| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Fendor Atar
   |
Posted - 2005.03.09 14:23:00 -
[1]
will alliances ever be able to setup there own sentrys at gates someday?
could work something like this
max 6 at each gate
need to have the system claimed by alliance
need a upkeep (need to be refilled with ammo now and then)
this would change alot in guarding claimed 0.0 space
this just me 5 cents 
|
Lig Lira
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 14:47:00 -
[2]
I wouldn't like to see automated gate camping.
Which PA character are you?
That's no flying saucer, that's my ass! |
Fendor Atar
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 14:56:00 -
[3]
well it would all be limited ofcourse these sentrys wouldnt be as good as empire sentrys
and it will only be possible in the system u claim and they need upkeep
also they will ONLY shoot targets the alliance has a bad standing with
Alliances are new empires acording to CCP... why shouldnt they have the same rights as the rest?
if u dont like it just stay the hell out of the systems claimed by alliances
|
Joshua Foiritain
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 14:57:00 -
[4]
Imo alliances should be able to build a somewhat secure empire in their space.
The sentries however should be fairly light, basicly they should be able to keep solo players and small frig squads away but be in no way usefull when it comes to protecting from invasions.
---------------------------
[Coreli Corporation Mainframe] |
Jamin Berry
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 15:14:00 -
[5]
that wud be cool,
sentries for t3h winz0r!
------------------------------------------------
Every time you click here i get 5 smac a ronies |
Neslo
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 15:15:00 -
[6]
Well Josh,
I think the way that would be fixed is that you could destroy sentries. A massive fleet is gonna take down sentries in no time... Also limit perhaps how far away from the gate they can be placed... say... 30 km is the farthest away they can be placed. And perhaps put a limit on how many can be placed... say... 1 sentry gun per gate per controlling territory POS... and max this out at 4 per gate. IE if Stain alliance has 4 POS structures in a system they can put 4 sentries at every gate. If they have 1 they can put 1 sentry at every gate? Just an idea...
From Ashes to Ashes... From Dust to Dust....
|
Novarei
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 15:32:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Novarei on 09/03/2005 15:32:59
I like the idea of amount of sentries being influenced by the amount of POS the alliance has, but i think that they should not have to all be in the same system, say for every POS in the region you get to be able to place one sentry per POS in the region up to a max of 4 - 6. Obviously they would be killable and have a lot of HP, but they should be by no means light. Maybe current sentry strength or 75% of but they do not all fire at once, they fire in turns and cycle targets. That way lone bs / cruisers will get a beating and a big fleet will barely be touched.
Though with the insta situation, anyone with gate instas is going to be fine. There arent too many peolpe who do 0.0 without instas, especially in claimed space.
If you think logically the sentries will not stop people from going into territory that is claimed or moving ships around, but it will (as in empire) stop pirates from making a nuisance of themselves at gates. So your spacelanes would be clear. As pirates would not be able to camp at a gate with sentries.
I do like the idea that you could program sentries to prioritise targets so that you could set them to focus on one individual if there were more than one at the gate. All in all a nice idea. And helps those POS runners to get their haulers through more effectivley. Unlike in empire the sentries would shoot at you non-stop regardless of aggressiopn, breaking up camps before they happen.
This also adds more value to the lacking POS, which are still largely usless as anything but safspots / refineries.
+--------------------------------------------+
|
Naverin
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 15:41:00 -
[8]
not gonna lie.. i like this idea.. POS in systems give you the right to place 1 sentry at a gate...I think this would make alliance's more willing to support and have each corp setup POS's in high traffic areas so they could sentry every gate.. Thus making Shipping lanes more safe.. and off the path areas a bit more pirate orentated
|
MinnieME
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 15:48:00 -
[9]
like the idea of alliance sentry guns, but having them shoot others where you have low standing towards, no. If you want the sentries to shoot your enemies declare a war  . thats what wars are for, low standing has nothing to do with war 
|
Oosel
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 15:48:00 -
[10]
this was touched on at the fanfest......its still a long way off getting into the game yet as is altering the actual sec lvl of systems with actual player policing will be good to see how this evolves in eve over the next few years
|
Clementina
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 16:10:00 -
[11]
I don't like this at all, it would lead to automated (and therefore very low cost) gate camping and intrench alliances in an area of space long after it has ceased to be theirs.
If you want to defend your space, put put your people at the gate.
|
Dionysus Davinci
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 16:22:00 -
[12]
I for one do not support this. It basically makes 0.0 empire for alliance members. Allowing them to roll in cash with no work and risk.
|
Fendor Atar
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 17:23:00 -
[13]
the sentrys dosent by far make 0.0 empire.. the fact that u can still be shot at anywhere without getting a gank squad all over you in 10 sec.
the sentrys will only prevent gate camping from a hostile force, and as i said this should ONLY be available in space that is claimed by the alliance the POS idea makes it harder to keep a defence up
u have no buisness in other allaiances space unless ure a friend or a member pirates and others should just stay out.. the sentrys is a way to make that happen
and remember.. the dreads will prolly be good to counter sentrys
|
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 17:26:00 -
[14]
Welcome to Candyland! 
|
Keta Min
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 18:00:00 -
[15]
Just recruite a few players who can defend your area. or get out of 0.0 ;)
|
MaiLina KaTar
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 19:46:00 -
[16]
Don't fool yourselves. It is the only logical way to settle players in .0 and the next logical step in the evolution of this game.
If you can't see this then you have no clue. Period.
Mai's Idealog |
Mephorios
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 20:16:00 -
[17]
If you go into the item database on the immediate left of the screen, and then hit the Trade Goods window, check out the Nexus Chips.
From what their description appears to be, it sounds as if players will be able to have ships, actual fleets, that they can launch and have patrol in the name of their organization. Although that's neither here nor there, just speculation, but was always an idea, and would put the player alliances on par with NPC empires.
|
El Yatta
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 20:21:00 -
[18]
Sentries are a bad idea, because no-one wants to see more ganking, especially without even having players involved. However, I dont think much of the situation where the so called alliances dont actually officially claim 1/100th of the system under their "control". However, even when they have a claim, it doesnt give them any more rights or control of that system. Claiming a chokepoint should be a massive advantage, but also a big target. Having a POS at a moon which cant be touched but doesnt give you control of the vital system isnt much use.
Solution:
Give POS the one thing that allows alliances to claim so much space: INTELLIGENCE.
Take away the Pilots in Space IN 0.0 ONLY, and give it back to members of an alliance, but only applying to claimed systems. You cant spot a blob coming in deep space, unless you own the space, in which case you can watch them blundering about in your own back yard.
Its not gates or sentries that give alliances control, its information, and its THAT which will make vital POS placement a reality.
---:::---
|
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 20:24:00 -
[19]
The problem with making a system out in 0.0 so secure with sentries is that it then becomes possible to mine high end ores and npcs in what may effectivly become the alliance version of 1.0 space.
I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it... |
Elita
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 20:29:00 -
[20]
Make this a double-edged sword. Having a certain number of sentry guns at a gate or surrounding a conquerable 0.0 station should raise the security level of that system over time.
So the increased security for alliance members would come at a price. Your highway would be safe from opportunistic pirates, but those systems would gradually lose high end rats, and more importantly, high-end rocks.
This would force alliances to pick the locations of their sentries very carefully to achieve a balance between increased security and continued profitability.
--
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." -Arthur C. Clarke |
hylleX
|
Posted - 2005.03.09 23:40:00 -
[21]
Edited by: hylleX on 10/03/2005 00:24:39
 Originally by: Fendor Atar
will alliances ever be able to setup there own sentrys at gates someday?
could work something like this
max 6 at each gate
need to have the system claimed by alliance
need a upkeep (need to be refilled with ammo now and then)
this would change alot in guarding claimed 0.0 space
this just me 5 cents
Yea really good idea not. How about CoE try and recruit some ppl who can actually defend your systems? Sentries is not the way to go that would just reduce player combat even more, and we know how easy u can avoid it already.
|
RollinDutchMasters
|
Posted - 2005.03.10 00:30:00 -
[22]
I like the fact that 0.0 is dangerous space.
Of course, if you have half a brain, the only dangerous part of 0.0 space these days is the chokepoints, but still.
Just because youre in a crappy alliance that cant protect its space, and you dont have the ability to intellegently watch for threats, does not mean that you get an automatic 'cant be killed' region of 0.0 for yourself and your incompetent friends.
"Well, a whole fleet will be able to kill t3h sentriez!!!!!"
Yeah, and a whole fleet is blatently obvious on the map. I bet you'll really stick around instead of ctrl+qing the second they get within 5 jumps of you, right?
You can own a system when you can defend it. And with all of the whining to the contrary, yes, you can stop all traffic from going through a system. It takes some manpower, but if its too much work for you, then too bad. Stop whining to get CCP to protect you.
Originally by: Sochin
CCP has provided you with the tools you need to avoid crime. You're just too lazy/stupid to use them.
|
Sheial Tarlien
|
Posted - 2005.03.10 00:46:00 -
[23]
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
I like the fact that 0.0 is dangerous space.
Of course, if you have half a brain, the only dangerous part of 0.0 space these days is the chokepoints, but still.
Just because youre in a crappy alliance that cant protect its space, and you dont have the ability to intellegently watch for threats, does not mean that you get an automatic 'cant be killed' region of 0.0 for yourself and your incompetent friends.
So because you cannot defend jack sheet during periods you are in bed sleeping, this makes you incompetent?
Thank you for clarifying that issue for me.
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
"Well, a whole fleet will be able to kill t3h sentriez!!!!!"
Yeah, and a whole fleet is blatently obvious on the map. I bet you'll really stick around instead of ctrl+qing the second they get within 5 jumps of you, right?
So get rid of that part of the map.
Originally by: RollinDutchMasters
You can own a system when you can defend it. And with all of the whining to the contrary, yes, you can stop all traffic from going through a system. It takes some manpower, but if its too much work for you, then too bad. Stop whining to get CCP to protect you.
OH NOES PWEASE!!! Not t3h ch4ng3!!! Evolution of anything is t3h b4d!!
|
Grimster
|
Posted - 2005.03.10 01:00:00 -
[24]
Don't think I'd like sentries on gates in 0.0, that'd make things hard for a solo inty to camp out 
What would be cool would be a "map blocking" probe, you could strategically place in a system and it stops map information reaching your HUD, could be similar to these "Recharge Beacons" or whatever you occasionally see in space, but ofc you gotta feed it.
Some of the best fights we had in the North were when the map was nerfed.
|
Nyk0n
|
Posted - 2005.03.10 01:05:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Dionysus Davinci
I for one do not support this. It basically makes 0.0 empire for alliance members. Allowing them to roll in cash with no work and risk.
Yeaitd be just like empire is now then
|
Nyk0n
|
Posted - 2005.03.10 01:11:00 -
[26]
Having had chance to actully play with a deployable player owned senty gun on chaos many moons ago id have to say they are a good thing.
If i remeber correctly they are standings based, working much like a pos defence, consideraby less powerfull than a empire sentry and reasonably easy to blow up.
They would be damageing in large numbers, but provided they arnt uber it would be good to allow alliences something to help them protect the regions they claim, because currently its the attackers advantage even tho its on the alliences home turf.
|
Baun
|
Posted - 2005.03.10 02:32:00 -
[27]
Originally by: El Yatta
Solution:
Give POS the one thing that allows alliances to claim so much space: INTELLIGENCE.
Take away the Pilots in Space IN 0.0 ONLY, and give it back to members of an alliance, but only applying to claimed systems. You cant spot a blob coming in deep space, unless you own the space, in which case you can watch them blundering about in your own back yard.
Its not gates or sentries that give alliances control, its information, and its THAT which will make vital POS placement a reality.
A better way to do this is to add a module to the POS structure list that acts as a deep space scanning station. This way the actual claim on the system is irreleveant, which avoids issues of NPC faction sovereignty AND allows multiple factions access to the intelligence of given systems. A problem with this then becomes people with alt spies in your alliance simply leaching your information (which happens anyway).
The Enemy's Gate is Down
|
Fillmeup
|
Posted - 2005.03.10 02:40:00 -
[28]
Personally I love the idea. It would promote alliances and give the game something that is currently sadly lacking.
For it to work, we would need to remove map in 0.0 for all pilots, and give it back to those that have a POS installed and claim a system (for that system only). This could be achieved by recon buoys or something like that as part of a POS infrastructure.
Also, rather than limiting it to the number of POS's, why not make it that they have 0CPU and Grid that is drawn from a local POS. In effect, you could set up multiple POS's in a system (which are a ***** to maintain in 0.0 anyway), and have one that you nominate as a command centre. (tick box anyone? )
This command centre has grid / cpu that is drawn on by the POS sentries. So, for instance, make the 'Remote' sentries require 500-1000 cpu or something. You can put them whereever you want, but are limited by the max capacity of the station they are linked to.
Also, I trialed these things in Chaos a long time ago, and they were not uber at all. One megathron could take down one or two guns, 4 guns would defeat the mega. They should stay like this, maybe a little stronger, while still allowing for an invasion fleet to come through with minimal losses.
Someone above said this is a natural progression .. I agree 100%. Someone else above said this would give crap alliances the ability to own huge swaths of space - u know how hard it is to maintain a lot of POS's?!?!?! - forget that as a problem.
As for automatic gate camping, these things wouldn't be strong enuf for this purpose.
|
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.03.10 12:38:00 -
[29]
Do you know how EASY it is to maintain a lot of POS?
|
Mattduk
|
Posted - 2005.03.10 13:01:00 -
[30]
Originally by: MaiLina KaTar
Don't fool yourselves. It is the only logical way to settle players in .0 and the next logical step in the evolution of this game.
If you can't see this then you have no clue. Period.
What a ****!
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |