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) |
Thanatos Marathon
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
450
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 16:34:04 -
[601] - Quote
I like the idea of being able to hire some really crappy NPCs to defend mah citadel from a lone entosis pilot as long as the price is near nothing. |
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
1018
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 16:35:55 -
[602] - Quote
Morn Hylund wrote:I think overall the new structure ideas are great. I do think though the idea a citadel will not automatically defend itself - i.e someone has to literally be present now for defense is a poor design concept. Not everyone plays Eve 24/7 or should be required to. Who is going to spend the time and investment to maintain a citadel if some solo player can d**k with it so easily? Especially in WH space? The devblog clearly states there will be "vulnerability windows" like is the new Sov warfare. It uses an example of 2 hours, so if your structure has such a window it will be invulnerable to entosis links for 22h of the day. Plus there will be multiple reinforcement windows so if no one from your corp is online one day for some reason, you will have other chances to show up to defend.
If you can't manage that, you probably should make some more friends or stick to smaller structures in the first place. |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
1092
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 17:10:28 -
[603] - Quote
afkalt wrote: To be fair, at no point did anyone mention in the other blogs that defenses wouldn't fire without an meat sack in there. That's a pretty damned major thing and it's rather underhanded of CCP to not mention it before now.
Given you were the single most active poster emitting the cry of "if you can't have someone online to defend it, you don't deserve it" in the fozziesov devblog, I am caught midway between stunned silence and hysterical laughter. Wasn't this exactly what you were campaigning for? No NPC protection, bare minimal attacker effort required to create a threat? This is what you asked for, and given the weight of posts you made on the subject, I wouldn't be surprised if your voice contributed, even in some way, to this version of the rules.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1188
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 17:27:30 -
[604] - Quote
Yes indeed, however WH'ers do rather pose a different bag of cats, don't they?
Being online to defend is a very different beast in a wormhole where a mere two jumps away might cease to exist over the course of thirty seconds.
Null players can be ratting a few systems over, return to contest...WH'ers....yeah that's one HELL of a gamble.
The only common ground between null and WH, really, is the security status.
tl;dr: Null alliances living in the space stay in the zip code, the WH dudes cannot afford to even go out the front door. |
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team
89
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 17:46:26 -
[605] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Yes indeed, however WH'ers do rather pose a different bag of cats, don't they?
Being online to defend is a very different beast in a wormhole where a mere two jumps away might cease to exist over the course of thirty seconds.
Null players can be ratting a few systems over, return to contest...WH'ers....yeah that's one HELL of a gamble.
The only common ground between null and WH, really, is the security status.
tl;dr: Null alliances living in the space stay in the zip code, the WH dudes cannot afford to even go out the front door for fear it locks behind them.
Edit: I'm also not too proud to concede I overlooked WH dwellers, however in a *SOV* rebalance I'm not that surprised. Mind you, looks like CCP are too, so I'm at least in good company.
Here are my thoughts on WH they were supposed to be tough to live in but also offered the best rewards for time/isk. With these changes I do not think it is going to be half as bad as people are making it out to be. Why should one area of space not have to be there to defend its stuff just like the rest of EVE? People keep using the same argument that we might be in a different worm hole and we might not be able to get back. Well guess what we can not be on the other side of eve attacking people any longer either when our window time is open. |
Fzhal
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
22
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 17:48:26 -
[606] - Quote
Ocean Ormand wrote:CCP frequently throws a lot of time/money at an issue and comes up with something that is not what the players want and is just unfun. CQ, minigame/spew, and industry teams are recent examples. The industry teams were so bad that it was pulled back while CQ and the minigame appear to have been abandoned with no further development for them being made. Accordingly,it is never to late to rally against a bad idea. The entosis link as all the earmarks for being a bad idea. So even though CCP seems hell bent on implementing it, it is not too late to rally against it being spread beyond sov structures to the new-pos. While I understand why people are spouting doomsday predictions about these mechanics, I don't think they are warranted.
They said that not all size structures are going to necessarily have the same capture mechanics. They specifically said that the Medium mechanics might not require more than one Entosis session, which I think was a bit of an extreme possibility. XL are going to be tied to Sov and cost about as much as an Outpost. So only LARGE alliances will build these (or a few stupid people) and the region capture mode makes sense to me. L are sized for medium sized corps or alliances, and it is unclear whether the node-capture mechanic would be attached to these structures. Ultimately (IMHO), the type of capture mechanics will probably be determined by the cost of the structures. M are for solo or small corps.
With what CCP has said they are aiming for... Here is how I think the capture mechanics should be setup: XL - High/Low/Null Sec: Region capture mechanics with 3 stages as outlined by Sov mechanics. XL - Wormholes: IMHO - If some WH alliance is silly enough to put an XL in a hole, then they should have to capture nodes in their WH chain... with 3 stages as outlined by Sov mechanics. L - I see a few good options here, depending on the cost of the structure. (Remember that this is for medium sized corps/alliances) L (A) Region capture mechanics with 3 stages as outlined by Sov mechanics. L (B) Two-step process where the first step is Entosis-ing the structure and the second step capturing nodes scattered throughout multiple systems. L (C) Three-steps with 2-3 where someone has to capture nodes that are only in the same system as the structure. (I think this option will be chosen BECAUSE of wormholes...) [*] M - Two-step process where the second step is capturing nodes only in the same system as the structure. |
Fzhal
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
22
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 17:52:44 -
[607] - Quote
Fredric Wolf wrote:Here are my thoughts on WH they were supposed to be tough to live in but also offered the best rewards for time/isk. With these changes I do not think it is going to be half as bad as people are making it out to be. Why should one area of space not have to be there to defend its stuff just like the rest of EVE? People keep using the same argument that we might be in a different worm hole and we might not be able to get back. Well guess what we can not be on the other side of eve attacking people any longer either when our window time is open. Unless you remember that you can jump-clone, and wormholers can't... |
Obil Que
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
296
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 17:53:00 -
[608] - Quote
Fredric Wolf wrote:Here are my thoughts on WH they were supposed to be tough to live in but also offered the best rewards for time/isk. With these changes I do not think it is going to be half as bad as people are making it out to be. Why should one area of space not have to be there to defend its stuff just like the rest of EVE? People keep using the same argument that we might be in a different worm hole and we might not be able to get back. Well guess what we can not be on the other side of eve attacking people any longer either when our window time is open.
Look at it this way, if you go out to defend your structure from attack, do you have the chance to be irrevocably removed from the system you're defending? Not podded back to your station to get into another ship. Removed. Podding + hole closing = inaccessible system. It's not a OMG the sky is falling DEATH TO WH problem but it's a concern and like most, it hits smaller groups the hardest. Since Medium Citadels are supposed to be for "individuals and small corporations" per the blog, I'm not sure that it translates well when placed into wormhole space where the geography is unique from all other space.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1190
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 18:09:51 -
[609] - Quote
Obil Que wrote:Fredric Wolf wrote:Here are my thoughts on WH they were supposed to be tough to live in but also offered the best rewards for time/isk. With these changes I do not think it is going to be half as bad as people are making it out to be. Why should one area of space not have to be there to defend its stuff just like the rest of EVE? People keep using the same argument that we might be in a different worm hole and we might not be able to get back. Well guess what we can not be on the other side of eve attacking people any longer either when our window time is open. Look at it this way, if you go out to defend your structure from attack, do you have the chance to be irrevocably removed from the system you're defending? Not podded back to your station to get into another ship. Removed. Podding + hole closing = inaccessible system. It's not a OMG the sky is falling DEATH TO WH problem but it's a concern and like most, it hits smaller groups the hardest. Since Medium Citadels are supposed to be for "individuals and small corporations" per the blog, I'm not sure that it translates well when placed into wormhole space where the geography is unique from all other space.
I was going to post, but you beat me to it.
It is one thing to remain in the local area (3-4 jumps away is no big deal), i.e. the space owned as I argued for in the main thread, it is quite another thing for WH guys.
However, as it stands what WILL happen is holes will simply be closed at the window with OCD and alacrity the likes of which you've rarely seen before. If they can't go out, no-one is going in. Content denial for all is just crap.
There is a pretty fundamental difference to being "on the other side of eve", compared to one jump away with no pod express available.
Really, it's not a deal breaker, WH life won't crash and burn, alts will be employed as required but the existing ruleset is ... meh. Hell I mean unless I missed it, saving/killing a WH structure is going to be a nightmare of epic proportion with the points spawning in places you might never even be able to connect to.
Tbh, it is like they forgot WH space even existed when they came up with the concept. I was guilty of this too. |
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1081
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 18:24:39 -
[610] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Yes indeed, however WH'ers do rather pose a different bag of cats, don't they?
Being online to defend is a very different beast in a wormhole where a mere two jumps away might cease to exist over the course of thirty seconds.
Null players can be ratting a few systems over, return to contest...WH'ers....yeah that's one HELL of a gamble.
The only common ground between null and WH, really, is the security status.
tl;dr: Null alliances living in the space stay in the zip code, the WH dudes cannot afford to even go out the front door for fear it locks behind them.
Edit: I'm also not too proud to concede I overlooked WH dwellers, however in a *SOV* rebalance I'm not that surprised. Mind you, looks like CCP are too, so I'm at least in good company. "i am only in favor of things being a pain in the ass for not-me, when it comes to me suddenly i understand why it's dumb. but only for me, there will be no introspection here, good day sir." |
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1190
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 18:30:38 -
[611] - Quote
Well that was a stunningly mature response, bravo.
I have not changed my stance on sovnull, but I've realised WH are a different beast. I didn't see you all in that thread crying that wormholes would suffer either so you'll forgive me if I ignore your slight and continue with the thread.
Or I suppose I could sit with you guys and laugh at WH guys, but since that's a dickmove, I'll pass. It won't make any difference to me, I'm just trying to make sure that certain areas don't disproportionately suffer as a side effect of shattering the blue doughnut. |
Takeo Yanumano
State War Academy Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 18:53:05 -
[612] - Quote
Quote:By being granted the ability to dock in these new structures
This was some pages back, but I thought it good to respond. I missed the part where docking instead of sitting in a forcefield became a desirable thing for w-space dwellers.
Also, I live in w-space and didn't make a sound at all about fozziesov. I didn't oppose it, but I also didn't welcome it or laugh at null dwellers over it, as it simply did not apply to me. It would be nice if the same courtesy could be offered me and others who live in w-space when we express our concerns over our home space suddenly becoming effectively "null with randomized, moving stargates and still no jumpclones". |
Pook600
Defiance LLC Praetorian Directorate
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 18:53:30 -
[613] - Quote
Quit trying to reinvent the wheel about EVERYTHING.
I like the overalls on these, but the defense ideas are idiotic.
Stick to what is already possible with POS's. Let it defend itself with the weapons you put on board. Keep the notifications for structure aggression Leave the "vulnerability timer" for when it comes out of reinforcement mode.
Doing it any other way screws over the small players/corps and makes it harder to enjoy the game (that is what we're trying to accomplish, right?), than this proposed system of ridiculousness. |
Fzhal
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 19:06:32 -
[614] - Quote
I'm still curious as to how they are going to explain why node capture mechanics are needed in game. It'd be nice to get a blurb like:
Quote:Scope New Network: "New Eden's Engineers have discovered that the recently invented Entosis Link is able to circumvent the security measures of all Pilot Owned Structures. In reaction, the companies came together to find a solution to this problem. Simply stated, regardless of how security is placed into these systems, they will all still be susceptible because the security measures are centralized. New structures are currently being designed to take advantage of distributed security measures so that pilots will have a large degree of warning and ability to combat those that would attack their structures.
Again, in the long-term, they found no way to permanently stop Entosis Links from exploiting the vulnerabilities in New Eden's current structures. However, in the short-term, they have developed and deployed a software patch that should deter Entosis Link attacks long enough for new structures, with distributed security measures, to be manufactured and deployed to New Eden pilots." |
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team
89
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 19:14:55 -
[615] - Quote
Obil Que wrote:Fredric Wolf wrote:Here are my thoughts on WH they were supposed to be tough to live in but also offered the best rewards for time/isk. With these changes I do not think it is going to be half as bad as people are making it out to be. Why should one area of space not have to be there to defend its stuff just like the rest of EVE? People keep using the same argument that we might be in a different worm hole and we might not be able to get back. Well guess what we can not be on the other side of eve attacking people any longer either when our window time is open. Look at it this way, if you go out to defend your structure from attack, do you have the chance to be irrevocably removed from the system you're defending? Not podded back to your station to get into another ship. Removed. Podding + hole closing = inaccessible system. It's not a OMG the sky is falling DEATH TO WH problem but it's a concern and like most, it hits smaller groups the hardest. Since Medium Citadels are supposed to be for "individuals and small corporations" per the blog, I'm not sure that it translates well when placed into wormhole space where the geography is unique from all other space.
It would be a larger problem if you didn't have multiple timers on these. Yeah you will have to watch these a little more closely then what you are watching POS's but if you can not make the 2nd or 3rd timer where you have the exact time to be there. Then I can not help you.
Also we do not know what will be allowed or not allowed in WH's I would be 100% on board with allowing clones if you are killed in that system to spawn you in your citadel on these but if you are in another it would default back to your birth station.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1194
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 19:22:32 -
[616] - Quote
Fredric Wolf wrote:Obil Que wrote:Fredric Wolf wrote:Here are my thoughts on WH they were supposed to be tough to live in but also offered the best rewards for time/isk. With these changes I do not think it is going to be half as bad as people are making it out to be. Why should one area of space not have to be there to defend its stuff just like the rest of EVE? People keep using the same argument that we might be in a different worm hole and we might not be able to get back. Well guess what we can not be on the other side of eve attacking people any longer either when our window time is open. Look at it this way, if you go out to defend your structure from attack, do you have the chance to be irrevocably removed from the system you're defending? Not podded back to your station to get into another ship. Removed. Podding + hole closing = inaccessible system. It's not a OMG the sky is falling DEATH TO WH problem but it's a concern and like most, it hits smaller groups the hardest. Since Medium Citadels are supposed to be for "individuals and small corporations" per the blog, I'm not sure that it translates well when placed into wormhole space where the geography is unique from all other space. It would be a larger problem if you didn't have multiple timers on these. Yeah you will have to watch these a little more closely then what you are watching POS's but if you can not make the 2nd or 3rd timer where you have the exact time to be there. Then I can not help you.
If this has been answered previously, I apologise - I'm not trying to troll here.
Last I heard the contest nodes spawn across a constellation - obviously this is a nonsense concept for a WH - have we more detail on it I missed? An unsecured structure remains vulnerable if it passes the window unsecured so I can see this being a bit weird.
Partially OT, but close enough, I reckon. I hazard that wont work like that in WH, as it's a 'mare for both attackers and defenders alike but details like this are pretty key to providing meaningful feedback. |
Laner Irondoll
Viziam Amarr Empire
5
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 19:23:17 -
[617] - Quote
Basically "get another account for your POS alt ". |
Obil Que
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
303
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 19:23:41 -
[618] - Quote
afkalt wrote:If this has been answered previously, I apologise - I'm not trying to troll here.
Last I heard the contest nodes spawn across a constellation - obviously this is a nonsense concept for a WH - have we more detail on it I missed? An unsecured structure remains vulnerable if it passes the window unsecured so I can see this being a bit weird.
Partially OT, but close enough, I reckon. I hazard that wont work like that in WH, as it's a 'mare for both attackers and defenders alike but details like this are pretty key to providing meaningful feedback.
Constellation events are SOV and XL structure events only. M and L sized Citadels don't have this component. |
Fzhal
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 19:25:51 -
[619] - Quote
Fredric Wolf wrote:... if you are killed in that (WH) system (you should) spawn in your citadel on these, but if you are in another it would default back to your birth station. So let me get this straight... Your ideas have been shown to be demonstrably invalid "Well guess what we can not be on the other side of eve attacking people (in K-Space) any longer either when our window time is open." You don't even live in wormholes. And you think that you know what is best for people in wormholes?
Just take the high road and admit that you don't have the proper understanding to be able to suggest appropriate mechanics that should apply to wormholers... |
Rashaab merkava
Black Powder Arsenal
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 19:25:53 -
[620] - Quote
Will these citadel structures be able to be used in High-security space ? |
|
Obil Que
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
304
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 19:26:42 -
[621] - Quote
Fredric Wolf wrote:Obil Que wrote:Fredric Wolf wrote:Here are my thoughts on WH they were supposed to be tough to live in but also offered the best rewards for time/isk. With these changes I do not think it is going to be half as bad as people are making it out to be. Why should one area of space not have to be there to defend its stuff just like the rest of EVE? People keep using the same argument that we might be in a different worm hole and we might not be able to get back. Well guess what we can not be on the other side of eve attacking people any longer either when our window time is open. Look at it this way, if you go out to defend your structure from attack, do you have the chance to be irrevocably removed from the system you're defending? Not podded back to your station to get into another ship. Removed. Podding + hole closing = inaccessible system. It's not a OMG the sky is falling DEATH TO WH problem but it's a concern and like most, it hits smaller groups the hardest. Since Medium Citadels are supposed to be for "individuals and small corporations" per the blog, I'm not sure that it translates well when placed into wormhole space where the geography is unique from all other space. It would be a larger problem if you didn't have multiple timers on these. Yeah you will have to watch these a little more closely then what you are watching POS's but if you can not make the 2nd or 3rd timer where you have the exact time to be there. Then I can not help you. Also we do not know what will be allowed or not allowed in WH's I would be 100% on board with allowing clones if you are killed in that system to spawn you in your citadel on these but if you are in another it would default back to your birth station.
From past conversations on the topic, it seems the majority of wormholers are against jump style clones in wormholes but in favor of implant switching at structures.
As for the timers, the challenge for wormholers is that targets are those of opportunity most times. We see this with POCOs quite frequently. Attack one in your home system when you are taking up residence and you will likely be attacked by whoever is in your chain the day the timer expires because they happened to notice the timer going off. The first, second, or third reinforcement timer would have a similar effect on a Citadel. The person who attacked you the first time may not be the person attacking you the second or the timer may draw additional people to the fight possibly making it even harder to win/counter. |
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team
89
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 19:26:45 -
[622] - Quote
afkalt wrote:
If this has been answered previously, I apologise - I'm not trying to troll here.
Last I heard the contest nodes spawn across a constellation - obviously this is a nonsense concept for a WH - have we more detail on it I missed? An unsecured structure remains vulnerable if it passes the window unsecured so I can see this being a bit weird.
Partially OT, but close enough, I reckon. I hazard that wont work like that in WH, as it's a 'mare for both attackers and defenders alike but details like this are pretty key to providing meaningful feedback.
You also Left out the second part of my post. That would address most of people complaints |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1194
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 19:31:50 -
[623] - Quote
Obil Que wrote:afkalt wrote:If this has been answered previously, I apologise - I'm not trying to troll here.
Last I heard the contest nodes spawn across a constellation - obviously this is a nonsense concept for a WH - have we more detail on it I missed? An unsecured structure remains vulnerable if it passes the window unsecured so I can see this being a bit weird.
Partially OT, but close enough, I reckon. I hazard that wont work like that in WH, as it's a 'mare for both attackers and defenders alike but details like this are pretty key to providing meaningful feedback. Constellation events are SOV and XL structure events only. M and L sized Citadels don't have this component.
Thanks |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1151
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 21:13:55 -
[624] - Quote
As far as medium structures are concerned including any kind of sov 'capture the nodes' mechanism will mean they cannot be used by solo/small group corps. There is very little chance such a group could capture multiple points given that they would have to use an entosis link and thus defenceless. If this is supposed to get more people using structures it won't.
If mediums are to be used by small groups they need to be ehp based for desruction, not entosis linked. They shouldn't give any sov control though, giving the option of mediums being the go to for forward bases/small hisec groups. Large and above would be entosis based still. |
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
252
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 21:33:12 -
[625] - Quote
I really don't understand the thought process of removing POS towers, you just wasted more time re-animating the forcefields just to remove them from the game. that seems like wasted labor. |
Beta Maoye
64
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 21:46:11 -
[626] - Quote
1. How does customs office work in citadel? Do I need to build one citadel per planet for importing and exporting PI materials? 2. Can you tell me something about the Interbus service you are thinking of? |
slam34
Defiance LLC Praetorian Directorate
13
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 22:11:30 -
[627] - Quote
One of the best comments in this whole thread was the remark in regards how this all affects those of us who live in wormhole space. "you're not even supposed to be there..."
It is, in fact, part of the reason many of us actually do it. It was never intended, but we do it anyway. So when I see how these fine new structures and functions are going to have to be "shoe-horned" into W-space, I cringe. All of them showing up automaticly on overview and warpable? Did a Dev actually say that?
Clearly, applying these changes in wormhole space wasn't seriously considered as a design parameter.
Having said that, I see a lot of hard work and creativity applied productively to our game, and I applaud that. Dealing with these changes in the coming months will be quite exciting and should be a lot of fun. Thank you CCP! I just hope I can continue to enjoy them from Wormhole space. I am now going to look for some cheese to go with my whine. :)
-áPeople are people. No matter what country, culture, religion, political party, business or communtiy you encounter in your travels, you will never find a shortage of people who will make it their personal mission in life to tell you how to live yours.
|
Fzhal
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2015.05.15 22:20:56 -
[628] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:As far as medium structures are concerned including any kind of sov 'capture the nodes' mechanism will mean they cannot be used by solo/small group corps. There is very little chance such a group could capture multiple points given that they would have to use an entosis link and thus defenceless. If this is supposed to get more people using structures it won't.
If mediums are to be used by small groups they need to be ehp based for desruction, not entosis linked. They shouldn't give any sov control though, giving the option of mediums being the go to for forward bases/small hisec groups. Large and above would be entosis based still. AFAIK the only thing affecting Sov will be the Sov deployable.
It sounds like all other structures will be deployable regardless of whether you have Sov. Which brings up a good question. Will XL structures (outpost sized) be re-scoopable? If so, we're talking about mobile outposts that could be used as a leapfrogging base of operations. The next question would be what happens to everyone's stuff when scooped? (I'm guessing the destruction mechanic would be used.) |
TurAmarth ElRandir
H.E.L.P.e.R
72
|
Posted - 2015.05.16 02:50:55 -
[629] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Quote: Like I said, it depends a lot on the timers and I'm assuming if you're solo you are in high sec, so in part wardec mechanics too. Fortunately the asset safety means although you lose your structure, you won't lose everything inside it.
If you cannot defend your structure though, you won't be able to keep it, but we want to give you every reasonable chance to defend it including the more casual players.
...I'm assuming if you're solo you are in high sec...
Uh... hate to burst yer bubble man but due of the Wonder of No Damned Sov Crap plus Wormhole Spawning Mechanics... one hell of a LOT of the corps in low to mid range holes are really small to middlin sized corps... and yes, some are even OMCs with an army of alts...and in those if the Account owner aint logged on, aint NO ONE logged on...
This "I ass-u-me" of yours will live up to it's name and screw really small gangs in low class holes... Hell I'm in a middling sized corp (wayyyy moar alts then living players) and half the time I'm logged on alone... with no back up and none to jabber in... add to this that our small number of players are spread from New Zealand all the long way round to the west coast of the US... well, life aint easy in holes... and from the sound of the above, ya'll are about to make it quite a bit tougher for small groups in Anoikis...
You really need to look long and hard at how this is all gonna affect SMALL gang/corp gameplay and life in Anoikis if you don't wanna accidentally screw us hard... if you really do want to live up to the promise made here... LetGÇÖs Talk About Emergence.
TurAmarth ElRandir
Anoikis Merc, Salvager, Logibro
and Unrepentant Blogger
Fly Wreckless and see you in the Sky =/|)=
http://turamarths-evelife.blogspot.com/
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
612
|
Posted - 2015.05.16 02:58:16 -
[630] - Quote
Epsyla wrote: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. How about Sanctuary Sphere for those in the vicinity of structure ( and those docked or moored Aegis Coupling?
All the best minds and ideas are from Hedion University.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
|
|
|
|
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 |