|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Daedric Lothar
Onslaught Inc
RISE of LEGION
714
   |
Posted - 2013.06.25 19:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
This doesn't seem fair..
If they paid the investment in clones to get the district.. They should do what they want with it. You are taking away their rights to do with their land as they please. |
Daedric Lothar
Onslaught Inc
RISE of LEGION
716
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 11:50:00 -
[2] - Quote
Well, since 2 CPM have responded, if we are going to run with this idea I will play along. For any idea we need to view it from the extreme, from a future perspective, and how it can be hideously abused. So lets pretend for now that EVE and Dust can transfer funds and that a rich alliance is wanting to attack a really awesome but small buddy buddy corp's district. They flop down 1 billion for clones (Drop in the bucket), which gives them 12 packs and then start laying the smack down.
Automatically, with a 30 min reup timer and a 15 minute timer, this gives the attacker the option for a 540 minute battle (9 hours). Attackers could just spend money to push the defenders out of their home, not sure how many corps could or would want to field a full team for 9 hours straight, and the attackers could just not really show up or stay in their MCC for the early fights and only really fight later once the defenders leave or are annoyed. Also might make it alot more difficult to keep Ringers since you can't agree on a set amount of time in advance.
Zdub's post eliminates most of this with his maximum attacks per window. Though I am not sure I like the 3 day lockout timer, because then you could abuse it the other way and make yourself nearly impossible to take over if you have enough money, because you would only be open to attack once every 3 days, and during those three days you almost make 1 day's worth of clones and can only be attacked 1 day before you lock yourself again for 3. |
Daedric Lothar
Onslaught Inc
RISE of LEGION
720
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 14:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote: Daedric, when I say open to immediate attack I only mean after the usual initial wait and then a subsequent victory. If at any point an attacker is defeated when pressing the attack then I think that should trigger a 2 day or maybe even 3 day wait as Zdub suggested. The key for me is that victory through fighting should be properly rewarded, and not fighting or defending your holdings should be punished.
The question I have then is, how does that affect corps using dummy corps to lock their districts up to prevent them from being taken? If they get 3 days of freedom from attacks to produce full clones then the profits are much higher for them to possibly want to lock their districts through alt attacks vs the setup we currently have. Also, if its limited, whats to stop people from grief attacking to slow clone production?
The other question is, what is not fighting? If there is a no show? What if the enemy just has 1 guy in the MCC afking? how would you track other such abuses?
I would like PC to be active and healthy as well. Honestly I would like to see asset destruction during a match. To make a profit, you have to invest in the district, build stuff to increase profit, the more investment a corp must put in means they are more likely to defend it. No need to penalize people when you can incentivize people instead.
|
Daedric Lothar
Onslaught Inc
RISE of LEGION
722
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 14:42:00 -
[4] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Maybe the solution there is to limit the lockout to the corporation that did the attack. This could help alleviate dummy corps being used to lock down a district.
On the grief option to reduce clone production that why Zdubbs suggestion that it be an option to lockdown the district at reduced clone production makes sense. If you want to be free from attacks after a victorious defense you have an associated cost. If you are ready to defend again then go for full clone production, but be open to attack.
That seems legit. if clone production is VERY limited when a district is locked up, then that can stop exploiting. Maybe possibly limiting the transfer of clones to and from that district so they cannot lock themselves and keep resupplying from other districts, I can see this possibly being an issue when there is a integrated economy and clones can be bought and sold in EVE. I would hate to see them lock themselves only to just keep fully resupplying their clone counts to be very hard to kill.
Example: If down the road, a maxed out district can hold like 600 clones, then you would have to win 4 fights against them. If they lose 3 in a row but win the 4th, they could lock the district for 3 days, resupply themselves and then you have to win 4 in a row to take it from them. |
Daedric Lothar
Onslaught Inc
RISE of LEGION
726
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 17:44:00 -
[5] - Quote
ZDub 303 wrote: My suggestion was to lock the district... meaning no clones in or out and reduced clone production as the price for electing to go for the lockdown.
Its just a way to give defenders a breather.
.....
Corp A now has 200 clones, and in 3 days Corp B will have 160 (lets say production is 60 instead of 80 for taking the repieve)
etc etc.
It makes the situation much more dynamic.
I like this, its like being surrounded, a siege of the planet. However. Doesn't this mean the attacker would ALWAYS win as long as the attacker kept applying money to the equation? When would the defender resupply clones?
Revelations 514 wrote:
You could just allow a half-hearted attack, and the clone count would be irrelevant.
Anyways, just an idea I thought I would throw out there.
This is exploitable, Defender could use fake corps to lock a district at the cost of only a few clones. |
|
|
| |
|