POB Change Suggestions

[jammi]

---

Suggestion
Type: Rules / POB Plugin / Economy / Other
Title:

Specifics

• Primary siege platform is changed from battleships to transports.
  
• Ammo-based siege weapons are added to transports.
  
• Cruiser-grade transport shields are added that consume approx 3,000-/+ cargo space.
  
• Wear and tear is entirely disabled, and replaced with a flat 5% decay rate if the crew has run out of FOW.
  
• FOW is implemented exclusively as a single combined commodity.
  
• Add variant module construction recpies that use credit cards at a 1:1 exchange for traditional construction commodities.
  
• Reduce the quantity of goods required to construct modules; massively increase the base purchase price for POB commodities.
  
• Lower base hull massively and increase regen speed. Bases now only consume repair commodities when attacked.
  
• Set weapon platforms to consume Armaments in order to respawn.
  
• Weapon platforms respawn in a randomised 50m radius sphere.
  
• POBs are made invulnerable to damage unless a /siege command is used. This removes the protection for that particular character. Defenders who are subscribed to a base are notified on log-in if an active siege declaration is ongoing.
  
• Destroyed bases that have been upgraded to core 3, 4 or 5 should be allowed the chance to rebuild without having to independently satisfy the specific requirements a second time.
  
• Add commodity cloning modules for ores to allow differentiated prices to be set for buy and sell.
  
• Rebalance POB commodity sale locations to be more fair on a regional level. Certain Houses should not have a massive advantage over others in terms of building or maintaining POBs.
  

Potential Problems

• POBs become easier and less time intensive to build, and should be balanced to be easier to kill. This design philosophy may be construed as a problem by many who either don't want them to be easier to build, or alternately, don't want them to be easier to kill.
  

Example of Effect

• Swapping to transports makes sieging more egalitarian: all factions can siege equally effectively without gating access behind the chosen few with access to heavy battleships.
  
• Siege ships become far more vulnerable, instead of being the biggest, tankiest area-control class in the game. Defending siege ships becomes far more important.
  
• Adding heavy-duty pseudo-capital ships for transports allows battle transports like the Uruz to be 'retrofitted' into non-trading Q-ships. This has implications outside of POB balance, but could also be paired with an overhaul of heavy transport turrets.
  
• Ammo adds an upkeep cost and investment to sieging. Looting the ammo becomes a de-facto reward for defenders who manage to kill siege ships. Setting ammo this way also allows us to balance DPS and cost on the basis of an idealised siege cash cost per core level.
  
• Module recipes should be changed to require less of a time sink, and more of a cash investment. Time input is one of the main reason POB destruction causes so much animosity. Adding the bulk of the cash cost to the commodity purchase price also allows us to use POBs as an actual cash sink, instead of a cash redistribution mechanic from the owner to suppliers.
  
• Enabling decay only when FOW is depleted and setting that decay to a fixed % value ensures that abandoned bases die within 20 days. It also removes current exploits relating to the low decay rate.
  
• Setting weapon platforms to consume Armaments allows POBs to be 'bled out' in a siege situation, making life far easier for siege transports when a POB has been softened up first. Randomised platform location means platforms cannot be targeted automatically by AFK sieging.
  
• A /siege command would remove the invulnerability from a POB for 14 days on that character. This requirement means all ships participating in a siege would be explicitly recorded in the server logs, making the enforcement of relevant rules far more straightforward. This also removes the issue of random ships taking potshots at POBs and getting sanctioned for it. Being able to subscribe to a base as a defender means there is very little chance of a declaration being overlooked, as they will be notified as soon as they log in to supply / play. The siege command could have the waiting period built into it, i.e. invulnerability turns off either 8 or 24 hours after first use depending on the core level. If a time delay was built in, this should be paired with a /siege join #t command that would enable others to add themselves to another ship's declaration instead of making their own from scratch.

Further Discussion
There's a lot to discuss above but I've run out of motivation to go further in depth here. Happy to respond to points of criticism or query though.

---

News article library, feedback and content requests.