EVE Search - New Dev Blog: Dominion--Storming the Gates

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

New Dev Blog: Dominion--Storming the Gates

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 19 post(s)

CCP Soundwave C C P Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.11 14:25:00 - [1] Originally by: Arkady Sadik Ok. In a system with both an outpost and an iHub, does the TCU become vulnerable when either the outpost is captured or the iHub is destroyed (as the text implies), or do you need to capture the outpost and destroy the iHub to make the TCU vulnerable (as the flowchart implies)? Need to take the outpost and destroy the IH to take sov.


CCP Soundwave C C P Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.11 14:27:00 - [2] Originally by: Genevieve Mitsuda Are we any closer to addressing the costs of sov and JBs/Cyno(jam/gen) equipment? In a monthly fashion, I mean? And what the upgrades will cost per month? I expected this blog to be a big reveal to the adjusted costs. Being only two weeks away and having 0 info on budget makes planning near impossible for alliances in 0.0 Based on feedback from the upkeep/infrastructure blog, we have made certain changes that will be available soon. Hopefully the feedback from this thread will add to that and we can present a more comprehensive set of changes.


CCP Soundwave C C P Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.11 15:22:00 - [3] Originally by: Teck7 Originally by: CCP Abathur Six hours currently, but we are looking at reducing that to probably three hours. Maybe. So, in short (assuming 3 hours, even with current 6 but not as drastic). The defending alliance can go to bed, attackers come in, spam and online SBU on all gates, reinforce hub/station. The defenders wake up, everything is reinforced and consequently the SBU's are invulnerable per the specs in the blog, making the defenders prime time absolutely worthless. Is that a correct assessment? Somewhat, but that's how it works today as well. That's why we've added dual reinforcement timers to make sure you have ample occasions to defend your space. But yes, you can go to bed, wake up with a system full of SBUs. Just like you can go to bed and wake up to a system full of reinforced POSs :)


CCP Soundwave C C P Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.11 15:51:00 - [4] Edited by: CCP Soundwave on 11/11/2009 15:51:40 Originally by: Teck7 Edited by: Teck7 on 11/11/2009 15:24:36 Originally by: CCP Soundwave Originally by: Teck7 Originally by: CCP Abathur Six hours currently, but we are looking at reducing that to probably three hours. Maybe. So, in short (assuming 3 hours, even with current 6 but not as drastic). The defending alliance can go to bed, attackers come in, spam and online SBU on all gates, reinforce hub/station. The defenders wake up, everything is reinforced and consequently the SBU's are invulnerable per the specs in the blog, making the defenders prime time absolutely worthless. Is that a correct assessment? Somewhat, but that's how it works today as well. That's why we've added dual reinforcement timers to make sure you have ample occasions to defend your space. But yes, you can go to bed, wake up with a system full of SBUs. Just like you can go to bed and wake up to a system full of reinforced POSs :) YES but currently when you wake up you can go on the offensive and attack the attackers POS's, this is not the case with SBU's, the attackers dictate when you can attack the SBU's. Well how you can defend a system is relatively situational, in a low mooncount system you might not get the option to do what you're describing. I'm also not a big fan of the defender and attacker fighting in different windows. In the new system, attackers and defenders will have parallel windows, which will hopefully result in more confrontation. Edit: Remember that the defender sets the reinforcement timer too.


CCP Soundwave C C P Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.11 16:15:00 - [5] Edited by: CCP Soundwave on 11/11/2009 16:15:18 Originally by: Gnulpie Originally by: Slobodanka Just one question on SBU spamming: Is it possible (under current mechanics) for an alliance to place it's own (lets say an alt alliance or alliance created specially for that reason) SBUs, thus denying attackers to even anchor and online theirs? Like 33% alliance 1, 33% alliance 2 and 33% allaince 3. Neither will have 51% so system should be safe? Everyone can online SBU regardless who anchored them. The ownership of the SBUs doesn't matter for breaking invulnerability. Only the total amount of SBUs do count. But a question... If the attacker is successful in capturing the system and planting their own TCU and gaining sov, what happened then with the SBUs? Will the go offline and can they be collected afterwards? Will the explode and just vanish? What happens to them? The SBUs effectively prohibit putting structures down, so the attacker will have to secure the system (which can be reasonably assumed since he/she has the force to take down the TCU), offline the SBUs and put the TCU up.


CCP Soundwave C C P Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.12 09:30:00 - [6] Originally by: Astal Atlar Edited by: Astal Atlar on 12/11/2009 09:21:27 And with tcu on poses what will be different from now,yeah before we shooted only poses now tcu and poses I don't think that's necessarily bad. There has to be some point of focus that draws attacker and defender into a situation where they fight each other. The issue with the old system was the 12 hour POS shooting grind ops. The new system means that when a system is reinforced the time you have to dedicate to taking the system comes in small spurts of combat. Hopefully this system retains the incentive for conflict, but cuts down on the hours players have to spend shooting at stationary objects.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.