| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Satav
Latinum Exports
1
   |
Posted - 2011.09.12 16:49:00 -
[1] - Quote
Anyone else think that outposts should be destructable? or at least have the consequences of having the Outpost RF'd much higher.
I understand that it maybe shouldn't be completely destructible since everything inside would be destroyed as well. (loot heaven!)
But perhaps make it so you have to rebuilt the platform from scratch with an egg.
Mainly looking for possible scenarios/outcomes from being for or against this from the eve community.
I thank you in advance for your opinions and constructive input. |
Othran
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2011.09.12 16:53:00 -
[2] - Quote
Yes, but not under current sov rules.
Everything "player-built" should be destroyable by players IMHO. |
Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate
21
|
Posted - 2011.09.12 17:22:00 -
[3] - Quote
Destructable Outposts = Scorched Earth |
Othran
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
17
|
Posted - 2011.09.12 18:14:00 -
[4] - Quote
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:Destructable Outposts = Scorched Earth
Under current sov rules yes I agree.
Players should be capable of destroying them though - mechanics can get sorted out before that (well assuming some competence in ccp). |
Lyris Nairn
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2011.09.12 18:29:00 -
[5] - Quote
Yes, burn down all outposts. |
Feligast
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
37
|
Posted - 2011.09.12 19:08:00 -
[6] - Quote
Lyris Nairn wrote:Yes, burn down all outposts.
|
whaynethepain
Dissident Aggressors
Mordus Angels
4
|
Posted - 2011.09.12 19:21:00 -
[7] - Quote
Excellent question.
Traditionally, PVP has included the destruction and acquisition of other players stuff.
And PVE tends to be re-spawning unimportant objects.
I fear to siege an Outpost, with the option of destruction, would honestly make some cry.
Having said that, if some Alliance took my Alliance Outpost, worked so hard to create, I would like to sneak in and destroy it.
Unfortunately, I believe this would seriously hinder an Alliance surging forward, taking many systems at once, because they would have hold back to defend their newly acquired assets.
|
Mirima Thurander
Deventer Exploration An Aqusition
2
|
Posted - 2011.09.12 21:52:00 -
[8] - Quote
whaynethepain wrote:
Unfortunately, I believe this would seriously hinder an Alliance surging forward, taking many systems at once, because they would have hold back to defend their newly acquired assets.
is this not the point? i mean should this not have been done this way it was done from the start.
|
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks
37
|
Posted - 2011.09.12 22:22:00 -
[9] - Quote
In the days of castles, it was impractical to utterly destroy a castle. This would require practically dismantling the entire structure and scattering the stones so that it could not easily be rebuilt. For an army on the move, this would cost valuable time and all the enemy to regroup, reinforce, and attack while you were destroying one castle.
Instead, it became a common practice to "slight" a castle, rendering it indefensible. Walls would be breached, gates would be opened and rendered unable to close, moats would be bridged with dirt. While dismantling a castle could take months, slighting it could take just a couple of weeks (in a time of multi-year sieges, this was fast).
So I would suggest this:
At 25% structure, an outpost surrenders to the attacking alliance and is captured. This would be the same as 0% today.
At 10% structure, the outpost goes offline. At this point the outpost must be repaired to 25% and spend 24-72 hours returning to an online status before it can be used again. This way an attacking alliance can cripple outposts and return to them later.
At 0% structure, the outpost is destroyed. |
destiny2
The Urben Saints
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 14:45:00 -
[10] - Quote
whaynethepain wrote:Excellent question.
Traditionally, PVP has included the destruction and acquisition of other players stuff.
And PVE tends to be re-spawning unimportant objects.
I fear to siege an Outpost, with the option of destruction, would honestly make some cry.
Having said that, if some Alliance took my Alliance Outpost, worked so hard to create, I would like to sneak in and destroy it.
Unfortunately, I believe this would seriously hinder an Alliance surging forward, taking many systems at once, because they would have hold back to defend their newly acquired assets.
However. destroying a Outpost would take a frick ton of firepower and im sure if CCP allowed the destruction of Outposts they would give it bonuses to use towards its fleets protecting it. its bad enough killing a large tower with the amount of time it takes without risking titans on the field. |
Satav
Latinum Exports
1
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 15:30:00 -
[11] - Quote
bump. |
Lyris Nairn
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
46
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 15:34:00 -
[12] - Quote
destiny2 wrote:whaynethepain wrote:Excellent question.
Traditionally, PVP has included the destruction and acquisition of other players stuff.
And PVE tends to be re-spawning unimportant objects.
I fear to siege an Outpost, with the option of destruction, would honestly make some cry.
Having said that, if some Alliance took my Alliance Outpost, worked so hard to create, I would like to sneak in and destroy it.
Unfortunately, I believe this would seriously hinder an Alliance surging forward, taking many systems at once, because they would have hold back to defend their newly acquired assets.
However. destroying a Outpost would take a frick ton of firepower and im sure if CCP allowed the destruction of Outposts they would give it bonuses to use towards its fleets protecting it. its bad enough killing a large tower with the amount of time it takes without risking titans on the field.
No, please do not even suggest this. CCP has already included enough brick walls for us to waste hours upon hours shooting with multi-hundred man fleets. We do not need an other such static thing at which to shoot. As long as there is an advantage to bringing more guys to the fight (in this case, more guys eat through the effective hit points faster so we have to waste less time stabbing ourselves in the faces with this stupid mechanic), then there will always be huge blobs. People do not seem to like blobs. And yet the same people who post about hating blobs want the extra security that comes from their space stuff being hard to kill. As long as there are things in space with obnoxiously high effective hit point totals, then there will continue to be an incentive to bring huge fleets that lag the servers and make the Elite PVP crowd whinge about dishonorable blobs of unskilled newbies. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
9
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 15:53:00 -
[13] - Quote
Would love for it to be possible, but it would have to very difficult and/or expensive to do and not be just another EHP sink that encourages blobbing.
Examples:
- Infiltration of owners corporation to disable nano-assembly array which keeps outpost from popping (ie. bypass the reinforcement mechanic). Spy is obviously burned by doing it so, consider the target carefully or have loads of spies in place!
- Sacrificing a bunch of SC's or one Titan to destroy the nano-assembly array (ex. Gallente's attack on Caldari station in runup to FW).
If the nano-assembly array is active the 'normal' reinforcement system is used and it rebuilds itself at DT.
To keep it fair:
Personal hangars get a sorting system similar to corporate hangars. Upon destruction items are ejected in locked freight containers (or similar) and scattered far grid wide, any ships are destroyed unless unassembled and in a hangar division.
Makes it a pinata fest but requiring freighters/JFs to pick up the loot without knowing which one is the golden egg .. no smash and grab possible and gives a second chance for outpost owners to recoup some losses or inflict some of their own as the case may be. |
Lyris Nairn
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
50
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 16:02:00 -
[14] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:
Makes it a pinata fest but requiring freighters/JFs to pick up the loot without knowing which one is the golden egg .. no smash and grab possible and gives a second chance for outpost owners to recoup some losses or inflict some of their own as the case may be.
You have no idea how happy this would make every member of GSOL.
But to be fair you probably have no idea how much a large alliance already has need of Jump Freighters in everyday logistics. |
Vio Geraci
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 18:54:00 -
[15] - Quote
While this doesn't exactly fit our party messaging, I think players should be able to cripple an outpost so that it cannot be docked in, nor used for any service at all. Players docked there, gear there, and jump clones would all remain. In this scenario outposts could be repaired through an industrial effort equal to perhaps 1/3rd or 1/2 of building an outpost. Perhaps you would make and transport a repair platform.
The point of this is area denial rather than loot, and players could retain their gear if they quit for a month and return to find that their space has changed hands or been destroyed. I think this would be a much gentler change than allowing wholesale destruction of stations, and be less brutal on the individual player that decided to take the risk of moving to 0.0. That said, I think there should be more ways to steal from other players and/or mess with them, but this does not seem to be it. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
10
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 19:05:00 -
[16] - Quote
Lyris Nairn wrote:You have no idea how happy this would make every member of GSOL.
Guiding Hand blokes, the ones who have made spying an assembly line job?
Yeah, I reckon their business would boom quite handily .. we already have "features" that allows a mole to do harm (theft, kicking, PW changes, alliance disband  etc.) this just adds an actual mechanic to the mix .. technically everything in Eve is easier to do using brute force or numbers and its quite tedious
Lyris Nairn wrote:But to be fair you probably have no idea how much a large alliance already has need of Jump Freighters in everyday logistics.
What do you mean? That they don't have freighters to spare for scooping duty in potentially hostile space or that it will be "too easy" to do?
Just imagine how many cans we are talking about for a busy station system, hundreds of peoples stuff all in individual containers (one per division to be evil!) that can not be scanned or opened in space .. need to haul them to a station to repack/reproc it to get the contents.
Further thought: Might even be something for the hacking skill to do, get an inventory listing for cans in space without actually being able to open the things. |
Vio Geraci
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 19:10:00 -
[17] - Quote
You bring up an interesting tangential point, in that spying is essentially an unsupported profession in EVE. A lot of the stuff spies do seems to happen despite CCP, rather than because of them. I'd love to see more ways to sabotage a corporation from within. |
Lyris Nairn
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
82
|
Posted - 2011.09.13 19:30:00 -
[18] - Quote
Hirana Yoshida wrote:Lyris Nairn wrote:You have no idea how happy this would make every member of GSOL. Guiding Hand blokes, the ones who have made spying an assembly line job? Yeah, I reckon their business would boom quite handily .. we already have "features" that allows a mole to do harm (theft, kicking, PW changes, alliance disband etc.) this just adds an actual mechanic to the mix .. technically everything in Eve is easier to do using brute force or numbers and its quite tedious.
I was actually referring to a group within Goonswarm whose abbreviation is GSOL, not the Guiding Hand Social Club run by Istvaan. They are the guys who go completely unnoticed as they fuel and configure POS, fuel jump bridges, move huge amounts of stuff around so that there is a cache at the front lines of a fighting force, and so on. They use Rorquals and Jump Freighters by the dozens to get these jobs done in something resembling a decent amount of time, which is to say that it is hours and hours of clicking buttons and being paranoid even with a fleet of such ships.
Quote:
What do you mean? That they don't have freighters to spare for scooping duty in potentially hostile space or that it will be "too easy" to do?
Just imagine how many cans we are talking about for a busy station system, hundreds of peoples stuff all in individual containers (one per division to be evil!) that can not be scanned or opened in space .. need to haul them to a station to repack/reproc it to get the contents.
I mean that in reference to what I just said above most large alliances already have a large fleet of Jump Freighters, Freighters, Rorquals and Carriers for the expressed purpose of moving huge amounts of ships. Consider if an alliance decides that it wants to switch from using an all-Maelstrom fleet doctrine to an all-Abbadon fleet doctrine; further, consider that the alliance can expect to field about 200-500 such ships in the course of a day, and lose about a quarter of them. That is 50-125 battleships per day, or 350-875 battleships per week, plus modules, rigs, ammunition, and variant modules for persons of various skill levels, that need to be imported to the staging area. Consider than in order to move a fleet of that size through a jump bridge network, or to bridge a fleet of that size through a Titan, and to fuel the POS that keeps those Titans safe and maintains the jump bridge networks, you need tens of millions of cubic meters worth of liquid ozone per week. Now consider the size of a jump-capable hauling fleet needed to maintain this. Now imagine how trivial it would be for an alliance of a size sufficient to field such a fleet to simply scoop up everything by cynoing in all of their logistical hauling ships.
Don't get me wrongGÇöI love the idea. I just don't think you realize how "not hard at all" your difficult task is. And even if it truly was a difficult task, game design should not be balanced around the difficulty or tediousness of an action; if an action is the best, most efficient, or most profitable, or only thing to do in a certain situation, the difficulty or tediousness of that action will not at all balance it. People will do it. They will commit as many hours, as many people, and as many accounts as necessary to doing it.
Quote:Further thought: Might even be something for the hacking skill to do, get an inventory listing for cans in space without actually being able to open the things.
I actually like that idea, which is probably evidence enough that it's a terrible idea.  |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
Limitless Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.14 14:48:00 -
[19] - Quote
Short answer: yes.
Long answer: yes, they should. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
10
|
Posted - 2011.09.14 15:32:00 -
[20] - Quote
Ahh, OK, so GSOL is the Goon logistics arm .. did not know that. Even if they are currently busy tending the needs of the hive, surely they will embrace the chance to boss around entire fleets as they need cover and warp-ins on cans scattered all over the place .. doubly so after December when the first changes towards making null industrially self-sufficient are made and a big chunk of their raison d'etre is removed .. no? 
As for the hard/tedious part, doesn't that apply to just about everything in Eve? Mining, missions, ratting et al.?
By scattering the goodies you essentially push it into the risk/reward part of the equation as the fatties are not exactly known for their defensive capabilities .. either way, if loot is to be on table for outpost destruction then it has to be an arduous task due to possible profit, hell even in the real world city sackings of old an army would spend days sifting through the rubble for the goodies.
|
DigDoug
Amber Lamps Labs
2
|
Posted - 2011.09.16 04:50:00 -
[21] - Quote
They should allow it and put a defense system upgrade on it and allows players to man the turrets when docked in the outpost. They could even put some incarna on it and let you do it from the player in the station point of view... this of course presumes their natural extremely long time line for getting **** done, so 1+ years before walking around stations out of the cpt quarters. |
destiny2
Sickle Moon
Intrepid Crossing
1
|
Posted - 2011.09.16 11:46:00 -
[22] - Quote
Lyris Nairn wrote:destiny2 wrote:whaynethepain wrote:Excellent question.
Traditionally, PVP has included the destruction and acquisition of other players stuff.
And PVE tends to be re-spawning unimportant objects.
I fear to siege an Outpost, with the option of destruction, would honestly make some cry.
Having said that, if some Alliance took my Alliance Outpost, worked so hard to create, I would like to sneak in and destroy it.
Unfortunately, I believe this would seriously hinder an Alliance surging forward, taking many systems at once, because they would have hold back to defend their newly acquired assets.
However. destroying a Outpost would take a frick ton of firepower and im sure if CCP allowed the destruction of Outposts they would give it bonuses to use towards its fleets protecting it. its bad enough killing a large tower with the amount of time it takes without risking titans on the field. No, please do not even suggest this. CCP has already included enough brick walls for us to waste hours upon hours shooting with multi-hundred man fleets. We do not need an other such static thing at which to shoot. As long as there is an advantage to bringing more guys to the fight (in this case, more guys eat through the effective hit points faster so we have to waste less time stabbing ourselves in the faces with this stupid mechanic), then there will always be huge blobs. People do not seem to like blobs. And yet the same people who post about hating blobs want the extra security that comes from their space stuff being hard to kill. As long as there are things in space with obnoxiously high effective hit point totals, then there will continue to be an incentive to bring huge fleets that lag the servers and make the Elite PVP crowd whinge about dishonorable blobs of unskilled newbies.
From my understanding goonswarm is the worst for blobs ive seen it we bring 5 ships they bring 300. lol. pretty sad. how it takes 300 ppl to kill 5 ships especially when their T1. by the way your allies Moros Mihi are fun to kill :) especially their pos'es :) yes some could call me a hater but (getting kinda tired of popping Goonies. because they cry like little babies.) maybe CCP should bring this outpost thing into game then we can watch the goonies cry even more :) |
KhaelaMensha Khaine
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
2
|
Posted - 2011.09.16 12:26:00 -
[23] - Quote
Othran wrote:Akrasjel Lanate wrote:Destructable Outposts = Scorched Earth Under current sov rules yes I agree. Players should be capable of destroying them though - mechanics can get sorted out before that (well assuming some competence in ccp).
"Scorched Earth" isnt a reason to NEVER make them destructable as I'm sure CCP could think of some mechanics to make suiciding your outpost difficult (e.g. just think of the 2minute self destruct timer on your ship).
Also if destroying an outpost meant destroying everything in it and also losing bonuses to the nearby space (dependent on sov mechanics) then alliances would be reluctant to "burn" them as they'd lose all assets still docked and any high quality resources in the constellation/region.
Also, destroying the outpost removes the opportunity to retake it at a later date. If you think about how often they change hands already in-game I think alliances would prefer to incapacitate rather than eliminate so if it was possible to (e.g) shut down the station services that would make things more interesting.
TLDR : I'm not really sure about the exact mechanics but in principle, yes. |
GiveMeATry
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.16 12:35:00 -
[24] - Quote
Anchorable arrays to dismantal a POS for salvage and parts and anchorable repair arrays to return salvage and parts for rebuild. 30 days to take apart.. 15 days to put back together. |
whaynethepain
7
|
Posted - 2011.09.17 22:02:00 -
[25] - Quote
So, this new outpost idea has to hold tens of millions of m3 of cargo and hundreds of millions of m3 of ships, and it needs to have man-able guns, also a fitting service .
Yea, put me down for one of them, I want it to have sentry drones and an activate able reinforce timer, and jump-drive fitted.
Ideally it would look the size of a small moon, but much more menacing. |
annab
Dromedaworks inc
Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.20 21:53:00 -
[26] - Quote
Would it be cool hell yes.
However there is a reason it takes a downtime to add an outpost.
The database programs needed to add an outpost would lag the servers and crash them. So just removing (big boom) and loot would not be that easy.
Lets say 1000 people are at the said outpost. (normally have more)
That 1000 jump clones need removing
That 1000 clones need removing
That 1000 list of assets need removing
Stop clones coming in
Stop repossess for stuff
That 11000 industry jobs need removing (All players have 11 job running)
The database needs to removing all the assets, clones, jump clone, industry jobs
Put all player in a new clone area
Then update all affected players inside and out
Now think that plus fleet battle the EVE servers would blow up. (now to find that nuke pic)
Not saying it can't be done but that going to need some mad coding skills and hardware.
|
Izuru Hishido
ADVANCED Combat and Engineering
Violent Society
2
|
Posted - 2011.09.22 05:18:00 -
[27] - Quote
Oh god. This question again.
Short history: This question has been around since before capitals were in game. People have been wanting to blow up nullsec stations forever. This isn't a new question or proposal, and its always been looked over without a second glance by every dev and every QA in CCP's employment history.
Now, why is that?
Lets say I have some assets in J-LPX7 in Delve, its a Minmatar service outpost, middle of W-4 constellation, fantastic strategic location, rabble rabble rabble.
I leave the game for some time.
I leave, I don't know, say my entire net worth in the station. Every asset, every ship, every module. Lets assume, for argument's sake, I'm worth forty billion isk and it's taken me seven years to gather this much worth.
The station gets taken, and I'm left with my assets intact unless I decide to liquidate.
Eventually, sov war, take the station back, I get my assets back.
Now, moving away from actual mechanics to this harebrained scheme.
Same situation. I'm in an alliance that gets forced out of a station, I can't evac all my assets in time due to having lived there forever, and they get blown up. I'm out (arbitrary value) thirty billion of my net worth. Needless to say, I'd be pretty pissed.
Different situation, same story.
Lets say that I've left the game for say...a year and a half. Real life has dictated that I need to take time off of EVE. I have say 200+ billion worth of assets and I lose it all.
Now I'm really pissed because CCP made the sole secure measure that I had to store my assets vulnerable.
Key words: Station. Sole measure to keep assets absolutely secure.
Destructible stations will. Never. Ever. Happen.
Not now, not ever, not in a future expansion, not ever precisely because of this fact.
|
Aichi Awara
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.09.22 12:27:00 -
[28] - Quote
Izuru Hishido wrote:stuff
I... can't... refrain.... don't put all your eggs in one basket.
=> Don't dedicate all your resources into one thing.
==> If this is ever going to happen, that would be the most hilarious thing ever. Perhaps those cursed CTA's would finally pull more people as there's actually something to lose... 
|
ValentinaDLM
Ubi Concordia Ibi Victoria
405
|
Posted - 2011.09.22 15:27:00 -
[29] - Quote
Yes, make them killable, however it doesn't drop the assets, at downtime everything that was in that station, clones and all goes to your starter station. Heh, imagine all the carriers in Duripant trying to can bait velators.
I know that sounds a bit crazy but maybe the idea of having to get your assets back to where you want them would be annoying, a low sec school of your race's starter corp is also probably more reasonable, and then it would introduce another massive isk sink as alliances raced to rebuild outposts in strategic systems. |
Kitty McKitty
In Praise Of Shadows
129
|
Posted - 2011.09.22 15:53:00 -
[30] - Quote
Absolutely make them destructible, with no loot drop. At the rate they are going up there will be more in 0.0 than high sec. Sov holding is too displaced at the moment and alliances need to be discouraged from spreading too far. Making defence a more critical role could stop the large swathes of empty but claimed sov space.
As a bonus, make supers dockable so we can lose some of those this way too thanks (just a joke but we need a way to cull them too).
"Why can't I be different and original, like everybody else?" |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |