Topic: Power projection

What mechanics are built in to the system to prevent any entity from placing three bases on each of the new three islands on release and then responding to reinforce timers?

The station limitation makes base capping all of gamma competitively easy. Drip feeding in gammas three at a time is going to make it even easier.

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."

Re: Power projection

good question.
would you suggest?

the least-effort solution the DEVs could come up, would be limiting gamma terminals to max 1 per corp until more islands are availiable.
At least that would be in line with their typical responses to such a matter.

*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

3 (edited by Burial 2014-09-04 12:46:34)

Re: Power projection

Restrictions on number of terminals a corporation can place will not work: Anyone can create proxy corporations and avoid the restrictions altogether.

Better fix is something that makes owning more terminals than you need unfavourable. There could be, for example, a cost or a time sink involved with maintaining each station. If the station is not properly maintained, it starts to gradually lose it's reinforcement cycles which eventually leads the terminal to just sitting there waiting for some random drive-by gang to destroy it.

Re: Power projection

well, i have a fix for so many issues the game has, already given 4 years ago... and funny enough, its something neglected all the time, because it would need lots of DEV work, even though it would fix gate-camping, afk mining, extreme power projection, market, etc...

it would be a sandbox feature and would have benefits for for the whole playerbase...

BUT, its nothing that can be done the "least effort" way, so.. its not on the table of possibilities.

also, an upkeep for those terminals doesn't help either, because they block others from claiming that island as long as they are there, from the moment their foundation is placed on ground and activated. same reason you struggle to get even one outpost back from CIR

*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

5 (edited by Syndic 2014-09-04 14:57:47)

Re: Power projection

I think winning fights and blowing up terminals is a good game mechanic to counter people too weak to defend their bases.

[18:20:30] <GLiMPSE> Chairman Of My Heart o/
CIR Complaint Form

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

6 (edited by Burial 2014-09-04 15:24:06)

Re: Power projection

Syndic wrote:

I think winning fights and blowing up terminals is a good game mechanic to counter people too weak to defend their bases.

Strongest entity at a time can easily close up all of the Gammas and it's a fact. Combine turrets with numerical superiority and we have another cocktail that allows self-serving leaders to systematically deny content - just like Betas have been since ability to close them.

Closing up Gammas over Betas is magnitudes worse for the population though. Makes you jump up and down even thinking about it, doesn't it.

Re: Power projection

Annihilator wrote:

good question.
would you suggest?

I would suggest that the energy requirements for a base are high so that it takes effort to keep one active. I would further suggest that when a base goes inactive it forgoes all of its reinforcement timers. This way if a base is active its a reasonable time sink (say 20 man hours a week) and if that time sink is not kept up with the base can be completely destroyed without the defender able to use the reinforce timezones to pick a fight.

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."

Re: Power projection

Jita wrote:
Annihilator wrote:

good question.
would you suggest?

I would suggest that the energy requirements for a base are high so that it takes effort to keep one active. I would further suggest that when a base goes inactive it forgoes all of its reinforcement timers. This way if a base is active its a reasonable time sink (say 20 man hours a week) and if that time sink is not kept up with the base can be completely destroyed without the defender able to use the reinforce timezones to pick a fight.

Should these rules be in place when the game has high population or low population and then change when the pop changes?

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

Re: Power projection

If the population rises then so would the ability to hold more stations (as you spread the work between more people) and also the ability to compete for those stations - it should balance itself.

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."

Re: Power projection

Burial wrote:
Syndic wrote:

I think winning fights and blowing up terminals is a good game mechanic to counter people too weak to defend their bases.

Strongest entity at a time can easily close up all of the Gammas and it's a fact. Combine turrets with numerical superiority and we have another cocktail that allows self-serving leaders to systematically deny content - just like Betas have been since ability to close them.

Closing up Gammas over Betas is magnitudes worse for the population though. Makes you jump up and down even thinking about it, doesn't it.

What you fail to realize is that Beta and Gamma revolves around the perpetual struggle to secure content.

But it's easier to simply be entitled to content and not play the game right? smile

[18:20:30] <GLiMPSE> Chairman Of My Heart o/
CIR Complaint Form

The Imperial Grand Wizard of Justice

11 (edited by Burial 2014-09-04 16:51:51)

Re: Power projection

Betas and Gammas should not revolve around one entity being able to shut everyone else off from all of the content.

Re: Power projection

Jita wrote:
Annihilator wrote:

good question.
would you suggest?

I would suggest that the energy requirements for a base are high so that it takes effort to keep one active. I would further suggest that when a base goes inactive it forgoes all of its reinforcement timers. This way if a base is active its a reasonable time sink (say 20 man hours a week) and if that time sink is not kept up with the base can be completely destroyed without the defender able to use the reinforce timezones to pick a fight.

but that doesn't prevent someone from placing down three t1 terminals on an island and leaving them alone for multiple reinforce timers -> and they will know when you show up. Until you have removed at least one of those terminals, you cannot start building your own outpost (not even the terraforming, because it would start eroding)

*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: Power projection

Syndic wrote:

What you fail to realize is that Beta and Gamma revolves around the perpetual struggle to secure content.

I agree. That perpetual struggle should be between 4 or 5 small entities on an island forging alliances and making deals to fight each other for individual stations that they actually live in and actively use. Islands should be their own ecosystem. It should not be for one coalition to hold the whole of beta and they are only opposed by what is necessarily another huge coalition which then goes on to own all of beta.

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."

Re: Power projection

Jita wrote:

If the population rises then so would the ability to hold more stations (as you spread the work between more people) and also the ability to compete for those stations - it should balance itself.

The same goes for beta outposts. So no reason to change the locking feature there due to low population. It will balance itself. But the current people playing don't want to lose bots to balance beta stations. wink

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

Re: Power projection

Burial wrote:

Betas and Gammas should not revolve around one entity being able to shut everyone else off from all of the content.

If a single entity holds all the real estate then smaller entities band together to take said real estate. If people want something they need to take it.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

Re: Power projection

Gremrod wrote:
Jita wrote:

If the population rises then so would the ability to hold more stations (as you spread the work between more people) and also the ability to compete for those stations - it should balance itself.

The same goes for beta outposts. So no reason to change the locking feature there due to low population. It will balance itself. But the current people playing don't want to lose bots to balance beta stations. wink

but what i'm suggesting requires a passive time sink to hold an outpost. Why beta doesn't work is it has no such time sink. An equivalent on beta would be having to take your own saps to maintain stability and having three saps a day.

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."

Re: Power projection

Gremrod wrote:
Burial wrote:

Betas and Gammas should not revolve around one entity being able to shut everyone else off from all of the content.

If a single entity holds all the real estate then smaller entities band together to take said real estate. If people want something they need to take it.

If that is the case Beta will always be owned by one entity unless that entity decides to either not care about other islands or rent / have pets.

Thats idiotic.

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."

Re: Power projection

Jita wrote:
Gremrod wrote:
Jita wrote:

If the population rises then so would the ability to hold more stations (as you spread the work between more people) and also the ability to compete for those stations - it should balance itself.

The same goes for beta outposts. So no reason to change the locking feature there due to low population. It will balance itself. But the current people playing don't want to lose bots to balance beta stations. wink

but what i'm suggesting requires a passive time sink to hold an outpost. Why beta doesn't work is it has no such time sink. An equivalent on beta would be having to take your own saps to maintain stability and having three saps a day.


It has been like that for a while and I have not heard anyone complain about it. Only when they want to get their stuff out. I see no reason to jerk the knee now.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

Re: Power projection

Jita wrote:
Gremrod wrote:
Burial wrote:

Betas and Gammas should not revolve around one entity being able to shut everyone else off from all of the content.

If a single entity holds all the real estate then smaller entities band together to take said real estate. If people want something they need to take it.

If that is the case Beta will always be owned by one entity unless that entity decides to either not care about other islands or rent / have pets.

Thats idiotic.

So you have never heard of war? One side wins? Or an alliance of people win together and claim the land as their own.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

Re: Power projection

Jita wrote:

but what i'm suggesting requires a passive time sink to hold an outpost. Why beta doesn't work is it has no such time sink. An equivalent on beta would be having to take your own saps to maintain stability and having three saps a day.

There is already a time sink, if you don't defend, saps are easily taken.  But they can't be taken if you're never attacked big_smile  It's a lot of boring waiting around for *** to happen babysitting saps.  Has it been so long for you that you forgot or did you just never defend?

Population graphs

<GM Synapse> please don't abuse our fresh players before blowing them up. And for god sakes, don't do that after it!

Re: Power projection

Gremrod wrote:
Jita wrote:
Gremrod wrote:

If a single entity holds all the real estate then smaller entities band together to take said real estate. If people want something they need to take it.

If that is the case Beta will always be owned by one entity unless that entity decides to either not care about other islands or rent / have pets.

Thats idiotic.

So you have never heard of war? One side wins? Or an alliance of people win together and claim the land as their own.

Sure. Claiming land is fine. Claiming everything because the mechanics make that easy is bad for the game. When one entity can lock out the whole of beta and the whole of gamma theres something wrong with the mechanics.

This thread was about how it would be wrong for one entity to be allowed to lock out all of the beta islands. Its really clear from how this behaviour is bieng defended that we have touched on what was the plan in the first place. If this doesn't ring alarm bells then maybe I miss understand the devs intentions for the game.

Theres a fundamental question here. Do the devs think that a dominant power should be able to own all of beta and all of gamma locking out stations and islands without any passive effort.

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."

Re: Power projection

Jita wrote:

Theres a fundamental question here. Do the devs think that a dominant power should be able to own all of beta and all of gamma locking out stations and islands without any passive effort.

Do you mean without any effort? You saying "without any passive effort" seems wrong for your argument.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

Re: Power projection

Gremrod wrote:
Jita wrote:

Theres a fundamental question here. Do the devs think that a dominant power should be able to own all of beta and all of gamma locking out stations and islands without any passive effort.

Do you mean without any effort? You saying "without any passive effort" seems wrong for your argument.

Passive effort is what I mean.

It is effort to defend and take a station. Its no effort to hold 20 stations because the timers passively stay at 100. If you were required to take your own saps to maintain stability then it would require passive effort to own.

From a gamma point of view there is some passive effort required to maintain a fully functional base. I believe that the ability to create a none passive base is too high and not balanced which is the point of the thread.

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."

Re: Power projection

Jita wrote:
Gremrod wrote:
Jita wrote:

Theres a fundamental question here. Do the devs think that a dominant power should be able to own all of beta and all of gamma locking out stations and islands without any passive effort.

Do you mean without any effort? You saying "without any passive effort" seems wrong for your argument.

Passive effort is what I mean.

It is effort to defend and take a station. Its no effort to hold 20 stations because the timers passively stay at 100. If you were required to take your own saps to maintain stability then it would require passive effort to own.

From a gamma point of view there is some passive effort required to maintain a fully functional base. I believe that the ability to create a none passive base is too high and not balanced which is the point of the thread.

I am not sure you understand what "passive" means.

The term "passive effort" doesn't make since in what I think your trying to convey.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23

25 (edited by Gremrod 2014-09-04 19:05:55)

Re: Power projection

If a single entity took over everything, I don't think there would be anything passive about it. There would be plenty of work to be done and on going.

John 3:16 - Timothy 2:23