Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
MNagy
|
Posted - 2010.06.07 13:13:00 -
[1]
Im still a bit of a newbie player - but I think it would be kinda cool if evety once in a while - a random solar system security would fail. Concord tied up or something...and for like 12 hours the security would hit like .4 or to 0.0
Would make things interesting not only for being 'stuck' at a base but also needing to 'haul' stuff from system to system. You would have to watch more the security.
Any thoughts on this?
|
Goose99
|
Posted - 2010.06.07 13:24:00 -
[2]
Only if it happens in Jita.
|
CEOcat
Gallente CAT Corp
|
Posted - 2010.06.07 13:30:00 -
[3]
Yes cause having all you industrial assets locked down in a station or your research POSes suddenly free for attack would be so much fun ... get out!
|
mkmin
|
Posted - 2010.06.07 13:44:00 -
[4]
Interesting in theory but broken. Now, if the sec status was to constantly fluctuate within the high/low/null groupings and on a longer cycle, including moon mins, belt rats, navy response, CONCORD response times, etc, that could be an interesting way to keep the landscape fresh. Probably more work than CCP would be willing to put in though. It would help make the game more interesting, which seems to be against CCP design philosophy these days.
|
Sujanra Acoma
Minmatar Shadow Kitty Legion
|
Posted - 2010.06.07 15:06:00 -
[5]
I am so tempted to support this |
Comodore John
Gallente Shattered Star Exiles
|
Posted - 2010.06.07 17:45:00 -
[6]
I see a few problems with this idea.
First, if a high security system falls to lo or null sec, people could jump capitals in and nothing forces them to leave. Second, people could technically anchor starbases in a 1.0 system that falls to .3 or below.
One bright side I see however, bubble spam a gate (and unless CONCORD destroys them), suicide ganking gets a whole lot easier and tears will flow.
Not supported however.
|
Miyamoto Isoruku
Caldari Original Sin.
|
Posted - 2010.06.07 18:47:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Sujanra Acoma I am so tempted to support this
Me too. Seriously, good idea from Sujanra, but ultimately probably unworkable.
|
Slimy Worm
Sons of Viagra
|
Posted - 2010.06.07 19:29:00 -
[8]
Originally by: CEOcat Yes cause having all you industrial assets locked down in a station or your research POSes suddenly free for attack would be so much fun ... get out!
You're not helpless. Try to fight, hire mercenaries, or go back to WoW.
However, though this seems like a good idea, especially if cap, bomber, POS, etc. rules don't change when a system's sec is lowered, I can't support it unless dynamic sec status drops were made a core part of the game since it would cause too much disruption.
|
iP0D
|
Posted - 2010.06.07 22:02:00 -
[9]
There is merit in the base idea. No, not the lulz part.
But, players influencing system security status would be an interesting angle to pursue. Not just in high sec, but primarily low sec and even nullsec. That way you'd also be able to avoid "hiccus" along the lines of "omg my stuff is now camped by Mackinaws", since things would evolve along the way. |
Goose99
|
Posted - 2010.06.08 04:09:00 -
[10]
Originally by: iP0D There is merit in the base idea. No, not the lulz part.
But, players influencing system security status would be an interesting angle to pursue. Not just in high sec, but primarily low sec and even nullsec. That way you'd also be able to avoid "hiccus" along the lines of "omg my stuff is now camped by Mackinaws", since things would evolve along the way.
Speaking of Mackinaws, it would be nice if highsec system turns lowsec when enough machinaws are in it.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |