Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Squizz Caphinator
First Flying Wing Inc Primary.
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 17:33:00 -
[1]
One of the great things about w-space is that it feels so empty and unexplored. As time goes on, however, this feeling will dissipate as explorers of wormholes find towers that are abandoned, without fuel, and just sitting there probably never to be seen by it's owners again.
In k-space, towers sit there for years, anchored until someone decides to war dec the long dead corp and remove the tower. In w-space, war decs are not needed - and removing the tower probably isn't necessary anyway. However, it is a blight in an otherwise beautiful environment.
Have you, CCP, considered this at all? Have you thought of allowing the sleepers to potentially attack and destroy undefended towers? It is their space, and this will just improve upon the idea that they're defending it.
|
BurnHard
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 17:37:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Squizz Caphinator One of the great things about w-space is that it feels so empty and unexplored. As time goes on, however, this feeling will dissipate as explorers of wormholes find towers that are abandoned, without fuel, and just sitting there probably never to be seen by it's owners again.
In k-space, towers sit there for years, anchored until someone decides to war dec the long dead corp and remove the tower. In w-space, war decs are not needed - and removing the tower probably isn't necessary anyway. However, it is a blight in an otherwise beautiful environment.
Have you, CCP, considered this at all? Have you thought of allowing the sleepers to potentially attack and destroy undefended towers? It is their space, and this will just improve upon the idea that they're defending it.
Excuse my n00bness, but what's the difference between W space and K space?!!
|
Tressin Khiyne
Minmatar The Tal'Shiar
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 17:48:00 -
[3]
This is another reason why hacking offlined towers and stealing them should be possible. --
There are 10 kinds of people in this world; Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
|
Major Templar
Caldari Knights Templar Defender's
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 17:50:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Tressin Khiyne This is another reason why hacking offlined towers and stealing them should be possible.
I second this. I hate flying to a moon and seeing an offline tower. Then, coming back no joke like 3 months later and it's still sitting there offline and all along it belongs to a dead, like 1 member, corp that has not logged in for so long. Come on, this is just an example of bad mechanics. Make it so you can hack them and take them or something. War decs to take em down shouldn't be required. Major Templar Knights Templar Defender's [-KTD-] Director, POS Manager, Personnel Manager
|
jst tstng
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 18:39:00 -
[5]
Quote: Have you, CCP, considered this at all? Have you thought of allowing the sleepers to potentially attack and destroy undefended towers? It is their space, and this will just improve upon the idea that they're defending it.
Or CCP could just take it down after the pos has been off line for a month or so and say the sleepers killed it.
|
Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 18:44:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Tressin Khiyne This is another reason why hacking offlined towers and stealing them should be possible.
This.
Also offline towers should weaken gradually over time so they become easier and easier to blow up. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic |
5pinDizzy
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 18:49:00 -
[7]
lol, somethings gonna have to be done about that. Kinda stupid as the OP said,
if you disagree with me then you should probably post a response and stop reading my signature. |
Bish Ounen
Gallente Best Path Inc. Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 18:51:00 -
[8]
I still don't understand why completely offline towers (no POS fuel, no Stront left) are even able to stay Anchored for any significant amount of time? Why not just make offline towers like GSC's? Only good for X amount of time and then "poof" gone at the next downtime.
Although hackability on ALL undefended Player Anchored Items seems like a nice idea as well. Although because it's a Player Anchored Item it should require perfect hacking skills and an T2 hacking mod though. We should never make it easy to break into player secure stuff. But it still makes for a nice new mini-profession, HACKER. Fix the Wardec System! Upgrade the Probing System! |
Issler Dainze
Minmatar Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 18:59:00 -
[9]
The CSM has discussed offline towers with CCP. I think CCP has agreed in principal that there needs to be something in Eve that either allows "taking" abandoned towers or that makes them go away on their own after some reasonale time.
I can't say when you'll see it but I'm pretty sure you can expect a change in Eve at some point that address this issue.
Personally I want to hack them and take the over so that is what I'm crossing my fingers and hoping for.
Issler
|
Dreamwalker
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 19:01:00 -
[10]
Attack the towers you lazy good for nothing SOB
Stop *****ing and get to WAR
Originally by: CCP Whisper Local chat in known 0.0, low sec and empire space will remain as it is today, in all it's insta-intel giving, afk cloaker panic inducing, jita trade spamming glory.
|
|
Imertu Solientai
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.04.03 19:13:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Tressin Khiyne This is another reason why hacking offlined towers and stealing them should be possible.
This. Please. CCP. Hire. This. Man!
|
Squizz Caphinator
First Flying Wing Inc Primary.
|
Posted - 2009.04.04 13:53:00 -
[12]
Originally by: BurnHard Excuse my n00bness, but what's the difference between W space and K space?!!
k-space: empire space, low sec and 0.0 systems w-space: unknown space, only reachable with wormholes
|
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2009.04.04 14:06:00 -
[13]
Sleepers should just pop/take over towers that go offline. Hell, they should even start raiding towers when they are online to keep things interesting. -------- Ideas for: Mining
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2009.04.04 14:13:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Tressin Khiyne This is another reason why hacking offlined towers and stealing them should be possible.
-
DesuSigs |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2009.04.04 14:54:00 -
[15]
Offline tower -> 7 days timer start 7 days timer finish -> unanchor tower TADA !
_ The problem with EVE || Fit a ship || Get some ISK |
Vasta Magna
|
Posted - 2009.04.04 15:50:00 -
[16]
Abandoned towers in high-sec are a problem, but wormhole space? If it's really sitting there undefended and/or offline, blow it up yourself.
Someone paid millions to put it there, and you're basically saying your annoyance at the spoiled beauty of a moon in the middle of nowhere should trump that investment.
|
Vodwyn
Gallente ME RAT OR FAMILY DIE
|
Posted - 2009.04.04 17:29:00 -
[17]
Do sleepers have the good isks to die with?
|
Crumplecorn
Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations
|
Posted - 2009.04.04 17:32:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Vasta Magna you're basically saying your annoyance at the spoiled beauty of a moon in the middle of nowhere should trump that investment.
I wouldn't count something that has been abandoned as an investment. -
DesuSigs |
Dr Resheph
Amarr YOU ARE NOW READING THIS LOUDLY
|
Posted - 2009.04.04 17:42:00 -
[19]
I'm all for Hacking uses in PVP, it would give covert ops pilots something offensive to do. I even think it should play the biggest role in the hacking of structures and outposts to steal information and the like.
But hacking to unanchor a tower is just plain stupid. What is the penalty for failing? Are a whole bunch of npcs going to spawn on you? And so what if the enemy gets alerted? They aren't going to do anything about it anytime soon in the majority of cases. A lot of alt corps have these things scattered throughout lowsec for example, where their people don't log in for months at a time.
But the biggest reason for why its a stupid way to do things, is that it creates a secondary market for POS that's pretty huge. Why buy one when you can steal one? Currently, the only towers that get resold by players are people who no longer need them or people who robbed their corporations. POS are an important ISK sink in an economy that's still inflating by trillions of isk a month.
And most tower thefts are going to be a "first come first serve" situation, so there's nothing tactical or strategic about it. The whole thing ignores the most elegant solution to the problem: BLOW THEM UP.
OFFLINE, ANCHORING, or UNANCHORING towers should have ONE TENTH the hitpoints they do now. That would mean a small offline tower would have 1-2mil hitpoints at the most, which is comparable to blowing up a giant secure container or two. One person in a battleship could do it with some time. Large offline towers would be as hard to kill as small currently are, which means it would take a few people about 30min to bring it down.
And you don't need any new gameplay to deal with the consequences. It's an aggressive act. In high sec you'd get CONCORD, in lowsec you'd take a security hit and in 0.0 nobody would care.
But cleanup of unused towers is not the only reason to make this change.
It makes POS spam significantly harder, and the erection/dismantling of undefended POS a risky proposition. This would put more emphasis on teamwork in POS operations without scaling the logistics to absurd levels.
|
Maria Kalista
Amarr Emerald Forest Securities
|
Posted - 2009.04.04 17:50:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Akita T Offline tower -> 7 days timer start 7 days timer finish -> unanchor tower TADA !
I'm all for this^. Maybe something for PrismX to clean up the towers like he did with the cans?
Originally by: Jacharian This sounds like a bad idea. I'm in.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |