These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

Dust Interaction, integration of Dust

First post
Author
Hailey Halkuun
Big Sister Exploration
#21 - 2014-01-30 19:13:18 UTC
As I also said before, the second paragraph from the end was one of many ideas for Open World expansions to Dust, whether it is a good or bad one is irrelevant, it is a statement of something possible, not really important to the rest of the post and a possibility for the future that Dusties have asked for.

I understand and agree that some of the details would be sketchy from that one post but feel it has in no way been described to it's full potential by the poster.

Something else that wasn't mentioned in that post but in another on a different thread was that Dusties want a way to travel the stars such as Eve pilot ferried player, requiring a considerable amount of trust on their part as well.
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#22 - 2014-01-30 19:18:21 UTC
Ive said it before, and ill say it again:

The day a group of 12 year olds with mommies pilfered credit card can bypass all the defenses of a heavily tanked ship and take or destroy it with absolutely no way of defending it, is the day you will know the true meaning of mass unsubs.

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?

Hailey Halkuun
Big Sister Exploration
#23 - 2014-01-30 19:22:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Hailey Halkuun
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:
Ive said it before, and ill say it again:

The day a group of 12 year olds with mommies pilfered credit card can bypass all the defenses of a heavily tanked ship and take or destroy it with absolutely no way of defending it, is the day you will know the true meaning of mass unsubs.

The majority of Dust players don't seem to be kids, rather some are older than the Eve players I see on everyday and most are between their 20s and 40s. The game isn't Pay to Win, and the idea is that there would be someone in Eve taking the Dust mercs to the other ship in the first place, not that the ship would be piloted by a Dustie.

First line of defense is always shoot the guy targeting you right?
Dolorous Tremmens
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2014-01-30 21:18:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Dolorous Tremmens
Hailey Halkuun wrote:
The thing about work is you can quit if you don't like it. I don't consider Eve work, I consider it my fun time, the time that I spend with my friends and loved ones, and have a good portion of my extended family playing as well. Its a group activity for people on the far corners of the globe. While you may be upset that you can't shoot your way out of a wet paper bag, I will point out that it is certainly not a "Twitch shooter". Thats just what the noobs do before they die.


All FPShooters are twitch games, and they can't help being twitch games. I have and play many, and have worked on a few FPS mods for BF1,vietnam, 2, and 2142, and am quite good, and I play the same as i do in eve: goal oriented not kill oriented. I go for the objective and secure it.If i happen to kill alot of people doing it, bonus. You may not think you do while playing FPS, but they're ALL twich games. Much as I like FPS, and in particular team tactical ones, the limit of the ps3 and making it free to play means that I will never support dust. I don't think dust will last, and I'd rather not see it put on life support by making it a mandatory part of eve. I would be sad to see eve die because of it. And it would.

Want to pay a subscription fee to play dust?

Get some Eve. Make it yours.

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#25 - 2014-01-30 22:35:57 UTC
Hailey Halkuun wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:

A console kiddie getting hit by an orbital strike respawns with no loss. A cap pilot losing their dread is out two, three billion at a minimum, and three weeks construction time. There is a massive difference here.

So no Isk is lost for the console kiddie? Wrong. There is loss, there are officer weapons, high value suits and many many losses if a squad of people get hit by an orbital.

Your millions (for a dread) really don't count for much if the introduction of an announced change to game mechanics don't allow you enough warning to make friends with some of the people you say you don't like. If it takes you till structure to save a ship then surely you can stifle the tears somewhat if some console kiddie gets launched out of a ship, most likely destroyer class, at your ship to board it and needs to fight their way through other console kiddies to evict you from it. I really don't know how CCP would plan on implementing this idea, sounds interesting to me though from a perspective of playing both games.

Basically if you are really that asleep that you can't stop a destroyer maybe you should stay a little frostier. TBH it is just another weapon suggestion for all your talk of a fail idea you really seem to have no argument that argues against another weapon being shot at your ship. This is all this is.



Billions. Something like five, six months worth of PLEX. How long does it take a dust kid to make enough money to replace his onesie? A hell of a lot less than it takes an EVE player to replace a dread.

Now, how do you suggest I make friends with a bunch of console kiddies when A) I don't have a way to communicate with them, B) I wouldn't WANT to communicate with most FPS players, and C), I don't much fancy getting arrested?

Now, explain how I kill a moving destroyer with XL guns Especially when it's in close. Hint: You can't do that.

Now, explain why my tank should be meaningless. Again. I will keep asking you this until you explain why my ship should be taken away from me while it has even one single point of structure left. It is MY dread. There should not be any kind of a way for me to lose it with no way of defending myself. Ever.


This is not 'just another weapon system'. This is a 100% garanteed loss with no way whatsoever for me to defend myself in any way, shape or form. I get boarded, I press self destruct as I'm going down either way. Simple as that.

You are saying that it doesn't matter that I skilled for a year to get this ship, that I paid billions to buy, fit and fuel the thing, nor what I do with it. A bunch of twelve year olds with mummy's credit card should trump all of that because reasons that yiou refuse to explain, and that when they get a booboo and have to go run around for an hour to replace thier stuff, it's exactly the same as a three billion ISK loss in EVE. Why is this?
Abdul 'aleem
Sumiko Yoshida Corporation
#26 - 2014-01-31 00:48:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdul 'aleem
My .02 ISK:

Great for Dust 514 players.

Bad for EvE Online players (agreeing with the objections stated in so many posts before mine).


The risk/reward would be way off for both sides: way to low risk/cost for the Dust players and way, way too high risk/cost for the EvE Online players.


Edit:

Now, adding the option for Dust 514 players to attack an EvE Online player's PI set up... yeah I could totally get behind that type of integration.

Double Edit:

I would even pay them to destroy my competition's PI facs on planets where resources are contested.... Twisted

The ability for everyone and their allies to legally counter-gank mission invaders... yes please. Add a Suspect Flag for Mission Invasion

Click "like" in the original post to support it.

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#27 - 2014-01-31 03:36:10 UTC
someones idea was having dusties for attacking POS's and stations.

sieging POS's takes days and less often happens on a whim. Furthermore sieging multiple POS's can become tedious. The time granted by a POS's hp and then its reinforce timer means that dusties can better organise an assault and defence.

It doesnt necessarily mean they completely bypass the POS's defences, it could be anything from reducing or extending the reinforce timer, taking the POS with tower intact, stealing stuffs.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Endovior
PFU Consortium
#28 - 2014-01-31 05:33:13 UTC
DUST-EVE integration remains a good idea... but anti-capital boarding parties is NOT the place for it. If nothing else, because its fate is likely to be decided a lot faster than you can organize and stage an FPS match, which doesn't make for a good gameplay experience on either side of the equation.

Daichi Yamato wrote:
someones idea was having dusties for attacking POS's and stations.

sieging POS's takes days and less often happens on a whim. Furthermore sieging multiple POS's can become tedious. The time granted by a POS's hp and then its reinforce timer means that dusties can better organise an assault and defence.

It doesnt necessarily mean they completely bypass the POS's defences, it could be anything from reducing or extending the reinforce timer, taking the POS with tower intact, stealing stuffs.


This makes a lot more sense than capital boarding parties. Sov structures, POS's, stations, POCOs, and so on are contested over a much longer timeframe than capitals... and when they do fall, it's not personal in the same sense a ship loss would be. Most of the same ideas you'd get from the 'boarding party' idea apply, but these are targets that you'd expect to be able to stick around for a while. Under this paradigm, DUST squads wouldn't be essential to taking Sov, or controlling structures in space... but they could help you save some time when grinding structures, and could potentially also save you the trouble of redeploying your own replacement for whatever it was you were fighting over.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#29 - 2014-01-31 11:33:11 UTC
also if dusties can shoot spaceships from planets, how stupid is the idea of dusties controlling POS guns??

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#30 - 2014-01-31 13:22:13 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
someones idea was having dusties for attacking POS's and stations.

sieging POS's takes days and less often happens on a whim. Furthermore sieging multiple POS's can become tedious. The time granted by a POS's hp and then its reinforce timer means that dusties can better organise an assault and defence.

It doesnt necessarily mean they completely bypass the POS's defences, it could be anything from reducing or extending the reinforce timer, taking the POS with tower intact, stealing stuffs.



How toes taking then POS intact and/or stealing stuff not count as completely bypassing it's defences? There's no chance at all for the POS owner to defend their stuff in any way, shape or form...
Hailey Halkuun
Big Sister Exploration
#31 - 2014-02-01 02:03:26 UTC
The idea of using boarding modules for Dust players was linked specifically with the consent of an Eve player and a contract system to be involved with them, so the onus for actually stopping these guys initially would be on the pilot of the ship that is the intended target.

There is a counter to it and not 100% guaranteed as a successful op for the Dust players. If you had drones in your drone bay they would defend your ship. Mercs could be hired to defend the ship as well. Not to mention they actually have to get a firing solution on your ship before using the module.

Are you saying your skills aren't adequate to shoot a sub cap? Or that you have that little faith in your support fleet (that you should have with the use of a capital ship anyways) that you can't take out a frigate, destroyer, cruiser, battlecruiser, or battleship?

Shame on all you Cap pilots who have enough skill to fly one but can't defend yourself against a ship that is significantly less well protected. Hell, a flight of fighters from a carrier should be able to do the trick. Shocked
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#32 - 2014-02-01 02:40:13 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Hailey Halkuun wrote:
There is a counter to it and not 100% guaranteed as a successful op for the Dust players. If you had drones in your drone bay they would defend your ship. Mercs could be hired to defend the ship as well. Not to mention they actually have to get a firing solution on your ship before using the module.

FYI: Except for carriers, no capital ship can use drones (Fighters and Fighter Bombers are not drones... they are in a separate class).

And I would never bring in people I don't trust or have no stake in the battle to defend my capital ship... even in EVE.
If I am forced to do so, I might as well self destruct and consider the whole thing a total loss (because that's what it is tantamount to).

Hailey Halkuun wrote:
Are you saying your skills aren't adequate to shoot a sub cap? Or that you have that little faith in your support fleet (that you should have with the use of a capital ship anyways) that you can't take out a frigate, destroyer, cruiser, battlecruiser, or battleship?

Your ignorance of capitals is showing.

One on one... no capital ship (except maybe a carrier and possibly a supercarrier if the foe is a battleship) can kill any sub-capital ship. A battleship can actually speed tank a Dreadnought or Titan just by moving.
Of course... no sub-capital ship can kill a capital ship one on one (or even 3 on 1). Capital tanks are simply too massive** And Supercapitals can't be tackled by anything other than an Interdictor or Heavy Interdictor (both of which can't even put out enough damage to break the shield recharge of an armor tanked capital).

For these reasons and their prices, very few use capital ships in combat without a lot of trusted sub-capital support (who can bring their best to bear) and/or overwhelming capital back-up.
At least when you lose a capital ship now you know exactly who/what to blame and can make adjustments accordingly. You can't do that against FPS people who play irregularly and don't have any loyalty or stake in the battle.

** NOTE: a standard Triage-fit Carrier can tank about 1000-1500 damage per second normally and 10-12,000 dps in Triage Mode... a dual-rep Dreadnought can self repair 1300-1500 dps normally and 12-15,000 dps in Siege Mode... and two Supercarriers in a remote repair configuration can easily tank 10,000+ dps plus an additional 10,000 dps for each additional supercarrier than joins in.


Hailey Halkuun wrote:
Hell, a flight of fighters from a carrier should be able to do the trick. Shocked

Fighters are terrible as they can only hit battleships and maybe battlecruisers. Hell... they can barely even hit a stationary frigate.
Hailey Halkuun
Big Sister Exploration
#33 - 2014-02-01 05:02:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Hailey Halkuun
ShahFluffers wrote:
Hailey Halkuun wrote:
There is a counter to it and not 100% guaranteed as a successful op for the Dust players. If you had drones in your drone bay they would defend your ship. Mercs could be hired to defend the ship as well. Not to mention they actually have to get a firing solution on your ship before using the module.

FYI: Except for carriers, no capital ship can use drones (Fighters and Fighter Bombers are not drones... they are in a separate class).

And I would never bring in people I don't trust or have any stake in the battle to defend my capital ship... even in EVE.
If I am forced to do so, I might as well self destruct and consider the whole thing a total loss (because that's what it is tantamount to).

Hailey Halkuun wrote:
Are you saying your skills aren't adequate to shoot a sub cap? Or that you have that little faith in your support fleet (that you should have with the use of a capital ship anyways) that you can't take out a frigate, destroyer, cruiser, battlecruiser, or battleship?

Your ignorance of capitals is showing.

One on one... no capital ship (except maybe a carrier and possibly a supercarrier if the foe is a battleship) can kill any sub-capital ship. A battleship can actually speed tank a Dreadnought or Titan just by moving.
Of course... no sub-capital ship can kill a capital ship one on one (or even 3 on 1). Capital tanks are simply too massive** And Supercapitals can't be tackled by anything other than an Interdictor or Heavy Interdictor (both of which can't even put out enough damage to break the shield recharge of an armor tanked capital).

For these reasons and their prices, very few use capital ships in combat without a lot of trusted sub-capital support (who can bring their best to bear) and/or overwhelming capital back-up.
At least when you lose a capital ship now you know exactly who/what to blame and can make adjustments accordingly. You can't do that against FPS people who play irregularly and don't have any loyalty or stake in the battle.

** NOTE: a standard Triage-fit Carrier can tank about 1000-1500 damage per second normally and 10-12,000 dps in Triage Mode... a dual-rep Dreadnought can self repair 1300-1500 dps normally and 12-15,000 dps in Siege Mode... and two Supercarriers in a remote repair configuration can easily tank 10,000+ dps plus an additional 10,000 dps for each additional supercarrier than joins in.


Hailey Halkuun wrote:
Hell, a flight of fighters from a carrier should be able to do the trick. Shocked

Fighters are terrible as they can only hit battleships and maybe battlecruisers. Hell... they can barely even hit a stationary frigate.

So if the boarding module were only able to fit on a Capital you would be okay with this then? I am assuming only a Cap pilot would want to fly a Cap in the first place.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#34 - 2014-02-01 06:25:32 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Hailey Halkuun wrote:
I am assuming only a Cap pilot would want to fly a Cap in the first place.


Speaking as a capital pilot of a small entity... yes and no.
I enjoy for about 5 seconds and then realize that I am flying a multi-billion ISK ship with very hyper-focused strengths and severe limitations in general combat.
This means that I use it only when I have to and find reasons to avoid using it if possible. If DUST mercs can board my capital and leave me with no other option than to hire other DUST mercs that I don't trust (which, again, is something I would never do even in EVE)... I will have yet another reason to limit its use. There is simply no way I can punish DUST mercs for their failure (which is my measure of trust).


Basically... I don't consider this a viable (or enjoyable) idea for ships that players fly. POSs, stations, and Planetary Interaction... maybe. But definitely not player controlled ships.
Senarian Tyme
Serenity Rising LLC
Controlled Chaos
#35 - 2014-02-01 06:41:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Senarian Tyme
Hailey Halkuun wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:
Hailey Halkuun wrote:
There is a counter to it and not 100% guaranteed as a successful op for the Dust players. If you had drones in your drone bay they would defend your ship. Mercs could be hired to defend the ship as well. Not to mention they actually have to get a firing solution on your ship before using the module.

FYI: Except for carriers, no capital ship can use drones (Fighters and Fighter Bombers are not drones... they are in a separate class).

And I would never bring in people I don't trust or have any stake in the battle to defend my capital ship... even in EVE.
If I am forced to do so, I might as well self destruct and consider the whole thing a total loss (because that's what it is tantamount to).

Hailey Halkuun wrote:
Are you saying your skills aren't adequate to shoot a sub cap? Or that you have that little faith in your support fleet (that you should have with the use of a capital ship anyways) that you can't take out a frigate, destroyer, cruiser, battlecruiser, or battleship?

Your ignorance of capitals is showing.

One on one... no capital ship (except maybe a carrier and possibly a supercarrier if the foe is a battleship) can kill any sub-capital ship. A battleship can actually speed tank a Dreadnought or Titan just by moving.
Of course... no sub-capital ship can kill a capital ship one on one (or even 3 on 1). Capital tanks are simply too massive** And Supercapitals can't be tackled by anything other than an Interdictor or Heavy Interdictor (both of which can't even put out enough damage to break the shield recharge of an armor tanked capital).

For these reasons and their prices, very few use capital ships in combat without a lot of trusted sub-capital support (who can bring their best to bear) and/or overwhelming capital back-up.
At least when you lose a capital ship now you know exactly who/what to blame and can make adjustments accordingly. You can't do that against FPS people who play irregularly and don't have any loyalty or stake in the battle.

** NOTE: a standard Triage-fit Carrier can tank about 1000-1500 damage per second normally and 10-12,000 dps in Triage Mode... a dual-rep Dreadnought can self repair 1300-1500 dps normally and 12-15,000 dps in Siege Mode... and two Supercarriers in a remote repair configuration can easily tank 10,000+ dps plus an additional 10,000 dps for each additional supercarrier than joins in.


Hailey Halkuun wrote:
Hell, a flight of fighters from a carrier should be able to do the trick. Shocked

Fighters are terrible as they can only hit battleships and maybe battlecruisers. Hell... they can barely even hit a stationary frigate.

So if the boarding module were only able to fit on a Capital you would be okay with this then? I am assuming only a Cap pilot would want to fly a Cap in the first place.


The ability to utilize something like this would only be viable in EVE as a ship to ship weapon only if it was a replacement/substitue for the Doomsday weapon on a Titan.

Your proposal to fit this on a destroyer is akin to letting a kid on a bike use a BB gun to take out a tank.

Now, if you put this super weapon onto a tank (Titan), there is much less angst about a tank killing a tank.... or running over any cars or bikes which get in its way. They can do this anyways. The capture would just be icing on the cake.

I do however think that utilizing bunnies to crush the mind numbing nature of SOV/POS warfare would create much more interest in their services. (Complete objectives reduce total HP in the defense system buffers, leave timers as they are.)
Endovior
PFU Consortium
#36 - 2014-02-01 07:07:25 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
someones idea was having dusties for attacking POS's and stations.

sieging POS's takes days and less often happens on a whim. Furthermore sieging multiple POS's can become tedious. The time granted by a POS's hp and then its reinforce timer means that dusties can better organise an assault and defence.

It doesnt necessarily mean they completely bypass the POS's defences, it could be anything from reducing or extending the reinforce timer, taking the POS with tower intact, stealing stuffs.



How toes taking then POS intact and/or stealing stuff not count as completely bypassing it's defences? There's no chance at all for the POS owner to defend their stuff in any way, shape or form...


Yes, "completely bypassing it's defences" with "no chance at all for the POS owner to defend their stuff in any way, shape or form" would be a stupid mechanic. That's not what's on the table, though; the guy you quoted specifically said it wouldn't be that way.

I'd imagine that a DUST raid would be used like this: a POS that is vulnerable (has been reinforced) is now a target for troops, which can be hired to attack the station. If the raid is unsuccessful, then the battle proceeds lie it normally would, with ships destroying or saving the POS like they usually would. If it succeeds, however, then its status becomes 'compromised'. A compromised POS functions identically to a reinforced and vulnerable POS... except that when it is reduced to structure, it offlines itself, and all of its modules and contents may be scooped by anyone.

This is not a huge change... you've still got basically all the opportunity to defend the thing as you had before (the defence offered by the structure points of a POS is practically nonexistent, after all), and if you manage to defend and restront the POS, all is well. Furthermore, if you lose, remember that your POS would normally drop loot anyway; the difference here is that more loot is saved, along with the POS structures themselves (note that there are already conditions under which POS modules can be reclaimed from ordinary POS battles). It would, however, be a thing that would be desirable for attackers to do, and similarly desirable for defenders to prevent, so you might want to put some sum of ISK in an account tied to your tower to automatically hire defenders at need, in the same way as you'd leave stront in a bay to automatically reinforce your POS shields.
Hailey Halkuun
Big Sister Exploration
#37 - 2014-02-01 14:59:43 UTC
Endovior wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
someones idea was having dusties for attacking POS's and stations.

sieging POS's takes days and less often happens on a whim. Furthermore sieging multiple POS's can become tedious. The time granted by a POS's hp and then its reinforce timer means that dusties can better organise an assault and defence.

It doesnt necessarily mean they completely bypass the POS's defences, it could be anything from reducing or extending the reinforce timer, taking the POS with tower intact, stealing stuffs.



How toes taking then POS intact and/or stealing stuff not count as completely bypassing it's defences? There's no chance at all for the POS owner to defend their stuff in any way, shape or form...


Yes, "completely bypassing it's defences" with "no chance at all for the POS owner to defend their stuff in any way, shape or form" would be a stupid mechanic. That's not what's on the table, though; the guy you quoted specifically said it wouldn't be that way.

I'd imagine that a DUST raid would be used like this: a POS that is vulnerable (has been reinforced) is now a target for troops, which can be hired to attack the station. If the raid is unsuccessful, then the battle proceeds lie it normally would, with ships destroying or saving the POS like they usually would. If it succeeds, however, then its status becomes 'compromised'. A compromised POS functions identically to a reinforced and vulnerable POS... except that when it is reduced to structure, it offlines itself, and all of its modules and contents may be scooped by anyone.

This is not a huge change... you've still got basically all the opportunity to defend the thing as you had before (the defence offered by the structure points of a POS is practically nonexistent, after all), and if you manage to defend and restront the POS, all is well. Furthermore, if you lose, remember that your POS would normally drop loot anyway; the difference here is that more loot is saved, along with the POS structures themselves (note that there are already conditions under which POS modules can be reclaimed from ordinary POS battles). It would, however, be a thing that would be desirable for attackers to do, and similarly desirable for defenders to prevent, so you might want to put some sum of ISK in an account tied to your tower to automatically hire defenders at need, in the same way as you'd leave stront in a bay to automatically reinforce your POS shields.

This is closer to what has been described by several people as a way to do the POS, SOV structure and Station warfare. There is never a time where you could not prevent a takeover by just hiring someone else to defend for you. The mercenaries would also in the future be using some of us to transport them from station to station as well as planet to planet. Now may be the time to start building trust.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#38 - 2014-02-02 03:55:30 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:


How toes taking then POS intact and/or stealing stuff not count as completely bypassing it's defences? There's no chance at all for the POS owner to defend their stuff in any way, shape or form...


right now a syphon unit steals stuff and completely bypasses a POS's defences.

use ur imagination.

as mentioned before, the POS having to already be in a weakened state could be a requirement, and so can having the attacking sides spare clones come from a deployable that must be anchored near the POS. it can be shot, and significantly impair the attacking forces chances if lost.

Theres also someones idea that id read about marines acting as bots on dust 514. not impotent bots, but not difficult to outsmart either. Or the drones i think they plan to have as bots in dust, could be manufactured in eve and used as automated sentries in POS's, stations, PI or whatever u need.

What about dusties targetting specific POS modules at a time? some e-war turrets have massive HP, and shutting them down or destroying them with a dusty fight could be a better alternative that doesn't take out the entire POS with one fell swoop. Also targeting specific hardeners to increase capsuleer damage to the POS. Not every POS is torn down with capital guns.

Not having dust buddies shouldn't be an automatic loss, but having dust buddies could well put u at an advantage over those who don't. Adapt or die?

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Hailey Halkuun
Big Sister Exploration
#39 - 2014-02-02 05:38:21 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:


How toes taking then POS intact and/or stealing stuff not count as completely bypassing it's defences? There's no chance at all for the POS owner to defend their stuff in any way, shape or form...


right now a syphon unit steals stuff and completely bypasses a POS's defences.

use ur imagination.

as mentioned before, the POS having to already be in a weakened state could be a requirement, and so can having the attacking sides spare clones come from a deployable that must be anchored near the POS. it can be shot, and significantly impair the attacking forces chances if lost.

Theres also someones idea that id read about marines acting as bots on dust 514. not impotent bots, but not difficult to outsmart either. Or the drones i think they plan to have as bots in dust, could be manufactured in eve and used as automated sentries in POS's, stations, PI or whatever u need.

What about dusties targetting specific POS modules at a time? some e-war turrets have massive HP, and shutting them down or destroying them with a dusty fight could be a better alternative that doesn't take out the entire POS with one fell swoop. Also targeting specific hardeners to increase capsuleer damage to the POS. Not every POS is torn down with capital guns.

Not having dust buddies shouldn't be an automatic loss, but having dust buddies could well put u at an advantage over those who don't. Adapt or die?

Honestly over the last 2 years that I have played, there have been more POSes that I have seen taken down by Sub Caps than by Cap ships, not everything bigger is better gentlemen. Another thought, I wouldn't mind hiring some dusties help me hijack someone's 5bil isk fit Machariel or Vindicator, would be like taking candy from a baby so to speak...mmm tears.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#40 - 2014-02-02 07:06:30 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:


How toes taking then POS intact and/or stealing stuff not count as completely bypassing it's defences? There's no chance at all for the POS owner to defend their stuff in any way, shape or form...


right now a syphon unit steals stuff and completely bypasses a POS's defences.

use ur imagination.

as mentioned before, the POS having to already be in a weakened state could be a requirement, and so can having the attacking sides spare clones come from a deployable that must be anchored near the POS. it can be shot, and significantly impair the attacking forces chances if lost.

Theres also someones idea that id read about marines acting as bots on dust 514. not impotent bots, but not difficult to outsmart either. Or the drones i think they plan to have as bots in dust, could be manufactured in eve and used as automated sentries in POS's, stations, PI or whatever u need.

What about dusties targetting specific POS modules at a time? some e-war turrets have massive HP, and shutting them down or destroying them with a dusty fight could be a better alternative that doesn't take out the entire POS with one fell swoop. Also targeting specific hardeners to increase capsuleer damage to the POS. Not every POS is torn down with capital guns.

Not having dust buddies shouldn't be an automatic loss, but having dust buddies could well put u at an advantage over those who don't. Adapt or die?



A siphon takes a fraction of a POS's output. It doesn't steal the whole bloody tower and everything in it with absolutely no way for the owners to defend it in any way, shape or form.

Bots in an FPS will lose. Every time. That's not a defence, especially not one you can claim is somehow a way for a POS owner to actively defend their stuff.

POS mods have that amount of EHP for a reason. Why should people be able to bypass your tower's tank entirely, with n way whatsoever for you to defend it?

Having dust people should not be an I win button, like you people insist on trying to turn it into. (And I'll give you a hint: What you want to do with DUST would be a major buff to the CFC. I thought you people hated that?)
Previous page123Next page