| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dan Sun
UK Corp
-Mostly Harmless-
   |
Posted - 2010.06.29 16:45:00 -
[1]
Just a quick one to put out for discussion
When TCU's and iHUBs came about they inclueded the ability to transfer them between the corps of the alliance
I want to see the same thing for POS
With the amount of Corperations leaving/joing alliances the infrostructure of those alliances shifts with the mind numbingly anoying POS work of switching towers
Being able for a director to transfer the Control tower to a corp staying/joining the allaince, would make alliance scale POS managment more ... managable
Now as I understand it getting it to work would involve a large amount of database issues with all the Mods, so forget them
If a tower could be transfered to another corperation in the alliance, the mods can just go offline as if the tower got distroyed, they can then be unanchored and reanchored by the corp taking over the POS
This would still involve some work, but the 2hrs of taking down a tower and putting it back up, removing fuel and stront and putting it back in, all done with no shield cover, atleast now it would take half the time and atleast have the shields up
Im no Tech guy, but its something ive wanted to put out there for a long time for the ones that do know about this stuff to discuss
|
Quesa
D00M.
RED.OverLord
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 17:25:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Quesa on 29/06/2010 17:25:23
Part of the process. There should be risk in just about everything you do in this game.
Maybe your corp selection process needs to be revamped instead of a game mechanic changed to make life easier for your Alliance?
|
SXYGeeK
Gallente
do you
-Mostly Harmless-
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 17:37:00 -
[3]
we don't see periods of risk/vulnerability for transferring TCU's/Hubs/Stations, why POS's?
You're perfectly capable of taking out towers when their fully gunned let alone when they are in the process of a switch, so it's not really that big a difference.
It makes it much less painful for the few folks that do all the tower work.
It would also add another form of risk, corp directors being able to transfer towers as a form of espionage.
-We So SeXy |
Namelesz
Viscosity
-Mostly Harmless-
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 18:49:00 -
[4]
/signed
T3 LOTTERY #1
2nd Lottery Complete, 3rd started! |
Quesa
D00M.
RED.OverLord
|
Posted - 2010.06.29 21:57:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: SXYGeeK
we don't see periods of risk/vulnerability for transferring TCU's/Hubs/Stations, why POS's?
You're perfectly capable of taking out towers when their fully gunned let alone when they are in the process of a switch, so it's not really that big a difference.
It makes it much less painful for the few folks that do all the tower work.
It would also add another form of risk, corp directors being able to transfer towers as a form of espionage.
Transferring of Stations and iHUBs wasn't part of the discussion. Don't deflect.
What does leaving in a bit of risk have to do with someone that is able or not able to take out a POS? Why does everything in this game need to make you feel 100% secure? If dealing with POS's is painful for you or your corp then don't put any up, you can live perfectly well without towers when you have 1 of 40 stations to choose from in the North.
Espionage within your same Alliance? - lol, if that's the case you have more to worry about than the 2 hours of "pain" it requires for you to swap a POS.
PS. You don't have to sit there glaring at your screen while a POS unachors, anchors and goes online, you know you could be doing something else.
Having your MH friends come in here and /sign your post doesn't make your point anymore viable or thought out.
|
SXYGeeK
Gallente
do you
-Mostly Harmless-
|
Posted - 2010.06.30 04:39:00 -
[6]
Edited by: SXYGeeK on 30/06/2010 04:40:41
If configuring and anchoring all the modules wasn't such a painfull process we might not need a "transfer" button.
we could strike a comprimize between as you say "100% safe" which obviously isn't what we want, and "mind numbing grind" which is what we do now.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1344894
as for doing something else, It's kind of emersion breaking to be forced to entertain oneself while waiting for POS Mods to anchor for hours on end. I usualy do it at work, but that hasn't been too slow lately.
It's not like we can simply not run towers, even though sov is held with TCU's, Hubs, Stations post dominon we still need tons of towers for bridges, jammers, safes, flags, and goo ext..
we're not realy running any fewer towers.
the fact that all of the other infrastructure items have transfer functions is indeed relavent to POS's.
I still think tower transfers are a worthwhile idea, true it is removing some risk in certain scenarios where we're forced to tear them down and put them back up in situations like corps leaving, or rebalancing, but it is far from "100% safety for towers"
And we've all seen how high espianage can go of late..
It's quite obvious your here for political motivations...
-We So SeXy |
Dan Sun
UK Corp
-Mostly Harmless-
|
Posted - 2010.07.01 11:44:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Dan Sun on 01/07/2010 11:45:07
I wasnt caring about the risk, what I was caring about is the waste of 4 hrs when it could be done in 2
The risks are only marginally better by transfering the tower, but when it does get transfered all the Mods go offline which means the tower is suddenly defencless to be reffed ( You could even put a 1hr delay on restronting and not allow transfers while stront bay is occupied, or just have the transfer option nuke the shields down to 40% for a laugh )
We dont really see many towers getting attacked in the mids of a transfer, so this is just a means to spead up one of the most pointless parts of the proccess when nothing really happends and we all have better things to be getting on with
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |