EVE Search - POS Fix or Nerf?

All Channels

Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions

POS Fix or Nerf?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Dianabolic Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.12.05 12:13:00 - [31] Originally by: Seleene Edited by: Seleene on 05/12/2006 11:53:51 Originally by: Dianabolic Weclome to the new era of pos spam. It's a horrible change. It weighs far too much in favour of spam spam spam and in the favour defenders who can't, erm, defend? Horrible, horrible change. It does nothing to promote aggression or assault - they would have been better off fixing the system so that soveriegnty didn't rely on a down time to apply. Diana, if you've got control of someone's space then all this does is add a couple extra days of waiting to finish off the towers, which you'll do anyway, right? It removes the option for blitzkreig though, Sel. Now there is NO "shock tactic". Instead we may aswell just spam up more pos. It's more effecient. cheaper, no timers get reset and just force people to attack US. I know who would win that war, and I know that neither side would get any joy out of it. Originally by: CRYVOK Others, like BoB, they play the game in a meaningless fasition, concerned with nothing but winning. We care about our friends.
Laboratus Gallente BGG Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.05 12:13:00 - [32] Originally by: Blacklight Originally by: Gibmundur Only good pos change would be to take them out of eve. A better change would be for Celes to stop whining about the fact that some people want to build infrastructure in space and that infrastructure shouldn't be removable by roving gangs of battleships. Personally I think it's probably a sensible change but it will make for a lot more grind when it comes to territorial wars. I never thought I'd say this. But I agree with you on this. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
Ronja Mistysdottir Norsk Gruvedrift	Posted - 2006.12.05 12:18:00 - [33] Edited by: Ronja Mistysdottir on 05/12/2006 12:21:37 Still takes 5 days to claim souv. That means, if you spam 10 pos's in a 15 moon system with 5 hostile towers, you have to keep them alive for 3 days (3 DT's?) to ensure you can b00m-b00m the station? [After 3 DT's, you can keep 2d12h of stront in there to ensure you get souv and ability to shoot station before your towers can be killed] Now, it seems that anyone willing to lay down 6 billion isk to take a station with 10 large Lagstars, have a fair and good chanse of success :) This is a fix, so POS wars go to be what they are intended to be, and I like it. ---------------------- Or.. 10 HULK's mining Ark/Bist for 10 hours will fund 8 large Deathstars, that will take a 100 man gang atelast 4 days to remove
Yeggstry Confederation of Red Moon Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.12.05 12:20:00 - [34] Originally by: Auman Originally by: Seleene Edited by: Seleene on 05/12/2006 11:53:51 Originally by: Dianabolic Weclome to the new era of pos spam. It's a horrible change. It weighs far too much in favour of spam spam spam and in the favour defenders who can't, erm, defend? Horrible, horrible change. It does nothing to promote aggression or assault - they would have been better off fixing the system so that soveriegnty didn't rely on a down time to apply. Diana, if you've got control of someone's space then all this does is add a couple extra days of waiting to finish off the towers, which you'll do anyway, right? But it was already a grind to assualt a system, this change means more grind and/or more POS spam. I don't understand why it can't just become time based and DT doesn't effect sov. Something similar to the way that the skill training works, where the db stores the time to complete? Can't see why that isn't possible. How much calculation would be done at dt for working out sovereignty? Check each system in 0.0 that has a pos in and work in out from there... but if they did change it then when the 5 day sovereignty timer runs out then sovereignty would have to be updated on the db, then to everyone in that system and on the map. Something that may cause more lag than it is worth? Then again there are quite a few aspects of the game that require downtime (e.g. respawning of roids), perhaps CCP are becoming too reliant on dt for this sort of thing?
Mindlles 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.12.05 12:22:00 - [35] Originally by: Seleene Originally by: Mindlles Another Make eve easy change in my opion. They are making everything much easyer atm so why not make it even more easy! What ever happend to the unforgiving eve wich i like so much //Edit - offcurse its gets harder for a attacking force. But in the end off the day its a change that will "help" most off eve coummnity.. Again.. It mostly helps the defenders, yes. However, I think that if you spend 6-10 months developing a region that it should take longer than 12 hours for someone to waltz in and take your station. I'm speaking as someone who has done this. If you want someone's land then you should have to bulldoze them out of it. As its very easy for a 500-2000 man alliance to spam system with poses. And not have to fire one gun, and hold 0.0 space. If ppl cant use the most basic off eve - their ship guns. They schould not be able to claim 0.0 space in the beggining in my opion. And if someone that actully know how to do so schould be able to run them over in a day. Becouse eve is suppose to be a pvp game and not spam posses.. But that might just be little me .P
Ronja Mistysdottir Norsk Gruvedrift	Posted - 2006.12.05 12:23:00 - [36] Regarding DT... Why not make DT every 22 or 26 hours? Make DT circle the clock :) That whould be more fair..
Ronja Mistysdottir Norsk Gruvedrift	Posted - 2006.12.05 12:26:00 - [37] Originally by: Mindlles Originally by: Seleene Originally by: Mindlles Another Make eve easy change in my opion. They are making everything much easyer atm so why not make it even more easy! What ever happend to the unforgiving eve wich i like so much //Edit - offcurse its gets harder for a attacking force. But in the end off the day its a change that will "help" most off eve coummnity.. Again.. It mostly helps the defenders, yes. However, I think that if you spend 6-10 months developing a region that it should take longer than 12 hours for someone to waltz in and take your station. I'm speaking as someone who has done this. If you want someone's land then you should have to bulldoze them out of it. As its very easy for a 500-2000 man alliance to spam system with poses. And not have to fire one gun, and hold 0.0 space. If ppl cant use the most basic off eve - their ship guns. They schould not be able to claim 0.0 space in the beggining in my opion. And if someone that actully know how to do so schould be able to run them over in a day. Becouse eve is suppose to be a pvp game and not spam posses.. But that might just be little me .P EVE are as FAR from a PvP game as you can come.. And until the lag and exploit problems are fixed, the delays are needed. Any corp/alliance that can wtfpwn a tower, can still do it, but, there are time now to prepare a defence. If the entity holding space can't kill off towers, or kill intruding ships, they will still loose they're space.
Imperil Northern Intelligence SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.05 12:29:00 - [38] Originally by: Blacklight Originally by: Gibmundur Only good pos change would be to take them out of eve. A better change would be for Celes to stop whining about the fact that some people want to build infrastructure in space and that infrastructure shouldn't be removable by roving gangs of battleships. Personally I think it's probably a sensible change but it will make for a lot more grind when it comes to territorial wars. Grinding POS is sooo fun Blacklight... Support POS Overhaul - Read it NOW!
Plutoinum German Cyberdome Corp Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.12.05 12:48:00 - [39] Edited by: Plutoinum on 05/12/2006 12:52:24 Edited by: Plutoinum on 05/12/2006 12:50:49 I find pos wars boring, too. I hate them. Anyway, I don't see how this changes so much, except for systems with a low number of moons. Full moon coverage is nothing new, it is the answer to be vulnerable to pos spammage. If you cover only one moon more than you need, the enemy puts poses on all others and then it's only one pos, that decides. In the RA vs. Coalition war, full moon coverage has been the goal of both sides for months. In a system like KZF- that means, 31 moons were covered with poses, before the system was attacked for the first time. That's how it has been already, even without this patch. The patch doesn't fix that pos-wars sucks, just that you can use a bug to get a station. The bug = shoot poses into reinforcement before DT, sovereignty gone after DT, no matter what the enemy does like pos recharging etc., next night you take station. edit: with kill poses during DT, I meant shooting them into reinforcment ofc CTD/con-loss vs. log-out. A proposal for a fix.
Tao Han Caldari Earth Day Corporation	Posted - 2006.12.05 12:49:00 - [40] Looks good to me, basicly they removed the "POS Rush" syndrome and lets face it, if you dont want to spend time sieging POSes and take sov then you should probably not be in the POS war at all. Saving the world, one bottle at the time
Mindlles 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.12.05 13:30:00 - [41] Originally by: Ronja Mistysdottir EVE are as FAR from a PvP game as you can come.. And until the lag and exploit problems are fixed, the delays are needed. Any corp/alliance that can wtfpwn a tower, can still do it, but, there are time now to prepare a defence. If the entity holding space can't kill off towers, or kill intruding ships, they will still loose they're space. To answer ur first point, im aware off that, thats why im still playing since beta :P And im pretty much worthless on annything that doesnt have to do with blowing someone els up. So the delays are needed becouse off the lagg?. The lagg is what stop ppl from taking over space today? As u can not protect ur cap fleet or out manouver the oppsiet bigger fleet when lagged. Not the otherway around! And their is systems with 30-50 mons u can just poof up with posses and alot off ppl wont care attacking it becouse its to much huzzel just. Poses has it use, but they are overpowerd in my opion :P
Braaage eXceed Inc. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.12.05 13:36:00 - [42] I think the whole idea that a POS takes sovereignty is the wrong way to go about system security. POSs aren't even a strong defense and can be taken out relatively easily with a moderate to strong force. POSs are just another ISK sink in more ways than one, ISK to buy, ISK to fuel and man they take hours to deploy properly. ATM though I can't think of an alternative method to securing sovereignty in a system. I like the change, it will now do as it says on the wrapper. But yes POS spammage (now even bigger ISK sink) will now be common. ___________________________________________ http://www.eve-tutor.com - Picture based tutorial site for EVE-Online.
Karunel Princeps Corp	Posted - 2006.12.05 13:43:00 - [43] /me prays for the day when the whole sovereignty system will be reworked to make it more fun than watching paint dry. Meh. Originally by: elbenito The problem with large fleet engagements is that the hamsters stop to watch.
Zhaine B e l l u m	Posted - 2006.12.05 13:56:00 - [44] Originally by: Tjakka Originally by: Plutoinum Edited by: Plutoinum on 05/12/2006 09:11:13 Blablablabla It is just stupid that you cant take systems if you take all or most pos in reinforce. If you spend 6hours shooting down 5 of the towers it seems pretty normal you can take the station and what keeps the defender from defending it? they can just take it back as easy as the attackers got it. So now CCP is gonna force ppl to drop pos on every moons and spam the system full with it and attack the defender at there strongest times (if the defender knows that they doing with timing pos) its the era of POS spam attacking Allaince station systems with pos is already hard enough pre rev dont think the HP of dreads will make it any differend with the risk of attacking hostile pos wiht decent ammount of ppl in local lol and to think I used to respect you. . . And on topic: It's a bug fix, and as such is a good change. It was the way the system was originally intended (surely) and it's the only way that makes much sense to me. - - - - - - - - - - "PERGITE DEGUSTATE FORMOSUM BELLUM" Forward to taste the beautiful war. . .
Fubear Vogon Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.12.05 13:59:00 - [45] I am torn over the implementation of this change. On the one hand, I am in complete agreement with Seleene that if you take the time to develop 0.0 space it should not be possible to lose it all in a weekend. On the other hand, POS warfare is mind numbingly boring and the reason I quit alliance warfare. Extending the amount of time it takes to siege using the current system is introducing more game play that simply isn't fun. I would like to see more options for POS warfare than simply bringing out X dreads, Y support, Z bubbles and then camping a system for 8 hours a day with a fight if you are lucky. For example, make Stront interfere with jump drives so it cannot be imported from empire and transported risk free as the carriers jump directly into POS shields. You would then be able to interfere with POS operations by successfully hitting their ice belts, haulers, and convoys. I know the above idea would not work because Dreads need to be able to jump stront, but it is an example of how I would like to see extended logistical warfare interfere with long term POS operation instead of being forced to bring an overwhelming fleet. Neither the ASCN/BoB or RA/LV wars were resolved in a weekend, so obviously the ability to temporarily take a station this way is not critical to overall success, but sometimes taking a station for a day can make all the difference in a siege, and I don't see why it needs to be removed. PS: I hate the daily downtime, it is a byproduct of a poorly developed game. There is no reason at all why SOV needs to be linked to the daily DT.
Nahual Gallente 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.12.05 14:00:00 - [46] I don't bother much with alliance stuff anymore, but from a view I think it's bad, it's another advantage to a defending POS spamming alliance, which there is enough bias towards already (lag, fighting under POS guns, etc). Suppose small alliances will love it greatly, and larger alliances will find it as a new way to hold onto a system with less resources being used. As putting the POS into reinforced isnt the hard part, its coming back during the defending players prime time and knocking it down with a lot of opposition. Bad move is my opinion, but then I'd prefer massive changes! Enjoy shooting them -----------------------------------------------
Auman Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.12.05 14:19:00 - [47] Originally by: Yeggstry Something similar to the way that the skill training works, where the db stores the time to complete? Can't see why that isn't possible. How much calculation would be done at dt for working out sovereignty? Check each system in 0.0 that has a pos in and work in out from there... but if they did change it then when the 5 day sovereignty timer runs out then sovereignty would have to be updated on the db, then to everyone in that system and on the map. Something that may cause more lag than it is worth? Then again there are quite a few aspects of the game that require downtime (e.g. respawning of roids), perhaps CCP are becoming too reliant on dt for this sort of thing? Meh, I wrote one reply which the forums ate You could be right about lag would take a dev to clarify. Basically CCP have said that they want to look at POS warfare and make it more fun. This fix is going to do the opposite.
MACTEP Solar Dragons Red Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.05 15:17:00 - [48] Originally by: Plutoinum Edited by: Plutoinum on 05/12/2006 09:11:13 Was supposed to come. RA tried that in 1v-. Shot all 5 poses into reinforcement before downtime to take the station after that. System has only got 5 moons. GMs said, it's a bug that poses in reinforcment don't add to sovereignty. Makes sense to me, because otherwise the people, who can field more people around downtime, would have an advantage. You'd just shoot all poses into reinforcement before DT and shoot the station after DT, Revoke all clone contracts etc. If such a fast takeover isn't available in the evening, why should it be possible around DT ? Reinforcement mode was meant to prevent that anyway. /edit: the additional problem is in 1v was, that sovereignty didn't come back immediately after recharging the poses, so what happened some weeks ago was: - RA/Goon shot all poses into reinforcement before DT - system lost sovereignty after DT - we recharged all poses after DT - still no sovereignty, because it only changes during DT - Goons shot the station during the next night and got it, removed clone contracts etc. Was kind of rediculous and a broken game-mechanics. GMs saw it the same way. the true is next - - RA/Goon shot all poses into reinforcement before DT - system DID NOT lost sovereignty after DT - GM said poses in reinforce still claim... - after 24 hours (next DT) system lost sovereignty - -v-\-lv-(contol stantion) and recharged all poses after DT - GM said he was wrong..game bug...and such bull****. xxx
Plutoinum German Cyberdome Corp Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.12.05 16:14:00 - [49] Edited by: Plutoinum on 05/12/2006 16:14:55 Originally by: MACTEP Originally by: Plutoinum Edited by: Plutoinum on 05/12/2006 09:11:13 Was supposed to come. RA tried that in 1v-. Shot all 5 poses into reinforcement before downtime to take the station after that. System has only got 5 moons. GMs said, it's a bug that poses in reinforcment don't add to sovereignty. Makes sense to me, because otherwise the people, who can field more people around downtime, would have an advantage. You'd just shoot all poses into reinforcement before DT and shoot the station after DT, Revoke all clone contracts etc. If such a fast takeover isn't available in the evening, why should it be possible around DT ? Reinforcement mode was meant to prevent that anyway. /edit: the additional problem is in 1v was, that sovereignty didn't come back immediately after recharging the poses, so what happened some weeks ago was: - RA/Goon shot all poses into reinforcement before DT - system lost sovereignty after DT - we recharged all poses after DT - still no sovereignty, because it only changes during DT - Goons shot the station during the next night and got it, removed clone contracts etc. Was kind of rediculous and a broken game-mechanics. GMs saw it the same way. the true is next - - RA/Goon shot all poses into reinforcement before DT - system DID NOT lost sovereignty after DT - GM said poses in reinforce still claim... - after 24 hours (next DT) system lost sovereignty - -v-\-lv-(contol stantion) and recharged all poses after DT - GM said he was wrong..game bug...and such bull****. But I was close. So the poses were in reinforcment for over 1 day. Don't remember it, although I was there recharging. Anyway, the poses were recharged to full shields. So 5:0 working pos for us, none of our pos ever got removed. You had your fun to get the station in the night after that, where you removed our clone contracts, after next DT it was our sovereignty again and righty so. CTD/con-loss vs. log-out. A proposal for a fix.
INZi coracao ardente	Posted - 2006.12.05 16:19:00 - [50] an i who thought this where about a prime orbital and firmus ixion conflict. damn it sorry for trolln'
Morris Falter The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2006.12.05 16:35:00 - [51] The idea of station ping pong always vaguely appealed to me.. but then all my resources are kept in nice secure NPC stations. POS warfare is truly dull. And lets not get into how POS's are kept so numerous from empire macro-miners.. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Machiavelli7 Gallente Obsidian Asylum Pure.	Posted - 2006.12.05 20:22:00 - [52] this is a good change (bug fix?) as it removes the 'need to be on at DT' element of POS warfare. I think it'd be better balanced by a massive increase of POS anchoring time. A POS spam attack is a helluva lot harder if it takes, say, 6 hours to anchor 'em.
Dianabolic Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.12.05 20:46:00 - [53] Originally by: Machiavelli7 this is a good change (bug fix?) as it removes the 'need to be on at DT' element of POS warfare. I think it'd be better balanced by a massive increase of POS anchoring time. A POS spam attack is a helluva lot harder if it takes, say, 6 hours to anchor 'em. Yeah, let's make ATTACKING even MORE difficult. Whilst we're at it, double the cost of dreadnoughts, who cares if it takes 20+ billion isk in equipment to take down a 1bn isk structure in less than an hour, LET'S TURN IT IN TO EVE:ONLINE:FORTRESS. Is this REALLY the kind of game you want to play? Originally by: CRYVOK Others, like BoB, they play the game in a meaningless fasition, concerned with nothing but winning. We care about our friends.
Kinsy Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2006.12.05 20:58:00 - [54] Edited by: Kinsy on 05/12/2006 20:59:51 Originally by: Mindlles It mostly helps the defenders, yes. However, I think that if you spend 6-10 months developing a region that it should take longer than 12 hours for someone to waltz in and take your station. I'm speaking as someone who has done this. If you want someone's land then you should have to bulldoze them out of it. As its very easy for a 500-2000 man alliance to spam system with poses. And not have to fire one gun, and hold 0.0 space. If ppl cant use the most basic off eve - their ship guns. They schould not be able to claim 0.0 space in the beggining in my opion. And if someone that actully know how to do so schould be able to run them over in a day. Becouse eve is suppose to be a pvp game and not spam posses.. But that might just be little me .P Quoted, signed, posted, shipped, despatched, handed to a courier and fired straight up Blacklight's arse.
Naxxiz GalacTECH Unlimited	Posted - 2006.12.05 21:24:00 - [55] Wouldn't the solution to stop pos spamming be to increase the cost of a POS. Maybe create a tech 2 version of the large tower that has the same cpu/grid as the standard tower but it is ranked higher on the sov scale. Have the costs increased 1000%+ for this type of tower. In order to pos spam a station system, you would need mounds of isk and there is increased incentive to protect the pos due to its value. Just my 0.02 isks.
Daroh Solar Dragons Red Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.05 22:17:00 - [56] Originally by: MACTEP the true is next - - RA/Goon shot all poses into reinforcement before DT - system DID NOT lost sovereignty after DT - GM said poses in reinforce still claim... - after 24 hours (next DT) system lost sovereignty - -v-\-lv-(contol stantion) and recharged all poses after DT - GM said he was wrong..game bug...and such bull****. /signed
Mistress Suffering Einherjar Rising Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.12.05 22:42:00 - [57] Removing the advantage for having high population around downtime is a good thing. Now make complexes respawn at random times too.
Shiraz Merlot Octavian Vanguard RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2006.12.05 22:52:00 - [58] Sovereignty warfare now takes longer - and you like it??
Nez Perces Amarr Black Spot.	Posted - 2006.12.05 22:55:00 - [59] One upon a time there were no POS and no sovereignty, all you had to do to take a station was shoot at it. The effect of this was station ping-pong, which to be perfectly honest was retarded.... stations would change hands up to half a dozen times per day, and ownership was completely subject to the vagaries of timezones.. So... CCP slowly implemented teh POS system, and it seems its implementation is now complete with this latest fix, or bug.. whatever you wanna call it. I think CCP has fixed one problem but introduced a much more horrendous scenario, i.e what Dianabolic eloquently called "Fortress EVE". Where, any degree of spontaneity is being erradicated from territorial campaigns, which makes Jack a very dull boy. I believe the problem lies with CCP's insistance on using POS for absolutely everything.... moon mining, building, researching, capital shipyards and defense via sovereignty, gun platforms.. etc...etc.... The mechanisms of sovereignty are and should be separate from POS, POS are already useful enough of themselves, without being saddled with the soveriegnty mechanics. With this in mind, something ocurred to me.... Novel Sovereignty Mechanism. A new structure for the claiming of sovereignty, called a Sovereignty Tower. No shields, no guns, just structure in the form of hp's, quite a lot of them, sufficient that only Dreadnoughts would be able to take them down in an acceptable timeframe. Maximum of 3 sovereignty towers per system and you need 3 towers for sovereignty activate. Need to be kept refueled like POS to stay online and count towards Sovereignty. Maximum of 24 hours reinforced state, so that you can time coming out of reinforced to your preferred timezone, but still allow shock millitary attacks. And thats it.... POS will still be useful in their own right and defendable with guns, just they aren't part of sovereignty mechanisms, without the Sovereingty towers you have no sovereignty. These Sovereignty Towers would not need to be expensive, and would be fueled like POS currently are. To defend a Sovereignty tower you have to field a fleet, cause it wouldnt have any guns, which forces PVP to happen. The main idea here is to accept that POS are useful structures of themsleves, but that the act of saddling them with sovereignty has imo, inadvertently turned the game into something that is approaching levels of unacceptable boredom.
Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2006.12.06 00:47:00 - [60] Edited by: Thor Xian on 06/12/2006 00:47:45 I still think my ideas about Sovereignty and how to handle it are the best I've heard. You start by claiming your 'HQ' System, and then work out 1 jump at a time claiming more space. This of course requires POSes in every system. You'd have to claim an entire constellation before being able to expand into a neighboring constellation. Same thing on the regional level. If you want the space, you should have to actively maintain it. The larger it gets the harder and more consuming maintaining it will be. System Sovereignty Lock would occur when you also have sovereignty in all the surrounding systems. SL makes POSes invincible and costing another 25% less in fuel. SL systems should be required to build an outpost or anchor capital yards. +7.5 standing is required to anchor a non alliance POS in a Locked System. This is to encourage battle fronts. No heading straight for the HQ and taking AZN to steal the thunder from the Avatar. Now, outpost ownership mechanics would need to change with this system. Since by my own rules you would never be able to gain sovereignty in the same system as someone else's outpost. Once you lose sovereignty, the outpost becomes vunerable and can be destroyed, but outposts would have sentry guns and other upgradeable components, plus millions of hp. When an outpost is destroyed so is everything in it...including offline players. This takes the safety of an outpost and forces people to deal with or flee from threats. POS Fuel modifiers: POS in npc space - No change POS in neutral space - +25% Fuel Consumption POS in enemy space - +50% Fuel Consumption POS in sovereign space - -25% Fuel Consumption (same as now) POS in locked space - -50% Fuel Consumption POS in outpost system - -75% Fuel Consumption This puts a higher cost associated with expansion and invasion. Of course this whole post sounds seriously bad for the likes of BoB, but, I also think POS should not be so laggy. Change them from being a mass of lag causing modules to being one structure that can be configured much like a ship can. Give them hi, med, and lo slots, and turret/launcher hardpoints. Example: Minmatar Large Structure 12 hi power slots, 8 medium power slots, 10 low power slots. With 8 turrets and 4 launchers. Bonuses could be 25% Projectile and Launcher RoF, 50% Projectile Falloff, and 100% Projectile Tracking. The result: Less guns, but more roses. Make them easier to use, but make the logistics of how you are using them more important. Also allow pod pilots with appropriate permissions and Starbase Tactical Officer skills board them and take manual control of operations. Another thing that would make things interesting would be to let Large Structures use Capital Modules, Medium use BS modules, and Small use Cruiser. This would widen the gap in the cost differences, but also the performance differences. Its a lot of reworking, but I think it would be better than what we have now. ~Thor Xian, Material Administrator "For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One." Corp/Alliance Services

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.