Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 53 post(s) |
Dominique Vasilkovsky
BFG Tech
240
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 10:17:05 -
[481] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Chirality Tisteloin wrote:Good evening, for clarification: docking in Citadels means the same as using the invulnerability link, right? very interesting concepts! Thanx for sharing the blog. No docking puts you inside and safe, but you still see the grid outside the station. The invulnerability link (we need a new name for this, taking suggestions) provides security while you are undocked and mobile around the structure. Remote shield extender?
Forcefield projector?
Dominique Vasilkovsky EVEboard
Once known as:
Mashie Saldana sold - Anastasia Rigel sold - Monica Foulkes sold
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31473
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 10:20:59 -
[482] - Quote
159Pinky wrote:Rain6637 wrote:That's a valid sentiment but I'm guessing you're not an industrialist.
Industry involves a practically unmanageable volume of materials, and it's nearly impossible to evacuate everything in a matter of two timers. A month, even. Caches of ships and materials that you really have no place else to put them, other than NPC stations. If you don't make considerations for assets, it would be a profound nerf to player owned structures.
You have to move all the stuff in the structure, so why aren't you able to move it out? It's all about planning. Then again, you could always defend your structure. Or you could run your operation out of an NPC station. The Interbus moving could be interesting, but then those convoys should be vulnerable to player attacks. So the gamble woud be: do I stay and fight and not evacuate or do I move them with Interbus and risk losing the stuff? It might have been moved there by buy orders. That's usually how large stockpiles accumulate, by one player paying other players ISK to sell it to them or move it there. The problem with saying "just do that to get it out" is the time crunch. Buy orders and stockpiling takes days, weeks, months. The opposite direction is impossible in two timers. At some point there is not enough ISK or freighter pilots in the game to move X amount of stuff like that. The result is an unwillingness to use player structures, and industry stays in NPC stations. That's bad, and it's why I say this is a profound nerf to industry and market in player structures.
Sweeping destruction of everything in a structure is bad for content. Move it, deny the enemy access, sure, but let them have access to it again so they can fight with it, which is more content.
The math of deleting people's stuff is amusing, but it's bad for activity in the game.
Help, I can't download EVE
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
1078
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 10:27:40 -
[483] - Quote
159Pinky wrote: The Interbus moving could be interesting, but then those convoys should be vulnerable to player attacks. So the gamble woud be: do I stay and fight and not evacuate or do I move them with Interbus and risk losing the stuff?
There is a certain appeal to NPC evac fleets of destroyable haulers scrambling out of an exploding station, and balanced right could be fun for everyone.
Say, make them bubble-immune and warp-stabbed to a certain level, but autopilot to their destination, so they can be attacked but aren't automatically all wiped out by a couple of dictors locking their route down. Give them a maximum capacity but with a proviso that any single ship over that size goes in its own hauler, so that if someone has a lot of stuff, they have it divided across multiple haulers, and there isn't an obvious "there is a cap ship in this one" flashing sign - this would mean more haulers, so a greater chance of some of it getting through, even if a fleet tries to take out as much as they can.
And a personal malicious wish, make the haulers "registered" to the character whose stuff is in it, whether thats so it shows up on their killboard if killed, or more so that particularly unscupulous attackers with a grudge can deliberately target their favourite enemies stuff amoungst the swarm of haulers
|
Samsara Nolte
Random Thinking Union Random Thinking
23
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 10:41:31 -
[484] - Quote
Well i carefully read what was written in the devblog and what answers were given to alot of unanswered questions the blog left us with.
Living in a wormhole i must say i-¦m not anticipating this in the least. Since this proposal creates some major concerns.
The first on being. I don-¦t like docking games. As proabally doesn-¦t any Wormhole resident. One of the mayor reason i never lieved prolonged in NPC null or low security space. But this iteration could force us into those things. Those Citadel structures will, to what i understood, work in many regards like stations, which are armed. So if i undock say for example in a paper thin scan frigate somebody in rocket fitted bomber and his friends might sit outside the station uncloack and lock me and shoot at me. With the server tick being what it is, the instant capability of Bombers to start locking a target i might, especially if an interdictor is with them, have no chance to redock. Resulting in the loss of my ship inclusive my Pod since the ejection causes an session change timer. And all this will happen under the guns of said citadel because it will take forever to lock some small frigs. And since i-¦m proabably after the undock within 2500 meters of the structure cloaking isn-¦t even an option. And in null i atleast know after a short glance on local if this might happen.
I mean atm you can kill ships circling Posses with Artillary Tornados before most gun are even able to lock you ...
sarcasm on "seems like a really fun mechanic for w-space where you aren-¦t allowed to jump clone back in." sarcasm off
Then as it was mentioned GÇô you are considering to have indices by default have higher numbers in w-space an low. Hmm seems nice for the ones living in there except that those indices are, because of the lack of sov and there for a lack of assignment of said indices to a specific party, usabale by everybody. So aou might have lived in the same wormhole for years and are having the same indices as someone who placed a structure there a day ago. Seems pretty fair on so many levels. At least atm we were able to hamper invaders by having towers at the moons in our system. Forcing them to commit to their invasion since they needed to at least kill one tower to gain a foothold into our home. The couldn-¦t just establish an outpost. But with the ability to place these structures everywhere this is longer possible. What might mean that we might face trolls, who plant outpost by us GÇô which then requires us to take them out. This might be fun gameplay once in a while. But i fear this might happen far more often than i-¦m hoping for. I-¦m not really into this whole king of the hill domination GÇô and if i were i would move into nullsec where this will be my everyday life. I-¦m honestly not certain why we wormholers get every step along the way this game develops nearly the same mechanics as they do in null but with consistent nerves to those. How about a different appraoch to those whole thing - Instead of trimming your intention and interation for nullsec to w-space. You start creating something that adjusted to the needs of those actually living there.
By the way have you at all considered what this new Citadel Structures will do to Shattered Wormholes ? Might be another thing you might have missed.
Hmm waht i also have been wondering GÇô what is gonna happen to those expensive faction tower we w-space residents normally use. I mean the announcemnet of those Citadel structures alone probably resulted in decreasing the value of those things by a huge margin. Will those get reimbursed in any way ? And what size of those Citadel structures will we be able to place in w-space up to large or even X-Large structres and what are they supposed to cost GÇô so that we can start to save our isk ... |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31474
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 11:00:05 -
[485] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:159Pinky wrote: The Interbus moving could be interesting, but then those convoys should be vulnerable to player attacks. So the gamble woud be: do I stay and fight and not evacuate or do I move them with Interbus and risk losing the stuff?
There is a certain appeal to NPC evac fleets of destroyable haulers scrambling out of an exploding station, and balanced right could be fun for everyone. Say, make them bubble-immune and warp-stabbed to a certain level, but autopilot to their destination, so they can be attacked but aren't automatically all wiped out by a couple of dictors locking their route down. Give them a maximum capacity but with a proviso that any single ship over that size goes in its own hauler, so that if someone has a lot of stuff, they have it divided across multiple haulers, and there isn't an obvious "there is a cap ship in this one" flashing sign - this would mean more haulers, so a greater chance of some of it getting through, even if a fleet tries to take out as much as they can. And a personal malicious wish, make the haulers "registered" to the character whose stuff is in it, whether thats so it shows up on their killboard if killed, or more so that particularly unscupulous attackers with a grudge can deliberately target their favourite enemies stuff amoungst the swarm of haulers This is a nice mix of content and loss, I think. Converts people's stuff to PVE.
But I'm also not an industrialist so I am still biased toward destruction.
Help, I can't download EVE
|
Helios Panala
50
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 11:15:07 -
[486] - Quote
Oh, this looks good.
Wait...
Guns don't auto fire?
Different structures have to be placed miles apart?
We have to use Entosis on them instead of guns?
...
This Citadel thing doesn't look as good as it did at first glance. Entosis capture seemed very artificial by Eve standards but it did at least seem like it would help null in the long run. I don't see why Entosis has to be used for everything, is using the sov-wand going to eventually be the way we take customs offices as well? |
Sinclair Spectrum ZX
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 11:18:12 -
[487] - Quote
Are you still planning to do Mooring? As mentioned in a previous devblog.
|
Skinta
Tiana Enterprises Mortum Ravagers
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 11:37:33 -
[488] - Quote
All entosis and no HP bashing? Won't somebody please think about the Dreadnaughts!
'I'm Skinta, from the Dreadnaughts Trust. This is Morry, he is a Moros that was abandonned by his owner after entosis ravaged the galaxy. We took him in and now and now he runs and plays with his own kind in our specialist capital ship habitat. Here at Dreadnaughts Trust we won't ever put a healthy Dreadnaught down. But we need your help to keep them healthy and fed. For just 2 million isk a month, you can sponsor a Dreadnaught. You will receive regular updates on how they are doing, aswell as our monthly newsletter. In addition if you sign up today you will receive this cuddly Pheonix, free of charge!. Thank you.'
So yeah whats the plan for Dreads with these changes? Other than cleaning up the old dead sticks. |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
1079
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 11:38:04 -
[489] - Quote
Helios Panala wrote: Entosis capture seemed very artificial by Eve standards but it did at least seem like it would help null in the long run. I don't see why Entosis has to be used for everything, is using the sov-wand going to eventually be the way we take customs offices as well?
I would guess yes.
It's been fairly obvious since sov-wands got dropped on us that it was going to replace all forms of structure grinding everywhere, simply because if it doesn't, it creates a strange straddling of old and new that would place formerly "anti-structure" ships (ie: Dreads and Supercarriers) in a bad place as their old characteristics would need to be preserved to prevent the little structure grinding that remains from being a pain in the ass. Once sov-wands have replaced all forms of structure grinding, those ships can be rebalanced purely on a pvp platform, without having to worry about balancing against stationary massive hp structures.
Likewise, POSes as they exist were doomed the second we saw stats for sov-wands. Note the range of a T1 sov-wand - it is less than the radius of a POS shield, so it cant physically activate on a POS, so there was never any chance the POS as it currently exists would be tolerated once the move to sov-wands was instituted.
I'm kinda impressed with how slyly this was done by our dear devs, keeping quiet on this stage of things so that the wormholer and small group players fully support fozziesov and sov-wands, completely ignorant of the fact they were about to get a good big bite of that lemon too.
|
Grorious Reader
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 11:49:00 -
[490] - Quote
Quote:The invulnerability link (we need a new name for this, taking suggestions)
I have a couple suggestions...
Ablative Intra-site Docking Shield Or perhaps...
Citadel Wide Energy Abolition Field |
|
Memphis Baas
398
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 11:49:04 -
[491] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote: There is a certain appeal to NPC evac fleets of destroyable haulers scrambling out of an exploding station, and balanced right could be fun for everyone.
There is an appeal, but there is no way to balance a PVP fleet vs. PVE content. Everything PVE in this game is figured out, posted on the internets, and then farmed. Look at incursions, sleeper content, even the upcoming drifters with their mini-superweapon.
You have the potential of billions of ISK in loot coming out of a station wreck inside stupid-AI untanked transports, vs. an 800+ fleet with enough firepower to blow up titans and the station it just destroyed. How the hell can CCP balance that?
Even if they make Interbus liked by all the empires, so shooting the transports makes you -10 standings across the board, it won't matter.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31476
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 11:49:09 -
[492] - Quote
Maybe it would be better to allow an NPC hauler pickup to be scheduled after the structure is destroyed. Potentially a lot of stuff needs to be moved, and even by freighter loads it could be in the hundreds of ships. If this happened while the station was being destroyed, that would be bad for TiDi, and maybe a bit too imbalanced toward the attackers who already on site and have control of the grid.
All your stuff in a structure wreck is kind of a non starter anyway, if you have a lot of volume. It might as well be stuck there or destroyed if it takes freighter loads to move out of what is now hostile space.
Help, I can't download EVE
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
1079
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 11:50:58 -
[493] - Quote
Skinta wrote:All entosis and no HP bashing? Won't somebody please think about the Dreadnaughts!
...
So yeah whats the plan for Dreads with these changes? Other than cleaning up the old dead sticks.
I'm personally hopeful that this has massively benefitial implications for the entire Capital and Supercapital line. Massive hp structures kind of locked capital play in to a high damage / high hitpoint game. Massive hp structures required ships that could deal vast amounts of hp damage (Dreads and Supers), which mean't the even bigger classes of ships (Supers and Titans) needed equally immense amounts of hp to avoid getting insta-nuked by damage amounts that were balanced on the hp of stations and POSes.
With structure hp gone, it is no longer a limiting factor. Fighters, Fighter Bombers and Dreadnaughts don't need to inflict the amount of damage they do. Dreads and Supers can be completely repurposed entirely in to a pvp combat role, and be balanced in that role without having to constantly consider station hps, and the hp pools of Titans and Supers can be cut dramatically to suit. Maybe I'm being massively optimistic here, but we all know fozziesov is virtually removing capitals from the sovreignty game, so something has to be done with them, and I like to think CCP isn't completely brushing them under a carpet and hoping for the best, given how big a part of the game they have been, and how many long-term players almost exclusively play in this field.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
31476
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 11:55:07 -
[494] - Quote
I have my eyes on a Hel, purely for the ship maintenance bay for the rest of my gang, and the repair bonuses. The DPS is a huge extra for my purposes, which is why I think supers need to be split between DPS and support.
For one, jump drives should be a T2 function (like jump freighters vs normal freighters).
Normal carriers too.
Help, I can't download EVE
|
M1k3y Koontz
Bio Troll Surely You're Joking
754
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 11:55:55 -
[495] - Quote
Ocean Ormand wrote:
In short, my read of it is that this makes the grind more tedious and boring - you circle the tower for an indeterminate time while the tower shoots at you but you cant shoot back at it because your guns dont work on it. That is going to get old real fast, especially with the multiple mandatory reinforcement cycles. Add to that no real loot, and it is just going to be a drag.
So whats changed? Bashing structues is boring and will continue to be boring. But now it doesn't require dreadnoughts or several hours to do it.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Helios Panala
50
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 12:00:44 -
[496] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Helios Panala wrote: Entosis capture seemed very artificial by Eve standards but it did at least seem like it would help null in the long run. I don't see why Entosis has to be used for everything, is using the sov-wand going to eventually be the way we take customs offices as well?
I would guess yes. It's been fairly obvious since sov-wands got dropped on us that it was going to replace all forms of structure grinding everywhere, simply because if it doesn't, it creates a strange straddling of old and new that would place formerly "anti-structure" ships (ie: Dreads and Supercarriers) in a bad place as their old characteristics would need to be preserved to prevent the little structure grinding that remains from being a pain in the ass. Once sov-wands have replaced all forms of structure grinding, those ships can be rebalanced purely on a pvp platform, without having to worry about balancing against stationary massive hp structures. Likewise, POSes as they exist were doomed the second we saw stats for sov-wands. Note the range of a T1 sov-wand - it is less than the radius of a POS shield, so it cant physically activate on a POS, so there was never any chance the POS as it currently exists would be tolerated once the move to sov-wands was instituted. I'm kinda impressed with how slyly this was done by our dear devs, keeping quiet on this stage of things so that the wormholer and small group players fully support fozziesov and sov-wands, completely ignorant of the fact they were about to get a good big bite of that lemon too.
I don't see why sov-wands and guns can't exist side by side.
Is it abandoned? Then wave your sov-wand it. Is it a customs office, medium citadel or large citadel? Then shoot it or sov-wand it, whichever is most within your groups capabilities. Is it a XL-citadel or sov macguffin? Then clear the field and sov-wand it.
I can live with everything being Entosis, but I'd very much prefer my Citadels guns to fire on their own even if it meant they can be destroyed. If the tower is manned and stocked it's still an indestructible turret as whoever is manning it can just keeps chucking new guns on it. |
M1k3y Koontz
Bio Troll Surely You're Joking
754
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 12:42:20 -
[497] - Quote
Deep Nine wrote:Quote:XL are going to be as hard to build as a player owned station. I think that fact alone will limit them. Yes, it would Limit them specifically to huge alliances and powerful corperations, which money and resources are no object for. They would be mass manufactured and inevitably it would be abused by organizations to augment and solidify their already staggering power, forever sealing null against any type of incursion from almost any type of outside force, not grand fathered in.
If using outposts, the current version of citadels, was going to be abused to reinforce hold over space people would've done it already. Your fear appears overblown
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Orm Magnustat
Red Serpent Industries
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 12:59:28 -
[498] - Quote
Fzhal wrote:Orm Magnustat wrote: ..................
[/list] worst of all: the "asset safety" some genius came up with when my POS/structure gets blown up ... seriously devs, have you totally lost it ?? This goes against the core fundamentals that make up this game and set it apart from the competition. If someone blows up my fortress HE DESERVES the loot! .....................................................................
Your post amazes me. Yes, I am amazed at how a person can play a sci-fi game with FTL travel/communication, shields, lasers, wormholes, cynos, and clone swapping... Oh, and spaceships! How this person can be okay with all of those things, yet find it unrealistic for someone in EVE to invent a system to fit into a FIFTY KILOMETER STRUCTURE that would safeguard items in the event of a catastrophic hull breach... News flash! CCP tracks asset loss and can easily see how many die-hard pvpers, like you, quit after losing a significant portion of their stuff... But no, lets design a game around your bias and feelings. In order of importance, CCP is a profit driven company that makes a game that is a sci-fi, sim, hardcore pvp niche product.
I can imagine lot of things, even materializing angels farting thunder and lightning to safe my neck ... but would they really fit in here just because i can imagine? Up until now anytime in EVE you move stuff out of an npc station or do your industry in a POS you have to be aware of the risk of loosing it all.... This new safty capsule really changes this paradigm that put EVE apart from other "games" (and as you yourself used the term - makes it a "sim"ulation in my eyes).
Please take a step back from your SciFi rant - if everything has to be possible just cause its a such a fantastic universe then ofc you can have your "unbreakable barrier", but others with the same logic should have their "all-breaking weapons". I dont like either (and so does logic).
On a sidenote - you couldnt be more wrong, I-¦m far from a PVP player. I just like the game for its realistic risk concept and true simulation character.
|
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
3539
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 13:20:03 -
[499] - Quote
That's what I said about Rubicon 18 months ago:
Quote:Frankly, adding more space to a game where most of the space is empty for good reasons, looks like a tad pointless.
While CCP Seagull talks about gold at the hills, here in our hisec town the sewers clog continuously and it's becoming difficult to find a decent loaf of bread for a fair price.
And I wonder why should we care of "space colonization". Why add more nullsec? F*ck it all already. I want to walk in stations.
And here we are...
73% of EVE characters stay in high security space. 62% of EVE subscribers barely PvP. 40% of all new accounts just "level up their Ravens". Probably that's why PvE content in EVE Online is sub-par and CCP is head over heels for PvP...
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
10971
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 14:02:31 -
[500] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
I'm kinda impressed with how slyly this was done by our dear devs, keeping quiet on this stage of things so that the wormholer and small group players fully support fozziesov and sov-wands, completely ignorant of the fact they were about to get a good big bite of that lemon too.
lol, isn't that how it always happens?
"Yay, CCP is doing stuff to other people and it's great...wait, what do you mean it's going to happen to me too? WTF? Bad idea....BAD IDEA!!!! |
|
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
245
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 14:03:48 -
[501] - Quote
im just going to fawking laugh hard when fozzie and ccp rise.. (yeah you rise don't think we forgot about you) when they try to show pretty charts and pies avoiding the incredible amount of drop subs due to stations blowing up and folks losing their things.
you have not once provided any information on why one should even keep sov.. after these changes go in..
you're making it to where blobs upon blobs will blow up stations just for the hell of it..
cant wait to see that Pie Chart of cancelations.. lets see if your faction ships and fuzzy-sov keeps subs up.
good luck with that bruh... |
Ocean Ormand
Bagel and Lox
4
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 14:12:36 -
[502] - Quote
Maybe i'm wrong about this, but as I understand it, these structures will be anchorable anywhere in a system. So for a busy system there may be dozens if not hundreds of individual structures, and if present history is a guide, many of which will be abandoned. Its hard enough now figuring out where a player is in a system; with the new system how are you supposed to find people? Doesn't this new ccp proposal cause a major break down in the idea of eve being a web with choke points where folk can be located? |
M1k3y Koontz
Bio Troll Surely You're Joking
755
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 14:29:35 -
[503] - Quote
Ocean Ormand wrote:Maybe i'm wrong about this, but as I understand it, these structures will be anchorable anywhere in a system. So for a busy system there may be dozens if not hundreds of individual structures, and if present history is a guide, many of which will be abandoned. Its hard enough now figuring out where a player is in a system; with the new system how are you supposed to find people? Doesn't this new ccp proposal cause a major break down in the idea of eve being a web with choke points where folk can be located?
Abandoned ones will be easier to destroy, since we're switching from DPS requirement to a flat time requirement.
Milla Goodpussy wrote:im just going to fawking laugh hard when fozzie and ccp rise.. (yeah you rise don't think we forgot about you) when they try to show pretty charts and pies avoiding the incredible amount of drop subs due to stations blowing up and folks losing their things.
you have not once provided any information on why one should even keep sov.. after these changes go in..
you're making it to where blobs upon blobs will blow up stations just for the hell of it..
cant wait to see that Pie Chart of cancelations.. lets see if your faction ships and fuzzy-sov keeps subs up.
good luck with that bruh...
"Captain, I've run out of jars for all the tears, what do I do now?!"
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Spugg Galdon
Nisroc Angels
671
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 14:44:40 -
[504] - Quote
I'm a little bi-curious.
When trying to reinforce a structure you use an entosis link
The structure reinforces and we switch to capture the flag in order to "take/Destroy" the structure.
The capture points are spread over the constellation.
In W-Space, how do you spread out the capture points? |
Spugg Galdon
Nisroc Angels
671
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 14:46:01 -
[505] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
"Captain, I've run out of jars for all the tears, what do I do now?!"
"Drink them straight from the source, Scotty"
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
581
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 14:53:46 -
[506] - Quote
Romel Erata wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote: 2. I think we will show them on the onboard scanner to warp to.
I haven't read the blog in its entirely yet, but how are these structures going to be deployed anywhere, if the only available points are the warpable solar system objects like the sun, moons, planets and all intersecting lines between them, i.e. someone will ALWAYS pass your structure in warp as it lies on the warp path between two objects, unless you deploy something like 2000 km off a planet's warp in point. In other words, you can't have positioning above the solar system's plane, unless you have old Deep safe spot bookmarks from many moons ago. You can get to all sorts of interesting positions with careful bookmark-warp-bookmarking. Not sure if anyone has brought this up yet but does this mean I can set essentially a stationary pipe-bomb with an XL Citadel and a bubble?
Dat is a good point. "Oh sorry, your new-POS-system-station-thingy appears to be in the way of your travel direction."The Future is UP! CCP pls a++ püñ Gùò_Gùòa++püñ gib warp 2 own Scanner Probe
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Philip Ogtaulmolfi
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
17
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 14:56:31 -
[507] - Quote
Spugg Galdon wrote:I'm a little bi-curious.
When trying to reinforce a structure you use an entosis link
The structure reinforces and we switch to capture the flag in order to "take/Destroy" the structure.
The capture points are spread over the constellation.
In W-Space, how do you spread out the capture points?
Interesting question. Connected wormholes?
Then, the fleet taking the node in another wh could be cut off, by accident or on purpouse. |
davet517
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
80
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 14:57:16 -
[508] - Quote
I feel like I'm missing a couple of puzzle pieces.
Do you need sov to anchor these? If you lose sov what happens to them? Do these have to be captured to take sov?
If they have nothing to do with Sov, does that mean that someone can anchor them all over your space to have a place to screw with you from?
It looks to me like you're designing your way in a circle back to Dominion sov, only worse. Still got multiple reinforcement to grind through, only now we have a tiny little attack window to do it, and, you've given the ability to have multiple windows, giving defenders ample tools to play attack-window-fu.
I think you started out with an idea that would have shaken things up, but then the bowing and scraping to the powers that be started, and it's been watered down to the point that it'll change nothing. Are you really that afraid of making the big players mad?
You're game is slowly dying because of stasis. You have entrenched power structures that control the game, and a growing perception that we've reached the game's end-state. You'd better look to that if you want to re-energize your player base. This isn't it. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
582
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 14:57:25 -
[509] - Quote
Philip Ogtaulmolfi wrote:Spugg Galdon wrote:I'm a little bi-curious.
When trying to reinforce a structure you use an entosis link
The structure reinforces and we switch to capture the flag in order to "take/Destroy" the structure.
The capture points are spread over the constellation.
In W-Space, how do you spread out the capture points? Interesting question. Connected wormholes? Then, the fleet taking the node in another wh could be cut off, by accident or on porpouse.
You don't do silly Sov things.
You RF it.
You nuke it.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Philip Ogtaulmolfi
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
17
|
Posted - 2015.05.14 15:03:36 -
[510] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
You don't do silly Sov things.
You RF it.
You nuke it.
Perhaps is time for a survey among the wh dwellers to decide if structures should be limited to medium citadel only conquered/destroyed by hp grinding.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |