| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Jita Alt666
631
   |
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:31:00 -
[1] - Quote
Terminal Insanity wrote:I agree POS warfare is tired, but what could they possibly replace it with?
It would have to give the owner of the POS a chance to defend it, and it cant just fall over in 30 minutes and be over... So what kind of mechanics do you propose?
Shoot-able ihubs anchored away from defence orientated structures that have level over rides corresponding to the systems military and industrial levels.
Level 5 approx 2.5mil EHP knocking it to level 4 removes the benefits of military and industrial 5 upgrades until its either repped up or passively recharges
Level 4 approx 5.0mil EHP knocking it to level 3 removes the benefits of military and industrial 4 upgrades until its either repped up or passively recharges
Level 3 approx 7.5mil EHP knocking it to level 2 removes the benefits of military and industrial 3 upgrades until its either repped up or passively recharges
Level 2 approx 10mil EHP knocking it to level 1 removes the benefits of military and industrial 2 upgrades until its either repped up or passively recharges
Level 1 - has reinforce timers - you are fighting for sov.
Edit: altering numbers as numbers are a little low |
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:38:00 -
[2] - Quote
SmashTech wrote:Took me a moment to think about that and then I concluded that it would be an improvement over the current system.
10 BCs who do 400DPS would take 10minutes or so to knock a level 5 to level 4 and that would knock the number of sanctums/havens down in a good sec system.
1. Defend your space if you wish to make isk off of it.
2. Small gangs are worthwhile. |
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.05 23:44:00 -
[3] - Quote
Shivus Tao wrote:Retooling the ihubs to be the core of system sovereignty is a good idea. It would also enable the addtion of constellation and regional command hubs for a proper feel of home systems.
I've done some modelling on that. The problem I see is "Home System" = Blob Central.
One option I thought could have potential is: link the total EHP of ihubs across a constellation. When the combined constellation ihubs lose the equivalent EHP of a complete level 5 ihub a random ihub in the constellation goes off line. |
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 00:03:00 -
[4] - Quote
SmashTech wrote:It would always be "blob central" as you describe it because people are supposed to be living there.
Yeah I understand that. The problem would be you guys would think:
Don't worry about I30- and 2O9G- let Evoke grind their way through, the constellation hub is JU-, just stack up 200 guys in there at all times and have the Cap fleet ready to jump from where ever they are stationed 2-K?
Amazing its the same as H-W but one for every constellation. |
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 00:14:00 -
[5] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:I don't see why it would have to be defined on a pr constellation basis. Why not just go back to the old system and have SOV be descriptive rather than presctiptive? If you want to turtle up in one system when you're attacked, fine, go ahead. Have fun living in ~one system~ then. I'm sure that'll be hella fun. is that not enough? Well, control more systems then.
I understand the concept. I can not picture it in reality. The old system was he who has most pos wins.
|
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 00:20:00 -
[6] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Fairly certain that the system prior to that was, you control the systems you can keep military superiority over. Kind of like NPC null is now, only you can do more with it.
That would also be a lot more sandboxy in my mind than today's abortion of a SOV system, but I'm not sure we'll ever see that kind of system in conquerable space again. vOv
Ah true. I agree not sure we will see that ever again, because how would we measure that in these heady days of 50 alliance titans on line at a single time.
|
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 01:12:00 -
[7] - Quote
I'm not sure if my untested ideas that I thought were good are being trolled into non existence by you two. |
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 01:27:00 -
[8] - Quote
Vyl Vit wrote:Large Collidable Object wrote:I agree - originally, the winter expansion was supposed to be a nullsec revamp, which we didn't see much of.
Anyway -a lot of nice little changes along witha few bad ones were delivered, so I there's enough left to do for summer, as long as they don't start doing 1000$ spaceparbie-jeans for 18 months again... This post epitomizes the holier than thou minority that speak with an imagined authority from a delusional database. Horrible avatar, btw. You win the ugly contest by a mile. GJ.
Your post epitomizes the off topic direct personal insults that the majority of these forums speak with. It is also contains undercurrents of self righteousness and thus strains of hypocrisy, the aroma is bitter but the body is supposed to be earthy but is merely vapid and there seems to an after taste of something... ...can't put my finger on it... |
Jita Alt666
631
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 01:31:00 -
[9] - Quote
There it goes.
The after taste is unfulfilled loneliness. |
Jita Alt666
632
|
Posted - 2011.12.06 06:30:00 -
[10] - Quote
SmashTech wrote:Titania Hrothgar wrote:do they shoot back in 0.0? They should. Have them have progressively more awesome offensive capabilities as the level goes up. Not in High Sec, but in 0.0 they should be able to blow up ships that intrude. It would take fleets to get in and take the system over.. The whole Tradewars effect if anyone here has played it. ...I suppose it was only a matter of time before somebody posted something dumb in here. No, IHUBs, TCUs, and SBUs do not fire back.
And it would make things much worse if they did.
|
| |
|