Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Maximus Stryker
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
401
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 17:01:00 -
[31] - Quote
As I replied in another post:
Because it is going to mean losing your district. In a one-off scenario, I agree, this is very exploitable.
However, I am thinking/hoping that if EVERYONE has this going on (and most corps will have multiple districts) and districts keep changing, that will leave them vulnerable to rival corps.
If you are in the midst of swapping out for profits with an friendly/alt corp and a rival corp sees this, would that not create a good time to attack the alt corp which may not have as many members from the true corp and thus be more vulnerable to attack.
I just think that have this little incentive and keeping things constantly changing (even if friendly changes some/most of the time) will allow for more conflict and less stagnant PC. |
Iron Wolf Saber
BetaMax. CRONOS.
3338
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 17:03:00 -
[32] - Quote
Maximus Stryker wrote:As I replied in another post: Because it is going to mean losing your district. In a one-off scenario, I agree, this is very exploitable. However, I am thinking/hoping that if EVERYONE has this going on (and most corps will have multiple districts) and districts keep changing, that will leave them vulnerable to rival corps. If you are in the midst of swapping out for profits with an friendly/alt corp and a rival corp sees this, would that not create a good time to attack the alt corp which may not have as many members from the true corp and thus be more vulnerable to attack. I just think that have this little incentive and keeping things constantly changing (even if friendly changes some/most of the time) will allow for more conflict and less stagnant PC.
Scenario
Light blue moves all but 10 clones out of district nearly abandoning it. Blue team moves 150 clones to attack.
Light Blue loses 10 clones and autoloses Blue team wins district and fund.
Blue team abandons district by moving 150 clones back out Light blue reoccupies zone with the formerly moved out clones.
Rinse Repeat Profit.
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS.
261
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 17:31:00 -
[33] - Quote
The one thing that limits the game is one of its design principles:
Even sided matches.
This principle does not belong to PC. It does not belong to New Eden. Things like stalling large corporations from dominating artificially only moves the said corporations into metagaming, which will be seen in the expanse of alt corporations used to gain more districts and utilize numbers better.
CCP should not cater to small corporations. Small corporations need to earn their place among the large alliances like they do in EVE. They can be renters, they can be mercenaries, they can utilize special guerrilla tactics to fight larger entities. Small corporations are not large corporations - they should never be artificially put in the same starting line.
This is the main drawback in PC at it's current iteration and glory. PC will make dust, and it will be brilliant. But trying to artificially limit large groups from utilizing their numbers is a very bad design choise, albeit it might not be the largest thing. |
Iron Wolf Saber
BetaMax. CRONOS.
3338
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 17:35:00 -
[34] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote:The one thing that limits the game is one of its design principles:
Even sided matches.
This principle does not belong to PC. It does not belong to New Eden. Things like stalling large corporations from dominating artificially only moves the said corporations into metagaming, which will be seen in the expanse of alt corporations used to gain more districts and utilize numbers better.
CCP should not cater to small corporations. Small corporations need to earn their place among the large alliances like they do in EVE. They can be renters, they can be mercenaries, they can utilize special guerrilla tactics to fight larger entities. Small corporations are not large corporations - they should never be artificially put in the same starting line.
This is the main drawback in PC at it's current iteration and glory. PC will make dust, and it will be brilliant. But trying to artificially limit large groups from utilizing their numbers is a very bad design choise, albeit it might not be the largest thing.
This is where I think technology is a problem in not allowing unevenness from happening. I would love to see more restrictions removed when possible and arming people with as many tools available.
If it where up to me, PC districts would be available 24/7 but designing means to make it viable to goto sleep at least (to account for some real life) is more of a conundrum than blue donuts. |
Vaerana Myshtana
Bojo's School of the Trades
587
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 18:06:00 -
[35] - Quote
Iron Wolf Saber wrote: If it where up to me, PC districts would be available 24/7 but designing means to make it viable to goto sleep at least (to account for some real life) is more of a conundrum than blue donuts.
Well, this is where OGCs (Ongoing Guard Contracts) come into play:
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=583770#post583770
Allowing corps to contract with one or more corporations to provide defenders is a way to eliminate the need for reinforcement timers (or at least broaden the windows).
It is also a way for smaller corps with good diplomatic and managerial abilities (but not necessarily shooty skillz) to potentially hold districts against the big boys. |
Iron Wolf Saber
BetaMax. CRONOS.
3338
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 18:09:00 -
[36] - Quote
Vaerana Myshtana wrote:Iron Wolf Saber wrote: If it where up to me, PC districts would be available 24/7 but designing means to make it viable to goto sleep at least (to account for some real life) is more of a conundrum than blue donuts.
Well, this is where OGCs (Ongoing Guard Contracts) come into play: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=583770#post583770Allowing corps to contract with one or more corporations to provide defenders is a way to eliminate the need for reinforcement timers (or at least broaden the windows). It is also a way for smaller corps with good diplomatic and managerial abilities (but not necessarily shooty skillz) to potentially hold districts against the big boys.
See that there is an elegant mechanic I can agree with once there is sufficient economy and population to support.
|
Vaerana Myshtana
Bojo's School of the Trades
587
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 18:21:00 -
[37] - Quote
trollsroyce wrote: This principle does not belong to PC. It does not belong to New Eden. Things like stalling large corporations from dominating artificially only moves the said corporations into metagaming, which will be seen in the expanse of alt corporations used to gain more districts and utilize numbers better.
CCP should not cater to small corporations. Small corporations need to earn their place among the large alliances like they do in EVE. They can be renters, they can be mercenaries, they can utilize special guerrilla tactics to fight larger entities. Small corporations are not large corporations - they should never be artificially put in the same starting line.
This is the main drawback in PC at it's current iteration and glory. PC will make dust, and it will be brilliant. But trying to artificially limit large groups from utilizing their numbers is a very bad design choise, albeit it might not be the largest thing.
There is a big difference between artificially limiting larger groups and preventing the large groups from creating a Blue Donut (or NAP fest) in which there are few if any major shakeups in PC sovereignty.
Large corps (and alliances) should absolutely be able to take and hold a lot of territory.
The problem is that the PC mechanics (as they stand now) look like they will make it nigh-impossible for anyone who isn't one of the big corps to participate in PC except at the level of buying 100-packs of clones from Genolution.
At that point, it is likely that about five giant corps will control most, if not all, of the 250 districts. Those "Kaiju Corps" will likely, after a few months, decide that it is most beneficial for them to only fight over a few planets and they will sign "Non-Aggression Pacts" (NAPs) to that effect with the other Kaijus.
At that point, we have gone from 250 districts available for PC to (in effect) 20 or 30 districts that regularly change hands. Anyone who is not in a Kaiju Corp will never hold a district longer than a few days because they cannot possibly acquire the resources to hold it. This is simple math:
100 clones vs. 300 clones (from a nearby district)
This is a very real problem and it needs a solution. That solution should not prevent the Kaiju Corps from taking and holding WAY more territory than the little guys. But, if the little guys have no place in PC then there is not enough sandbox (at this point) for them to play anything but Instant Battles. |
D Roc43
L.O.T.I.S. Legacy Rising
12
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 19:19:00 -
[38] - Quote
Iron Wolf Saber wrote:Idea 4 Soon (tm)
Man you're way ahead of ccp standards on that, using soon tm for only a few weeks out!!?? |
Maximus Stryker
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
404
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 21:00:00 -
[39] - Quote
Iron Wolf Saber wrote:Maximus Stryker wrote:As I replied in another post: Because it is going to mean losing your district. In a one-off scenario, I agree, this is very exploitable. However, I am thinking/hoping that if EVERYONE has this going on (and most corps will have multiple districts) and districts keep changing, that will leave them vulnerable to rival corps. If you are in the midst of swapping out for profits with an friendly/alt corp and a rival corp sees this, would that not create a good time to attack the alt corp which may not have as many members from the true corp and thus be more vulnerable to attack. I just think that have this little incentive and keeping things constantly changing (even if friendly changes some/most of the time) will allow for more conflict and less stagnant PC. Scenario Light blue moves all but 10 clones out of district nearly abandoning it. Blue team moves 150 clones to attack. Light Blue loses 10 clones and autoloses Blue team wins district and fund. Blue team abandons district by moving 150 clones back out Light blue reoccupies zone with the formerly moved out clones. Rinse Repeat Profit. Possible solution:
Have a lock out timer to where once you lose a district, you cannot move to retake it for 48 / 72 hours thus leaving the alt corp vulnerable to attack from Red or Light red
This would encourage coprs to always have a hold on certain districts because if they lost a strategic district it could leave them cut off. |
Iron Wolf Saber
BetaMax. CRONOS.
3339
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 21:01:00 -
[40] - Quote
D Roc43 wrote:Iron Wolf Saber wrote:Idea 4 Soon (tm) Man you're way ahead of ccp standards on that, using soon tm for only a few weeks out!!??
Soon as it I haven't done any scenario-fying or simulation nor writing about it. |
|
Iron Wolf Saber
BetaMax. CRONOS.
3339
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 21:07:00 -
[41] - Quote
Maximus Stryker wrote:Iron Wolf Saber wrote:Maximus Stryker wrote:As I replied in another post: Because it is going to mean losing your district. In a one-off scenario, I agree, this is very exploitable. However, I am thinking/hoping that if EVERYONE has this going on (and most corps will have multiple districts) and districts keep changing, that will leave them vulnerable to rival corps. If you are in the midst of swapping out for profits with an friendly/alt corp and a rival corp sees this, would that not create a good time to attack the alt corp which may not have as many members from the true corp and thus be more vulnerable to attack. I just think that have this little incentive and keeping things constantly changing (even if friendly changes some/most of the time) will allow for more conflict and less stagnant PC. Scenario Light blue moves all but 10 clones out of district nearly abandoning it. Blue team moves 150 clones to attack. Light Blue loses 10 clones and autoloses Blue team wins district and fund. Blue team abandons district by moving 150 clones back out Light blue reoccupies zone with the formerly moved out clones. Rinse Repeat Profit. Possible solution: Have a lock out timer to where once you lose a district, you cannot move to retake it for 48 / 72 hours thus leaving the alt corp vulnerable to attack from Red or Light red This would encourage coprs to always have a hold on certain districts because if they lost a strategic district it could leave them cut off.
Scenario. Create 4 farming alts. Light-blue periwinkle sky-blue and sapphire circle jerk as necessary to circumvent timer.
|
Maximus Stryker
Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation
404
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 21:15:00 -
[42] - Quote
Iron Wolf Saber wrote:Maximus Stryker wrote:Iron Wolf Saber wrote:Maximus Stryker wrote:As I replied in another post: Because it is going to mean losing your district. In a one-off scenario, I agree, this is very exploitable. However, I am thinking/hoping that if EVERYONE has this going on (and most corps will have multiple districts) and districts keep changing, that will leave them vulnerable to rival corps. If you are in the midst of swapping out for profits with an friendly/alt corp and a rival corp sees this, would that not create a good time to attack the alt corp which may not have as many members from the true corp and thus be more vulnerable to attack. I just think that have this little incentive and keeping things constantly changing (even if friendly changes some/most of the time) will allow for more conflict and less stagnant PC. Scenario Light blue moves all but 10 clones out of district nearly abandoning it. Blue team moves 150 clones to attack. Light Blue loses 10 clones and autoloses Blue team wins district and fund. Blue team abandons district by moving 150 clones back out Light blue reoccupies zone with the formerly moved out clones. Rinse Repeat Profit. Possible solution: Have a lock out timer to where once you lose a district, you cannot move to retake it for 48 / 72 hours thus leaving the alt corp vulnerable to attack from Red or Light red This would encourage coprs to always have a hold on certain districts because if they lost a strategic district it could leave them cut off. Scenario. Create 4 farming alts. Light-blue periwinkle sky-blue and sapphire circle jerk as necessary to circumvent timer. I admit it is not fool-proof but I do still think it would help as it would be A LOT to manage if you owned multiple districts.
Additionally, as the alt corps were "circle jerking as necessary to circumvent timer" they would be susceptible to attack from Red, Light red, Pink, Crimson, Cardinal Red, Ruby, Fire Engine Red and Maroon.
|
Goric Rumis
Amarr Templars Amarr Empire
136
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 21:17:00 -
[43] - Quote
My idea from another thread: Feudal land ownership. This is more an enhancement than a fix, although I think it would do a lot to "fix" the problems people are anticipating, along with adding a land-management mini-game that could be interesting for people. I could flesh it out more, but the idea is this:
Each district is broken up into territories (say 6 on average) that can be given to specific players. Players will receive benefits from holding a territory, whether that's passive income or a special resource that's needed to acquire uncommon items. Managing your territory well also benefits the district as a whole, which benefits the corp. Now each of the players within a territory has a personal reason to fight in its defense. On the other hand, corps now have upward pressure from members who want to hold territory to attack and get more territory. The stakes in PC become personal as well as corporate, we get additional territorial management content for players, and people continue to make attacks because they stand to benefit in a direct, individual way. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |