DUST Search - [Feedback] End to the Coward's Defense

Daedric Lothar wrote:

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.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kain Spero Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1765	Posted - 2013.06.25 19:17:00 - [1] - Quote I continue to get reports that players continue to find themselves fighting empty matches as enemies choose to force enemies to grind through districts without putting up a fight. This really has to be stopped. If you aren't going to fight for your district then the mechanics need to favor the quick removal of your ownership of the land you either can't or are unwilling to protect. At the same time the rewards for fending off an attack have to be increased to ensure that a good balance is struck. The most job-like part of Planetary Conquest has to be essentially clocking in for 2 to 3+ days to fight for one district, and, on the flip side, being force to defend over and over against an enemy even though you repeatedly pound them into the dirt. For attacking, I think the ideal would be a longer, multi-stage fight that has a serious sense of progression as you take the district. For now, I would be happy with having the attackers able to immediately attack the district and spawn the next match after successful fight as long as they have more than 150 clones left in their attack pool. One question would be would be whether or not if an attack has the option to immediately attack again or use the current mechanic of attack the next day. On this point I'm not sure if it should be mandatory or not for the attacks to be immediate. I do think on the defense side of the equation if you defeat an attack, even if your attacker declares another attack in their exclusive window after the fight, it should be after two reinforcement periods. Also, you should be immune to an immediate attack again as described earlier if you reduce your attacker to less than 150 clones. If the attacker wins with less than 150 clones at the end of the battle they can attack again but it will not take place until the next day as is currently the case.
Kain Spero Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1765	Posted - 2013.06.25 20:16:00 - [2] - Quote CHICAGOCUBS4EVER wrote: could see a single match being best 2 of 3 or something, after each map go back to lobby and 10min countdown begins again for subs etc. This is pretty much how would imagine the first iteration of being able to press an attack. CHICAGOCUBS4EVER wrote: I would also like to see the ability of the defender to choose the side it wants. Honestly its only fair being the owner of a district to start on the side you prefer. This is an interesting idea I hadn't though of. CHICAGOCUBS4EVER wrote: but none of this should even be discussed until we can get PC matches running smoothly for every single person on this game that chooses to participate, regardless of their geographic location. I completely agree that the priority of performance, but I don't think the discussion needs to be shelved since different folks are responsible for the bigger picture stuff and the nitty gritty performance issues.
Kain Spero Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1765	Posted - 2013.06.25 21:36:00 - [3] - Quote Daedric Lothar wrote: 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. Sure you can do what you want with you land. If this includes not defending it then don't be surprised for it to end up in someone else's hands. Their is an upside in going at this from two prongs in that if you successfully defend you get relief from you attackers for 2 days. You also get the benefit that bringing more than 150 clones to a fight would be much more common and this would make winning a defense more financially rewarding for the individuals from the extra clones destroyed and also to the owning corporation in the form of clones stolen from the attacks.
Kain Spero Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1765	Posted - 2013.06.25 21:44:00 - [4] - Quote ZDub 303 wrote: This is what I posted in the CCP PC Feedback thread... I think it could really work. Attacker Wins: Allow a couple options for when an attacker wins their first PC battle on a district: 1. Option for a follow up attack in 10-30m. Follow up attacks would use the same clones that you already have on the district from the first attack, incentivizing the use of more than 150 clones per attack. You can follow up attack a maximum of 2 more times (and claim a district immediately). 2. Option to reinforce attack. This leaves the current amount of clones on the district attacking, and allows you to send more to reinforce for another attack tomorrow. 3. Option to withdraw from attacking. This sells off the clones and unlocks the district to be attacked by someone else tomorrow. Defender Wins: 1. There should be an option to place a 3 day lock out timer on the district with reduced clone production. First night produces no clones, second and third night reinforces with 40% clone production. There is a slight penalty for doing this but allows defenders to take a break if they need it. 2. no lockout, 100% clone reinforcement immediately. (This is what happens now.) Same 1 hour timer to make a decision, if timer expires then we default to Option 3 for attackers and Option 2 for defenders. Pretty spot on. I'm not sure about a 3 day lock, but I do like the fact that you reduce production for increased defense. For option 3 for the attacker winning I would say return the clones to the district they came from unless it was a gen pack attack. In that case they get sold off. I do like the reinforce idea you put forward in Option 2. It makes sense that the clones are parked on the district and you reup the side of the attack. The only change I would make is that I really think that if you take a huge numbers hit in your first attack and drop below 150 clones you don't get access to Option 1.
Kain Spero Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1767	Posted - 2013.06.26 06:25:00 - [5] - Quote CHICAGOCUBS4EVER wrote: the only argument to that zdub is matches are scheduled ahead of time. This allows corps time to set up personnel ensure availability etc. Having an option to attack 30min later....right after a match will not work out well I don't think. Ppl get on for wars and often log off after. Not everyone is like us nolifers and I don't think its wise to force people to be on longer than they want. Scheduling the mass attack using the current tim ing system I think has greater potentail to appeal to everyone. Otherwise its will come down to corp A taking even greater advantage of the timers and availability of corp B than it already is Actually, I think that the ability to attack immediately actually is better for those that want to get on and get off rather than fighting the same hour 2 to 3+ days in a row. Often times a lot of time gets put into to preparing for a battle as well and with the current mechanics all of that preparation has to be repeated for several days in a row.
Kain Spero Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1771	Posted - 2013.06.26 13:44:00 - [6] - Quote A multi-staged, skirmish 1.0 type map is definitely my ideal for taking a district in the long run. Reading some of the posts I'm not sure I made this very clear. Once you start pressing the attack, if you loose an attack the defender would then get their relief window. 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.
Kain Spero Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1771	Posted - 2013.06.26 13:54:00 - [7] - Quote Nova Knife wrote: ZDub 303 wrote: 3. Option to withdraw from attacking. This sells off the clones and unlocks the district to be attacked by someone else tomorrow. IMO, This sounds like a 'retreat' option. In the case of a 'retreat', I think the defenders should get the attackers' clones that they leave behind. Or maybe a portion of them. I dunno. Yeah, I like this better. Makes sense when you combine it with option two. I wold say maybe not all of the clones since the attacker did win the fight, but a portion.
Kain Spero Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1772	Posted - 2013.06.26 14:18:00 - [8] - Quote 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.
Kain Spero Imperfects Negative-Feedback 1772	Posted - 2013.06.26 15:30:00 - [9] - Quote Daedric Lothar wrote: 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. I think this would make sense with the district being in a reinforced mode. Essentially no clone in or out potentially.