Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Minnow maught
Art of War Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.08.23 11:48:00 -
[61]
There is of course a catch to this tactic.
If you only have 6 moons and you use this tactic to hold the moons then the attacker only needs to clear 1 moon, anchor a POS and let YOU the defender tidy up the other moons to recontest sov.
|
Nairb Ecrep
|
Posted - 2007.08.23 13:15:00 -
[62]
It seems to me that having a control tower up is key to allowing structures to remain 'anchored'. I was always under the impression that in the game, you were somehow anchoring strucutres to the control tower (because you can't just anchor guns/etc anywhere). It would make sense to me that if the thing gets destroyed that you anchored a gun to, the gun becomes unanchored...
|
Vishnej
Demonic Retribution Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.08.23 22:08:00 -
[63]
Edited by: Vishnej on 23/08/2007 22:10:15
Originally by: Minnow maught There is of course a catch to this tactic.
If you only have 6 moons and you use this tactic to hold the moons then the attacker only needs to clear 1 moon, anchor a POS and let YOU the defender tidy up the other moons to recontest sov.
It's not intended to replace having deathstars. It's intended to replace having more deathstars, or for chipping away at enemy defenses without ever dropping deathstars.
Do it on every moon, and you can turn the station back to pre-sovereignty days.
An alliance can plop down in a 60 moon system with this after picking 8 moons to set up with heavily armed domination defensive POSes, and after their initial outlay, pay for sovereignty with a single 100-day GTC per week.
|
Voculus
E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.08.24 04:25:00 -
[64]
Well if you're in BoB, you can convo your dev buddies on MSN, and they'll just unanchor them all at once for you. _________________________________________________________
|
Mr Krosis
The humble Crew Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.08.24 08:36:00 -
[65]
I can confirm that GMs will, at least in some situations, destroy structures left behind that prevent the anchoring of a new POS.
We had some 20 cruiser missile batteries that we were destroying all simultaneously pop in front of our eyes in response to a petition regarding a blocked moon.
I would think twice before spending my time anchoring 200 sensor dampeners.
-- Mr Krosis The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge. |
Vishnej
Demonic Retribution Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.08.24 16:10:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Mr Krosis I can confirm that GMs will, at least in some situations, destroy structures left behind that prevent the anchoring of a new POS.
We had some 20 cruiser missile batteries that we were destroying all simultaneously pop in front of our eyes in response to a petition regarding a blocked moon.
I would think twice before spending my time anchoring 200 sensor dampeners.
In what situations? What was your petition?
|
Arwen Ariniel
Gallente Shaolin Legacy
|
Posted - 2007.08.26 11:27:00 -
[67]
Originally by: meritorious brown Do I detect the subtle aroma of sour grapes here?
Alliance X is getting walked over by Alliance Y, therefore Alliance X resorts to the tactics of a backward child?
25 billion tears, I heard.
Sour grapes indeed, the big alliances crying 25 billion tears about the smaller ones using scorched earth tactics and running of to the gm's to cry like a backward child 'mommy, he doesn't let me win'.
Don't change a thing CCP, at least this way there is a better balance of power. |
javer
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 18:23:00 -
[68]
/signed -------------------------------------------- Never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their Level and beat you with experience. |
Johnny Blademan
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 02:53:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Price checker2k What a load of crap. CCP, Acknowledge the problem and come up with a fast soultion to this bul1sh1t or I will come up with a solution to something taking around 60 euro from my VISA card each month.
SIGNED.
Price checker - while I barely understand this discussion I can tell you that there is another chap threatening to quit because the game isn't played the way he'd like it.
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=582805
Check out the thread, Desolacer is getting lots of support and encouragement there and I'm sure you'll get some too!
JB
|
Scordaf
Ganja Labs Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 12:00:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Arwen Ariniel
Originally by: meritorious brown Do I detect the subtle aroma of sour grapes here?
Alliance X is getting walked over by Alliance Y, therefore Alliance X resorts to the tactics of a backward child?
25 billion tears, I heard.
Sour grapes indeed, the big alliances crying 25 billion tears about the smaller ones using scorched earth tactics and running of to the gm's to cry like a backward child 'mommy, he doesn't let me win'.
Don't change a thing CCP, at least this way there is a better balance of power.
What a load of childish drivel.
I know some people can't quite grasp this, but Eve is a game. A F**king game. Last I checked games were about entertainment and enjoyment. Spending 5 hours taking out a single POS is NOT ENTERTAINING OR ENJOYABLE. Hell, my 9 to 5 job is more exciting than POS warfare. I'll also point out that only a masochist would gain enjoyment from anchoring all those bubbles, too.
OK, OK. Eve isn't about instant gratification and twitch gameplay... But come on. The whole POS system (anchoring, fueling, sieging, defending) takes everything boring about MMO's, drains any remaining life out of it and delivers up a whithered husk of anything even remotely enjoyable.
|
|
Vishnej
Demonic Retribution Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.09.24 07:07:00 -
[71]
Edited by: Vishnej on 24/09/2007 07:08:09 UPDATE:
In response to a petition someone in our alliance filed a month ago, and miraculously managed to escalate time after time, we got this back today:
Quote:
Hi.
Yes, spamming massive number of anchored structures without having the CPU/Grid to online them is considered to be an exploit.
If you need any further assistance on this issue please do not hesitate to contact us. If you would like me to close this petition please let me know.
Best regards, GM [redacted] EVE Online Customer Support
|
Blazing Fire
Interstellar Operations Incorporated
|
Posted - 2007.09.24 08:55:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Vishnej Edited by: Vishnej on 24/09/2007 07:08:09 UPDATE:
In response to a petition someone in our alliance filed a month ago, and miraculously managed to escalate time after time, we got this back today:
Quote:
Hi.
Yes, spamming massive number of anchored structures without having the CPU/Grid to online them is considered to be an exploit.
If you need any further assistance on this issue please do not hesitate to contact us. If you would like me to close this petition please let me know.
Best regards, GM [redacted] EVE Online Customer Support
I think it is agains the EULA and/or forum rules to post GM responces.
Anyway, something must be done about the POS warfare, and it is not what CCP has done in REV II.
Blazing Fire CEO Interstellar Operations Incorporated Corp web site
Recruitment Looking for experienced players Looking for new EVE players
Services [Service] Killboard hosting [Service] Forum hosting [Service] Web site hosting [Service] Obelisk for rent [Service] Alliance Creation
|
Vishnej
Demonic Retribution Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.09.24 10:02:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Blazing Fire
I think it is agains the EULA and/or forum rules to post GM responces.
Anyway, something must be done about the POS warfare, and it is not what CCP has done in REV II.
I'm not publishing the full private correspondance between myself and a GM, which would be against the rules. The petition was not my own, and the person who posted it has redacted the name of the GM he talked with along with their own name, rendering it from a private correspondence to a public statement about CCP Policy on what is an exploit - statements the like of which are necessary in order to avoid being banned from the game or having ones' actions reversed by GMs.
The rule is designed to prevent needless whining and prevent (sometimes needed, it appears) attacks on GM consistency from escalating into allegations of corruption and player revolt. Neither of which this quote serves, as apparently they took a month or so to decide what the policy would be, and finally answered, and this petition was informational, not requesting action.
|
Firkragg
Blue Labs Knights Of the Southerncross
|
Posted - 2007.09.24 10:54:00 -
[74]
increase resist while pos is online to 99% on structure.
drop total structure hp on the modules to 10% of current.
seems like a simple fix that makes no different when the pos is operational but makes it alot easier to clean up afterwards.
|
Doxs Roxs
White Wolves Defence league The OSS
|
Posted - 2007.09.24 11:23:00 -
[75]
Personally I like a combination of the spoils of war idea and the 99% hull resists when tower is online but only 10% of the current hp idea.
When the tower blows up about 50% of the anchored structures should go pop as well, the surviving structures should instantly unanchor so that the attacker can scoop them or destroy them.
Regards /Doxs After 9 months of being a "!" face, I now discover that Im butt ugly instead... |
Clansworth
Point-Zero SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.09.24 19:22:00 -
[76]
I agree that the anchored structures hsould have a chance of the tower's boom boom cascading to them, making them go boom boom. How seriously purtified would it be to take out a tower, and just as it's big 'ol explosion was dieing off, some ofthe smaller structures started lighting up the sky. Not all of them, and they hsould have a delay before themselves going up, just so their destructionisn't masked by the explosion from the tower... Completely frapstastic if you ask me.
I used to shoot structures in misisons down to low hull, and then set my drones on them sequentially, to watch them go up. Those power generators in some misisons make big booms, and look really cool going up one after the other in their nice clean rows.
Prospector Class |
Rhaegor Stormborn
Pestilent Industries Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2007.09.26 22:45:00 -
[77]
I thought of this as well, should of posted this in general discussion then it would get the attention it deserves.
Rhaegor Stormborn Fleet Admiral - Pestilent Industries Amalgamated [PIA] Recruitment Thread |
Mistress Suffering
Einherjar Rising
|
Posted - 2007.10.11 18:48:00 -
[78]
Mods should take significantly increased damage after the POS itself is dead. Cleanup is a 'safe' job, but mind-numbing in its length and boredom. There's no reason to subject people to that length of unfun.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |