| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Veldaran
The-Hole-Idea
Void-Legion
3
   |
Posted - 2013.08.12 15:07:00 -
[1] - Quote
Wormholes have become too predictable. The distinct lack of variety in any given class of WH is a problem that could be remedied by reorganizing existing content. So let's begin!
COMBAT SITES:
Wormhole Re-Classification:
C1-3 = Perimeter
C2-5 = Frontier
C4-6 = Core
Extending the range of each classification by 1 allows for more diverse WH activities using a system similar to mission running. Sites no longer need to be restricted to a specific WH class and can have dynamic stats in relation to where they are found. WHs are no longer limited to 4 Combats, 2 Datas and 2 Relics and will spawn anomalies/sites of +/- 1 class (C4 spawning C3 through C5 sites).
The difficulty/reward of a site will scale up/down to match the WH they are found in. A C3 site found in a C4 will be more difficult/rewarding than if found in its native C3, but less difficult/rewarding than a C4/5 site found in the same C4. This creates a wider range of difficulty for players to engage in. The number of players required to complete a site will change based on what site you enter and where you found it.
Spawn Rates:
C1 || P (100%)
C2 || P (66%) / F (33%)
C3 || P (33%) / F (66%)
C4 || F (66%) / C (33%)
C5 || F (33%) / C (66%)
C6 || C (100%)
Sites by Class:
C1:
--(Combat Anoms)
[C1] P. Ambush Point
[C1] P. Camp
[C2] P. Checkpoint
[C2] P. Hangar
--(Combat Sigs)
[C1] Phase Catalyst
[C1] The Line
--(Data)
[C1] F.P. Coronation Platform
[C1] F.P. Power Array
[C2] F.P. Gateway
[C2] F.P. Habitation Coils
--(Relic)
[C1] U.P. Amplifier
[C1] U.P. Information Center
[C2] U.P. Comms Relay
[C2] U.P. Transponder Farm
C2:
--(Combat Anoms)
[C1] P. Ambush Point
[C1] P. Camp
[C2] P. Checkpoint
[C2] P. Hangar
[C3] Fortification F. Stronghold
[C3] Outpost F. Stronghold
--(Combat Sigs)
[C2] The Ruins of Enclave Cohort 27
[C2] Sleeper Data Sanctuary
--(Data)
[C1] F.P. Coronation Platform
[C1] F.P. Power Array
[C2] F.P. Gateway
[C2] F.P. Habitation Coils
[C3] F.F. Quarantine Outpost
[C3] F.F. Recursive Depot
--(Relic)
[C1] U.P. Amplifier
[C1] U.P. Information Center
[C2] U.P. Comms Relay
[C2] U.P. Transponder Farm
[C3] U.F. Database
[C3] U.F. Receiver
C3:
--(Combat Anoms)
[C2] P. Checkpoint
[C2] P. Hangar
[C3] Fortification F. Stronghold
[C3] Outpost F. Stronghold
[C4] F. Barracks
[C4] F. Command Post
--(Combat Sigs)
[C3] Solar Cell
[C3] The Oruze Construct
--(Data)
[C2] F.P. Gateway
[C2] F.P. Habitation Coils
[C3] F.F. Quarantine Outpost
[C3] F.F. Recursive Depot
[C4] F.F. Conversion Module
[C4] F.F. Evactuation Center
--(Relic)
[C2] U.P. Comms Relay
[C2] U.P. Transponder Farm
[C3] U.F. Database
[C3] U.F. Receiver
[C4] U.F. Digital Nexus
[C4] U.F. Trinary Hub
C4:
--(Combat Anoms)
[C3] Fortification F. Stronghold
[C3] Outpost F. Stronghold
[C4] F. Barracks
[C4] F. Command Post
[C5] C. Garrison
[C5] C. Stronghold
--(Combat Sigs)
[C4] Integrated Terminus
[C4] Sleeper Information Sanctum
--(Data)
[C3] F.F. Quarantine Outpost
[C3] F.F. Recursive Depot
[C4] F.F. Conversion Module
[C4] F.F. Evactuation Center
[C5] F.C. Data Field
[C5] F.C. Information Pen
--(Relic)
[C3] U.F. Database
[C3] U.F. Receiver
[C4] U.F. Digital Nexus
[C4] U.F. Trinary Hub
[C5] U.C. Enclave Relay
[C5] U.C. Server Bank
C5:
--(Combat Anoms)
[C4] F. Barracks
[C4] F. Command Post
[C5] C. Garrison
[C5] C. Stronghold
[C6] C. Citadel
[C6] C. Bastion
--(Combat Sigs)
[C5] Oruze Osobnyk
[C5] Quarantine Area
--(Data)
[C4] F.F. Conversion Module
[C4] F.F. Evactuation Center
[C5] F.C. Data Field
[C5] F.C. Information Pen
[C6] F.C. Assembly Hall
[C6] F.C. Circuitry Disassembler
--(Relic)
[C4] U.F. Digital Nexus
[C4] U.F. Trinary Hub
[C5] U.C. Enclave Relay
[C5] U.C. Server Bank
[C6] U.C. Backup Array
[C6] U.C. Emergence
C6:
--(Combat Anoms)
[C5] C. Garrison
[C5] C. Stronghold
[C6] C. Citadel
[C6] C. Bastion
--(Combat Sigs)
[C6] Strange Energy Readings
[C6] The Mirror
--(Data)
[C5] F.C. Data Field
[C5] F.C. Information Pen
[C6] F.C. Assembly Hall
[C6] F.C. Circuitry Disassembler
--(Relic)
[C5] U.C. Enclave Relay
[C5] U.C. Server Bank
[C6] U.C. Backup Array
[C6] U.C. Emergence
Each class will also retain a pair of unique Combat Anomalies that would become Signatures. They'd have more sleepers than Data/Relic sites and better loot/salvage to compensate for lacking cans. The number of site types in each class would increase to 14/20 from 8 (75-150% more variety!). |
Veldaran
The-Hole-Idea
Void-Legion
3
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 15:07:00 -
[2] - Quote
GAS MINING:
Gas Sites can be similarly reorganized by total volume of a random set of 3 gases.
Gas Re-Classification:
[P] C50 (1m3)
[P] C60 (1m3)
[P] C70 (1m3)
[F] C72 (2m3)
[F] C84 (2m3)
[F] C28 (2m3)
[C] C32 (5m3)
[C] C320 (5m3)
[C] C540 (10m3)
Gas Sites:
--(PERIMETER)
Barren -- (Volume: 5,000m3 | Clouds: P / P / PF)
Token --- (Volume: 7,500m3 | Clouds: P / P / F)
Minor ---- (Volume: 10,000m3 | Clouds: P / PF / F)
--(FRONTIER)
Ordinary -- (Volume: 15,000m3 | Clouds: P / F / F)
Sizeable -- (Volume: 20,000m3 | Clouds: PF / F / FC)
Bountiful -- (Volume: 25,000m3 | Clouds: F / F / C)
--(CORE)
Vast ------------- (Volume: 35,000m3 | Clouds: F / FC / C)
Vital ------------- (Volume: 45,000m3 | Clouds: F / C / C)
Instrumental -- (Volume: 55,000m3 | Clouds: FC / C / C)
Every Gas Site would have 3 clouds (up from 2) of gas types pulled from their respective categories totaling the specified volume. For example, a Token Perimeter Reservoir would be guaranteed to contain 2 Perimeter Clouds (C50, C60 or C70) while the 3rd could be Perimeter(C50, C60 or C70) or Frontier (C72, C84 or C28).
The upgrade chance and total volume would depend on the WH the site spawned in. A C2 Sizeable Frontier Reservoir would have <20km3 leaning towards P/F/F clouds while the C5 version would have >20km3 with predominantly F/F/C clouds.
Players would have a reason to check Gas Sites for cloud spawns whereas now the lower end sites are often ignored. Variability encourages players to seek out better "rolled" sites leading to more chances for PvP.
ORE MINING:
The same mentality carries over to Ore Sites but requires more drastic changes given the dismal state of WH Mining (read: don't bother). The best WH ores are worth less for your time than the average gases, are significantly harder to make use of and are less safe to mine given Gas Sites are sigs and Ore Sites are now anomalies.
Revert Ore Sites to signatures!
Alternatively, give Procurers 1 base stab and Skiffs 2 base stabs to allow miners to counter 3 point faction scrams. There currently isn't a reason to use more than 1 stab for long points given that most WH pilots looking to gank miners will have the faction scrams for Ventures. Procurers will counter T2 scrams with a single Stab while Skiffs counter faction scrams with a single stab. Skiffs (and Exhumers in general) are otherwise wasteful to use now that belts are anomalies.
After that, completely reorganize site classifications. It doesn't make sense to have six Core sites but only four total Perimeter and Frontier sites.
Ore Re-Classification:
[P] Ordinary (Highsec)
[P] Common (Lowsec)
[P] Unexceptional (Nullsec)
[F] Average (Highsec)
[F] Isolated (Lowsec)
[F] Uncommon (Nullsec)
[C] Infrequent (Highsec)
[C] Unusual (Lowsec)
[C] Exceptional (Nullsec)
[MOD] Rarified (+5% yield)
Ore Sites:
--(PERIMETER)
Ordinary ---------- (Volume: 1,500,000m3 | +10% HS)
Common --------- (Volume: 2,000,000m3 | +5% HS, +10% LS)
Unexceptional -- (Volume: 2,500,000m3 | +5% HS, +5% LS, +10% NS)
--(FRONTIER)
Average ------- (Volume: 4,500,000m3 | +10% HS, +5% LS)
Isolated ------- (Volume: 6,000,000m3 | +5% HS, +10% LS, +5% NS)
Uncommon -- (Volume: 7,500,000m3 | +5% HS, +5% LS, +10% NS)
--(CORE)
Infrequent ----- (Volume: 10,000,000m3 | +10% HS, +5% LS, +5% NS)
Unusual ------- (Volume: 12,500,000m3 | +5% HS, +10% LS, +5% NS)
Exceptional -- (Volume: 15,000,000m3 | +5% HS, +5% LS, +10% NS)
Each grouping of sites would have a HS, LS or NS "focused" belt wherein ores of the matching category would become high yield versions and comprise a larger portion of the total volume. This being relative to a more reasonable distrubituion of ore volumes (No more 1.5mil m3 of Spodumain with 50-200km3 of everything else). The relative spawn rates would create highsec belts more often than low/nullsec belts. Total belt volume would shift identically to Gas Sites.
This makes mining ops easier to plan as the current balance of minerals refined from WH belts is so incredibly skewed that you're always missing a large quantity of something (Trit/Pyerite mostly). You now have the option of seeking out belts focused on the ores you need. Additionally, Rarified is turned into a prefix like "Large" in k-space belts. Rather than affect the size of WH belts it increases the ore quality by 5%. This stacks on top of any existing quality increases (0->5%, 5->10%, 10->15%).
Support this by increasing the max refining efficiency inside a WH to 90%.
+5% Ore = 94.5%
+10% Ore = 99%
+15% Ore = 103.5%
Local refining is still worse than k-space, but it's not so crippling that it's worthless. Restricting +15% Ore to Rarified belts in WHs also encourages daytrippers to visit more frequently (PvP!), but doesn't render HS mining moot given the significant logistical requirements for moving it to k-space.
Let me know what you think :) |
Alundil
Seniors Clan
Get Off My Lawn
269
|
Posted - 2013.08.12 19:27:00 -
[3] - Quote
Excellent proposal. These are exactly some of the types of ideas I was thinking of when I wrote my DSP proposal and pined for more variability and difficulty in in exploration content (and specifically w-space as what say explore more than jumping through a rip in the space/time continuum and into unknown and disconnected space).
I'll be adding a link to this thread to my DSP proposal if that's alright with you as I truly think that there could be some synergy between the ideas.
Clone mechanics enchancements
Deep Space Probe Revival |
Veldaran
The-Hole-Idea
Void-Legion
6
|
Posted - 2013.08.13 08:53:00 -
[4] - Quote
Alundil wrote:I'll be adding a link to this thread to my DSP proposal if that's alright with you as I truly think that there could be some synergy between the ideas.
That's fine, glad you approve :) |
Veldaran
The-Hole-Idea
Void-Legion
8
|
Posted - 2013.08.14 01:13:00 -
[5] - Quote
As a sidenote, any thoughts on creating hybrid sites that splice WH activities?
A few examples:
[COMBAT] Automated [P/F/C] Shipyard
- Shipyard Structure(s) periodically spawn Sleepers until destroyed (In addition to initial spawn + triggered waves)
- Hackable sentry power hub(s) (Data) with sleeper ship parts that refine into sleeper invention components
- Hackable construction hangar(s) (Relic) with partial sleeper hulls that refine into sleeper salvage materials
- Hacking minigame unlocks containers rather than spew minicontainers (haulers required for bulky sleeper parts/hulls)
[DATA] Unsecured [P/F/C] Industrial Complex
- (Rare) Hackable large assemply array (Data) with invention components for Rorqual/POS Modules
- Hackable assembly line(s) (Data) with invention components for Mining Lasers/Crystals
- Destructible Silo(s) containing single stack of random mineral (relative to WH class)
[RELIC] Forgotten [P/F/C] Mining Outpost
- (Rare) Hackable derelict POS-like structure (Relic) with salvage materials for Rorqual/POS Modules
- Hackable derelict mining vessel(s) (Relic) with salvage materials for Mining Laser/Crystals
- Small asteroid belt with 2-4 specific ores (P=Highsec, F=Lowsec, C=Nullsec)
- Destructible Silos containing ores associated with belt (relative to WH class)
[ORE] Frozen [P/F/C] Deposit
- Below average belt size using above changes but without high yield ores (contains new Frozen Ores)
- Frozen ore variants produce small amounts of non-racial ice when refined (in addition to minerals)
- Frozen ores have increased volume proportional to ice refined per batch
- Handful of normal ice blocks scattered across belt (mostly non-racial)
[GAS] Reactive Chemical Lab
- Hackable reactor array(s) (Data) with invention components for Gas Harvester and Polymer Reaction BPs
- Hackable derelict harvesting vessel(s) (Relic) with salvage materials for Gas Harvesters
- Single gas cloud of random type (relative to WH class)
New Sleeper Faction Items:
Mining Laser (Use Sleeper mining crystals)
- Mining Outpost (BPs) + Industrial Complex (materials)
Mining Crystals (2.0 x Modifier, 50% Volatility; less cost effective to buy, most efficient when produced/used in WHs)
- Mining Outpost (BPs) + Industrial Complex (materials)
Rorqual/POS Modules (90% refining efficiency through faction module and improved Rorqual compression?)
- Mining Outpost (BPs) + Industrial Complex (materials)
Gas Harvester (+80% yield w/double fitting requirements; intended for combat fit gas mining)
- Reactive Chemical Lab (BPs + materials)
This could be carried over into many other new sites.
|
Blodhgarm Dethahal
Transcendent Sedition
Dustm3n
24
|
Posted - 2013.08.14 02:15:00 -
[6] - Quote
Would the C5 grade sites in the C4 as you propose be capable of escalating? If so then bringing Capitals to break Capitals running sites is no longer an option.
-Bl+¦d
Wormholes are the best Space.. |
Veldaran
The-Hole-Idea
Void-Legion
9
|
Posted - 2013.08.14 10:08:00 -
[7] - Quote
Sites would scale to whatever WH they are found in and adopt the localized mechanics:
A C4 site in a C5 WH would gain cap escalations but be less difficult/rewarding than a native C5
A C5 site in a C4 WH would lose cap escalations but be more difficult/rewarding than a native C4 |
BlakPhoenix
Veni Vidi Vici Reloaded
Darkspawn.
42
|
Posted - 2013.08.14 10:47:00 -
[8] - Quote
I very much like this idea |
Aakkonen
The 0rigin
Illusion of Solitude
7
|
Posted - 2013.08.14 12:09:00 -
[9] - Quote
Very informative and out-of-the box thinking :D Me likes 1+
Bad Jokes since -09.... Fly Safe! o7 |
Veldaran
The-Hole-Idea
Void-Legion
14
|
Posted - 2013.08.15 13:47:00 -
[10] - Quote
Bump for moar stuffs!
Improving Site Diversity in WHs |
|
|
Veldaran
The-Hole-Idea
Void-Legion
14
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 14:47:00 -
[11] - Quote
WTB opinions, paying with cookies!
Improving Site Diversity in WHs |
RoAnnon
Strategic Acquisitions Group
Tactical Research Lab
245
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 16:32:00 -
[12] - Quote
+1, good stuff Maynard!
So, you're a bounty hunter.
No, that ain't it at all.
Then what are you?
I'm a bounty hunter. |
Luc Chastot
Daktaklakpak.
456
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 16:47:00 -
[13] - Quote
This is ineresting.
Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot. |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children
TOHA Conglomerate
162
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 17:05:00 -
[14] - Quote
+1.
Also:
1. random spawns of sleepers near wormholes
2. POS attack! Surely sleepers must be programmed to evade continual slaughter through retaliation?
So how about this, every week (or so) a sleeper unit attacks a POS in system. Week 1 is 1 sleeper, week 2 adds another..... week 50 has 50 sleepers of varying sizes attacking as one. By week 100, you're going to need a hell of a defence force, but you'll be making reasonable money from the wrecks.
Unless you man your defences, you can't camp in your wormhole carebearing away forever.
Once all the POSes are gone, the mechanic resets.
Thinking this through, you'd need to give the POS owner the option of when the attack will take place, so much like station timers, you'd have to give them the option of setting a time for the engagement. So, it goes like this:
day 1: corp receives a mail, "leave our system or be terminated"
corp dials in the day and time they want the engagement, from now to any time in the next 6 days, or the pack up their stuff and move if so inclined.
day n: sleepers attack, but they bring with them a module that disables the strontium in the tower.
Stront is only there to time the defence of a tower, and in this case the players have already been given the option to control the timing.
While many might recoil in horror at this idea, I would welcome it. It would force our corporation to practice POS defence while having something tangible to lose.
|
Veldaran
The-Hole-Idea
Void-Legion
18
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 21:14:00 -
[15] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:1. random spawns of sleepers near wormholes
I would like to see a less predictable "arrival" of Sleepers, but I don't think parking them on WHs is the right approach. The overall goal should be to get MORE people coming into WHs (and then trapping them!  ) so that they can poke around before they are attacked.
I would rather "fake" WHs show up that appear like normal inbound WHs but are really connections to a new set of Sleeper DED-like WH systems. Upon entering, you trigger all the alarm bells as they start warping to the WH and traveling through to the other side if you aren't there to meet them. This is more inline with the "reactive" nature of Sleeper lore. What they do once they come through, however, could be any number of things similar to what you propose:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:2. POS attack! Surely sleepers must be programmed to evade continual slaughter through retaliation?
So how about this, every week (or so) a sleeper unit attacks a POS in system. Week 1 is 1 sleeper, week 2 adds another..... week 50 has 50 sleepers of varying sizes attacking as one. By week 100, you're going to need a hell of a defence force, but you'll be making reasonable money from the wrecks.
Unless you man your defences, you can't camp in your wormhole carebearing away forever.
Once all the POSes are gone, the mechanic resets.
I don't like the idea of endlessly increasing aggression because it would be a clear indication that WH habitation isn't intended. If setting up shop in WHs is NOT what CCP wants to happen, a significantly more drastic overhaul than what I'm proposing is needed.
The current system is directly at odds with the idea of day-tripping given how tedious logistics are for bringing ONLY what you need into a WH to clear sites while still being able to haul everything out. AFK mining in HS is typically more profitable in the long run than day-tripping. If you want to boot carebears from WHs, the opportunities for PvP go with them. The vast majority of WH PvP revolves around one group rolling into another groups home system OR a group running sites. There's not enough people around to shoot otherwise.
Without carebears living in WHs. . . to run the sites. . . you have to randomly bump into someone who is ALSO looking for PvP in said WH as they won't have any other reason to be there
I like the underlying concept for your idea, but it shouldn't be a consistently predictable occurrence that escalates until you're evicted.
Improving Site Diversity in WHs |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children
TOHA Conglomerate
162
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 22:07:00 -
[16] - Quote
Hmm, if we want more carebears in wormholes how about this:
Every time someone warps, there is a small chance (0.001%) of a mis-warp and they end up in a wormhole until the space-time continuum straightens itself out and a 'return' hole appears in the same spot 10 minutes later.
All the carebear has to do is survive for 10 minutes...
:-)))
|
Veldaran
The-Hole-Idea
Void-Legion
20
|
Posted - 2013.08.20 18:06:00 -
[17] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Hmm, if we want more carebears in wormholes how about this:
Every time someone warps, there is a small chance (0.001%) of a mis-warp and they end up in a wormhole until the space-time continuum straightens itself out and a 'return' hole appears in the same spot 10 minutes later.
All the carebear has to do is survive for 10 minutes...
With such a low chance to occur, this qualifies as "pure RNG" given that there is no real consistency involved. This would undoubtedly affect PvP more than carebearing as people looking for "pew" use WHs more than those who are carebearing in their home system. Unless you're saying any warp, in general, in which case this still affects PvP more given all the bouncing between celestials/safes that happens.
We really don't need to focus on eliminating carebears from WHs. I've never understood the unreasonable hatred for people who enjoy PvE (outside of botting). You do realize that without them, the game would fall apart, yes? Where do you think all the isk came from in the first place?
People running missions and/or ratting
If anything, you should want MORE people carebearing in WHs so that you have something to shoot at. This won't happen unless people have better reasons for moving into WHs. Add some honey and you'll inevitably get more target practice.
I do still like the idea of roaming sleepers, though.
Improving Site Diversity in WHs |
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children
TOHA Conglomerate
172
|
Posted - 2013.08.20 18:12:00 -
[18] - Quote
the next doctrine I'm going to get off the ground is "roaming sanctum stealing".
take a gang of cruisers with t1 logi into 0-sec and WH space and roam around cleaning up all the anoms and combat sites.
if we get engaged, then we go hot.
I use this principle in wormholes and it works really well. you get pvp with a profit.
pve can be fun, if you add a little spice and even the odds...
coming? |
Veldaran
The-Hole-Idea
Void-Legion
21
|
Posted - 2013.08.22 23:09:00 -
[19] - Quote
I already have a corp to roam with so I'll have to pass 
I'd love to talk more about your roaming sleeper idea though 
Improving Site Diversity in WHs |
Medinus
The-Hole-Idea
Void-Legion
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.28 23:53:00 -
[20] - Quote
I definitely need more reasons to mash rocks in my life, +1! |
|
|
Pidgeon Saissore
Sacred Templar Knights
Metatron Inc. Alliance
31
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 00:48:00 -
[21] - Quote
I'd say the pos attack idea is actually good for inhabiting wormholes. The number of sleepers a death star can kill would be worth billions on its own. The sleepers would eventually overwhelm said death star but not before it paid itself off a dozen times over at least.
It would change the way people would have to play it though. People would not be able to accumulate an excessive amount of stuff in their tower. Towers would be exclusively death stars. People would need to keep a spare tower logged off on an alt in system.
Personally apart from my large amount of pi I can live exclusively out of my carriers. When d day comes I would only need to throw all my pi in the customs offices then pack up my tower while my carriers are cloaked somewhere, then just put it back up when its over and start the cycle of ratting with my death star all over again.
Since that would be so easy to do the attacks should not be predictable. While they should be generally escalating there should be a random multiplier so there would be no way to predict when you need to evac and reset it. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
354
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 00:50:00 -
[22] - Quote
Or we could just continue to put pressure on CCP to create a truly dynamic mission/anomaly system. Where by you can't read from a script and all you get is some rough idea of risk/opposition before you enter a site.
This would be best meshed with a lego POS system which would then make for easy to create POS's for the opposition to be working out of as structures.
Anything else is simply a band aid fix to a massive flaw. |
Veldaran
The-Hole-Idea
Void-Legion
25
|
Posted - 2013.08.31 00:38:00 -
[23] - Quote
Pidgeon Saissore wrote:I'd say the pos attack idea is actually good for inhabiting wormholes. The number of sleepers a death star can kill would be worth billions on its own. The sleepers would eventually overwhelm said death star but not before it paid itself off a dozen times over at least.
It would change the way people would have to play it though. People would not be able to accumulate an excessive amount of stuff in their tower. Towers would be exclusively death stars. People would need to keep a spare tower logged off on an alt in system.
I think the idea deserves some more thought, but I don't agree with pushing all WH POS's to "Death Star" setups. This would make the already unattractive industry portion of WH's entirely too difficult to be worthwhile. I'd much rather Sleepers randomly reinforce towers in variable fleet sizes so that OTHER WH corps are motivated to put eyes on towers they find reinforced.
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Or we could just continue to put pressure on CCP to create a truly dynamic mission/anomaly system. Where by you can't read from a script and all you get is some rough idea of risk/opposition before you enter a site.
This would be best meshed with a lego POS system which would then make for easy to create POS's for the opposition to be working out of as structures.
Anything else is simply a band aid fix to a massive flaw.
I can agree to an extent, but asking for multiple system overhauls at once is unrealistic. I consider it a more worthwhile effort to push them towards a diversified system before waiting the length of time it would take to complete revamp it.
Improving Site Diversity in WHs |
Simc0m
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
106
|
Posted - 2013.11.28 18:35:00 -
[24] - Quote
+1 Going to save this one from the permalock. |
Nariya Kentaya
Phoenix funds
1062
|
Posted - 2014.02.25 18:46:00 -
[25] - Quote
Gee willickers, look at this old thread. A most wonderful idea, time for a trip to the first page! |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |