| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
The Pilgrimage
   |
Posted - 2008.06.14 03:43:00 -
[1]
I seem to have run in to an interesting situation with the sovereignty mechanics that did not go as I predicted. What more, the GM response to a request for clarification was even more unexpected. So that I can get my ducks in order and make sure I'm not going senile, someone please tell me if this makes sense given the GM response.
---
Day 0: We hold sovereignty in a system, we have 2 towers, a large and a small. The large had been planted for some time and we had sovereignty for several weeks, the small was planted on this day.
Day 2: A hostile large tower is planted
Day 4: Our small tower is put in reinforced mode for 2 days.
Day 5: Our large tower is put in to reinforced mode for 2 days.
Day 6 and 7: Both towers are saved.
Day 9: We lose sovereignty
---
Now the logical conclusion my cohorts and I came to was that we would maintain sovereignty, the enemy only dropped a tower to neutralize our large, they did not have a second tower to neutralize our small. When a request for clarification on this matter was sent to the GMs, I got the following back (paraphrased to avoid running afoul of the rules):
You lost sov because the towers were reinforced and then put back online later. Only online towers contribute to sovereignty
Now this flies in the face of what I know and what some guides list; I even recall this being changed so that reinforced towers do count for sov in a patch (sadly I can't find the notes). So there are two real issues I'd like input on:
1) Am I correct in believing the GM to be wrong?
2) Am I correct in believing that we should have not lost sovereignty?
Thanks in advance.
|
Mioelnir
KULT Production
Atrum Tempestas Foedus
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 04:01:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Mioelnir on 14/06/2008 04:04:47
Quick clarification, is the "[...]... put back online later. [...]" sloppy paraphrasing or factual representation of events, aka, did the towers run out of fuel or something else that had them drop into "anchored" state?
[Edit] Actually, forget that, if both towers would have gone offline somewhere along the line, sov would have been lost on day 8, not taken over on day 9.
From the timeline I'd say, the large tower dropped offline at some point, resetting its timer. The small tower stayed online and claimed until the hostile large tower finished his 7 day claim.
|
The Pilgrimage
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 04:18:00 -
[3]
Edited by: The Pilgrimage on 14/06/2008 04:18:41
Edited by: The Pilgrimage on 14/06/2008 04:18:31
The towers were never offline, they had over 2 weeks of fuel in them at all times. "Put back online later" is literally what the GM said.
Also I should add that the opponents did not take sov, they only neutralized it, so apparently we're both making equal claims. |
Mioelnir
KULT Production
Atrum Tempestas Foedus
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 06:44:00 -
[4]
Ah, sov is only neuted. Ok, then everything is working as intended.
It is not that the larges equal each other out and your small tips the sov in your favor. The presence of a large tower negates any claims a medium or small tower makes, they aren't considered anymore.
Sov only weights the biggest class of towers that are present in the system between contesting parties. Right now, there are two actively claiming towers in system, being your large and the opposing forces' large, with your small being a backup that only counts if there are no medium are large towers left in the system.
To (re)gain sov, a second large tower has to be placed.
|
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 19:13:00 -
[5]
oh...? an "extra" small tower doesn't help..?
-
putting the gist back into logistics |
Lord Fitz
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 19:26:00 -
[6]
Short form 1) yes 2) no.
Long:
Towers that are in reinforced have contributed to soverignty for about 18 months now. Previously this was not the case. If a tower goes offline for any reason, it must return online and stay that way for 7 days (downtimes) to contribute.
If there is a medium tower in system claiming soverignty, No amount of small towers will make ANY difference.
If there is a large tower in system claiming soverignty, No amount of medium or small towers will make ANY difference.
The soverignty calculation only looks at the largest type of sov claiming tower in the system. It totally ignores any that are smaller, they do not add up, they do not count for anything (other than holding that moon spot).
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |