|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
594
   |
Posted - 2013.05.22 04:49:00 -
[1] - Quote
Sorry for spam but i need PC players looking at this.
The long and short of it is the PC system needs to be less restrictive and be a results driven system, get the win and you have the ability to recommit if you are the attacker and make changes to your district if you are the defender. In the end WInning is the ONLY thing that should mater, to the victor goes the spoils after all. Jump to edit 2 for more info.
Thanks to Mavado and others who have shown me why micro pushes are being penalized because of the current lock on flip condition. I mean you have teams making concentrated weekend pushes and are being forced into attacks in cruddy timers back on the week simply because they didnt get to control the outcome of their newly won territory. This is not a job and even if it were the only thing should matter is results.
TO THE VICTOR GOES THE SPOILS; sorry HARRY TRUMAN I REJECT YOUR 14 ponts.
1. Remove lock on capture state when a district flips: Its main purpose to prevent early land grab and change of timers is over. Moreover if you commit to 2-3 attacks over a weekend to take a timer that isnt in your ideal TZ you shouldnt be forced to defend it at that crummy timer during the week simply because you didn't have the option to make changes like you were supposed to.
2. Automatic sale of clones
Any action that would cause a district to overfill will cause the extra clones to be sold to the Genolution corporation and the funds from the sale deposited into the corporation wallet. This includes things such as:
A district generating clones
Moving clones to a district
Clones returning from a battle
This is from Evelopedia.
This is not working as intended.Autosale of my clones locked the district that or moving clones for attack or the clones that returned to the district after the attack was over locked my district but none of these conditions should lock the district. This last one could most likely be the reason since its moving clones back into the district after the attack which could be confusing it with a lockable condition if you do it from another friendly district or using clone pack it could be because of the the extra clones we brought back from successful attack.
3. A timer should unlock at the top of the reinforcement window. Again basing this on the locked condition of districts that remain locked through a reinforcement window without having actions completed onto it.
4. Successful attacks are not taking all districts into an offline state. ***MAJOR BUG***
5. Remove the minimum of 24 hrs to perform actions and make it simply timer to timer. (except changing the timer itself) If i change my timer and then want to move clones out to attack allow me to do this please. The minimum 24 hr rule on attacks is more then enough of a restriction, restricting every action to a 24 hr to 24 hr action just creates unneeded red tape. To be succint any action performed on the district that is not a timer change or an attack should not be mandated to the minimum 24 hours rule
6. Note when an unlock condition is supposed to end(we know it should be 24hr but if we can see it in the timer circle wheel when viewing the district saying it will unlock on this date it will help us better find if there is bugs with it.
Edit
7. Make the reinforcement window a protected block of time to allow for changes to be made on the district and make the status changes occur at the top of the hour if they aren't already. Again the minimum 24 hr rule protects it anyway from a corp attack for 47 hrs regardless.
8. While obvious to those that understand the mechanics perhaps a second clock is warranted to note how long the 1hr recommit time ends given the battle starts at at multiple times. Or simply make all fights at the top of the hr with no fights extending past the 30 min mark.
3 & 7 in conjunction with 8 will allow for greater versatility of corp district clone use since once a beachhead is established a corp can't use the protected window to snipe a district with a last second attack before it unlocks. They would have to commit to it before the reinforcement window thus commit them to fight the next day. Additionally it will allow for better use of district clones for followup attacks if timers are properly coordinated.
Edit-2
Make the district status a results driven system, winning gives you the control of what happens to the district. If you are the defender and you win you get a grace period, if you are the attacker you get the control to recommit(or if you flip you get control with a 24 hr 1 time recommit from the ousted owners to attack and try to take control back using the aforemention results driven district control; Ie you lose your district and you have the option to recommit, if you win then you are in control of the district to attack or not, if you lose again the defenders well they won so they have a cooldown as it was their district all along and they won) |
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
601
|
Posted - 2013.05.22 17:50:00 -
[2] - Quote
bump |
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
609
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 03:26:00 -
[3] - Quote
Foxhound Elite wrote:Deluxe Edition wrote:Foxhound Elite wrote:Deluxe Edition wrote:lets not forget to mention the timer problems have been exasperated by all EURO corporations blueing together under CRONOS eliminating any competition during EURO prime time. Any successfully attacks made on the weekend on their timers are easily undone once Monday rolls around and everyone has to go to work again. http://i.imgur.com/h6PXrBa.gif I guess this is the New Eden "Meta-Game". No wonder EvE is more exciting to read about than to play. I wonder how long your members will stick around getting no fights during your prime time. With all these districts? ..we'll be around for quite some time Deluxe, don't you worry about that 
SI and CRONOS planting their flag first to establish Farmville514  |
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
609
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 05:19:00 -
[4] - Quote
New edit. |
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
619
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 13:52:00 -
[5] - Quote
As I stated previously
5. Remove the minimum of 24 hrs to perform actions and make it simply timer to timer. (except changing the timer itself) If i change my timer and then want to move clones out to attack allow me to do this please. The minimum 24 hr rule on attacks is more then enough of a restriction, restricting every action to a 24 hr to 24 hr action just creates unneeded red tape. To be succint any action performed on the district that is not a timer change or an attack should not be mandated to the minimum 24 hours rule
Currently im realizing its not just killing attacks but everything in this game. Any change that is made because its being made during the reinforcement time is forcing the system to remain locked for >24 hrs. Because it will be 23 hours to the next reinforcement window EVERY time you make a change to the district.
The mechanic needs to be a timer to timer function such that actions can be conducted at the next timer. Personally i dont think it should be even limited to one action timer. But if it needs to be one action per timer fine but make the changes timer to timer. The only exception should be a change in the timer itself. If there is any change in the timer, apply the minimum 24 hr rule then. This will always result in 2 cycles before the district will unlock. Also as a safety make any changing the timer a mandatory 24 hr wait time since the last action this should prevent abuse like changing to cargo hold, adding clones and then changing timer in very short order.
===================================================================================================
TL;DR with scenarios so not really TL;DR
The biggest caveat to below is this: The minimum 23 hr rule will result in one less day of clone production of newly won districts and will force counter attacks to take place the very next day with only 1 cycle of clone generation(not sure if this is desired i understand why you have the mechanic the way it is for this scenario, it ensure any acquired district will be at least in a codition requiring 2 min 150 clone loss attacks before the territory is lost) .
If it is at all possible to separate attack actions from everything else then it is perhaps wise to maintain the minimum 24 hr restriction on deploying clones onto an enemy district.
Everytime you make a change on a district you are doing so during the reinforcement time. Therefore it will always be 23 hrs to your next timer. The minimum 24 hr rule therefore is pushing every lockable action on a district to 47 hrs before the district will unlock.
Scenario: I have a district its timer is 0100. I make a change at 0100 (this is still <24 hrs away cause the system tracks seconds in the background but lets be realistic and say i made the change at 0101) So i make a change to the district at 0101 well now that is <24hr from 0100 so my district will remain locked past the next timer and onto the following days timer because the next 0100 is <24hrs away.
Point is 24hr is too restricting, using 23 hrs works better. WHY? because any changes that result in a lock will still unlock the district the following day.
What about abuse of the clone generation? Ok lets say i make a change to my timer at 0100 and change it to 0000 I made the change at 0101 and that is 0000 is now 22hrs 59mins away, cant abuse it going backwards. Okay how bout 0100 to 0200 okay so that will be a 25 hr wait period. So where is the harm?
What about a person abusing this to rapidly change structures and then fortify their districts with clones. So What? They still have to defend, waste isk or move clones to keep resupplying them. And attacking a district brings all of that to a grinding halt.
But as it is now every actions that results in a locked state creates a 47 hr delay in future actions because of the minimum 24hr mechanic, minimum 23 hrs mechanic will do just fine because any action performed during the timer will result in an unlock at the next timer. Thus creating the request i make in pt 5 of my original post.
Thanks. |
Gunner Nightingale
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
682
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 18:09:00 -
[6] - Quote
Shrapnels wrote:Where is the Cost fixes for a Corp who does NOT own a District, when Attacking?
I suggested this, but as it was pointed out to me, ALT corps freaking alt corps would abuse the crap out of it.
Unfortunately there is no good answer. But i for one would rather the entry into PC be lower even if it means economic might can overwhelm.
I have suggested a few things to help mitigate it though.
1. Currently a successful defense will yield 50% of clones from any clones over 150 brought to battle. Problem is no one brings more than 150 clones. So if you are only producing 80 clones that is your buffer before you can be beaten down by attrition over time. Frankly an 80 clone loss is very easy to come by in a tough fight.
Solution: Make it 50% of clones brought to battle regardless of number. So if its 150 clones you will earn 75 of them from a successful defense, add that your 80-100 clone generation, successfully defending really pays off and makes people think 2x of just mindless throwing ISK at you. As far as how to account for such a high yield, lets simply say that from x number of clones destroyed you can salvage the parts to yield a 50% return.
2. Currently there is a minimum 150 clone movement on attack, with this you can only obtain 50% of the clone generation of the district you are attacking. That is 40-50 clones. Again makes raiding not all that profitable once you factor in clone loss to and during battle and the ISK transport cost.
Solution: Make it 100% that means you can raid a district and gain 80-100 clones for winning the attack. That is a great raiding yield while not increasing passive ISK gain.
Originally i thought lets just increase the clone generation. That would only make things worse since your are creating a larger passive ISK faucet. Now ISK generation comes from actively attacking or successfully defending.
Most important you will note is that WINNING is the predominant factor that yields your rewards.
Now if you did this and lowered the ISK cost of clone attack to 40-60M It wouldnt be so bad. Sure ppl could use their ISK printers to use more clone pack attacks but if they aren't winning then they are basically paying you to fight them. If they are winning by farming small corps well then that might be where a good MERC organization can help--Fortunately I know of such an organization ;) |
|
|
| |
|