 |
| This is my favorite action movie. |
A couple new questions popped up that I've given some responses to. The first one involved a question about if I favored 'destructible outposts'.
This is something I can actually give an informed answer to. Without massive changes to the EVE code base (as in a complete re-write) the actual destruction of outposts isn't something that you're going to see. The more practical reason for this is a scenario like what if a player comes back from fighting cancer for six months only to discover that all his stuff is gone?
The answer to this is something that has been tossed back and forth for years and the seeds for which were really planted back in Las Vegas in 2009 - wreckable stations. The idea is that after a station exits it's final reinforcement timer, you would have the option to either capture it or blow it to hell. After a nice, Micheal Bay-ish explosion, you'd be left with a wreck, much like the one normal ships leave. The wrecked station would have all services disabled save one - undocking. If you were already in there when it blew, you somehow luckily found a broom closet to hide yourself and your stuff in. Maybe some of it got shaken up and damaged. You can undock, but that's it. Hopefully you stuffed a freighter into your broom closet.
The option would also exist for 'someone' to rebuild the station by simply dropping a similar egg next to it and filling it with magic pixie dust, etc... then after DT, yay, station is rebuilt.
This idea was one of several planned features that should have been in Dominion or iterated into the new sov system afterward. It is a prime example of why the sov system was changed from the evolutionary dead end that it was to something that could actually be iterated on. Treaties and wreckable stations are things that have been publicly discussed by CCP on multiple occasions and are just parts of what's laying on the cutting room floor.
The answer to this is something that has been tossed back and forth for years and the seeds for which were really planted back in Las Vegas in 2009 - wreckable stations. The idea is that after a station exits it's final reinforcement timer, you would have the option to either capture it or blow it to hell. After a nice, Micheal Bay-ish explosion, you'd be left with a wreck, much like the one normal ships leave. The wrecked station would have all services disabled save one - undocking. If you were already in there when it blew, you somehow luckily found a broom closet to hide yourself and your stuff in. Maybe some of it got shaken up and damaged. You can undock, but that's it. Hopefully you stuffed a freighter into your broom closet.
The option would also exist for 'someone' to rebuild the station by simply dropping a similar egg next to it and filling it with magic pixie dust, etc... then after DT, yay, station is rebuilt.
This idea was one of several planned features that should have been in Dominion or iterated into the new sov system afterward. It is a prime example of why the sov system was changed from the evolutionary dead end that it was to something that could actually be iterated on. Treaties and wreckable stations are things that have been publicly discussed by CCP on multiple occasions and are just parts of what's laying on the cutting room floor.
Local chat channel in 0.0 - remove, delay or leave it like it is?
Your question assumes that there should be some kind of 'blanket' mechanic for this in sovereign space, which I do not believe there should be. I would much rather put the power in the hands of the players by iterating onto the sov system with Intel Management Tools. It's your system, you are paying the stargate maintenance fees and such; you should be able to develop a proper infrastructure that lends to how day to day life in your space works. If you don't like random people ****ting up your local during a major fight, shut it down (for a time). If you prefer delayed local over local that is always on, tell the comm relay people working in the stargates to turn the dials down a bit.
The choices should be yours, the players, as much as possible. If you can fit a ship in EVE, why not fit a star system with the features you see fit and pay for? There is endless potential for iteration on these concepts.
The choices should be yours, the players, as much as possible. If you can fit a ship in EVE, why not fit a star system with the features you see fit and pay for? There is endless potential for iteration on these concepts.
..Especially if you can change it on the fly.
ReplyDeleteImagine a defense fleet local chat to delayed mode while they assemble an ambush, or a covops sneaking into an enemy pocket and hacking the infrastructure hubs to (temporarily?) alter settings.
I don't buy the whole "if someone came back from battling cancer" excuse for not destroying stations for two reasons. First, this is Eve. Second, you have other places to keep your most valuable stuff.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what codebase changes could be making it so impossible to delete an object and the stuff inside.
Re: Local
ReplyDeleteLocal should be delayed for everyone at all times. The ship's d-scan should be iterated on to become the full blown intel collection system, but without the local's omnipotence. And that's it.
The only control players should have over local is to define how they themselves appear in it: visible to everyone, to those with good standing, to alliance, to corp (a set of tick marks in the local options).
Allowing the sov holding entity control over how local behaves would be completely against the whole idea of delayed local and its pro-small gang and ambush tactics and counter-bot qualities.
"The power in the hands of the players" shouldn't be just another 'auto win button' payed for by the alliance income. It should be a scanning tool that requires active player participation, with enough complexity to allow for player skill but without the drudgery of continuous button-mashing or magic god modes.