I like the idea, although I'd prefer it to be less powerful overall, but also be able to be mounted on cruisers as well as battleships. Get 2 or 3 of them together and they should be able to take down a base in a few hours at most.
@ Jack
I like much of what you said in your op, but I don't agree about oorp regulation on where a base can be placed. It should be dealt with inrp IMO....if someone builds a base at a jumphole then the local authorities should remove it before it becomes a problem. If no one does before it hits core 4 then it wasn't a problem to begin with apparently.
There is a fine line between creating rules to ensure fair play and creating rules to ensure some people don't QQ because they can't have it easy. I don't think the latter should be encouraged. It should be handled inrp.
Except you dont seem to understand how base assaults work. Its not a linear scale of damge-time to kill. It doesnt take twice as many ships, half the time to kill a base, it takes any number of battleships the same amount of time to kill a base, right up untill they have enough to beat its regen, then it only takes 1 or 2 extra battleships a few hours to kill it.
Therefore if one of these siege ships took 4-5 hours to kill a base, 2 would probly take a few minutes. You want that? Added to that, admins WANT base sieges to take a long time, so the owners can sleep, go to work, and still have enough time to come back and defend it. How do you propose they do that with this system?
User was banned for: Griefing others
Time left: (Permanent)
(06-28-2013, 06:21 AM)Hone Wrote: Except you dont seem to understand how base assaults work. Its not a linear scale of damge-time to kill. It doesnt take twice as many ships, half the time to kill a base, it takes any number of battleships the same amount of time to kill a base, right up untill they have enough to beat its regen, then it only takes 1 or 2 extra battleships a few hours to kill it.
Therefore if one of these siege ships took 4-5 hours to kill a base, 2 would probly take a few minutes. You want that? Added to that, admins WANT base sieges to take a long time, so the owners can sleep, go to work, and still have enough time to come back and defend it. How do you propose they do that with this system?
Fair enough.
The only base siege I ever took part in was in the beginning days of bases, and I really don't remember much of it to be honest.
I'm not overly concerned over base sieges and how they work at the moment. As long as you can kill a core 4 base without crashing the server, as many here claim (although to be fair, I never participated in a siege that caused the server to crash, so that's all hearsay for me as well), I'm fine with how things currently work.
I'm just against oorp rules on where they can be placed. It is quite easy to handle something like that inrp, and it makes things more interesting.
If people don't like bases that block jumpholes and such, then they have some viable options for resolving their grievance inrp.
Ask for docking rights, choose an alternate route, or get some friends and blow it up.
My main concern when this whole thing started was that what happened to Blackpool wouldn't become the accepted "InRP" norm.
![[Image: E9d8RnV.jpg?1]](http://i.imgur.com/E9d8RnV.jpg?1)