Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
miner804
|
Posted - 2006.07.30 21:27:00 -
[181]
What would be great is skills for a player to operate a POS.
Lets say you want small mim tower. Well for a person to directly control the tower they should have a POS skill to atleast level 1 (some skills that could be needed for that are that races BS to level 3). For a large tower have the skill to level 3 or something.
If that person wanted to have projectile weapons on that tower he would need a pos projectile skill. Level 1 gives you small guns, level 3 gives you large guns.
If a person doesn't have these trained the tower will act like it does know.
|
Sniser
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2006.07.31 00:05:00 -
[182]
Edited by: Sniser on 31/07/2006 00:09:24 nm, delete it please
|
Domania
|
Posted - 2006.07.31 04:56:00 -
[183]
Bah! Didn't read the 7 pages, only the frist one. :P
100% agree with what Seleene said, the AI are sort of random when picking it's target, it's like the frist person who locks onto it and shoots get's the pain But besides adding one thousand new skills to control it, why not have the owner or someone with the password "log" into the POS, sort of like docking. Such as... 'type in your password :*********** "password comfirmed" "Docking" "Bringing POS view up: loading...." So when you log into the POS, your ship docks with the POS and the POS is sort of like your ship now. You got the mods and turrets in the lower right spot, you can lock on to your target and do what you want.
|
Ellaine TashMurkon
Em Pack HUZZAH FEDERATION
|
Posted - 2006.07.31 08:35:00 -
[184]
You cannot have POS turrets in normal ship interface because You culd have 50 small turrets or so. --- Bookmark improvements Player owned brokers |
Ayumi Kuribayashi
|
Posted - 2006.07.31 16:08:00 -
[185]
Personally, I think being able to manually control your POS is a bit unrealistic unless you were actually at the POS itself (perhaps make it so that you can enter it and "pilot it". Something a little more realistic would be allowing players to write their own scripts to define a POS's actions during an engagement. While you can just create a checklist where you can define a POS's priorities in terms of targetting, I personally feel that creating some sort of in-game programming language to define the behavior of a POS would be a wonderful way to increase a POS's effectiveness while also adding a great deal of depth to the use of POS's. It could also open up a whole new market for people willing to master the use of this POS programming language and they could effectively sell scripts to POS owners. This could be done with simple If, Then commands, which would allow for players to script general scenarios and also to script reactions toward much more specific and complex situations. At any rate, I think this idea of programming a POS AI would be much better than just having another skill set to grind time on which would allow you to manually control what each gun targets, which would be a bit unrealistic in many circumstances.
|
Domania
|
Posted - 2006.07.31 17:22:00 -
[186]
@Ellaine That's why you are logging into a NEW interface for the POS. :P
|
Ganiaxxir Anferdanni
|
Posted - 2006.07.31 17:23:00 -
[187]
I browsed through the beginning of this thread (excellent btw) and am about to go to work. I noticed an early theme seemed to be a problem with lag. Is this a problem that CCP can overcome at all?
I wondered why CCP couldn't moderate lag problems when you have extremely large numbers in a system by perhaps "moving" the offending system to a dedicated server when the numbers exceed a certain threshold. Or are there too many really large battles going on that this would be cost prohibitive?
|
Princess Angel
|
Posted - 2006.08.02 12:09:00 -
[188]
Edited by: Princess Angel on 02/08/2006 12:11:02 While the suggestions are good,m they are geared towards the megacorps/alliances. Its not fair on the small underdogs who have about 4 or 5 dreads to assume that tanking a PoS in a Dread is an Easy feat. It isn't.
Maybe they simply need targetting enhancments or options, such as All modules lock This ship. (could be largest, most damaging or A specific class.) Maybe setting up pos guns to say Large Guns attach Dreads, Medium take down BS's etc.. or however. Or like that other person mentioned. HAve POS control system, Whereby if docked in a station you can log into you PoS and Manually Control your defences. Now that Would be great !
Its all about balance, and Catering for the Mega/alliance to often results in people haivng to leave EvE because the lack of options. not every one in Eve Online Wants to Join BoB, MC, Goonswarm or ASCN.
Like you said Seleene, Against a large enough dread fleet.
One of the reasons I like this game is the freedom to do anything, but some people seem to want everyone doing the same the thing. When everyone's joined your allies , who is left to contract you. |
Ruffio Sepico
Minmatar Hidden Agenda
|
Posted - 2006.08.02 14:31:00 -
[189]
Originally by: Ellaine TashMurkon You cannot have POS turrets in normal ship interface because You culd have 50 small turrets or so.
No, but you could have a fire control that have all gun types grouped after type and size.
Would fit in the current interface option imho.
Home: http://www.hidden-agenda.co.uk
|
Reithan
Caldari Dark Planet Ventures
|
Posted - 2006.08.02 15:11:00 -
[190]
I'm a big fan of re-using systems.
So why not simply re-use the carrier/fighter system here (to an extent)?
Have it so ONE defender may "board" the controll tower, which then brings all the defenses up as "drones".
However, based on certain skills (like perhaps the unused "Starbase Tactical Officer") would limit how many guns they could actively control. Like 1-2 per level of STO.
So, in the interface, you'd have something like:
Online Defenses Controlled Defenses Offline Defenses
Which would be displayed just like the drone interface. You could choose weapons from the "Online Defenses" folder and group them like drones or whatnot and you could hit "Take Control" which would add them to the Controlled Defenses folder, like launching drones, provided you had enough skill.
Then, to continue stealing from current systems, you could designate defenses to other players within control range like you do with fighters.
However, I'm not sure how that works with fighters currently, does the person(s) allocated fighters require the skills to use them? if so, then allocated defenses should require similar, and if not, they shouldn't.
This system would give 3 benefits:
1. Grouped defenses could be made to operate as a group, getting rid of the stupid cycling issues. 2. Controlled defenses, with a limit to controll numbers could add a new level of fun and controll to seiges. 3. Allocated Defenses mean that the defenses can/should/have to be spread out among different defenders, so that: A. The controller of the tower isn't overwhelmed with too many things to controll at once. B. It takes more than 1 person to effectively controll a POS.
Oh, and whoever said it, yeah Fighter/Drone bays as a POS module would KICK ***.
|
|
Aserkast
|
Posted - 2006.08.09 02:21:00 -
[191]
Do really think that all the problem are caused by POS and dreads?
Lets the game be more realistic.
The shielding system need to be changed.. a ship behind a larger one have to be protected from the incoming attack by the m8's shields... (other games have this feature) This'll introduce more and new tactics for combats (and not only for pos fight) For example we'll be able to see the support ships working to help a dreads tanking or maybe the defending fleet hiding behind the pos shields and able to use EW and drones.
At this point, POS's power fire can be changed. As i said at the beginning I'm for realism, so lets have more poses at a moon (and aggressor could be able to anchor too...) and have pilots entering the guns and so on.
At the end, balance the damage and the tanks of the dreads and the pos.. (but think that in a year we'll be able to see lots of dreads pilots)
One last think about sovranity. where it is the realism? I don't like it. No sovranity ...No pos war... so change it... |
Drazhar Kain
Alpha Production Technologies HUZZAH FEDERATION
|
Posted - 2006.08.09 04:56:00 -
[192]
Edited by: Drazhar Kain on 09/08/2006 04:57:31 Haha. That would make the game take 4 times the amount of CPU. Line-of-sight weapon maths would make most computers cry.
Remove sovereignty (Yes, sovereignty, not sovranity)? Wtf are you smoking man?
Anyway, POS's are not made to kill dreads, dreads are made to kill POS's. Think about it: why should a 500 mil setup that can be used to refine, produce, moon mine, re-equip ships etc. be able to take down a 2 bil ship designed specifically to kill the said 500 mil setup? This is like complaining that your covetor can't kill inties very well.
|
voidvim
Minmatar Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.08.09 10:48:00 -
[193]
Originally by: Drazhar Kain Anyway, POS's are not made to kill dreads, dreads are made to kill POS's. Think about it: why should a 500 mil setup that can be used to refine, produce, moon mine, re-equip ships etc. be able to take down a 2 bil ship designed specifically to kill the said 500 mil setup?
I think one of the problems is that you can't send 2 billon (if you want to )or more on your pos defence.
Originally by: Drazhar Kain This is like complaining that your covetor can't kill inties very well.
True but one can buy a ship thats wipes the flour with inties it would be nice to do the same with pos.
|
WarGod
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2006.08.09 11:28:00 -
[194]
Havin only saw the 1st page :P
I agree the POS have to be changed in some way, be it more powergrid for more guns, bring out damage mods, increase the standard damage output of the turrets, or give the POS a more player controled role when it comes to deffending the POS.
I put up a Minmatar large POS (on the TEST server) with 8 large howiz... and by myself! with one else there to share the damage with, i was able to tank it for almost an hour, with 1 capital repper and 2x tec2 hardeners, at the POS's range so all guns hit.
Now, eve has changed alot since they first brought out POS's. If someone wants to remove them, (mainly a large one) the instant responce is, Get the dreads.. because people dont use BS to attack a large (unless they got insane numbers ofc) I dont think that all aspects of EVE have been updated to keep up. Yeah, Back when POS's were brought into the game there was no Dreads, and the challenge of removing one was a good one.
Since then EVE has new bigger better ships ships (capital ships) and left the POS with no real way to deffend itself anymore.
And its also just wrong for one dread that doesnt have any faction stuff on or even 2 reppers, to tank a large POS for that long :P
POS removal job would include multiple dreads being use.. but one dread with maybe 2 frigs MWD around it could get it done.. would take awhile but it would get done.. so maybe another way of changing it would be lower the HP, increase the Damage.. or give the player the choice.
But i think one thing is for FACT. POS's need to be updated. D00M. WarGods Kills
|
Aserkast
|
Posted - 2006.08.09 12:38:00 -
[195]
Originally by: Drazhar Kain Edited by: Drazhar Kain on 09/08/2006 04:57:31 Haha. That would make the game take 4 times the amount of CPU. Line-of-sight weapon maths would make most computers cry.
Remove sovereignty (Yes, sovereignty, not sovranity)? Wtf are you smoking man?
Anyway, POS's are not made to kill dreads, dreads are made to kill POS's. Think about it: why should a 500 mil setup that can be used to refine, produce, moon mine, re-equip ships etc. be able to take down a 2 bil ship designed specifically to kill the said 500 mil setup? This is like complaining that your covetor can't kill inties very well.
I agree with u about the dreads are made to kill POSes. Dreads have to be able to easly kill mining pos... maybe to be less effective to combat pos... but with out Line-of-sight weapon maths (Dark Space, an old game , have it) the game'll continue to have a lack of strategy. U can add all the mod u like.. for dreads and poses... but u need all the other ships in the fleet to be more usable. We'll see tec II dreads firing tec II Combat pos and tell me where is the fun for the other 200 pilots in the fleets?.. ah yes.. we'll coninue camping a gate ... or waiting in the pos's shield for the next years...
|
Yoran Gerel
|
Posted - 2006.08.10 11:49:00 -
[196]
I have browsed through the posts here - and no ... havent read em all, so I may talk oldish here.
But yeah, POS defence should be more "advanced" than random firing turrets. More control is ofcourse needed.
On the other hand, its also way too easy to put up a tower. Even when its just sitting there onlining you need insane firepower to take it out. Why not have the shield HP's removed untill a tower is online - this way people putting up a POS would need to actually BE THERE. And not just send in a few haulers who sits safespotted untill the tower is online, while a few 100 guys on the other team cant do anyting about it.
Just a few brain-farts.. feel free to refine or flame as needed ;-)
|
Kraschla
|
Posted - 2006.08.11 05:01:00 -
[197]
Maybe have POS Clone Vat bays... You can keep a fleet in the Hangar, and Gate Camps will only affect people who don't have Jump Clones, isn't this what Jump Clones were designed for? Faster fleet defence?
|
voidvim
Minmatar Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.08.11 23:49:00 -
[198]
Originally by: Yoran Gerel
Why not have the shield HP's removed untill a tower is online - this way people putting up a POS would need to actually BE THERE. And not just send in a few haulers who sits safespotted untill the tower is online, while a few 100 guys on the other team cant do anyting about it.
The problem is this would F**k over small to medium corps setup up pos all over low sec empire.
|
voidvim
Minmatar Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.08.12 00:13:00 -
[199]
Their need to be alliance pos's and corp pos's and they need differnt rules. A lot of the problems come from the fact ccp wants pos to ward of small threads and not be to much of a pain for the average corp to use. But when it come to sovereignty for alliances their a differnt dynamic and alot of the problems that people have talk about on this thread and other come from this.
eve news A new sovereignty structure that works differntly to a pos . NO mining NO refining No building ect. Does have ship fiting and storage does have a huge arsnal and is used for sovereignty of systems and thus gives the fuel bonus to pos.
just an idea.
|
Lor LokStar
|
Posted - 2006.08.12 00:40:00 -
[200]
Originally by: voidvim Their need to be alliance pos's and corp pos's and they need differnt rules. A lot of the problems come from the fact ccp wants pos to ward of small threads and not be to much of a pain for the average corp to use. But when it come to sovereignty for alliances their a differnt dynamic and alot of the problems that people have talk about on this thread and other come from this.
eve news A new sovereignty structure that works differntly to a pos . NO mining NO refining No building ect. Does have ship fiting and storage does have a huge arsnal and is used for sovereignty of systems and thus gives the fuel bonus to pos.
just an idea.
I think it was mentioned earlier, but maybe we need a module that has to be deployed at a pos to claim soverignity. These big alliances laugh at B's of isk, so make a sov module cost 5B each. And make it like 900,000m3, so it can only be deployed by a freighter.
Perhaps to make some of you happy the guns could get a 1.25 rof increase when the module is present, although its not truly necessary as lag+pos+defending TII BS fleet will always get a few dread kills(and losses).
Lor LokStar Daikoku Trade Syndicate
|
|
voidvim
Minmatar Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.08.13 11:11:00 -
[201]
Originally by: Lor LokStar
Perhaps to make some of you happy the guns could get a 1.25 rof increase when the module is present, although its not truly necessary as lag+pos+defending TII BS fleet will always get a few dread kills(and losses).
Lor LokStar Daikoku Trade Syndicate
Their needs to be a way to break the battle in small ingagments
say you have a structure call a starfort (that controls soverenty ) it has 3 to 4 smaller structure that have to be attack at the same time thus spliting the attacking and defending force in to 3 or 4 groups each of the small structures are in a differnt grid so as to lessen lag.
just a idea
|
voidvim
Minmatar Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.08.13 11:11:00 -
[202]
Originally by: Lor LokStar
Perhaps to make some of you happy the guns could get a 1.25 rof increase when the module is present, although its not truly necessary as lag+pos+defending TII BS fleet will always get a few dread kills(and losses).
Lor LokStar Daikoku Trade Syndicate
Their needs to be a way to break the battle in small ingagments
say you have a structure call a starfort (that controls soverenty ) it has 3 to 4 smaller structure that have to be attack at the same time thus spliting the attacking and defending force in to 3 or 4 groups each of the small structures are in a differnt grid so as to lessen lag.
just a idea
|
Spike Spegel
Minmatar Infinite Improbability Inc Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2006.08.14 11:25:00 -
[203]
Edited by: Spike Spegel on 14/08/2006 11:31:44 Edited by: Spike Spegel on 14/08/2006 11:28:16 POSes are ok atm, these must not be the machines able to stop enemy fleets. They are there just to give you some time to muster a fleet - and that is good. And situation changes drastically when there are defenders present... Fit nosferatus/neutralizers into your nanoed domis and see how long the dread tank will last... Have a fleet of sniping BSs on the other side of POS, out of covering fire of attacker's sniping BS, and see what will happen... Assaluting a POS while there is a deffending fleet with numbers at least half of attacking fleet is very nice and interesting experiance and gives a lot of fun... suddenly you discover that one more cov op is worth more then 10 BS...
Making the POSes stronger will just make the game more static, and more and more time consuming... I would like to see them even less powerfull, so the real deffenders of systems would be people not AI...
Just my two isks...
Spike out __________________________ Our logs does not show any evidence of server problems. please check your computer for viruses and spyware; also double check your ISP connecting speed. |
Nicholai Pestot
Gallente Havoc Inc
|
Posted - 2006.08.14 12:03:00 -
[204]
Edited by: Nicholai Pestot on 14/08/2006 12:06:07 What we need is a new type of POS intended purely for claiming sovereignty. Call it a POW (player owned warbase) or a TPOS (Tactical player owned starbase)...whatever.
This can then be balanced in reguards to claiming systems and holding systems without having to worry about screwing over the whole industrial aspects of POS's.
Give the TPOS/POW lighter shields,larger gun bonuses, player targitable guns, hard-coded re-inforce time, long anchor time etc
Leave the small/medium/large POS as defended industrial structures that are a large time sink to take out. ________________ What you do is you store up the rage, let it fester while you gain strength, then use it to gank those weaker than you... and so the circle of life is complete |
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.08.14 15:38:00 -
[205]
An XLarge starbase tower would, IMO be a solution. 5-10x cpu and grid of the current large, similar boost to shield, but use 5-10x the fuel, and cost 5bn each or something. It'll still be possible to squish with a dread fleet, but it'll be a lot more touch and go.
Straight isk comparison is, IMO a fallacy, as a starbase is pretty much a 24/7 thing, unlike a dread that gets to pick where and when to kill things.
I agree that a 2bn asset should mostly win against a 500mil one. However I also think that if I really want to keep said 500mil asset, it should be possible to increase the defenses to the '2bn' level.
|
Cker Heel
ISS Logistics Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.08.14 17:52:00 -
[206]
Originally by: James Lyrus An XLarge starbase tower would, IMO be a solution. 5-10x cpu and grid of the current large, similar boost to shield, but use 5-10x the fuel
An XL POS is great idea. It would overrule large POS in sovereignty scoring, just like large overrule smaller POS. Size it to require freighter deployment to prevent spamming. That size means it cannot be scooped and is permanent until destroyed.
In another thread, Serenity Steele suggested just making large POS larger to prevent spamming. But that would make deploying a large industrial POS noticeably harder.
The catch here would be preventing XL POS from being useful for industrial purposes. I would suggest same CPU as large POS but an XL amount of powergrid. That way it couldn't run more than 2 reactor arrays but could bristle with guns and make dread pilots sweat a bit.
Or perhaps just making the XL POS use significantly more fuel compared to the size of its CPU would minimize industrial usefulness.
|
ImACrunchyNut
|
Posted - 2006.08.14 18:01:00 -
[207]
i thought the skill [Starbase Tactical Officer - Skill at setting up starbase weapon systems] was going to be used to this effect as a means of controlling the POS by player instead of AI. I agree POS's should be player controlled not AI controlled. This would mean more tactical placement and prevent POS spamming tactics which are incorporated and degrade the game to points of people quitting
|
FireFoxx80
Caldari E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.01.09 19:16:00 -
[208]
I'm probably going to duplicate what people have said, but here goes... oh, and this might be a necro.
I think any system needs to be both balanced and flexible. As people have pointed out, if you can 'pilot' a large tower and point all 8 Large Arties at a Dread and make them go boom one by one, then that is overpowered; but equally there is a post saying that you can still tank such a setup. Also we still need to think about the little guy, a small corp should have a realistic chance of taking out another small corp's POS. As BoB have pointed out, it wouldn't take long to train up a dedicated POS officer alt to maintain each system held; so I feel that 'piloting' POS' should go out of the window. However, I am all for making weapons more intelligent. I guess CCP will have to let us know how viable it is.
Some cool suggestions I have seen here and in other threads though:
XL Towers. We're getting to the point now where people are sticking billions of ISK worth of BPO's into POS labs; so we need to have the opportunity of sticking billions of ISK worth of defences there too.
Fighter Hangars. Computer controlled fighters would be good, stoping people warping to a safespot. And I can instantly see people abusing this - warp in a ship to aggro the fighters, then have the fighters persue you to a force ready to take them all out. So some sort of configuration would be needed ("do/do not persue"). I also think a Small/Medium Hangar, with 'number of fighters to have launched' acting as a modifier on CPU. So you can configure your medium hangar to only keep 2-3 fighters in the air at any time (of it's stock of 20), and it uses less CPU than if you want 4-6 fighters in the air at once.
CPU/PG Upgrades. Why not?
Fuel Tanks. Again, why not?
POS Shield Extenders, I know we have shield hardeners, but for the ultimate in shielding...
Heat Sinks, etc. Even if they only affect weapons within 250m/500m.
T2 Equipment. I guess it only really applies to EW, shields, and weapons; but still it's a nice concept. As any T2 equipment really, slightly increased PG/CPU usage in return for a greater effect.
Fire Control Groups and customisation. I am aware that guns cycle every 30-45 seconds, but manually being able to modify this would be good. Having the options of [30s], [60s], [90s], [120s], [150s], [180s], [until target is no longer present]; would be fantastic. Especially as it gives the element of tactics; if you configure your gun to focus fire for 180s, then it becomes useless for 170s if it destroys its target in the first volley. Also configuring certain target priorities. Such as [fire on closest target], or [target priority frigates/cruisers/battleships/... (sortable list)], etc. For EW, [until target is no longer present] would be excellent for Warp Srambling arrays. Still a system that won't make a 'human' decision, but one that can be customised in order to keep the POS alive a little longer.
Logistics Fields. Being able to mass shield/armour/cap repair ships in range or inside the bubble. Prone to abuse, so it'd need to be pre-nerfed/balanced. Off the top of my head; the POS could boost the equivalent of 10 Small Shield Boosters, but that would be divisible by the total number of ships within the effect (1 ship = 20x, 10 ships = 1x, 20 ships = 0.5x); or a percentage rather than absolute boost.
Cyno Field Generator. Permanent field generator.
Hmpf, brain empty of ideas now.
What I do the rest of the time - Vote for a Jita bypass! |
bluecheast
Four Rings Myriad Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.10 14:57:00 -
[209]
Originally by: PeopleDamager In my opinion, posses are just fine as they are. They are a safe heaven in 0.0 to warp to.
POSses are no wtfpwn machines, they are dumb deployable structures with only 1 funtion. (0.0 producing and safespot).
Using dreads kills a pos, yes thats right. It should stay that way.
What I am wondering is why should a structure at the cost of a bs or 2 would be able to fend off a ship costing several billions. It doesn't make sense.
Not any of you thought of the following so I'll just suggest it: Use Dreads against dreads. Dreads in siege mode have no ability to track, thus making them inable to kill flying ships. Counter these dreads by using dreads yourself. If you aren't able to do so, crease your pos in a system that requires less defence, or don't get a POS at all. What fun is it if a single player can fend off an entire fleet? It's unbalanced.
POS killing takes long and is boring, I agree. But the knife cuts on both sides if you want to have your own system. Try using dreads to defend your pos, The enemy fleet wont be able to come in close, since the poss will pop anything smaller than a Dread. You will have the advantage of POS covering fire, allowing you to have a relative small fleet to fend of a large blob (if it is at your pos that is).
In my opinion...
Regards, PD
Hey 1 deathstar is not just 1 tower you need atleast 1 bill off stuff then to have (secure) sov you need 5-15 poses is that cheap?
The Rings Forums |
|
Abathur
|
Posted - 2007.01.11 12:02:00 -
[210]
Edited by: Abathur on 11/01/2007 11:59:35
POS warfare is going to see some major changes & updates in Kali 2. While you may not see us reply much, threads like this one are watched closely by the Dev team. Hopefully there will be a Dev Blog in the next couple weeks that will give players a glimpse into the future of POS warfare and allow everyone a chance to re-focus their energies. Not everyone will be pleased (shocking, I know), but this summer will see some radical and progressive changes on the POS warfare front.
"Tux did it!" |
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |