Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 30 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
EthanPow
Caldari Drakeal Inc. Drakeal Federation
|
Posted - 2007.12.31 12:47:00 -
[361]
Edited by: EthanPow on 31/12/2007 12:47:16 Well I believe that SOV has a good system already but you are needed to get fuel form low or high sec it gets annoying maybe making the idea of having another object like a Beacon Active to get SOV and it is much more easy to kill and Break SOV if no SOV is made. You can still have POSes support your control but have another way like stations and Beacons set to keep control. also having a planet claimed in space (Terra formed and colonized) docking Gates are opened allowing you to land on the planet easy. also much cheaper than getting/making a outpost, making small and big 0.0 alliances very happy. also making it breakable so if a big alliance wanted to Break your connection they can blow up your gates making it hard to maintain the colony demands (fuel), and each corporation in the alliance can make their own colony
What if Beacons have powerful turrets and built when not attacked or just anchored. also having small, medium, large and extra large beacons having different levels of resistances and Turrets
also Beacons have 1,000,000 HP in total and for a small its like a small tower but costs 50% less, and medium 45% less, large 40% less than tower, extra large is 20% more than a large tower and supplies the size of control of two larges. all Beacons are anchored at a planet
Also colonies having modules that needs to be bought or made nearby. this makes industy 0.0 players happy.
you can undock form a colony when its dead or the gate is gone, its that you need to repair and maintain them. Dead colonies go to dust after being not touched for a few days making it clean for new colonies to be made. its only when you fly into the planet you can crash and blow up. with the docking ring it can guide you down to a landing pad to place your ships.
colonies should be upgradeable like outposts and take alot to get to a reasonable stats like a outpost :)
also each colony can be limited to standing or otherwise. so you can have special colonies than others :)
also it would be nice to see a ship in a environment. with trees and a colony nearby :D ----------------------------------------------- Drakeal inc. Recruitment |
McCreary075
|
Posted - 2008.01.01 21:09:00 -
[362]
I'm not all knowing on this subject, but I do have some ideas I'd like to share.
I think that limiting the number of systems a corp or alliance can claim might has merit.
The higher number of people a corp can have the more space they can claim, but that amount is limited. A decision would need to be made on how much space a certain number of people could 'own,' but I don't think that this is big deal, I'm not suggesting that a multi-thousand player corp should be stuck with 1 system, not at all. The CEO's ability to have a large corporation should tie in with the amount of space the corporation can control. The number of systems should be tied into the corp size skill, but I acknowledge the possibility for a completely separate skill progression has some merits to it.
Alliances who control space would need to have an 'alliance council' of sorts who are made up some number of members or CEO's from the alliance, and the number of systems that the alliance can control are simply additive from these people. The membership of this alliance council would need to be scaled based on the number of member corporations.
By limiting the number of systems corporations or alliances could claim, the mega-alliances and mega-corps would find themselves at a disadvantage in terms of space. While mega-corps/alliances could still siege and destroy stations easily because of their larger numbers, they couldn't gain more territory from it.
There have been a few good ideas in this thread about better ways to actually CLAIM sovereignty, so I won't repeat them. But I believe that making sovereignty more volatile and limiting the overall space one group can claim will increase the enjoyment of the game. More people will realize that they can claim space, and then you'll have more people fighting for control and cutting deals, because mega-huge alliances and corporations no longer have a stranglehold on systems.
Naturally, some other features would be needed to make this system work. For example, if you decided you wanted to take another system but you were at your limit, you'd have to be able to give up sovereignty in one system to free up a slot for the new one. Also, exactly how much space people need is up for (intense) debate.
I have thought of two ways that the system limitation could be implemented. One is very simple, for each increase in skill (whether this increase is tied to the corporation member number skill or a separate skill) you get X number of systems you can control. Or, for each increase in skill you get X number of points for system control, and certain systems are 'worth' more than others. So maybe a system with 12 belts, two ice belts and 8 planets is worth 5 points, while another system is worth 2 points, because it has 5 belts and 5 planets.
Now, if this were to be implemented and certain corps/alliances were 'over' their limit, they would keep sovereignty of their 'extra' systems until they are lost, or relinquished.
|
Thera Romana
|
Posted - 2008.01.02 14:47:00 -
[363]
I like the ideal of size of alliance interplaying into size of sov.
Give .01 sov to each member of an alliance, or you could have a skill to increase it like social skills but i would say it would need to be a skill on each player not a skill on the leadership. Now if player housing comes into play, that could also play into the sov of the system. Say .01 per player structure, player is limited to one player structure per region. Example: 1,000 members = 10 sov in one system = 5 sov in two system = 7 sov in one system and 3 sov in another. Now player structures would apply sov only to the system they are in. Player structures could be something like appartment in a pos as well. Maybe limit the amount of storage in an outpost, you want more storage you rent an apartment, the more apartments rented, the higher the sov. Have habitat modules to be added to outpost making them bigger and grander as you expand your outpost. Habitat modules would come in sizes. Depending on size would make a difference on how much you store. A station that can hold 10 titans should be really huge. Make them modular and allow the outpost admin to decide where they get attached at. On some outpost these habitat modules may be rings that get stacked one each other.
Not a BOB fan or hater, but as big as they are(same for like goon), thier home system should have a huge grand outpost to reflect the size of thier member ship. Their outpost should be way bigger than one owned by a 100 man corp/alliance. NPC corps and factions should be same way, The headquarters should be a sight to see, dwarfing planets.
Pos's would give .01-.03 towards sov. towards the system its in
Now by doing this, alliances have the option spread out and have a little sov. everywhere or focus and have alot of sov in just a couple of systems.
There are systems that alliances own, that only have one pos in it. There is no real presence all the time, they are just hogging the systems, one alliance has gone out and owns almost all of the dead ended systems in 0.0. I dont think this is right, these would be great systems for smaller corporations to get a foot hold in 0.0, but they can't really.
I also believe there should be a ratio for how much you can spread out. The points for members would help with that.
|
Kerdrak
3B Legio IX Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.02 15:01:00 -
[364]
Simple:
Make sovereignty planet based instead moon based (planets need love). Make POS "real" starbases. Hard to defeat strongholds, with strategical options and where fleets can fight for hours. ________________________________________
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.03 21:52:00 -
[365]
Edited by: Tzesaeia on 03/01/2008 21:55:29 Edited by: Tzesaeia on 03/01/2008 21:53:14 This idea well throws away large parts of the current sov system since it is not what it was imagined. CCP you give in into that point right in the beginning it is very very hard but it is true and it can happen anyone anytime even the best of the best world dominators around. As long as you don't stick to it and accept the little defeat you only deserve respect for your own brave an honesty.
I loved the very first idea that came from a UT player I don't play the game but I know what he is talking about. CCP go watch some clan battles of UT 2004. This will leave an impression I gurantee even better play a bit yourself. UT is real fun PvP wise. It is an insanely suggsessive game and in any respect all your ppl working on game desing should have played it once or at least watched some tournaments.
The whole warfare must be more dynamic but at the same time shouldn't make Eve a anarchy world were war is 24h a day many many players don't like this.
A good solution is assembled of many good solutions. Lets start building.
First the UT 2004 System. To conquere the center point you must first conquere several sourounding points. Wich can be conquered back qickly( about 1-6h). Meaning that the defenders can try to reconquere another point befor the aggressors have conquered them all or while they conquere another one.
Second give planets some love really! Settling SPACE! Sovereignity isn't only about warfare it is mainly for citizens well an alliance has none so far. No real once. Invent a oppotunity to settle planets. Those planets need some initial terraforming done by a rorqual or any big ship you should need more than one. And it shouldnt take long. Also you need ppl citizens as items that have to be brought to the planet in huge quantities several frighters. Like real settling. This planets give taxes and well are the final "target" of any aggressor who wants to seriously claim your space or destroy your alliance. As for the rest they are nothing but POSs wihtout modules that look like planets so no docking on them etc to bring citizens and food etc on them you fuel them like POSs. the poulation of those planets grows once they have been initial settled(just a number and some light blinking nothing complex code wise). Depending on the population of a constellation you get better opportunities to defend your space (stronger UT2004 conquere points).
The conquere points:
Well eve is no ego shooter so they got to be a bit different...this sadly is not expalined in one sentence.
I read about missions here...Great idea! Deadspace Warfare
In missions even the most unorganized pirates manage to hide their structures from the eyes of the big factions and to limit the incomming of ships to a certain size or number witrh the help of deadspace complexes.
So far all structures and POSs planets aswell as outpost are easly warpable by anybody. This reduces the sovereignity system to some bonus on POSs and to better moduels reduced costs. In fact sovereignity means much more. You own the place you defend it you have borders. You are living their and anyone who comes in must show his passport to get in.
This is the important node that leads us to a blob free Eve. Yes you have the right to blob; No it should not be of any use in a high technologie future war. Even today no army in the world uses large masses to overcome the enemy.
Strategical Points(OUR UT2004 but hehe well thousand times better):
So I guess you watched a UT2004 tournament? If not this is the point to do unless you want to get really confused by the following post and liek your ehad beeing ina status of total kaos.
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.03 22:34:00 -
[366]
Strategical Points
center Point/node:Planets
As stated befor the planets are the final goal now, not any POSs or Outposts. As soon as the aggressors conquere a planet all POSs left in the System will suffer attacks of revolting ppl (NPCs) that destroy them. Or, in case the aggressor mangages to get citizens(item) with frighters in large numbers and police-officers(item) to the planet in time, overtake those POS for the aggressor. A maximum of one planet can be settled per Solar System due to living conditions(position to sun etc.) Many systems won't have one at all (every constellation needs at least one). The constellation is the biggest collective that is possible, since humans tend to be egoistic they don't care enough about ppl living thousands of lightyears away to revolt. There is a main planet but just cause it is conquered the others won't make massive suiced or run into the arms of the enemy. The constellational defences and therefore the defensive abbilities of every node will be reduced because the population(ruled by the defenders) in the constellation is reduced. The main planet has nothing special except for a higher population growth so most likely the highest population. The main planet is the very first planned settled and can be changed by a corp/alliance holding all settled planets in the system. The change needs about a week. The fuel of the defense comes from it's planet. Every solarsytem has a maximum of one. A solar system with none populated planet can have only very limited defences but I'll come to this later. As soon as the population reaches a certain point the owning corp/alliance will get the chance to build a deadplex defence node. This node can be very different depending on the taste of the corp and on the lvl of population. As soon as the inital poulation has finished a planet will have 3 deadplex defence nodes (DDNs). To be able to warp to the planet directly you have to conquere and hold all those 3 basic DDNs. As soon as the aggressor manages to do this the deadplex gate to the planet it self will be unlocked for him and as soon as he loses one it will be locked again leaving his fleet without backup(they can as in every deadspace complex warp off).
Outposts
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.04 00:06:00 -
[367]
reserved
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.04 00:07:00 -
[368]
reserved
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.04 00:07:00 -
[369]
reserved
|
Talula Honaloola
|
Posted - 2008.01.04 09:47:00 -
[370]
I was thinking along the lines of a SOV system that uses Stations anchored at the planets ( towers that can be upgraded to outpost like structures? ) which reduces POS spamming. Only the stations at the planets count towards SOV.
Simple.
To complicated it use the POS around the moons to protect and fuel the tower/outpost. To make fleet/POS warfare interesting, install Station shield transfer arrays that allow the POS and outpost to share shields.
This would mean that a fleet attacking any one structure out of a group, would be unable to take down the POS shields, as the transfer array would be able to simply shunt the recharge rate of the group to the POS under attack.
The idea here is to force an attacking fleet to split up and attack multiple structures at the same time. Also by uniting the shields the shields/armor/hull of the structures could be reduced without allowing very small gangs to cause grief.
By placing a cap on the maximum amount of structures that shields can be transferred to at any one time would allow for strategic/tactical maneuvers to hit unprotected POS/structures (they would still have their own shields - just not boosted) which would be easier to take down due to reduced shield/armor/hull.
Once the POS fueling the tower/outpost are offlined/destroyed then the tower/outpost is up for grabs (assuming that the current outpost mechanic is maintained). However its services remain offline till the fueling POS is back up again.
Please, tell me what you think? SOV and Blobs?
|
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.04 23:01:00 -
[371]
ok i guess i'll need some more posts... Someday some may sort them but not yet I will post here again as soon as i have finished. So long it makes no sence to sort it sicne it is still under construction.
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.04 23:02:00 -
[372]
reserved under construction
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.04 23:07:00 -
[373]
Edited by: Tzesaeia on 04/01/2008 23:08:05
Idea 1c: Standings and Planetary Control
Under construction
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.04 23:10:00 -
[374]
Idea 2a: POSs
under construction
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.04 23:14:00 -
[375]
Idea 3: Eve warfare
under construction
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.04 23:15:00 -
[376]
Idea 4: Player owned Deadplexes
Under construction
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.04 23:45:00 -
[377]
Edited by: Tzesaeia on 04/01/2008 23:45:16
Idea 1d : Planet Types
Under construction
|
Elendar
The Illuminati. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.05 03:35:00 -
[378]
As it is make cyno jammers require CPU so that you can actually knock them offline by reinforcing the pos, rather than having to beat them down with battleships daily against spider tanking/repping carriers ---------------------------- There is no sig |
EthanPow
Caldari Drakeal Inc. Drakeal Federation
|
Posted - 2008.01.05 05:32:00 -
[379]
Also we shouldn't make it harder to maintain SOV, using Beacons which are similar to outpost eggs and can only be transported by a freighter. also planet takeover shouldn't be hard or complex. than just attacking the planet you should have planet gates which allow access to a planet much easier and no risk of having your ship blowing up in entry. making colonies to for each friend or alliance corp they can have their own little place to operate. like POSes they have needs and require maintenance, if the planet gate was blown up another one will be needed to be made or colonies will die out and go to dust. no military might isn't needed and population count, it just makes it harder and useless to get.
if we keep it simple and easy to understand and simple how it works and blown up then makes everyone happy. also Capital ships like titans and motherships should be able to "land" on a planet if the right platform and planet gate was installed. so each corporation in a alliance has a focus on what stuff they can have in their colony.
and since planets are huge in nature space to place a colony anywere. ----------------------------------------------- Drakeal inc. Recruitment |
Pah Triac
Imperium Technologies
|
Posted - 2008.01.05 14:27:00 -
[380]
Most of the problem is that the way to gain SOV and to lose it is 1 sided bringing focus of masses to a certain point in a system creating lag. and isues. bring Ideas to spread the attack over the whole of a constelation.
Aswell the focus of controlling a area should be brought down to a smaller area An alliance that like to lay claim to a area should have a certain stronghold we have seen in these multiple replys what options are like Battle stations, Super POS,Easykill structures etc etc. Fundametal issue is the way to gain/remain the status quo of a alliances her claim to the area. how should it start in the 1st place how should man build up the claim aswell Look at the alliance 1st is it large and stable enough to sustain a claim? Then bring the claim to a area and start from there. There are2 ways to claim, the actual "Hardware claim" of the structure's making the claim a fact and the pre exodus "statement" claim both can be used in a new system.
Take a Empty/Occupied constelation Alliance A say we like it and we like to lay claim to it what is the the pre req to do such? The alliance should go to a concord station and should buy a claim to a Constelation This should be a decent amount.(prove of worthy the claim) ok here the start small should be in order. Every bought claim has a 6 hour mirrior of attack opportunity witch can be chosen by the buyer (4 choices for every day part) The claiming should be done with a claiming structure (either what kind or how large) the alliance should be able to defend the claim during the mirror of attack by others.(proof of worthy the claim) From here you can place a Resource structures (moonmining/refining POS) 4 day's later your claim is noted by Concord, and your alliance is official Claimer of that particular Constelation. (Sov 1,Claimed)
To gain further sov. you need to place a claiming structure in a system in the same constelation and 3 days from there you will gain (Sov 2, Occupier) you get the ability to ugrade your claiming structure wich will need resources of some sort and takes 1 week to complete and has during the upgrade the same attack opportunity window for others to engage your structure to break the upgrade and bring it back to its previous state. 2 weeks later Sov 3 (occupier)with complex reactor,Extensive refine,labratories etc
2 weeks later Sov 4 (resident)with Outpost, Cap construc, JPA, CFG, 4 weeks later Sov 5 (owner) with Outpost upgades and a formal Owner ship. Thing is that by doing this, a Alliance cannot claim a whole 2 or 3 regions at the same time wile opening a lot of windows to get attacked. (proving worth the claim) he comes the nifty tric others that like to attack the claim can attack the "small" claiming structures that have the attack window
(work in progress)
*Sig under construction*
People are stupid. They will believe anything they want to be true or fear to be true. |
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.05 14:43:00 -
[381]
But this wouldn't help to make combat more exciting. The gates would be sieged or the planets camped. Giant blobs would just blob there and camp so noone can open up a gate again until the planet is dry.
The military forces sound comlicated but they re really easy to use. You also don't need to bring in "eggs" to colonize a planet. As I tryed to describe you have to bring in population that is in no way expensive. Loosing it won't hurt much. The inital process of colozining a planet will be really easy and since you do it in a closed deadspace noone can keep you from it. It also won't take long so it is pretty much unavoidable.
But once a planet is colonized it gets inetresting from that point on the planet is a permanent target. Try to imagine the military forces as kind of a shield or armor it is just a number. The whole thing needs more planning than any standard fleet op we ever had but at the same time lesser pilots and lesser ships as well as much lesser time. Planets will be taken over in steps first outer nodes will be attacked and than you have to hold some of them. You first get down there inital defences than you try to hit power plants and imprtant strategical nodes you try to get access codes and secure important supply lines. In the end you finally struggle for the planet it self but while you do it other gangs must defend the supply lines and the nemy has multiple ways to defend his plpanet not only by facing oyu in a final battle. Everything needs to be planed well but a little raid onto a power plant or a sudden push will be possible, too.
While you conquere a node or something you have one hour of instant fighting full concentration no waiting no gathering of giant fleets. YOu have your gang your task is a certain node intesive PvP sometimes leading to one on ones cause ech side has only one ship left but this one ship can still matter if it survives and gets the important access codes to a supply line. In the mean time other gangs of your alliance try to disable the enemy defence turrets by destroying a main power plant.
This is just a short description of what this Idea will produce and why it is has these values. Watch a unreal tournament game you see those nodes. there is a special weapon to load there shields up. This is replaced by the military forces. Everything will get much clearer as soon as I have made the posts about the population and about the deadplexes.
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.05 17:27:00 -
[382]
Idea 2a: POSs
under construction
|
Matrixcvd
Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.05 21:43:00 -
[383]
Edited by: Matrixcvd on 05/01/2008 21:44:15 Alot of good ideas here but they all seem very complex and really alter the whole mechanic. Which could only lead to huge problems since so much of 0.0 revolves around the towers in the current system. Two things need to get fixed, Grind and Lag. Both are driven by the same game mechanic and thats the incredibly long time to knock out anything due to ridiculous HP. There are only a few minor changes that need to be implemented and everything would be actually fun.
1. LOWER HP for EVERYTHING!. POS shields, anchorables, Guns, Station Services should all have their HP reduced. It takes less to take down and less to rep back. Keeps things more dynamic allowing smaller gangs for offense and defense.
2. Limit number of pilots in POS shield of a single POS. This will limit the number of people already on Grid and spread forces out across the system and you could even limit the number of carriers as well since most defenders just stack their carriers and release all their fighters to lag out the incoming attackers. POS already has defense, and when an attacking fleet warps into the POS grid, there is too much lag+flat out death. POS guns don't lag. If you lowered HP, less ships could attack a POS. The attacking Blob could split up his forces so they aren't there for 6 hours having 1 blob shoot 1 object, warp to next covert ops repeat.
3. If you wanted to get crazy have defensive mods for outposts as well.
4. Lower number of POS's for sov to 3
When the outpost services were brought in they were pitched as allowing small organized gangs to affect alliances but when you gave them so much HP you just brought the blob back. Its the HP that is killing all of this.
|
Astro MAlFete
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 02:38:00 -
[384]
Let system Sovereignty work the same was as real life sovereignty, military control. If a Corp or Alliance can deny access to outside military forces then they are sovereign. Make it a matter of total pilot time in a system with in a given period of time. One alliance pilot active within the system for hour = one pilot hour; ten alliance pilots active in system for one hour = ten pilot hours. If the time to claim sovereignty is decided to be one week, then the CEO files a claim on the system with Concord and the counting of pilot hours begins, if that corp can maintain 90% (or whatever % works for balance purposes) of the pilot hours for the week then they gain sovereignty. POS would make this easier, but a pack of hardcore gate campers could claim a system by their ablity to deny access, without needing to have a POS. Perhaps non alliance pilots that hold the alliance in good standing would not count for or against the 90%.
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 16:39:00 -
[385]
Idea 4 : Deadplex Complexes
Index: Introduction (Idea 4) Definition of Deadplexes (Idea 4) The Gates (Idea 4a) Stages (Idea 4b) Cynoaccess (Idea 4c) Content (Idea 4d)
Introduction To shift fleet-fighting from gates and POSs to conquerable private Deadplexes is the core of the whole Idea. It's aim: Split up fleets and blobs in multiple fleets witch are split up again in little tactical gangs and scatter them over multiple solarsystems. As a whole they need to work all together sometimes synchronous to achieve one big goal. In the whole process shell be no requirement for a bigger fleet than about 100 Ships at one place. Depending on how good the server handles the load this number can be reduced or increased while testing easily. Fights shell not be predictable in a manner, that a single position witch must be past by the attacker can be camped anymore. This is achieved by not only giving several possible ways to achieve the main goal but also by splitting up incomming warps with the help of multiple deadplex gates leading to one battlefield.
"All roads lead to Rome."
This is a saying that hasn't had enough attention in the present sovereignity system . While the work on this Idea we may save the following main thought to our Cache so it is present all the time:
" If we create one way to achieve a goal we must instantly create antoher one. No road shell stand alone. "
I try to keep this in mind but if you find a road with no alternatives than eve-mail me at best with a suggestion for an alternative road but just a quote and i'll take a look at it. As we layed the cornerstone now we can start getting on the actual idea. I close the introduction with a clear "yes" size still matters. A larger alliance will be able to attack multiple constellations of an enemy at once, what will be worth it, since claiming one constellation won't take their whole fleet and leave them enough spare ships to attack another one. A smaller alliance won't be able to defend itself at all frontiers, forcing it to reduce their claim to a few or maybe only one constellation. In a fight for a single constellation there is a maximum limit for ships that can be of use in the fight for both sides so as long as both sides have enough ships to reach this limit they gonna fihgt with equal numbers. (more Idea 3) Definition of Deadplexes The Deadplex System splits up in different types of Deadplexes. As it is now there is only one kind of deadplex gate though that can have a different limit to the size of the ships that can enter. The type of a deadplex can already be defined by the maximum size of a ship that can activate the gate. More over a limit is needed for the number of ships that can enter over time, this is a another factor that helps defining different deadplex-types. To make it possible to differentiate between player owned and NPC owned Deadplexes, they need to be divided into public and private deadplexes. Eventually, comming to the UT 2004 System, we need to divide them furhter into outer and inner nodes. We come up with the following criterias:
Gate Size Gate Capacity Gate Ownership Node Type
As we want to make it possible for the players to build deadplexes we need to look over what we already have. A deadplex is either :
The first stage (with an entry-gate and a gate to the next stage(nxt-gate)) A Stage (with a gate to the next stage(nxt-gate)) The final Stage (with no gate at all)
Finally we want capitals to matter*theatrical shout* this mean deadplexes need to be opened to cynofields. BUT this shell not lead to simply avoiding the Gate size limit. Therefor not all deadplexes can allow cynofields creation within them giving us the last criteria.
Cynoaccess
Having all those criteria we only need to remember that we wan't different tasks in every deadplex and that there are different places and reasons for deadplexes.
The content Deadplex Task, Place, Reason.
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 17:12:00 -
[386]
under construction
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 17:14:00 -
[387]
under construction
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 17:15:00 -
[388]
under construction
|
Tzesaeia
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 17:28:00 -
[389]
under construction
|
Zakru Anul
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 06:33:00 -
[390]
Sov Space.
Staging up.
Moon Control towers are in the game and got there reasons. simply lessen there bunos too weapon a tad and add in the need for -- Sov-Control ?tower?, ?hub?
Anchored at a planet this Large ?thing? does only 1 thing you care about. Hold your flag on this system. weapons based flying wall of guns.
Why, ya ask. I never seen a Planet count go over 10, unlike moons which some systems got what 20, 80 moons for all we know in some areas.
The smaller Towers retain there user as Support objects. they are the place too build ships and ammo, moon mine and so on.
the larger planet object is there too Hold Sov over the area.
whole both can claim sov in the system. the larger tower would be a Hard target. while the Moon towers can be weaken too something a "smaller" gang could attack.
Outside the above.
make Anchoring and faster and allow us too do say 3 or 4 at a time. 6 hours too set up a single tower is Outright crazy.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 30 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |