51 (edited by Obi Wan Kenobi 2011-12-08 00:11:09)

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

MY CORP my alliance isnt out to rule large bits of beta. we live on alsbale & so we (naturaly) want to own the outposts there. But we dont want o have to keep sitting on saps for a min of 4 hour EACH DAY! doing nothing coz if we leave to even take  BIO some 1 can roll past do the sap & be off again in 2 mins easy. thats what i have a problem with.

As an attacker i have a ton of fun big_smile our little squid republic is already getting sick of wasting hours doing nothing on our saps. we pay money to have fun. i mean at least in eve you could shoot crap while you wait for timers lol. (mostly).

at this rate we will just go F stations were moving completely to alpha.

i dont think any 1 from my corp is asking to have the attackers nerfed with a nuke .. not at all. we just as  defenders we want to have RLs.

as for the devs hating alliances... DEVs if you hate us that much you never should have made a MMO ok ? lol i mean really this is well documented human behavior isnt something shockingly new.

True Pros make a Podcast to influence the Devs minds, 
The rest of you guys are Hacks tongue

PS. I got my Highways & stopped playing b4 they came in & have never used them! ...... Irony much ? tongue

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

I wouldn't really per say that 62nd likes knocking down sand castles. We do enjoy good fights and roaming not interested in owning the whole game and saying I win like some other groups that have Ben actively trying to do this since launch.

We are playing chess and the rest of perp is playing checkers.   http://stringcan.com/wp-content/uploads … 80x305.jpg     
http://www.youtube.com/user/Alkore321/videos

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Quote me damn it! big_smile

-.-

I don't want anyone to leave the game, as I read back through my posts I see it recurring, but if your not having enjoying the game....

Also, the word "FUN" keeps getting tossed around. Here are some other words, that if you are feeling, are just as valid to CONTINUE playing as 'fun'

enjoyment
satisfaction
accomplishment
time-sink (Ok, this could be 2 words)

Some words which are NOT reasons to quit;

frustration
persecution
bordom

These are reasons to take a break, and then come back.

In fact, the only thing word I can think of that's worth quitting over;

Apathy.

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

MY CORP my alliance isnt out to rule large bits of beta. we live on alsbale & so we (naturaly) want to own the outposts there. But we dont want o have to keep sitting on saps for a min of 4 hour EACH DAY! doing nothing coz if we leave to even take  BIO some 1 can roll past do the sap & be off again in 2 mins easy. thats what i have a problem with.

Your corp doesnt have to defend all the outposts, just 1. Ninja SAP the others for loot.

Each member of the alliance should be large enough to hold their own outpost, if not then they can be pets in the one outpost until you get enough manpower to hold 2.

Alliances automatically holding a whole Island is, as Zoom says, Yesterday's Perpetuum.

Take one. Hold it. Get the aura's and bonuses, then go for 2, and 3.

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Mara Kaid Pirate of Nia wrote:

The funny thing of this whole thread is 62nd are THE ONLY ones defending the new intrusion.

Can we keep comments on topic?

This is simply not true. Others from corps are figuring out the pros and cons. In fact we've posted some cons.

What you mean to say, is when it's easier for you to hold 8 stations again just logging in once a week, that people will cry blob. Of course, when your large alliance can own 8 stations easily, and then just focus on one target, what would you expect? You have only one real force on the server fighting you.

But that's not going to happen, you're going to have to pay the price now, of holding 5 stations - 6 stations by being logged in and active enough to do that. You don't want to do that though. You want to log in for a bit, then log off. You now take a station on the enemy side, the enemy can just harass the new one, or the others you own.

The system should reward active players, prevent alliances from dominating the whole map, and encourage smaller groups to enter. It certainly wont by making it easier for larger alliances to do so. Friedrich pointed this out in his radio comment. Mechanics that allow larger alliances to do easier work will just make the server two sided.

Dan posted some good points.


Lol, the only price we are having to pay is for teleport beacons to jump the lithuses in to collect all this T2 and T3 loot from you losing 40+ bots on a consistent basis.  48h in and already three separate come help me server posts. Lololoololol

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: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Something I probably should add;

If another Corp or alliance has more manpower, meaning able to field more players with better bots, more often, then don't they deserve to win?

Wanting an outpost doesn't mean you automatically get one right away. Corps may have to actually hire Merc's to help.

Merc's are actually viable now, because if they don't show up and you lose a SAP, its not the same as getting screwed in I 1.0 intrusion and losing the outpost. If a merc group fails to perform, they won't get hired again.

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Balfizar wrote:

I wouldn't really per say that 62nd likes knocking down sand castles. We do enjoy good fights and roaming not interested in owning the whole game and saying I win like some other groups that have Ben actively trying to do this since launch.

I don't mean it in a bad way smile But for example Squid enjoy good fights and don't want to own everything, but we have a different play style to 62nd I would say. Maybe defensive and offensive would be better words, but the point still stands, without defenders, what's the point of attackers?

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Ok, lets talk about it.

First off, and most importantly: it's way too soon to be calling it a failure or a success.  Honestly.

My impressions so far are pretty positive, I think it's been quite fun--with some exceptions I think are key, key changes that need to be made:

1.  Being able to scan SAP timers so exact.  At any given time our corp usually knows the EXACT(sounds like I'm exaggerating but it's accurate within like 5 minutes every time) time a good 50% of the outposts in the game will have a SAP active.  Preferably the whole scanning of timers will be removed completely, honestly it just makes alarm clocking more prevalent and bite sized--and constant.  Removing SAP scanning will only work if we make a couple more much needed changes too though...

2.  Such as how simple it is to complete a SAP.  Passive SAPs are way too easy to cap, 2 and a half minutes out of a one hour window is way too short.  Active hacking SAPs I don't have an opinion on yet, but if it's in line with the other SAPs so far it probably needs to be tweaked.  Destructive SAPs can be ninja'd by a light EWAR and an assault in almost no time at all, they need more hit points.  Specimen SAPs are just terrible to begin with, they throw the entire flow of the game out the window, and under certain circumstances will be impossible to take.  I'd be all for just removing specimen SAPs all together, I think they are terrible(what do the rest of you think about specimens in particular?).

3.  Letting defending corporations complete their own SAP.  I'm not so sure this is a good idea, but if we drastically raise the required effort to take a SAP it could be a prety good way to go.  Really it comes down to my second point, specimen aside--the other SAPs are way too easy to take in the time that they are open.  With a significantly reduced gap in SAP completion time to the window they are open perhaps letting the defender actively shut their own SAP off could be strong way to go.


I see the frustrations people are having with the whole "my alliance is having a hard time doing this."  But honestly,  why should it be so easy to hold so much land.  It wasn't easy for the British, it wasn't easy for the Romans, and it sure as hell shouldn't be simple in this game--it would break it.  Here's the thing, you don't have to defend every single SAP that comes up, and you're not expected to in this new system.  However, if you put any effort at all into it you should be able to maintain 70+(85+ I dont think is out of the question either) points pretty easily and strike out against your opponents SAPs.

Right now it's really hard to gauge how the system is working because it's so fresh and we have people either marathoning the game to ensure 100% SAP defense up time so they can bring their SAPs from 05 to 100 points.  Give it a week or two and once some of the fatigue of compulsively needing to maintain every single SAP timer that pops up kicks in perhaps we'll see things settle down a little as some of the community sees it less like "AMAGAWD I need to be awake and at a force of 1000 men to defend every timer or this system is a failure!"  Relax guys, there's some problems with it now but with some tweaking I think we are looking at a pretty fun and rewarding territorial warfare system.  Let the DEVs see it in practice and get some troll-less feedback.

On a side note:  We've been getting some pretty fun fights out of the system, even if we are being sucked into the whole "crank the SAP awareness to 11" type of thinking.  We were fighting SovNov forces for hours last night--good stuff.

Keep the stupid Corporation Dialogues crap in Corporation Dialogues please.

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Arga wrote:
Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

MY CORP my alliance isnt out to rule large bits of beta. we live on alsbale & so we (naturaly) want to own the outposts there. But we dont want o have to keep sitting on saps for a min of 4 hour EACH DAY! doing nothing coz if we leave to even take  BIO some 1 can roll past do the sap & be off again in 2 mins easy. thats what i have a problem with.

Your corp doesnt have to defend all the outposts, just 1. Ninja SAP the others for loot.

Each member of the alliance should be large enough to hold their own outpost, if not then they can be pets in the one outpost until you get enough manpower to hold 2.

Alliances automatically holding a whole Island is, as Zoom says, Yesterday's Perpetuum.

Take one. Hold it. Get the aura's and bonuses, then go for 2, and 3.

you seem to know alot about what its like defending outposts i see. the devs want less alliance to none. bollox if needed we just merge in mega corps & then what.... oh wait its a default alliance feature!

any of you corp are welcome to come take outposts on norhoop. just remember tho. when we get sick of play camp fire sap guards & go F stations.... good luck to yas coz we will be roaming station intrusions so much u will pray for the old system to come back smile

True Pros make a Podcast to influence the Devs minds, 
The rest of you guys are Hacks tongue

PS. I got my Highways & stopped playing b4 they came in & have never used them! ...... Irony much ? tongue

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Been reading this thread for a little bit.

What makes since to me would be the attackers having to alarm clock an ops to attack and the defenders not having to alarm clock at all.

To do this it would mean that the owners of the outpost would have the ability to set a prime time for their saps to open (All three random times during a 8 hour window etc..? Don't know) for an attack.

Of course this leans to making it easier for the defender then the attacker but not fully since the owning corps prime time could be the same as an attackers.

This would also give the corp the ability to change their times and not make them predictable, but not random either. Of course something would have to control a cut off point for changing the times.


But I keep coming to the conclusion that the defender should not have to alarm clock an ops the attacker should have too since they are the side being proactive or aggressive.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Kazzanka wrote:

Ok, lets talk about it.

First off, and most importantly: it's way too soon to be calling it a failure or a success.  Honestly.

My impressions so far are pretty positive, I think it's been quite fun--with some exceptions I think are key, key changes that need to be made:

1.  Being able to scan SAP timers so exact.  At any given time our corp usually knows the EXACT(sounds like I'm exaggerating but it's accurate within like 5 minutes every time) time a good 50% of the outposts in the game will have a SAP active.  Preferably the whole scanning of timers will be removed completely, honestly it just makes alarm clocking more prevalent and bite sized--and constant.  Removing SAP scanning will only work if we make a couple more much needed changes too though...

2.  Such as how simple it is to complete a SAP.  Passive SAPs are way too easy to cap, 2 and a half minutes out of a one hour window is way too short.  Active hacking SAPs I don't have an opinion on yet, but if it's in line with the other SAPs so far it probably needs to be tweaked.  Destructive SAPs can be ninja'd by a light EWAR and an assault in almost no time at all, they need more hit points.  Specimen SAPs are just terrible to begin with, they throw the entire flow of the game out the window, and under certain circumstances will be impossible to take.  I'd be all for just removing specimen SAPs all together, I think they are terrible(what do the rest of you think about specimens in particular?).

3.  Letting defending corporations complete their own SAP.  I'm not so sure this is a good idea, but if we drastically raise the required effort to take a SAP it could be a prety good way to go.  Really it comes down to my second point, specimen aside--the other SAPs are way too easy to take in the time that they are open.  With a significantly reduced gap in SAP completion time to the window they are open perhaps letting the defender actively shut their own SAP off could be strong way to go.


I see the frustrations people are having with the whole "my alliance is having a hard time doing this."  But honestly,  why should it be so easy to hold so much land.  It wasn't easy for the British, it wasn't easy for the Romans, and it sure as hell shouldn't be simple in this game--it would break it.  Here's the thing, you don't have to defend every single SAP that comes up, and you're not expected to in this new system.  However, if you put any effort at all into it you should be able to maintain 70+(85+ I dont think is out of the question either) points pretty easily and strike out against your opponents SAPs.

Right now it's really hard to gauge how the system is working because it's so fresh and we have people either marathoning the game to ensure 100% SAP defense up time so they can bring their SAPs from 05 to 100 points.  Give it a week or two and once some of the fatigue of compulsively needing to maintain every single SAP timer that pops up kicks in perhaps we'll see things settle down a little as some of the community sees it less like "AMAGAWD I need to be awake and at a force of 1000 men to defend every timer or this system is a failure!"  Relax guys, there's some problems with it now but with some tweaking I think we are looking at a pretty fun and rewarding territorial warfare system.  Let the DEVs see it in practice and get some troll-less feedback.

On a side note:  We've been getting some pretty fun fights out of the system, even if we are being sucked into the whole "crank the SAP awareness to 11" type of thinking.  We were fighting SovNov forces for hours last night--good stuff.

Keep the stupid Corporation Dialogues crap in Corporation Dialogues please.

+1  Kazzanka's ideas.

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: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Kazzanka wrote:

Ok, lets talk about it.

First off, and most importantly: it's way too soon to be calling it a failure or a success.  Honestly.

But I do have to agree with the above statement.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Ville wrote:

+1  Kazzanka's ideas.


lol you realize his ideas are what I'm saying, but for some reason why I make a statement you flip out smile

I see the frustrations people are having with the whole "my alliance is having a hard time doing this."  But honestly,  why should it be so easy to hold so much land.  It wasn't easy for the British, it wasn't easy for the Romans, and it sure as hell shouldn't be simple in this game--it would break it.  Here's the thing, you don't have to defend every single SAP that comes up, and you're not expected to in this new system.  However, if you put any effort at all into it you should be able to maintain 70+(85+ I dont think is out of the question either) points pretty easily and strike out against your opponents SAPs.


Grem making it easier for defender, makes it easy once they've established their grip.

64 (edited by Dazamin 2011-12-08 01:14:19)

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Yeah some interesting stuff from Kazzanka and especially Gremrod, as I really dislike completely random timers, defender should have some say in the timing.

Part of the issue tbh was to give actively owned and used outposts, 5 stability to start with, forcing a grind straight away.

And yes again, if SAPs weren't so stupidly easy to complete that you didn't have to sit right on the SAP for the whole hour to defend it, they would still be annoying imo, but not nearly as much as they are now.

Anyway, good stuff guys.


EDIT: Also some of us liked the big Intrusion fights but wished they could be timed by corps better, so those fights to some extent seem to have disappeared for now sad While the stupid random timers stay sad(

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Gremrod wrote:
Kazzanka wrote:

Ok, lets talk about it.

First off, and most importantly: it's way too soon to be calling it a failure or a success.  Honestly.

But I do have to agree with the above statement.


I gotta disagree there mate if were already saying wow defending these saps sucks. i Dont think doing it for another few weeks is going to change that lol.
probable will only confirm it.

True Pros make a Podcast to influence the Devs minds, 
The rest of you guys are Hacks tongue

PS. I got my Highways & stopped playing b4 they came in & have never used them! ...... Irony much ? tongue

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:
Gremrod wrote:
Kazzanka wrote:

Ok, lets talk about it.

First off, and most importantly: it's way too soon to be calling it a failure or a success.  Honestly.

But I do have to agree with the above statement.


I gotta disagree there mate if were already saying wow defending these saps sucks. i Dont think doing it for another few weeks is going to change that lol.
probable will only confirm it.

Good point.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

I'd also point out in regards to random timers and not needing to take every SAP, we don't alarm clock for them anyway, I'm not that evil smile But then instead of fights we get to play time zone ping pong with the station \o/

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Dazamin wrote:

I'd also point out in regards to random timers and not needing to take every SAP, we don't alarm clock for them anyway, I'm not that evil smile But then instead of fights we get to play time zone ping pong with the station \o/


I DO LIKE PING PONG!  ever played skins ping pong? best done after a beer or 2 smile

True Pros make a Podcast to influence the Devs minds, 
The rest of you guys are Hacks tongue

PS. I got my Highways & stopped playing b4 they came in & have never used them! ...... Irony much ? tongue

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Dazamin wrote:

I'd also point out in regards to random timers and not needing to take every SAP, we don't alarm clock for them anyway, I'm not that evil smile But then instead of fights we get to play time zone ping pong with the station \o/

I can imagine the fun of having the saps easier to defend. You'd just put arkhes on those as well as the teleports.
wouldn't you Dazamin?? Admit it now! ;-)

70 (edited by Jack Jombardo 2011-12-08 02:22:35)

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

At the moment there is no reson for a corp with players from only one country (or better timezone) to claim a outpost.

Normal people may have 3 to 6 hours/day time to play. And 3 hours is allready much if you have a family and a job. So they might be able to defend their outpost 3 hours/day while the attacker get 21 hours to destroy anything without any risk of defens.

Solutions?
- corps with players from only one country/timezone are history and just global corps can survive
- kick your family and job and make Perpetuum your new job
- ability to call timeframes where your outpost is attackeble

I prefare the 3. option wink.
- timeframe can be set just ONCE A WEEK
- timeframe must be at last 4 (6?) hours/day

Remember: a NORMAL player who isn't a gaming junky can't play more then 3 hours a day which is allready a loooong time peer day. So 6 hours would cover 2 to 3 timezones allready for NORMAL gamers!



PS: solution 1 is the ideal dream but not posible in Perpetuum at the moment
24 time zones / 3 h gametime = you need min 8 players to have 1 person online around the clock.
As you can't defend alone but need a minimum gank size of 5 (right?) at the moment that are 8*5 = 40 members from all over the world. AKTIVE players, NOT alt/twink/dead members!
CIR and NOX might have this AKTIVE member count, maybe MORTE.
Some other might have uncommon gamers, which can play more then 3 hours/day.

But after this 3 corps there isn't much air for more as there simply isn't the playerbase for more (they soke up the majority).

This is no offence against this corps!!

It's a simple calculation based on simultan players peer day graph -> http://content.perpetuum-online.com/fee … h_1200.png .

71 (edited by Rex Amelius 2011-12-08 03:26:33)

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Overall I think the system is good. It may just need some adjustments.

Specifically, the ease of taking SAPs and gaining or losing stability is pretty off balance. But I have some different ideas on tweaking than what I've read so far.

I like the aggressive nature of the system, but I can really see the annoyance of sitting around waiting for something that never comes. Even if you only have one outpost it can become exhausting defending it on average TWICE a day. That requires multiple timezones and lots of manpower. Period.

Right now the difficulty of taking SAPs seems linear, though I could be wrong. Is it just as easy to take an outpost from 10 to 25 as it is to take it from 60 to 75? Or do the SAPs get easier or more difficult as you go up the stability ladder? I'm not sure.

Perhaps the difficulty should scale. Or perhaps the points you lose or gain can be adjusted. Or some combination of both. But leave the 8-16 hour timers!

One suggestion: reduce the points you lose or gain when taking or defending an SAP. This allows aggressors to get their loot or a potential fight everyday all over the map. It also gives defenders the option of prioritizing and choosing their own battles. If every SAP loss or gain is critical to your stability and operations then you are going to get burned out really quick. But if the gains and losses are not as critical a defender can afford to lose a few SAPs without terribly affecting their real life sleep. But in no way should a defender be allowed to remain lethargic forever. Eventually you have to defend yourself or you're out! It makes more sense that it takes a long time to stabilize or destabilize an outpost, not just a few days. Hence the word: stability.

Another option: Scale the difficulty of taking SAPs as they increase in points/stability. If I'm defending my home and I'm down to the last 5 points of stability I kinda like the idea that it should be HARDER for an aggressor to cross that final line of taking the outpost. We're talking final LAST STAND baby. It should not be easy for the attacker to send in some paltry force and finish it off. It should be an organized operation that defenders and attackers know is coming as points dwindle down to the last.

Continuing the scaling difficulty option, as an outpost gets closer to 100 in stability it should be EASIER for an aggressor to take SAPs. Thus raiders can get the awesome loot from high stability outposts and also make it really hard for defenders to get and maintain perfect stability. Devs say 100 should be hard, so make it easy to attack when its high.

I realize high stability / easy SAPs may be counter-intuitive but screw reality man, I want a FUN game. Reality is offline.

Also, I like the scanning process for timers, for aggressors at least. I think intelligence gathering is right on. But I do not like the in-game SAP notification that ANYONE can see when they enter an island. Perhaps only corps and/or friendly settings should see them. Finally, passive hacking is kinda gay.


edited like 3 fkkn times for grammar and clarity

Sparking to other games

72 (edited by Obi Wan Kenobi 2011-12-08 05:19:14)

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Rex Amelius wrote:

Finally, passive hacking is kinda gay.


edited like 3 fkkn times for grammar and clarity


dont bother about grammar its over rated tongue

but ya right passive hacking is LOL joke.

i cant say i agree 100% with all your ideas but atleast u at attempting to see it from an owners POV. fianly some 1 from wardec that makes sense! big_smile

True Pros make a Podcast to influence the Devs minds, 
The rest of you guys are Hacks tongue

PS. I got my Highways & stopped playing b4 they came in & have never used them! ...... Irony much ? tongue

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

I2.0 has brought a great deal of activity to Beta areas that have been vacant for months!  Kudos! wink

The larger alliances that have to defend multiple islands and multiple outposts for their friends or pet corps are complaining....Kudos again! wink

Corps should stay home and defend their own SAPS.  If you want to control pets and have pens for all of them, then welcome to the hard work of a large ranch! tongue

Fixes are needed but I love the direction.  Some suggestions:

1. (Mentioned) kill the on island SAP information for all but the corporation that has an active one.

2.  Scanning for a SAP timer that you do not own, reduce its accuracy by 1+ hrs.  You want it, then commit to a semi-random timer for you.  Owning corp should get a 100% accurate scan.

3. Passive hacking- allow one pilot from owning corp to sit in the passive zone and reduce the SAP count down at a 1/1 ratio. This would take that SAP down from 60 to 30 min and make it more defendable. (Benefit of being on your island)

4. Destructive SAP - Allow the defender to "rep up the HP” on the SAP.  Have it start at about twice the current HP, and allow the defender to double or triple that number with remote reppers.   This in an essence would also reduce the time needed to defend as the HP would get higher than a small roaming gang could deal with. (Benefit of being on your island)

5. Kill the Specimen thing...I mean what is that anyway?  Make it an “Energy SAP”.  Attackers Drain x from it to capture while defenders get to add with remote energy transfers to double or triple totals when it comes online. (Seems energy should be one of the focuses of the station since from lore, that is why we are here anyway. (Benefit of being on your island)

6. Add some more awesome PVP bonus auras to the station options like: reduced lock time, speed increases, enemy interference, enemy molecular time reduction at teleports, or other small aids to defend against larger attacking groups. (Benefit of living on a Beta Island)

These changes will give the owners something to do while they await the aggressors and give them a slight time advantage as the aggressors will not have a specific time that the SAP comes online.

We have had some great fights and it has only been a few days.  Some minor adjustments and there should be a bright future for Beta Outpost owners. big_smile

74 (edited by Obi Wan Kenobi 2011-12-08 05:23:29)

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Takeo Prime wrote:

I2.0 has brought a great deal of activity to Beta areas that have been vacant for months!  Kudos! wink

The larger alliances that have to defend multiple islands and multiple outposts for their friends or pet corps are complaining....Kudos again! wink

Corps should stay home and defend their own SAPS.  If you want to control pets and have pens for all of them, then welcome to the hard work of a large ranch! tongue

Fixes are needed but I love the direction.  Some suggestions:

1. (Mentioned) kill the on island SAP information for all but the corporation that has an active one.

2.  Scanning for a SAP timer that you do not own, reduce its accuracy by 1+ hrs.  You want it, then commit to a semi-random timer for you.  Owning corp should get a 100% accurate scan.

3. Passive hacking- allow one pilot from owning corp to sit in the passive zone and reduce the SAP count down at a 1/1 ratio. This would take that SAP down from 60 to 30 min and make it more defendable. (Benefit of being on your island)

4. Destructive SAP - Allow the defender to "rep up the HP” on the SAP.  Have it start at about twice the current HP, and allow the defender to double or triple that number with remote reppers.   This in an essence would also reduce the time needed to defend as the HP would get higher than a small roaming gang could deal with. (Benefit of being on your island)

5. Kill the Specimen thing...I mean what is that anyway?  Make it an “Energy SAP”.  Attackers Drain x from it to capture while defenders get to add with remote energy transfers to double or triple totals when it comes online. (Seems energy should be one of the focuses of the station since from lore, that is why we are here anyway. (Benefit of being on your island)

6. Add some more awesome PVP bonus auras to the station options like: reduced lock time, speed increases, enemy interference, enemy molecular time reduction at teleports, or other small aids to defend against larger attacking groups. (Benefit of living on a Beta Island)

These changes will give the owners something to do while they await the aggressors and give them a slight time advantage as the aggressors will not have a specific time that the SAP comes online.

We have had some great fights and it has only been a few days.  Some minor adjustments and there should be a bright future for Beta Outpost owners. big_smile


holy carp! best post made in this thread! really dude thats some awesome ideas! DEVS hire this man!!!! cool

the boring factor is having to sit on a sap & have nothing to do. at least with your ideas your doing something that is of use

True Pros make a Podcast to influence the Devs minds, 
The rest of you guys are Hacks tongue

PS. I got my Highways & stopped playing b4 they came in & have never used them! ...... Irony much ? tongue

Re: Intrusion 2.0 issues and feedback

Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:
Takeo Prime wrote:

I2.0 has brought a great deal of activity to Beta areas that have been vacant for months!  Kudos! wink

The larger alliances that have to defend multiple islands and multiple outposts for their friends or pet corps are complaining....Kudos again! wink

Corps should stay home and defend their own SAPS.  If you want to control pets and have pens for all of them, then welcome to the hard work of a large ranch! tongue

Fixes are needed but I love the direction.  Some suggestions:

1. (Mentioned) kill the on island SAP information for all but the corporation that has an active one.

2.  Scanning for a SAP timer that you do not own, reduce its accuracy by 1+ hrs.  You want it, then commit to a semi-random timer for you.  Owning corp should get a 100% accurate scan.

3. Passive hacking- allow one pilot from owning corp to sit in the passive zone and reduce the SAP count down at a 1/1 ratio. This would take that SAP down from 60 to 30 min and make it more defendable. (Benefit of being on your island)

4. Destructive SAP - Allow the defender to "rep up the HP” on the SAP.  Have it start at about twice the current HP, and allow the defender to double or triple that number with remote reppers.   This in an essence would also reduce the time needed to defend as the HP would get higher than a small roaming gang could deal with. (Benefit of being on your island)

5. Kill the Specimen thing...I mean what is that anyway?  Make it an “Energy SAP”.  Attackers Drain x from it to capture while defenders get to add with remote energy transfers to double or triple totals when it comes online. (Seems energy should be one of the focuses of the station since from lore, that is why we are here anyway. (Benefit of being on your island)

6. Add some more awesome PVP bonus auras to the station options like: reduced lock time, speed increases, enemy interference, enemy molecular time reduction at teleports, or other small aids to defend against larger attacking groups. (Benefit of living on a Beta Island)

These changes will give the owners something to do while they await the aggressors and give them a slight time advantage as the aggressors will not have a specific time that the SAP comes online.

We have had some great fights and it has only been a few days.  Some minor adjustments and there should be a bright future for Beta Outpost owners. big_smile


holy carp! best post made in this thread! really dude thats some awesome ideas! DEVS hire this man!!!! cool

the boring factor is having to sit on a sap & have nothing to do. at least with your ideas your doing something that is of use

I agree some good ideas there. cool

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23