| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Badi Assad
   |
Posted - 2007.06.20 01:34:00 -
[1]
Moved form General Discussion to Starbase Forum as it will likely get more useful responses here. -Yipsilanti ([email protected])
When I try to assume the control of a mod on my empire POS I am informed: 2007.06.20 01:31:44 Notify You cannot do that because it is currently against empire policy to launch, anchor or control objects of that type within their jurisdictions.
Does anyone have any idea how to control an empire POS? Did CCP decide to not let people control empire POSs?
Badi Assad |
Verite Rendition
Caldari
AUS Corporation
CORE.
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 03:06:00 -
[2]
That is correct. You can't use the starbase defense abilities in Empire AFAIK.
----
AUS Corp
Lead Megalomanic |
Wendat Huron
Lupus Industries
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 03:10:00 -
[3]
Are you saying that empire POS' are now defenseless in a state of war?
|
Calladen Nimitz
Caldari
Sovereign Enterprises
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 03:11:00 -
[4]
How about against declared war enemies? Can you control it then? If a fleet of 10 enemies come up I'd like to be able to select the target that is causing the most damage to attack with my weapons first.
If not then they should move all the weapons systems of empire based POSs back inside the shields of the towers. It's like giving our POSs all the risk of weapons outside (where they are vulnerable) with none of the benefit (being able to target specific ships).
Either both or none. Shortchanging empire POS owners like this isn't right.
Calladen 
SOVEREIGN ENTERPRISES WEBPAGE AND FORUMS |
Miyamoto Uroki
Katsu Corporation
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 07:25:00 -
[5]
CCP, tell us this isn't true, plz.
Build in a routine so that you only can give the fire command against war targets, otherwise you would have screwed with your new starbase warfare design.
|
Covert Oops
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 08:15:00 -
[6]
POS defenses in empire target on their own. Maybe because if they can be controlled it's probably bloody impossible for a gang of battleships to gank a high-sec pos.
|
Carniflex
Caldari
Fallout Research
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 08:40:00 -
[7]
 Originally by: Covert Oops
POS defenses in empire target on their own. Maybe because if they can be controlled it's probably bloody impossible for a gang of battleships to gank a high-sec pos.
If they can't be controlled then it's relatively easy to kill even large towers however due to new POS warfare design. And unlike popular belief it does not take full day to kill large tower (unhardened) even with medium sized gang (approx 15 .. 20 pilots).
Oh well. Time to anchor 5 hardeners and enough small guns to fill the rest of the grid. Not that their small signature would help them a lot against turrets as they don't move.
|
Nyphur
Pillowsoft
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 08:44:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Verite Rendition
That is correct. You can't use the starbase defense abilities in Empire AFAIK.
I especially like how this was in the patch notes.
Eve-Tanking.com - For tanking spreadsheet and resources. |
Marcus Tedric
Gallente
Tedric Enterprises
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 09:17:00 -
[9]
Are we really sure about this?
This certainly requires an official response...
Or is it a 'roles' issue?
|
Whip Slagcheek
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 09:25:00 -
[10]
If you control POS defenses in hi sec you could use your POS to grief neutrals who happen to warp to your POS. It's probably an exploit issue and not an issue of balance.
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 09:36:00 -
[11]
We had to remove player control of starbase sentries in high sec empire due to possible exploits.
|
|
El'essar Viocragh
Minmatar
FSK23
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 09:46:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Whip Slagcheek
If you control POS defenses in hi sec you could use your POS to grief neutrals who happen to warp to your POS. It's probably an exploit issue and not an issue of balance.
Except that the exploit ""fix"" (I have moral issues calling that a ""fix"" and need to wash my fingers and keyboard now) completely whacks up balance.
--
[17:47] <Mephysto> its dead, jim |
Fergus Runkle
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 09:59:00 -
[13]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
We had to remove player control of starbase sentries in high sec empire due to possible exploits.
You are kidding right ?
You are going to "fix" this exploit (whatever it is) and let us high sec POS owners control our defences in a patch to come Soon¡Ö RIGHT?
High sec POS owners already have to worry about corp standings, we got shafted with the removal of large ship arrays and now this?
Come on please.
|
Acid Makeup
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 10:20:00 -
[14]
You need to reconsider this or come up with some way of fixing it because right now hisec starbases are basically dead in the water.
While you're at it, isn't Anchoring V a bit of a harsh pre-req for the skill in the first place.
|
Badi Assad
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 10:56:00 -
[15]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
We had to remove player control of starbase sentries in high sec empire due to possible exploits.
Ok, so then at least you are planning on fixing this right? I am worried that not allowing high sec POS owners to defend their POS is more unbalanced than what might happen if a neutral was hanging around at a moon with a POS.
Wouldn't there be a way to at least code the game so that you cannot engage a POS array with a target who has not agressed the POS (unless you are at war with said target)? Then it would be very hard to use the POS for anything but defending itself.
Badi Assad |
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 11:18:00 -
[16]
the 'attack if at war' option should still work fine and pos should defend itself. If this is not the case, please bug report it. We do hope to fix this as soon as possible.
|
|
Shameless Avenger
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 13:00:00 -
[17]
Way to go! They introduce wardecability to high sec POS but deny you the new POS defence capabilities! . 
Someone else feels like a cow in route to the slaughterhouse?
|
Miss Praise
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 13:08:00 -
[18]
The mind boggles as to how you could exploit this, apart from controlling and killing anyone warping to your moon and not take any consequences for I have no clue.
But all you have to do is say that doing so is an exploit and broadcast that and people wont do it. Rather than take that route you basically made all empire POSs work the old way which as we all know is so easy to destroy.
|
Inmate 19225004
Absoluten Calfeutrail
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 13:26:00 -
[19]
if you have to disable that for some of the playerbase then disable it for ALL of the playerbase.
|
Der Ewige
Cataclysm Enterprises
Kraftwerk.
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 14:33:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Inmate 19225004
if you have to disable that for some of the playerbase then disable it for ALL of the playerbase.
Well the rules are the same for ALL of the playerbase. 0.4+ = Disabled. 0.3- = Enabled.
-------
http://www.stillbruch.ch |
Wiggy69
5punkorp
Betrayal Under Mayhem
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 18:00:00 -
[21]
Here's a simple resolution - make it so you can use the defence mode (or whatever it's called) in highsec. Then make it so if you use it against someone who isn't a war target, CONCORD shows up and ganks your POS. Problem solved!
-----
Wiggy's Bad Spelling and Grammar Complaints Department |
Hockston Axe
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 18:51:00 -
[22]
I'm sorry but it is a very lazy solution to a very tiny problem. How many people are really gonna lure other people to their high-sec POS to gank them (and have anchoring lvl 5 for the trouble)? There has to be a way to prevent that without resorting to just disabling the feature all together.
|
Marcus Tedric
Gallente
Tedric Enterprises
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 19:41:00 -
[23]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
We had to remove player control of starbase sentries in high sec empire due to possible exploits.
Thank you very much for responding.
Could you please confirm that, however, you can control them in Low Sec?
Regards,
|
Badi Assad
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 20:26:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Hockston Axe
...There has to be a way to prevent that without resorting to just disabling the feature all together.
There is a very simple solution. Make it so you can assume control of the arrays in high sec, but make it so when you try to activate the mod on a non war target or non agressing target the game simply gives you the message it does now and does not let you activate the mod.
badi |
Inmate 19225004
Absoluten Calfeutrail
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 20:52:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Badi Assad
Make it so you can assume control of the arrays in high sec, but make it so when you try to activate the mod on a non war target or non aggressing target the game simply gives you the message it does now and does not let you activate the mod.
sounds logical and obvious enough.
|
Belenkas
FinFleet
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 21:03:00 -
[26]
I do believe that allowing to shoot at neutrals would be a very new and very efficient way of ganking people at highsec. Like if you asked for help in mission and then warped guy to a moon and ransom...
So a big no no to allowing attack non-killright people when controlling highsec POS. However it SHOULD allow to defend the POS from war targets.
I foresee it won't be too hard for 10 battleships to disable all the guns of POS. Not easy, but not hard, and then it is a matter of killing a fish in a barrel.
Especially considering that most of highsec POS owners don't have a lot of PvPers to back them up in case of assault, I do believe this will lead to a lot of highsec POS griefing. To a level where holding a highsec POS will require the owner to either pay ransoms or hire mercenaries to defend the POS(es) from griefers at least once a month - to a level where it just won't pay off(afaik it doesn't pay off too well already) and highsec POSes will offline one after another.
That ofcourse leads to much larger need on factory and research slots and higher market price of T2 items.
How much such a little thing can harm, huh? Moving guns out and not allowing to focus fire in highsec = higher market prices T2 items? Well, that's why I like EVE!
|
Hockston Axe
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 21:47:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Belenkas
Edited by: Belenkas on 20/06/2007 21:03:29
I do believe that allowing to shoot at neutrals would be a very new and very efficient way of ganking people at highsec. Like if you asked for help in mission and then warped guy to a moon and ransom...
It's not new. Lofty does it all the time with ganging and alt corp war decs. I think it may even be called the Lofty Maneuver. And that's a lot easier and less skill training to do than using a POS with player controlled guns, and last I checked perfectly acceptable. 
|
Belenkas
FinFleet
|
Posted - 2007.06.20 21:52:00 -
[28]
OK, cut the 'new' part :)
Still it should be considered exploit - shooting neutrals shall not be allowed in highsec. So just don't allow that, but allow to target killrights.
Note: I am not highsec POS owner :)
|
Calladen Nimitz
Caldari
Sovereign Enterprises
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 00:29:00 -
[29]
Quote:
the 'attack if at war' option should still work fine and pos should defend itself. If this is not the case, please bug report it. We do hope to fix this as soon as possible.
Which exactly do you "hope to fix"? The fact we can't control defenses in high sec or something else?
I will say the "attack if at war" function can work for those in low sec too that isn't the point here. The point is being able to control fire on particular targets ignoring others.
We all remember the "not an exploit" exploit where people in shuttles would warp around a POS at high speed using up the stations ammo and CPU? Then a fleet would move in and attack it.
I agree there are people who would try to exploit ganking innocents in high sec but declare that an exploit like you have declared that remote repairing by neutrals an exploit and allow us to control our defense systems. At least against designated war targets.
Calladen 
SOVEREIGN ENTERPRISES WEBPAGE AND FORUMS |
Badi Assad
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 00:36:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Calladen Nimitz
I agree there are people who would try to exploit ganking innocents in high sec but declare that an exploit like you have declared that remote repairing by neutrals an exploit and allow us to control our defense systems. At least against designated war targets.
Calladen
I agree, the other fix, and a temporary one would be to give control of the POSs to the empire owners right now and list in the news it is an offence to exploit this to kill neutrals just like neutrals cannot heal POS structures.
Badi Assad |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |