Re: SAP times

Ville wrote:

how would you balance the reward for this?

All completed SAPs would simply drop a container like now.

Re: SAP times

So possibility to get destroy/active and passive rewards?  At the same time?

Steam achievement Unlocked:  Being a Badass
http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/239407
Dev Zoom: I think its time to confess, Ville is my alt
Dev Zoom: Ville can be sometimes so sane it's scary.

Re: SAP times

Ville wrote:

So possibility to get destroy/active and passive rewards?  At the same time?

yeah

Re: SAP times

I like it then +1

Steam achievement Unlocked:  Being a Badass
http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/239407
Dev Zoom: I think its time to confess, Ville is my alt
Dev Zoom: Ville can be sometimes so sane it's scary.

Re: SAP times

DEV Zoom wrote:

Now that this is among our plans, have a bump.

What to discuss:
* Pair up intrusion times, so selected outposts/SAPs will always open at the same time
* Makes controlling multiple outposts much harder for one corporation
* Possibly make intrusion times public for everyone, remove intrusion scanning - feedback needed


And another idea to ponder that I thought of already after the blog was out:

* Activate all 3 SAPs of an outpost at the same time when an intrusion starts
* Each of them still have a 1 hour timer, but all of them can be completed by anyone
* The final stability change will be calculated from the 3 SAP results
* Just examples:
Owner completes it: +5 stability
Enemy completes it: -5 stability
Timeout: -1 stability

For example if owner can complete 1 SAP (+5), enemy takes another (-5), and noone bothers with the 3rd one (-1), stability will change by -1. If the owner can complete all 3, stability will change by +15.


a Few quick notes off the top of my head with out fulling thinking this out .

Specimen saps = PITA especially if up every-time as a owner.

With no need to scan, maybe review the idea of forcing anonymous sign-ups to intrusions. This would give the player access to complete the SAP and then take loot or access the expired loot.

Unsure if just the owner should know the event time is being engaged by a enemy or if it should show as pending siege for all.

I would not trigger 3 saps and 3 sap rewards on globally published timers and give free loot.

Force a little anonymous skin in the game.

Undefeated 2013
"Even alone you probably are one of the best" - Khader Khan
"Lemon the 1 man army .... also know as: THE TERMINATOR!" - Obi Wan
"There are people who are just better then you at doing many things at one time, some are far better then myself, far better." -Merkle

Re: SAP times

Lemon wrote:

Specimen saps = PITA especially if up every-time as a owner.

From the blog:

Specimen processing SAP rework
* You hate this
* Rework it so that it would require you to deliver items from the SAP to a randomly chosen item delivery point nearby (or the other way around), similar to transport assignments

Re: SAP times

DEV Zoom wrote:

Now that this is among our plans, have a bump.

What to discuss:
* Pair up intrusion times, so selected outposts/SAPs will always open at the same time
* Makes controlling multiple outposts much harder for one corporation
* Possibly make intrusion times public for everyone, remove intrusion scanning - feedback needed


And another idea to ponder that I thought of already after the blog was out:

* Activate all 3 SAPs of an outpost at the same time when an intrusion starts
* Each of them still have a 1 hour timer, but all of them can be completed by anyone
* The final stability change will be calculated from the 3 SAP results
* Just examples:
Owner completes it: +5 stability
Enemy completes it: -5 stability
Timeout: -1 stability

For example if owner can complete 1 SAP (+5), enemy takes another (-5), and noone bothers with the 3rd one (-1), stability will change by -1. If the owner can complete all 3, stability will change by +15.

Zoom, doesn't that basically put us back to Intrusion 1.0 except nobody has to sign up now?

I still feel we're approaching this from the wrong angle.

1 corp controlling 3 or X outposts isn't the root of the problem. The root of the problem is that nobody else is attacking all of those outposts at the same time.

7 months ago, we made a public statement that the strongest alliance in the game wouldn't touch 2/3 of the Beta islands and outposts. Nobody aside from NSE, ETHOS and OTHERS bothered trying.

So in my mind, the question isn't "Why is Corp X holding Y outposts?", the real question is "Why is nobody else attacking Corp X on all fronts?".

Do you see my line of reasoning here? Am I making sense to you?

58 (edited by Jita 2015-07-25 09:28:49)

Re: SAP times

I do think sap times should be public. As far as doing three saps goes, I don't see why not. As for changing the specimin sap, I wouldn't over develop it. Just remove it for now, make every station destro / passive / active and when you have these new PVE mechanics in place borrow from that code.

The risk of this needs a little balancing IMO, I would make doing any of the saps Pvp flag you (even passive). If its easy I would also make both the passive and active speed of completion related to bot size. Risking an arkhe to do a passive sap is not risk.

Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."

59 (edited by Annihilator 2015-07-25 10:47:12)

Re: SAP times

changing the speciment sap is probably one of the easiest things to do, using the transport mission template.

since beta 2 islands are the next for the revamp, Zoom can do that in one go.

but for that, one aspect of transport missions needs to be fixed -> *feature issue*

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

60 (edited by BeastmodeGuNs 2015-08-31 02:55:38)

Re: SAP times

DEV Zoom wrote:

Now that this is among our plans, have a bump.

What to discuss:
* Pair up intrusion times, so selected outposts/SAPs will always open at the same time
* Makes controlling multiple outposts much harder for one corporation
* Possibly make intrusion times public for everyone, remove intrusion scanning - feedback needed


And another idea to ponder that I thought of already after the blog was out:

* Activate all 3 SAPs of an outpost at the same time when an intrusion starts
* Each of them still have a 1 hour timer, but all of them can be completed by anyone
* The final stability change will be calculated from the 3 SAP results
* Just examples:
Owner completes it: +5 stability
Enemy completes it: -5 stability
Timeout: -1 stability

For example if owner can complete 1 SAP (+5), enemy takes another (-5), and noone bothers with the 3rd one (-1), stability will change by -1. If the owner can complete all 3, stability will change by +15.

Very late on this but hey, a necro a day gets the forum PvP to stay!

TL;DR = +1 on the stuff already proposed in this post.

Reading this signature fills you with determination.

Re: SAP times

DEV Zoom wrote:

Now that this is among our plans, have a bump.

And another idea to ponder that I thought of already after the blog was out:

* Activate all 3 SAPs of an outpost at the same time when an intrusion starts
* Each of them still have a 1 hour timer, but all of them can be completed by anyone
* The final stability change will be calculated from the 3 SAP results
* Just examples:
Owner completes it: +5 stability
Enemy completes it: -5 stability
Timeout: -1 stability

For example if owner can complete 1 SAP (+5), enemy takes another (-5), and noone bothers with the 3rd one (-1), stability will change by -1. If the owner can complete all 3, stability will change by +15.

I'll see beasts necro and raise him one.

I think this is the best idea tbh, but I agree with Jita that the specimen needs to go completely.  If all 3 saps come up you only need to do 2 to get a 5 point increase. So if the station is at 100 (or whatever max is) then only completing 2 will be sufficient, and that's fine. But if a specimen is involved then who is going to do that ? Just do the other two and leave the specimen. If if the enemy take it, it's still a 5 point increase if you take the other two and that will make the specimen sort of redundant anyway..

Re: SAP times

Why does the "F'ing" owner get penalized for owning a outpost?

SO much backwards logic.......Look at EVE's system, and to the opposite.

I am Perpetuum.

Re: SAP times

It forces the owning corp to actually present the power it represents.   By that standard the mechanics are appropriate.

It comes across as penalizing because presenting the power a base owner represents is more costly than it is to grief a station down to 0.  That is a more fundamental problem with whole PvP system right now than just base ownership.  Effectively, it is easier to gank than it is to defend against ganks.  With no reward on the defender side for being in a defensive position the balance is out of whack. Even if it IS appropriate for defenders to have a PvP disadvantage there still needs to be compensation for that somewhere in the game.  You already know this :-p

-K

Re: SAP times

Kayin Prime wrote:

It forces the owning corp to actually present the power it represents.   By that standard the mechanics are appropriate.

There are several uni-language corps that would even with 20 more active player having trouble covering all timezones.

This means you just loose standing while corp sleeps, even when allied defend so no enemy can sneak in for SAP.

Yes doing 1 out of 3 SAP is still enough to maintain standing on a decent level, but atm no corp would be able to cover all 3 SAP on one outpost. Not to speak about the fact, that you still will have to deal with, that it is possible to gather task force, run to enemy island, perform SAP and leave before enemy is able to form up, as it takes more time bringing 10 player in same TS channel, agree on bot fit and find point from where they could move together than it takes to move from 3 island distance to a SAP and leave again.

Maybe there will be a time when 20 active player in a medium size corp happens, then think about this feature, but please not today.

Re: SAP times

The owning corp already presents it's power by stability being at 100.

SAP's don't complete themselves anymore.

Through PVP strength, our POE alliance has made Fortress Doomhalarn a reality. Nobody dares launch a campaign against our home island because we have eradicated all those that tried. Through PVP strength we have intimidated our many enemies into not even trying anymore.

The attacker is already in a favorable position, this system only makes it worse to be a defender. It's an attempt to fix what isn't broken.

The proposed system places defenders in a position of perpetually grinding their own SAPs regardless if there is opposition or not.

Re: SAP times

Naismith wrote:

The proposed system places defenders in a position of perpetually grinding their own SAPs regardless if there is opposition or not.

Only because of the -1 points for timeouts?

Re: SAP times

Naismith wrote:

The proposed system places defenders in a position of perpetually grinding their own SAPs regardless if there is opposition or not.

The proposed system encourages people to actually play regularly. not just when when they have to to keep the station.

If you're too lazy to log in, get one of your minions to do it.

With the current population however, some sort of alliance mechanic might be appropriate to at least keep it from going negative during off time zone (alliance member takes it, stays same or goes up a small amount and still drops the loot??).

Re: SAP times

DEV Zoom wrote:
Naismith wrote:

The proposed system places defenders in a position of perpetually grinding their own SAPs regardless if there is opposition or not.

Only because of the -1 points for timeouts?

The Intrusion 2.0 system already requires a global presence across time-zones (with the random dice-roll on SAP times), and fairly balances out the take-over of stations. The defenders have X days while their stability is dropping to either start defending or start evacuating, before they can be locked out. The attackers have X days to take SAP's before they can take it over and later on lock the outpost.

To me those mechanics seem to be fair and balanced, with special regard for casual players. As you can remember before in Intrusion 1.0, all it took to lose your station was one Intrusion window in the worst timezone.

-1 point sounds trivial, but -1 point removes the facility upgrade point outpost owners receive at 100 stability - meaning, the defender is going to be forced to show up for every SAP in random timezones if they want to maintain a fully upgraded outpost.

I would say -1 point for time-out is a needless extra grind placed on the backs of owners for maintaining their control, when there's already a mechanic in place (Intrusion 2.0 and the concept of Territory Control) that does that same role.

Zoom if you need proof that Intrusion 2.0 is working, look at the history of South Iseitsu in-game. OTHERS owned it, then we decided to help NSE take it and they lost it over a period of time, now they're taking it back. It's organic and happening over a period of time because of player involvement.

What you're proposing is a game-mechanic that does what players should be doing IMHO.

Re: SAP times

do you only pay your rent when the flat-owner already knocked several times on your door?

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: SAP times

DarkTerror wrote:
Naismith wrote:

The proposed system places defenders in a position of perpetually grinding their own SAPs regardless if there is opposition or not.

The proposed system encourages people to actually play regularly. not just when when they have to to keep the station.

If you're too lazy to log in, get one of your minions to do it.

How does this encourage regular play?  What is my reward, not being punished for owning the outpost?

Undefeated 2013
"Even alone you probably are one of the best" - Khader Khan
"Lemon the 1 man army .... also know as: THE TERMINATOR!" - Obi Wan
"There are people who are just better then you at doing many things at one time, some are far better then myself, far better." -Merkle

Re: SAP times

Annihilator wrote:

do you only pay your rent when the flat-owner already knocked several times on your door?

No, I pay it on the planned day set once a year monthly.

If I miss anything then a fun trickle system of follow-up goes off.

Emphasis on the annually set due date, done(paid) on my available schedule, until I am late. Then a 30 day response begin, again giving me time to respond.

I have a hard enough time managing a planned life, let alone more RNG

Undefeated 2013
"Even alone you probably are one of the best" - Khader Khan
"Lemon the 1 man army .... also know as: THE TERMINATOR!" - Obi Wan
"There are people who are just better then you at doing many things at one time, some are far better then myself, far better." -Merkle

Re: SAP times

DEV Zoom wrote:

* Makes controlling multiple outposts much harder for one corporation

If you want to make it harder for a single corporation to control multiple outposts then increase the loss in stability for an outpost owner losing a SAP and decrease the gain in stability for a Corp winning a SAP relative to the number of outposts that corp already owns.

These changes need only be applied on the way up from 0-100 when trying to win and on the way down from 100-0 when trying to defend otherwise people will just use alt to reduce a station to 0 at the "normal" rate.

Something like a 50% stability loss per SAP when owning 3 outposts would really change things.

To combat the circumvention of this by alt corps maybe a new "Outpost Control" extension for a particular corp role which requires a significant EP investment or even an active member restriction on taking (not holding, just taking) more than one outpost or even an escalating rent might help alt corp exploits.

Re: SAP times

Competition makes it harder to own multiple outposts.

Adding reasons for competition are necessary.

This is what field terminal taxation and facility upgrades on Beta will be - reason for competition.

Food for thought - There's less people in General Chat then there are Beta outposts in the game. At this point, the population can adopt a 1-player-1-outpost approach and there would still be outposts to go around.

Re: SAP times

Zoom, If someone does not like, what you want to change, then you are on the right track.
I like your ideas smile

Just @ Game