Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Darth Aethrian
Pacific Dawn Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.09.04 20:07:00 -
[1]
Hey, I was floating this idea with a few guys, and it seemed like a decently popular thought, so I figured I'd pass it on here.
Why don't we have the ability to put up gate guns when we hold sov over a system?
It would give the sov holding side an advantage when attacked, and would at least give a minimal amount of defense in the favor of small gangs trying to stop a camp or defend their own system.
My reasoning on the implementation is this: Give the guns a certain amount of powergrid and CPU, say enough to put up 4-6 medium turrets of any type, or however many small guns that is.
You would have to fuel the gate in order for the guns to continue functioning, while the gate would function as a gate with or without fuel.
I say medium guns, because if you could fit 4-6 large guns, it would effectively shut down access to a system to everything short of cloakies and heavy tanked battleships, and that would effectively destroy small gang warfare.
Make the guns require, say, Strategic 2 or 3, so you have to hold the system for a while before you can put the guns up. This means that newer systems would be more vulnerable than longer established systems, and it would prevent people from immediately throwing up guns and effectively locking out a retaliation force when sov changes hands.
Feel free to comment on this or throw out improvements on it, I can take criticism. :D
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.09.04 20:20:00 -
[2]
Edited by: darius mclever on 04/09/2010 20:20:23 or you could just defend space yourself instead of ruining frigate sized combat on gates in 0.0.
and yes your idea is anything but new.
|
Rhadia
|
Posted - 2010.09.04 22:02:00 -
[3]
Originally by: darius mclever Baaawwwww, I hate every idea forever.
That's really about all I ever see you post.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.09.04 22:42:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Rhadia
Originally by: darius mclever Baaawwwww, I hate every idea forever.
That's really about all I ever see you post.
only if the idea is making 0.0 even safer.
|
Rhadia
|
Posted - 2010.09.04 23:06:00 -
[5]
Making 0.0 safe for who? The carebears? You and I have always had opposing ideas as to who should be safe in 0.0, where, and how. Hence my opinion on cloaks providing unlimited safety, and your opinion on passive Sov defences.
You seem to only support things that let you watch it all burn. You can add in logical system defenses such as these without suddenly making 0.0 carebear-land.
You need to get out the mind set of "I hate you, I hate your idea, I hate carebears, hate hate hate". Start offering your own terms to the idea. If you think gate guns are suddenly going to imbalance the game and ruin it for you, list the reasons why.
Did it ever occur to you that passive defenses like these would be an isk sink to help bolster an economy fueled by PVP? Infact, they would be motivation for people to spend more time in a system causing havoc. How annoying do you think it would be to have to replace every single gun each time a gang comes through and destroys them? This would mean that people would either A- Not put the guns up due to cost or B- Not allow the guns to be undefended by players.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.09.04 23:12:00 -
[6]
Edited by: darius mclever on 04/09/2010 23:13:32 yes. gate guns definitely would fuel frigate size pvp in 0.0. and it also wouldnt harm cruiser size pvp. seriously ... if you want to hold space ... you have to defend it ... not some random guns on a gate.
besides ... if you would have searched assembly hall and features & ideas forums, you would have noticed that this idea gets beaten down everytime people propose it.
|
Rhadia
|
Posted - 2010.09.04 23:15:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Rhadia on 04/09/2010 23:17:31 Erm... I don't really do low sec pirating or deal with POS guns at all, so correct me if I'm wrong...
But in small numbers, without support (or gunners) they're kind of useless, right?
It was my assumption that most frigates move too fast to hit, and the usual TII cruisers you see roaming around would barely flinch.
Edit: Also, did it ever occur that some ideas are reposted constantly because certain mechanics in Eve do not function realistically?
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.09.04 23:56:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Rhadia Erm... I don't really do low sec pirating or deal with POS guns at all, so correct me if I'm wrong...
lowsec gate guns eat frigates.
Quote: But in small numbers, without support (or gunners) they're kind of useless, right?
in a small scale fight (1v1/2v2) ... they add noticable dps to the local side.
Quote: It was my assumption that most frigates move too fast to hit, and the usual TII cruisers you see roaming around would barely flinch.
that assumes you wont get tackled, or that you dont have to slow down a bit yourself so you can hit. and suddenly that dps from those guns matters and i dont really see why sov holder need that extra dps in fights.
|
Jaggati Khan
|
Posted - 2010.09.05 00:05:00 -
[9]
i think its a novel idea but then i think null should be slightly more dynamic, at the end of the day the alliances that hold nullsec are in effect its factional owners and should have more options to defend their space, i also beleive however that the more pilots and ihubs etc in a system all the time would defo NOT encourage rats to appear more often - i think the higher the sov the safer it should be from npc rats (as its basically becoming its own little factional part of space) but then i also believe that null should be bigger and have a couple more entry points :P
|
Rhadia
|
Posted - 2010.09.05 00:19:00 -
[10]
When roaming into enemy territory the attacker should have access to a certain amount of infrastructure that they can destroy, but I do not believe that small groups of 2-3 people should be able to easily penetrate borders unless they can cloak or are fast enough to avoid defenses (Assuming something like this was implemented).
As far as roaming gangs go (Which I'm sure you're convinced I just want to carebear safely, but whatever) they're kind of screwed because the only damage they can cause is directly to the players themselves (By looking for a fight and blowing up someone's ships).
What I would like to see in 0.0 are weak industry structures, etc... Something to simulate "Farmland to burn" when some enemy comes by to pillage. Leave more things lying around that can be destroyed by an enemy and there would be more motivation to defend it.
This is why I wish the "pirate attraction array and the like" were not plugged into the IHUB, but instead scattered around the system around planets and other celestial objects, able to be destroyed, but more easily replaced.
|
|
Therra Starwind
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.09.05 04:03:00 -
[11]
sure, darius never supports ideas, but to be quite honest, 99% of the time, they are stupid ones like this.
If you can't defend yourself in your own systems, you deserve to die anyway. Welcome to Eve.
<3 Therra Starwind |
Abdiel Kavash
Caldari Paladin Order Fidelas Constans
|
Posted - 2010.09.05 04:30:00 -
[12]
I would support this if the guns
a) had realistic lock time and tracking - similar to POS guns. b) like POS guns, could be incapacitated - just with less amount of HP. c) required sovereignty in the system (level TBA). Only after sov is taken they can be permanently destroyed.
A lone traveler could just warp off before the guns lock him, but let's say an enemy industrial would be killed before he aligns. Frigates could mostly outrun the guns, they would only act in a support role to defend the system. And the guns would give opportunities to small gangs - run around and incap them - either they are down all the time, or the holder corp has to run around repping them. ___________ EVE is dying! Now for real! |
Rhadia
|
Posted - 2010.09.05 06:01:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Therra Starwind sure, darius never supports ideas, but to be quite honest, 99% of the time, they are stupid ones like this.
And 99% of the people who post here are posting because they know their ideas aren't perfect and are looking to build on them/make them better. You guys really need to learn what the purpose of these forums are, and start being constructive, or finding a new forum to go rip people's ideas apart on.
Either start providing constructive posts, or quit posting here- Simple as that.
|
Makalu Zarya
|
Posted - 2010.09.05 06:02:00 -
[14]
"Hey look my Raven isn't safe enough in this system, there are annoying people who don't let me carebear."
get over it, 0.0 doesn't need to be any safer, if you can't protect yourself with what you have already then moved to empire, they have gate guns there
|
Nova Fox
Gallente Novafox Shipyards
|
Posted - 2010.09.05 10:50:00 -
[15]
make them tougher a viable threat to fleets pilot controllable and finally destroyable and buildable Pre-order your Sisters of ≡v≡ Exploration ship today, Updated 1SEPT10
|
1600 RT
|
Posted - 2010.09.05 10:52:00 -
[16]
Edited by: 1600 RT on 05/09/2010 10:54:09 id like if we was able to put POSes everywhere we like not only near moons
you could put a POS near the gate this ofc will cost you a bit and would give something worthy to kill to an opponents fleet
|
Torothanax
|
Posted - 2010.09.05 11:09:00 -
[17]
Gate guns in 0.0, even if they were pos style, probably wouldn't be a good idea. If you are using your space, you should be able to defend it.
And no, darius mcspamsalot doesn't like any idea.
|
Portmanteau
|
Posted - 2010.09.05 11:12:00 -
[18]
what a terribad idea
|
General Domination
|
Posted - 2010.10.01 15:20:00 -
[19]
Dear CCP,
that is a great idea, but it should be implemented to make it easier for little corperation and alliances to hold a system not to make big alliances overpowered. I donŠt know how to make sure of that now, but I am sure your game design team got get into deep with that.
|
LordElfa
|
Posted - 2010.10.01 15:23:00 -
[20]
I'm not going to guess good or bad here but I will say that its realistic. If I built a Stargate, it would have guns no matter what the security level, if only to defend itself from attack.
|
|
chopper14
|
Posted - 2010.10.10 09:07:00 -
[21]
I think the fact that there aren't any gate guns encourages carebearing by outsiders.
When I was brand new to the game I organized a anti bob, noob channel, swa glory backed fleet.
we walked all over their space until finally we were stomped out by a non bob fleet. It wasn't until the non bob fleet chased us even further into bob space that we finally docked at a station with bob (1st dred encounter).
We undocked attacked lost, some of us redocked. I stayed behind for a day talking smack in an attempt to get them to chase me in my new kesteral, and undocked alongside a Phoenix. The pilot didn't fire he was preping to jump into a real fight, just smiled and jumped. I made it all the way home to caldari space withought one 0.0 contact. I've never felt so unworthy to be somwhere.
I think gate guns are a good idea. I think how many, what size, and how fast they decide to lock a target should be dependant on the depth of sov.
if they change sov in the future to make alliances choos a "homeworld system" it could also be based on the number of jumps from that system. Kind of like a player owned security rating.
This would allow incursions at the borders while ensuring some 2 week old noob doesn't just walk right through the equivalent of somones front door, eat all their food and leave. It would also mean committing caps to attack inner system sov.
Supported.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |