| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Xthril Ranger
   |
Posted - 2006.05.02 11:47:00 -
[1]
Seleene. Todays POS and sovereignty rule are there to force people to fight. To kill a POS an atacker need to commit many billions worth of expensive , imobile and defensless hardware for 30 min to several hours in a position that is difficult to defend. The pos is just there to be a setting for the fight , not to be the fighter. Atm it is the only time where fleets are forced to fight.
What happens if ccp makes POS more powerful? You will force people to make larger alliances since the manpower needed for pos assault increases. You will see systems defended by 1 person. You will be back to the invulrnable POS and POS wars (cheaper to set up another tower than loose 2 dreads).
you'll never jump alone |
Xthril Ranger
|
Posted - 2006.05.02 12:01:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Seleene
As has been said, POS's are speed bumps in thier current form.
Speed bumps are good , the longer it takes to take down a pos the more fleet fights you will have time to do. (ok , not exactly what you meant. I cut the quote short. But it describes what I think the pos should be.)
Originally by: Seleene
While I agree that fleet support is a good argument, it should not be the only option for defense, especially if the POS owners want to pimp them out with insane defenses.
I disagree with you.
Originally by: Seleene
Oh, and I want a POS Gas Tank that I can dump a month of fuel in. Not Strontium tho, because then people would have reinforced mode for a month. So, give us a gas tank that can hold a month of normal fuel or something. KTHX? 
You would probably have to move the strontium to a separate place in the tower then. Else you could just use 95% of the regular storage for strontium. But I would like to see that too.
you'll never jump alone |
Xthril Ranger
|
Posted - 2006.05.02 12:35:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Seleene
Numbers mean nothing. The MC is barely 100 players. Dedication, planning and experience can compensate for quite a lot.
Lack of dedication, planning and experience is compensated by larger numbers. 0.0 is wast and there should be room for smaller alliances that isnt as dedicated as MC.
100 of the regular 0.0 alliance members or an alliance of newer players would have problems with those kind of pos. I would like 0.0 warfare to be able to scale from the smallest to the largest.
you'll never jump alone |
Xthril Ranger
|
Posted - 2006.05.02 12:51:00 -
[4]
I make a lot of post , but I do other stuff and make a comment when I find the time :-D
Originally by: Seleene
Edited by: Seleene on 02/05/2006 12:06:21
Originally by: Xthril Ranger
Seleene. Todays POS and sovereignty rule are there to force people to fight. To kill a POS an atacker need to commit many billions worth of expensive , imobile and defensless hardware for 30 min to several hours in a position that is difficult to defend. The pos is just there to be a setting for the fight , not to be the fighter. Atm it is the only time where fleets are forced to fight.
That's an interesting point of view, but it doesn't negate a lot of the other arguments made here. The target cycling renders all the damage POS guns do moot. The lack of control over what your POS does is maddening. The basic simplicity of what a POS can and cannot do makes me wanna scream.
The damage done by the pos is not moot. It forces the attacker to commit the dreadnoughts. That makes this a fight the attackers cannot withdraw from. The POS gun cycling on support fleet gives the defenders the home field advantage.
But 1 thing I would like to see is an option to set what kind of targets each type of gun should cycle through. xl guns on small targets is just silly.
you'll never jump alone |
Xthril Ranger
|
Posted - 2006.05.02 13:08:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Seleene
Originally by: Rod Blaine
Btw, hwo did you like my idea for some additional income for your bunch of merry men Seleene ?
Who says we don't already do something like this, Rod? Not everything the MC is involved in is worthy of a post on EVE-O... 
Wouldnt your clients get better protection for their pos if it was announced? It will be revenge and not protection if the attacker discover this after the pos is destroyed.
"this pos is under MC protection(small secure can)(MC)(BDCI)" 
you'll never jump alone |
| |
|