These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Private station changes - confiscate / trash enemy assets
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Anthar Thebess
#1 - 2012-09-11 08:22:15 UTC
Simple :
If my alliance own a station it can have access to assets on it.
So, if there are assets for those we are at war with we can confiscate them or at least trash them.
If someone is logged off on this station, all things except the ship he sits on can be confiscated or trashed.

Additional reason for not allowing an enemy forces to catch your station.



Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Jafit
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2 - 2012-09-11 08:26:02 UTC
In before destructible outposts debate.
Anthar Thebess
#3 - 2012-09-11 08:39:16 UTC

Nope.
My suggestion have much smaller impact.
I don’t like idea of stations falling apart, i think only that it would be logical to have access to items stored on YOUR station.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Anthar Thebess
#4 - 2012-10-19 08:05:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Anthar Thebess
We should also add trading rights to the station owner.
If you want you can prohibit trading ( contract should be allowed) on the station market ( based on alliance standings)

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Rordan D'Kherr
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#5 - 2012-10-19 10:22:50 UTC
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Forum_rules (see 12).

Don't be scared, because being afk is not a crime.
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#6 - 2012-10-19 13:20:24 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
Simple :
If my alliance own a station it can have access to assets on it.
So, if there are assets for those we are at war with we can confiscate them or at least trash them.
If someone is logged off on this station, all things except the ship he sits on can be confiscated or trashed.

Additional reason for not allowing an enemy forces to catch your station.





Are you trying to make sure that no one ever moves to nullsec ever again? Who's going to dock a multi-billion ISK ship in a station knowing that all you have to do to take it is set them red and "confiscate your enemy's stuff cause you know it's war and everything".

And that doesn't even begin to cover the people that go away for six months and then return to the game. "What do you mean they confiscated all my stuff? I was GONE, how was I supposed to get it out? *file petition of great justice*"

This is a terrible idea.

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#7 - 2012-10-19 18:23:40 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
Simple :
If my alliance own a station it can have access to assets on it.
So, if there are assets for those we are at war with we can confiscate them or at least trash them.
If someone is logged off on this station, all things except the ship he sits on can be confiscated or trashed.

Additional reason for not allowing an enemy forces to catch your station.





No......

If you DESTROY a station, I'd allow all items in the station a small probability of dropping (standard loot mechanics with perhaps a 10% chance of items dropping rather than a 50%). (This would be an incentive to destroy stations, although I'm not sure how to handle pilots docked in the station when it is destroyed).

If you capture the station, while it makes sense you'd be able to confiscate items, I don't think you deserve it, nor would it be good for the game.
Anthar Thebess
#8 - 2012-10-22 09:41:34 UTC
Then simply trash it.
I have no desire for those items ;)
As a point "i was gone, why i lose my stuff" - do this like all proper null corps.
Keep 95% of your assets in a npc null station in the jump range.
This is a nullsec, if you do something wrong ... your stuff is gone ;)

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Baroness Vulna
Armada vi Vulnezia
#9 - 2012-10-22 09:49:18 UTC
This would have a very negative impact on the game and players, CCP would lose money as players get frustrated and leave the game.

Look, i know people want to be able to just '****' and destroy the enemy, but there is a fine line between your power in the game and players having rights in the game, yes even the loser needs to have rights. This game is ever changing with power struggles and players need to know they wont lose everything if they invest in alliances locations.

It is very easy to lose ships and territory in this game. Just look at all the old maps of eve sov, its always changing. What you are suggesting is that players who have any amount of assets in a station, lose it all. That is too heavy handed, its hard enough that they likely will never get those assets 'out' of the system, so they are forced to sell them or sit on them. I think that is enough.

remember it is a game, it needs to be fun first, making it too frustrating will make less people play.

brought to you by -Barony of Vulnezia MMO micro nation- www.vulnezia.com Be a part of the world's first MMO Micro Nation
Anthar Thebess
#10 - 2012-10-23 07:01:53 UTC
If you are afraid of loosing your assets don't move it to a player owned station.
They are very safe at NPC owned station.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Doddy
Excidium.
#11 - 2012-10-23 08:59:25 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:

Nope.
My suggestion have much smaller impact.
I don’t like idea of stations falling apart, i think only that it would be logical to have access to items stored on YOUR station.


The only real argument against destructable stations is people losing assets so no, your suggestion doesn't have a smaller impact.
Anthar Thebess
#12 - 2012-10-24 06:39:38 UTC
No there is quite big difference.
If a station would be destructible - it would mean i can destroy it, and not allowing enemy to take one, or make a raid to enemy territory not to hold a system, but to catch it for while destroy station(s) and return.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Witchking Angmar
Perkele.
#13 - 2012-10-24 08:06:38 UTC
Instead of being conquered, outposts should become wrecks, which can be rebuilt at say 20% of the original build cost. The destroyed outpost acts like a normal station, but no one can dock. People already docked can undock, but have no access to services. People outside the station can access the wreck like a normal container and take out their own items and ships, but not place any in. As a result the number of outposts in 0.0 would slowly but inevitably drop, and even if you can't afford to rebuild the outpost, there are still a number of conquerable stations available, which should not be changed.

My two cents on the subject of 0.0 outposts.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#14 - 2012-10-25 07:38:00 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
No there is quite big difference.
If a station would be destructible - it would mean i can destroy it, and not allowing enemy to take one, or make a raid to enemy territory not to hold a system, but to catch it for while destroy station(s) and return.


'lose all your stuff after the week long effort it takes to capture and destroy a station'

vs

'lose all your stuff after the week long effort it takes to capture a station when the reds just trash it all'


Please explain how one has a lesser impact to my stuff than t'other? Or are you proposing that stations no-longer have RF timers?