These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Wormhole stabilizers and selfdestructing ships

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#21 - 2012-01-20 21:44:33 UTC
Jafit McJafitson wrote:
Two step wrote:
we didn't do it for the loot, we did it to prove to ourselves that we were better than they were. I think that would be the motivation for any entity that wanted to come kick us out as well. Sure, the loot is nice, but making yourself top dog is a lot nicer.


for people who aren't colossal epeen waving turbofaggots

Roll

Hathrul wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Make it so wh-wh connections are possible, but wh-kspace are not.

wouldnt change that much. all the people that live in the "fortress systems" would still be able to drop 10+ caps on you without warning. right now it takes a lot of time and effort to get those numbers, making it a dangerous operation and very costly if it goes wrong.

Not only that, but depending on how you *move* those caps - they become vulnerable at various points... Again, depending on your tactics.


With stabilizers... not so much.

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#22 - 2012-01-20 23:31:08 UTC
Jafit McJafitson wrote:
Two step wrote:
we didn't do it for the loot, we did it to prove to ourselves that we were better than they were. I think that would be the motivation for any entity that wanted to come kick us out as well. Sure, the loot is nice, but making yourself top dog is a lot nicer.


Did you make a cool video about it though?

Also what about gameplay for people who aren't colossal epeen waving turbofaggots and want something tangible as a reward for their efforts?


Sadly, we didn't make a video, sorry.

You do get some reward, depending on how fast you are able to RF key POSes. Our recent 2nd eviction of Firebirds Squadron netted us 10 billion or so, for example. Certainly the rewards are better than you get for nullsec sov capture, which are just about nothing (something I brought up with CCP in regards to the station destruction conversation). You also cost your competition a very large amount of ISK (CCRES was probably 50 billion +), and you do have a slight impact on the market for T3 salvage.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
Hathrul
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#23 - 2012-01-21 00:23:38 UTC
Two step wrote:


You do get some reward, depending on how fast you are able to RF key POSes. Our recent 2nd eviction of Firebirds Squadron netted us 10 billion or so, for example. Certainly the rewards are better than you get for nullsec sov capture, which are just about nothing (something I brought up with CCP in regards to the station destruction conversation). You also cost your competition a very large amount of ISK (CCRES was probably 50 billion +), and you do have a slight impact on the market for T3 salvage.


as far as i know (and thats not that far, i havent lived in 0sec for a long time) sov warfare is about owning systems and being able to draw money from owning those systems. if this is true, you dont need to make isk while capturing a system, the system itself is the payment for your work. However, we both know wormhole systems arent worth jack. the majority of the c5 and c6 are empty anyway, or just have 1 pos in it. any corp or alliance that wants to live in those wormholes is perfectly able to remove a single tower (or pay mercs to do it).

So you made 10b on evicting a powerfull alliance. This sounds like a lot of money, but its not really. considering to the time and effort it takes to pull that off you barely made anything really. im not trying here to tell you that wasnt a big victory, it was, but as far as income goes, it isnt much for the high class wormhole alliances.

i truly think that by changing how sma's / ships / selfdestruct timers work in this situation you will see a massive increase in invasions. i know i will be quicker starting an invasion
Jafit McJafitson
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#24 - 2012-01-21 01:25:11 UTC
Two step wrote:
You do get some reward, depending on how fast you are able to RF key POSes. Our recent 2nd eviction of Firebirds Squadron netted us 10 billion or so, for example. Certainly the rewards are better than you get for nullsec sov capture, which are just about nothing (something I brought up with CCP in regards to the station destruction conversation). You also cost your competition a very large amount of ISK (CCRES was probably 50 billion +), and you do have a slight impact on the market for T3 salvage.


Taking sov gives you nothing...

You don't take sov for one-off loot drops, they're nice if you win a battle but that's a bonus. Sov is an investment, you take something that you can then use to make money and enjoy in the long term. Things like stations, moon goo, ratting space, nearby hostiles that actually form up to fight you instead of blueballing you, and then there's politics and drama and all that good stuff. Players fought over sov for these reasons before we even had sov mechanics that allowed you to develop your space with infrastructure such as cyno jammers and jump bridges. Also unclaimed nullsec space isn't as abundant as wormhole space, so there is always a good reason for invasion and conflict.

In wormholes you can conduct raids for the purposes of short term one-off profit, that's fine but there's no long term benifit. If you wanted conquest in wormhole space then a system that has someone in it has to be worth more in the long term than a system that has nobody in it. Conquerable infrastructure would make that possible.

I'm not suggesting sov and stations in wormholes, but something like a capturable POS (or something in between a POS and a Station) so you can conquer it, take everything that's in it (not just what drops), and then use the stuff that they built to make yourself more money (or burn it down whichever works). That way it would be worth invading a system that someone else has developed, for reasons other than just epeen.
Jafit McJafitson
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2012-01-21 01:27:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Jafit McJafitson
See spelling mistake, edit post... Oh i hit quote instead.

No CCP want this post to stay here, there's no delete button.
Borg Stoneson
SWARTA
#26 - 2012-01-22 09:45:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Borg Stoneson
Weaker destroyable outposts would help to provide a loot incentive. If people don't log in during the time the outpost is going down then anything they may have in their personal hangers becomes fair loot. Self destructing ships also becomes a lot harder since they have to be in space, which gives the attackers plenty of time to kill them on the undock. It would also solve at a stroke the roles/access rights and the t3 assembly issues.
1 thing, 1 issue fixed, 2 issues vastly improved.

Maybe have the rest of the established infrastructure revert to control of whoever has the sov/claim/etc so that invaders will have a reason to stay (they don't have to of course).
Oxandrolone
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2012-01-24 01:46:02 UTC
Wormhole stabalisers are a terrible idea, they will turn wh's into blobfests. The limited mass basically forces you to make more decisions on what ships you can field instead of how many battleships can you bring.

Having some way to increase the lifespan on eol wormholes is something that might be interesting.

Just this weekend we watched somewon who we invaded sd billions worth of ships. Setting SMA's to require 1 cpu would also make alot of difference.
Kenpachi Viktor
Perkone
Caldari State
#28 - 2012-01-25 00:53:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Kenpachi Viktor
This discussion is relevant

Quote:
The Hive ship can only be moved at DT. To move the ship a special beacon is placed at a wormhole entrance in the same system the ship is in. This beacon will prevent the wormhole from collapsing until next DT (all it's mass might get used up though so it's not a way to extend the usable lifetime of a wormhole). At DT the hive ship and everything in it is moved to the corresponding wormhole system. The wormhole will collapse after the jump.

A war that would’ve involved 20,000 players, 75% of nullsec space, and hundreds of supercapitals was halted not by diplomacy, but by a game mechanic so dreadful that those who have experienced it previously have no desire to do so again. - Fix POS & SOV
Poloturion
Genco Pura Olive Oil Company.
#29 - 2012-02-02 06:01:37 UTC
Jafit I really get the feeling you've either never lived in a wormhole, or that perhaps you tried it and didn't like it so now you want to make them just like null. I'm quite certain the huge majority of wspace dwellers do not want this, hence why we're in wspace in the first place.

Your idea of conquerable stations only encourages the building of fortress systems (exactly what CCP wants less of). It's been stated there are tons of empty C5's and 6's, and this is without a doubt the truth. Why the hell would you go to the effort of taking on an entrenched group and contest their system when you could find another that was empty and build your own station? Isk isn't really a big deal if you have a group devoted to making it so tada, a new fortress system is born!

The idea for removing the ability to SD in a POS provides an excellent reason to invade fortress systems. Everyone loves a loot pinada and a rich wspace alliance has some of the greatest candy around. Plus it's a reason to invade a system that doesn't revolve around epeen waving, which you apparently dislike.

I will agree with you that the ability to capture said station could also provide shinies, but that would likely take CCP years to create and personally I'd rather see something done before the doomsday at the end of the Mayan calendar. As a bonus it could actually go towards achieving what CCP is trying to do rather than making it worse. Wspace is meant to be a place where small gangs and a raiding style of game play is the norm. Attacking and razing systems for profit fits that design exactly.

Finally a WH stabilizer is a very, very bad idea for all the reasons already stated. Shame on anyone who seriously considered it.

Also, please fix POS.
Previous page12