I don't think you killing a tradeslave to defend your gals Ai base would cause a war tbh
| Star Sonata http://forum.starsonata.com/ |
|
| Aggroable bases http://forum.starsonata.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=61848 |
Page 2 of 4 |
| Author: | carterstrain [ Sat May 07, 2016 10:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aggroable bases |
SI wrote: I don't like the idea of aggro bases being the norm I would imagine the reason most of us have renewed interest in aggroed galaxies is because unless you war every single p2p team (and crafty people can move alts to and from new alt teams to fuck with that), it's very, very hard to dislodge a passive MFM slave system bringing Industrial Commodities from their galaxy to your galaxy, and selling at *your* AI base. I think the best solution to this would be a requirement to own the galaxy before you can actually trade with the station. It immediately prevents all those MFM slaves and gives people another reason to knock your bases down. It also forces people to consider extending further to grab specific ai bases. |
|
| Author: | Tron20 [ Mon May 09, 2016 4:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aggroable bases |
/signed. Please. potato2 wrote: 6 now- aggroable bases and drones opens up quite a few options in my view, ie actual border gals protecting weaker core,/blocking industrial commod stuff warp beacons mean no one can truly be blocked off from anywhere now, perhaps make hq kit act like a warp drone to to avoid gals being blockaded before one can be dropped, maybe warp3 only? so newbies can still have space to build and test stuff although don't like the idea of it costing loads else there wouldn't be much point All of that is awesome. PLEASE! jack the ripper wrote: It would also fix a lot of existing dynamics issues with wars. First Issue: once you've killed a galaxy, if you didn't cap it, all the kits sit there for a while. someone can bring in an off team alt and just pack em. This would stop that, and is kind of in line with the 'only braking off alive ships' dynamic. Second Issue: shield monkey's agro in PvB. If you truely want to defend a galaxy, everything needs to die. having shield monkeys sitting there always alive is horrible at best. Any more I can think of off the top of my head are very similar to these. These are not the 'benefits,' these are just things I think would be fixed if this change happened. If this dynamic was introduced it would be substantially easier to defend while you are not there. Given that there are approximately 140 galaxies with jux's in them, a true blockade of WS is improbable, though possible. Considering that a large portion of them lead to other WS galaxies (and thus you'd only have to block one side) decreases that number. There's also that issue where one team wars you yet your defenses don't consider the warring team to be hostile until you war them back. And in one case -13- warred us yet I couldn't war back because I didn't have enough skills in warmongering but there were no other wars listed for us. It was really bull shit. Edit: Especially the part about defending while you're not there. And the idea about being able to trade to a certain AI base is a very awesome and interesting idea. (Maybe when you own the system it only opens up to your team and if the system is not owned, then anyone can trade with it.) |
|
| Author: | sabre198 [ Mon May 09, 2016 5:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aggroable bases |
Why can't you just shoot their ts? |
|
| Author: | carterstrain [ Mon May 09, 2016 5:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aggroable bases |
sabre198 wrote: Why can't you just shoot their ts? You can. You can't stop them from ordering the slave to leave stasis. And with the size difference (IC basically condenses commods into a smaller size, but with same or greater weight), the trade slaves will become smaller, faster, and stealthier. Sure the bases can see those slaves. You can't, barring giant red sun galaxies. So you flip them the bird and war the guy with the trade slave. I've got EF, TR, RE, and RF slaves selling stuff to my ai base for the sake of this discussion. What do you think will happen if I declare war on any one of those teams, let alone all four at once? |
|
| Author: | Tron20 [ Mon May 09, 2016 11:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aggroable bases |
Yeah, I think the AI base allowing trade with only the team owning the system would be better, keeps the bigger or stronger teams from monopolizing local AI bases away from smaller or newer teams. Simply shooting a TS wouldn't bode well for any team that isn't EF, TR, RE, and RF. You also risk becoming aggro to their systems and getting shot down during AP. |
|
| Author: | sabre198 [ Tue May 10, 2016 1:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aggroable bases |
What you are saying is your team is too weedy to play wild space TS games? |
|
| Author: | DarkSteel [ Tue May 10, 2016 2:36 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aggroable bases |
I don't think you killing a tradeslave to defend your gals Ai base would cause a war tbh
|
|
| Author: | Pixel [ Tue May 10, 2016 5:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aggroable bases |
Will bring this suggestion up in the meeting on Wednesday! Cause I like it. |
|
| Author: | ShawnMcCall [ Tue May 10, 2016 9:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aggroable bases |
I vote no. |
|
| Author: | carterstrain [ Tue May 10, 2016 10:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aggroable bases |
heylo wrote: I don't think you killing a tradeslave to defend your gals Ai base would cause a war tbh No, but armed conflicts are not just limited to formal wars. About half of all the beat downs in SS history was without a formal war declaration. People have gone to battle over less than having a couple TS die. |
|
| Author: | Tron20 [ Tue May 10, 2016 10:46 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aggroable bases |
sabre198 wrote: What you are saying is your team is too weedy to play wild space TS games? No, we'll play them if we want to. But you can talk big because you're RE. Any new team or team weaker than the top 5 will get steam rolled. There have been plenty of wars start just because of something small that turned into something big. -13- shoots peep's bases just because they suck. It's a sand box, pretty sure a war could happen because of anything, even something small.. |
|
| Author: | ShawnMcCall [ Tue May 10, 2016 11:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aggroable bases |
carterstrain wrote: heylo wrote: I don't think you killing a tradeslave to defend your gals Ai base would cause a war tbh No, but armed conflicts are not just limited to formal wars. About half of all the beat downs in SS history was without a formal war declaration. People have gone to battle over less than having a couple TS die. I can't remember which team it was but I know a big one steam rolled a small one once because someone killed someone on the big team in colo and told him he wasn't the best PvPer in the game... |
|
| Author: | potato2 [ Wed May 11, 2016 1:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aggroable bases |
ShawnMcCall wrote: carterstrain wrote: heylo wrote: I don't think you killing a tradeslave to defend your gals Ai base would cause a war tbh No, but armed conflicts are not just limited to formal wars. About half of all the beat downs in SS history was without a formal war declaration. People have gone to battle over less than having a couple TS die. I can't remember which team it was but I know a big one steam rolled a small one once because someone killed someone on the big team in colo and told him he wasn't the best PvPer in the game... usually bored people with nothing else to do that start conflicts and pewpew smaller teams And as for aggro bases And drones, just keep it to warp 3 and smaller teams can still build in warp2 if they want to avoid any aggro gals, have a warning on entering wildspace or auto /avoid aggro gals won't have any issue with people blocking gals off of EF sancs itl make it easier to defend by stopping people scouting gals properly and honestly why does wildspace have to be so carebear EF layer is surely for that. Basing is a huge deal easier since xyz/copypaste templates and cheaper junk shit apart from the well known silly requirements on rad/surg/heat damps (which seriously needs removing) If hq could act like a warp drone in owned galaxies maybe outposts too there isnt any way to block off a team/s space Although i disagree with a cost towards it and perhaps no aggroing in the first 24/48 hours so that people can setup but aside from that being able to stop enemies from scouting your stuff by the Constantly abused off team characters to scan or be able scout the galaxy to see if its worth taking. |
|
| Author: | carterstrain [ Wed May 11, 2016 10:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aggroable bases |
All of this bullshit with trade slaves coming to your galaxy, and selling stuff to your AI base is already covered by having to actually own the galaxy before you do business. Want to do business but don't own the galaxy? Knock down whatever team already owns it. The next issue is what to do about teams knocking other teams down for fun, rather than for reward? Simple. Make Outposts support considerably reduced amount of siege kits in enemy galaxy. Instead of the 30 TR vs 15 EF base siege that happened, it's now 5 TR bases vs 15 EF bases. I don't see how 5 Ada T20 kits geared with Ada gear is facing down 15 ada T20 kits geared with Anni Z gear. If you want to BVB someone with real force, build your HQ next to them. |
|
| Author: | USSGalaxy [ Thu May 12, 2016 12:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Aggroable bases |
Also make sure to include the rule that you cannot aggro in galaxies you do not own. |
|
| Page 2 of 4 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|