These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 page12
 

Improving Site Diversity in WHs

Author
Pidgeon Saissore
DNS Requiem
Fraternity.
#21 - 2013-08-29 00:48:40 UTC
I'd say the pos attack idea is actually good for inhabiting wormholes. The number of sleepers a death star can kill would be worth billions on its own. The sleepers would eventually overwhelm said death star but not before it paid itself off a dozen times over at least.

It would change the way people would have to play it though. People would not be able to accumulate an excessive amount of stuff in their tower. Towers would be exclusively death stars. People would need to keep a spare tower logged off on an alt in system.

Personally apart from my large amount of pi I can live exclusively out of my carriers. When d day comes I would only need to throw all my pi in the customs offices then pack up my tower while my carriers are cloaked somewhere, then just put it back up when its over and start the cycle of ratting with my death star all over again.

Since that would be so easy to do the attacks should not be predictable. While they should be generally escalating there should be a random multiplier so there would be no way to predict when you need to evac and reset it.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#22 - 2013-08-29 00:50:10 UTC
Or we could just continue to put pressure on CCP to create a truly dynamic mission/anomaly system. Where by you can't read from a script and all you get is some rough idea of risk/opposition before you enter a site.

This would be best meshed with a lego POS system which would then make for easy to create POS's for the opposition to be working out of as structures.

Anything else is simply a band aid fix to a massive flaw.
Veldaran
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2013-08-31 00:38:41 UTC
Pidgeon Saissore wrote:
I'd say the pos attack idea is actually good for inhabiting wormholes. The number of sleepers a death star can kill would be worth billions on its own. The sleepers would eventually overwhelm said death star but not before it paid itself off a dozen times over at least.

It would change the way people would have to play it though. People would not be able to accumulate an excessive amount of stuff in their tower. Towers would be exclusively death stars. People would need to keep a spare tower logged off on an alt in system.

I think the idea deserves some more thought, but I don't agree with pushing all WH POS's to "Death Star" setups. This would make the already unattractive industry portion of WH's entirely too difficult to be worthwhile. I'd much rather Sleepers randomly reinforce towers in variable fleet sizes so that OTHER WH corps are motivated to put eyes on towers they find reinforced.

Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Or we could just continue to put pressure on CCP to create a truly dynamic mission/anomaly system. Where by you can't read from a script and all you get is some rough idea of risk/opposition before you enter a site.

This would be best meshed with a lego POS system which would then make for easy to create POS's for the opposition to be working out of as structures.

Anything else is simply a band aid fix to a massive flaw.

I can agree to an extent, but asking for multiple system overhauls at once is unrealistic. I consider it a more worthwhile effort to push them towards a diversified system before waiting the length of time it would take to complete revamp it.

Simc0m
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2013-11-28 18:35:02 UTC
+1 Going to save this one from the permalock.
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2014-02-25 18:46:23 UTC
Gee willickers, look at this old thread. A most wonderful idea, time for a trip to the first page!
Previous page12