| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Valei Khurelem
180
   |
Posted - 2012.01.19 08:02:00 -
[31] - Quote
Well it's not as if we can do mission running for the pirate factions with all the gankers around anyway so I say it's a worthy sacrifice if it means the assholes actually have to take some losses once in awhile.
"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP." -á - CCP Ytterbium |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
2624
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 08:03:00 -
[32] - Quote
Elessa Enaka wrote:Colonial Burton wrote:I'm all for this idea. I mean, look at 0.0 currently. A new station is deployed each week. Back in 2008 you could roam through Vale of the Silent and you'd only come accross a couple of stations, now there is a station in half of the systems in that region. Soon they're going to be completely filled with stations and there will be no further use for station construction.
Once a station is deployed, it is a permanent fixture. What if the new residents want a different station in that system? What if they want a Minmatar Refinery but there is a useless Caldari Research outpost? It cannot be changed. Unless they become destructable! Unless of course, the rules were altered to allow 1 Outpost per X planets....
I think this is the opposite of the correct solution. Allow an outpost at every planet, but make them wreckable.
Half the reason that there are so many systems with outposts is that you can only put 1 in a system. Sov alliances would far prefer to put several outposts in one system, than have several systems with one outpost.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
2624
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 08:04:00 -
[33] - Quote
Valei Khurelem wrote:Well it's not as if we can do mission running for the pirate factions with all the gankers around anyway so I say it's a worthy sacrifice if it means the assholes actually have to take some losses once in awhile.
Where do you think all those Dramiels on the Jita market come from?
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Valei Khurelem
180
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 08:07:00 -
[34] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Valei Khurelem wrote:Well it's not as if we can do mission running for the pirate factions with all the gankers around anyway so I say it's a worthy sacrifice if it means the assholes actually have to take some losses once in awhile. Where do you think all those Dramiels on the Jita market come from?
0.0 alliances who roam around empire space ganking anyone they can get their hands on while their friends run missions to get loyalty points and yes, I saw one group popping into local once.
"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP." -á - CCP Ytterbium |
Othran
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
139
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 08:14:00 -
[35] - Quote
Looks OK but I'd remove the "No Sov" requirement.
Make it harder to destroy/wreck if there is sov. However if someone has taken sov from the previous alliance its extremely unlikely they would then wreck the outpost. I suppose the sov losers may decide on a "scorched space" policy but otherwise it'd be business as usual.
Apart from that it should be done. Sooner than soon too  |
Sentient Blade
Walk It Off
Coalition of the Unfortunate
232
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 08:48:00 -
[36] - Quote
Destroying outposts and everything in them would be moronic. It actively discourages the building up of assets and strength in null, as all it takes is a few supers dropped on your home system over the course of a week and bam, everything gone.
As it is now if your outpost gets nuked you have the chance to re-take it at a later date, in fact, it gives you something to work towards. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power.
Cascade Imminent
229
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 10:46:00 -
[37] - Quote
seany1212 wrote:Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:seany1212 wrote: make alliances work for the stations they live in rather than grind one out from the last person who owned it. lol wut you know, that thing other than sitting 50 titans on a station until it hits reinforced or you capture it...
lol wut |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power.
Cascade Imminent
229
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 10:54:00 -
[38] - Quote
In reality, with POS mechanics and supers as is, destructible stations will quickly reduce nullsec into a few supercap-heavy coalitions with a rich, nougaty station-filled core area surrounded by dozens of jumps of barren, lifeless systems in every direction (neighboring/newcomer stations are liabilities, after all). Which I suppose is great if you fit the profile of "coalition leader with access to a lot of supercaps" like, well, a lot of the CSM do. |
octahexx Charante
Yulai Guard 1st Fleet
Yulai Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 11:10:00 -
[39] - Quote
i dont understand how this will not make ppl leave null.
alot of null is just empty systems.
if stations would have been destructable and something like branch would happen and 52 stations would be blown up all assets destroyed.
who in their right mind would even use the effort to restart? why bother?
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
2625
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 11:23:00 -
[40] - Quote
Othran wrote:Looks OK but I'd remove the "No Sov" requirement. Make it harder to destroy/wreck if there is sov. However if someone has taken sov from the previous alliance its extremely unlikely they would then wreck the outpost. I suppose the sov losers may decide on a "scorched space" policy but otherwise it'd be business as usual. Apart from that it should be done. Sooner than soon too
I think it's much more likely than you think that alliances would destroy captured outposts. If there's one thing that defines nullsec wars at the moment it's the bitching about having to grind through dozens of outposts to formalize a victory won in practice long before. Clearing out the excess outposts would be very popular indeed.
In fact I think you'd find that with my proposal, alliances would be willing to destroy quite a few of their own outposts just to be rid of the cost of the sov bills for them, especially if they could also concentrate more outposts in a single or few systems.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
2625
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 11:24:00 -
[41] - Quote
octahexx Charante wrote:i dont understand how this will not make ppl leave null.
alot of null is just empty systems.
if stations would have been destructable and something like branch would happen and 52 stations would be blown up all assets destroyed.
who in their right mind would even use the effort to restart? why bother?
Most of the proposals, including mine, specifically protect individual player assets kept in an outpost.
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
|
CCP Spitfire
C C P
C C P Alliance
1289
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 12:27:00 -
[42] - Quote
Moved from "EVE General Discussion".
CCP Spitfire | Russian Community Coordinator
@ccp_spitfire |
|
Iris Bravemount
Airkio Mining Corp
Bloodbound.
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 13:12:00 -
[43] - Quote
If you have a look at the latest CSM summit minutes, you will see that destructible outposts WILL be implemented. The only question is how.
To make a long story short, three options are being discussed :
- Destroy the outpost and everything in there.
- Destroy the outpost, but teleport everything in there to the nearest NPC station.
- Destroy the outpost and have everything put on force auction in the nearest NPC station. The items' owners would get the money.
I would prefer option 2, but would be fine with option 3 as well. Option 1 would really suck, because there is so much stuff in an outpost.
But this is just my personal opinion.
Improve weapon sound effects |
Cyprus Black
Tears of Redemption
NEM3SIS.
129
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 16:35:00 -
[44] - Quote
Iris Bravemount wrote:If you have a look at the latest CSM summit minutes, you will see that destructible outposts WILL be implemented. The only question is how.
To make a long story short, three options are being discussed :
- Destroy the outpost and everything in there.
- Destroy the outpost, but teleport everything in there to the nearest NPC station.
- Destroy the outpost and have everything put on force auction in the nearest NPC station. The items' owners would get the money.
I would prefer option 2, but would be fine with option 3 as well. Option 1 would really suck, because there is so much stuff in an outpost.
But this is just my personal opinion. Well, if its going to happen regardles, I'll start packing and moving back to empire now. I know for a fact I won't be the only one.
Yay, another mass exodus out of null sec 
Hopefully CCP will have the sense to recognize this bad feature before it goes live.
Option one is just bad overall.
Option two means players will camp said NPC station 24/7, knowing any ships undocking are loot pinatas.
Option three is too easy to abuse. Alliance leaders can mandate that nobody can bid except them. Thus keeping the auction prices dirt cheap.
Like my post?
Made you laugh or think?
Maybe even offended or nausiated you?
Then give a Like.
They're free and oh so easy to give. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
101
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 17:26:00 -
[45] - Quote
Krios Ahzek wrote:All docked ships wrecked, all loot wrecked or dropped (same chance as when a ship dies)
TADAM! Now war pays.
Let the galaxy burn
yeah, because what PL needs is a boost to their income. If destructable stations in your manner would ever be implemented, their current contract fees of xxx billion would look like crap compared to what would drops from stations, when they start their 0.0 annihilation tour.
For me, I would move to NPC 0.0 with all my stuff and never return to sov 0.0 for "living". |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |