How much would you miss Dundee?

[Thyrzul]

As I already stated, Leeds and Edinburgh are ALREADY warzones for BAF and GRN (the latter being VERY under-used at present). So, having Dundee around just makes one more system to spread out the conflict, when, imo, it would be much better to have it concentrated in those systems.

None of the systems you mentioned are as symmetrical as Dundee. What I mean is that there is a GRN BS in the bottom left corner of the map, there is a BAF BS in the top right corner, there are nebulae in both the top left and bottom right corners, and the middle corridor is open space for battle with the stationary ships in each end of it. That symmetric battleground is what neither Leeds nor Edinburgh have.

Whether this kind of layout will be missed or not is an other question though...

---

[Highland Laddie]

Symmetry doesn't guarantee a good battlefield. Its not like Omega-5's symmetry has caused a swell of fighting between Hessians and Sairs.

If you wanted some more symmetry in Edinburgh, you could put the Stirling neasr the Dublin hole, Castres is already near the Lewis hole, and you could even put another GRN near the Leeds JH if there isn't one already. Voila. More symmetry.

[Blodo]

A "good system to fight in" isn't about symmetry, it's about path of least resistance and reasons to be in the system in the first place. Any fights in Omega-5 (aside from the ones generated by event) used to start because Corsair fleet was on its way to Bretonia through Cambridge JH and they got jumped by Hessians, or Hessians were getting ready to raid O-3/O-7 and were jumped by Corsairs. This is why New Hampshire failed, why Dundee failed, why Eta failed, because if you have no reason to actually stay in said fight system then there are not going to be any fights in it. Ask the question why Gamma raids are/were so popular? Because for a long, long time Gamma actually had an ambient population around Crete. So it was a better place to raid than an empty system and waiting for enemy to log.

As a result of the above, the best battle system is one where both sides have a reason to be in the system, different than just each other. For example: Omega-7 or Dublin at the height of mining (supercharged mining invites armies of miners invites armies of pirates invites armies of lawfuls), New York (home system, ambient Navy population), Omicron Gamma (home system, ambient Corsair population and/or fast emergency response), Leeds (RP investment, fast emergency response), and so on. If you want a good battle system, the system needs leverage for the general population, otherwise its forced and will fail.

[Highland Laddie]

Well, the leverage for Leeds and Edi are obvious because both sides want to own the system, both of which have several NPC bases and major resource planets.

[SpaceTime]

As a result of the above, the best battle system is one where both sides have a reason to be in the system, different than just each other.

Thank you, I am going to lend your words for a post that I will write soon and it concerns and proposes a solution for a very important matter.

[Cookie Jar Cloaks]

So one topic that the devteam has been somewhat divided on is what to do with Dundee. Remove it? Repurpose it? Leave it where it is?

How much would Discovery miss Dundee if it were to up and vanish?

Remove it and every other boundary system that makes discovery way to big.

E.g. Tau 37 should link to Alpha not some intermediary pointless system. Same goes for New Hampshire etcetc

---

[Cookie Jar Cloaks]

As I already stated, Leeds and Edinburgh are ALREADY warzones for BAF and GRN (the latter being VERY under-used at present). So, having Dundee around just makes one more system to spread out the conflict, when, imo, it would be much better to have it concentrated in those systems.

None of the systems you mentioned are as symmetrical as Dundee. What I mean is that there is a GRN BS in the bottom left corner of the map, there is a BAF BS in the top right corner, there are nebulae in both the top left and bottom right corners, and the middle corridor is open space for battle with the stationary ships in each end of it. That symmetric battleground is what neither Leeds nor Edinburgh have.

Whether this kind of layout will be missed or not is an other question though...

No one uses Dundee

---

[Eugen]

As I already stated, Leeds and Edinburgh are ALREADY warzones for BAF and GRN (the latter being VERY under-used at present). So, having Dundee around just makes one more system to spread out the conflict, when, imo, it would be much better to have it concentrated in those systems.

None of the systems you mentioned are as symmetrical as Dundee. What I mean is that there is a GRN BS in the bottom left corner of the map, there is a BAF BS in the top right corner, there are nebulae in both the top left and bottom right corners, and the middle corridor is open space for battle with the stationary ships in each end of it. That symmetric battleground is what neither Leeds nor Edinburgh have.

Whether this kind of layout will be missed or not is an other question though...

No one uses Dundee

i would i f i could login -.-

[Quetz]

Dundee was a good mosh pit for spamming bret and kus capships into.
But now, it's a bit under used, and boring imo.

[Highland Laddie]

I remember Leeds and Edinburgh in 4.86 were notorious for NPC cap patrols before NPC patrols got way nerfed in 4.87. That could be adjusted if that's the only major thing that will be missed in Dundee.