EVE Search - POSs Spaming

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

POSs Spaming

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Luso Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.01.30 10:36:00 - [1] CCP want combat situations ingame. But the reallity shows that POSs spaming is the best way to win a War. Put the price for a large POSs at 1B ISK and than let¦s see whats happen!
Bozse Caldari Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.01.30 11:20:00 - [2] Sadly making them more expensive isn't the sollution to the problem, the system needs to be reworked ( again ). The way i see it the only way to gain sov shuld be by removing the claiming alliance pos's that stake the claim, this would ofc need a new type of pos specificly to claim sov. The sov claiming tower shuld only be able to have guns / hardners / hangars fitted and be fairly expensive, a limit on amount per system ( thinking 3 ) would be needed aswell. That's the general gist atleast, to tired to go further in to it atm =) Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE is designed to be a dark and harsh world
thetwilitehour Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.30 12:06:00 - [3] Originally by: Luso Put the price for a large POSs at 1B ISK and than let¦s see whats happen! everyone who already owns a POS will be crazy rich? Sorry for the flippancy, but while I think most people would agree there is a general problem with the mechanics right now, just making towers more expensive wont solve it, they'll just require that alliances let in more corps of isk farmers to tax. See ongoing discussions for how Titans are no longer expensive enough and are proliferating rapidly. Honestly I think some sort of tie in with the cynojammer discussion is worthwhile to have, and maybe a solution that solves both problems, I found the idea of exploration having a component in conquring being particularily interesting and worthwhile. If you had to anchor sovreignty claiming modules inside deepspace zones that limit ship sizs for example, you could add a whole dimension of small gang pvp. Theres also this thread sticky for an ongoing discussion of revamping sovreignty mechanics.
Zarin	Posted - 2008.01.30 12:26:00 - [4] lol. Just lol. Someone got their POS stockpile already ? It shouldn't matter should it, you can just kill them or put more up yourself ?
Brmble Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.30 12:42:00 - [5] Originally by: Luso CCP want combat situations ingame. But the reallity shows that POSs spaming is the best way to win a War. Put the price for a large POSs at 1B ISK and than let¦s see whats happen! Do you know what is going to happen or do you just want to change game mechanics for the hell of it? Counter Proposal: make POSes into NPCOSes, put one on every moon (maybe planet *looks at the crazy moon counts in omist), you can shoot them to make them yours (claim sov, CHAs, silos, guns etc. all configured in advance and not alterable) and bingo: system ping pong of the old days is back, but with the bonus of different tactical battlegrounds. ~ no not believin in urself ~
Schani Kratnorr Internal Revenue Service	Posted - 2008.01.30 14:02:00 - [6] Those with experience in setting up towers, playing with sov. and taking down towers need to explain to CCP what is wrong with the current system. From the outside, looking in, it appears that almost everyone agrees control towers are booring to set up, manage and attack. The way control towers are tied into sovereignity claims, seems to compound the matter. Part of the problem seems to be that if you make changes to the way towers work, you could end up unintentionally affecting a lot of other things. In Jumpgate (a MUCH smaller game) each system had a "beacon". Flying through one would "flip" it to your faction. Perhaps a similar system could be consideren for sov.? Quote: Example: each moon in a system could have a "bacon"-like structure. A capture-the-flag trigger of sorts. You could still put up a tower, but with no guns anyone would be able to fly up to the "beacon" and "flip" it. Naturally, flipping a beacon would require a LOT more effort if the moon also had a control tower next to it. I envisage the beacon to be at a fixed distance from any pos deployed at the moon. It takes X minutes for each of your alliance members within Y kilometers of the beacon-structure. Basically I suggest moving sov. claims away from the control tower mechanic. This could make it easier to adjust without worrying about the effects on current control towers.
BuIIseye Amarr Pax Amarria Corp	Posted - 2008.01.30 14:28:00 - [7] Gave this some thought and came up with: (+ means advantage, - means disadvantage, +- depends on your point of view) All current POS's are transformed into NPCOS's as stated above. What does this mean? Corporate POS's (NPCOS's): + The Offensive Bonus's of the current POS is turned into Bonus's to industrial equipment (example: Caldari Tower / Dread Gurista has bonus's to Advanced and normal Mobile Laboratories, can fit more on a tower, extra ME/PE/copy/invetion slots and so on) (example no2: Minmatar / Domination tower has bonus's to Moon Harvesting cycle so you don't have to put 2 or 3 and so on) +- Barely any offensive modules, could serve as method of introduction for Pirate NPC dreads (example: You can run Pirate lvl 5 missions for corporation only, it requires that your corp owns a NPCOS and it will be like a mock siege with the defender being the players and the atacker being a npc faction with the whole of the bounty going to corp wallet) - Huge Strontium consumption rate in 0.0 space, not influenced by sov level (24h maximum, mostly because you won't need them for Sovereignty while at the same time not messing the high sec personal NPCOS's) - Unable to fit Sovereignty specific modules (Cyno Generator Arrays, Cyno Jammer Arrays) +- Can only be anchored on moons (no change there i guess ) +- Lower HP than what current POS's have +- Cannot claim Sovereignty +- Can be unanchored by anyone when Sovereignty swaps This could be a good balance betwen what they are now and what could be in the future. Now for the real deal: Sovereignty POS's (the current Deathstar): + The same/increased? Offensive Bonus's as current POS's +- Cost's 1.5Bil + Can only be anchored at Planets + Can claim Sovereignty + Can fit Sovereignty specific modules (Cyno Generator Arrays, Cyno Jammer Arrays) +- Similar/Lowered Strontium consumtion rate to current POS's + Lower Fuel Consumption +- Can be the POS type one can fit the doomsday array thingy we keep hearing about +- Only one type (for each race) of Sovereignty POS, the equivalent of a Large one The only real disadvantages i could think of would be: - More blob warfare to take them down because of cost? - Alliances now have to spend isk on buying them when they come out So basicly your tradeing normal pos's for a slightly improved combat only POS's that uses realy small ammounts of fuel (unless you want to set up industrial POS's). Not much advantage there except the combat version is limited by planet count per system (max 12 or something) and not moons (which can be 60-80? moons in some systems) ------------------------------ Because of the name I have a higher chance of a wrecking shot, please don't tell the GM's or they'll nerf me =/
Spoon Thumb Caldari Paladin Imperium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.30 14:30:00 - [8] Here what I'd do to change the sov system. Khaldari khanidpublic: RP channel for Kingdom loyalists Recruiting
Moctobot GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.30 14:47:00 - [9] i may have to print this thread out and make sweet love to it at some point
Luso Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.01.30 15:13:00 - [10] Originally by: Moctobot i may have to print this thread out and make sweet love to it at some point This is a developement Forum!!!
Moctobot GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.30 15:16:00 - [11] Edited by: Moctobot on 30/01/2008 15:15:51 no smack intended - i am interested to see what you guys theory craft up pos mechanics need to be look at in a bad way
Basics	Posted - 2008.01.30 15:47:00 - [12] http://eve-files.com/dl/146643
Seeing EyeDog	Posted - 2008.01.30 16:40:00 - [13] Originally by: Luso CCP want combat situations ingame. But the reallity shows that POSs spaming is the best way to win a War. Put the price for a large POSs at 1B ISK and than let¦s see whats happen! someone upset over the loss of TPAR? _____________________ Originally by: Locus Bey Intelligence isn't a prequisite for being a Goon, in fact its a deficit.

CCP Saint C C P	Posted - 2008.01.30 19:38:00 - [14] Degenerating into trolling and spam. Please get back on track or this thread will be locked. Saint Community Representative EVE Online, CCP Games Email/Netfang

Luso Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.01.30 20:03:00 - [15] Originally by: BuIIseye Now for the real deal: Sovereignty POS's (the current Deathstar): + The same/increased? Offensive Bonus's as current POS's +- Cost's 1.5Bil + Can only be anchored at Planets + Can claim Sovereignty + Can fit Sovereignty specific modules (Cyno Generator Arrays, Cyno Jammer Arrays) +- Similar/Lowered Strontium consumtion rate to current POS's + Lower Fuel Consumption +- Can be the POS type one can fit the doomsday array thingy we keep hearing about +- Only one type (for each race) of Sovereignty POS, the equivalent of a Large one The only real disadvantages i could think of would be: - More blob warfare to take them down because of cost? - Alliances now have to spend isk on buying them when they come out Sounds great
Vaal Erit	Posted - 2008.01.31 08:05:00 - [16] Originally by: CCP Saint Degenerating into trolling and spam. Please get back on track or this thread will be locked. Did you even read the original post? It STARTED as trolling. There is also a Features and Ideas forum but this thread doesn't belong there either because it is a flat-out whine. In case you have forgot, this forum is for: Test server feedback, comments to changes and fixes. This isn't the 'Complain about game mechanics forum' but it has degraded into such, please moderate this forum correctly.
Brmble Minmatar GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.01.31 09:33:00 - [17] Originally by: Luso Originally by: Moctobot i may have to print this thread out and make sweet love to it at some point This is a developement Forum!!! You never answered my post. "Let's see what happens!" is not a good development strategy. ~ no not believin in urself ~
Swatcat PsyCorp Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2008.01.31 12:43:00 - [18] Personally, I would like to see a 'Sovereignty' deployable item for POS's, that requires a lot of CPU/grid and therefore making it harder to fit. Swatcat
Schani Kratnorr Internal Revenue Service	Posted - 2008.01.31 22:52:00 - [19] snip - Mitnal Now back on topic. The sov. mechanic is up for debate. The OP has valid points regardles of affiliation, the current system is a bit booring? and (perhaps) not as good as it could be. Raising the cost of towers does little to fix the underlying issues, that pos warfare is a bit dull am I right? or...?
Swatcat PsyCorp Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2008.02.01 01:04:00 - [20] I totally agree that POS warfare is boring as hell, also slightly elitist since you need capitals and they are not cheap.. I understand why POS warefare was brought in, I think it makes perfect sense, as I stated in my post, I really feel that the sov control gets a little more tied into POS warfare in a way that will allow systems to change ownership without spamming missiles at a POS for hours Swatcat Originally by: Schani Kratnorr Now back on topic. The sov. mechanic is up for debate. The OP has valid points regardles of affiliation, the current system is a bit booring? and (perhaps) not as good as it could be. Raising the cost of towers does little to fix the underlying issues, that pos warfare is a bit dull am I right? or...?
Draconus Lofwyr Eternal Guardians Corp. The Covenant Alliance	Posted - 2008.02.01 03:29:00 - [21] If you want to make pos's more of a tactical battle and sov to be more dynamic, with front lines and better battle tactics, try this solution. sovrenity has a limit, no system can have a higher sov level than 1 higher than the lowest surrounding systems level. So to have a capital system, and all the fun toys (cyno jam, cap ship prod, jump gates ) you must have a system that has a outpost that has sov control for 3 surrounding systems. If a system loses sov status, it doesnt mean an imidiate drop, but you have 1 week to restore its sov status before all neighbor systems ripple down. This will encourage system seiges one at a time, working your way to a capital to eventualy take it down. Change the sov level req's for certain equipment to depend on sov level so you have a tiered defense and as you lose control, you loose defenses. /me waits for the flames to start and activates his capital posterior thermal hardeners on overheat DL
Koyama Ise	Posted - 2008.02.01 04:59:00 - [22] That isn't the solution for what you're trying to say. The way to stop "PoS Spamming" is to make the other alternatives seem more... useful. The reason why deploying PoSes into space is used to win a war is that if the system has Sov 3 with a cyno jammer it makes it very difficult, long and boring to take down a PoS since you cannot use dreads. So I don't see this as the way to fix this, but maybe an alternate solution could be looked into. -------- Yes, I know I'm an alt, what are you going to do about it?
Westly Synpa GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.02.01 05:08:00 - [23] Originally by: BuIIseye Gave this some thought and came up with: (+ means advantage, - means disadvantage, +- depends on your point of view) All current POS's are transformed into NPCOS's as stated above. What does this mean? Corporate POS's (NPCOS's): + The Offensive Bonus's of the current POS is turned into Bonus's to industrial equipment (example: Caldari Tower / Dread Gurista has bonus's to Advanced and normal Mobile Laboratories, can fit more on a tower, extra ME/PE/copy/invetion slots and so on) (example no2: Minmatar / Domination tower has bonus's to Moon Harvesting cycle so you don't have to put 2 or 3 and so on) +- Barely any offensive modules, could serve as method of introduction for Pirate NPC dreads (example: You can run Pirate lvl 5 missions for corporation only, it requires that your corp owns a NPCOS and it will be like a mock siege with the defender being the players and the atacker being a npc faction with the whole of the bounty going to corp wallet) - Huge Strontium consumption rate in 0.0 space, not influenced by sov level (24h maximum, mostly because you won't need them for Sovereignty while at the same time not messing the high sec personal NPCOS's) - Unable to fit Sovereignty specific modules (Cyno Generator Arrays, Cyno Jammer Arrays) +- Can only be anchored on moons (no change there i guess ) +- Lower HP than what current POS's have +- Cannot claim Sovereignty +- Can be unanchored by anyone when Sovereignty swaps This could be a good balance betwen what they are now and what could be in the future. Now for the real deal: Sovereignty POS's (the current Deathstar): + The same/increased? Offensive Bonus's as current POS's +- Cost's 1.5Bil + Can only be anchored at Planets + Can claim Sovereignty + Can fit Sovereignty specific modules (Cyno Generator Arrays, Cyno Jammer Arrays) +- Similar/Lowered Strontium consumtion rate to current POS's + Lower Fuel Consumption +- Can be the POS type one can fit the doomsday array thingy we keep hearing about +- Only one type (for each race) of Sovereignty POS, the equivalent of a Large one The only real disadvantages i could think of would be: - More blob warfare to take them down because of cost? - Alliances now have to spend isk on buying them when they come out So basicly your tradeing normal pos's for a slightly improved combat only POS's that uses realy small ammounts of fuel (unless you want to set up industrial POS's). Not much advantage there except the combat version is limited by planet count per system (max 12 or something) and not moons (which can be 60-80? moons in some systems) are you ******* retarteded or something? you just said put a DD module on something that can cyno-jam?
Cerina Natal	Posted - 2008.02.01 07:49:00 - [24] I think its a bad idear over all. The problem is not the price of the POS, the problem is that sovereignty is tied to a structure that already have way to many roles! The solution, remove sov role from the POS structure! Give the sovereignty role to a dedicated structure that does that one thing and ONLY that thing. Make this structure deployable at planets and NOT moons, this will reduce the chance of POS spamming, as most if not all of the solar systems in EvE have fare fewer planets then they have moons. Have this structure be like a housing structure that "unlinke the way POS's work" doesnt start with 100% of its sovereignty points. Have this be a iterative process. When you deploy the structure it might only give 1 sov point, but defending it and keeping it in system will encrese that number (lets say it increses every day - up to a certent level). If such a structure is put into reinforced mode or somthing equivilent to that, the sov counter will enter into a idel state untill structure have been repaired. Structuers should be very vulnable at a low level, and the longer they last the harder they would be to influence/take down. I agree with you that there is a problem with POS spamming, but problem is with POS's over all and not just with the spamming.
Lord Merkator	Posted - 2008.02.01 08:18:00 - [25] This migh be a bit offtopic, but are there any official statement as to how POSes can you put up in single system/constelation in certain period of time?

CCP Mitnal	Posted - 2008.02.02 05:36:00 - [26] Moved to Features and Ideas. Mitnal, Community Representative EVE Online CCP Games Email/Netfang

Luso Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.02.02 08:20:00 - [27] Edited by: Luso on 02/02/2008 08:23:55 Originally by: Westly Synp you just said put a DD module on something that can cyno-jam? Why not? Give an higher countdown as at a Titan and it works! So you maybe have time to warp out.
SuperSarge Dark Knights of Deneb Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2008.02.02 12:26:00 - [28] why not keep the current system and just add "Propaganda Towers" as a starbase structure? Reqs something like 2mil pg and 3-4k cpu? Said towers would increase loyalty(of the "population?") in a system thus increasing the sov level? just a preliminary thought.

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.