+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+--- Thread: Base Shield (/showthread.php?tid=100686)
RE: Base Shield - dirmaster0 - 06-25-2013
(06-25-2013, 09:19 AM)AeternusDoleo Wrote:(06-25-2013, 02:11 AM)ryoken Wrote: Your beating a dead horse Snake. Although i agree with you fully, the players with bases have to many friends here, and as such, pretty much run the server. Admins will do nothing to bases, Devs will do nothing to bases. The average player cannot make a base, so the Skype lords rule, and run the server as they please.
Personally i think POBs was the worst addition to Discovery since 4.83, and ruined the game for me. I have lost most of my will to play here, and only log on now 1 or 2 times a month just for a little pew pew, and to keep chars active.
Only Cannon can change bases at this point, but i really do not think he even cares anymore these days. Just my oppinion
Bases are meant to be run by groups, yes. They are designed that way. Bases are meant to be -extremely- resilient if you supply them properly. The only think I currently find a bit skewed is the free, near instantaneous respawn of the gun platforms - they should take a bit longer, and should cost some resources to respawn. Destroying platforms should effectively drain a base, much like keeping the shield up drains fuel.
But giving anyone who can muster some 10-15 capital ships together the ability to insta any base? Not going to happen. It takes several hours of group play at least to build one up - it'll have to take at leas that amount of effort to bring one down.
I agree with the weapon platforms part; as realistically it should take resources to bring said platforms back if they're shot/blown up--Since it takes resources to repair base, it would only make sense for this to be so.
I myself have been a part of a few base sieges before, although most of the facilities being attacked were Core 3 and below--It only took a small battle group of roughly 10 capital ships to take care of these bases after all the resources were spent on board--Yet it seems like a daunting, almost physically impossible task to blow up any of the Core 4 bases in O-74 (since they're constantly restocked, regardless of the daily sieges). I don't believe any particular group would be able to remove these said bases unless they had some sort of assistance (i.e. espionage & sabotage)--Or even a more organized battle group focused on one primary target vs. 3 different stations.
tl;dr Not enough in numbers or enough DPS = Impossible to puncture base shield & scratch paint;;
RE: Base Shield - AshHill07 - 06-25-2013
I don't think I really agree with the platforms burning up resupplys because 1. They're very easy to kill anyway. and 2. You are essentially making any base that dares try to defend itself automatically more vulnerable, since people will just shoot the platforms from range rather than bothering with the base. Right now the best way to deal with platforms is actually not to kill them. You can shoot the weapons off the platforms and since they only regen once they're killed, they'll stay damaged like that until someone does kill them. It might be a good idea to buff up the respawn time so that they actually stay down for a longer period of time, but in regards to the bases in O-74, I'd suggest getting lighter ships to take the guns off the platforms first, rather than caps just mortaring or missileing or whatever your doing now to destroy them.
Also, the irony hasen't escaped me that someone whos currently in command of maintaining a base that even to this day everyone seems to love to hate, is giving advice on how to cause similar bases issues ...
RE: Base Shield - Skorak - 06-25-2013
I still don't understand why you are all so eager to destroy all the bases that took eternities to build without putting effort in it. You can't destroy the NPC bases and you can only destroy POB when they are badly supplied, and it is good like that. They don't need to be destroyed easily...
RE: Base Shield - Highland Laddie - 06-25-2013
None of this conversation would matter if you just made a rule that Bases (AND defense platforms) must be built a minimum 4K away from every Dockable object - be they planet, npc base, jump gate, and jump hole.
Then no one would care where you put them.... Just sayin'.
RE: Base Shield - Skorak - 06-25-2013
Well about rules... first they would need to appear in any rule that would also help. Maybe force them to mount an ID or something as well.
RE: Base Shield - AeternusDoleo - 06-25-2013
(06-25-2013, 05:44 PM)Highland Laddie Wrote: None of this conversation would matter if you just made a rule that Bases (AND defense platforms) must be built a minimum 4K away from every Dockable object - be they planet, npc base, jump gate, and jump hole.
Then no one would care where you put them.... Just sayin'.
*shrug* Up to the house governments / local factions really. The use of turrets to block off a jump gate or hole was an intended use of player bases.
RE: Base Shield - SnakeLancerHaven - 06-27-2013
Platforms are ok, seriously if they wouldn't respawn the bases wouldn't have any real defenses at all... huh Geez, what I'm about is, the bases as I heared can actually level up till Core 10 (Well not here in 4.86). Now please imagine Base Core 4 already hard which takes already 1 - 2 weeks till you get it down, HOW LONG WILL THE CORE 10 ONE TAKE!?!?!?!?
RE: Base Shield - Haste - 06-27-2013
Well, if bases are getting no "risky" counter..
One of the issues is that - depending on location of course - a base can be supplied with resources to last days in mere hours, so unless you can keep a 24/7 siege going and never, ever allow resupply, it's pretty much impossible to take a base down.
Not to mention everyone who owns a base probably has fifteen accounts worth of Titanics docked on there with fuel and other supplies to last another three months.
Oh, and also: the rate at which a base can be brought up to core two with a shield is quite a bit too high. If you really wanted to be 100% sure there'll no unwanted bases in your faction's ZOI, you pretty much have to patrol every square inch twice a day. Making the base consume significantly slower would help a great deal, so if people stay on top of the core 1 bases they see, and destroy anything unwanted before it gets a shield, they can succeed.
(Yes, I'm suggesting any faction that claims a certain part of space blow up anything that they don't recognize as soon as they run into it. A "48 hour notice" can be too late)
RE: Base Shield - GTB - 06-27-2013
(06-27-2013, 12:33 AM)Snake Wrote: Platforms are ok, seriously if they wouldn't respawn the bases wouldn't have any real defenses at all... huh Geez, what I'm about is, the bases as I heared can actually level up till Core 10 (Well not here in 4.86). Now please imagine Base Core 4 already hard which takes already 1 - 2 weeks till you get it down, HOW LONG WILL THE CORE 10 ONE TAKE!?!?!?!?
Doesn't bare thinking about how long it would take a core 10 base to be taken down, years. LOL!
RE: Base Shield - Haste - 06-27-2013
Two and a half times as long as a Core 4 base, of course.