These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

Hacking towers that are offline 2W+
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#1 - 2013-09-29 01:47:23 UTC
Hacking towers that have been offline for over 2 weeks has been discussed several times already and IIRC all players were all for it.

One of developers expressed his interest around the release of retribution as well but the thing didn't go though yet.

Perhaps since Rubicon is focusing on structures they will let us hack offline towers that are only good as space debris that can only be removed by killing it for no reward.

As for the part where people leave offline poses to claim a spot... You could make the hacking have a similar effect as RF mode where you would start the hack, do it for 30 sec and then tower goes into lockdown from which you can release it a day or two later and gain ownership of the tower so you can unanchor it.

As a lore part you could call the process virus injection that reroutes towers systems that govern ownership.

This function of removing towers is a long awaited feature of this game, with the introduction of odyssey we also have a minigame that could serve as part of the process.

Is anyone at all against this?
I can't think of a single reason why this shouldn't be in the game.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#2 - 2013-09-29 01:48:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Arya Regnar
Reserved.


Apart from the thread about hacking all structures generally which I consider a dumb idea there were no active threads pertaining this topic as far as I have gathered.

[ 2013.04.11 17:07:25 ] Zahard Ignis > why are offline POSes still just space debree which gives no reward for killing
[ 2013.04.11 17:07:40 ] Zahard Ignis > why cant they be hacked after 2 months of offline status
[ 2013.04.11 17:07:53 ] CCP Fozzie > Zahard Ignis That's a good idea, I've liked it for a while

Correct me if I'm wrong but I am allowed to paste chatlogs of local channels yes?
This was in Rens local 5 and half months ago.

Yes, it took a while to dig up but luckily I still have most of my chatlogs.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Nightmare Hakaari
Industrial and Mining Syndicate
#3 - 2013-09-29 01:56:46 UTC
don't know it this is sort of a reply thread to mine but ya similar concept to what I was thinking but I was thinking of the active running towers but also player gates and stations (the little descript that u see didn't update when I changed it from ship hacking to what it is now). but it would still be cool if they do that for inactive towers.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#4 - 2013-09-29 02:01:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Arya Regnar
Nightmare Hakaari wrote:
don't know it this is sort of a reply thread to mine but ya similar concept to what I was thinking but I was thinking of the active running towers but also player gates and stations (the little descript that u see didn't update when I changed it from ship hacking to what it is now). but it would still be cool if they do that for inactive towers.

Your thread is generalized and would serve no good to the execution of what seems much more logical and not super game breaking idea like yours.

I was originally planning to post in your thread but it has no future and seems more like a poorly thought out troll attempt.

Very few like the idea of a ton of things being hackable, but offline, inactive and abandoned towers are entirely different thing.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Ben Houssa
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#5 - 2013-09-29 02:15:27 UTC
Nightmare Hakaari
Industrial and Mining Syndicate
#6 - 2013-09-29 03:07:15 UTC
... well ... guess I'll just stick to my ship designing -_-
but be able to disable a player star gate without having to destroy it would be something worth while
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#7 - 2013-09-29 03:09:21 UTC
Nightmare Hakaari wrote:
... well ... guess I'll just stick to my ship designing -_-
but be able to disable a player star gate without having to destroy it would be something worth while

First we would need to have player stargates.
Let's discuss that when it actually happens?

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Elmnt80
Life. Universe. Everything.
#8 - 2013-09-29 03:10:35 UTC
Logged in just to say that this is a ridiculously pointless feature that doesn't serve a purpose other than people wanting something for nothing. You've got plenty of options if you want a tower removed. You can war dec the corp and kill it yourself, you can ask them to take it down (or bribe them if need be) or if you really want to avoid having to do any work yourself, pay a merc corp to kill it.

Anything that purposely avoids combat is bad.
Rendiff
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2013-09-29 03:11:04 UTC
I like this.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#10 - 2013-09-29 03:15:58 UTC
Elmnt80 wrote:
Logged in just to say that this is a ridiculously pointless feature that doesn't serve a purpose other than people wanting something for nothing. You've got plenty of options if you want a tower removed. You can war dec the corp and kill it yourself, you can ask them to take it down (or bribe them if need be) or if you really want to avoid having to do any work yourself, pay a merc corp to kill it.

Anything that purposely avoids combat is bad.

I'm thinking more around the lines of wormhole lowsec and nullsec tower removal.
For highsec to hack you would have to possibly wardec or do it while suspect, this isn't avoiding combat at all it's just an alternative to BLOWING the tower up for zero reward.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association
#11 - 2013-09-29 04:15:50 UTC
+1
Elmnt80
Life. Universe. Everything.
#12 - 2013-09-29 04:49:33 UTC
Arya Regnar wrote:
Elmnt80 wrote:
Logged in just to say that this is a ridiculously pointless feature that doesn't serve a purpose other than people wanting something for nothing. You've got plenty of options if you want a tower removed. You can war dec the corp and kill it yourself, you can ask them to take it down (or bribe them if need be) or if you really want to avoid having to do any work yourself, pay a merc corp to kill it.

Anything that purposely avoids combat is bad.

I'm thinking more around the lines of wormhole lowsec and nullsec tower removal.
For highsec to hack you would have to possibly wardec or do it while suspect, this isn't avoiding combat at all it's just an alternative to BLOWING the tower up for zero reward.


I live in Nullsec. I'd personally rather drop dreads on a tower to kill it and the mods if I really want that moon. And you do get a reward, you get access to the moon. And on the other side, null and WH space would be the places that would suffer. This would cut way down on our "Hey, there is some ****** in a dread solo RFing a tower, lets go gank him" fun.
Everblasting
NEXT FRONTIER INITIATIVE
#13 - 2013-09-29 06:11:23 UTC
Maybe since they are coming up with resource theft mods to steal resources from pos' maybe they could make an anchorable mod that unachors the pos after 2 weeks of work?

Plenty of time for defenders, if someone else whats the pos they can dec or destroy the competing hacking mod within 14 days I hope. If the people who dropped the hacking mod dont show up when it becomes unanchored, anyone can take it.

Not sure how else to keep it balanced so peoeple dont get a free domi tower that someone never logged in to unanchor when they fit a mod on thier ships that normally makes like 5m an hour when hacking normal sites.

What do you guys think?
Altered Ego
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#14 - 2013-09-29 08:22:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Altered Ego
Elmnt80 wrote:
Logged in just to say that this is a ridiculously pointless feature that doesn't serve a purpose other than people wanting something for nothing. You've got plenty of options if you want a tower removed. You can war dec the corp and kill it yourself, you can ask them to take it down (or bribe them if need be) or if you really want to avoid having to do any work yourself, pay a merc corp to kill it.

Anything that purposely avoids combat is bad.


How does a ship, uncloaked in space beside a pos -not - promote combat?

If someone owns that station ... they'll show up right away to drive off the hacker .. otherwise hey deserve to loose it, quickly.

EDIT: Also, a weeks time is silly.

If we were talking about a ship in space with out a pilot or an afk miner in a low sec belt , no one would bat an eyelash it that pilot lost his property to a gank or someone just docking with the ship and warping away.

This is Eve ... any one who neglects his responsibilities should face similar consequences. The owner deserves to loose their pos, within a day, maybe hours.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#15 - 2013-09-29 12:43:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Arya Regnar
Everblasting wrote:
Maybe since they are coming up with resource theft mods to steal resources from pos' maybe they could make an anchorable mod that unachors the pos after 2 weeks of work?

Plenty of time for defenders, if someone else whats the pos they can dec or destroy the competing hacking mod within 14 days I hope. If the people who dropped the hacking mod dont show up when it becomes unanchored, anyone can take it.

Not sure how else to keep it balanced so peoeple dont get a free domi tower that someone never logged in to unanchor when they fit a mod on thier ships that normally makes like 5m an hour when hacking normal sites.

What do you guys think?

Problem with that is that if such a thing appear on dscan any passerby is going to pop the module for fun, you can't defend such a thing for 2 weeks and it's not worth it.

The 2 weeks timer is there only to ensure that POS is in fact not being used.
As in you can only hack a POS after it has been there offline for 2 weeks.

Also I'm not particularly promoting less risk and less work, I am just trying to make cleaning debris profitable or at least somewhat rewarding instead of...

There is a WH system with 80 moons 18 of them have offline POS at it and have had it for 3 years, but nobody kills them because there is no moon mining and nobody is going to kill them because you get nothing doing it.

There should be no system with no rules in EVE where valuable things in space that aren't protected get to stay because it's not worth killing them, that's bs.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Elmnt80
Life. Universe. Everything.
#16 - 2013-09-29 22:26:31 UTC
Altered Ego wrote:
Elmnt80 wrote:
Logged in just to say that this is a ridiculously pointless feature that doesn't serve a purpose other than people wanting something for nothing. You've got plenty of options if you want a tower removed. You can war dec the corp and kill it yourself, you can ask them to take it down (or bribe them if need be) or if you really want to avoid having to do any work yourself, pay a merc corp to kill it.

Anything that purposely avoids combat is bad.


How does a ship, uncloaked in space beside a pos -not - promote combat?

If someone owns that station ... they'll show up right away to drive off the hacker .. otherwise hey deserve to loose it, quickly.

EDIT: Also, a weeks time is silly.

If we were talking about a ship in space with out a pilot or an afk miner in a low sec belt , no one would bat an eyelash it that pilot lost his property to a gank or someone just docking with the ship and warping away.

This is Eve ... any one who neglects his responsibilities should face similar consequences. The owner deserves to loose their pos, within a day, maybe hours.


There is a very large difference between a frigate sitting next to the pos with a hacking unit running and a dread sieged on the tower, in cost, in the terms of the engagement, in the likely support it has, etc. Here is my point, having to commit some large amount of resources to take down the tower is A GOOD THING. I want people out there shooting towers, me included. I want things being destroyed. It promotes combat and it promotes market activity along with many other things. In short, it promotes everything good in eve. And like I said, you do get a reward, you get the moon.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#17 - 2013-09-29 23:16:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Arya Regnar
Elmnt80 wrote:

There is a very large difference between a frigate sitting next to the pos with a hacking unit running and a dread sieged on the tower, in cost, in the terms of the engagement, in the likely support it has, etc. Here is my point, having to commit some large amount of resources to take down the tower is A GOOD THING. I want people out there shooting towers, me included. I want things being destroyed. It promotes combat and it promotes market activity along with many other things. In short, it promotes everything good in eve. And like I said, you do get a reward, you get the moon.


Then make it so that the tower has to be below 25% shields before hacking can start, that way you still have to nuke it to past max regeneration.

Why would you even use a sieged dread to bash an offline pos when a vexor with 2/2/1 drones and a few lasers can afk bash it at the risk of losing 15 mil.

I'm not trying to make tower removal cheapass, I am just trying to make it worth the damn hassle.

Fine if this has to be then make it possible just for wormholes since null is such a problem that you have to use dreads to kill an offline tower after nobody touched it for 2 weeks because you need to kill tower really bad to mine moon goo.

Implying if tower was strategically important people would leave it offline for 2 weeks, do you see how dumb this sounds right now?

Also as I said the reward (the moon) in wormhole is meaningless because you have 60 other empty moons that don't involve POS killing.

Why do I still want POS dead?

Because it is undefended and shouldn't be there for 3 years straight just because nobody wants to destroy it.

Will I attack it just because of that?

NO, because there is no reward for it.

Does this promote hiding and less pvp?

Again no, it brings people out to the field and the defenders have the exact time when the offender will appear again derived from the POS virus injection timers.



So where is the issue?

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Copper Rei
Copper Corp
Aggressively Passive Bears
#18 - 2013-09-30 01:34:50 UTC
I had a h-sec tower. I went on vacation for 10 days and when I came back...it was gone.
I was war dec'd and they killed it. The war dec was over when I came back from vacation and I had little to no recourse but to dec them back and attack them.

The idea of removing towers that have been offline for more than 1 to 3 months is a good idea.
Just being offline should not be enough to enable someone to hack them though. They should have to be completely inactive for quite some time first, then they should just unanchor and drift or become hackable/claimable.
Even satelites in orbit require some form of GPS calibration or other interaction or they tend to lose their position and 'drift'
I think that if you look at the number of POS in worm space, you will see there is no shortage long term anchored offline towers out there.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#19 - 2013-09-30 01:49:18 UTC
Copper Rei wrote:
I had a h-sec tower. I went on vacation for 10 days and when I came back...it was gone.
I was war dec'd and they killed it. The war dec was over when I came back from vacation and I had little to no recourse but to dec them back and attack them.

The idea of removing towers that have been offline for more than 1 to 3 months is a good idea.
Just being offline should not be enough to enable someone to hack them though. They should have to be completely inactive for quite some time first, then they should just unanchor and drift or become hackable/claimable.
Even satelites in orbit require some form of GPS calibration or other interaction or they tend to lose their position and 'drift'
I think that if you look at the number of POS in worm space, you will see there is no shortage long term anchored offline towers out there.


Exactly.

Thank you for knowing what you talk about.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Elmnt80
Life. Universe. Everything.
#20 - 2013-09-30 06:43:18 UTC
Arya Regnar wrote:
Elmnt80 wrote:

There is a very large difference between a frigate sitting next to the pos with a hacking unit running and a dread sieged on the tower, in cost, in the terms of the engagement, in the likely support it has, etc. Here is my point, having to commit some large amount of resources to take down the tower is A GOOD THING. I want people out there shooting towers, me included. I want things being destroyed. It promotes combat and it promotes market activity along with many other things. In short, it promotes everything good in eve. And like I said, you do get a reward, you get the moon.


Then make it so that the tower has to be below 25% shields before hacking can start, that way you still have to nuke it to past max regeneration.

Why would you even use a sieged dread to bash an offline pos when a vexor with 2/2/1 drones and a few lasers can afk bash it at the risk of losing 15 mil.

I'm not trying to make tower removal cheapass, I am just trying to make it worth the damn hassle.


Ahaha, Thats cute. Really cute. Please tell me more about how I should just go AFK to shoot a tower in a vexor in nullsec/lowsec/WH space. Because being afk in space for hours on end won't end horribly AT ALL.

You know what this sounds like? This really just sounds like "Hey, I wanna run around and steal towers to sell it make isk with no risk to me whatsoever." This is really what your argument sounds like. So please, Give me a real reason why you should be able to make money with little to no risk like this, because at the moment, this is just a ridiculous idea. And no, getting a monetary reward for removing a pos is not a legit reason. There are already a large number of rewards you get upon removing the POS from the resources the moon may provide, the space itself located in a valuable area of highsec for invention or production or just the security of knowing that the group that previously was in your WH can't use those poses to come back in and force you out while using the poses as a base to operate from, and of course the KM for just knocking down the pos, to name a few rewards.
123Next page