| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 178 post(s) |
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
8603
   |
Posted - 2015.04.07 16:26:00 -
[33121] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Hm.
I agree that it should be in roughly that format but a great deal of that revolves around 'fleet potential'. What is it and why would anyone care?
:: Reaches Behind ::
Pay troops better perks and benefits.
Augment troop incomes.
Customize your corp's uniforms and fleet appearance.
Unlock corp-based market agent; get better prices from NPC vendors.
Schedule orbital delivery time/locations for your PC districts (turret types, depots, etc).
Do something smart with strongboxes.
Shoot scout with yes.
- Ripley Riley
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
Negative-Feedback
23115
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 16:35:00 -
[33122] - Quote
Adipem Nothi wrote:
Do something smart with strongboxes.
lol?
Gallente Guide
one day i may leave the basement but that day is not today
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
8603
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 16:36:00 -
[33123] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:
Do something smart with strongboxes.
lol?
Shoot scout with yes.
- Ripley Riley
|
Spademan
Fatal Absolution
Negative-Feedback
6212
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 16:41:00 -
[33124] - Quote
Adipem Nothi wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:
Do something smart with strongboxes.
lol?
Put them in the grenade slot and throw them at people.
What're you looking at me like that for? I'll shank you I will.
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
8604
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 17:05:00 -
[33125] - Quote
Spademan wrote:
Put them in the grenade slot and throw them at people.
Corp Smelter:
Melt strongboxes down and make jewelry to go with Pokey's Pink Suits.
Shoot scout with yes.
- Ripley Riley
|
IAmDuncanIdaho II
Nos Nothi
2088
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 17:42:00 -
[33126] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:IAmDuncanIdaho II wrote:re: PC
If we're looking at ways of not allowing the biggest corps to steam-roller everything else, then why not introduce some sort of penalties based on the number of districts you own. Then over-extension and / or lots of real-estate means your costs can increase exponentially.
Yes I'm currently playing Civ and my health is constraining my growth Suddenly alt corps. That goes for the suggestion of mu ranking corps as well.
As I said to Iggy, don't mercs have to switch corps for alt corps to be useful? There are many many ways of making switching corps a big deal. |
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
Negative-Feedback
23116
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 17:45:00 -
[33127] - Quote
IAmDuncanIdaho II wrote:
As I said to Iggy, don't mercs have to switch corps for alt corps to be useful? There are many many ways of making switching corps a big deal.
Have one scrub alt sitting in the corp, pull in folks from the main corp whenever needed.
If your next suggestion is to ban ringers, then I'll point out that that would put an unreasonably high logistical demand on many corps. Few corps can field 16 man teams reliably unless it's at their absolute prime times. Even then you get awkward timezone splits.
Gallente Guide
one day i may leave the basement but that day is not today
|
IAmDuncanIdaho II
Nos Nothi
2088
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 17:48:00 -
[33128] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:IAmDuncanIdaho II wrote:
As I said to Iggy, don't mercs have to switch corps for alt corps to be useful? There are many many ways of making switching corps a big deal.
Have one scrub alt sitting in the corp, pull in folks from the main corp whenever needed. If your next suggestion is to ban ringers, then I'll point out that that would put an unreasonably high logistical demand on many corps. Few corps can field 16 man teams reliably unless it's at their absolute prime times. Even then you get awkward timezone splits.
lol isn't that the whole point? Logistical demand dictates over-extension, and what you can reasonably hold onto. Anyway point taken. |
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
Negative-Feedback
23116
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 17:50:00 -
[33129] - Quote
IAmDuncanIdaho II wrote:
lol isn't that the whole point? Logistical demand dictates over-extension, and what you can reasonably hold onto. Anyway point taken.
No, because the logistical demand here is such that you end up with only a small handful of corps which are capable of consistently fielding that and then those few corps are able to take lots of land each.
Gallente Guide
one day i may leave the basement but that day is not today
|
IAmDuncanIdaho II
Nos Nothi
2088
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 17:57:00 -
[33130] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:IAmDuncanIdaho II wrote:
lol isn't that the whole point? Logistical demand dictates over-extension, and what you can reasonably hold onto. Anyway point taken.
No, because the logistical demand here is such that you end up with only a small handful of corps which are capable of consistently fielding that and then those few corps are able to take lots of land each.
So the issue is with the size of the player base? Seems we're having to make concessions because there aren't enough corps with that many players. Plus I thought earlier keeping corps' land ownage in check would also be covered via raids and wotnot.
Am I misunderstanding? Are there no more other creative things we can do to prevent this? |
|
|
IgniteableAura
Pro Hic Immortalis
2172
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 18:32:00 -
[33131] - Quote
Arkena, the Mu score wouldn't be based on the corp, but rather the players inside that corp. So even if you have an alt corp, whatever the players skill level inside would dictate their Mu score. Mu score for the corp would need to have different metrics that are applied so it can't be exploited through throw away alts. Something like WarPoints earned gives a higher percentage of Mu score. So if a throw away alt has 100 WP and another character has 1,000 WP, they throw away alt applies 10% to the total Mu score.
I too agree with what Duncan is alluding to, if a corp can only field 16 people then really they shouldn't be holding onto 5 districts only because they pay ringers to win battles for them. Most of my corp grew tired of attempting to fight specific entities only to get blocked by ringers every single game. STB constantly picked fights with out corp out of rivalry, whenever we fought back they filled their ranks with top-tier ringers that were over our experience level.
My Youtube
Biomassed Podcast
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
Negative-Feedback
23117
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 18:33:00 -
[33132] - Quote
If you thought that a more dynamic mechanic like hostile pressure would be responsible for preventing small groups from owning large amounts of land, then I would hope you are correct.
I strongly dislike relying on hard mechanics like 'corps can hold X districts' because there are always ways to get around that kind of thing.
IMHO, if we could get PC to a point where it's sufficiently active that people trying to take more districts than they ought to are overwhelmed as they end up being unable to keep up, then that'd be the best way to do it.
Gallente Guide
one day i may leave the basement but that day is not today
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
Negative-Feedback
23117
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 18:35:00 -
[33133] - Quote
IgniteableAura wrote:Arkena, the Mu score wouldn't be based on the corp, but rather the players inside that corp. So even if you have an alt corp, whatever the players skill level inside would dictate their Mu score. Mu score for the corp would need to have different metrics that are applied so it can't be exploited through throw away alts.
I don't understand.
If you use an alt corp with the only player inside it being a fresh alt, then the mu score is negligible. If you mean to count ringers, how would that be accomplished, exactly?
Quote:
I too agree with what Duncan is alluding to, if a corp can only field 16 people then really they shouldn't be holding onto 5 districts only because they pay ringers to win battles for them. Most of my corp grew tired of attempting to fight specific entities only to get blocked by ringers every single game. STB constantly picked fights with out corp out of rivalry, whenever we fought back they filled their ranks with top-tier ringers that were over our experience level.
How many groups are there that can field a team for each of those 5 districts simultaneously?
There really aren't many groups that can manage more than one team at once.
Gallente Guide
one day i may leave the basement but that day is not today
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
8610
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 18:38:00 -
[33134] - Quote
In my opinion, the more land a corp intends to occupy, the more hands it should need to hold that land. Activity should be a fundamental prerequisite to expansion and resource production. The larger a corp's roster of actives, the more CP it generates. The more CP it generates, the more it can harvest resources, raid, expand, defend, etc. Daily Activity becomes the centerpiece of the new system,
Such a model would promote recruitment in ways we haven't seen since Chromosome. There is presently no reason to recruit an early or mid-career merc. There's nothing of value new blood can contribute to the current system, and competitive corps are simply shuffling around the same top-tier 70M+ SP players. As that number of players diminishes, demand for blue donuts increases and competitive play stagnates.
But imagine a model wherein a symbiotic relationship existed between newbro and vet, with newbros powering the war machine by pumping out CP from Daily Corp Missions, and earning real pay in exchange for their contributions to the corp.
Shoot scout with yes.
- Ripley Riley
|
IgniteableAura
Pro Hic Immortalis
2172
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 18:42:00 -
[33135] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:
I don't understand.
If you use an alt corp with the only player inside it being a fresh alt, then the mu score is negligible. If you mean to count ringers, how would that be accomplished, exactly?
How many groups are there that can field a team for each of those 5 districts simultaneously?
There really aren't many groups that can manage more than one team at once.
Those corps could hold a distinct but wouldn't be able to field mercs over a specific Mu score to defend/attack. I'm saying that if you attempted to deploy into a battle with a "ringer" it simply wouldn't let you. You could probably get one or two ringers as I would expect a "range" but you couldn't fill it up with top-tier mercs.
EX: Disclaimer, this is a very rough guideline. Its simply an idea, I am not a game designer nor implementation expert.
corp mu score = 100
Range of Mu you can attack/defend = 50-150
Roster is filled with 12 Mercs from corp Mu score = 125
Roster filled with 1 ringer = 150
Roster filled wtih 2 ringers = 175
With two ringers you wouldn't be able to deploy.
My Youtube
Biomassed Podcast
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
8612
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 19:01:00 -
[33136] - Quote
Why not implement restrictions on a per-player basis rather than per-corp basis? This would allow for a corp to participate at different tiers of competitive play, and different tiers of play could be segregated by experience level (i.e. < 50M SP Districts, > 50M SP Districts)
Shoot scout with yes.
- Ripley Riley
|
IgniteableAura
Pro Hic Immortalis
2173
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 19:06:00 -
[33137] - Quote
Adipem Nothi wrote:Why not implement restrictions on a per-player basis rather than per-corp basis? This would allow a corp to participate at different tiers of play segregated by experience level.
Thats sorta the idea, but I don't want to keep top tier players from playing in PC games just because they are in a corp with a low Mu. Most corps have a range of high skill and low skill players. Not only that, but PC normally require a sort of "training" period. With a restriction on the player it keeps them from teaching newbros the ropes on lower stake battles.
One or two ringers won't influence a battle too much. A whole squad will. SP is not indicative of skill though, so it needs to be based on the Mu score.
My Youtube
Biomassed Podcast
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
8613
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 19:14:00 -
[33138] - Quote
IgniteableAura wrote: Think of it this way, I have less than 50mil SP and would not consider myself in the low tier.
But I consider you to be low tier :P
(jokes)
Lower tier players could get training when they run with upper tier deployments.
Shoot scout with yes.
- Ripley Riley
|
Dreis ShadowWeaver
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
2587
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 19:15:00 -
[33139] - Quote
Pseudogenesis wrote:Politicians are almost never well-liked, but nobody in their right minds would simply say "**** it, get em out of here" just for that reason.
You ever been to Britain? That's literally all we say.
Creator of the 'Nova Knifers United' channel
Caldari blood, Minmatar heart <3
I'm a monster
|
Dreis ShadowWeaver
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
2587
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 19:25:00 -
[33140] - Quote
Adipem Nothi wrote:Why not implement restrictions on a per-player basis rather than per-corp basis? This would allow for a corp to participate at different tiers of competitive play, and different tiers of play could be segregated by experience level (i.e. < 50M SP Districts, > 50M SP Districts)
More likely, all the < 50M SP players would be booted from the top PC corps. I imagine that you wouldn't get corps participating on various competitive levels as you describe, but corps would be segregated into two classes: The > 50M and the > 50M, and they would keep to themselves. In corp descriptions you'd see 'Minimum SP Requirement: 50M.'
I like the idea of different levels of competitive play, but I think it would split corps in two.
Creator of the 'Nova Knifers United' channel
Caldari blood, Minmatar heart <3
I'm a monster
|
|
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
8614
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 19:26:00 -
[33141] - Quote
Dreis ShadowWeaver wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:Why not implement restrictions on a per-player basis rather than per-corp basis? This would allow for a corp to participate at different tiers of competitive play, and different tiers of play could be segregated by experience level (i.e. < 50M SP Districts, > 50M SP Districts) More likely, all the < 50M SP players would be booted from the top PC corps. I imagine that you wouldn't get corps participating on various competitive levels as you describe, but corps would be segregated into two classes: The > 50M and the > 50M, and they would keep to themselves. In corp descriptions you'd see 'Minimum SP Requirement: 50M.' I like the idea of different levels of competitive play, but I think it would split corps in two.
Nope! Because all PC actions will require Command Points. The very last thing a competitive corp will do is kick its more active players. Activity, FTW!
Shoot scout with yes.
- Ripley Riley
|
Dreis ShadowWeaver
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
2587
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 19:31:00 -
[33142] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:IAmDuncanIdaho II wrote:
As I said to Iggy, don't mercs have to switch corps for alt corps to be useful? There are many many ways of making switching corps a big deal.
Have one scrub alt sitting in the corp, pull in folks from the main corp whenever needed. If your next suggestion is to ban ringers, then I'll point out that that would put an unreasonably high logistical demand on many corps. Few corps can field 16 man teams reliably unless it's at their absolute prime times. Even then you get awkward timezone splits.
IMO, if a corp can't field a full 16 at it's prime, it shouldn't be able to claim a district.
Creator of the 'Nova Knifers United' channel
Caldari blood, Minmatar heart <3
I'm a monster
|
J0LLY R0G3R
And the ButtPirates
2618
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 19:48:00 -
[33143] - Quote
Stupidly off topic but I think the minmatar scout from dust has inspired me over in h1z1
I kinda run around with the bare minimum. XD
Agree with if a corp can't reliably run 16 of it's own people it shouldn't have a district.
However, for the most part corps stopped doing that a long time ago.
Ringers for days and it is understandable. You want the best chance at a win.
No corp has 16 of the best people. 16 people who do really well in pubs sure.
The ButtPirates Now Accepting Applications. XD
TheYoutube
|
Dreis ShadowWeaver
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
2590
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 20:12:00 -
[33144] - Quote
J0LLY R0G3R wrote:No corp has 16 of the best people.
That's exactly the point though. When PC corps use ringers to get the best 16 people, PC stops being fun. This is why only corp members should be allowed in the corp's PC.
I know some people might say 'Hurr Durr we're mercenaries; we should be able to fight for whoever pays us.', but that's what we do in pubs. We can fight for one NPC corp in one match, and fight against it in the next. Player-run corps are things we should be loyal to.
Creator of the 'Nova Knifers United' channel
Caldari blood, Minmatar heart <3
I'm a monster
|
Ares 514
D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N
D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E
1430
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 20:15:00 -
[33145] - Quote
Dreis ShadowWeaver wrote:J0LLY R0G3R wrote:No corp has 16 of the best people. That's exactly the point though. When PC corps use ringers to get the best 16 people, PC stops being fun. This is why only corp members should be allowed in the corp's PC. I know some people might say 'Hurr Durr we're mercenaries; we should be able to fight for whoever pays us.', but that's what we do in pubs. We can fight for one NPC corp in one match, and fight against it in the next. Player-run corps are things we should be loyal to.
I agree. Ringers stop it from being corp vs corp. At a minimum the # of non - corp players should be limited in a PC battle.
Overlord of Broman
|
J0LLY R0G3R
And the ButtPirates
2618
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 20:21:00 -
[33146] - Quote
Want corp vs corp I'd suggest when corp battles come back. They are indeed just that. 1 corp against another corp. Only way a merc can fight in it is if he or she has been in said corp for a determined duration.
If every mode has the same stipulations I stop seeing a difference in them. I stop seeing a point for this one or that one.
The ButtPirates Now Accepting Applications. XD
TheYoutube
|
IAmDuncanIdaho II
Nos Nothi
2093
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 20:34:00 -
[33147] - Quote
lol that looks like you're having fun in your y-fronts there Jolly.
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
8617
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 20:43:00 -
[33148] - Quote
I can see a "no ringer rule" working well for Raids, but I can't see that flying for PC in general. What's the point of an Alliance if you can't help one another out?
Shoot scout with yes.
- Ripley Riley
|
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
916
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 21:16:00 -
[33149] - Quote
Dreis ShadowWeaver wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:Dreis ShadowWeaver wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:IAmDuncanIdaho II wrote:
In other news, I just skilled into level 4 gal scout (will be 5 within 24 hours)
... Damn good suit
Absolutely agree. GA Scout > CA/MN/AM Scout, especially when up against tough, coordinated opposition. I used to be able to run a Proto Gal Scout before I respecced. It sucks. The Min Scout is better in almost every way. PC usage disagrees. MinScouts are great for stomping pubs with friends, but when the going gets tough, the tough get a GalScout. It's the only scout suit which can beat scans and remain competitive. Or Min Assault Scout :p Depends what you're using it for. Every decent PC team has a Minja speedhacker.
This.
I realize most won't consider it competitive, but you guys would be insanely surprised what a 3 second hack time can do in firefight over an objective panel that no one can approach (presumably).
Miracles happen when you slap on a third codebreaker and have a childhood memory flashback.
Know what cannot be known.
|
Kaeru Nayiri
Ready to Play
916
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 21:19:00 -
[33150] - Quote
Pseudogenesis wrote:Re: CPM2 candidates, I really want Pokey Dravon to win this time around, the guy seems like he's got his head on straight. Am I being naive?
Pokey will make a great CPM2 member, I can vouch for him if you have any doubts.
Know what cannot be known.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |