Jita Park Speakers Corner

They are one of the biggest things in the game and should not be possible to destroy. As they are one of the biggest things in game I could agree with their cost and deployment being increased. I have worked on many outpost launches myself going as far back as the ISS. Stations were cost equal to the task way back then. With easier isk and logistics now Stations are cheap in comparison. At least you can fill the egg with freighters now rather than a fleet of MKV's Any small alliance that has some decent leadership and the will can build a station (holding it can require friends).

If the stations are destructible that can be an isk sink that can sink the game. Who cares about fighting for the space... just kill the stations. The only groups that could be in favor of this are LARGE power blocks and pirates. Large blocks have little to fear of invaders and in some cases it could be worth it to send a suicide fleet of supers to kill staging stations.. no need to hold it from being re-taken. From the start Stations were never meant to be destroyed, they were meant to be a big deal, an addition permanently to the game.

Pirate groups living in npc stations generally have nothing to fear from going and blowing up stations, as one candidate put it a "loot pinata"

It does nothing to stop large bored power blocks from jumping around killing stations for something to do. It would kill small alliances starting out, the Station is their home, their first foot hold and the eventual guys that will provide the new pvp fun.

They need a home too or this would be the first big step to a one man game.



On another point :)

Market orders changed from an out of game ap is wrong. That is part of the game play and while it may not be a macro, it is the next worst thing. If you are going to play and affect the game you should have to log in to do it.

I would be all for destructible stations AND doubling or tripling the cost to build and deploy them.

Fact is, right now, nullsec has ALOT of stations, what happens when ALL the systems have one? start letting mroe than oen station per system so that they ahve a reason to be built? doesnt solve the problem.


Way I think it shoudl eb done, si that while invading a system you have a choice, A) use Legion/DUST players to storm and capture a station thats been made vulnerable (elaborated on later), or B) scorched Earth it (either as the attacker wanting an expedient conquering of the region, or the defender denying the enemy a powerful asset). Outright destroying it should be MUCH quicker than the siege, so that its actually CONSIDERED an option by the attacker, whereas the station should cost enough that blockading it to conquer using DUST troops should also be appeasing.

to compensate for stations now vulnerability, they should be treated like XX-Large modular pos's, with the ability to have guns/EWAR fitted to them, and be the only structure capable of equipping Capital-turrets. They shoudl also have ample defenses that without a COMMITED capital fleet, successfully sieging/destroying a station should be an effort in futility.

Thats just my 2 cents opinion on matter.

Personally I had raised eyebrows when they announced everything can be destroyed.

First thing through my head was people who get posted overseas and DON'T acct share. They leave their stuff, come back after deployment and . . . all their stuff is gone? Would this stop returning players from ever coming back?

Jita 4-4 Just let that one sink in.

Loot pinata is a cool thing unless a) it was your stuff or (b) you are trying to stop lag.

Consider the people you play with. How many f them would be willing to destroy a moon once and for all, the final definition of scorched earth. Everything is everything

m

@ Mike Azariah and others - I think the quote is misrepresented above.

At fanfest was mentioned that everything that can be constructed by players, should be destroyable. Jita 4-4 is created by the Empires, so should not be destroyable.

Living in providence, a region we worked hard on to litter with stations and a place that woudl be burned too the groudn and never rebuild like it is i am against destructable stations in the simplified manner people look at it now.

Having a future view on stations being able to repackaged, re deployed or even jumped, and having pos liek defenses up the butt and repping modules on it, as well fail sage mechanisms for stored stuff i can see its a viable, yet long term debate. Once peopel enisioned titans as mobiel stations, tons of options, except its a debate that goes further. Imagine a hostile red station jumping into your space, anchoring a planet further, or different stations, currnt onces understructable, and onces that can, but can move, have limittions but also benefits..

Being just ref it and blow it up i am dead against that, especially being elected by nrds small null warfare block, but lets not let the current view cramp future visions.

Greetz
Core
Csm9

I have removed a rule breaking post and those quoting it.

The Rules:
5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

I think your hitting on something. So if stations can be destroyed what if they make it where you can fit out stations? Example: You can have different types of fittings such as turrets/defense moduals or you can have a Indy set up with maybe having a system mining upgrade etc.

I think it wouldn't only be different but it gives stations more of a defense if choose to have that fitting. Another thing I've been pondering on is in the most recent eve trailer you have this what looks to be like an EMP blast. What if they put that on stations? Lots of things to think about and I'm very excites to see what CCP have in store

If your going to make stations destructable you need to make them worth building.