|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mithridates VI
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
369
   |
Posted - 2013.03.20 03:33:00 -
[1] - Quote
Kevall Longstride wrote:The problem is that PC potentially is a large source of ISK for Dust Corps and we aren't going to be able to have a piece of the pie at the moment.
I'm a bit put off by this being framed as "we want our piece of the pie."
I also agree that participating in the mad scramble for territory on release of PC is not a workable strategy for the university.
I'd be interested in what the larger corps think about taking one or two uni students along in their corp battles.
My main thought, though, is how exactly you would teach the finer points of planetary conquest without attempting to expand/defend your territory. The smaller scale details of a planetary conquest battle sounds very much a skirmish, while the elements of PC which are specific to only that area of gameplay... are on a scale which cannot be practically explored without actively engaging other conquerors in combat.
Quote:There is little doubt that DUST University needs to take place in planetary conquest in order to provide that experience to our student body. I have some doubts. Can you please elaborate on why you require these districts?
Quote:DUST University also needs a revenue stream other than corp member donations in order to meet some of our training goals. An agreement not to attack your territory amounts to sponsorship from larger corporations. If the requirement to own a planet cannot be justified, why not seek direct sponsorship from the same entities that you want to allow you to coexist with them in PC? |
Mithridates VI
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
393
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 20:26:00 -
[2] - Quote
Thanks for the response, 3 bird.
I still feel that community agreement to leave D-UNI alone amounts to a community sponsorship. It's an income stream which, if not for the agreement to divert it to the university, would be going into someone else's pocket.
The system you describe allows a few things to be taught:
- Reinforcement timer mechanics, gathering a team to attack at a specific time.
- Different tactics within a match, depending on the combat resolution which is most beneficial, which may depend on whether you are attacking or defending.
- New respect for clone count and use of logistics players to keep the team alive.
- Presumably you can use the surface infrastructure to teach students the various uses of this slot.
To my mind, all of the things in this list can be practised in a skirmish. You don't need a real reinforcement timer to practice the reaction to one. You don't need real attacker/defender consequences to a match to practice aiming for a specific result. The only benefit that PC would give is that it would allow for an entire team to be D-UNI with the removal of the current corp battle system. Once the arena system is in place, this benefit would not be unique to PC.
But what can't be taught with the system you are discussing is the strategy on a larger scale, which I see as the most unique element of planetary conquest... development of a territory and clone-placement within that territory for defensive advantage, whether it is more advantageous to abandon a district and fortify those closer to home, how much territory can be held with x number of mercenaries, the most beneficial way to assault a well-fortified territory, consequences of clone loss in larger-jumps.
Simply put, the grunt work is comparatively basic. It's being ordered to aim for clone depletion, aim for MCC destruction, minimise friendly clone losses. This can all be taught outside of live PC scenarios, without ownership of a district.
The stuff that is unique to planetary conquest is the domain of commanders, strategists and CEOs and happens on a scale much greater than three districts and while it would be beneficial to teach the theory of this, it's not practical to learn it in the live game, unless you are willing to actively take part in the same way as other groups will be. |
Mithridates VI
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
398
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 03:12:00 -
[3] - Quote
3 bird wrote:
Mine being that in this situation the community would be supporting the work we are doing at D-Uni and giving us the tools to do our job that much better, the income generated from that isn't even part of my thought process, its an after thought.
My point is simply that in allowing D-UNI to exist unmolested, largers corps are depriving themselves of an income stream in the same way that they would if they sponsored you directly. To the treasurer of a corporation, giving away money and failing to capture potential income streams look very much the same.
I think that in considering the principles of neutrality, this basic level of consideration is missed. I don't think that the income is more important that the territory or the tools to teach the students.
3 bird wrote:
Grunt Experience
But the opponent your playing against wouldn't be playing the same game as you.
This is true and not something I had considered. Does the current corp battle system allow for two teams of students to focus on attack or defence and so let the other team play against someone who is directly countering their aim?
I ask because I am interested in whether the arena system to replace the corp battle system will also meet these needs.
3 bird wrote:
Add to that the increased communication between the involved educational corps, sharing of information, teaching practices and the opportunity to have a direct comparison of teaching practices. it would be a hot bed of education. the ideas and minds brought together through it would change in game education. give me a tingly feeling just thinking about it.
I don't feel that a shared planet can be treated quite so much like a collaborative space as this suggests. That communication, that hot bed, would still be taking place outside of the PC mechanics, whether you had a district or not.
Those criticisms made, I'm still keen to see D-UNI do well and have the tools to support students in learning how this all works, so if there is no alternative to planetary ownership, I am in support of the idea until an alternative presents itself.
If the ability to train in planetary conquest without owning a planet was realised, would D-UNI abandon their planet? |
Mithridates VI
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
398
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 05:26:00 -
[4] - Quote
3 bird wrote:Mithridates,
Income
I do see where your coming from with the income. And I'm reluctant to continue that line of debate as its beginning to feel like your goading me. That's not to say that if you bring up a new point I wont answer it, of course I will but at the moment your point has not changed and so neither has my response.
Not my intent. I was just unclear on whether you understood my position. |
|
|
| |
|