Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Valkerias
|
Posted - 2008.11.03 11:39:00 -
[1]
I've been giving this idea serious thought. From POS to outposts players can own everything else. Why not have players being able to own or better yet lease acceleration gates to private DED complexes?
Now to keep these from just crowding space, here are some powerful limitations.
1.) They should be prohibitively expensive. They should have a daily rental cost that matches the MONTHLY rental cost of the closest corporate office owned by the corp that wants to rent the gate. Players can choose to pay this fee daily or in monthly lump sums (ie 28X the daily value).
2.) Corps that want to establish a gate must meet the same requirements as corps wishing to anchor a POS (Standing, charters, etc.) And the needed consumables must be in a corp hangar within range of a remote science and industry job.
3.) Exploration must be used to find the DED space where the gate will be anchored. Players must choose to rent the ACC gate before the DED space de-spawns or is claimed by someone else and the rental fee must be paid in advance of anchoring the gate. (Before players know where the gate leads. A special permission allowing the exploring players to rent ACC gates may be a good idea to go with this.) Once the gate is established, the DED complex will remain as long as the rental fee is paid. The rental fee will then be automatically paid from the chosen corp wallet. If funds are insufficient, the DED plex will de-spawn 24 hours after payment failure. An eve-mail should be sent to the renting corp. (A sort of grace period)
Now that the restrictions have been listed, here's some benefits to owning this gate.
1.) In addition to what is normally found in exploration DED complexes, players may find... a.) Hidden dockable stations, probably owned by criminal factions (with or without mission agents, randomly selected.) b.) Hidden moons where players can anchor POS and which could possibly be mined for rare T2 minerals and reactions. c.) Hidden Ice belts so players can fuel their POS. d.) Flying mission agents that can't be found any other way.
2.) Players with the proper permissions can set restrictions on who can use the gates. a.) Ship type --- Only certain ships can use the gate. b.) Key item --- Only players that have the key item in their cargo hold can use the gate. c.) Guarded by faction ships. --- The gate is guarded by faction/ criminal ships that "lock" the gate until destroyed. (Unless the player wanting to use the gate belongs to the owner's corporation, and those can pass unmolested.) d.) Standing --- Players who have a standing below a certain level with the owning corp can not use the gate. e.) No restriction --- Anyone who can find the gate can use it.
I think this could open a whole new dimension of game play in eve.
|
Krystal Demishy
|
Posted - 2008.11.03 12:24:00 -
[2]
No thx. You got jump bridges already, and that's too much already.
|
Valkerias
|
Posted - 2008.11.03 15:44:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Valkerias on 03/11/2008 15:53:30
Originally by: Krystal Demishy No thx. You got jump bridges already, and that's too much already.
That's like saying "you got interstates already, you don't need driveways."
Jump bridges connect one fully public solar system to another. They don't give you private pockets of space. Acceleration gates do. Why do you think missions, criminals and secret operation encounters use them? Decoration?
I just thought players would appreciate the ability to do the same.
Also, I should mention, players never carry the gate. They spawn with the DED plex. It's just that players can't use them until they're claimed.
|
Rupicolous
Higher Ground
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 04:34:00 -
[4]
"A whole new dimension of game play in eve" is not quite all that but i'll give it one thumb up the bum cause some where some how a gate could be used for private enterprise.
Like keeping a DED complex active for a longer duration of time and allowing any pilot to locate and access the gate with a regular system scan. Attack and destruction of the gate will certainly allow one to ponder the cost/benefit ratio involved with the purchase and logistics of the heap. Soverenty should definitly be in affect for the deployment but otherwise it should be free game. If DED space is conquered then gate leads to nowhere and needs to be packed up for the next big adventure .........
|
Dantes Revenge
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 08:33:00 -
[5]
Oh great, your own private plex to farm every day for as long as you want. Plexes despawn and respawn somewhere else so that others can get a shot at running them. I doubt that anchoring one to your own private acceleration gate for as long as you want would be very popular. Those waiting to get their turn while you wallow in free isk may be a little less enthusiastic about it.
If you want a private gate, it should cost more isk than the plex generates. That way, you are paying for the privilege of anchoring a plex and running it every day instead of farming free isk from it constantly.
-- There's a simple difference between kinky and perverted. Kinky is using a feather to get her in the mood. Perverted is using the whole chicken. |
Evan Batarr
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 08:35:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Evan Batarr on 04/11/2008 08:36:29
Originally by: Dantes Revenge Oh great, your own private plex to farm every day for as long as you want. Plexes despawn and respawn somewhere else so that others can get a shot at running them. I doubt that anchoring one to your own private acceleration gate for as long as you want would be very popular. Those waiting to get their turn while you wallow in free isk may be a little less enthusiastic about it.
If you want a private gate, it should cost more isk than the plex generates. That way, you are paying for the privilege of anchoring a plex and running it every day instead of farming free isk from it constantly.
Pretty much this!
On a side note - the OP had a typical dumb carebear idea. EVE is already safe enough and it's way too easy to generate massive amounts of money in the safety of empire space.
|
Bobbechk
The Priory
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 10:06:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Valkerias
b.) Hidden moons where players can anchor POS and which could possibly be mined for
Moons in Deadspace.... sounds wieerd
|
Shirley Serious
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 11:42:00 -
[8]
There used to be a thing on the drawing board, I think, about player constructed deadspace depots.
Instead of having to anchor stuff at moons with a POS, you could construct a deadspace depot, to locate your refineries and factory modules and other stuff which isn't directly related to moon mining, so doesn't need to be at a moon.
That sort of thing might be interesting.
But having any sort of harvestable resource? I don't think so.
Yes. Yes, I am. |
silken mouth
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 12:05:00 -
[9]
it would be a nice tactical tool, one could place his outpost in a deadspace pocket and place the acc gates near a deathstar.
any attacking fleet would have to get past the pos or disable it and once at the station they could camp it and disable the deadspace generator.
|
Jinserai
|
Posted - 2008.11.06 16:05:00 -
[10]
The more I think about this, the more I like it. Aspects of it at least, not the entirety of the OP's idea. To make a correlation between Eve and a traditional SciFi/Fantasy type game, this would be the equivalent of building a keep/castle. You could concentrate defenses at the gate, and determine what size ships can get in or out by building a bigger or smaller gate. Obviously there is a smallest useful size of gate, as you need a pretty big ship to carry POS building materials.
But walls have advantages and disadvantages. They make it harder to get in, but they also make it harder to get out. They also provide a choke point for reinforcements coming in to repel invaders. Maybe make these player created Deadspace Zones only allow you to warp back to the acceleration gate that brought you there? Have the acceleration gates be hackable with varying security levels, which would be an incentive for CCP to actually make the named hacking modules DO something. Hack a gate (not something you would want to attempt until its defenses are neutralized) and you can temporarily set the gate to be (from easiest to hardest) Open to you, to your corp, your alliance, everyone, or the hardest possible set being setting it to allow exclusively you, your corp... etc;
The other disadvantage to this should be that reinforced mode should be either way way more limited, or in some way much more difficult. The sacrifice for making a more defensible POS is that it is weaker once you manage to get to it. I don't know enough about POS mechanics to know what this should be, but then, I' not making specific mechanics suggestion, instead these are to be taken as more abstracts to be fleshed out by people that DO understand the mechanics.
Is it feasable to balance, to program, or even needed? No idea. Just an interesting thought to play with.
|
|
Vanguard Warden
|
Posted - 2008.11.07 09:29:00 -
[11]
We can already build space-castles, it'd be great to have space-drawbridges.
|
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2008.11.07 17:39:00 -
[12]
Originally by: silken mouth it would be a nice tactical tool, one could place his outpost in a deadspace pocket and place the acc gates near a deathstar.
any attacking fleet would have to get past the pos or disable it and once at the station they could camp it and disable the deadspace generator.
Ok, now that would be cool ^_^
I'm not thrilled about the farming aspects of this idea, but I do rather like the idea of setting up your own deadspace pockets where you can place structures like control towers etc. Essentially, letting players do the same things that NPCs have been doing all along.
|
Daevonar
Minmatar Starfish Operating Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.11.07 18:03:00 -
[13]
A nice side effect of this is that you may start getting PvP action in dead space, which is inherently different from combat in normal space due to the, ah, 'natural phenomena' making AB's the only viable way of seriously boosting speed.
I have nothing against high speed ships and fast combat, but there's nothing wrong with a bit of variety too.
Deadspace at the moment has to be forced on players through missions or 'plex's, would be nice to see it become more incorporated.
You would need some way of overriding the gater permissions too, like you do with current acc. gates. Perhaps each player has to carry a passcard that always forms part of the loot when they get popped. Dae.
|
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2008.11.07 19:39:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Daevonar
You would need some way of overriding the gater permissions too, like you do with current acc. gates. Perhaps each player has to carry a passcard that always forms part of the loot when they get popped.
That would actually be a really cool way to handle it. Have some process that can sync passcards to gates (gate admin or something) and if you want to invade someone's deadspace all you have to do is pop someone going to/from it to get their key. Or have a mole in the corp...
|
Ashley Thomas
Kiith Paktu Nex Eternus
|
Posted - 2008.11.07 23:56:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Ashley Thomas on 07/11/2008 23:56:48 i would be in favor of player controlled acceleration gates
make a deadspace generator (like in a few missions) that has to be fueled like a pos (though uses only one type like uranium, and alot less demanding then poses))
make gate to enter deadspace field
nothing would come in it, it is simply space. players could anchor things in it or even put a pos in it if close enough to moon. standard deadspace limitations apply, no MWD and the like
|
Korovyov
Luminous Love Brewery
|
Posted - 2008.11.08 00:33:00 -
[16]
I vote NO on the MOAR SAFESPOTS PLOX initiative.
--=--=-- end of post --=--=--
got booze? |
Clansworth
Burning Sky Labs Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2008.11.08 01:04:00 -
[17]
I do think it is odd that everything has to be anchored at a moon, so I'm all for some sort of deadspace/empty space anchor ability. I actually do like the idea of acceleration gates, as well as the ability to anchor structures more like the mission areas. I do NOT like the idea of farm able items in the deadspace though, it's not like you would let pirates use your acceleration gates. I'd like the ability to anchor your POS/structures pretty much wherever you want, though the non-moon'd ones can't be used for sovereignty. I also like the idea of a deadspace generator that could be anchored at the POS to 'hide' it, while requiring an acceleration gate to get to it. The gates should be able to be hacked though. The deadspace generator should use a fair amount of fitting, so that it really nerfs what can be done in theses 'hidden starbases',
Perhaps, to help with scanability, they should follow the same rules as exploration sites and have to be anchored within 4 AU of a planet.
POS Personal Storage |
Daevonar
Minmatar Starfish Operating Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.11.08 03:23:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Clansworth I do think it is odd that everything has to be anchored at a moon, so I'm all for some sort of deadspace/empty space anchor ability
How, exactly, do you suggest that anything can be anchored in the middle of space. Moons have gravity, you'd need a large body that also exerted gravity greater by an order of magnitude to the thing you are anchoring. Dae.
|
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2008.11.08 08:23:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Daevonar
How, exactly, do you suggest that anything can be anchored in the middle of space. Moons have gravity, you'd need a large body that also exerted gravity greater by an order of magnitude to the thing you are anchoring.
It all depends what 'anchored' actually means. There is no reason I can think of why a control tower would need gravity nearby to switch on, and NPCs don't need gravity to anchor THIER towers. As far as I can tell, anchoring in EVE is just 'can't be hauled away by anyone with a ship', which gravity isn't going to make a differnce with anyway.
And besides, what you describe is just orbit, and technically it isn't even that since you can have similiar mass objects orbiting eachother just fine.
|
Daevonar
Minmatar Starfish Operating Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.11.08 16:26:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Nekopyat
Originally by: Daevonar
How, exactly, do you suggest that anything can be anchored in the middle of space. Moons have gravity, you'd need a large body that also exerted gravity greater by an order of magnitude to the thing you are anchoring.
It all depends what 'anchored' actually means. There is no reason I can think of why a control tower would need gravity nearby to switch on, and NPCs don't need gravity to anchor THIER towers. As far as I can tell, anchoring in EVE is just 'can't be hauled away by anyone with a ship', which gravity isn't going to make a differnce with anyway.
And besides, what you describe is just orbit, and technically it isn't even that since you can have similiar mass objects orbiting eachother just fine.
Fair enough mate, I took anchored to mean that it is essentially latched/leashed to something (which would be anchoring ;). I apologise for my ignorence of its meaning in game terms :) Dae.
|
|
Anchiria
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 14:04:00 -
[21]
Watching the replies, I find the idea to be taken favorably by quite a majority, though not in its entirety. What I find most interesting is that many of the nae sayers have NO ideas of their own.
"Another dumb CAREBEAR idea." Have pirates posted good ideas lately, or ANY ideas? Haven't seen em.
"I vote NO on MOAR SAFE PLOX" Hmm. Another one of those "I want more easy kills! Give me more kills! This game's no fun without kills. Waaahhh!" Stories it seems.
"This game's way too 'safe' already!" Seems someone hasn't actually flown missions recently and just gate camps. BS in Lvl 1 missions is not "SAFE" by any standards.
"You already have Jump Gates, this is too much." That one's been answered already.
I do like the one who pointed out the draw back and farming potential. THAT's an example of GOOD negative feedback not the usual "gankbear wannabe" tripe we usually hear from the "pirate" community.
The rest of the feedback's been overwhelmingly positive, and I hope CCP responds to the idea soon. Making the gates hackable has been the best of the player suggestions so far. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |