| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 35 post(s) |
Guilbert 515
United Pwnage Service
RISE of LEGION
2
   |
Posted - 2013.04.08 09:00:00 -
[271] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:It's looking very likely we will introduce corporation tax, just a question of when.
About the when, id say, as soon as possible!
Since people are already complaining that they dont have any control tool to manage how much money actually got in and by whom into the corp wallet. That causes a lot of internal tention between officers and members within a corp, probably resulting in loosing players interest in the corp or in playing dust i fear.
This is something to fix pre-launch so that small and med size corps have a chance to compete by the time of launch.
Otherwise you widen the monetary gap between small med size vs large corporation exponentially.
|
NIKIA BETHUNE
Ill Omens
EoN.
73
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 09:57:00 -
[272] - Quote
Very well said kujo truth is the region is too small for everyone to get a piece. If you are truly ambitious prove it. How far and what are you willing to sacrifice to be at the top? You want to hold on to your 20 man corp with 5 active members so be it but I say show me the drive to succeed. I started my corp with 4 people 32 days ago I have 90+ members now and 30+ active daily. I feel I have more right than older corps to say if you want it go for it. You smaller corps WILL fail if you don't get your act together if my corp wasn't as big as it is u better believe I would have merged to be a force in PC. Let go of your pride and show the bigger guys whose boss. |
Rigor Mordis
Imperial Populicide Legion
9
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 11:07:00 -
[273] - Quote
DJINN Kujo wrote:OK for all the small corps that are claiming such a hard idea to take part into Planetary Conquest, I am actually with CCP on their new ideas. All the smaller corps that are out there we can assume are playing this game for the short term and to play it just as a FPS and not a game that's implemented with a Massive RPG Online via EVE Online.
In other terms; I know there's lots of players that have hibernated to DUST from Call of Duty, Battlefield or even Halo; just to name a few. That's great, their use to having some spectrum of gun game somewhere buried in their minds that they get to unleash on this game.
I don't mean offense to smaller corps, but I have already been seeing smaller corps merging with bigger corporations already to get ready for Planetary Conquest.... just throwing that up in the air for whomever is willing to catch it and obtain that knowledge.
Throughout the Closed Beta to even the Open Beta, we have seen corps come and go with still a few corps from Closed Beta rocking out everything they have against one another to take that #1 spot in Dust. Corps will remain to come and go as friendships are made and enemies are made in retrospect. It's the game we envelop ourselves into, take it for what it is, or don't judge it to begin with without previous knowledge on why everything works the way it does.
Hope this is helpful to a lot of people
I think you meant immigrated to DUST. Once arriving at DUST is where the hibernation begins.
I understand that nobody really knows what's coming on the 6th. I also understand that this game is an extension/integration of EVE. I understand that there is a decade's worth of fiction and ever-changing demographics that the new people are not going have knowledge of at first. I think I can speak for most of the people new to it when I say it is not a matter of NOT understanding the complexities of EVE and how integration might work. The concepts of EVE are no excuse for a public match that sucks. The concepts of EVE are no excuse for spawning dead at the possible cost of REAL MONEY. The concepts of EVE are no excuse for shooting through mountains.
I honestly don't see how the post is supposed to helpful to people unless that's just the long version of what I said about sandboxes earlier. If the little guy with the DUST corp is only meant to be contracted by the big guy with the EVE corp, why even give the little guy the option to create a corp? Does anyone really expect someone to play for seven years before they ever get to experience the "concepts of EVE"?
Then, after all of ones time spent, divorce, weight gain, and effort, his corp still doesn't have a snowball's chance of having any real success. For they have not been in PC X amount of time raking in Y amount of profit from Z amount of districts. NOW ITS JUST TARGET TRYING TO COMPETE WITH WALMART. Target might have the initial startup capital, a warehouse full of goods, and an excellent location, but Wally World has warehouses nation wide, Unlimited resources, and will be moving a supercenter AND neighborhood market right across the street in a day or two.
Again, we can go back to recruiting. Why on earth does a noob want to join with anybody that's not kicking butt in PC? They don't unless they have the ********* to try and build a corp from the ground up. That appears to be a lost cause because nobody want to join one that's not in PC. Chicken or the egg? And again, why even have the option to create one if it is not intended for HUNDREDS or THOUSANDS to be competing (realistically) for territories? Seems to me that if only the transstellar empires are supposed to participate and have any real chance, everyone should have been forced to stay in their default corps. Oh wait, that would have screwed the new people too.
The fact that public matches are complete garbage also will play into recruiting. Out of every 100 people who download it, then play 10 battles, how many do you think are going to want to dedicate ANY kind of time to a game that had ONE relatively balanced outcome. How many people is everybody counting on to think that spawn camping is fun, or that being held for 30 minutes inside of the redline is fun? Is that one of the great concepts of EVE? I don't think so.
Its just sounding more and more like what I feared early on and this just reaffirms it. People are supposed to accept it as an integrated FPS. Okay, it doesn't make the cut as FPS and it appears that the RPG integration part makes one no more than a lackey even if they are a CEO. I will see what the build has to offer before I form a full opinion on the integration.
I completely understand that people envelop themselves into the fiction and other aspects of EVE. Nobody has anything against that. Heck, I spent who knows how long writing up a history for my corp. Did a lot of research and tried to make it fit best I could while still having some originality. I thought this might help recruit some of those with more knowledge of it than I have. That's not going to help with whats on the table.
I think that 99% of us can accept the fact that we are 10 years late on showing up at EVE kindergarten. But, when you say accept it for what it is, then we all have to accept doodoo. Because that's what is here at this point is doodoo. If that's intention behind the design, to make a game just for the hardore EVE people; where spawncamping, ridiculous blowouts, and falling asleep during a gunfight is apparently the standard, then just somebody say it. Don't urinate down everyone's back and tell them it's raining.
We'll see. Just sure sounds to like the ones who have it all don't want play with the cool kids. I would just hate to see it stagnate and not gain any real support when there were measures that could have been taken to make it MORE successful. It would be nice to here a dev tell us flat out "Don't get ur hopes up" |
DJINN Kujo
Hellstorm Inc
League of Infamy
30
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 11:10:00 -
[274] - Quote
NIKIA BETHUNE wrote:Very well said kujo truth is the region is too small for everyone to get a piece. If you are truly ambitious prove it. How far and what are you willing to sacrifice to be at the top? You want to hold on to your 20 man corp with 5 active members so be it but I say show me the drive to succeed. I started my corp with 4 people 32 days ago I have 90+ members now and 30+ active daily. I feel I have more right than older corps to say if you want it go for it. You smaller corps WILL fail if you don't get your act together if my corp wasn't as big as it is u better believe I would have merged to be a force in PC. Let go of your pride and show the bigger guys whose boss.
Very well said yourself NIKIA; in order to truly grasp the idea of Planetary Conquest, smaller corps are going to have to sacrifice some things here and there to foot your own foot down in the long run. NIKIA's corp is a prime example of younger corps writing their own chapter in this book. Great corp to play cause we know it's going to be a challenge, as far as Planetary Conquest; I really look forward to their success in it cause I know a lot of players out of Hellstorm respect III Omens with the upmost respect. So it can be done, everyone just has to take that extra leap of faith or cross a line here and there to truly expose yourself and your corporation.
DJINN KUJO
Co-leader Hellstorm |
DJINN Kujo
Hellstorm Inc
League of Infamy
30
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 11:17:00 -
[275] - Quote
@Rigor: I understand your aggression to pub matches, if you will; and I understand how the goals of EVE are not shown in pub matches. As such implementation has not been a direct cause/effect of EVE pilots, I personally don't think you can be barking up that tree. You see a few guys on the enemy team you don't want any part of... leave or run free gear. Recently my whole corp has been running BPO's or something similar to MLT or low base cost gear in order to start preserving our assets for Planetary Conquest. I am not saying that the little corps have no chance, as NIKIA noted two comments below it, it's the smaller guys responsibility to do something about it if their current goals are not met; via: recruiting, merging or what have you. I know everyone is counting the days down to see how everything is going to be fully implemented, it's the talk of DUST right now and we all know it. I just know that a lot of sacrifices will have to be made in order for some CEOs to get their foot in the door for Planetary Conquest. |
Rigor Mordis
Imperial Populicide Legion
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 11:45:00 -
[276] - Quote
Also, if it was always going to be necessary to merge with another corp to get in on PC, why have the option to create one? Why does one want to put in all of the effort and time just to have to be a subsidiary? People keep throwing the whole merger thing around like EVERYBODY should have known! Well, people didn't know because they weren't expecting it to be an exclusive country club. People were probably under the impression that it would be on a comparable scale to what is happening in EVE as far as the territorial aspect goes.
Its whatever. It just amazes me that there are those that are quick to tell you to 'start recruiting' and 'merging happening' when, like what was pointed out, nobody knows what the build holds.
I guess my bottom line is the basic, the start it up and lets me play vs. you isn't good enough to keep many around for any period of time. If the estimate was always that the smaller corps (ALL THE ONES STARTING OUT) would not be around for anything but the short term, again, why not keep everyone in their default corps? That logic just says to me that they wanted to slap together a turd because the EVE people will get involved no matter what kind of garbage it is. Just because its associated with EVE.
If you are a noob and you play your first 20 games and 18 of them were lame as duck, are you going to want to go out and learn more about EVE? I said it in another thread but FPS people are very unforgiving. They typically turn their backs on companies that release a garbage shooter. They are skeptical of companies bringing in new development teams.
Now, if we all just have to accept it for what it is...then why have a beta and ask for feedback? Why when someone offers some feedback or criticism do the bandwagoners have to jump to CCP's defense? Why are people so hellbent on this game not being all that it could be?
If it is just designed to envelop the EVE people and not really provide any real rewarding experience to the DUST folks, then we have been duped. And, it offends PS3 owners. The kind of saps ya'll were looking for are on Xbox. That's another thing that makes me curious. Why not Xbox? Ohhhhh yeah. Free 2 play. Looks like free PSN to be sullied with F2P garbage.
I don't mean to offend anyone either man. It's extremely aggravating because I like the idea, but it just needs some serious tuning, At the heart of it all, when you put a loaded firearm into a gamers hand, its a shooter. This needs to have a whole lot of management and customization and bells and whistles. Because as a shooter, its not that great. |
Sojaboy23
Ill Omens
EoN.
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 11:56:00 -
[277] - Quote
Rigor Mordis wrote:Also, if it was always going to be necessary to merge with another corp to get in on PC, why have the option to create one? Why does one want to put in all of the effort and time just to have to be a subsidiary? People keep throwing the whole merger thing around like EVERYBODY should have known! Well, people didn't know because they weren't expecting it to be an exclusive country club. People were probably under the impression that it would be on a comparable scale to what is happening in EVE as far as the territorial aspect goes.
Its whatever. It just amazes me that there are those that are quick to tell you to 'start recruiting' and 'merging happening' when, like what was pointed out, nobody knows what the build holds.
I guess my bottom line is the basic, the start it up and lets me play vs. you isn't good enough to keep many around for any period of time. If the estimate was always that the smaller corps (ALL THE ONES STARTING OUT) would not be around for anything but the short term, again, why not keep everyone in their default corps? That logic just says to me that they wanted to slap together a turd because the EVE people will get involved no matter what kind of garbage it is. Just because its associated with EVE.
If you are a noob and you play your first 20 games and 18 of them were lame as duck, are you going to want to go out and learn more about EVE? I said it in another thread but FPS people are very unforgiving. They typically turn their backs on companies that release a garbage shooter. They are skeptical of companies bringing in new development teams.
Now, if we all just have to accept it for what it is...then why have a beta and ask for feedback? Why when someone offers some feedback or criticism do the bandwagoners have to jump to CCP's defense? Why are people so hellbent on this game not being all that it could be?
If it is just designed to envelop the EVE people and not really provide any real rewarding experience to the DUST folks, then we have been duped. And, it offends PS3 owners. The kind of saps ya'll were looking for are on Xbox. That's another thing that makes me curious. Why not Xbox? Ohhhhh yeah. Free 2 play. Looks like free PSN to be sullied with F2P garbage. Though all this u seem to be missing the fact that dust was never just meant to be a shooter. It has way more to offer for those that want to stick around and learned.
I don't mean to offend anyone either man. It's extremely aggravating because I like the idea, but it just needs some serious tuning, At the heart of it all, when you put a loaded firearm into a gamers hand, its a shooter. This needs to have a whole lot of management and customization and bells and whistles. Because as a shooter, its not that great.
|
Vaerana Myshtana
Bojo's School of the Trades
651
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 12:09:00 -
[278] - Quote
Rigor Mordis wrote:Also, if it was always going to be necessary to merge with another corp to get in on PC, why have the option to create one? Why does one want to put in all of the effort and time just to have to be a subsidiary?
... QQ ...
Now, if we all just have to accept it for what it is...then why have a beta and ask for feedback? Why when someone offers some feedback or criticism do the bandwagoners have to jump to CCP's defense? Why are people so hellbent on this game not being all that it could be?
... More QQ ...
If it was only intended for EVE people to get into and enjoy, keep it on the pc ffs.
Please remember that the Uprising expansion is the FIRST implementation of PC. It is not, nor was it ever intended to be, the end-all-and-be-all of PC.
The point that people are trying to make is that with less than 250 districts in one small region, there will be a LOT of heavy fighting for the few districts available. As such, there will not be a lot of room for five-man corps to take and hold territory. If they can- more power to them, those guys must be seriously awesome!
However, if those guys are that awesome, then the 80M ISK threshold should be pretty achievable for them.
Going the other direction, the 80M ISK price was a necessary speedbump to keep the Kaiju corps from buying everything day one using shell corporations staffed with alternate characters. |
Rigor Mordis
Imperial Populicide Legion
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 14:23:00 -
[279] - Quote
Well, I didn't mean to give anybody the impression that I was in a five man corp. I also didn't mean to give anybody the impression that I wasn't recruiting diligently. Since we gonna toot our own horns: I started mine with myself. Took me almost a week to get 1 other guy to join me. A week later I think we had 5. 6 weeks later, now we have right under 50. That's having purged several due to inactivity and lost a handful to bigger corps and maybe 2 that founded their own. Have probably had 30 come and go for whatever reason.
I really don't think the 80 mil buy in is a big deal. Yeah, its a stretch for a lot of folks but I don't think our group would have a problem raising it in any amount of time. Its a big risk and it should be. Where the whole thing falls flat and really disappoints is in the long term economics of it. A corp goes in, gets it handed to them, then they go reorganize and try again. Sounds great! Well its NEVER going to be able to happen that way. Lets say it does. Lets say that this corp is the baddest bunch of sobs playing the game but they only have about 50 online at any given time. At what point can those guys really hang with the corp with twice the numbers, who has held numerous districts for some time now, and has virtually unlimited resources? How especially do they hold onto their few districts if they have differing time slots?
Lets present a hypothetical question: After PC under the current structure is around for a while. Will it be possible for a corp to break in to PC, gain and sustain a few territories then, gain and sustain a few more, and a few more until THAT corporation has one of the largest 1-2-3 areas on the map?
If one can answer yes, then cool. But the answer is No, not possible, or the odds are slim to none. So then I'm back at what's the point? Now, that's really far fetched all issues with this game aside, but, its nice to aspire.With the way the economics looks to shape things, the max members in a corp should be about 500 which would only triple the number of corps with the ability to really compete on the ground. That's my rough guestimations, I wasn't a math major.
If or when there is another region added, the handful of corps that own all of the districts in this first region are going to march right in and easily conquer 90-99% of the new region. I will give some hope to a few corps that will be able to hang at that point. I also realize that the build may change several things and that more EVE people may become interested in this aspect of it all IF it is successful AND there is some real benefit to going out of their way.
I don't know if there is any way to crunch the numbers from PC profits and the little guys OR, what maybe I should say, the newly organized guys have a realistic chance of huge success. That's why I think if there were a planet level and certain criteria it took to occupy them on the ground then several more can participate and actually gain. This would also make the young corps and small corps more relevant to EVE corps....I think.
Really though think about it, if the small corps all started where they could only conquer one another on the lowest level planets, then they would be wiping each other out while gaining some assets/profit, and generally moving up toward the ones in the middle. Its kind of how the "free" market is supposed to be regulated. If its really about competition, make it so everyone has an opportunity to be competitive.
Everyone will not have the opportunity to be competitive if Mom and Pop are supposed to come in and open up in between two Walmarts. They wont get the people, 1. pub match/basic game wont carry it, 2. Walmart is the largest employer on the planet next to the governments of the worlds largest nations. (US and China basically) People typically regard those involved with these governments and their programs as socialists. Well, we all don't like that stuff, but the whole trickle down from the wealthiest monopolies theory has FAILED time and time again.
I don't know how one can rationalize saying to get up get out, work harder, hit the pavement, make it happen, it ones own reponsibilty, etc. etc. insinuating that the people who are not happy about PC being designed for the elite and huge few are just not working hard enough. This while saying some will have to swallow their pride and just merge. Now there is some REAL crazy logic.
Nothing at all against them taking measures to prevent a massive buyout on day one. There just needs to be an incentive for people to keep playing first off. Building a corp and participating in PC, sovereignty and pride are the ONLY incentives that many people have had to play it. This doesn't look like its going to do much to draw people in. |
Vaerana Myshtana
Bojo's School of the Trades
652
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 14:38:00 -
[280] - Quote
Rigor Mordis wrote:
Lets present a hypothetical question: After PC under the current structure is around for a while. Will it be possible for a corp to break in to PC, gain and sustain a few territories then, gain and sustain a few more, and a few more until THAT corporation has one of the largest 1-2-3 areas on the map?
If one can answer yes, then cool. But the answer is No, not possible, or the odds are slim to none.
Slim to none. For now.
Most of the Kaiju corps are backed by large nullsec alliances in EVE. That means that when PC goes to nullsec, those guys are likely to shift their efforts towards their home systems/regions.
That will leave all of lowsec open to a middle-sized group of corporations that either have no interest in EVE nullsec or that are trying to build up the resources to take a stab at it.
I also want to point out that a bunch of us (who are telling would-be PC corps to get bigger) are also kicking around ideas about how to prevent NAPing (The Blue Donut) in which the biggest corps just decide not to fight each other. This NAP fest would allow them to devote all of their resources to smacking down up-and-coming corps, which is a bad thing.
Ideally, what we should see is a huge number of corps that are fighting for control of a few districts each and then a smaller number of corps that are playing a much larger system strategy game. Those "Monster" and "Kaiju" corps should be harassing each other all the time so that they don't have much spare energy to stomp the "Minnows" and "Sharks" who are fighting over scraps in dead-end systems. |
|
|
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
276
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 14:52:00 -
[281] - Quote
Also keep in mind the growth of dust. Dust will not realistically ever get the playerbase to occupy all of New Eden districts. The approach of opening them up slowly over time is a good way of keeping the fighting intense. This is of course just my guess. Dust could make a ten million player breakthrough on PS4 and PC, too. |
Orion Decline
Reckoners
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 14:53:00 -
[282] - Quote
As the CEO of a pretty small Corp - we only have about 20 members, including alts and a couple of not-yet-accepted applicants, I'm more than a little worried by the changes to PC right now.
I can see why it's been done, but I don't like it.
My Corp has - assuming the 40 million figure we had previously been given - saved up pretty hard in the hopes that we'll have a chance to claim some space for ourselves. We don't have the numbers to reliably defend our own territory, but we DO have friends in several larger Corps who would be willing to merc themselves out to us for a minimal fee. If we can maintain a district, our costs should be not only sustainable, but profitable, meaning we can afford to gift some extra ISK to the Corp members who will provide us with the most entertainment.
80 million - the price is right, imo. But not for 150 clones. There are a lot of reasons why I prefer 200 clones for this pack. Also, I think there should be a second option for either a 150 clone pack at 60 million or a 100 clone pack for 40 million. If it was the latter option, then the 200 clone pack would only be available to "new" Corps with no territory, and the 100 clone pack would only be available to land-holders.
First, a less important reason - it simplifies the math. 80 million for 200. 40 million for 100. 60 million for 150. 30 million for 75. I mention 75 because it's a day's worth of non-PF production. This works. The numbers are all neat and easy to work with. It makes everything clear. If 80 million buys you 150 clones, then you get 100 clones for 53,333,333.333 ISK. That's not a simple number to work with, and it's an important amount of clones to have a clean value for.
On top of that, 200 clones means more tactical options - both to attackers and defenders. It still leaves cloning the enemy out as a valid strategy, but it also helps to make MCC victory a more viable goal. With the current system, defenders will be pushing for MCC victory to minimise losses, rather than trying for something that could reasonably be called a victory. Attackers would meanwhile have a better chance of actually having enough survivors to be reasonably able to defend the district against a counter-offensive.
If there was a "starter" pack with 200 clones and a "landholder" pack with only 100, you'd be less likely to be "wasting" ISK by topping up beyond your district's cap. If you could only buy 100 clones at a time, attacking directly with purchased clones rather than from a district would instantly become impractical. While you COULD technically use this to "buy" a large portion of the map early on, doing so would leave almost all your districts vulnerable. Corps would therefore be encouraged NOT to use the Genolution packs to attack when they already hold territory, and would instead be encouraged to top their districts up with the clone packs while attacking from them.
One of the main reasons players were going to be limited to the single purchase was so that a Corp would have a limited offensive range around their own territory. They wouldn't be able to just buy their way into places at the far ends of the galaxy. Unless they play well enough to win a war of attrition with only 100 clones on the field at once, this plan makes such "long range" attacks less of a viable option. Still possible, but less practical than the proposed system.
If there were two packs, one with 200 clones and one with 150, then the 150 clone pack would be ideal for attacking a strongly-defended district with a high (250+) clone count, while the 200 clone pack is a good option to ensure the defensibility of a heavily-weakened district when you claim it, or to better establish control over an unclaimed district.
I prefer the 200/100 idea over this one, but it would be a good alternative option, and it works within the 150 minimum attack size which currently exists in the plans for PC. |
Cerebral Wolf Jr
Immobile Infantry
893
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 20:25:00 -
[283] - Quote
Any starter pack with a one purchase limit will get exploited by alt corps, thats the main reason behind the price change. |
Mithridates VI
DUST 411
713
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 20:32:00 -
[284] - Quote
Cerebral Wolf Jr wrote:Any starter pack with a one purchase limit will get exploited by alt corps, thats the main reason behind the price change.
Yeah, if it's going to happen anyway, it might as well be part of the design so CCP are in charge of how it works with the other pieces of the system. |
Kitten Commander
Ostrakon Agency
Gallente Federation
151
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 21:32:00 -
[285] - Quote
Cerebral Wolf Jr wrote:Any starter pack with a one purchase limit will get exploited by alt corps, thats the main reason behind the price change.
Well, alt corps and zerg alliances. In the old setup, large alliances had a much larger impact than large corps did.
I still think the map is going to be a lot bigger than people think when you have to take into account that districts need to be guarded 365 days a year. There are many more Red Christmas' to come. |
Orion Decline
Reckoners
12
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 00:03:00 -
[286] - Quote
Cerebral Wolf Jr wrote:Any starter pack with a one purchase limit will get exploited by alt corps, thats the main reason behind the price change.
And if you can buy a large enough pack to press an effective attack, it will get exploited by larger Corps to push out the smaller ones who can't afford to pay to keep up.
I'd rather they exploit it with alt Corps that leave them exposed to "divide and conquer" strategies than exploit a system that's built to be exploited.
Under my system, the starter packs would let someone's alt Corps swarm across the map, but they'd have to gradually work on taking over paths linking their districts before they can safely reunite into a single solid Corp that owns everything, and for the duration of that VERY long-winded process (even longer if you consider that they WILL lose battles occasionally, no matter how good they are), they'll be vulnerable to having any of their Corps basically put to siege by another wealthy Corp that DIDN'T spread themselves too thin.
Lets imagine a corp with literally thousands of members decides to split into, lets say 100 Corps, so they can take almost half the map on day 1.
That gives them 100 districts. Each district has 200 clones. It could be argued that they have 2000 clones, but they don't. They have 100 Corps with 200 clones each, and without the ability to transfer clones from one Corp to another, that 2000 clones is misleading. ANYONE can attack ANY district and weaken it, and there can be no reinforcing. If they want to claim a district, they have to launch a 150 clone attack - leaving only 125 clones behind on the earliest attack you can make, a small enough number to be more vulnerable to cloning out even against an attack with only 150 clones. Another Corp using a starter pack will start with a huge lead in clone numbers, and even a minimum-size attack from a same-planet district will outnumber you. The victory in your attack might be a pre-planned and foregone conclusion, but that doesn't let you consolidate anything, you just chose which district you lose.
And if you instead wait for your clone numbers to build up, each and every day's delay is another opportunity for someone else to attack and claim one of your districts.
As long as there are thousands of Corp, and as long as even a couple of hundred have the numbers, funding and delusions of grandeur required to try and attack wherever they see a potential weakness, splitting a corp into alts will NOT be a viable strategy, because the long-term requirements can only be sustainable when you assume the Corp's districts will be reliably safe from attack for long periods.
Also, I forgot to mention in my first post, but when capturing a district, there should be an immediate "change RT" option, because otherwise newcomers will be forced into places they don't want just to get an easily-managed RT, or Corps that try to work outside their usual available hours for an attack will get their district locked into an RT they can't handle long-term.
I don't think it's reasonable to use the RT mechanic as a limiting factor, because there are smaller regions with less-populated timezones which would be essentially excluded from most of the PC map simply by not having the numbers in their REGION, even if the Corp is sufficiently dedicated and capable. Australia (and to a lesser extent, New Zealand) is already getting forced out of their gaming primetime because of the inability to set RT straight after downtime. This would severely widen the area around this region of the world where the RT system is unfair. Districts will quickly gravitate towards having RTs that suit either US or EU players, and anyone who doesn't fit into those timezones will be unable to secure any districts they capture because they can't sustain the off-time play while under repeated attack from the Corps who want to keep the RT where it is. |
Fannomos
Namtar Elite
Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 00:11:00 -
[287] - Quote
TakeCover OrDie wrote:hello
TakeCover OrDie brings up a good point. We're so concerned only the biggest corps can buy in. Well of the 2 million created characters over 1.8million are in NPC corp (yes I tallied it). And of the 10% in a player made corp I bet 1% of that knows anything about Uprising. So really, PC is so niche that it is a gift directly from CCP to us: the griefer. |
Rigor Mordis
Imperial Populicide Legion
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 00:18:00 -
[288] - Quote
Wow. A large portion of the conversation that was here this morning is just gone. How neat. There it is in a nutshell. The great defense of all defenders and defenses; the ole delete peoples posts entirely tactic. I could understand if the discussion taking place was off-topic or becoming too intense and personal between people. However, its just a case of abusing power too control information. Its a good thing that the EVE base loves you all so much because CCP isn't doing itself any favors if they're trying to win over any new people.
Anyway I think I made my point about all of this. The fact that a good portion of the conversation and my last rebuttal have been removed just validates my view on it all. The fact that people were starting to agree and see my arguement's side, and making really good points from both sides got it shut down I guess.
Well, for those who didn't get to see, we established that it is a FACT that the current PC system will leave virtually NO CHANCE for a new corp or a smaller corp, or even a mid-level corp to break into PC and actually make a mark. I think we also established that it is pointless to found a corp if you want in on PC and that all the recruiting in the world will not matter because all of the noobs who are actually willing to stick with a game that isn't that good, will all gravitate toward the corps in PC.
I guess that information like that gets your conversation shut down. Oh, not shut down, but removed altogether. Its ok. It is quite apparent that conflict is not looked at in a good light. I guess we all should have known seeing as how the game offers little REAL conflict, but a whole lot of glitching and spawn camping. Again, how neat.
Rather than waste time trying to articulate a VALID point, I guess I'll just join in with those that think CCP can do no wrong. So, here goes: Wallah wallah, wallah wallah, smack, slurp. Wallah wallah, smack, smack, smack, slurp slurp. 'I think you guys are right on the money with this one. Yeah, nobody wants it to be about anybody but us. Lets make it so people either have to be subservient to our established group, or they have to play public matches that are no fun.' Wallah wallah wallah....... |
Garth Mandra
The Southern Legion
RISE of LEGION
7
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 04:39:00 -
[289] - Quote
Has there been any news yet as to which servers will be used for Planetary Conquest? |
Arron Rift
Commando Perkone
Caldari State
77
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 05:02:00 -
[290] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Another question that comes up a lot:
Q) Does attrition apply to clones being moved between friendly districts?
A) Yes. The cost of a move, in both ISK and clones, is paid when moving clones between any districts.
Added to the blogs FAQ.
Forgive me if this is a silly question, but why do you loose clones in while transferring them to another friendly district, even if it's just next door? Are the living conditions inside those MCCs really horrible or something? LOL!
I mean seriously, what did they die from? |
|
|
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
2410
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 05:50:00 -
[291] - Quote
Arron Rift wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Another question that comes up a lot:
Q) Does attrition apply to clones being moved between friendly districts?
A) Yes. The cost of a move, in both ISK and clones, is paid when moving clones between any districts.
Added to the blogs FAQ. Forgive me if this is a silly question, but why do you loose clones in while transferring them to another friendly district, even if it's just next door? Are the living conditions inside those MCCs really horrible or something? LOL! I mean seriously, what did they die from?
If it's "just next door" on the same planet, clone loss is 0%.
It's only if you're moving across planets, which means moving through space.
Capsuleers are built for space. DUST Mercs are not. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
1282
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 07:55:00 -
[292] - Quote
Orion Decline wrote:
Also, I forgot to mention in my first post, but when capturing a district, there should be an immediate "change RT" option, because otherwise newcomers will be forced into places they don't want just to get an easily-managed RT, or Corps that try to work outside their usual available hours for an attack will get their district locked into an RT they can't handle long-term.
I don't think it's reasonable to use the RT mechanic as a limiting factor, because there are smaller regions with less-populated timezones which would be essentially excluded from most of the PC map simply by not having the numbers in their REGION, even if the Corp is sufficiently dedicated and capable. Australia (and to a lesser extent, New Zealand) is already getting forced out of their gaming primetime because of the inability to set RT straight after downtime. This would severely widen the area around this region of the world where the RT system is unfair. Districts will quickly gravitate towards having RTs that suit either US or EU players, and anyone who doesn't fit into those timezones will be unable to secure any districts they capture because they can't sustain the off-time play while under repeated attack from the Corps who want to keep the RT where it is.
i agree with you on the RT as i said many times already since they announced the lock of newly acquired districts.
Now, to get back at the small corp debate...
What you guys are missing here is that entering PC to hold one district is not sustainable. I'm not saying it shouldnt be, i'm just saying it's not as the current numbers make attacking repeatedly a big advantage compared to a defender trying to hold that one bit of land.
An attacker winning one game will have a way deeper impact on the clone count of the defenders than a defender managing to repel the attacker.
Here are a post with some old math that are still valid (only thing changed is the 75->80 clone generation rate)
Quote:More than ever, defenders wont stand a chance against an attacker. the result of a draw game will be A LOT MORE in favor of the attacker than the defender. Why ?
Arrow Attacker when losing a fight will STILL generate clones on its base district
Arrow Attacker will NEVER see any clone being stolen as the current game mode CANNOT justify sending more than 150 clones in a fight. So, defenders will NEVER still anythin.
Arrow Attacker will instead ALWAYS steal clone when winning as it's based on the district clone production output.
Bottomline => bad idea.
Example :
I'll use default districts, equipped with a Prod Facility.
So clone count 300 on both. Clone Gen is 100 per RT.
A is Attacker. D is Defender
ArrowLet's skip directly to first battle day. (So notice send day-2)
A attacks with 150 clones.As attacking clone movement is done instantly the day the notice is sent, its district has refilled in the mean time. so both districts have 300 Clones in stock when fight starts
A wins through MCC destruction. A Loses 100 clones D loses minimal clone loss.
A gets 50 remaining + 50 from defenders PF going back to district.
Sold => 10 Millions Pure profit
A uses dibs hour to attack again with 150 clones. They move instantly.
Clone count after first battle : A= 150 D=150
Arrow Second fight
A gets Reinforcement
D gets none.
Clone count before battle : A=300 D=150
Defenders wins through MCC destruction or clone depletion (doesnt matter tbh). D Loses 100 clones.
Attackers loses all clones. Defenders get jack clones.
A uses dibs hour and attacks again with 150 clones (why bother with more).
Clone count after 2nd battle and 3rd attack set : A= 150 D=50
Arrow Third fight
A and D gets reinforcement
Clone count : A= 250 D=150 (1 Victory on both sides though).
D wins again. same conditions.
A attacks again with 150 clones.
Clone count after 3rd battle and 4th attack set :
A = 50 D= 50
Arrow Fourth Fight
A and D gets reinforcements
Clone count : A=150 D= 150
A wins the fight and loses 100 clones. D loses district no matter clone depletion or MCC.
Why ? When defender managed to win 2 fights ? And the defender 2 fights ? It's a draw and yet defender loses ?
Imagine that for a corporation that manages to get ONE district in a few month. They spend maybe hundreds of millions to get a district with Geno Packs. They DONT HAVE any clone reinforcement each day and PAY for each attack. A very expensive price...
And then, when they got their ONLY district, they get stormed this way and WILL lose it no matter what. Even before having a chance to try and expand..... In my example, even if defenders had won the fourth game, it wouldnt be over. Attacker would just come back again. Maybe use a friendly district to cover for its low clone count after setting the attack. And even then he would still ALWAY have at least 150 clones to defend...
Attackers have WAY TOO much Clone advantages compared to defenders. A status quo on the battles on the ground should be in favor of the defender. Not the other way around. I agree this doesnt take attrition into account. But the whole point of attrition is to guarantee some kind of logic in the progression of the military campaign of the corps right ? So nobody would actually attack 4 jumps instead of securing a base allowing you to be closer to your real foe.
This stealing clone systems doesnt fix anything. I think it makes the disbalance even worse. PC is gonna be a permanent shifting of lands. Mark my words, you'd better be the one to attack and consider defending a waste of |
vmlinuz78
Les Baleines sous Graviers
Squale Operation Empire
5
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 10:12:00 -
[293] - Quote
I would add something too.
Opening ISK between Eve and Dust, and also think the way Dust Merc corp only could apply Alliances.
(see my related post 679776#) sorry I cannot add http link.
My thought is that way could help smaller corp to handle PC.
Regards
++
Linuz Vip |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
1285
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 13:29:00 -
[294] - Quote
vmlinuz78 wrote:I would add something too.
Opening ISK between Eve and Dust, and also think the way Dust Merc corp only could apply Alliances.
(see my related post 679776#) sorry I cannot add http link.
My thought is that way could help smaller corp to handle PC.
Regards
++
Linuz Vip
Again here... Sure we need more alliance tool inside Dust ( joining, creating, sharing battles, contracting etc.)
But even if they were available, the COST of joining an alliance shouldnt change.
And regarding ISK transfer, fully opening = death of Dust and everyone who doesnt have any kind of EVE support. Happened before, will happen again. The value of 1 ISK in dust is very different from the value of 1 ISK in EVE. When transfer are first included, they will fo with a tax that will balance that difference.
Also, this has been discussed thousands of time in the past so you're not bringing anything new.
And regarding your "small corp". I think it's valid to mention that what for you it's corps with less than 10 members. And you wont find much people here telling you that they SHOULD be able to handle PC. Worse, most people here will tell you that they would be fool to even consider it. |
Mavado V Noriega
SyNergy Gaming
EoN.
2709
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 13:54:00 -
[295] - Quote
I disagree with the RT insta change suggestion.
1. like ccp said if u manage to get ppl for a fight on that TZ u already showed both sides can make the time. IF u didnt plan ahead for a long campaign then thats ur fault. Simple Win then change to ******** timer isnt kool and will be used as a mechanic to dodge and tbqh its too easy to win and just change the timer, ppl keep QQing about attackers being favoured and tbqh THEY SHOULD since we dont want ppl just sitting passively farming ISK like they want.
The non insta change makes it so that the defender has a 2nd chance to launch a counter and regain the district. Who ever heard of ppl conquering a city etc and able to setup defenses in 1 night. Only after possible threats are dealt with will u have the time to properly setup defenses aka ur timer
And lets face it if u lose while u were defending ur district AND fail the counter attack then yea u deserve to lose that district.
PC should always favour those that take risks over those that just want to passively farm and claim to be #1 because of a Donut Fest.
If PC favours attackers then guess what? time to go attack some peeps since this IS a FPS and we SUPPOSE to be shooting each other in the 1st place, more fights and conflicts is what ppl should be striving for in an ideal PC setup
BlueDonut will kill DUST |
lordjanuz
Norwegian Dust514 Corporation
104
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 14:59:00 -
[296] - Quote
As long as the corp with good EVE connections will be able to use that force , right now its just turning in to be a gimick. It should be something attackers should be aware of and take it in to account. It should not be easy to take down a good corp with total control in space.
Let EVE players be more involved on the outcome of real battles in real time. |
Laurent Cazaderon
Villore Sec Ops
Gallente Federation
1290
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:30:00 -
[297] - Quote
Mavado V Noriega wrote:I disagree with the RT insta change suggestion.
1. like ccp said if u manage to get ppl for a fight on that TZ u already showed both sides can make the time. IF u didnt plan ahead for a long campaign then thats ur fault. Simple Win then change to ******** timer isnt kool and will be used as a mechanic to dodge and tbqh its too easy to win and just change the timer, ppl keep QQing about attackers being favoured and tbqh THEY SHOULD since we dont want ppl just sitting passively farming ISK like they want.
The non insta change makes it so that the defender has a 2nd chance to launch a counter and regain the district. Who ever heard of ppl conquering a city etc and able to setup defenses in 1 night. Only after possible threats are dealt with will u have the time to properly setup defenses aka ur timer
And lets face it if u lose while u were defending ur district AND fail the counter attack then yea u deserve to lose that district.
PC should always favour those that take risks over those that just want to passively farm and claim to be #1 because of a Donut Fest.
If PC favours attackers then guess what? time to go attack some peeps since this IS a FPS and we SUPPOSE to be shooting each other in the 1st place, more fights and conflicts is what ppl should be striving for in an ideal PC setup
BlueDonut will kill DUST
I dont see how changing RT makes it a nap fest at all. It's a simple matter of "you own, you decide when to fight"
And i disagree with the "hey you managed to have dudes at that time ? ok, you always can then".
What about a corp using the week end to fight a corp at say 3am ? They manage to get the district winning two games in a row on friday night and saturday night. Then, comes the week and oh.... RL !!! Damn, didnt see that one coming....
Why should they then be compelled to defend their district for maybe another 4 days at 3 am despite the fact they own the place ? Doesnt make sense to me.
Go ahead : bla bla alliance, bla bla defence in one day. One thing : Video-game here !
And the snooze fest you fear could happen is already turned down by the huge advantage in clone evolution between fights attackers gets. Time of fight aint snooze fest. Even worse. Why go and attack an out of your TZ district knowing you'll have to then struggle to keep it due to not being able to change RT right away ? Many could end up thinking "not worth the trouble, just gonna be a hassle" and decide to not even make the effort of syncing with specific RT just once to conquer it.
This could virtually split the fights through TZs except for large corps with around the globe players. Still thinking it's a bad move.
Oh dear: got 2 likes too, amazing  ............................................... |
BUGSBUNNY LOONEY
Anonymous Killers Mercenary Corporation
9
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:43:00 -
[298] - Quote
vmlinuz78 wrote:I would add something too.
Opening ISK between Eve and Dust, and also think the way Dust Merc corp only could apply Alliances.
(see my related post 679776#) sorry I cannot add http link.
My thought is that way could help smaller corp to handle PC.
Regards
++
Linuz Vip
here i will add it for you https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=679776# |
Mavado V Noriega
SyNergy Gaming
EoN.
2713
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 21:04:00 -
[299] - Quote
Laurent Cazaderon wrote:Mavado V Noriega wrote:I disagree with the RT insta change suggestion.
1. like ccp said if u manage to get ppl for a fight on that TZ u already showed both sides can make the time. IF u didnt plan ahead for a long campaign then thats ur fault. Simple Win then change to ******** timer isnt kool and will be used as a mechanic to dodge and tbqh its too easy to win and just change the timer, ppl keep QQing about attackers being favoured and tbqh THEY SHOULD since we dont want ppl just sitting passively farming ISK like they want.
The non insta change makes it so that the defender has a 2nd chance to launch a counter and regain the district. Who ever heard of ppl conquering a city etc and able to setup defenses in 1 night. Only after possible threats are dealt with will u have the time to properly setup defenses aka ur timer
And lets face it if u lose while u were defending ur district AND fail the counter attack then yea u deserve to lose that district.
PC should always favour those that take risks over those that just want to passively farm and claim to be #1 because of a Donut Fest.
If PC favours attackers then guess what? time to go attack some peeps since this IS a FPS and we SUPPOSE to be shooting each other in the 1st place, more fights and conflicts is what ppl should be striving for in an ideal PC setup
BlueDonut will kill DUST I dont see how changing RT makes it a nap fest at all. It's a simple matter of "you own, you decide when to fight" And i disagree with the "hey you managed to have dudes at that time ? ok, you always can then". What about a corp using the week end to fight a corp at say 3am ? They manage to get the district winning two games in a row on friday night and saturday night. Then, comes the week and oh.... RL !!! Damn, didnt see that one coming....Why should they then be compelled to defend their district for maybe another 4 days at 3 am despite the fact they own the place ? Doesnt make sense to me. Go ahead : bla bla alliance, bla bla defence in one day. One thing : Video-game here ! And the snooze fest you fear could happen is already turned down by the huge advantage in clone evolution between fights attackers gets. Time of fight aint snooze fest. Even worse. Why go and attack an out of your TZ district knowing you'll have to then struggle to keep it due to not being able to change RT right away ? Many could end up thinking "not worth the trouble, just gonna be a hassle" and decide to not even make the effort of syncing with specific RT just once to conquer it. This could virtually split the fights through TZs except for large corps with around the globe players. Still thinking it's a bad move. Oh dear: got 2 likes too, amazing ...............................................
u do realise the other side pertains to that as well right?
oh u won the district and 2 secs later changed it to aus tz now we never have a crack at it again ....RL!!! damn, didnt see that one coming....
it works both ways, the reason ccp did this way is because if YOU attack YOU have shown that YOU can already make HIS TZ, its not certain he can make YOURS for a counter attack.
funny thing is u know in advance that the enemy could launch a counter attack and if u didnt plan for that counter then thats on u.
also never said the TZ thing would make it a snooze fest. the PEOPLE that play in PC will make it a snooze fest
nothing CCP implements can stop a Donut if the players want it no matter how enticing CCP makes attacking
as for splitting fights between EU and US thats more your concern since pretty much all the good EU corps are in ur alliance.
US is more split and will still has enough EU presence on the US heavy sides to attack EU. U winning a fight and auto switching the timer means there is no other big name EU corp to even challenge u whereas US has to worry about other US and ur guys cuz u guys do make fights on both US and EU TZs
the ONLY ppl that can complain about timers is the AUS TZ guys imo |
Rigor Mordis
Imperial Populicide Legion
10
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 22:01:00 -
[300] - Quote
I think a lot of people are overlooking the issue that PC will be at the base of....Gaining new players and keeping the current noobs. What the game offers in skirmish and ambush (IB and FW) will not be able to do these things if the glitches aren't fixed, the spawning isn't tweaked, and the MCCs dump people into the line of fire. WHEN the blowout or redline happens, people need to feel that the fight isn't over and that their actions will have some effect of the outcome whether it be turning the tides and winning, or just putting a dent in the clone count.
Right off the bat, the basic fight is flawed. This is going to be the same structure for PC and FW? Right there we lose a bunch. The noob just played how ever many matches, got kicked around for however many minutes, and got lucky enough to be on the winning side how ever many times. Either way, do they leave feeling like they affected anything? Right there goes a bunch more.
So, the noob shows some heart. They like the game and want to try and get better, level up, and focus some skills training. They get some bigger and better weapon, suits, and shields so now they consistently around a 1.0 kdr, wlr, and feel like they are having an effect on the battlefield. Now the rookie not making as much money so levels up some more for the bigger and better stuff. Now the rookie is fighting with a majority of meta level 3 gear and is still the 1.0 merc, but now they are not making ANY money but just breaking even after restocking. So now they have to fight with free gear and go back to getting kicked like a dog just to be profitable? There goes a bunch more.
Now, the aspiring merc decides that FW and PC, and maybe the management aspects of corporations will make it all worth his while. The merc builds on their skills, is actively online, and diligently strives to help build his corporation. The corporation is able to field a team or two and believes they are ready to get involved. The startup is exorbitant and members are having to fight with free gear to save money? ^^^^^^^^
So, aspiring merc and his corp buy in, gain a district and then turn around and lose the district due to the fact that the group that held the district or another group nearby had a significant economic and numerical advantage. An insurmountable advantage resulting from the profits of being involved in PC first? An insurmountable recruiting advantage resulting from being involved in PC first? Right there goes a bunch.
So aspiring mercs decide that they need to cut their teeth and reap the benefits of FW for a while. Mercs are of different races so their corp must choose 1 faction over the other? Mercs can fight for any faction whenever they want? Mercs never see any significant change on the FW map? There goes a bunch if not what's left.
The systems design will prevent small guys or new guys from growing therefore prevent them from being able to ever realistically compete in PC. People can say whatever they want along the lines of 'its one's own responsibility', 'start recruiting', etc. The ones with only 10 or 20 KNOW that they aren't ready for it or capable so everyone can drop that rationalization.
First and foremost the glitches and spawn camps need to be addressed and the pub matches need some alternative game modes, AND a way for the noobs to compete amongst themselves. This would get people to give it a chance again or give it longer initially.
I would like to see a way for the scrubs to fight for scrub turf in PC. I had an off the top of my head idea in post #256. There should be a way for all who aspire to get involved and stay involved. I like the subcontracting idea but at the end of the day that's not going to get any corp over the hump and into PC. How realistic is it that a sub corp will become strong enough to enter a market where all the big corps can afford to sub corps like the sub corp?
I think that if certain criteria were in place to own, attack, conquer, profit, and upgrade then a lot more people would want to AND have the ability to get involved. I think it would also help the strictly DUST people to get integrated with more EVE people too. I don't see the basis for the defense of a system that doesn't allow people in. Whatever the system is the upstarts and the small guys are likely never going to kick around the BCS guys with the most powerful EVE affiliations.
So I don't know what all the 'kaiju' folks would be worried about. I don't see what bragging right there really are for the few that will surely dominate the PC spectrum of DUST when the system's design will keep any real competition and growth from happening. The people who can get in on it at the very beginning will be the only people relevant to the whole thing. Their corps will have been involved and will have unlimited resources to expand their territory if/when there is a new region added.
Let's say people are actually willing to play for 10 years just to get in on PC. We right back at square one. What's the point? Ok neat we got a little spot that we held for 24 hrs until the guys took it right back or the vulture swooped in and stole the kill. If the management aspects of the game are only reserved for PC then creating a corp will be a FAIL if you can't get involved and have the opportunity to manage EVEN a low-level district(s).
If its only meant for the few, why offer it to all? If its only meant for EVE loyalists, why put it out on PS3? If its only going to be a handful that can get involved and sustain, why not keep everyone in their default NPC corps? If it is going to take a huge investment of time and ISK to participate, then why only 1.5 mil to found a corp? If we are actually meant to have 1500 members, then why is the system designed so that NO ONE will want to join a group that doesn't already have half that?
I will see like everyone else. But, I fear that when this PC business released, its over with for a lot of folks.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |