These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Suggested Changes to Structure Vulnerability/Reinforcement Mechanics

Author
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#1 - 2017-03-24 20:40:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Rowells
With the implementation of new structures cane a very different way of dealing with timers. Most notably, the extension of the time it takes to kill one vs what has been used for a POS or POCO. It more closely represents that of sov RF mechanics in terms of vulnerability and exit timers.

On the one hand, this has made life much easier for a Structure owner to manage and ends the need to use strong or get to a tower quick enough to set the stront right. It also gives a much larger window in which the defender has time to organize and prepare for a final defense.

On the other hand, it has made the life of potential hostiles very frustrating and time-consuming. It can be made to specifically exclude certain TZs from ever participating in the process, with possible exclusion of weekends. If we include some oddities and unclear mechanics, it further makes the life of an attacker much more difficult.

All things considered, the change has drastically moved to favor the defender.

So I propose an adjusted system that more closely leans toward old POS RF mechanics, while maintaining a progressive benefit for the defender as the situation worsens. The goal will be to allow specific advantages to either the defender or the attacker, depending on the situation. The goal also includes making sure that not all of the maximum benefits for one side or the other are in play during the majority of the process. Behind the shoots and fights themselves, there will be a little tug of war for different aspects of process.

Now for the details: (for this example we will use citadels Astrahus, Fortizar, and Keepstar. Values may be different for other structures)

Removal/Repurpose of Vulnerability Timers

- Remove vulnerability timers
- Introduce exit windows

This is similar to how SOV and POCOs work. The owner sets times that they choose as for when the structure wil exit on any given day. Each structure will have a certain amount of hours per week/day which it may exit. For starter numbers, I suggest 21/28/36 for M/L/XL respectively (specifics debatable). On top of that, all structures must have a minimum of 1 hour each day of the week. Using my suggested numbers, this means the exit timer could range from a balanced 3 hours for 7 days, or a more conservative approach; 1 hour for 6 days and 15 hours for one day.

This allows the owner to be flexible about which days they believe they are likely to have more coverage throughout the day. Maybe longer times on weekends or maybe Wednesday is a good day, so you throw some extra hours then. Regardless, this puts the choice of response in favor of the defender.

Structures Are Always Vulnerable

- There is no defender choice on occurrence of initial attack

This allows groups with multiple TZs to cooperate, without entirely deciding the result. It also returns the advantage of initiative back in favor of the attacker. All other things equal, a true surprise attack should be the advantage of the attacker. It also allows them to use a little Intel/spy work to possibly time the process when it suits them or is perceived as unfavorable to the enemy.

Reinfocre Durations and Occurances

- Varied number of timers based on structure size
- 1 - 2 day timers on all structures
- Services no longer affected by RF
- Retain 15 minute repair window

To give a clear and significant benefit to choosing a larger structure, the number of possible timers will be based on size: Medium = 1 timer, Large = 2 timers, and Extra-Large = 3 timers. With increasingly valuable assets comes more chances to protect them. Or at a minimum, more time to recover assets. Varying timer counts somewhat reflects the amount of effort needed to destroy certain sized structures, which can be especially painful if there are no defenders present. This also more closely reflects Medium structures to their POS counterparts

As for time between exits, it would be a simple method: the structure will be vulnerable again on the next timer after 24 hours. This allows the defender a minimum of 24 hours to be notified and prepare. In conjunction with the 1 hour minimum per day, this also ensures that hours can't be stacked in a method requiring the whole week to complete. To clarify, this means that if the end of that 24 hour period lands on an exit window, the next (the following day) open timer is chosen.

Since Medium structures (the most common) won't have multiple timers, it would be very unfair to consistently have services shut off because the attacker is simply playing TZ games. Also returns a bit of home-field advantage back to the defender.

Structures will still retain the 15-minute repair window. This mechanic is very favorable compared to old POS/POCO repair mechanics.

And that pretty much sums up the process.

TL;DR:
- more opportunities for attack
- less frustration for attack
- time investment for attack more granular
Bjorn Tyrson
Infinite Point
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#2 - 2017-03-25 02:17:45 UTC
This just sounds like a weird hybrid of the two systems. That combines the worst elements of both.