Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Nalha Saldana
Shattered Void Test Alliance Please Ignore
898
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 17:29:42 -
[31] - Quote
Hendrink Collie wrote:I like that the max capture time has been increased in heavily used systems, should help out defense some. The changes should allow medium sized groups that use space and can small gang fairly well hold at least small chunks of space. The 18 hour gap for non-used systems almost seems to be too much; however, it does scale down really fast, so meh. All in all, can't wait to try it out and see how the new sov system feels.
The strategic level alone can cut the time in half so it really isn't that much, I'm looking forward to the changes and the fights it will bring! |
Dr Cedric
Independent Miners Corporation Care Factor
97
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 17:47:48 -
[32] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Dr Cedric wrote:I think the incentive for most Null-Sec'ers (me included) is that if I want PvP, I can do it, if I want PvE, I can do it, and for the most part, the people around me want to do it also. Moreover, we want to do those things in groups rather than solo. The incentive is already there. People are living in Null Sec and making ISK and having fun and shooting stuff. I suppose New Fozzie-Sov will allow those things to continue to happen, and probably a little bit more on the PvP side. ISK isn't the incentive... if it was no one would live in Null-sec or Low-sec and we'd all be friends in an incursion fleet This new sov system will create a trend of everyone moving closer together in order to better defend, which is a good idea. It will definately increase the ~peeveepee~ aspect of the game. I have no problem with the sov changes. However, when you start getting more and more people into closer quarters your income is going to drop. When the income decreases you lose ability to buy new ships. Lacking the ability to support your pvp hobbies means you stop fielding ships to fights. Yes, alot of people will still make isk from moongoo and production, but a majority make their income via simplistic routes such as ratting. Making isk to enjoy the other aspects of the game is the incentive, my friend. You can't shoot stuff from a pod.
We won't know how Fozzie Sov will affect the distribution of people around space until it happens. Its premature at this time to assume everyone in an alliance will move to the capital system and be fighting over a few anoms and some DED's.
Its a feasible thought that once these changes hit players will identify an "optimal" alliance size and start spreading out on their own to accomplish a better space-to-player ratio, especially if it becomes possible for sov defense to be successful on uneven terms.
Also, I'd be willing to wager a few ISK that once a few months of people dealing with Fozzie Sov have passed CCP will have a better idea about how ISK is generated and moved around. Lets be patient and play it out.
Cedric
|
Arkumord Churhee
Bavarian Unstressed Mining Mob Synergy of Steel
27
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 17:56:20 -
[33] - Quote
I love it! All of it!
- The further extended Activity multiplier helps to fend off the sov trolls - Not having to grind all indices to 5 also is a nice addition - Capital Systems are great - TZ shifting and length changes are absolutely wonderful! They really help to make your space more vulnerable if you don't use it, and it also works the other way around.
The UI mockups are nice and (mostly) understandable.
And finally: Sov Info available in the Show Info panel! FINALLY! |
Alexis Nightwish
170
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:00:53 -
[34] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:...our first generation Activity Defense Multiplier system will not include contributions from typical capital system activity such as trading and manufacturing. We hope to work towards including these factors in future iterations of the Activity Defense Multiplier mechanic, but in the meantime we need an effective way for alliances to defend their staging systems. You stated that anything that contributes to indexes must be disruptable in space which is why you didn't want manufacturing to contribute to the industrial index. Now you're saying manufacturing and trade (both very easily gamed) will eventually contribute?
CCP Fozzie wrote:...the bonuses in the new capital will not take effect for several days. This is intended to prevent alliances from shifting their capitals rapidly to react to invasions or to stabilize newly captured territory. Make it at least a week. With the new, higher defense bonuses, an alliance can easily stall attackers for a few days. Or, even better, don't allow movement to a system whose TCU has been attacked (not necessarily captured) within the past few days. This would allow attackers the opportunity to deny gaming the system by the defenders, but if an alliance is not under siege then moving their 'capital' would be simple.
CCP Fozzie wrote:Firstly, it will be possible for alliances to set custom vulnerability timers per structure. You've gone from no granularity to too much granularity. The problem with allowing every structure to have a different window is you make it a massive chore for attackers to strike. Now instead of "Alliance X is vulnerable from 12:00-16:00" you have "Alliance X, System ABC-D: TCU is vulnerable from 12:00-16:00, Station vulnerable from 16:00-20:00, IHUB is vulnerable from 20:00-0:00, System WXY-Z: TCU is vulnerable from 0:00-04:00, Station vulnerable from 04:00-08:00, IHUB is vulnerable from 08:00-12:00, System OMG-Y (on the other side of the constallation): TCU vulnerable from 12:00-16:00, Station vulnerable from 16:00-20:00, IHUB is vulnerable from 20:00-0:00, etc., etc., etc.!
Large alliances will love this however as they will need fewer guarddog alts in tanky elink ships to watch over their nodes. As one window ends, they just fly the alt over to the node that's becoming vulnerable.
This change will result in entrenched alliances becoming absolutely unbreakable as they can bring their collective might onto one single grid because they do not have to defend all of their space during the same vulnerability window.
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
|
Current Habit
Get LP or Die Trying
47
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:04:00 -
[35] - Quote
Quote: As much as possible, the Entosis Link capture progress should reflect which group has effective military control of the grid.
After one side can't or won't fight (anymore), they might resort to harassment to delay the attackers from actually using the Entosis Link on the target node/structure. To which extend do you think the capturing should be susceptible by harassment ?
For example an alliance fielding a short-mid range doctrine might drive off all hostiles other than single hostiles at max range using falcons or damps trying to use their E-war on the ships with the Entosis Links. Another example are interceptors fitted for very short align times (<2 sec) and with an ECM-Burst can warp in to the capturing ships, use their bursts and warping out again. In both examples the hostiles could try to break the lock on the capturing ships delaying the conquest without challenging the grid control of the other alliance.
It's understandable that harassment like this is acceptable to some degree and can be negated or eliminated by having more people bring Entosis Links on their ships. Then again, if half the fleet is bringing Entosis Links just to combat harassment the fleet is likely to perform worse than one in which everyone uses all their slots for combat. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1073
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:13:32 -
[36] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:...our first generation Activity Defense Multiplier system will not include contributions from typical capital system activity such as trading and manufacturing. We hope to work towards including these factors in future iterations of the Activity Defense Multiplier mechanic, but in the meantime we need an effective way for alliances to defend their staging systems. You stated that anything that contributes to indexes must be disruptable in space which is why you didn't want manufacturing to contribute to the industrial index. Now you're saying manufacturing and trade (both very easily gamed) will eventually contribute?. manufacturing requires extensive in-space flying to bring in raws and export finished products |
Alexis Nightwish
170
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:36:17 -
[37] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:...our first generation Activity Defense Multiplier system will not include contributions from typical capital system activity such as trading and manufacturing. We hope to work towards including these factors in future iterations of the Activity Defense Multiplier mechanic, but in the meantime we need an effective way for alliances to defend their staging systems. You stated that anything that contributes to indexes must be disruptable in space which is why you didn't want manufacturing to contribute to the industrial index. Now you're saying manufacturing and trade (both very easily gamed) will eventually contribute?. manufacturing requires extensive in-space flying to bring in raws and export finished products JFs are basically unkillable, so until that changes manufacturing is not disruptable.
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2379
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:43:33 -
[38] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:...our first generation Activity Defense Multiplier system will not include contributions from typical capital system activity such as trading and manufacturing. We hope to work towards including these factors in future iterations of the Activity Defense Multiplier mechanic, but in the meantime we need an effective way for alliances to defend their staging systems. You stated that anything that contributes to indexes must be disruptable in space which is why you didn't want manufacturing to contribute to the industrial index. Now you're saying manufacturing and trade (both very easily gamed) will eventually contribute? Maybe that whole first part of, "We hope to work toward including..." implies they plan on working on those aspects. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5220
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:45:01 -
[39] - Quote
Bethan Le Troix wrote:mynnna wrote:Xttz's fingerprints on the timezone mechanics, mine all over the mineral changes, sov is just goons all the way down. Yeah I know. 'Absolute power corrupts absolutely'. I do agree the new revised timezone mechanic is a very good idea though.
/me takes the melted gummy bears off his fingers.
There's a reason my name is mentioned, you know.
Woo! CSM X!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Yroc Jannseen
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
114
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:47:39 -
[40] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:...our first generation Activity Defense Multiplier system will not include contributions from typical capital system activity such as trading and manufacturing. We hope to work towards including these factors in future iterations of the Activity Defense Multiplier mechanic, but in the meantime we need an effective way for alliances to defend their staging systems. You stated that anything that contributes to indexes must be disruptable in space which is why you didn't want manufacturing to contribute to the industrial index. Now you're saying manufacturing and trade (both very easily gamed) will eventually contribute?. manufacturing requires extensive in-space flying to bring in raws and export finished products JFs are basically unkillable, so until that changes manufacturing is not disruptable.
Does everyone who does industry have a JF?
|
|
Sigras
Conglomo
1025
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:48:03 -
[41] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Dr Cedric wrote:I think the incentive for most Null-Sec'ers (me included) is that if I want PvP, I can do it, if I want PvE, I can do it, and for the most part, the people around me want to do it also. Moreover, we want to do those things in groups rather than solo. The incentive is already there. People are living in Null Sec and making ISK and having fun and shooting stuff. I suppose New Fozzie-Sov will allow those things to continue to happen, and probably a little bit more on the PvP side. ISK isn't the incentive... if it was no one would live in Null-sec or Low-sec and we'd all be friends in an incursion fleet This new sov system will create a trend of everyone moving closer together in order to better defend, which is a good idea. It will definately increase the ~peeveepee~ aspect of the game. I have no problem with the sov changes. However, when you start getting more and more people into closer quarters your income is going to drop. When the income decreases you lose ability to buy new ships. Lacking the ability to support your pvp hobbies means you stop fielding ships to fights. Yes, alot of people will still make isk from moongoo and production, but a majority make their income via simplistic routes such as ratting. Making isk to enjoy the other aspects of the game is the incentive, my friend. You can't shoot stuff from a pod. Well, that is exactly the point isnt it? Everyone wants to be in the same system for protection yet they have to kinda spread out to make money...
Its a fantastic balance of risk vs isk.
My only concern is that the scaling vulnerability window makes it much harder to take and hold new systems than systems that are already established... |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2379
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:48:58 -
[42] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Bethan Le Troix wrote:mynnna wrote:Xttz's fingerprints on the timezone mechanics, mine all over the mineral changes, sov is just goons all the way down. Yeah I know. 'Absolute power corrupts absolutely'. I do agree the new revised timezone mechanic is a very good idea though. /me takes the melted gummy bears off his fingers. There's a reason my name is mentioned, you know. Sadly you're not goon. Therefore the tinfoil factor is limited, decreasing demand for your credit.
I did like the variability idea though, if that makes you feel any better. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2379
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:50:23 -
[43] - Quote
Yroc Jannseen wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote:EvilweaselSA wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:...our first generation Activity Defense Multiplier system will not include contributions from typical capital system activity such as trading and manufacturing. We hope to work towards including these factors in future iterations of the Activity Defense Multiplier mechanic, but in the meantime we need an effective way for alliances to defend their staging systems. You stated that anything that contributes to indexes must be disruptable in space which is why you didn't want manufacturing to contribute to the industrial index. Now you're saying manufacturing and trade (both very easily gamed) will eventually contribute?. manufacturing requires extensive in-space flying to bring in raws and export finished products JFs are basically unkillable, so until that changes manufacturing is not disruptable. Does everyone who does industry have a JF? Confirming that I build capitals with myself, A blockade runner, and my entire life-savings shoved into cargo. |
Vyle Feelings
Southern Cross Incorporated Flying Dangerous
7
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:01:52 -
[44] - Quote
Is there any intention of buffing systems that do not contain the resources necessary to increase indices? My alliance currently owns a system with 0 astroid belts, making it difficult to raise the military and industry indexes. We kill gate rats and run any anomalies that spawn, but it's slow going. Under the new mechanics, solar systems like this will be at a severe disadvantage and difficult to maintain defensive indexes for. |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
249
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:08:52 -
[45] - Quote
Still not keen; was hoping for the free-form 'sovless' system to be given more consideration - this one still seems contrived and immersion breaking.
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
Yroc Jannseen
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
114
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:18:23 -
[46] - Quote
Vyle Feelings wrote:Is there any intention of buffing systems that do not contain the resources necessary to increase indices? My alliance currently owns a system with 0 astroid belts, making it difficult to raise the military and industry indexes. We kill gate rats and run any anomalies that spawn, but it's slow going. Under the new mechanics, solar systems like this will be at a severe disadvantage and difficult to maintain defensive indexes for.
FA would drop a refinery in a system with no belts. What a cruel joke. |
Molenius Morrowinger
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
24
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:19:51 -
[47] - Quote
Vyle Feelings wrote:Is there any intention of buffing systems that do not contain the resources necessary to increase indices? My alliance currently owns a system with 0 astroid belts, making it difficult to raise the military and industry indexes. We kill gate rats and run any anomalies that spawn, but it's slow going. Under the new mechanics, solar systems like this will be at a severe disadvantage and difficult to maintain defensive indexes for.
Systems should not be all equal, otherwise what is the purpose of fighting? |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2379
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:23:49 -
[48] - Quote
Molenius Morrowinger wrote:Vyle Feelings wrote:Is there any intention of buffing systems that do not contain the resources necessary to increase indices? My alliance currently owns a system with 0 astroid belts, making it difficult to raise the military and industry indexes. We kill gate rats and run any anomalies that spawn, but it's slow going. Under the new mechanics, solar systems like this will be at a severe disadvantage and difficult to maintain defensive indexes for. Systems should not be all equal, otherwise what is the purpose of fighting? Yeah, but the bottom level of value doesn't need to be so low.
Is there really no belts there? |
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
2069
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:44:03 -
[49] - Quote
My only real concern about the new system is it does not get rid of the defensive grind for "no show" events. Basically its when an attacker reinforced everything but has no intention to show up for the capture event. This is still found in pos warfare where you have to rep the pos. This got do bad with dominion sov that they rebalanced hp over resist... but this is not going away with elinks. .. you still have to defense gtind your stuff even if the attacker dont show.
My solution for this is simple.give the 1st 5 capture annoms a timer if no enemy elink is activated in that window then the annoms go away and no defense grind.
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
CCP Goliath wrote:
Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
|
SpaceSaft
Capts Deranged Cavaliers Gentlemen's.Club
151
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:47:58 -
[50] - Quote
Looks very good.
I like the alliance "capital" system status a lot.
I don't think you have to take that away even after you incorporate industry and market activity into the multiplier.
Concerning the UI, did you consider putting "Upcoming vulnerabillity" time windows on the galaxy map?
Consider me hyped for summer.
The UI is still bad.
|
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Mildly Annoyed
3357
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:49:23 -
[51] - Quote
I'm still unclear on how the entosos link works. Say I have run through the warmup timer, then ran it for 5 more minutes. At that point I get interrupted by the enemy.
What happens to that 5 minutes? Does it persist forever? Does it decay? Does it just go away, and I have to start over once the enemy has been cleared off?
If it does persist in some way, what happens if the enemy uses an Entosos link? Do they first drive my time to zero before building up their own time? Or do they have their own timer, and its first to the total that wins? Or what?
On another note : I propose an Entosis link never destroys any structure. It only allows capture. In addition, all structures (ALL structures) have a self destruct system. Said system cannot function if an Entosis link is active on the structure, or the structure is in its timer.
Now, you want to capture? Use your link. You want to destroy? Capture, then push the button. You want to evacuate and leave nothing for the enemy? You better do it before the enemy shows up, and remember one spy with an Entosis link can cancel the self destruct.
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
Dr Cedric
Independent Miners Corporation Care Factor
98
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:50:32 -
[52] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:My only real concern about the new system is it does not get rid of the defensive grind for "no show" events. Basically its when an attacker reinforced everything but has no intention to show up for the capture event. This is still found in pos warfare where you have to rep the pos. This got do bad with dominion sov that they rebalanced hp over resist... but this is not going away with elinks. .. you still have to defense gtind your stuff even if the attacker dont show.
My solution for this is simple.give the 1st 5 capture annoms a timer if no enemy elink is activated in that window then the annoms go away and no defense grind.
From my understanding of the system (which is not all-inclusive) you only need 5/2 (T1/T2) minutes + 5 minutes to capture the sov beacon... and I think that all 5 of the beacons spawn at the same time (right?). Wouldn't that mean a max of 7 minutes of time across 5 characters to end the capture game.
Am I right on this?
Cedric
|
Vyle Feelings
Southern Cross Incorporated Flying Dangerous
8
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:51:59 -
[53] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Molenius Morrowinger wrote:Vyle Feelings wrote:Is there any intention of buffing systems that do not contain the resources necessary to increase indices? My alliance currently owns a system with 0 astroid belts, making it difficult to raise the military and industry indexes. We kill gate rats and run any anomalies that spawn, but it's slow going. Under the new mechanics, solar systems like this will be at a severe disadvantage and difficult to maintain defensive indexes for. Systems should not be all equal, otherwise what is the purpose of fighting? Yeah, but the bottom level of value doesn't need to be so low. Is there really no belts there?
Yah, zero belts. When I first got to the system and started poking around I thought they had moved the astroid belts option in the right click menu. I went to check dotlan and couldn't find the belts info there either. Then I realized it was just a garbage system. Poor truesec, no belts, but it's home ;). |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Mildly Annoyed
3357
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:53:40 -
[54] - Quote
Dr Cedric wrote:MeBiatch wrote:My only real concern about the new system is it does not get rid of the defensive grind for "no show" events. Basically its when an attacker reinforced everything but has no intention to show up for the capture event. This is still found in pos warfare where you have to rep the pos. This got do bad with dominion sov that they rebalanced hp over resist... but this is not going away with elinks. .. you still have to defense gtind your stuff even if the attacker dont show.
My solution for this is simple.give the 1st 5 capture annoms a timer if no enemy elink is activated in that window then the annoms go away and no defense grind. From my understanding of the system (which is not all-inclusive) you only need 5/2 (T1/T2) minutes + 5 minutes to capture the sov beacon... and I think that all 5 of the beacons spawn at the same time (right?). Wouldn't that mean a max of 7 minutes of time across 5 characters to end the capture game. Am I right on this? In think you need to capture more beacons than that. But it is still relatively fast.
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
2069
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:58:37 -
[55] - Quote
Dr Cedric wrote:MeBiatch wrote:My only real concern about the new system is it does not get rid of the defensive grind for "no show" events. Basically its when an attacker reinforced everything but has no intention to show up for the capture event. This is still found in pos warfare where you have to rep the pos. This got do bad with dominion sov that they rebalanced hp over resist... but this is not going away with elinks. .. you still have to defense gtind your stuff even if the attacker dont show.
My solution for this is simple.give the 1st 5 capture annoms a timer if no enemy elink is activated in that window then the annoms go away and no defense grind. From my understanding of the system (which is not all-inclusive) you only need 5/2 (T1/T2) minutes + 5 minutes to capture the sov beacon... and I think that all 5 of the beacons spawn at the same time (right?). Wouldn't that mean a max of 7 minutes of time across 5 characters to end the capture game. Am I right on this?
Even still you could literally have hundreds of these per region... and i though it wss 10 you have to capture per event. It makes defense into a chore which it should not be.
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
CCP Goliath wrote:
Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
|
Peter Sibiro
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
5
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:58:46 -
[56] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: I have good news for you! Other than the exact real time status of the fights for each structure (which will only be available in-client), we plan to make everything available via a combination of CREST and the XML API. You'll be able to look up the exit timers of every reinforced sov structure in the game (yours and everyone elses) via CREST whenever you want.
can't wait to get my hands on this API and show all timers here - http://npsi.rvb-services.com/
much love Fozzie! |
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
2069
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:59:41 -
[57] - Quote
Double post frw
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
CCP Goliath wrote:
Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
|
Sodamn In-sane
Phorever People
5
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 20:12:49 -
[58] - Quote
yeah yeah , blah blah positive feedback and all that bollocks,now can we have our jump fatigue off and range back ,now that you got us all sitting in our own owned space ty ty
RIP greyscale
Fozzie
job change is good but you're still a muppet
|
Rekkr Nordgard
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
451
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 20:16:00 -
[59] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Firstly, it will be possible for alliances to set custom vulnerability timers per structure. You've gone from no granularity to too much granularity. The problem with allowing every structure to have a different window is you make it a massive chore for attackers to strike. Now instead of "Alliance X is vulnerable from 12:00-16:00" you have "Alliance X, System ABC-D: TCU is vulnerable from 12:00-16:00, Station vulnerable from 16:00-20:00, IHUB is vulnerable from 20:00-0:00, System WXY-Z: TCU is vulnerable from 0:00-04:00, Station vulnerable from 04:00-08:00, IHUB is vulnerable from 08:00-12:00, System OMG-Y (on the other side of the constallation): TCU vulnerable from 12:00-16:00, Station vulnerable from 16:00-20:00, IHUB is vulnerable from 20:00-0:00, etc., etc., etc.!
This.
The maximum customability should on a one timer per system or constellation basis. An attacker should be able to make a clean sweep of a system's structures in one set of timers, not have to show up at three completely different times for the iHub, TCU, and station. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5221
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 20:21:11 -
[60] - Quote
Dr Cedric wrote:MeBiatch wrote:My only real concern about the new system is it does not get rid of the defensive grind for "no show" events. Basically its when an attacker reinforced everything but has no intention to show up for the capture event. This is still found in pos warfare where you have to rep the pos. This got do bad with dominion sov that they rebalanced hp over resist... but this is not going away with elinks. .. you still have to defense gtind your stuff even if the attacker dont show.
My solution for this is simple.give the 1st 5 capture annoms a timer if no enemy elink is activated in that window then the annoms go away and no defense grind. From my understanding of the system (which is not all-inclusive) you only need 5/2 (T1/T2) minutes + 5 minutes to capture the sov beacon... and I think that all 5 of the beacons spawn at the same time (right?). Wouldn't that mean a max of 7 minutes of time across 5 characters to end the capture game. Am I right on this?
5 or 2 minutes warm up cycle (if you're interrupted and miss a cycle, you need to redo this. For a capital, this is multiplied up)
Once the warmup cycle is complete, the capture timer starts ticking. (10 minutes multiplied by the defensive multiplier) needs to pass, with you uncontested, for the thing to be captured/reinforced/whatever. The moment someone (in the owning alliance) slaps another link on it, it's contested, and the timer stops ticking.
Woo! CSM X!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |