| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
MajorBJ
   |
Posted - 2007.06.20 21:48:00 -
[1]
I am not sure if this is the proper forum to discuss this. Last evening a few of us decided to try out small gang tactics to take down a small POS. We have a couple Cap ships and about a 1/2 dozen or so battleships. What we discovered was that the POS was very simple to take down. Took just a matter of minutes. But to our dismay, we found that after the tower was taken down, the guns that remained would still fire at us. Additionally, we found that after taking the guns into structure that it took and insanely long time to destroy the guns. Is this an intentional design? After discussing it over TS the consensus was the new POS system is flawed. Here are the flaws we have identified.
1. Taking down a tower should not be quicker than taking out a gun or an structure that is outside the POS shields.
2. All structures should go offline if the POS is taken out before the external structures.
3. Guns should not shoot at you if the POS has been taken out prior to the gun. Where does it get it's power from? Or was this intended?
4. Structure hitpoints need to be adjusted to more reasonable levels. It should not take a 6 man crew 45 minutes to take out a small arty battery.
One idea I would like to propose is:
Structures attacked while the POS is online have lower structure hitpoints. This way the small fleets will choose to focus on the external structures prior to taking out POS. POS towers should be designed to receive more structural hit points as a synergistic result of all other structures being online. This way the strategic goal of POS warfare with small fleets is to take out external structures (as well as other structures inside the force field) first to weaken the tower, and then the tower is the last to go.
Thank you.
MajorBJ
|
Nesa
Antares Fleet Yards
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 12:28:00 -
[2]
Sounds like a bug, my understanding is that modules are supposed to be hard to fully destroy while a tower is online, but should be easy once the tower has been destroyed.... The real clue that it's a bug is that the guns are shooting without the tower ??? Like they think it's still there and are perhaps still getting their structure bonus.
|
MajorBJ
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 18:57:00 -
[3]
Perhaps a Dev can take a look?
|
Nidus
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 19:46:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Nidus on 21/06/2007 19:45:43
Just a quick note on the structure HP;
Thats intended, you are meant to be able to disable external structures with a smaller gang (ie; cruisers/frigates raiding a large gun/no web POS) but not destroy them without the aid of larger ships.
2&3 sounds like a bug tough and you could consider filing a bug report.
-------------------
(::) - This is a cookie with chocolate chips, its mine! If you disagree; these are my teeth ';..;'
~nya!
|
Krugerrand
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 19:48:00 -
[5]
I take it the POS went into reinforced?
If thats correct everything is working as intended.
|
MajorBJ
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 22:38:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: Krugerrand
I take it the POS went into reinforced?
If thats correct everything is working as intended.
Sorry I didn't clarify this, but the POS was destroyed. So all that were left were Small and Medium Arty Batteries. Nothing else. The guns were still firing at us and were very very difficult to take out, even with 3 carriers.
|
Verite Rendition
Caldari
AUS Corporation
CORE.
|
Posted - 2007.06.22 04:16:00 -
[7]
Originally by: MajorBJ
Originally by: Krugerrand
I take it the POS went into reinforced?
If thats correct everything is working as intended.
Sorry I didn't clarify this, but the POS was destroyed. So all that were left were Small and Medium Arty Batteries. Nothing else. The guns were still firing at us and were very very difficult to take out, even with 3 carriers.
With the tower, the guns have 90% resistances across the board, so they're damn near impossible to take out. Without the tower, they still have somewhere between 1.25mil and 5mil structure HP, that takes a while to wear down no matter what.
----
AUS Corp
Lead Megalomanic |
Covert Oops
|
Posted - 2007.06.22 04:20:00 -
[8]
Guns and other defenses that are outside the POS forcefield are rediciously hard to kill even without an active POS powering them.
With 0% resistances, it took about 20-30 minutes for 10 or so battleships to take out a single large gun.
|
MajorBJ
Sturmgrenadier Inc
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.06.22 16:44:00 -
[9]
Edited by: MajorBJ on 22/06/2007 16:47:50
Edited by: MajorBJ on 22/06/2007 16:45:50
Originally by: Covert Oops
Guns and other defenses that are outside the POS forcefield are rediciously hard to kill even without an active POS powering them.
With 0% resistances, it took about 20-30 minutes for 10 or so battleships to take out a single large gun.
This is exactly what I am talking about. One thing that puzzles me is that CCP has claimed they would like to enable the small fleet to be a viable option in POS warfare. What I am asserting here is under the current system, it is not a viable option. I'm not stating it should be rediculously easy to take out structures that are outside the POS shield. But it shouldn't be insanely difficult either. 5-10 BS's with Cruise Launchers should be sufficient in destroying these objects. This is why I proposed a synergistic approach to POS design. The tower is only as strong as the structures attached to it. It should not require more than 10 BS's to take out out a small arty battery. Additionally, these same 10 BS's shouldn't easily be allowed to put a tower into reinforced or destroy it when it comes out of reinforced.
What I propse is, the tower has a base number of HP's, but has decent base resistences. For every structure that is connected to a tower, the tower's HP's increase. In return, the structure receives a bonus to resistences from the tower (The structure would have a base resistence of 0). Additionally, as a result, structure HP's are decreased by a small margin. The object is to make the tower near impossible to take down with a small fleet until most of the attached structures destroyed first. What this does is prevent small fleets from going after the tower first; but doesn't make it impossible for them to put the tower into reinforced or destroy it.
As it is right now, taking out the tower was a piece of cake, compared to the structures attached to it. Towers are much more expensive than the modules and therefore should be better protected. This sinergistic approach to POS defenses would better protect the investment, as well as give offenses the ability to systematically take out a tower, with the small gang in mind.
Thanks!
|
Arriadna
Gallente
Night Guards
|
Posted - 2007.07.05 00:08:00 -
[10]
Fully agree with Major. Devs, guns structure HPs it's a VERY SERIOUS problem. And in current state it's very easy to exploit!! Take 30mil isk.. buy 100 small turrets. anchor it on POS (you can anchor it under forcefield where attackers can't hit you) .. and attacker must beat 125mil!! (like 3 large pos) hit points of structure, (which have frig signature so main damagdealers like dreads and fighters will sux) before he (attacker) can anchor own tower in same place.
So be ready to tons of petition on guns spam.
Just raise resist to 99.9% while tower onlined and divide structure hp on 100, so POS guns still be invulnerable while POS online and easy to kill when it go offline.
|
|
|
Xeliya
Eternity INC.
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.07.05 05:18:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Xeliya on 05/07/2007 05:18:45
Agreed, but they also need to fix the guns so there not so pointless also too.
They have horrid lock times (100 sec on a BS for a large gun) and really really bad tracking now. All you need to do is drop the Warp Disruptor and Web and goto town.
Right now there isn't much of a point to arm them with anything other then a small gun for the silly cov ops pilot.
|
Draahk Chimera
Interstellar eXodus
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.07.05 10:50:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Xeliya
They have horrid lock times (100 sec on a BS for a large gun, 60 seconds to lock a scrammer on a Carrier)
Aaah, that explains it. A hostile warped to a tower I was at, he was in a command ship and then just warped off. I thought it was a bug but its intended you say? Long enough lock time on structures now to warp to a pos, sit there a while and then warp off, even in big ships. Nice to know, then there is no point in having guns at all then, since they do no real damage to dreads either.
|
quellious
COLSUP
Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2007.07.05 16:16:00 -
[13]
Some personnal feedback:
The only issue i see here is gun still firing even when the POS is destroyed (not reinforced, destroyed).
Concerning structure HP you might consided that the goal for small gangs are to disable or to heal those modules/guns. The objective you should focus on is disabling a maximum nomber of POS modules, instead of completly killng them. (the same apply to outposts services, you can disable them, but not kill them).
So, basically, just maybe understand that POS warfare is really different than before rev II. Just don't try to play the same way.
-
Did you noticed that a pendulum does not swing in deep space ? |
Papa Digger
REUNI0N
Red Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.07.06 05:34:00 -
[14]
Originally by: quellious
Some personnal feedback:
The only issue i see here is gun still firing even when the POS is destroyed (not reinforced, destroyed).
Concerning structure HP you might consided that the goal for small gangs are to disable or to heal those modules/guns. The objective you should focus on is disabling a maximum nomber of POS modules, instead of completly killng them. (the same apply to outposts services, you can disable them, but not kill them).
Are you tried to kill any pos turret or structure after POS-tower was killed? I think no. To anchor your own POS on same place you need to damage near 40-80mil hp of incacipated structures (like kill more 2 poses). Yes, turrets structure hp was boosted so you they easy to disable and hard to destroy. But idea was that turrets hard to destroy when pos online, but they still hard to destroy even if POS tower destroed.
I agree with Ariadna that structure resist must be *10 (when tower online) and structure hp must be divided by 10.
PS. About lock time.. only faction pos web or pos scrambler now can be useful becase their lock time twice faster then usual. For turrets lock time is ok, but for e-war and web/scramble it must be boosted on 100%.
----
CEO. |
James Duar
Merch Industrial
We Are Nice Guys
|
Posted - 2007.07.06 05:54:00 -
[15]
Confirmin' this. So far I've been shooting modules a lot longer then I've actually been shooting the large they were attached to.
IMO once the tower is down the modules should have an effective HP the same as they did pre-Revelations II.
Probably the best way for this to happen is to nerf the absolute values of structure down to where they were, then give the modules even more resist while the tower is active.
|
James Duar
Merch Industrial
We Are Nice Guys
|
Posted - 2007.07.06 06:20:00 -
[16]
Confirmin' this. So far I've been shooting modules a lot longer then I've actually been shooting the large they were attached to.
IMO once the tower is down the modules should have an effective HP the same as they did pre-Revelations II.
Probably the best way for this to happen is to nerf the absolute values of structure down to where they were, then give the modules even more resist while the tower is active.
|
Scavok
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.07.06 07:59:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Scavok on 06/07/2007 08:02:16
2 and 3 sound like a bug as we haven't yet experienced that happening.
1 on the other hand I couldn't agree with more. The structure HP on modules is absolutely ridiculous. It took a 100-110 person fleet (no they weren't all t1 frigates) over 90 minutes to clean up one moon, and the funny part is that the POS that was destroyed at the moon had about half of the number of guns that some of the other POS's in system do.
Deploying a large tower and anchoring 30-40 medium guns, and then unanchoring the tower to use again would be just as effective as using a large POS full of hardeners at a tiny fraction of the cost.
These things need a serious reduction in structure HP, and just give them 99.99% resists while the tower is online.
|
Nimitz Alexander
Infinity Enterprises
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.07.06 12:29:00 -
[18]
They know about it, managed to get a couple devs to show up at one we took down and was shooting at us still over a week ago... THey didnt learn much from it apparently 
|
Darth Vegeta
Caldari
PROCYON FLEET YARDS
|
Posted - 2007.07.07 18:32:00 -
[19]
From Rev 2.0 Patch Notes:
Structures have the following hitpoints based on size:
Large structures have 100,000 shield, 1,500,000 armor and 5,000,000 structure (and 90% structure resistance given by the control tower),
Medium structures have 50,000 shield, 750,000 armor and 2,500,000 structure (and 90% structure resistance given by the control tower),
Small structures have 25,000 shield, 375,000 armor and 1,250,000 structure (and 90% structure resistance given by the control tower).
Structure HP was apparently intentional, but they should go offine if the tower is destroyed first
|
ghosttr
Amarr
ARK-CORP
FREGE Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.07.07 19:25:00 -
[20]
The locking time need to be changed, no longer need a covops to scout a pos, just warp in any ship, tap the directional scan and warp out . Maybe it should take longer for guns, but the web & scram batteries need to lock really fast (if you are coming in forcethe targets will cycle and you will be able to escape, but the 1 guy who warps to your pos solo in his cruiser should be ganked)
.
Do not read this thread!!!
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |