Increase the time required to wait from "attack declaration" to "the actual siege".
I mean come on, 8 hours? I sleep longer than that, people go to work/whatever for lot longer. It should be 24-48 hours for Core1 at least. Give players some time to prepare the siege, ask for help, coordinate defense.
Decrease the time the attackers have to siege the POB. Two weeks is too much, make it one week.
The problem with POBs is that they allow for players to impact balance and each other's gameplay too strongly, thereby pissing players off at each other.
No amount of re-balancing of weapons is going to change the fact that players will bulldoze other players dreams and aspirations law-of-the-jungle style as long as bases are destructible.
Make POBs indestructible extensions to existing NPC bases.
Entering a name and passwords while docked at the NPC base lets you enter "your" part of the base (which will be almost exactly like POBs are now).
Players will get to "rent" storage space, which they can also use to store ingredients of things built at factories which are part of the NPC base.
Failure to pay rent results in loss of access, failure to pay within a month results in loss of the rented space and all contents.
This will also focus players more into common locations to access their bases instead of spreading them out to their far off hiding places.
Also saves a lot of grief about diplomacy, blocked locations, and crushed projects.
(10-06-2017, 04:21 PM)Karlotta Wrote: The problem with POBs is that they allow for players to impact balance and game play too strongly, thereby pissing players off at each other.
No amount of re-balancing of weapons is going to change the fact that players will bulldoze other players dreams and aspirations law-of-the-jungle style as long as bases are destructible.
Make POBs indestructible extensions to existing NPC bases.
Entering a name and passwords while docked at the NPC base lets you enter "your" part of the base (which will be almost exactly like POBs are now).
Players will get to "rent" storage space, which they can also use to store ingredients of things built at factories which are part of the NPC base.
Failure to pay rent results in loss of access, failure to pay within a month results in loss of the rented space and all contents.
This will also focus players more into common locations to access their bases instead of spreading them out to their far off hiding places.
Also saves a lot of grief about diplomacy, blocked locations, and crushed projects.
(10-06-2017, 04:21 PM)Karlotta Wrote: The problem with POBs is that they allow for players to impact balance and each other's gameplay too strongly, thereby pissing players off at each other.
No amount of re-balancing of weapons is going to change the fact that players will bulldoze other players dreams and aspirations law-of-the-jungle style as long as bases are destructible.
Make POBs indestructible extensions to existing NPC bases.
Entering a name and passwords while docked at the NPC base lets you enter "your" part of the base (which will be almost exactly like POBs are now).
Players will get to "rent" storage space, which they can also use to store ingredients of things built at factories which are part of the NPC base.
Failure to pay rent results in loss of access, failure to pay within a month results in loss of the rented space and all contents.
This will also focus players more into common locations to access their bases instead of spreading them out to their far off hiding places.
Also saves a lot of grief about diplomacy, blocked locations, and crushed projects.
I would like to have something like a NPC annex depot, even if it's an official faction perk only, and only deployed on secure npc bases of said faction.
Keep in mind any player building a station should be fully aware of the fact it is destructible. To problem is not the object itself but how it is currently handled, in a pretty unfair and not necessarily profiting way. People who think their PoB is untouchable are simply forgetting what a PoB is, matter of factly. Great sources of activity, sometimes even RP, but especially a very vulnerable target. All the current PoB system needs is a fair - and with that I mean fair - way of defending the PoB. Are defense platforms doing the job? Partially. As long as they keep bugging and as long as people are allowed to simply exploit the bugged platforms (as in not shooting them once they respawn), destroying a PoB will remain very easy. If not done within two hours with a mass of battleships, then by sieging it like in medival times, having it dry out.
(10-06-2017, 04:29 PM)DannyD Wrote: It's more complicated than that
Please explain.
People get attached to a system, the system changes. People invested in the old system may get upset and people may leave because of it. Considering Discovery is on life support those changes seem a bit too drastic for the community
(10-06-2017, 04:33 PM)Sombra Hookier Wrote: Keep in mind any player building a station should be fully aware of the fact it is destructible. To problem is not the object itself but how it is currently handled, in a pretty unfair and not necessarily profiting way. People who think their PoB is untouchable are simply forgetting what a PoB is, matter of factly. Great sources of activity, sometimes even RP, but especially a very vulnerable target. All the current PoB system needs is a fair - and with that I mean fair - way of defending the PoB. Are defense platforms doing the job? Partially. As long as they keep bugging and as long as people are allowed to simply exploit the bugged platforms (as in not shooting them once they respawn), destroying a PoB will remain very easy. If not done within two hours with a mass of battleships, then by sieging it like in medival times, having it dry out.
Destroying other player's month long work is never fair. It doesn't matter if you do it alone or together with 20 people.
(10-06-2017, 04:37 PM)DannyD Wrote:
(10-06-2017, 04:29 PM)Karlotta Wrote:
(10-06-2017, 04:29 PM)DannyD Wrote: It's more complicated than that
Please explain.
People get attached to a system, the system changes. People invested in the old system may get upset and people may leave because of it. Considering Discovery is on life support those changes seem a bit too drastic for the community
And how many people left because of the current system?
Not changing a system that you know is bad because a change would be mildly upsetting is like never taking a shower because you don't like water.
It's also possible to make the new system an additional option, and it's also possible to move existing bases into an NPC base of the owners' choice.
![[+]](/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
Signature:
![[Image: OFPpYpb.png]](https://i.imgur.com/OFPpYpb.png)
![[Image: N1Zf8K4.png]](https://i.imgur.com/N1Zf8K4.png)
![[Image: LnLbhul.png]](https://i.imgur.com/LnLbhul.png)
![[Image: 5tZIDB3.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/5tZIDB3.jpg)
