Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
WolfGang H
|
Posted - 2005.10.12 05:06:00 -
[1]
Right now to gain control of a system, alliances can build POSes to get sovreignty which actually shows up on the map and conferes a lessened fuel use bonus. Once a group of players has sov, they can build outposts which offer station-like services. This is a great start. But to finalize system control and turn EVE into the undisputed pvp game of territory and resource control (which = the best/most meaningful pvp imo) it would be awesome if these things were added:
Once an outpost is placed in orbit around a planet, that planet can be colonized. Planets would be the #1 greatest source of wealth in EVE, and would have a very diverse amount of uses. Planet colonization is already on the drawing board I beleive.
Another thing on the drawing board, super weapons for dreadnaughts. These should cost like 60 billion. They can be used in fleet combat as a normal weapon (not do uber crazy damage, but OK damage) but their main use should be for shooting planets with their "ultra shot." It takes like 3 hours to charge and uses literally 10-20 billion worth of resources PER SHOT, but 1 shot ruins a planets ecosystem for like 3-6 RL months, making it 100% uncolonizable. The reason there is an actual resource cost per shot is so that people wont just fly around mindlessly ruining random planets for the heck of it. This is something you'd do after taking an alliances outpost but knowing you cant hold it, similar to salting the earth of aniecnt days, or something to do in at enemy planets that you know will serve VERY valuable to them by they have not yet developed into a colony planet.
The third thing would be making it so if an alliance has an outpost in a system, they can now spend another 5-10 billion and build something about as powerfull as a small POS, or some other type of defensive structure, around stargates leading into the outpost system. A very rich and successfull alliance might be able to lock down an entire constelation or very imporant 0.0 space route, and then mine the wealth of the astroids and harvest moons/planets. Being able to effectivly close off small areas of space if you have outposts placed is countered by your enemies ability to destroy the stargate structures, and makes ships that have JUMP DRIVES more meaningful. Imagine jumping right into an enemies claimed and fully developed closed space with a few dreads and carriers and titans, and then scores of ships undocking from these mother ships and owning the enemy from the inside....or putting themselves in a total deathtrap! Anyways, the structures that an alliance could put around stargates would not be uber strong, but would have a lot of HP so a grop of BS pilots cant take out a multi billion isk structure just because it is that alliances sleeping time. Remember, these structures would be fairly rare and VERY expensive and serve to be greattargets for roving pirate alliances.
Another thing that could be added to alliance systems that have an outpost is NPC patrols. they would basically be pirates that spawn at random places in the system and their AI is pretty much like normal npc pirate AI, except they will not shoot anyone in your alliance. They would serve as a great isk sink etc...you could pay 200 million per week for example to hire a few interceptor/cruiser patrols.
And the last thing would be the ability to build low damage/high HP sentry guns anywhere you want in your OUTPOST system. Each one costing a billion isk or so. Again, these sentrys would do low damage but be hard to destroy, giving alliances main systems slight combat defenses that can be placed near POSes, outposts, astroid belts, and anywhere really, with a limit on max per system and max per grid, so that an alliance cant spend 300 billion isk and have 300 sentrys right at a stargate. These guns WOULD NOT shoot npcs. Perhaps whoever controls the outpost controls the sentry guns.
|
Mathmatics
|
Posted - 2005.10.12 05:39:00 -
[2]
Great ideas
/signed
|
Silvero
|
Posted - 2005.10.12 06:31:00 -
[3]
Something like that
|
infused
|
Posted - 2005.10.12 06:39:00 -
[4]
We seriously need deployable sentry guns. High HP same damage as normal sentrys.
|
WolfGang H
|
Posted - 2005.10.12 06:46:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Silvero Something like that
Perhaps, but limiting it to systems that you have an outpost in is the only way they should be put into the game, if ever. Making them do so much damage that they 1 shot anything smaller than a BS or HAC would be silly also. Maybe make their damage scale depending on target size etc. Overall high HP low damage would be the best solution in my opinion. The sentrys help out but they alone do not defend your space.
|
Kanuo Ashkeron
|
Posted - 2005.10.12 06:57:00 -
[6]
Sounds very cool to me.
signed, of course
Kanuo
|
Murdock Jern
|
Posted - 2005.10.12 06:58:00 -
[7]
Your "super weapon" idea is already in the works... it was mentioned in the E-ON magazine...
MJ _______________________________________________
|
WolfGang H
|
Posted - 2005.10.12 07:15:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Murdock Jern Your "super weapon" idea is already in the works... it was mentioned in the E-ON magazine...
MJ
Originally by: Wolfgang H
..."Planet colonization is already on the drawing board I believe. Another thing on the drawing board, super weapons for dreadnaughts..."
Yes, I know. I'm still listing it as a suggestion for finalizing the entire sovreignty system. It is one of the peices.
|
Tar om
|
Posted - 2005.10.12 08:40:00 -
[9]
Good stuff. -- We are the Octavian Vanguard www.octavianvanguard.net
"The belief in the possibility of a short decisive war appears to be one of the most ancient and dangerous of human illusions." |
WolfGang H
|
Posted - 2005.10.12 17:51:00 -
[10]
I've never seen a thread with so many large scale ideas survive so long without massive flames against it. Maybe this means something? Here here! Sign your name if you think the above ideas (or near variations of them) would make EVE into an even better game than it is now. Or, if you have a critical suggestion, let us here it.
|
|
Chinsor
|
Posted - 2005.10.12 18:59:00 -
[11]
Alliances definitely need more ways of defending their territory, we need clear "borders"
nice ideas, signed
|
Hohenheim OfLight
|
Posted - 2005.10.12 19:13:00 -
[12]
As long as there is no way to set these things to kill nuturals on sight fine, other wise they will jsut become the new gate camp, and make ever where like the outer ring.
|
Ikvar
|
Posted - 2005.10.12 19:41:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Ikvar on 12/10/2005 19:41:46
Originally by: WolfGang H
Once an outpost is placed in orbit around a planet, that planet can be colonized. Planets would be the #1 greatest source of wealth in EVE, and would have a very diverse amount of uses. Planet colonization is already on the drawing board I beleive.
I like this idea.
Originally by: WolfGang H
Another thing on the drawing board, super weapons for dreadnaughts. These should cost like 60 billion. They can be used in fleet combat as a normal weapon (not do uber crazy damage, but OK damage) but their main use should be for shooting planets with their "ultra shot." It takes like 3 hours to charge and uses literally 10-20 billion worth of resources PER SHOT, but 1 shot ruins a planets ecosystem for like 3-6 RL months, making it 100% uncolonizable. The reason there is an actual resource cost per shot is so that people wont just fly around mindlessly ruining random planets for the heck of it. This is something you'd do after taking an alliances outpost but knowing you cant hold it, similar to salting the earth of aniecnt days, or something to do in at enemy planets that you know will serve VERY valuable to them by they have not yet developed into a colony planet.
I like this idea.
Originally by: WolfGang H
The third thing would be making it so if an alliance has an outpost in a system, they can now spend another 5-10 billion and build something about as powerfull as a small POS, or some other type of defensive structure, around stargates leading into the outpost system. A very rich and successfull alliance might be able to lock down an entire constelation or very imporant 0.0 space route, and then mine the wealth of the astroids and harvest moons/planets. Being able to effectivly close off small areas of space if you have outposts placed is countered by your enemies ability to destroy the stargate structures, and makes ships that have JUMP DRIVES more meaningful. Imagine jumping right into an enemies claimed and fully developed closed space with a few dreads and carriers and titans, and then scores of ships undocking from these mother ships and owning the enemy from the inside....or putting themselves in a total deathtrap! Anyways, the structures that an alliance could put around stargates would not be uber strong, but would have a lot of HP so a grop of BS pilots cant take out a multi billion isk structure just because it is that alliances sleeping time. Remember, these structures would be fairly rare and VERY expensive and serve to be greattargets for roving pirate alliances.
Not too keen on this, I'm very against alliances being able to defend their space without actually being logged on or whilst mining etc.
Originally by: WolfGang H
Another thing that could be added to alliance systems that have an outpost is NPC patrols. they would basically be pirates that spawn at random places in the system and their AI is pretty much like normal npc pirate AI, except they will not shoot anyone in your alliance. They would serve as a great isk sink etc...you could pay 200 million per week for example to hire a few interceptor/cruiser patrols.
Not sure if that would be very useful.
Originally by: WolfGang H
And the last thing would be the ability to build low damage/high HP sentry guns anywhere you want in your OUTPOST system. Each one costing a billion isk or so. Again, these sentrys would do low damage but be hard to destroy, giving alliances main systems slight combat defenses that can be placed near POSes, outposts, astroid belts, and anywhere really, with a limit on max per system and max per grid, so that an alliance cant spend 300 billion isk and have 300 sentrys right at a stargate. These guns WOULD NOT shoot npcs. Perhaps whoever controls the outpost controls the sentry guns.
Again, not very keen on the idea of automated territory defence.
And to the person who said sentries that do gate sentry like damage, pull the other one [:lol
Originally by: Berneh
You will never take me aliv coppers
|
Shin Ra
|
Posted - 2005.10.12 19:51:00 -
[14]
Yeah I think we should have sentry guns in 0.0. This would ensure that it would be almost impossible to kill anyone in that alliance who was mining or npc hunting.
Inflation 4tw.
|
WolfGang H
|
Posted - 2005.10.12 21:51:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Shin Ra Yeah I think we should have sentry guns in 0.0. This would ensure that it would be almost impossible to kill anyone in that alliance who was mining or npc hunting.
Inflation 4tw.
Don't get frightened because you hear the word "sentry guns."
The difference between these turrets and the sentrys you know would be:
Low damage/high HP anywhere you want in your *OUTPOST* system only. Very high cost max per system and max per grid, so alliances cant really rely on it as their only means of defense.
To sum it up, buildable sentry turrets would be slight annoynces only to invaders. They would serve as an isk sink and give alliance something to spend their billions of isk on. They could have bad enough tracking not to even be able to hit frigate sized ships unless they are moving very very slowly. They by no means would defend an alliances territory by themselves. And remember, you have to already have an outpost in the system to even place these, and there is a max limit per system AND grid. It's not like there will be uber massive damage turrets just placed randomly around 0.0 everywhere you try to go.
|
Gimbr
|
Posted - 2005.10.13 01:32:00 -
[16]
I think adding these changes would really put the finished touches on the true meaning of pvp for this game. I would love to see all or most of these ideas implemented. Devs, please take notes :)
|
Benilopax
|
Posted - 2005.10.13 01:44:00 -
[17]
never seen these ideas put so well.
signed
one suggestion perhaps consumables could be used in the "defence platforms" for the "gunner crews" like water and food etc?
|
WolfGang H
|
Posted - 2005.10.13 01:49:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Benilopax never seen these ideas put so well.
signed
one suggestion perhaps consumables could be used in the "defence platforms" for the "gunner crews" like water and food etc?
Agreed. These structures serve a very important purpose and they should probably take at least a bit of maintainence. These are deisgned for alliances to run, afterall. It's up to the people who balance stuff I suppose.
|
Veskrashen
|
Posted - 2005.10.13 03:05:00 -
[19]
If you allow them to place guns, etc near gates, it would probably be best to run off the current POS model. Makes implementation easier, etc.
Main structure would be a "defense platform" around small tower size, with med tower fueling requirements. Have it require Strontium Clathrates as part of it's normal fuel, be tough - but not have a shield. Interferes with the jump gate mechanics, dontcha know. Allow one defense platform per gate.
Make them grid heavy and CPU light, again - something along the lines of a med-large tower in terms of grid, with only a few hundred CPU. This will give you the option of lots of guns, with fewer web/scram/ecm options.
Architect of Change |
WolfGang H
|
Posted - 2005.10.13 03:31:00 -
[20]
To be fair, perhaps on the overveiw gates with defenses built around them would blink or be a shade of some color, and autopilot would warn you if your ship was going to fly though one of them....not that you should really be autopiloting in 0.0/lowsec...Also, just like outposts and stuff, these are only put onto gates after a downtime.
|
|
Krolena
|
Posted - 2005.10.13 06:14:00 -
[21]
Those are interesting, ideas, I like them.
/signed o7
|
Krolena
|
Posted - 2005.10.13 06:18:00 -
[22]
I really like your NPC patrols idea, it d be nice to have people guarding and not needing to be logged in heh.
Ilike it signed
|
Derron Bel
|
Posted - 2005.10.13 06:23:00 -
[23]
Player sentry guns are in the works, check the post devchat interview.
Item 3: It sounds like you want an automated battlestation. Which would be neat, but there don't seem to be any such things as battlestations in EVE, unless you count Ultima Station.
-==- Holy-Jim> as you know, surprise is the key to victory.....surprise! LooseCannoN> ahh! LooseCannoN> my plans have been foiled! |
Snake Jankins
|
Posted - 2005.10.13 08:41:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Snake Jankins on 13/10/2005 08:42:16 Well some ideas sound nice, but what shouldn't happen is that you can a secure your territory so much with npcs and sentry guns that it's like empire space if you have the isk. Where do small groups pvp, if alliances place sentry guns everywhere from empire though the corridors into deepest 0.0 and every one hides in their safe alliance empire space ? Then it's all about making isk and placing sentries. No room for little new groups in 0.0 anymore or independent people.
Maybe it was possible, if these sentries have to be fueled like a pos and are very easy to destroy, if they aren't fueled ! Then there would be a logistic problem. You would have to mine tons of ice, refine it and transport it to your sentries. These transports and mining operations were attackable by stealth bombers etc. This would be a scenario that I could accept or even like. Not just having the isk and dropping sentries everywhere. There should also be routes into 0.0 and areas that can't be secured so that new people who are not sponsored by an alliance could at least enter 0.0 and start somewhere.
|
StellarSheep
|
Posted - 2005.10.13 09:16:00 -
[25]
I like that ideas. Maybe with little changes but they looks nice atm.
And ppl PLZ start READING. U can place sentrys only in system with OUTPOST ffs So small pvp alliances/corps still can do a lot of dmg. But it`ll be harder for them AND very good. Because atm it`s impossible to defend your "space" at all. ________________________________________________
StellarSheep
|
The GoldenRatio
|
Posted - 2005.10.13 16:05:00 -
[26]
These ideas look pretty good. I declare this thread and the ideas contained here-in a winner.
The GoldenRatio > All. |
WolfGang H
|
Posted - 2005.10.15 08:10:00 -
[27]
Thanks for the input people. See any gaps in my reasoning...or any improvements that could be made? Any small details that wouild need to be put in place which I did not mention? --- I claim Basgerin. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |