|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
   |
Posted - 2010.04.27 12:35:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Helen Highwater
And the net result of that won't be small gangs roaming around and harassing station services it will be BS fleets with cap support instapopping them. If you can do something with x guys you will always do it faster and more reliably with x+1 guys. Giving small gangs the ability to take on strategic targets like that is a bad idea. Having said that there should be a lot more ways for small gangs to actually interdict hostile activity and cause a nuisance without opening the system up to abuse.
Short of some anti-sandbox restrictions like class specific acceleration gates this is going to be the issue with any structure.
With this "don't give x something to do because x+1 will do it faster" attitude you might as well increase the HP of all Sov structures because it takes no time at all to drop them with a large supercap fleet  But not everyone wants to / can fly capitals which means even with the current HP levels hours and hours of sitting still shooting a single structure...
Giving a small gang some sense of achievement or provoking a fight was the aim of the station services change. As the suggestion was for the majority of the HP to be in resists it wouldn't take hours to rep them back again either. It becomes a more short term situational thing, and if a group want to cyno in their caps to incap services every hour then that is their time to waste
This discussion kinda leads on to ship class escalation (if x BS can do something then x capitals will be better). All some of the lag reduction ideas people are floating around to limit the number of viewable ships on grid will do is kill the game for smaller ship pilots because if you can only bring 100 ships to a fight you sure as hell are not going to bring 100 frigs when you could bring 100 BS and caps. Well Agony might 
Vote TeaDaze for CSM5!
|
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.04.27 14:42:00 -
[2]
Originally by: xena zena
I entirely agree with Bellum Eternus here. Any CSM candidates also agree with delayed local in 0.0? 
Full w-space local will not be implemented in k-space 0.0 - CCP stated this at Fanfest.
There have been a number of proposals to remove local in 0.0 and I support the concept. However CCP won't do it without replacement intel tools (again at Fanfest).
A proposal containing replacement local intel tools is more likely to get past CCP and I would be happy to contribute to and support it.
Vote TeaDaze for CSM5!
|
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.04.27 15:34:00 -
[3]
Originally by: xena zena
Make it an upgrade on the ihub to see instant local, just make it expensive and probably only obtainable at around level 4 or 5. That way the majority of less used systems would be far riskier, it would also encourage people to develop more systems and increase index levels.
This is one suggestion that has been mooted a few times. It doesn't work in NPC 0.0 of course. The debate there is should NPC 0.0 be more risky than Sov 0.0 considering that it has worse rewards?
Originally by: xena zena
w-space's intel of using the directional scanner seems to work quite well, same concept is used for low-sec missioners to look for scan probes...
The concern here is not turning all kinds of activity into spam directional scanner every 2 seconds. We've already seen what happened with unchecked dscan spamming which is why we have the limit now...
Originally by: xena zena
Irregardless I think delayed local in 0.0 is really the only option to bring back small gang warfare in any meaningful way. A CSM candidate that thinks it SHOULD happen is what I was asking, if CCP would implement it without further intel mechanics is a different matter entirely. Although I'd love to hear everyone's ideas on how to improve intel mechanics sufficient enough to remove local from 0.0, yet keep the element of surprise it would give small gangs intact.
Being aware of what has already been suggested and rejected (either via CSM or via fanfest roundtables) means future suggestions can be designed in a way more likely to be implemented.
Like it or not the CSM's power ends at CCP's table. CSM cannot force CCP to commit to anything (though they can request a reason). Bringing up the same issues which have been rejected again and again without significant changes doesn't do us any good (see POS dead horse and removal of insurance from suicide ganking for examples of proposals consistently rejected by CCP)
As I said, I am in favour of changing local. To be more specific I would like to remove the "free" intel in 0.0 space. Why should somebody already in system when I jump in see my name, corp, sec status and other such things in a chat window before I've even come out of blackscreen? Especially as they don't have to do anything for that intel (I don't appear on directional etc)
I did suggest a compromise of removing char portraits from local chat unless somebody talks but leaving the count of people in local (possibly delayed at least 30-60 seconds). People were not receptive to the idea  The concern is that whilst delayed local will solve the issue of sneaking up on people, it creates a new one. How does a roaming gang know which systems to spend time scanning for targets? This is why I pitched delayed local count...
Ideas discussed at fanfest included being able to hack gates to get a list of shiptypes who passed through recently, deployable beacons, proximity alarms, infrastructure upgrades and so on.
Whatever solution is eventually picked needs to be carefully designed, I don't want some half-arsed "solution" which causes more issues than it solves.
Vote TeaDaze for CSM5!
|
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.04.27 16:22:00 -
[4]
Originally by: xena zena
And Ihubs are pretty darn new, has CCP categorically rejected the idea of intel this way already?
It hasn't been officially raised but it was certainly one of the ideas discussed at Fanfest 2009 before dominion was released.
The most likely proposal to gain traction would be a number of ideas for 0.0 local intel replacement and let CCP pick the one(s) that would be simplest to implement. I had planned to raise something along these lines but time conspired against me.
Here's another idea which could be added into that list, small groups of people (say up to 5) can enter system and stay out of the local count for longer than larger blobs. This gives an advantage to your skirmishers while "punishing" people who just throw a blob into system
Vote TeaDaze for CSM5!
|
|
|
| |
|