Alaika Arbosa
Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc.
336
   |
Posted - 2013.06.09 17:25:00 -
[1] - Quote
You say "raiding" in the title, though what I read was a PC revamp proposal that still focused on attacking to take the land (at least that is the impression I got).
When I think of raiding, I think of guerrilla style hit-and-run attacks where you aren't looking to take their land, you're just looking to take their ****. I would be more enthusiastic about PC in general if there were a way that we could interfere with (or briefly commandeer) passive wealth generation without needing to mount a full assault complete with timers and all.
I want to slip in in the dead of night and start taking your **** when the alarm sounds and you need to decide if you're going to let me rob your District blind or neglect other things to stop me from making off with your passive wealth for the day.
Raiding should be potentially very profitable and significantly cheaper than mounting a full-on assault. This isn't to say that it should be a cakewalk to perpetrate, though it shouldn't require near as much preparation or investment as it does to assault with the intention of evicting the current landowners. |
Alaika Arbosa
Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc.
338
|
Posted - 2013.06.09 23:25:00 -
[2] - Quote
Mavado V Noriega wrote:Alaika Arbosa wrote:You say "raiding" in the title, though what I read was a PC revamp proposal that still focused on attacking to take the land (at least that is the impression I got).
When I think of raiding, I think of guerrilla style hit-and-run attacks where you aren't looking to take their land, you're just looking to take their ****. I would be more enthusiastic about PC in general if there were a way that we could interfere with (or briefly commandeer) passive wealth generation without needing to mount a full assault complete with timers and all.
I want to slip in in the dead of night and start taking your **** when the alarm sounds and you need to decide if you're going to let me rob your District blind or neglect other things to stop me from making off with your passive wealth for the day.
Raiding should be potentially very profitable and significantly cheaper than mounting a full-on assault. This isn't to say that it should be a cakewalk to perpetrate, though it shouldn't require near as much preparation or investment as it does to assault with the intention of evicting the current landowners. that sounds kinda boring for a FPS tbqh, showing up in a match in a fps and no one to shoot........ heres my view on your point.......whats the point raiding if the enemy dont even show? slippin in the dead of the night means ppl will pick some random ass times to raid when u cant show up. Also winning ur fight DOES actually interfere with the passive wealth generation. When u win the district doesnt generate clones for 24hrs and u also LOSE 150 clones minimum which means realistically the district is gonna take 2 days to start making back ISK passively Right now i rather CCP make some quick tweaks that can work in the current system atm than trying to come up with a complex method while still being fun as a fps cuz lets be real.......if u arent shooting ppl in an FPS then why play it?
I see what you're saying though you're from SyNergy Gaming, aren't you guys a competitive MLG corp/clan?
I can understand why you'd take the view from an FPSer POV. I am looking at it from more of an MMO/RPGer POV.
In answer to your question, the point of raiding "even if the enemy doesn't show" is to gather wealth at their expense. They're confident enough to have seized land they call their own, they'd better be ready to defend it when the time comes, regardless of when that time is. If they don't show to defend their territory, they still maintain their land, they just lose out on the profit their land would've provided for them for that cycle. It is something that happens in Eve (granted it happens differently) and I feel it should have an analogue in Dust.
In response to your assertion that "winning your fight does actually interfere", yes, though in order to do that, the attackers need to put up the same investment that they would need to if they were looking to seize the District for their own. In my proposal, they wouldn't need to put up nearly as much of an investment to negatively impact the passive wealth generation of their target. The return from raiding wouldn't align with the necessary investment, especially if the raiders didn't plan on seizing the District for their own.
Beyond that, it opens up other potential possibilities down the road, if they don't pay enough attention to their Districts and try to hold vast tracts of land just to say they can; who is to say that people couldn't dig Viet Cong-style bunkers under their District and know it better (and profit from it more) than the Feudal Landlords who fancy themselves as powerful because of their vast tracts of land.
3-way PC battles anyone? You can be the attackers, they can be the defenders, I want to be Roach, living under their stairs, knowing their house better than they do. If you make it your house, I'll still know it better than you do.
I know that Dust is an FPS, though that doesn't mean that everything needs to revolve around "Instant Battles!!!!!!". |