These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Wormholes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Hoard/Wave based sleeper site ideas
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2012-09-03 13:09:13 UTC
Terrorfrodo wrote:
The idea of sleepers bashing POSes is terrible. The fate of our home base shouldn't be determined by randomly generated NPCs but by other players.


Isn't that like saying, sleepers shouldn't have scrams, the destruction of ships should be determined by the players not NPC.

The way i see it, wormhole space in unclaimable and as sleepers were there first, it technically belongs to them. So why wouldn't they seek to remove us? Either way, if your pos can't defend against them, what are you doing in WH space?

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#22 - 2012-09-03 13:22:05 UTC
If a POS could be set up to deal with those new sleepers in auto-mode, then everyone would set up their POS in this way simply because they had to. In the end we'd have the same stable situation we have now only with no more fail-POSes to bash, because the game would force people to not be stupid. That is not progress.

If a POS could NOT deal with those sleepers alone we could come back from a weekend where most members weren't online and find our POS in ruins or so weakened that another corp could easily finish it off. This is something that of course can happen now, but not just by a random roll of the dice but through an organized effort by other players.

And as for this 'unclaimable' myth... CCP may have designed w-space with the intention that it is not for long-term habitation, but clearly players had different plans and we have conquered w-space for long-term habitation and like it this way. What CCP intended is really quite irrelevant if what actually happened instead is much better than their original intentions.

.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2012-09-03 13:59:21 UTC
Fair enough. I just like the idea of sleepers attacking POS's but if there is no threat of them being able to destroy the pos then there would be no point. Risk aversion isn't exclusive to k-space i guess.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Priodontes
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2012-09-03 16:33:12 UTC
A good way to eliminate POS offline. No it can defend itself would be destroyed over time. And wipe the WH again.
Tortise Winkle VonDudenberg
Doomheim
#25 - 2012-09-03 19:35:08 UTC
No to unlimited sleeper spawns. NO

More sleepers, more loot, less profit, market crashes not worth it to do them. No

You and your crews skill levels have outgrown the wh life. Time to move on. You have other options that offer a challenge. Explore them.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2012-09-03 19:49:03 UTC
Tortise Winkle VonDudenberg wrote:
No to unlimited sleeper spawns. NO

More sleepers, more loot, less profit, market crashes not worth it to do them. No

You and your crews skill levels have outgrown the wh life. Time to move on. You have other options that offer a challenge. Explore them.


Please read the initial post before posting.

Rek Seven wrote:

To prevent people from farming, it could be made so that the only the last ship destroyed in each wave contains loot (e.g. salvage and blue tags).


The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Tortise Winkle VonDudenberg
Doomheim
#27 - 2012-09-03 19:53:50 UTC
Terrorfrodo wrote:
If a POS could be set up to deal with those new sleepers in auto-mode, then everyone would set up their POS in this way simply because they had to. In the end we'd have the same stable situation we have now only with no more fail-POSes to bash, because the game would force people to not be stupid. That is not progress..


How is teaching people with npc's about the game not progress? Happens all the time in missions etc.

Terrorfrodo wrote:
If a POS could NOT deal with those sleepers alone we could come back from a weekend where most members weren't online and find our POS in ruins or so weakened that another corp could easily finish it off. This is something that of course can happen now, but not just by a random roll of the dice but through an organized effort by other players.


And you should come back to nothing. Either stay active or move back to hisec. Actual players dont consider you being on vacation as to whether they come and bash your pos. A weekend is all thats needed. So that argument is invalid.

Terrorfrodo wrote:
And as for this 'unclaimable' myth... CCP may have designed w-space with the intention that it is not for long-term habitation, but clearly players had different plans and we have conquered w-space for long-term habitation and like it this way. What CCP intended is really quite irrelevant if what actually happened instead is much better than their original intentions.


How is this a myth? Its a fact that WH's are not claimable. Show me on the WH map where your claimed systems are? Go ahead I'll wait. The part about them not being for prolonged habitation is where the lack of constant spawns come from. There is no sure fire way to log in and find sleepers in your home system. The fact that you choose to "live" there is your own decision.

CCP intends allot of things, but we all know how often that works out in there favor. I dont like the idea of Sleepers hitting pos' any more than you. But your reasoning is flawed in this sense. Players could do the same in the same amount of time. If you are there or not.
Tortise Winkle VonDudenberg
Doomheim
#28 - 2012-09-03 19:55:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Tortise Winkle VonDudenberg
Rek Seven wrote:
Tortise Winkle VonDudenberg wrote:
No to unlimited sleeper spawns. NO

More sleepers, more loot, less profit, market crashes not worth it to do them. No

You and your crews skill levels have outgrown the wh life. Time to move on. You have other options that offer a challenge. Explore them.


Please read the initial post before posting.

Rek Seven wrote:

To prevent people from farming, it could be made so that the only the last ship destroyed in each wave contains loot (e.g. salvage and blue tags).




So only one wreck with loot? Wheres the challenge for my noctis pilots? And the pilots seeking them out to extract the loot from all them shiny sleeper wrecks.... No
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2012-09-03 20:37:05 UTC
Challenge for the Noctis? I wasn't aware this was a thing...

The site would be more challenging as a whole because the waves would be unpredictable. It would probably be so challenging that people would pay less attention to d-scan and as a result, be more vulnerable to ganks

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Ellariona
B52 Bombers
#30 - 2012-09-03 21:39:26 UTC
Terrorfrodo wrote:
The idea of sleepers bashing POSes is terrible. The fate of our home base shouldn't be determined by randomly generated NPCs but by other players.

The valid way to make sleeper sites (or any pve site) more fun is not to make their waves or composition random, but to give the individual NPCs something that resembles actual artificial intelligence. NPCs which not only switch aggro once in a while in predictable patterns, but really analyze what players are doing and go for the weak spot or the crucial ship in the fleet. They put all their neuts on the first RR Tengu while jamming the other and killing the third, that kind of thing. They do not fly in a fixed orbit but adjust their tactics when you start to smart-bomb them or apply webs. In short, they do what players in pvp do. Instead of warp-in, lock, shoot, we'd have to constantly react to the NPC's actions.

Then again, we don't really need this because EVE already has actual players who will do this to you.


An easy way to make the fate of your home be decided by players is to let the sleepers target pos modules only, not the shield. I might have forgotten to mention that. It would make it easier for players to attack you, but as described in my post, if you take care of your system, you won't get attacked by sleepers at all (or very very very few times)
Blodhgarm Dethahal
8 Sins of Man
Stray Dogs.
#31 - 2012-09-03 22:31:10 UTC
I'm suprised no one has mentioned Complexes, like WH Based DED Sites. Why not do that with some form of Rarer Spawn in the last room. OR you could make complexes a way to combine both Radar and Mag sites and have cans for each in teh last room or something.

Either way I think WHs are fine the way they are. If you need to break the mood go hunt and PvP. But I still think Complexes would be cool.
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#32 - 2012-09-05 08:52:26 UTC
Tortise Winkle VonDudenberg wrote:

Terrorfrodo wrote:
And as for this 'unclaimable' myth... CCP may have designed w-space with the intention that it is not for long-term habitation, but clearly players had different plans and we have conquered w-space for long-term habitation and like it this way. What CCP intended is really quite irrelevant if what actually happened instead is much better than their original intentions.


How is this a myth? Its a fact that WH's are not claimable. Show me on the WH map where your claimed systems are? Go ahead I'll wait.

We may not see our alliance name in the upper left corner of the screen, but wormhole corps claim their systems in a truer sense than most nullsec systems are claimed. We actually control it and live in it, and if someone enters it, he's guaranteed to meet active people there. Not like most nullsec systems where nobody ever does anything except hauling out moongoo every few weeks.

.
Previous page12