle is over.
District A : 300 clones District B : 300 Clones
Day 3 12h00
District B doesnt generate clones. District A does.
District A : 375 clones District B : 300 Clones
NO BATTLE happens as it's not been a full 24h since the first fight Don't know if you guys took that into account but it's important. Or at least that's the way i understood that part of the wiki
I think that exclusivity period takes into account that you're setting the timer after the RT, but doesn't need that minimum of 24 hours again. It would be incredibly stupid if you needed two days between every attack after the first.
Quote:It would be nice to know if what matters is the overall RT or the beginning of the RT regarding that rule. If it has been answered before then my bad but i dont think so. Let's move on.
I'm pretty sure he's said the beginning of the RT is what matters, just like the beginning of RT is when you get your clone reinforcements.
The rest of your post is contingent upon the above possibility that you'd have to wait 2 days between attacks after the first, which has to be wrong, or it breaks the system. Plus it would be really boring. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1222
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 22:31:00 -
[1064] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote: Let's say both district engage in the fight have a RT set between 12h00-13h00pm.And both have a cargo hub. Same planet. No attacks on district A.
District A (attackers) 450 clones District B (defenders) 450 clones. Regen rate 75 clones per RT.
Day 1 District A attacks District B at 9h00 am with 150 clones. Come RT. No fight. Excess clone is sold for district B District A is at 375 clones.
You've already lost me. District A would have to wait, in the case of this example, 27 hours after Setting an Attack against B to actually Launch it. If the RT is at 1200-1300, then no fight can happen at any other time. Also, how is District A at 375 clones without fighting? Unless you mean that 150 is somewhere in limbo between Districts A and B and A doesn't need to account for them when accumulating clones, which I'm almost positive is incorrect. The clones themselves don't move out of the district until the actual fight, and therefore you can't send 150 off right before your RT and get 75 back while keeping the 150 in limbo.
Nope, it has been said clone movement is done instantly. So when setting the attack, your 150 clones would 'leave" your district and idle in the targetted one. Unless it works differently for fights.
The whole point of this post was to raise questions. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2079
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:23:00 -
[1065] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Nope, it has been said clone movement is done instantly. So when setting the attack, your 150 clones would 'leave" your district and idle in the targetted one. Unless it works differently for fights.
The whole point of this post was to raise questions. This particular question - do the clones travel immediately on declaring the attack, or immediately on INITIATING it? - is an important one that I'm now surprised we didn't think to ask earlier.
As for the scenario you're presenting though, the OPTION to attack is created just BEFORE the attacker goes into battle. They have one hour to accept that option, and if they take it, the attack is initiated based on the time the option was created - NOT the time it was accepted. This allows you to effectively declare an attack an hour later than you should be allowed to under normal circumstances. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:33:00 -
[1066] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote: Nope, it has been said clone movement is done instantly. So when setting the attack, your 150 clones would 'leave" your district and idle in the targetted one. Unless it works differently for fights.
The whole point of this post was to raise questions.
It's been said that clones moved between two districts of the same corp is instant, I don't think they've said specifically what it is for battles, but I think we need to assume the clones only move when the battle actually takes place, otherwise attackers could manipulate the system to guarantee 150-200 more clones prior to the first attack like so:
Corp A has RT set for 1300 Corp B has RT for 1400
Corp A Sets an Attack against Corp B at 1259 on Tuesday (let's just say 150 clones). Corp A gets 75 clones from RT Tuesday. Corp A gets 75 clones from RT Wednesday Battle takes place at 1400 Wednesday.
If Corp A has a Cargo Hub, this effectively gives them 600 clones to attack with. This means, even if they lose, they've only really lost the chance at some ISK and are still maxed on clones. If they win, they're already maxed on clones, putting the defender in an even worse position. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1222
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:34:00 -
[1067] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Nope, it has been said clone movement is done instantly. So when setting the attack, your 150 clones would 'leave" your district and idle in the targetted one. Unless it works differently for fights.
The whole point of this post was to raise questions. This particular question - do the clones travel immediately on declaring the attack, or immediately on INITIATING it? - is an important one that I'm now surprised we didn't think to ask earlier. As for the scenario you're presenting though, the OPTION to attack is created just BEFORE the attacker goes into battle. They have one hour to accept that option, and if they take it, the attack is initiated based on the time the option was created - NOT the time it was accepted. This allows you to effectively declare an attack an hour later than you should be allowed to under normal circumstances.
ok so the "dibs hour" gives you the possibility to not wait 24h+ before rematch. Makes sense and thanks for clearing the air.
Let's hope Foxfour or Null can give us an answer regarding clone movement timing when setting an attack. |
Booker DaFooker
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
74
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:41:00 -
[1068] - Quote
given that the act of moving your clones into a district is what either claims a district or sets up an attack, I think we can safely say that the movement of clones is instant |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2079
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:43:00 -
[1069] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Nope, it has been said clone movement is done instantly. So when setting the attack, your 150 clones would 'leave" your district and idle in the targetted one. Unless it works differently for fights.
The whole point of this post was to raise questions. This particular question - do the clones travel immediately on declaring the attack, or immediately on INITIATING it? - is an important one that I'm now surprised we didn't think to ask earlier. As for the scenario you're presenting though, the OPTION to attack is created just BEFORE the attacker goes into battle. They have one hour to accept that option, and if they take it, the attack is initiated based on the time the option was created - NOT the time it was accepted. This allows you to effectively declare an attack an hour later than you should be allowed to under normal circumstances. ok so the "dibs hour" gives you the possibility to not wait 24h+ before rematch. Makes sense and thanks for clearing the air. Let's hope Foxfour or Null can give us an answer regarding clone movement timing when setting an attack. TECHNICALLY, it "backdates" the attack order to a moment before the RT.
11:59:59 Attack option created for the target district of the attack that's about to happen. THIS is when an attack using the option is actually created, not the time that the option is claimed.
12:00:00 Attack begins.
12:00:01 - 12:59:59 At any point during this window, the attacker can claim their option to attack, and it activates as of the option's creation - thus allowing the attack to effectively have already been initiated before being confirmed.
Another thing I'm curious about is whether or not this attack can be initiated before the battle ends. We already know it's possible - if unlikely - to draw a battle out for more than an hour. If it looks like that hour is about to run out, can you initiate the attack for the following day in spite of the battle still continuing?
And more importantly, if you can, and you do, and after setting the follow-up attack, what happens if you win the battle and claim the district? does the attack turn into a normal clone move? Is it cancelled? Do you get to launch an attack on your own territory? |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:53:00 -
[1070] - Quote
Booker DaFooker wrote:given that the act of moving your clones into a district is what either claims a district or sets up an attack, I think we can safely say that the movement of clones is instant
I think of attacking an occupied district more as setting down a flag and saying "okay we're going to hit these guys, so you can't". It sounds a little strange, but it makes a lot more sense then "okay we've moved these 150 clones to this district and we're going to wait 24-47 hours for the defenders to get ready before we attack".
Also, it makes more sense that moving them to one of your own districts or to an unoccupied district wouldn't take any time because there's no one to stop you from just walking in. With an enemy district, there is. |
|
Booker DaFooker
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
74
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:54:00 -
[1071] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Nope, it has been said clone movement is done instantly. So when setting the attack, your 150 clones would 'leave" your district and idle in the targetted one. Unless it works differently for fights.
The whole point of this post was to raise questions. This particular question - do the clones travel immediately on declaring the attack, or immediately on INITIATING it? - is an important one that I'm now surprised we didn't think to ask earlier. As for the scenario you're presenting though, the OPTION to attack is created just BEFORE the attacker goes into battle. They have one hour to accept that option, and if they take it, the attack is initiated based on the time the option was created - NOT the time it was accepted. This allows you to effectively declare an attack an hour later than you should be allowed to under normal circumstances. ok so the "dibs hour" gives you the possibility to not wait 24h+ before rematch. Makes sense and thanks for clearing the air. Let's hope Foxfour or Null can give us an answer regarding clone movement timing when setting an attack. TECHNICALLY, it "backdates" the attack order to a moment before the RT. 11:59:59 Attack option created for the target district of the attack that's about to happen. THIS is when an attack using the option is actually created, not the time that the option is claimed. 12:00:00 Attack begins. 12:00:01 - 12:59:59 At any point during this window, the attacker can claim their option to attack, and it activates as of the option's creation - thus allowing the attack to effectively have already been initiated before being confirmed. Another thing I'm curious about is whether or not this attack can be initiated before the battle ends. We already know it's possible - if unlikely - to draw a battle out for more than an hour. If it looks like that hour is about to run out, can you initiate the attack for the following day in spite of the battle still continuing? And more importantly, if you can, and you do, and after setting the follow-up attack, what happens if you win the battle and claim the district? does the attack turn into a normal clone move? Is it cancelled? Do you get to launch an attack on your own territory?
I seem to remember a dev post earlier here (i am not searching 50 odd pages for it! lol) that stated that the "dibs" hour happens for an hour after the battle has finished. |
Booker DaFooker
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
74
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:56:00 -
[1072] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:given that the act of moving your clones into a district is what either claims a district or sets up an attack, I think we can safely say that the movement of clones is instant I think of attacking an occupied district more as setting down a flag and saying "okay we're going to hit these guys, so you can't". It sounds a little strange, but it makes a lot more sense then "okay we've moved these 150 clones to this district and we're going to wait 24-47 hours for the defenders to get ready before we attack". Also, it makes more sense that moving them to one of your own districts or to an unoccupied district wouldn't take any time because there's no one to stop you from just walking in. With an enemy district, there is.
I hear what you say, nevertheless, currently an attack is instigated by the action of moving your clones to an occupied district |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 23:57:00 -
[1073] - Quote
Booker DaFooker wrote:
I seem to remember a dev post earlier here (i am not searching 50 odd pages for it! lol) that stated that the "dibs" hour happens for an hour after the battle has finished.
Same here, I'm pretty sure it's the hour after.
But we're all arguing about semantics (at least about that specific problem). Whether it backdates or is the one exception to the 24-47 hour rule is pointless because each has the same effect and no others. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1222
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:05:00 -
[1074] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Nope, it has been said clone movement is done instantly. So when setting the attack, your 150 clones would 'leave" your district and idle in the targetted one. Unless it works differently for fights.
The whole point of this post was to raise questions. This particular question - do the clones travel immediately on declaring the attack, or immediately on INITIATING it? - is an important one that I'm now surprised we didn't think to ask earlier. As for the scenario you're presenting though, the OPTION to attack is created just BEFORE the attacker goes into battle. They have one hour to accept that option, and if they take it, the attack is initiated based on the time the option was created - NOT the time it was accepted. This allows you to effectively declare an attack an hour later than you should be allowed to under normal circumstances. ok so the "dibs hour" gives you the possibility to not wait 24h+ before rematch. Makes sense and thanks for clearing the air. Let's hope Foxfour or Null can give us an answer regarding clone movement timing when setting an attack. TECHNICALLY, it "backdates" the attack order to a moment before the RT. 11:59:59 Attack option created for the target district of the attack that's about to happen. THIS is when an attack using the option is actually created, not the time that the option is claimed. 12:00:00 Attack begins. 12:00:01 - 12:59:59 At any point during this window, the attacker can claim their option to attack, and it activates as of the option's creation - thus allowing the attack to effectively have already been initiated before being confirmed. Another thing I'm curious about is whether or not this attack can be initiated before the battle ends. We already know it's possible - if unlikely - to draw a battle out for more than an hour. If it looks like that hour is about to run out, can you initiate the attack for the following day in spite of the battle still continuing? And more importantly, if you can, and you do, and after setting the follow-up attack, what happens if you win the battle and claim the district? does the attack turn into a normal clone move? Is it cancelled? Do you get to launch an attack on your own territory?
Yeah i get the whole concept of back dating. And the back dating is a good idea. Yet i would say the best solution for the "dibs hour" would be that it starts right after the fight ends. Thus leaving plenty of time to decide wether or not to attack.
Also, and i didnt think about it before. Defenders would then have the opportunity to send back up for the district under attack while the fight happends and before the re-attack action is taken thus locking the district.
This possibility for a defender to resupply clones to a weak district between attacks should be an option. It's a choice between having faith in your strenght and weakening another district to have an extra insurance of protecting the one under attack. |
Booker DaFooker
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
74
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:08:00 -
[1075] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:given that the act of moving your clones into a district is what either claims a district or sets up an attack, I think we can safely say that the movement of clones is instant I think of attacking an occupied district more as setting down a flag and saying "okay we're going to hit these guys, so you can't". It sounds a little strange, but it makes a lot more sense then "okay we've moved these 150 clones to this district and we're going to wait 24-47 hours for the defenders to get ready before we attack". Also, it makes more sense that moving them to one of your own districts or to an unoccupied district wouldn't take any time because there's no one to stop you from just walking in. With an enemy district, there is.
I think you have to suspend lore a little bit here regarding the 24 hour delay, your district is invaded by the arrival of enemy forces, but the delay is forced on us because of real world considerations to allow players from all over the world to play this game without descending into timezone chaos. Clearly, within new eden a defence would be immediately mounted |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:11:00 -
[1076] - Quote
Booker DaFooker wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:given that the act of moving your clones into a district is what either claims a district or sets up an attack, I think we can safely say that the movement of clones is instant I think of attacking an occupied district more as setting down a flag and saying "okay we're going to hit these guys, so you can't". It sounds a little strange, but it makes a lot more sense then "okay we've moved these 150 clones to this district and we're going to wait 24-47 hours for the defenders to get ready before we attack". Also, it makes more sense that moving them to one of your own districts or to an unoccupied district wouldn't take any time because there's no one to stop you from just walking in. With an enemy district, there is. I think you have to suspend lore a little bit here regarding the 24 hour delay, your district is invaded by the arrival of enemy forces, but the delay is forced on us because of real world considerations to allow players from all over the world to play this game without descending into timezone chaos. Clearly, within new eden a defence would be immediately mounted
The thing is, both gameplay and lore work better with the way I think it works. You wouldn't have attackers stacking 150-200 past the clone limit, and you wouldn't have fictional mercs in the EVE/Dust universe sitting around playing cards while there were enemies on the other side of the door. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1222
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:27:00 -
[1077] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:given that the act of moving your clones into a district is what either claims a district or sets up an attack, I think we can safely say that the movement of clones is instant I think of attacking an occupied district more as setting down a flag and saying "okay we're going to hit these guys, so you can't". It sounds a little strange, but it makes a lot more sense then "okay we've moved these 150 clones to this district and we're going to wait 24-47 hours for the defenders to get ready before we attack". Also, it makes more sense that moving them to one of your own districts or to an unoccupied district wouldn't take any time because there's no one to stop you from just walking in. With an enemy district, there is. I think you have to suspend lore a little bit here regarding the 24 hour delay, your district is invaded by the arrival of enemy forces, but the delay is forced on us because of real world considerations to allow players from all over the world to play this game without descending into timezone chaos. Clearly, within new eden a defence would be immediately mounted The thing is, both gameplay and lore work better with the way I think it works. You wouldn't have attackers stacking 150-200 past the clone limit, and you wouldn't have fictional mercs in the EVE/Dust universe sitting around playing cards while there were enemies on the other side of the door.
Yeah well. Regarding lore and such. If you receive an attack notice and clones move at the last moment, why would your district be locked in a way that even stops you from getting reinforcements from another district for the next 24 hours ?
Just sayin, lore is to be forgottent atm. |
Rigor Mordis
Imperial Populicide Legion
5
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:34:00 -
[1078] - Quote
Q1 When will the system expand beyond 250 districts?
Q2 Is it worth while to found a corp on Dust?
Q3 Will ANY other game modes be offered in the future?
I have read through this forum thoroughly and hope I am not asking anything that hasn't already been answered. I am asking these questions for the following reasons:
Q1-- I think 250 districts will be claimed by day 3. The larger corps will want to separate themselves as much as possible from the about 12 corps (DUST) that are the largest who will also probably distance themselves from one another. All of the corps in these 2 groups will undoubtedly form alliances with one another not to support each other from attacks by the other corps in this group, but to spawn camp on a larger scale the smaller corps without 10 years of EVE affiliations and the advantages of playing since the closed beta. To this point, spawn camping seems to be what skirmish is all about.
The smaller and smallest of corps who want to experience the promise of the expanded fun, will try to place themselves in positions of isolation if they want to waste their time and ISK. Because these positions will soon be taken by the advancing enemy with 500 members and all of the level 5 skills, or by complete idiots that have no desire to build with you but constantly force your corp into meaningless stalemates. I don't think 250 districts will lat a month before they are controlled entirely by 5-7 alliances of the largest corporations. Kind of like a MMO browser game such as grepolis.
Q2-- If the EVE tie in will have a significant effect on the planetary/district control aspect of the game, then it will be imperative for DUST corps to recruit and possess EVE players. This will be virtually impossible since EVE is 10 years old and most of the console Dusties have never even heard of it much less played it. EVErs are already in their established corps and have already made their ties with Dusties that know what they are doing. 1 reason I think closed betas are bullshit. Ultimately it sounds like those who are not affiliated with both games are going to be at a severe disadvantage on DUST especially if/when the economies are integrated.
It also appears that if one wants any hope of being any significance to the EVE universe and it's outcomes, they will have to join one of the "BCS" corporations as these corps will absorb the "small schools" and always dominate recruiting. Our corp is at 35 members now but we have had at least 20 come and go. Whether it be to larger, more established corporations, or just quit playing altogether, it is because of the exaggerated imbalance in the current build. The big boys with the big toys are always going COMPLETELY DOMINATE the guys with the slightly smaller toys. This imbalance just looks to transfer to the planetary/district control aspect.
Q3-- I think by offering some alternatives to being killed while spawning, or if you are on the fortunate side, killing those who are spawning, the chances of forming a real base for DUST would be greatly increased. A free-for-all and/or a last-man-standing game mode would be a good start. LMS could go on 3, 5 minute rounds where last man alive wins. In event of more than one, merc with most kills or WP wins. A Team LMS would also be a good option.
I see several ppl being turned off by lack of simple, good, FPS fundamentals, Bugs such as the terrain not being uniformly navigated and targets not taking damage is bad enough. But the real issue with this game is the gross imbalance of the haves and have-nots, and the spawn camping/redlining. I don't care who you are, being destroyed at a spawn, or being continuously picked of at the redline is not fun. In turn, if one finds participating in such acts to be fun, they have no balls in my opinion.
In all seriousness, if I am lucky, 1 out of every 10 battles that I participate in might be a fun, well-fought battle where both sides were equally matched and suffered close to the same number of casualties. 9 out of 10 though are just complete waxing by whichever side has the highest leveled skills/weapons.
I started out playing vigorously and I thought that this game had great potential. I wanted to be part of the beta in hopes that maybe could help form a really great game. After playing for a month and a half, I am not so optimistic. Quite frankly, what is here at this point is not good. Great ideas, great potential, but just not good. There has to be some alternatives not just for game modes, but for the complete rookies, mid-levels, and elite players to find an enjoyable and challenging experience.
Devs only need respond. Fanboys will not be acknowledged. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:37:00 -
[1079] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:
Yeah well. Regarding lore and such. If you receive an attack notice and clones move at the last moment, why would your district be locked in a way that even stops you from getting reinforcements from another district for the next 24 hours ?
Just sayin, lore is to be forgottent atm.
I didn't say it was perfect, but I could level the same inquiry with regards to why you can't reinforce a district with mercs even when the enemy is already there. Surely 150 mercs can't blockade an entire district, and even if they could, why couldn't mercs come up behind them and attack anyway?
Just think of that timer as a way to let your forces know they need to start planning and setting up strategies to attack the district, and there was some intelligence leak that alerted the enemy, so they know you're coming. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:40:00 -
[1080] - Quote
Rigor Mordis wrote:Devs only need respond. Fanboys will not be acknowledged.
I'm glad I saw this first so I didn't have to read that entire post |
|
Maximus Creed
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
70
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:45:00 -
[1081] - Quote
Just out of interest, where has this 75 clones generated at RT come from?
40 + 50% = 60? |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
179
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:48:00 -
[1082] - Quote
Maximus Creed wrote:Just out of interest, where has this 75 clones generated at RT come from?
40 + 50% = 60?
You have some reading to do, sir.
Link.
Link. |
Maximus Creed
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
70
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:51:00 -
[1083] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Maximus Creed wrote:Just out of interest, where has this 75 clones generated at RT come from?
40 + 50% = 60? You have some reading to do, sir. Link.Link. Ah thank you, thought that might be the case. I read up to page 35, and skipped the rest :)
CCP please update this! |
Absolute Idiom II
BetaMax. CRONOS.
68
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 01:47:00 -
[1084] - Quote
I didn't notice answers for either of these questions:
1) Does the clone survival rate apply for the journey back after the battle is over?
2) When the Attacker MCC explodes the unspawned clones do not count as biomass awards for the Defender. Is this the same when the Defender MCC explodes? |
Skihids
The Tritan Industries
1052
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 04:03:00 -
[1085] - Quote
How does the attrition attack on a defender who goes 1:1 and manages to win each battle by a few clones go if the attacker is using clone packs rather than districts for an unlimited clone supply?
This could be done by a corp with no district, or through a splinter corp if it does. |
God Hates Lags
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
5
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 04:48:00 -
[1086] - Quote
Skihids wrote:How does the attrition attack on a defender who goes 1:1 and manages to win each battle by a few clones go if the attacker is using clone packs rather than districts for an unlimited clone supply?
This could be done by a corp with no district, or through a splinter corp if it does.
This definitely an issue, but there are some mitigating factors.
1. Clone packs are inordinately expensive. At 43 mill isk a piece it's all but impossible for a corp to keep a steady stream of them coming.
2. 1:1 is almost never an issue. Most skirmish games, even the close ones right now are won by mcc destruction rather than clone count. Usually both sides have a little under half their original clones left. Also, defender gets twenty percent of the attackers clones upon a victory, so there's that.
3. If an attacker is winning consistently, even by just a few clones, then they should take the district. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
180
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 06:24:00 -
[1087] - Quote
God Hates Lags wrote:
1. Clone packs are inordinately expensive. At 43 mill isk a piece it's all but impossible for a corp to keep a steady stream of them coming.
I'm pretty sure there isn't any movement cost associated with the Genolution pack because you're not attacking from any district, you're just sort of plopping down, so 40mil.
Quote:2. 1:1 is almost never an issue. Most skirmish games, even the close ones right now are won by mcc destruction rather than clone count. Usually both sides have a little under half their original clones left. Also, defender gets twenty percent of the attackers clones upon a victory, so there's that.
The defender only gets 20% of the clones that weren't destroyed, though there's still some confusion about how that's going to be calculated with respect to people who bring more than 150, but lose less. Either way, it's likely the number will be pretty small.
Quote:3. If an attacker is winning consistently, even by just a few clones, then they should take the district.
Indeed. With the loss of 150 minimum clones for the defenders, and the fact that they don't produce any more clones from the RT, it shouldn't take more than a couple days if the attackers are winning every fight (unless the defenders have a Cargo Hub, in which case it will take 1 more day). |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1223
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 08:49:00 -
[1088] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:
Yeah well. Regarding lore and such. If you receive an attack notice and clones move at the last moment, why would your district be locked in a way that even stops you from getting reinforcements from another district for the next 24 hours ?
Just sayin, lore is to be forgottent atm.
I didn't say it was perfect, but I could level the same inquiry with regards to why you can't reinforce a district with mercs even when the enemy is already there. Surely 150 mercs can't blockade an entire district, and even if they could, why couldn't mercs come up behind them and attack anyway? Just think of that timer as a way to let your forces know they need to start planning and setting up strategies to attack the district, and there was some intelligence leak that alerted the enemy, so they know you're coming.
I agree. Thus why it would be good to know if attacking clone move instantly. No matter the answer and the lore. Then it's just a matter of knowing if it can be tweaked and what solution is the best. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2080
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 09:05:00 -
[1089] - Quote
Rigor Mordis wrote:Devs only need respond. Fanboys will not be acknowledged. Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were posting this on a public forum, not emailing the devs directly.
Nice try, but too bad, you're getting my response anyway. Deal with it.
Rigor Mordis wrote:Q1 When will the system expand beyond 250 districts?
Q2 Is it worth while to found a corp on Dust?
Q3 Will ANY other game modes be offered in the future? Q1: No idea. I want to know this too. Good question. Probably SOONGäó though.
Q2: If you want to be involved with Planetary Conquest, you need to be in a Corp. If you want control over a group in PC, you need to at least reach a senior level within the Corp. It depends what you want out of the game.
Q3: They've already offered different game modes at different times during development, so this is a no-brainer. I could probably find official sources using google, or just by digging a little in these forums, but I'll trust that you're either intelligent enough to find them for yourself, or cynical enough not to even trust those sources until they're replying directly to your question. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2080
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 09:13:00 -
[1090] - Quote
After thinking about this a lot while I slept all day (because asleep is when I do my best thinking, apparently), I've realised that sending the attackers instantly is a GOOD thing for the game.
Why?
Because it forces the attackers to balance out the delays in attacking and the delay in their own reinforcements replacing the attacking clones.
Lets say the attacker has their RT set to 06:00 and the defender has 12:00. If the attacker declares their attack at 11:30 to minimise the amount of warning their target is given, that means they're waiting for almost 18 hours with a 150 clone hole in their defenses. If they instead launch their attack at 5:30 to better line up with their reinforcements, then they give the enemy Corp an extra 6 hours' notice about the attack, which could potentially mean the difference between having your best player (or a high-tier squad from a friendly/mercenary Corp) and not getting to them in time. |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
322
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 10:01:00 -
[1091] - Quote
Rigor Mordis wrote:Q1 When will the system expand beyond 250 districts?
Q2 Is it worth while to found a corp on Dust?
Q3 Will ANY other game modes be offered in the future?
You've clearly got some bones to pick but I'm going to look past your attitude and answer your question nonetheless:
1) You can not and should not assume that the 12 biggest corps will form a big alliance and not attack each other. Firstly, they all want the bragging rights of being the biggest and best and picking on small corps will give them no respect. Secondly, some of them HATE each other; like absolutely hate each other. There's a couple of the big corps who are allies but certainly not all of them by a long shot.
2) EvE is an important part of this game, whether you want it to be or not. People with EvE links are in a good positiion in Corp battles because of the orbital bombardments (people without an EvE ship above their district get no OBs in PC). That doesn't mean you have to get an EvE player in your corp; you can find yourself an alliance to join (many form everyday and many accept smaller corps under their wings) and have an ally send an EvE ship to help you out.
Honestly though, yes small corps are going to struggle in PC unless they are very skilled and dedicated. If you want easy time casual play, stick to pub games or Faction Warfare because this is entering hardcore mode here.
3) You sound very much like you've never had a proper corp battle. Spawn camping only happens in pub games. And if you're worried about being dominated by big boys with expensive toys every match, you could again try finding an alliance to join. Make some friends in good corps and bring them into your matches to help out.
The biggest point I can make to you is that this is an FPS but it is also much much more. You can just play pub games if all you care about is SP and Isk and normal FPS stuff. If you really want to start getting involved in the higher levels of the game though, there is a lot more to it - you NEED to strategise, make EvE contacts, form or join an alliance. You can't just ignore large and important aspects of the game and then complain that you can't take part in significant areas of it. You might as well just play this and never use any skill points or buy any new stuff and just use militia starter fits in pub games all the time - not that you shouldn't be allowed to do that if you really want to; you just can't complain about losing lots if you do. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2080
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 10:04:00 -
[1092] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:2) EvE is an important part of this game, whether you want it to be or not. People with EvE links are in a good positiion in Corp battles because of the orbital bombardments (people without an EvE ship above their district get no OBs in PC). That doesn't mean you have to get an EvE player in your corp; you can find yourself an alliance to join (many form everyday and many accept smaller corps under their wings) and have an ally send an EvE ship to help you out.
Honestly though, yes small corps are going to struggle in PC unless they are very skilled and dedicated. If you want easy time casual play, stick to pub games or Faction Warfare because this is entering hardcore mode here. Pretty sure when I asked about this, FoxFour confirmed you'll have Precision Strikes at least. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
322
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 10:07:00 -
[1093] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Django Quik wrote:2) EvE is an important part of this game, whether you want it to be or not. People with EvE links are in a good positiion in Corp battles because of the orbital bombardments (people without an EvE ship above their district get no OBs in PC). That doesn't mean you have to get an EvE player in your corp; you can find yourself an alliance to join (many form everyday and many accept smaller corps under their wings) and have an ally send an EvE ship to help you out.
Honestly though, yes small corps are going to struggle in PC unless they are very skilled and dedicated. If you want easy time casual play, stick to pub games or Faction Warfare because this is entering hardcore mode here. Pretty sure when I asked about this, FoxFour confirmed you'll have Precision Strikes at least. Ah, I was sure of the opposite - might have to hunt through a bit to find it though... |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2080
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 10:31:00 -
[1094] - Quote
Yes, you did specify Orbitals, not Precision Strikes, I was just pointing out that there's still a (limited) option for off-map support without EVE connections. Not saying it's a fully-functional alternative, just that you're not left TOTALLY high and dry.
Also, thanks for beating me to finding the reference. |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
440
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 11:23:00 -
[1095] - Quote
Questions, which I don't think have been asked/answered:
"Loot is a percentage of the items lost in the battle such as vehicles, drop suits, and weapons. This includes Aurum items."
Does that include modules and equipment (so basically everything being used), or just vehicle hulls, suits and weapons (and turrets?)?
What is that percentage exactly? 20%? 50%? |
Absolute Idiom II
BetaMax. CRONOS.
68
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 11:44:00 -
[1096] - Quote
There are 3 uses for alt corps in Planetary Conquest (PC).
1) At the start to assist with the district 'gold rush' or 'land grab' 2) To provide a battle shield to allow your districts to generate clones in 'peace'. 3) To attack distant districts with a zero clone attrition
Full details here: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=631677 |
Daalzebul Del'Armgo
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
48
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 12:19:00 -
[1097] - Quote
Ok just throwing this random idea out there.
what if the Genolution in there haste(to save us or however the story line will go) didn't allow us to pick where we put the clone packs we bought off them.
1. Random dispersion fill unoccupied districts first. 2. After all districts are filled then it would randomly pick a district to attack based on the time you are placing the pack. aka if you buy your pack at 18:00 and choice to use it at that time. It would pick an occupied district randomly that have there reinforcement timer set at 18:00 to attack.
This would remove a few issues with using alt corps. Help limit using Genolution packs to repeatedly attack certain districts or keep them in a state of Locked. Using alt corps to feed districts uncontested to primary corps making Distance a deterrent and more of a factor.
Note this would just help limit it. with enough work it could still be done but at a greater cost.
There are quite a few pro's and con's with this but i will let others debate that. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1223
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 12:43:00 -
[1098] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:After thinking about this a lot while I slept all day (because asleep is when I do my best thinking, apparently), I've realised that sending the attackers instantly is a GOOD thing for the game.
Why?
Because it forces the attackers to balance out the delays in attacking and the delay in their own reinforcements replacing the attacking clones. And because it gives the attackers some chance to attack while also having at least a chance at defending themselves against someone else - or a retaliatory attack from another district under the same (or allied/hired) ownership.
Lets say the attacker has their RT set to 06:00 and the defender has 12:00. If the attacker declares their attack at 11:30 to minimise the amount of warning their target is given, that means they're waiting for almost 18 hours with a 150 clone hole in their defenses. If they instead launch their attack at 5:30 to better line up with their reinforcements, then they give the enemy Corp an extra 6 hours' notice about the attack, which could potentially mean the difference between having your best player (or a high-tier squad from a friendly/mercenary Corp) and not getting to them in time.
Good thinking. Though the insta travel of attacking clones also has a downside that advantages the attacker. It allows him to replenish clones even before the attack.
Say RT at 6:00 for the attacking district. Fully stocked with clones (300 default district) Attack is set at 5:30 => 150 clone insta move out => 150 clones remaining.
At 6:00 => Generates clones => 225 clones remaining. 250 with a PF.
That's a huge incentive to attack if you have a good amount of money and dont care much about selling excess clones. With that and the fact that the defensive district has no option to send in reinforcement as soon as it's under attack + the no-generating clones when losing MCC and you have many downside in defending.
Also, i saw my last remark was unnoticed so displaying it again: When a district is "under attack", you cannot move clones to it. OK. When the fight actually happens, attacker gets "dibs hour". OK When can the attacker decide to use that dibs hour to attack again the next day ? After battle ? Before ? both ? Garret raised that question before and it deserves an answer.
Point is to determine if the defensive corp can get a time during which its district goes back to "online" between the beginning of the RT and the battle and before the decision of the attacker to keep on attacking is made. Having the status of its district to go back to "online" would thus mean being able to move clones in or out.
Example:
District A attacks District B RT is 12-13 => District B is locked. No movement of clones allowed.
Next day, RT starts at 12h00. => What is the status of District B ? Online again ? Still locked until battle happens and is over ? => If it goes back to online, nothing stops the defender to move clones in or out. => If it stays locked for the entire RT (which would make sense) then nothing changes compared to our previous simulation. => Other option would be to have district B go back to "online" status and give the option to the attacker to send a second attack notice even before the first fight happens. That could create a very tensed time during which both defender and attacker would have to anticipate their next move. Do i back up that district and risk that this attack is just a decoy for me to drop guard on another one ? Should i block that district reinforcement by re-attacking it without knowing if that first fight will be successfull ?
What do you guys think is best ? Should a defender be able to reinforce its district with clones from another district between two attacks from the same assailant ? |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1223
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 14:03:00 -
[1099] - Quote
Extra question : does buying an SI affects your district status in any way ?
Example : can you first buy a new SI and then change RT ? Does buying a New SI locks your district so you then cannot attack or move clones ? |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
183
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 15:12:00 -
[1100] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:After thinking about this a lot while I slept all day (because asleep is when I do my best thinking, apparently), I've realised that sending the attackers instantly is a GOOD thing for the game.
Why?
Because it forces the attackers to balance out the delays in attacking and the delay in their own reinforcements replacing the attacking clones. And because it gives the attackers some chance to attack while also having at least a chance at defending themselves against someone else - or a retaliatory attack from another district under the same (or allied/hired) ownership.
Lets say the attacker has their RT set to 06:00 and the defender has 12:00. If the attacker declares their attack at 11:30 to minimise the amount of warning their target is given, that means they're waiting for almost 18 hours with a 150 clone hole in their defenses. If they instead launch their attack at 5:30 to better line up with their reinforcements, then they give the enemy Corp an extra 6 hours' notice about the attack, which could potentially mean the difference between having your best player (or a high-tier squad from a friendly/mercenary Corp) and not getting to them in time.
You're ignoring the fact that a Corp is going to know if their district is under attack before they send clones. If we did it where clones moved instantly, we'd have situations like this:
District A has RT set for 0600 District B has RT set for 0700 A sets attack on B at 0559 on Tuesday with 150 A gets 75 from RT on Tuesday
Now even if District C sets an attack on District A, A is still going to have 150 going to B and a full compliment of clones in their own district, because C needs to wait until the next full RT (Wednesday) to attack. It just gives too much advantage to any attacking districts. There's no risk at all involved with attacking the first time.
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Extra question : does buying an SI affects your district status in any way ?
Example : can you first buy a new SI and then change RT ? Does buying a New SI locks your district so you then cannot attack or move clones ?
This one the wiki answers. Link.. Changing RT, SI, being reinforced or being attacked all locks the district.
|
|
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1223
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 15:29:00 -
[1101] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Extra question : does buying an SI affects your district status in any way ?
Example : can you first buy a new SI and then change RT ? Does buying a New SI locks your district so you then cannot attack or move clones ? This one the wiki answers. Link.. Changing RT, SI, being reinforced or being attacked all locks the district.
Damn, SI change isnt in the "action tab" and i forgot about the scenario part. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
325
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 16:58:00 -
[1102] - Quote
Haven't heard from CCP Fox Four for a while - do you think we killed him off with all our questions and numbers? Or is he just catching up on the sleep he should have been getting when he's been 24/7 doing PC stuff lately? |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
228
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 18:30:00 -
[1103] - Quote
He ran out of all the 5 hours in "Keeping customers happy" project.
Just kidding, awesome work and a nice improvement lately CCP! <3<3<3<3<3<3 |
Booker DaFooker
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
74
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 18:38:00 -
[1104] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:After thinking about this a lot while I slept all day (because asleep is when I do my best thinking, apparently), I've realised that sending the attackers instantly is a GOOD thing for the game.
Why?
Because it forces the attackers to balance out the delays in attacking and the delay in their own reinforcements replacing the attacking clones. And because it gives the attackers some chance to attack while also having at least a chance at defending themselves against someone else - or a retaliatory attack from another district under the same (or allied/hired) ownership.
Lets say the attacker has their RT set to 06:00 and the defender has 12:00. If the attacker declares their attack at 11:30 to minimise the amount of warning their target is given, that means they're waiting for almost 18 hours with a 150 clone hole in their defenses. If they instead launch their attack at 5:30 to better line up with their reinforcements, then they give the enemy Corp an extra 6 hours' notice about the attack, which could potentially mean the difference between having your best player (or a high-tier squad from a friendly/mercenary Corp) and not getting to them in time. Good thinking. Though the insta travel of attacking clones also has a downside that advantages the attacker. It allows him to replenish clones even before the attack. Say RT at 6:00 for the attacking district. Fully stocked with clones (300 default district) Attack is set at 5:30 => 150 clone insta move out => 150 clones remaining. At 6:00 => Generates clones => 225 clones remaining. 250 with a PF. I dont see any attacker pass on this refill of clones just to shorten the warning given to its opponent tbh. Also, that's a huge incentive to attack if you have a good amount of money and dont care much about selling excess clones. With that and the fact that the defensive district has no option to send in reinforcement as soon as it's under attack + the no-generating clones when losing MCC and you have many downside in defending. Also, i saw my last remark was unnoticed so displaying it again: When a district is "under attack", you cannot move clones to it. OK. When the fight actually happens, attacker gets "dibs hour". OK When can the attacker decide to use that dibs hour to attack again the next day ? After battle ? Before ? both ? Garret raised that question before and it deserves an answer. Point is to determine if the defensive corp can get a time during which its district goes back to "online" between the beginning of the RT and the battle and before the decision of the attacker to keep on attacking is made. Having the status of its district to go back to "online" would thus mean being able to move clones in or out. Example: District A attacks District B RT is 12-13 => District B is locked. No movement of clones allowed. Next day, RT starts at 12h00. => What is the status of District B ? Online again ? Still locked until battle happens and is over ? => If it goes back to online, nothing stops the defender to move clones in or out. => If it stays locked for the entire RT (which would make sense) then nothing changes compared to our previous simulation. => Other option would be to have district B go back to "online" status and give the option to the attacker to send a second attack notice even before the first fight happens. That could create a very tensed time during which both defender and attacker would have to anticipate their next move. Do i back up that district and risk that this attack is just a decoy for me to drop guard on another one ? Should i block that district reinforcement by re-attacking it without knowing if that first fight will be successfull ? What do you guys think is best ? Should a defender be able to reinforce its district with clones from another district between two attacks from the same assailant ?
Attacker can only use the dibs hour after battle, it is activated by the ending of the battle for an hour
I think there should be a mechanic to allow a winning defending team to reinforce or to get a production bonus so that they can replenish to the level of clones they were at before battle start |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
325
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 18:44:00 -
[1105] - Quote
Booker DaFooker wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote: What do you guys think is best ? Should a defender be able to reinforce its district with clones from another district between two attacks from the same assailant ?
Attacker can only use the dibs hour after battle, it is activated by the ending of the battle for an hour I think there should be a mechanic to allow a winning defending team to reinforce or to get a production bonus so that they can replenish to the level of clones they were at before battle start
I like the idea of being able to reinforce your district if you win a defense. Effectively an attacker gets to reinforce whether they win or lose - maybe there should be some sort of mechanic that prevents a losing attacker from reinforcing? |
Booker DaFooker
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
74
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 21:16:00 -
[1106] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote: What do you guys think is best ? Should a defender be able to reinforce its district with clones from another district between two attacks from the same assailant ?
Attacker can only use the dibs hour after battle, it is activated by the ending of the battle for an hour I think there should be a mechanic to allow a winning defending team to reinforce or to get a production bonus so that they can replenish to the level of clones they were at before battle start I like the idea of being able to reinforce your district if you win a defense. Effectively an attacker gets to reinforce whether they win or lose - maybe there should be some sort of mechanic that prevents a losing attacker from reinforcing?
Don't reckon there's any need to change the attacker's outcome Win or lose, just buff a winning defence so that people have to beat you because they're better than you not just bigger |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
183
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 23:10:00 -
[1107] - Quote
Booker DaFooker wrote:Django Quik wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote: What do you guys think is best ? Should a defender be able to reinforce its district with clones from another district between two attacks from the same assailant ?
Attacker can only use the dibs hour after battle, it is activated by the ending of the battle for an hour I think there should be a mechanic to allow a winning defending team to reinforce or to get a production bonus so that they can replenish to the level of clones they were at before battle start I like the idea of being able to reinforce your district if you win a defense. Effectively an attacker gets to reinforce whether they win or lose - maybe there should be some sort of mechanic that prevents a losing attacker from reinforcing? Don't reckon there's any need to change the attacker's outcome Win or lose, just buff a winning defence so that people have to beat you because they're better than you not just bigger
Agreed. I think defenders just need a way to survive prolonged attacks if they're winning the majority of the battles. Right now the penalty for losing is extremely harsh (150 clone lose, no reinforcements during RT), whereas the rewards for winning are just 20% left over clones, and that assumes they enemy brought more than 150. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1225
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 00:30:00 -
[1108] - Quote
Guys, i'm glad you feel the same way about defenders being able to send in reinforcement between attacks. Or have the option to get bonus clones instead of biomass ISK. Or whatever option anyone would suggest so defenders cannot beaten over time even by doing well in fight. So yay us !
Now, for CCP_FoxFour, there's one thing i'd like to be cleared out :
If a corp attacks a district with 150 clones. And loses the battle through MCC destruction. Does the defender gets 20% of the non-consumed clones ? Or does that rule just applies for clones past 150.
Examples :
attacker goes in with 150 clones. Lose 100 on the BF before its MCC blows up. Defender gets 10 clones. True or False ?
Attackers goes in with 200 clones. Lose 100 on the BF before MCC blows up. Defender gets 10 clones or 20 clones ?
My opinion is that defender should get 20% of the attacking clones leftover no matter how many clones were sent to the battle by the attacker (150 or more). Dont think we got a clear answer on that specific point.
|
Absolute Idiom II
BetaMax. CRONOS.
78
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 00:57:00 -
[1109] - Quote
Let's imagine a corp with 3 districts. If only only one is under attack they will will never be at risk of losing the district, no matter the quality of their attackers since they can easily reinforce with 150 clones per day. This principle expands out to larger numbers. A corp will only suffer a net lose of clones if more than 1 third of it's districts are under attack.
At this stage, it's not possible to accurately predict how many districts will be attacked each day and so calls for REQUIRED reinforcements are premature. I'd like to see the current system in action before we start theory crafting that reinforcements are REQUIRED to be allowed. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
183
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 02:20:00 -
[1110] - Quote
I like the idea of defenders being able to turn some small percentage of the clones lost into new clones (assuming they win) much better than allowing reinforcements to come in from another district while it's locked.
If the defenders have another district to begin with, then they can just attempt to attack either the district hitting them or one of the districts in the corp attacking them, so it's not as if having multiple districts in a corp wouldn't be helpful in terms of defense. In other words, even if you can't send reinforcements directly to your district under attack while it's locked, your clones can still help indirectly through attacks (good for big corps). The percentage biomass turned into new clones could help bolster defender numbers if under constant attack and winning the majority of their battles (good for small corps).
I don't like the idea that you'd have to choose between ISK and clones as a defender for winning, though. If you can only use 10% of the biomass from destroyed clones (ie 10% of total clones killed are made into new clones for you), then it's reasonable to be able to sell off the other 90% of the biomass anyway.
But even if that didn't make sense, defenders are probably going to be treading water, at best, with regards to clone count as it is (if they're under constant attack by an opponent of slightly lesser skill level) and so won't be making ISK from clones sold over the cap (effectively every battle would be a loss in ISK due to all fittings destroyed). That's why they should get ISK and new clones. |
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
230
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 05:58:00 -
[1111] - Quote
I would like the defenders to start with all installations and NULL cannons blue. This would make sense lorewise and give a much needed advantage to defense.
After this kind of boost, if attackers win they deserve the spoils and if defenders lose they deserve the clone loss and lockdown. |
Booker DaFooker
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
74
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 07:48:00 -
[1112] - Quote
Absolute Idiom II wrote:Let's imagine a corp with 3 districts. If only one district is under attack they will never be at risk of losing the district no matter the quality of their attackers since they can easily reinforce with 150 clones per day. This principle expands out to corps with larger numbers of districts. A corp will only suffer a net loss of clones if more than 1 third of it's districts are under attack.
At this stage, it's not possible to accurately predict how many districts will be attacked each day and so calls for REQUIRED reinforcements are premature. I'd like to see the current system in action before we start theory crafting that reinforcements are REQUIRED to be allowed.
You are using old numbers, current proposals are 75 or 100 with PF. Even if they went ahead with the 100 and 150 option (which I personally much prefer as it makes districts more valuable) then the 150 will still only apply to a lucky third of districts |
Booker DaFooker
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
74
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 07:55:00 -
[1113] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:I would like the defenders to start with all installations and NULL cannons blue. This would make sense lorewise and give a much needed advantage to defense.
After this kind of boost, if attackers win they deserve the spoils and if defenders lose they deserve the clone loss and lockdown.
I agree that this so obvious it should have been an automatic consideration! Come on GDP what we're you thinking?
I think you may have a point then that if the defenders can't keep clone loss to a minimum in this situation then they can be rightfully ground down by attrition. Hmmm, not sure, interesting to think on though |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
325
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 09:01:00 -
[1114] - Quote
Booker DaFooker wrote:trollsroyce wrote:I would like the defenders to start with all installations and NULL cannons blue. This would make sense lorewise and give a much needed advantage to defense.
After this kind of boost, if attackers win they deserve the spoils and if defenders lose they deserve the clone loss and lockdown. I agree that this so obvious it should have been an automatic consideration! Come on CCP what we're you thinking? I think you may have a point then that if the defenders can't keep clone loss to a minimum in this situation then they can be rightfully ground down by attrition. Hmmm, not sure, interesting to think on though
I too like this idea, as I think many people will but there;'s a big problem in that it necessitates wholesale map redesign and this will just delay PC longer and longer. Think about how hard it is to break a red-lined battle - now think about if every time you played you started as red-lined; with current maps this is too far weighted towards defenders.
Booker DaFooker wrote: A restock of 150 would certainly solve the question of any disadvantage tor winning defenders though
The reason the numbers were lowered from max 150 was because with that many it's possible to self-lock your districts with genolution attacks and make a profit! |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1228
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 09:05:00 -
[1115] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:I would like the defenders to start with all installations and NULL cannons blue. This would make sense lorewise and give a much needed advantage to defense.
After this kind of boost, if attackers win they deserve the spoils and if defenders lose they deserve the clone loss and lockdown.
I tend to agree with you pal. But skirmish 2.0 isnt really compatible with such plan. I fear that if the defenders can manage to hold the defense in the first 4 minutes, turning the tide may then be very difficult to achieve. Especially in a fight where the two teams are very close in terms of efficiency.
Skirmish 1.0 was much better to give defender a tactical advantage at the start of the fight.
Going back to the reinforcement idea for defenders. I agree that in the case of a corp attacking with just genolution packs in order to get its first district from a corp holding 3 or more, it would make it very difficult if they can't manage to win 2-3 fights in a row.
On the other hand, the current system is very unfair to a corp defending its only district against a corp holding 2-3 districts as all numbers point out that the defender will see its clones count wear off even he manages to win 1 out of 2 fights.
So it's more a matter of picking the less evil solution.
Obviously, being able to move clone to a district that has been attacked should only be possible when the defender is winning. But the current mecanics point out that the defender may have that option no matter the outcome of the match.
Example :
Defending district RT : 12-13 Day one, attacker sends an attack notice.
At day 2, when the RT starts, district should go back to "online" according to the general rules we can see in the wiki. Dibs hour is set at 11:59 like garret explained a few post backs so if the attacker decides to keep attacking, he doesnt have to wait almost 48h to attack again.
The fight starts at 12h15 and ends at 12h45. Then, attacker has one hour to decide if he wants to attack again. And if he does, the game will consider that attack notice being sent at 11h59, locking the defending district.
So, unless an attack notice locks the target district for the whole RT (which would be an exception from the general rules), defenders always has a time between RT start and end of the battle during which its district is "online". In that time, nothing would stop him from moving clones to the district. And as clone movement between friendly district is done instantly, backup could arrive even before the fight starts.
We need more information on how this goes down : - Does the defending district goes back to online state when RT starts and before attacker decides to use dibs hour to attack again ? - Can an attacker decide to attack again before or after the fight ? (at the moment, i think it would be after)
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
326
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 11:03:00 -
[1116] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote: We need more information on how this goes down : - Does the defending district goes back to online state when RT starts and before attacker decides to use dibs hour to attack again ? - Can an attacker decide to attack again before or after the fight ? (at the moment, i think it would be after)
It's my understanding that nothing can be done by anyone during the 'dibs hour' except for the attacker setting another attack, so with current rules the defender couldn't reinforce until the dibs hour is over.
We do need clarification on this though. |
Absolute Idiom II
BetaMax. CRONOS.
81
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 11:06:00 -
[1117] - Quote
Booker DaFooker wrote:Absolute Idiom II wrote:Let's imagine a corp with 3 districts. If only one district is under attack they will never be at risk of losing the district no matter the quality of their attackers since they can easily reinforce with 150 clones per day. This principle expands out to corps with larger numbers of districts. A corp will only suffer a net loss of clones if more than 1 third of it's districts are under attack.
At this stage, it's not possible to accurately predict how many districts will be attacked each day and so calls for REQUIRED reinforcements are premature. I'd like to see the current system in action before we start theory crafting that reinforcements are REQUIRED to be allowed. You are using old numbers, current proposals are 75 or 100 with PF. Even if they went ahead with the 100 and 150 option (which I personally much prefer as it makes districts more valuable) then the 150 will still only apply to a lucky third of districts A restock of 150 would certainly solve the question of any disadvantage tor winning defenders though
Nope, I'm using current numbers :)
150 minimum clone loss for the district under attack. 2x 75 = 150 clone generation for the 2 other districts not under attack. This means that corp can reinforce the attacked district with 150 each day for no net loss of clones - making their districts invulnerable. |
Korvin Lomont
United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION
13
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 11:09:00 -
[1118] - Quote
As far as I know you can't restock districts under attack. So when the attacker decides to attack you again you should not be able to send clones to your attacked district. And even if you could there would be only 150 clones in the district due to minimum cloneloss after a defeat your district would have 0 clones and would fall to the attacker. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1230
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 11:43:00 -
[1119] - Quote
Absolute Idiom II wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:Absolute Idiom II wrote:Let's imagine a corp with 3 districts. If only one district is under attack they will never be at risk of losing the district no matter the quality of their attackers since they can easily reinforce with 150 clones per day. This principle expands out to corps with larger numbers of districts. A corp will only suffer a net loss of clones if more than 1 third of it's districts are under attack.
At this stage, it's not possible to accurately predict how many districts will be attacked each day and so calls for REQUIRED reinforcements are premature. I'd like to see the current system in action before we start theory crafting that reinforcements are REQUIRED to be allowed. You are using old numbers, current proposals are 75 or 100 with PF. Even if they went ahead with the 100 and 150 option (which I personally much prefer as it makes districts more valuable) then the 150 will still only apply to a lucky third of districts A restock of 150 would certainly solve the question of any disadvantage tor winning defenders though Nope, I'm using current numbers :) 150 minimum clone loss for the district under attack. 2x 75 = 150 clone generation for the 2 other districts not under attack. This means that corp can reinforce the attacked district with 150 each day for no net loss of clones - making their districts invulnerable.
Yeah but not generating ISK either as they dont sell any excess of clones. THe attack still has an impact on the economic side of the defending corp.
The real problems we have are with the cases of 1 small corp with one district facing 1 big corp with several. We all agree a small corp winning 3 fights in a row defending or attacking should keep\get the district. At the moment, there may be loop holes that could prevent that.
An i guess there are many other loop holes we havent seen yet. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2084
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 12:28:00 -
[1120] - Quote
I have an idea.
Transporting clones - whether for an attack or not - should take the district offline, so the attackers DON'T get their next downtime's worth of clone production. If someone declares an attack, they still get their clone production for the next downtime, which will hit as the attack comes in.
It doesn't mean you're instantly screwed (you still have a minimum of 225 clones on site), but there's that little bit more vulnerability when you're sending your forces out against the enemy. |
|
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1230
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 13:28:00 -
[1121] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:I have an idea.
Transporting clones - whether for an attack or not - should take the district offline, so the attackers DON'T get their next downtime's worth of clone production. If someone declares an attack, they still get their clone production for the next downtime, which will hit as the attack comes in.
It doesn't mean you're instantly screwed (you still have a minimum of 225 clones on site), but there's that little bit more vulnerability when you're sending your forces out against the enemy.
Could work but should be limited to moving clones for an attack imo. Would avoid the "double reinforcement" advantage the attacker gets even when losing a fight against the defender. |
Absolute Idiom II
BetaMax. CRONOS.
81
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 13:30:00 -
[1122] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Absolute Idiom II wrote:Booker DaFooker wrote:Absolute Idiom II wrote:Let's imagine a corp with 3 districts. If only one district is under attack they will never be at risk of losing the district no matter the quality of their attackers since they can easily reinforce with 150 clones per day. This principle expands out to corps with larger numbers of districts. A corp will only suffer a net loss of clones if more than 1 third of it's districts are under attack.
At this stage, it's not possible to accurately predict how many districts will be attacked each day and so calls for REQUIRED reinforcements are premature. I'd like to see the current system in action before we start theory crafting that reinforcements are REQUIRED to be allowed. You are using old numbers, current proposals are 75 or 100 with PF. Even if they went ahead with the 100 and 150 option (which I personally much prefer as it makes districts more valuable) then the 150 will still only apply to a lucky third of districts A restock of 150 would certainly solve the question of any disadvantage tor winning defenders though Nope, I'm using current numbers :) 150 minimum clone loss for the district under attack. 2x 75 = 150 clone generation for the 2 other districts not under attack. This means that corp can reinforce the attacked district with 150 each day for no net loss of clones - making their districts invulnerable. Yeah but not generating ISK either as they dont sell any excess of clones. THe attack still has an impact on the economic side of the defending corp. The real problems we have are with the cases of 1 small corp with one district facing 1 big corp with several. We all agree a small corp winning 3 fights in a row defending or attacking should keep\get the district. At the moment, there may be loop holes that could prevent that. An i guess there are many other loop holes we havent seen yet.
There aren't any loopholes at the moment, but allowing a corp to send additional reinforcements from their other districts *would* create one, as detailed above.
|
Booker DaFooker
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
74
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 14:19:00 -
[1123] - Quote
letting succussful defending districts to reinforce from another district is not a great answer I think, pretty pointless if you're the little guy on one district.
I'm thinking a mechanic that allows a production bonus on victorious defence. ie. your poulation is motivated by the win and the desperation to keep their district to make a superhuman effort to produce more clones for their valiant protectors!! |
LXicon
VENGEANCE FOR HIRE
73
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 15:15:00 -
[1124] - Quote
any (extra) bonuses for successfully defending a district might encourage corps to make an alt and attack themselves.
if corps attack themselves and can make more ISK or net clones than it costs to mount the attack, then we'll just see a bunch of fake battles going on which prevents real fights from taking place. |
KEROSIINI-TERO
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
261
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 15:26:00 -
[1125] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote: Against that, the sole perk for defending is the 20% "cashback" on the unused clones the attacker brought to the fight. And i wouldnt be surprised to see attackers ruin on purpose all of their clones when a game seems lost. Using militia gear and killing themselves just to avoid offering clones to the enemy.
Or, what about offering a deal for defenders through the reward system ? When winning, defender could choose to process used biomass into new clones instead of getting full ISK reward ?
Idea for future: When districts are going to have Main Surface Infrastructure and perhaps 1-3 additional Minor Surface Infrastructures, one could be Corpse Processing Facility "Necro SI" Which would grant the district ability to gain extra clones from casualties on both sides.
Of course having that Necro SI would be a choice from several defence modification options (like district-wide AA Def Battery, Orbital Defence Artillery Battery, District-wide Orbital Resistance Shield, Artillery Installation firesupporting other maps of the district and the likes of those) |
KEROSIINI-TERO
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
261
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 15:33:00 -
[1126] - Quote
Pryke Bastion wrote:Well in the interests of PC, I'm curious if these districts that we control would allow any other industrial production facilities besides the clone affecting ones. With the economies split there isn't much drawing the average EVE player to PC besides good will toward alliances with the hope that one day all these manic ground troops might prove useful.
I suggest that CCP allow industrialism on these districts to be tied in. Gives the EVE players an incentive to set roots in these systems with increased production capabilities and output. Might get the industrialist corps interested at any rate.
Another idea to bring more interactivity. An EVE fleet could install a satellite defense system geo-synchronous with their favoured district. This would allow the district the ability to destroy or damage incoming clone assault packets sent by Genolution, Increasing the attrition rate by a modest percentile. These satellite defense networks could be destroyed by a hostile fleet, but it would be necessary to hold the system for a period long enough to root out all the cloaked satellites. This would allow more context and purpose for fleet involvement other than, "Nuke the CLONES!"
Pryke out.
Already gave +1 to this.
My addition: hostile satellites which wouldn't do anything dramatic on their own but which would reduce the districts capabilities. For example, reduce districts production reduce attackers attrition reduce districts clone production
So this why this is on-topic discussion. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1230
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 15:35:00 -
[1127] - Quote
LXicon wrote:any (extra) bonuses for successfully defending a district might encourage corps to make an alt and attack themselves.
if corps attack themselves and can make more ISK or net clones than it costs to mount the attack, then we'll just see a bunch of fake battles going on which prevents real fights from taking place.
Self attacking with a dummy corp implies a 40 Million loss. No bonus to clone generation can ever be enough to sustain such tactic.
And guys you missed my point. I'm not especially rooting for the reinforcement solution. I think it would make sense to have that opportunity but aside from that, i'm just asking question about whether or not the mechanics would allow it with the current setting.
The last example i wrote down would suggest there could be a short time during which the district is online between two successive attacks and thus would allow moving clones to it.
Let's figure out what the current mechanics allow you to do before arguing
As for the bonus to clone generation when defending succesfully or the "take ISK from wasted biomass or bonus clone" option. those could be good solution to buff the defender a bit.
PS: i think i messed up "loop holes" with "blanks" perhaps. french here, be nice ^^ |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1230
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 15:38:00 -
[1128] - Quote
KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:Pryke Bastion wrote:Well in the interests of PC, I'm curious if these districts that we control would allow any other industrial production facilities besides the clone affecting ones. With the economies split there isn't much drawing the average EVE player to PC besides good will toward alliances with the hope that one day all these manic ground troops might prove useful.
I suggest that CCP allow industrialism on these districts to be tied in. Gives the EVE players an incentive to set roots in these systems with increased production capabilities and output. Might get the industrialist corps interested at any rate.
Another idea to bring more interactivity. An EVE fleet could install a satellite defense system geo-synchronous with their favoured district. This would allow the district the ability to destroy or damage incoming clone assault packets sent by Genolution, Increasing the attrition rate by a modest percentile. These satellite defense networks could be destroyed by a hostile fleet, but it would be necessary to hold the system for a period long enough to root out all the cloaked satellites. This would allow more context and purpose for fleet involvement other than, "Nuke the CLONES!"
Pryke out. Already gave +1 to this. My addition: hostile satellites which wouldn't do anything dramatic on their own but which would reduce the districts capabilities. For example, reduce districts production reduce attackers attrition reduce districts clone production So this why this is on-topic discussion.
i think all this can only gets a +1 and is already on the roadmap. If you take another listen at the latest CAST 514, you can hear ideas about Nullsec SI thrown around by CCP_Praetorian and CCP_Nullarbor :
Cynosural blockers, Sensor array etc... They also mention orbital structure set on EVE that would serve as an orbital backup for dusters. Kind of like having an EVE ship firing orbital strikes but without needing a capsuleer to actually be there.
Honestly, a very good podcast everyone should listen |
Corbina Ninja
Maphia Clan Corporation CRONOS.
96
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 16:35:00 -
[1129] - Quote
"Game Of Clones" Orbital Strike is coming (SOONGäó) |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
184
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 17:11:00 -
[1130] - Quote
Corbina Ninja wrote:"Game Of Clones"
Starmap Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones |
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
326
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 17:30:00 -
[1131] - Quote
Here's an idea that might provide the reinforcement answer - if an attack fails, the attacker doesn't get the 'dibs hour'. Successful defense means you could call in reinforcements before another attack could be sent. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2084
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 18:11:00 -
[1132] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Here's an idea that might provide the reinforcement answer - if an attack fails, the attacker doesn't get the 'dibs hour'. Successful defense means you could call in reinforcements before another attack could be sent. You wouldn't NEED to call in reinforcements if you lost less than 150 clones (or 200 with PF), because the next available attack window gives you 2 RTs to restock. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
326
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 19:55:00 -
[1133] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Django Quik wrote:Here's an idea that might provide the reinforcement answer - if an attack fails, the attacker doesn't get the 'dibs hour'. Successful defense means you could call in reinforcements before another attack could be sent. You wouldn't NEED to call in reinforcements if you lost less than 150 clones (or 200 with PF), because the next available attack window gives you 2 RTs to restock. Not sure what you mean - where does the extra RT come from? If all that happens is that the attackers lose their 'dibs hour', it doesn't stop someone else (or even the same attacker) from launching an attack; it just gives the defender a chance at a very small window to send more clones to the district before an attack is set. It would only be one RT. |
Bojo The Mighty
Bojo's School of the Trades
664
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 20:00:00 -
[1134] - Quote
Can We Assume That PC Coincides With Player Market?
Quote:How do corporations make money from planetary conquest? Owning districts generates clones and clones can be sold for profit. You will however require clones for battle in order to expand and defend your districts so balancing how you use them will be important. At the end of a district battle rewards are paid out to just the winning team based on the value of biomass from the clones destroyed. Salvage is also handed out to both teams and is based on the items destroyed on the opposing team, similar to a loot drop from EVE. Rewards are evenly balanced among the team members based on their time in the battle not war points.
Quote:You can always pull additional players in to corporation battles using squads and if they win they will paid out of the biomass rewards. So if a lone wolf can receive Biomass, and Biomass can be sold, yet needs to be bought, would this still occur in NPC market where Biomass/Clones are sold to NPC or would it be direct to player with the involvement of NPC? |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
326
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 20:02:00 -
[1135] - Quote
Bojo The Mighty wrote: So if a lone wolf can receive Biomass, and Biomass can be sold, yet needs to be bought, would this still occur in NPC market where Biomass/Clones are sold to NPC or would it be direct to player with the involvement of NPC?
At the moment this is all done using the Genolution NPC. |
Zekrin Free
GamersForChrist
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 20:11:00 -
[1136] - Quote
Out of 1000 posts 300 went to 5 guys in a cyclic debate about how losing ISK to win is an exploit, but we're all broke!
Vaerana Myshtana had a good idea on skills to boost ISK in post #340. Skihids was right that this is a "peacock's tail" from back in post #738. They guy who doesn't want fanboys responding in post #1078 claims it will be 3 days for all land to be taken, not a 3hour land grab rush. Hmmm, I agree. My corp is top 150 for warpoints, so out of the 250 districts we're involved enough to earn a spot and when I talked to them they weren't interested much when I said we defend the same map everyday until we lose it. I talked with another corp (the EVE player in it said "we can benefit much from an alliance with each other"...typical) that is ranked close to us and they only had 2 people online.
People talk with certainty that corps will split up to take more. I sure hope so! The majority of players are in NPC corps! Tens of thousands in each one! They aren't apart of this. It seems there are so many ways to be punished in the name of balance, but I have a sneaking suspicion all this debate is coming from exclusive EVE players who bought a PS3 to get an edge on the Dust side of things.
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
326
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 20:35:00 -
[1137] - Quote
Zekrin Free wrote:Out of 1000 posts 300 went to 5 guys in a cyclic debate about how losing ISK to win is an exploit, but we're all broke!
Vaerana Myshtana had a good idea on skills to boost ISK in post #340. Skihids was right that this is a "peacock's tail" from back in post #738. They guy who doesn't want fanboys responding in post #1078 claims it will be 3 days for all land to be taken, not a 3hour land grab rush. Hmmm, I agree. My corp is top 150 for warpoints, so out of the 250 districts we're involved enough to earn a spot and when I talked to them they weren't interested much when I said we defend the same map everyday until we lose it. I talked with another corp (the EVE player in it said "we can benefit much from an alliance with each other"...typical) that is ranked close to us and they only had 2 people online.
People talk with certainty that corps will split up to take more. I sure hope so! The majority of players are in NPC corps! Tens of thousands in each one! They aren't apart of this. It seems there are so many ways to be punished in the name of balance, but I have a sneaking suspicion all this debate is coming from exclusive EVE players who bought a PS3 to get an edge on the Dust side of things.
Nope. Never played EvE before in my life. Granted I've read up a lot on it over the last 6 months of playing the Dust beta.
The 300 post debate on the exploit actually came to a productive conclusion and came up with some really good points, so I hope you're not deriding all that analysis we did.
I am sure that some of the big corps will split anyway, if only so they can ensure that more of their members get to be involved, but I still don't think this will provide much of a strategic advantage over being a single entity.
It is true that many players won't be able to take part in this initially because they aren't in corps. Well, that's their choice but they're missing out on a huge part of the game by playing solo. You couldn't possibly hold a district on your own. This game is intended to be played in groups, especially if you want to be doing anything more than your typical FPS. I'll say it again - they won't be a part of this unless they choose |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
184
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 21:32:00 -
[1138] - Quote
Zekrin Free wrote: Vaerana Myshtana had a good idea on skills to boost ISK in post #340. Skihids was right that this is a "peacock's tail" from back in post #738. They guy who doesn't want fanboys responding in post #1078 claims it will be 3 days for all land to be taken, not a 3hour land grab rush. Hmmm, I agree. My corp is top 150 for warpoints, so out of the 250 districts we're involved enough to earn a spot and when I talked to them they weren't interested much when I said we defend the same map everyday until we lose it. I talked with another corp (the EVE player in it said "we can benefit much from an alliance with each other"...typical) that is ranked close to us and they only had 2 people online.
Did you happen to mention that your corp can earn up to 10mil per district per day?
Also, once they enact planetary bonuses, if you ever managed to control an entire planet (keep in mind, there's at least one planet with only 5 districts) EVE (and maybe Dust) players can get bonuses beyond the ISK accumulation. |
Zekrin Free
GamersForChrist
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 21:38:00 -
[1139] - Quote
Here's my wildest hopes for this Planet Conquest build: 1. Mercs in the corps wanting officer gear and high stakes fun with consequence will do PC for the one capital of the planet. Everything will be as Django and co. analyzed and proposed for universal domination.
2. Mercs can also look for jobs in the Planet Conquest Districts. They'll require a 4 man squad that will utilize co-op skills to kill a few drones, or turn off a forcefield, kill a prototype clone, steal a document upload a hack signal etc. The maps will be small (inside preferably) and skirmish 1.0 style in that you progress to the end objective. Your reward will be petty ISK but also 1 resource for a recipe to make items you get in market but not in salvage (modules for example). Depending on what's happening over the planet perhaps there is an additional challenge like no radar, or drones are tougher, or your shield resets every 30s, or the mission timer is shorter. Districts that were successfully tampered with only reduce planets EVE bonuses by a percent. The goal is for PS3 gamers to have some fun, try a tradeskill. A cutscene at the beginning would be nice like your merc is having their conscious scanned since the job has already been done (EVE and DUST don't have to interact in realtime for these missions) and when the mission is over you either get congratulated and offered a gift from your employers or not. The more missions you do the higher your popularity rating with different race employers for better recipe items. Corps will look to take all types of jobs to get the variety needed to build an item bundle. Note: no warpoints here.
3. Faction warfare will offer pure carnage. Four colours are on the map instead of two, thus no more stuck at the redline since there are 3 enemies to shoot at but they also shoot each other. There will be outside map support dropping one of each installation every 2min that are not hackable yet still destroyable. No vehicles allowed here. No warpoints either. Put an ISK counter on the screen that is constantly climbing in value for time in the game and jumps up on kills too (your payout). Periodically make certain parts of the map lethal (environmental hazard or space warfare debris, just a bomb really) where players have 15s to move their fight. Make the matches long, with people constantly hopping in and out, they don't pick a side either and the kill feed is streamed to EVE for their own statistics/bonuses.
Summary of my idea: PC for districts won't effect universe much, offer a relaxed varfiety to DUST and let PS3 people do a tradeskill. Reward is mainly the recipe item. PC for capital will offer the competitve bragging rights, corp/alliance domination, officer gear etc. FW will be for crazy money to return back to to PC fights, and for mindless fun.
|
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
3212
|
Posted - 2013.03.22 02:49:00 -
[1140] - Quote
Oops, wrong thread. was trying to quote something from here. |
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2109
|
Posted - 2013.03.22 14:08:00 -
[1141] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:Django Quik wrote:Here's an idea that might provide the reinforcement answer - if an attack fails, the attacker doesn't get the 'dibs hour'. Successful defense means you could call in reinforcements before another attack could be sent. You wouldn't NEED to call in reinforcements if you lost less than 150 clones (or 200 with PF), because the next available attack window gives you 2 RTs to restock. Not sure what you mean - where does the extra RT come from? If all that happens is that the attackers lose their 'dibs hour', it doesn't stop someone else (or even the same attacker) from launching an attack; it just gives the defender a chance at a very small window to send more clones to the district before an attack is set. It would only be one RT. When we asked what happens to an attack declared during the RT, they said that it doesn't count the current one, so you'd go through to 24 hours, miss your chance in the next RT, then attack in the one after.
So if you've just attacked a district, whether you finish the battle before the RT ends or not, your next attack CAN'T come in the next RT unless you get your "dibs hour" attack option.
I still think it would be better to give the defenders the option of either a partial clone restoration from the corpses or an ISK payout for the biomass of killed enemy clones. |
Meconium Blue
REGULATORS OF VALOR Orion Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 03:30:00 -
[1142] - Quote
Here is just a thought I would like to through out there. Is it possible to add more functions to the MCC's? My main idea is to charge for the purchase of mcc's but I'm sure there could be a lot more ideas to go with it other than just balancing issues. |
Nevec Overlord
Nevec Task Force Orbis Imperialis
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 06:26:00 -
[1143] - Quote
i am looking forward to try this |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
234
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 12:45:00 -
[1144] - Quote
Meconium Blue wrote:Here is just a thought I would like to throw out there. Is it possible to add more functions to the MCC's? My main idea is to charge for the purchase of mcc's but I'm sure there could be a lot more ideas to go with it other than just balancing issues.
I'm sure they will look into MCC and warbarge customization later on. Warbarge is prolly on EVE side as a physical ship, MCC dust side asset. All of this for nullsec PC. However, this is a topic for suggestions forum. |
Terry Webber
Gothic Wars Consortium
57
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 23:05:00 -
[1145] - Quote
After reading the EVElopedia, I have a question. What does corporation closure mean? Does it mean the disbanding of a corporation? |
Mr Gloo Gloo
What The French CRONOS.
41
|
Posted - 2013.03.25 19:29:00 -
[1146] - Quote
I have a suggestion (if you didn't plan it already).
Create an alert to each corp members 30 minutes before the fight on a district (attack, or defense). |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1240
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 14:46:00 -
[1147] - Quote
Hey guys. I had the opportunity to see [CCP]FoxFour on IRC and told him there a few details we would need some more precisions about to keep discussing what should be tweaked and what is good as is. As he's busy writing stuff i offered to send him the rest of our questions by mail so he doesnt need to scout the last pages.
Just to make things clear, it's not about having his opinion on suggestions we made, but to still go deeper in the mechanics understanding. Feeling the small blanks left. So here's what i'm thinking about sending him. If you guys see anything that hasnt been answered yet that i've missed, please go ahead.
if an attacker sends 200 clones (none lost on transport), and lose 100 in the battle and lose the battle itself through MCC destruction, does the 20% get taken away from the remaining 100 or only 50 because they have to lose 150 minimum? Number wise, would the defender get 10 or 20 clones in that case ?
When do the clones travel to the targeted district when declaring an attack ? -Immediately after sending the notice -When RT starts on battle day -When fight starts
About how the "Dibs Hour" is set up
-The attack notice sent during the "Dibs Hour" is back dated to a moment before the RT so the attacker can attack on the next coming RT ? -Dibs Hour starts right after the battle ends ? -Can an attacker send another attack notice before the first fight happens or does he need to wait until Dibs Hour starts ?
About the status of the targeted district on battle day, what state is it in when:
-RT begins and before the battle starts -During the battle -During "Dibs Hour" and until attacker decides its next move
Does the clone survival rate apply for the journey back after the battle is over?
About loot "being a percentage of the items lost in the battle such as vehicles, drop suits, and weapons. Including Aurum items."
-Does that include modules and equipment (so basically everything being used) or just vehicle hulls, suits and weapons -What is that percentage exactly ? |
Yosef Autaal
Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic
73
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 17:37:00 -
[1148] - Quote
[CCP]FoxFour i say let attackers steal % of clones from defenders When the attackers destory the defenders MCC(10/20% this could depend on type of building on district which attacker comes from ) This is lost on top of minimum clone amount of 150 for MCC destruction. so if the district is fully stocked with 450 clones there is possiblity to loose 210 clones minimum in a single match this might encourage defenders to attack more and not just sit in the mcc hiding and timing out the match, as the more clones they loose in a fight just means less clones the attackers will raid if they lose compared to current system defenders attacking till 150 mark then hiding so attackers only getting isk for the trouble
(obviously corps will work out a optimal amount to loose in one match so they have another 2 rounds before district loss)
also means attacking the mcc becomes a viable tactic of attack rather then currently where attackers want to take as long as possible to destroy mcc to get clone count down much as possible,
more tactical choices are good |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1241
|
Posted - 2013.03.26 21:16:00 -
[1149] - Quote
Yosef Autaal wrote:[CCP]FoxFour i say let attackers steal % of clones from defenders When the attackers destory the defenders MCC(10/20% this could depend on type of building on district which attacker comes from ) This is lost on top of minimum clone amount of 150 for MCC destruction. so if the district is fully stocked with 450 clones there is possiblity to loose 210 clones minimum in a single match this might encourage defenders to attack more and not just sit in the mcc hiding and timing out the match, as the more clones they loose in a fight just means less clones the attackers will raid if they lose compared to current system defenders attacking till 150 mark then hiding so attackers only getting isk for the trouble
(obviously corps will work out a optimal amount to loose in one match so they have another 2 rounds before district loss)
also means attacking the mcc becomes a viable tactic of attack rather then currently where attackers want to take as long as possible to destroy mcc to get clone count down much as possible,
more tactical choices are good
There is already a disbalance between attackers and defenders regarding clone evolution between battle. Adding a % steal of the defender total amount of clones will just make it even bigger. See all previous pages there a plenty of obvious pointers about that.
Also, if defenders know that they will lose a game and lose additional % clones to attackers, they will simply lower the amount of clones they intend to lose and make battles even less dynamic that they would have been with the 100 minimal clone loss from previous numerical mechanics.
|
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising
193
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 01:47:00 -
[1150] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote: if an attacker sends 200 clones (none lost on transport), and lose 100 in the battle and lose the battle itself through MCC destruction, does the 20% get taken away from the remaining 100 or only 50 because they have to lose 150 minimum? Number wise, would the defender get 10 or 20 clones in that case ? When do the clones travel to the targeted district when declaring an attack ? -Immediately after sending the notice -When RT starts on battle day -When fight starts About how the "Dibs Hour" is set up -The attack notice sent during the "Dibs Hour" is back dated to a moment before the RT so the attacker can attack on the next coming RT ? -Dibs Hour starts right after the battle ends ? -Can an attacker send another attack notice before the first fight happens or does he need to wait until Dibs Hour starts ? Does the clone survival rate apply for the journey back after the battle is over? About loot "being a percentage of the items lost in the battle such as vehicles, drop suits, and weapons. Including Aurum items." -Does that include modules and equipment (so basically everything being used) or just vehicle hulls, suits and weapons -What is that percentage exactly ? Planning on sending the mail tomorrow. And will obviously post every reply in that thread. Or FoxFour will do it himself.
Looks good, though I think on this point:
Quote: About the status of the targeted district on battle day, what state is it in when: -RT begins and before the battle starts -During the battle -During "Dibs Hour" and until attacker decides its next move
You might want to ask directly if it's possible for a defender to send reinforcement clones from another district in the few minutes after an attack ends and before the enemy decides to attack again or not. |
|
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1241
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 08:57:00 -
[1151] - Quote
Parson Atreides wrote:Looks good, though I think on this point: Quote: About the status of the targeted district on battle day, what state is it in when: -RT begins and before the battle starts -During the battle -During "Dibs Hour" and until attacker decides its next move You might want to ask directly if it's possible for a defender to send reinforcement clones from another district in the few minutes after an attack ends and before the enemy decides to attack again or not.
The point here is to detect if there is a loop hole allowing for reinforcements being sent as i dont think it would be intended in any way. If status is "online" at any point, then you can send in reinforcement. Guess i could add something like that though.
About the status of the targeted district on battle day, what state is it in when:
-RT begins and before the battle starts -During the battle -During "Dibs Hour" and until attacker decides its next move
If the district is online at any of those moment, then nothing can stop defenders from sending clones to it from another district ?
|
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
455
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 09:08:00 -
[1152] - Quote
I'm pretty sure FoxFour already said the "dibs hour" starts when the battle starts.
So if the window is 12-13 and the attack happens at 12:15 the district would be in "under attack" status until the battle ends. The defenders cannot reinforce the district when under attack.
The attackers can schedule another attack for 1 hour starting from 12:15, so if they schedule one before the battle ends the defenders cannot reinforce their district.
They can only reinforce it if they win the battle and the attackers haven't scheduled another attack during the battle and aren't quick enough to do it after. |
Bendtner92
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
455
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 09:21:00 -
[1153] - Quote
I would like to discuss the 24+ hour notice there currently is.
It has been discussed a lot on IRC and like others there I agree that having both a reinforcement window and this long a notice is a little overkill.
I like the window a lot and this should stay. It ensures that fights will happen and that people won't just attack when the other team is asleep. So this should definitely stay.
I just don't see the need for a 24+ hour notice when you already know when your reinforcement window is and therefore should know when to be online for a battle. I would really like to see a minimum notice of 2 hours, or at least 4 or 6 hours. This would allow for some surprise attacks, but it won't only be surprise attacks since you can still schedule attacks up to 24 hours in advance. In fact, if you don't schedule attacks well ahead there might not be any districts to attack if you only want to schedule attacks a few hours before, so most battles would still be scheduled 20-24 hours in advance, but there would be a few surprise attacks.
Like I said, the defending team already know when their reinforcement window is, so I don't see the need for a 24+ hour notice. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
242
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 09:27:00 -
[1154] - Quote
PC launch date 6th may, or after we get to experiment a bit with the new dropsuits and equipment? |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1241
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 09:56:00 -
[1155] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote:I'm pretty sure FoxFour already said the "dibs hour" starts when the battle starts.
So if the window is 12-13 and the attack happens at 12:15 the district would be in "under attack" status until the battle ends. The defenders cannot reinforce the district when under attack.
The attackers can schedule another attack for 1 hour starting from 12:15, so if they schedule one before the battle ends the defenders cannot reinforce their district.
They can only reinforce it if they win the battle and the attackers haven't scheduled another attack during the battle and aren't quick enough to do it after.
That's the pretty sure parts i want to clear out with this. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
334
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 10:02:00 -
[1156] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:PC launch date 6th may, or after we get to experiment a bit with the new dropsuits and equipment?
I can't imagine PC launching the same day that everyone will be downloading the patch - that would just leave whoever can download first to get all the districts and people who have problems will get left behind with nothing. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1241
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 10:15:00 -
[1157] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:trollsroyce wrote:PC launch date 6th may, or after we get to experiment a bit with the new dropsuits and equipment? I can't imagine PC launching the same day that everyone will be downloading the patch - that would just leave whoever can download first to get all the districts and people who have problems will get left behind with nothing.
good point. they could wait the beginning of the "Sp Week" on the wednesday 8th. |
Booker DaFooker
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
77
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 12:38:00 -
[1158] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:Looks good, though I think on this point: Quote: About the status of the targeted district on battle day, what state is it in when: -RT begins and before the battle starts -During the battle -During "Dibs Hour" and until attacker decides its next move You might want to ask directly if it's possible for a defender to send reinforcement clones from another district in the few minutes after an attack ends and before the enemy decides to attack again or not. The point here is to detect if there is a loop hole allowing for reinforcements being sent as i dont think it would be intended in any way. If status is "online" at any point, then you can send in reinforcement. Guess i could add something like that though. About the status of the targeted district on battle day, what state is it in when: -RT begins and before the battle starts -During the battle -During "Dibs Hour" and until attacker decides its next move If the district is online at any of those moment, then nothing can stop defenders from sending clones to it from another district ?
Although online that only effects clone production which will only go offline if a defense is lost. The district will remain locked (un-reinforceable) until battle starts, will remain locked during battle and still further remain locked throughout "dibs hour".
If your attacker does not attack again then you will have an opportunity to reinforce from another district between the end of dibs hour and before any one else gives notice of an attack which will lock you again.
Dibs hour starts directly after battle has finished. If attacker does not utilize dibs hour, any attack by another corps made after dibs hour will of course have to wait almost 48 hours for that battle to commence so defenders will get a chance to reinforce or produce more clones in time for it
............I think........ |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1241
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 13:20:00 -
[1159] - Quote
Booker DaFooker wrote:Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Parson Atreides wrote:Looks good, though I think on this point: Quote: About the status of the targeted district on battle day, what state is it in when: -RT begins and before the battle starts -During the battle -During "Dibs Hour" and until attacker decides its next move You might want to ask directly if it's possible for a defender to send reinforcement clones from another district in the few minutes after an attack ends and before the enemy decides to attack again or not. The point here is to detect if there is a loop hole allowing for reinforcements being sent as i dont think it would be intended in any way. If status is "online" at any point, then you can send in reinforcement. Guess i could add something like that though. About the status of the targeted district on battle day, what state is it in when: -RT begins and before the battle starts -During the battle -During "Dibs Hour" and until attacker decides its next move If the district is online at any of those moment, then nothing can stop defenders from sending clones to it from another district ? Although online that only effects clone production which will only go offline if a defense is lost. The district will remain locked (un-reinforceable) until battle starts, will remain locked during battle and still further remain locked throughout "dibs hour". If your attacker does not attack again then you will have an opportunity to reinforce from another district between the end of dibs hour and before any one else gives notice of an attack which will lock you again. Dibs hour starts directly after battle has finished. If attacker does not utilize dibs hour, any attack by another corps made after dibs hour will of course have to wait almost 48 hours for that battle to commence so defenders will get a chance to reinforce or produce more clones in time for it ............I think........
That's what we all think i would say. But as nothing has been confirmed by a dev, it's worth asking. Might even raise something they didnt think about in the first place. That's what we're here for.
Btw, mail sent. |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
336
|
Posted - 2013.03.27 20:20:00 -
[1160] - Quote
Cheers Caz. Can you ask CCP Fox Four to come back to this thread too; it misses him. |
|
Stexn byd
UnReaL.
5
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 01:06:00 -
[1161] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:So large corps can put out multiple attacks or defend multiple locations, where a smaller corp has to decide whether they attack or defend?
There is only 1 hr window a day to attack district A? Win or lose you wait another 24hrs to attack?
So a corp of 16 holds 24 districts and can be attacked at each district that day and they have to fight all 24 or what? do the times overlap? Do the defenders choose the time or is it the attackers? The corporation in control of the district chooses the reinforcement time. seriously? so the defenders choose when the aggressors are allowed to attack? seems rather unrealistic to me, I mean wouldn't an invasion be kept secret and be a surprise? the aggressors should definitely be the ones who pick the engagement time with a short warning and some form of extra punitive measure if they don't show up for the battle. |
Goric Rumis
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
117
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 04:09:00 -
[1162] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Django Quik wrote:trollsroyce wrote:PC launch date 6th may, or after we get to experiment a bit with the new dropsuits and equipment? I can't imagine PC launching the same day that everyone will be downloading the patch - that would just leave whoever can download first to get all the districts and people who have problems will get left behind with nothing. good point. they could wait the beginning of the "Sp Week" on the wednesday 8th. I think that's why they only allow you to take one district at first. You'll have to wait for the second district until you have enough clones to attack it. But it does give an advantage to people who can download first, in the sense that they'll be able to pick whatever district they want. So expect all the good SI districts to be gone early. |
Goric Rumis
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
117
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 04:17:00 -
[1163] - Quote
Bendtner92 wrote:It has been discussed a lot on IRC and like others there I agree that having both a reinforcement window and this long a notice is a little overkill.
I like the window a lot and this should stay. It ensures that fights will happen and that people won't just attack when the other team is asleep. So this should definitely stay.
*snip*
Like I said, the defending team already know when their reinforcement window is, so I don't see the need for a 24+ hour notice. I'm on board for the way they're doing it, which is pretty conservative but should give everyone a fair shot at first. I'd be surprised if this weren't a server-side variable that they could tweak between builds if things are too slow, and I expect there will be some tweaking done before the notice period is set on a relatively permanent basis. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1245
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 07:19:00 -
[1164] - Quote
Django Quik wrote:Cheers Caz. Can you ask CCP Fox Four to come back to this thread too; it misses him.
He is busy writing another devblog on PC. Some things changed apparently ^^. He ll come back then i guess |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1245
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 07:21:00 -
[1165] - Quote
Stexn byd wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Belzeebub Santana wrote:So large corps can put out multiple attacks or defend multiple locations, where a smaller corp has to decide whether they attack or defend?
There is only 1 hr window a day to attack district A? Win or lose you wait another 24hrs to attack?
So a corp of 16 holds 24 districts and can be attacked at each district that day and they have to fight all 24 or what? do the times overlap? Do the defenders choose the time or is it the attackers? The corporation in control of the district chooses the reinforcement time. seriously? so the defenders choose when the aggressors are allowed to attack? seems rather unrealistic to me, I mean wouldn't an invasion be kept secret and be a surprise? the aggressors should definitely be the ones who pick the engagement time with a short warning and some form of extra punitive measure if they don't show up for the battle.
It s a needed mecanism. Otherwise you ll see corps with 1k players attack when smaller corps are offline. Realism isnt always good gameplay |
Head xXCaseXx
Helion Production Labs Mildly Sober
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.28 17:03:00 -
[1166] - Quote
I'm unclear on one thing after reading the dev blog and the notes here. Is this only for low sec/FW or will null sec corps finally have a use for Dust mercs in their sov space?
|
Django Quik
R.I.f.t
338
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 10:41:00 -
[1167] - Quote
Head xXCaseXx wrote:I'm unclear on one thing after reading the dev blog and the notes here. Is this only for low sec/FW or will null sec corps finally have a use for Dust mercs in their sov space?
This is only for 1 low sec region at the moment but there are plans to eventually expand to null-sec in the future. |
Robert JD Niewiadomski
Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation
37
|
Posted - 2013.03.29 11:46:00 -
[1168] - Quote
A tiny little bit off topic question i would like to ask. What about sex of clones? We have both sexes in our ranks. Someone in the other thread have mentioned something about particular clones (ie. unique DNA set) as being tied with the particular mercenary (ie. his consciousness able to roam from body to body). Excuse my nosiness. But do districts produce unisex clones? Or not? How do district knows how many female/male clones to produce? It seems we are talking about farming/buying clones in bulk like carrots or potatos or other vegetables but with the difference of readiness to spring to life upon command . And vegetables are unisex
Or is it something Ladies and Gentlemen do not discuss?
PS CCP, I know this might sound crazy... But... thanx for familiarizing wide audience through EVE Online & DUST514 that chances are big we might not be our bodies and are totally separate from them. That we might all be Infomorphs who strayed too far from their home world and get stuck into material bodies.
A Big Big Big Thank You
PPS Next step for New Eden is to find an entrance into The (not so much imho)Virtual Reality of Sleepers/Infomorphs. And then beyond... |
Chad2k95
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
10
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 03:13:00 -
[1169] - Quote
I have a Question about PC You have said that once a corporation takes a planet it can build anti spaceship guns yeah! My question is can a district act like a pirate district and and attack all the ship what enter the solar system and have eve pilots scavenge the wreckage? |
CODE Breaker93
Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore
37
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 07:33:00 -
[1170] - Quote
Question: When capturing a district for another corp do you obtain their infrastructures or are they destroyed are you put in your own?? |
|
Harkon Vysarii
Dead Six Initiative Daringly Inserting Large Dangerous Objects
134
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 08:13:00 -
[1171] - Quote
CODE Breaker93 wrote:Question: When capturing a district for another corp do you obtain their infrastructures or are they destroyed are you put in your own??
I would assume you get their infrastructure as I see no reason for it to spontaneously be destroyed when changing hands unless the corp CEO elects for some kind of Scorched Earth policy/ option before combat. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2225
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 10:23:00 -
[1172] - Quote
CODE Breaker93 wrote:Question: When capturing a district for another corp do you obtain their infrastructures or are they destroyed are you put in your own?? We pay to CHANGE the SI, not to build a fresh one on a district without one.
There's always an existing SI, even right from the beginning before any player holds the district. The starting SIs are supposed to be randomly seeded along with the default RTs on each district. |
Thor Odinson42
PXRXO HOLDINGS
41
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 15:00:00 -
[1173] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:CODE Breaker93 wrote:Question: When capturing a district for another corp do you obtain their infrastructures or are they destroyed are you put in your own?? We pay to CHANGE the SI, not to build a fresh one on a district without one. There's always an existing SI, even right from the beginning before any player holds the district. The starting SIs are supposed to be randomly seeded along with the default RTs on each district.
I thought it was predetermined which SI is on a district. As in we won't know pre-launch, but each district will have the same SI no matter how many times it changes hands. |
Dalmont Legrand
Nemesis Ad Astra
3
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 17:03:00 -
[1174] - Quote
1.Is there going to be a star map with systems and planets just like in EVE that shows what part corporations or alliances control.
2. Is there going to be a more specified corporation hierarchy with more specified role and alliance channels like local.
3. A corporation mail address to which administration of corporation has access? So that all emails with offers news and trades from other organizations would be directed there.
4. How about a window like for skills or vehicles or drop suit but for corporation in personal room. So that each player could see post and updates that administration of corporation is making. Not like the monitor but like an access hub. It could be ok on that glass table on the station.
5. Possibility to sit on that sofa near glass table and to manage hubs on the table from there, or to lay on bed inside wall and chat from there. Like you lay down and a chat window pops up.
|
Pryke Bastion
GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention
12
|
Posted - 2013.03.30 20:01:00 -
[1175] - Quote
KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:Pryke Bastion wrote:Well in the interests of PC, I'm curious if these districts that we control would allow any other industrial production facilities besides the clone affecting ones. With the economies split there isn't much drawing the average EVE player to PC besides good will toward alliances with the hope that one day all these manic ground troops might prove useful.
I suggest that CCP allow industrialism on these districts to be tied in. Gives the EVE players an incentive to set roots in these systems with increased production capabilities and output. Might get the industrialist corps interested at any rate.
Another idea to bring more interactivity. An EVE fleet could install a satellite defense system geo-synchronous with their favoured district. This would allow the district the ability to destroy or damage incoming clone assault packets sent by Genolution, Increasing the attrition rate by a modest percentile. These satellite defense networks could be destroyed by a hostile fleet, but it would be necessary to hold the system for a period long enough to root out all the cloaked satellites. This would allow more context and purpose for fleet involvement other than, "Nuke the CLONES!"
Pryke out. Already gave +1 to this. My addition: hostile satellites which wouldn't do anything dramatic on their own but which would reduce the districts capabilities. For example, reduce districts production reduce attackers attrition reduce districts clone production So this why this is on-topic discussion.
Good Point Kero, gotta have the EVE players who like to assault interested as well as the ones who are defensive by nature. +1 |
Draco Cerberus
Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy
14
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 00:17:00 -
[1176] - Quote
This is not entirely on topic, but I have to ask, are we going to get the ability to do production and research of modules, dropsuits, vehicles, equipment and planetary infrastructure as it is done in EVE some day or are we looking at clones as the only remotely industrial thing that Dust corps will be able to do?
Is the planetary research facility only going to be used for clones or is there another future use planned for it?
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2272
|
Posted - 2013.03.31 14:38:00 -
[1177] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:Garrett Blacknova wrote:CODE Breaker93 wrote:Question: When capturing a district for another corp do you obtain their infrastructures or are they destroyed are you put in your own?? We pay to CHANGE the SI, not to build a fresh one on a district without one. There's always an existing SI, even right from the beginning before any player holds the district. The starting SIs are supposed to be randomly seeded along with the default RTs on each district. I thought it was predetermined which SI is on a district. As in we won't know pre-launch, but each district will have the same SI no matter how many times it changes hands. They said it will be randomly seeded when the PC system goes live (which will probably happen before our client is linked to the system). From there, it won't change unless the current owner changes it, which (according to the wiki) will cost 100 million ISK. |
General Tiberius1
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
415
|
Posted - 2013.04.01 06:45:00 -
[1178] - Quote
holy **** this is a threadnaught.
not even going to attempt to read it |
General Tiberius1
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
430
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 04:03:00 -
[1179] - Quote
bacon has arrived |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1258
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 12:44:00 -
[1180] - Quote
Hey there.
I asked FoxFour if he had the time to check the email i sent him. He said he was adding some answers to the next devblog. In the mean time, he answered about one thing :
Clone Movement when attacking is done instantly when setting the attack. So just like any other clone movement.
now go, debate |
|
S1l3NTK1ll3r86
3dge of D4rkness SoulWing Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 21:16:00 -
[1181] - Quote
Excited!!! looks good for a foundation cant wait until its released
|
From Costa Rica
Grupo de Asalto Chacal CRONOS.
74
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 22:03:00 -
[1182] - Quote
Just came here to make sure this gets to 100 pages long, also a question , if the planet has a pair number of regions and they got split down the middle. Lets say Zion owns 3 districts and GAG ows 3... who owns the planet? |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2374
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 10:28:00 -
[1183] - Quote
From Costa Rica wrote:Just came here to make sure this gets to 100 pages long, also a question , if the planet has a pair number of regions and they got split down the middle. Lets say Zion owns 3 districts and GAG ows 3... who owns the planet? Nobody. They own 3 districts each. For any purpose where we might get a benefit from owning a planet, a single Corp will definitely need MORE than 50% control over the planet, though how much more is still up in the air.
If you had an example where Zion held 3 districts, GAG had 2 and PRO had 1, I don't think you could call that a Zion planet either. |
CRIMSON Sheperd
FIREFLY ATLANTIS ENTERPRISES UNLIMITED TACNET
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 12:02:00 -
[1184] - Quote
I have a question will the addition of planetary warfare allow us to reallocate any of our SP? of course i am interested so that i can re-specialize.. Also because i hope all the changes will make most if not all players want to assist their teams more then try to collect K/D..and most players may now want to make their clones corp / team/ faction and not just have SP spent for queuing public matchs |
Korvin Lomont
United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION
16
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 12:45:00 -
[1185] - Quote
A SP respec has already been announced for the uprising Build in the podcast. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
1267
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 18:50:00 -
[1186] - Quote
hey there.
Here are a few hints from dear FoxFour on IRC earlier about coming Devblog on PC :
Possible drop of the genolution pack limit to 1 per corp. Increase in Genolution pack Price. Modifications to the movement fee. Going up and down. By the way attrition and movement cost is also applied to clone movement between friendly districts Cargo Hub max clone may have changed. |
Sparrow 1
The Southern Legion RISE of LEGION
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.27 15:22:00 -
[1187] - Quote
can't wait CCP thx you |
The Loathing
The Southern Legion RISE of LEGION
31
|
Posted - 2013.04.28 07:50:00 -
[1188] - Quote
Soooooo pumped for this. It's a shame it's limited to Molden Heath, but conflict wouldn't happen for ages if the Dust Corps had their pick of the universe, so 1 region is probably wise. |
SIRAJKNIGHT
KNIGHTZ OF THE ROUND Lokun Listamenn
61
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 03:54:00 -
[1189] - Quote
Whats the cargo max hub? is it like the 80 clones reserve we get in ambush? |
From Costa Rica
Grupo de Asalto Chacal CRONOS.
79
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 23:11:00 -
[1190] - Quote
Is a corp capable of launching several attacks at the same time?
If the corp has 800 members and enough money to establish more than just one contract (or fight) can it attack several districts at the same time ? Given the 16 vs 16 on each match.... a corp with more than a couple hundred could launch several attacks at the same time? |
|
Lynn Beck
Forsaken Legion-0
14
|
Posted - 2013.05.02 12:56:00 -
[1191] - Quote
Dalmont Legrand wrote: 1.Is there going to be a star map with systems and planets just like in EVE that shows what part corporations or alliances control.
2. Is there going to be a more specified corporation hierarchy with more specified role and alliance channels like local.
3. A corporation mail address to which administration of corporation has access? So that all emails with offers news and trades from other organizations would be directed there.
4. How about a window like for skills or vehicles or drop suit but for corporation in personal room. So that each player could see post and updates that administration of corporation is making. Not like the monitor but like an access hub. It could be ok on that glass table on the station.
5. Possibility to sit on that sofa near glass table and to manage hubs on the table from there, or to lay on bed inside wall and chat from there. Like you lay down and a chat window pops up.
5. I've been complaining for SO long, why can't i sleep on the dam sofa? lemme take off my helmet in merc quarters too. Gettin tired of that wonky as all hell gallente scout helmet. |
EternalRMG
ZionTCD
338
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 23:47:00 -
[1192] - Quote
The questions is: HOW ARE ALLIENCES SUPPOSED TO FORM IF WE DONT HAVE THE MECHANICS |
|
|
|
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] |