|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.09 22:48:00 -
[1]
Originally by: Wolodymyr
Also hacking an I-Hub upgrade might take 10 or so minutes
Stopped reading here. There isn't a single entity in the game who can form an effective counter gang, engage and destroy 10-20 ships in 10 minutes. Nor will there ever be. If we assume absolute best case scenario, there are enough people in system to counter the gang, they notice their iHub is being hacked (1 minute) and dock up (1 minute), switch to the exact counter ship they happen to have in station and undock (1 minute), warp to the iHub (1 minute) they now have 6 minutes to wipe out a 10-20 man gang. If people need to come from 2-3 jumps out they aren't even going to get in system in time.
What this comes down to (every time) is you want people to be forced to engage roaming gangs with an inferior gang that will do nothing but pad your killboard. 10 minutes of effort for 1 person to shut down ratting for 6 hours is pants on head ******ed.
|
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.10 09:52:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Wolodymyr
ok half an hour hack time, or an hour whatever. Just whatever time it takes one alliance to get a home defense fleet going, but not enough time to cyno in every super-cap in whatever massive power block you are in. And maybe it only shuts down the I-Hub upgrade for 2-3 hours
So you want to be able to do damage deserving of a serious response without actually risking any of your own assets, sounds fair to me.
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
There is absolutely nothing in the way of guerilla options at present and since any such option will have a massive impact on the 'set in their ways' (read: cannot/will not adapt) null who make up the majority, CCP will have to endure a lot of crap to make it happen .. in short: your 'blob > all' lifestyle is safe for a long time, don't worry.
Its irrelevant what size of entity you're attacking. In fact a larger alliance will probably have a higher chance of responding with a 10 minute warning than a smaller one. The overall chance of winning is still basically zero.
I'm all for having something like an anchorable which shuts down services in a constellation, or even region if you want (although not docking, thats not going to encourage fights at all) as long as you can defend it. I'd also be quite happy for a 10 minute hack to disable services so long as they could be restored with a similar amount of effort.
Damage should be proportional to the effort the attacker puts in, regardless of how much more the attacker feels their sense of self-superiority entitles them too.
|
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.10 11:49:00 -
[3]
Originally by: bartos100
i agree but if you need an hour to hack a the ihub you will get dropped by a blob
i would say that the hacking is halted the moment 1 uncloaked ship (no noobship/shuttle) is on grid (something like within 300K of the structure)
that means that you can send in some huge buffered ship to get more time for the rest of the fleet
To give you some credit, this is the most transparant "Alliances should feed me easy killmails whenever I'm in their space" I've ever seen.
|
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.10 12:22:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Originally by: Yeep Its irrelevant what size of entity you're attacking...
Depends which metric you use: geographical size, # on 'show info' or actual active players (not characters).
Not really, at the 10 minute mark none of it matters. Unless the system owners are pre-warned you'll be in and out before any meaningful response happens.
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
One could make all iHub upgrades vulnerable with a built in 4hr auto-repair cycle (add manual repair to cut it way down). Could make it a costly affair to just POS/Dock up when a roam comes around without impacting TZ xenophobes too harshly.
See this I could actually get behind, even without the auto-repair (but not without the manual option). I'd even go as far as to say iHub upgrades aren't really enough damage.
The trouble is it still doesn't incentivise people to actually come fight. People are pushing for longer lasting, unrepairable damage as the solution to that but effects that persist hours after the gang has left remove far too much risk from the equation for the attacker. Instead I'd argue for more severe and widespread disruption for gangs that are willing to commit. If the Sanshas can apply constellation wide reductions to player resists, damage and income, why not have a range of siege-like modules that do similar things (you could even stick the mods in the incursion LP store for added roleplaying). Give it a 1-2 minute cycle , make it aggress and immobilize the ship, even throw up a beacon if needed, then you'll get your fights.
|
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.10 13:32:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Damage from iHub disruption in 'random system X' is negligible but in important systems it could/should be devastating .. just as an attack on a metropolitan area has greater impact than a fire on some farm in the country.
I was more implying that knocking out iHub upgrades as they stand right now isn't really very much inconvenience (again, assuming they can be repped).
If you're discussing offlining CSAAs then you've strayed back into the realms of attacks that should merit a full alliance response without allowing one to take place. And knocking out jump bridges can be done as is anyway (plus if you're looking for a good fight, you shouldn't be preventing people from bringing one).
The problem with something like destroying an iHub upgrade having lasting effects is that the definition of a reasonable response time changes depending on both the attacker and the defender. You can't balance a high-skillpoint, high isk value fleet incapping an iHub upgrade without making it impossible for everyone else. And likewise you can't balance it for a more reasonable gang without making it impossible to defend against the ~elitepvp~ gang.
|
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.10 22:31:00 -
[6]
Originally by: That One Guy
Part of encouraging the attacker to only field a medium sized gang is to make the reward for completing the event to only be worth it for a moderate sized gang. So the penalty to the defenders needs to only last a little while. Something that is worth it for a small gang to try but not worth calling a CTA for.
Then for the defenders the response time needs to be long enough that one alliance can mount a home defense fleet. But not long enough for them to get a huge blob from whatever power block they are part of.
Yes, but you can balance this for precisely one combination of attacker and defender on precisely one occasion. Ask most of the people in this thread and their fleet size will be roughly what they regularly field, and the response time will be just under what it takes their targets to form a fleet that can beat them. Wider ranging and more severe active disruption is far better than local, persistant damage unless all you want to do is hurt an entity and leave before it can respond.
|
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.10 22:57:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Val'Dore Between Freighters and Jump Bridges, it just isn't cost effective to mine low end minerals locally for most 0.0 entities.
Before freighters and jump bridges almost all ships were built in empire and we flew them out to 0.0 one by one. It has never been cost effective to mine low ends in 0.0 because you can mine high ends instead and convert them into isk which you can then use to buy ships. Most of the low ends that aren't flown in come from reprocessed rat loot. Being surrounded by friendlies has nothing to do with it.
It isn't too easy to source stuff from empire, its way too hard to produce it locally.
|
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 08:27:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Val'Dore
Originally by: Yeep Before freighters and jump bridges almost all ships were built in empire and we flew them out to 0.0 one by one.
The proletariat did anyway.
So 0.0 should be painful to live in for anyone but the super rich elite. Which you happen to be one of, because you're elite (obviously).
|
|
|
|