Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Remember there are warm bodies on both sides. The attacker wastes more time than the defender in all used systems. I suspect this will go the way of the siphons - remember how so many of those were going to be deployed they'd blot out the sun.....or uh...not as actually transpired.

These will hit an equilibrium over (a fairly short time) and heavy trolling will not really happen. Most likely I see the harassment being a tool for roaming gangs to force the locals to respond.

I could be wrong, but there's a lot of heavy agendas in play here, hell bent on being able to defend space by not being there.

You could start by reading all dev blogs. ALL structures will be changed, and all will be afftected by entosis. Including the ones that will be deployed in low sec and NPC space to replace the POS, since outposts will NOT BE ABLE TO MANUFACTURE!

So yup, NPC space will be less risky.. but not riskless.

Nothing about the Entosis Link system is going to force anyone to undock anywhere. You can capture the place where they have docked but you don't get to spit a docked ship out so you can kill the ship and pod the pilot. NPC stations are safer but provide fewer benefits compared to player structures, including restrictions on access and the ability to be placed where you need them. If you don't need those benefits then using an NPC station for the increased security is fine and intended by the new system.

Im not quite sure what your issue is here. If someone is docked up their threat level against you is at its near absolute minimum, outside being logged off. If someone is docked, they can't be out entosis linking your stuff, congrats you can go back to doing whatever activity you were doing previously, or you can just camp them into station as punishment for trolling you, no fun allowed!

And if defending your assets is to much effort, you can always abandon your ****.

Or just have one dude put a counter entosis on the structure in question. I am sure someone in your organization has an alt that can do this...

I don't feel like "bring an alt or be bored" is good gameplay. There is gameplay that emerges through alts and is enabled by them, and that needs to be taken into account here, but I think that "bring an alt and multi-box or be bored for 4 hours" is a good solution here. Not when other potential solutions exist.



I don't think the one to one requirement is realistic or needed, since this is sov space and if you can only muster one guy on defense then you deserve to lose your space. Besides you won't know what the enemy has on grid until you show up to check. The notification you get will (if past notification are any indication) simply show you that something is being attacked along with the timer until it's captured.

The bigger thing here is that you should have some ability to end the threat, even if it takes you a bit of effort and a few people to do it. This means that the Inty pilot harassing needs to be at some risk for doing so, rather than being able to simply kite around for the 1-2 minutes needed for his cycle to finish and then warping off.

It seems to me there are a number of ways to do this:

• Put active AI controlled defenses on all SOV structures.
• Put some kind of penalties on an active Entosis Link that make targets attempting to kite easier to catch.
• Put some kind of penalties or effect on the space around Sov targets that makes attacking them riskier, especially for small or fast attackers.
• Put some kind of restriction on attacking Sov targets that makes harassing/annoyance attacks less viable.

Each of these has its own drawbacks and benefits, but I think that covers the range of options fairly thoroughly.

I posted this over in the main thread, but I am curious to see people's thoughts specifically as it relates to the issues associated with destroying things via Entosis.

One of the things that has bothered me the most about the proposed sovereignty system is that it allows small, non-committal entities to destroy valuable things without committing very much of their own to the fight. With destructible stations coming SoonTM, this is particularly troubling. In light of that, I suggest the following compromise.

In the proposed system, f I go into your system and run my Entosis link on your I-Hub and you do not stop me by chasing me away or blowing up my ship, it generates the standard timers as proposed by Fozzie. Forty-eight hours later, we have the multi-node Entosis capture point battles (or you blue ball me). If I win, I keep my stuff.

Under the proposed system, "If the attackers win a capture event for a Territorial Claim Unit or Infrastructure Hub, then the structure explodes and any alliance will be free to attempt deploying of their own replacement structures."

Now, here is my suggestion: "If the attackers win a capture event for a Territorial Claim Unit or Infrastructure Hub, then the structure becomes vulnerable to capture, theft, or destruction."

For the first 24 hours after the successful capture event, only the successful attacker can claim the structure - they can do so by activating an Entosis link on it (does not have to complete a cycle). As soon as the successful attacker tags the structure by activating an Entosis link, the structure becomes invulnerable until the next prime time for that alliance (at which point, the Entosis game can begin anew). The captured structure retains the indices and other advantages earned by the previous owner[s]. If the successful attacker does not claim the structure within 24 hours, then the vulnerable structure may be captured when any alliance/corporation runs one Entosis cycle on it, at any time (no prime time window).

Upon completion of a successful capture event, a vulnerable structure may be stolen when any player scoops the structure into the cargo hold of his ship. Structures too large to fit into a ship cannot be stolen. Once scooped, the structure loses the indices and other advantages earned by the previous owner[s].

Upon completion of a successful capture event, a vulnerable structure can be destroyed at any time, provided someone is willing to shoot at it long enough or bring enough [big] ships to do the job quickly. While there are no reinforcement timers, the structures all have a significant amount of hit points. In the event of destruction, the structure loss mail will belong to the last alliance/corporation to own the structure.

I think that is a reasonable compromise. What say you?

Advantages over the current proposal:
1. It still gives attackers a way to make people undock and fight to defend their space.
2. It requires real commitment to actually destroy any structure.
3. It preserves a role for Dreadnoughts and other big ships in the destruction of structures.
4. It allows for more emergent gameplay and player interaction.
5. Assuming that some structures are the right size, it could allow for some interesting choices regarding Freighters and Jump Freighters.

I see no disadvantages of this system versus the current proposal.

good luck getting to the other capture points in the constellation.

I did, but you on other hand is clearly unable to do so. I never said that you will aply them to the NPC outposts. Try again.. read it.. i know it might hurt your head, byt if 6 year olds can do it, so can you.

PEOPLE LIVING IN NPC STATION WILL NEED TO DEPLOY THEIR OWN STRUCTURES!! BECAUSE THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BUILD ANYTHIGN ON OUTPOSTS.

IS that so HARD to read?

After spending a day bashing towers and contemplating life choices, I can say for certain HP sov > entosis sov.