Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sir Scorpion
Black Banners
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 09:49:00 -
[1]
Ok lets talk POSs, why are thy good why are thy bad , keep it clean, open your mind and be constructive please:
Yeah subject has been talked about a lot but since the latest attempts did not seem to fix the problem in my opinion, maybe we take another shot at it, once more be constructive.
Now I just want to discuss the role of POSes in alliance wars, and how they hold sovereignty and so on.
CCP really tried to counter the Blob warfare by throwing in bombs remote ECM, and several other items, but I never saw them or see them as effective counters, since you will have the same amount of people in the same grid, or location but a but further out.
Now I am no game technical expert, but that dose not convince me that by adding such so called counter blob objects will have its effect.
We all know the worst blob is a POS blob, earthier its defense or attack, thy are the worst type. Its not fun at all as we all know.
Sovereignty made things worse in some way now alliance are more focused on Pos spamming more than ever. And blobs from their will only get bigger.
A guy around here ôcant rememberö posted something that might work he did it in brief so I will try and expand on it,
Any of you played world in conflict beta?? Great game and had something that mightàjust might work for eve
Now to the hold a location or zone in that game you need to have unites in 2-4 different arias in the same time and capture that location, which worked pretty well giving that strategy game a lot of tactical combat elements since every player has a limited amount of unites he can control.
This not only did it eliminates the normal things you see in a strategy game like super army blobs all in one choke points, it made it so that the whole map has small to medium combat zones.
Now how much can we brake that down and implement it to eve and not quite sure, but it dose look like a good start.
Lets take something for example and create a situation ôNOW lets all use this situation in your repliesö
**We have a constellation of 3 system, holding it is an alliance with 200 players ôBlueö, we have an invading force of 300 players ôRedsö**
Now lets say to hold a system you need to hold 3 different grids at the same time, in every gird there is a communications tower ônot a posö
Lets take the 3 grids in the first constellation and call them A,B,C.
Now all the Comm. Towers are blue, for the ôRed teamö capture them, thy must hack it, which takes 1hr. Then the tower turns to Black, now black means that the tower is off for 24 hrs.
And so Red team turns off all the 3 towers, which will give enough time for Blue and Red team to prepare for the ôcaptureö battle. To capture the tower it must be Analyzed for 1hr.
And to capture the system all comm. Towers, must be captured and defended by the same team for another 30min, then the towers move to the winner. Same thing happens on a larger scale to capture the constellation, by treating them the same way as grids.
This will need a set of rules like, number of comm. Towers are not controlled by player.
And so one, I still didnÆt work the details and I hope to see some good insight form all of you thanks, and sorry if this was posted before.
-Sir Scorpion
|
Sir Scorpion
Black Banners
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 09:50:00 -
[2]
Reserved
|
Tanksmann
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 10:17:00 -
[3]
Original idea thats for sure.
Needs an "Incoming wall of text" warning...
|
WidowMaker IX
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 11:53:00 -
[4]
Edited by: WidowMaker IX on 15/08/2007 11:52:56
nvm
|
Major Stallion
Four Rings D-L
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 13:29:00 -
[5]
its a decent idea, but could use tweaking because it still sounds a touch boring.
Also how would this solve the blobbing problem? To hack the tower you would need a support fleet. To defend the tower you would need a support fleet. Fleet size is determined by the attackers and defenders, not by the means in which a tower can be taken.
Another thing, this would eliminate the role of a dreadnought, what plans would you have for making them worth training for if all you need to do is hack the communications tower? Would these towers be defended by guns and launchers as POS's are right now? If so, then you may as well keep the current tower system in place.
________________________________ High Sec PvP |
Sir Scorpion
Black Banners
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 13:46:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Major Stallion its a decent idea, but could use tweaking because it still sounds a touch boring.
Also how would this solve the blobbing problem? To hack the tower you would need a support fleet. To defend the tower you would need a support fleet. Fleet size is determined by the attackers and defenders, not by the means in which a tower can be taken.
Another thing, this would eliminate the role of a dreadnought, what plans would you have for making them worth training for if all you need to do is hack the communications tower? Would these towers be defended by guns and launchers as POS's are right now? If so, then you may as well keep the current tower system in place.
In terms of the blobbing problem, it will spread the blob over 3-4 locations since they must be under control at the same or relatively the same time,
Dreads will still be used to take out POSÆs now matter how annoying a POS is, in many terms its important for eves economy, but It dose not need to be a tools of holding control in the system.
Why?
Well usually, and this is from a military background and if you think about it, it will be very clear and simple in contrast to whatÆs going on now using POSs.
Every city, location, country, baseàwhat ever represent a strategic point or viable point to be captured has a set of tactical locations to prepare of the strategic move.
Now in any military conflict, 95% of the time the Tactical locations are fixed and out side the control of both defenders and attackers. A ridge, a mountain, a river crossing, a waterfront , whatever. Those are all limited. There is a set number of those due to geography and so on.
Those tactical locations can be fortified but to an extent of that location only, now in CONTRAST to whatÆs going on in eve where the alliance creature the tactical location, thatÆs why we have the POS spam idea, and that should simply not happen and thatÆs why its not fun to obtain 30 tactical locations and get another 90 locations created!!!
Attackers view Its like we captured this mountain, but our foe created another mountain, and another and another.
Defenders view: We are defending this water front, no hostiles can land here, but boom 10 more waterfronts are opened. This is just an example, and the logic behind it applies to any large number conflict.
|
Laboratus
Gallente BGG League of Abnormal Gentlemen
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 13:57:00 -
[7]
Pos
Purpose: To create a persistant enviroment without the need to be online 23/7. To create a player built infrastructure. To act as strategic targets in warfare, thus creating purposeful pvp.
Pros: It takes commitment and effort to put up and supply pos networks. They also provide a good base of operations for a handful of pilots per pos. It takes commitment and effort to reinforce and take down towers. Quite on par with how much effort it takes to put them up. Stront system means you don't lose everything as soon as you log off and a few gankers arive.
Cons: Pos are a pain to supply. They consume redicilous amounts of fuel in cubic meters.
Pos are a pain to take down. It's always a two day op (reinforce+ takedown) and it takes several capital ships not so useful for other purposes.
Dreads are very vulnerable to smaller ships and as such require a huge escort fleet to protect them. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats |
Sir Scorpion
Black Banners
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 14:04:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Laboratus Pos
Purpose: To create a persistant enviroment without the need to be online 23/7. To create a player built infrastructure. To act as strategic targets in warfare, thus creating purposeful pvp.
Pros: It takes commitment and effort to put up and supply pos networks. They also provide a good base of operations for a handful of pilots per pos. It takes commitment and effort to reinforce and take down towers. Quite on par with how much effort it takes to put them up. Stront system means you don't lose everything as soon as you log off and a few gankers arive.
Cons: Pos are a pain to supply. They consume redicilous amounts of fuel in cubic meters.
Pos are a pain to take down. It's always a two day op (reinforce+ takedown) and it takes several capital ships not so useful for other purposes.
Dreads are very vulnerable to smaller ships and as such require a huge escort fleet to protect them.
Yes I agree with many of the points of posÆs u posted if not all of them, and thatÆs why I say poses should stay, but should thy be the means of holding sovereignty and building outposts ?
|
Laboratus
Gallente BGG League of Abnormal Gentlemen
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 14:27:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Sir Scorpion
... but should thy be the means of holding sovereignty and building outposts ?
On a purely hypothetical sense, no, they don't have to be.
At the moment poses themselves work as the "flag" in a "capture the flag" type of game for sovereignity. Other methods could be viable, but as they would need to fill the same shoes as poses.
It should take a long time and a good commitment to transfer and/or hold the sov and as such the new system would need to force ppl to spend a lot of isk, time and manhours when sov is under contest.
How this can be done without falling into the pitfalls that POS suffer today is beyond me.
If we put ourselves into dev shoes I think we can say at least the following: POS are an exsisting system and moving to a new system with same design specs, pros and very propably cons is much more time consuming than working with the exsisting system and trying to improve that.
In my humble opinion, what should be worked on is the problem of escalation we have with poses today. With the size of cap fleets ever increasing, the takedown of a pos is taking less and less time. This has seriously dented the stability of poses and the current system. At some point in the future poses will pretty much be a slight hinderance to larger alliances with smaller newer ones being completely unable to compete in this. This requires a bit of attention to think how this could be changed so that we get newer/smaller alliances competable and able to threaten low security infrastructure and at the same time prevent older/bigger alliances from steamrolling over poses in minutes. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats |
Maltitol
Gallente Tides of Silence Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 15:26:00 -
[10]
I read the op and the replies.. but maybe im a little slow this morning (couldn't find any irish coffee), but from what i gather you are proposing Capture the Flag scenario in eve?
|
|
SSgt Sniper
Gallente MAIDS
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 15:52:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Maltitol I read the op and the replies.. but maybe im a little slow this morning (couldn't find any irish coffee), but from what i gather you are proposing Capture the Flag scenario in eve?
Reads to me more like capture the command posts (Star Wars Battlefront style) ------- CEO of Maids. No I didn't pick the name. I've grown rather fond of it though.
|
Gort
Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 19:17:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Gort on 15/08/2007 19:17:30 The Germans took Europe in '39 faster than sov gets changed in this game.
Dial way back on the needless time sink aspect, please.
Bring back ping pong, I say... and let the maneuvering and shooting commence.
Gorty
edit: Or was it '40?
-- When in doubt, empty the magazine. |
Laboratus
Gallente BGG League of Abnormal Gentlemen
|
Posted - 2007.08.15 21:23:00 -
[13]
Ping pong was horrid.
Daily check list: 1.Wait until > 50 active in TS 2.Set up op 3.hope this takes less than 2h 4.Kick the reds out of system again 5.Take back the station from random pirates. 6.Just to take a **** at someone go highjack their station on their off hour and rep it. 7.Log off getting nothing done after 6h. 8.Rince and repeat. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats |
Roger Douglas
Infinite Improbability Inc Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 00:39:00 -
[14]
Add a bit of spice:
Each tower has a 500km radius damping field that damps sensors down to 30km max range.
Short range knife fights might make life exciting.
Then again, the smartbombs, oh my...
|
Saffron Reynoldes
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 22:30:00 -
[15]
I ran across an interesting concept the other day. I was looking at this game in which the objective is to capture ports on the high seas. It goes something like this:
2 teams: A and B (we'll say team B owns the port currently).
A team has to engage npc groups in the area surrounding the port in order to cause a 'destabilization' of the immediate area. B team does the same, only with the effect of stabilizing the area. After a certain point, if A team is successful, the area becomes openly contestable and a limited time pvpbattle begins. The victor of that battle takes control of the port.
Now what if, by engaging rats and sovereign alliance members, an enemy force could cause a system, or constellation, to destabilize (weakening sovereign installations throughout economically and militarily). This could leave an entire area vulnerable to even small assualt parties (because of the 'destabilized' structures).
|
Saffron Reynoldes
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 22:31:00 -
[16]
Oh pooey, I posted with the wrong character.
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 22:38:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Gort Edited by: Gort on 15/08/2007 19:17:30 The Germans took Europe in '39 faster than sov gets changed in this game.
Dial way back on the needless time sink aspect, please.
Bring back ping pong, I say... and let the maneuvering and shooting commence.
Gorty
edit: Or was it '40?
How dare you!
SKUNK
Originally by: Jeximo I also like how your cat only managed to hit the enter button when he/she jumped on your keyboard.
|
Macmuelli
Gallente Gallente Mercantile Exchange Coalition Of Empires
|
Posted - 2007.08.16 23:35:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Macmuelli on 16/08/2007 23:41:16 Edited by: Macmuelli on 16/08/2007 23:40:10 Edited by: Macmuelli on 16/08/2007 23:37:30 Edited by: Macmuelli on 16/08/2007 23:36:06 All Pos moduls shoud be reduced to " batteries" which can be fitted
Poduction lines shoud be combined in anchorable factorys. Which can hold 1 silos splitted in 8 parts + 2 reactors.
Moon minng batteries which can hold 2 moon miners + 2 silos in one batteries.
woud reduce anchored objects in space
(skilbased in diffrent qualtiys which gives a bonus for the cost of.... more cpu/powergrid usage etc..)
" gun batteries" shoud be limited in slots. 3 large / 3 medium / 4 small can be fitted and repaired in fight
Only one player can control 1 batterie and u can maximal anchore 2 gun batteries.As log there is enough powerggird u can fitt them with guns.
Damage on this batteries reduce the dmg output of the guns. It shoud be also possible to anchore a Repair modul which allow to repair damaged batteries.
about souvereignety:
.4 and below in empire has the " souvereignty of the faction etc.. but no navy/officiells on gate. It shoud be possible to " turn souvereinity on, for a faction of your choice. A chance adding it to factional warfare.
(caldari claim in gallente space pa example)<- this woud be player generated
What about a warfare agent gives out this mission , and only this ? And u get as reward a " goodly railgun of uberdestruction"
About pos warfare i woud add the possibilty to capture the pos too. U have the choice destroying or capture it." means what ever is inside th batteries it s yours( if u have something let alive).
some personal minds on it.
Ps: english isnt my mothelanguage so sry for all grammtical mistakes and typos
"Ein jeder ernte Ruhm auf seine Weise.....Gunnar von Hlidarendi "
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |