+- 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: PoBs | Factions - Balance & Motivation (open discussion) (/showthread.php?tid=145978)
RE: POBs | Factions - Balance & Motivation (open discussion) - sasapinjic - 12-05-2016
I agree that some change is necessary , current system is not exactly terrible , but it is not good either .
RE: POBs | Factions - Balance & Motivation (open discussion) - Titan* - 12-05-2016
well if they fix pob platforms they should add new siege weapon otherwise platforms will kill any battleship because of instant respawn time and weapons
Battleship Cerberus turret only effective weapon against bases and it has 1.5k Range
POB Platform Cerberus Turret/Pulse Turret have 4K range
RE: POBs | Factions - Balance & Motivation (open discussion) - Felipe - 12-06-2016
(12-05-2016, 11:44 AM)Laura C. Wrote:(12-05-2016, 11:08 AM)Ihtyander Wrote: Has anybody made a parralel anology -Bases have to be destructable because sometimes destruction is only acceptable outcome for sieging side. For example when there is base built without permission and in completely unacceptable area, be it for lawfuls, unlawfuls or basically anyone who claims the control over the area. Not to mention bases which are hostile to some local faction.
If your BS get destroyed in a fight - it is not forfeit for all time -you respawn
So if base destroyed in a siege why is destroyed permanent? Put respawn lockout time and all will be pleased from a prospect of RP.
Not to mention that sometimes there is almost no roleplay around the low core bases.
Suggestion of capital ships be lost is for cash reason, so the attacker can lose too, and will weight if Worth it, but thinking well, lose the ship isnt the best option. Should be a HUGE price to tow ship to shipyard and make repairs.
RE: POBs | Factions - Balance & Motivation (open discussion) - Xenon - 05-07-2017
I was reading about the older threads talking about "Factions Balance" and "PoBs Complications" and i thought that there were none worth reviving
Then i found this one, and after reading all of it, i found that some Developers gave great amazing ideas about fixing some errors concerning those 2 topics
Also community members have contributed some great points of views applauding and opposing.
I thought this topic need some more opinions and more care from the current community developers and administrators specially that we have new blood added to the community members database lately.
Your opinion shapes discovery's future, so let us hear it
RE: PoBs | Factions - Balance & Motivation (open discussion) - sindroms - 05-07-2017
We are currently looking into the mechanic as a whole. This also includes situations where the attackers might need to invest monetarily before being allowed to siege an installation.
RE: PoBs | Factions - Balance & Motivation (open discussion) - sasapinjic - 05-08-2017
(05-07-2017, 07:41 AM)sindroms Wrote: We are currently looking into the mechanic as a whole. This also includes situations where the attackers might need to invest monetarily before being allowed to siege an installation.
I also think it will be good idea for attackers had to pay some money ( depends on POB level ) to be able to attack POB , kinda like expedition costs , it makes sense , equipping army/fleet is costly . If they won , they got re-funded and get some form of LOOT :
![[Image: GreedyArt.png]](http://minotaurrpg.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/GreedyArt.png)
RE: PoBs | Factions - Balance & Motivation (open discussion) - diamond1 - 05-08-2017
(05-08-2017, 07:18 AM)sasapinjic Wrote:(05-07-2017, 07:41 AM)sindroms Wrote: We are currently looking into the mechanic as a whole. This also includes situations where the attackers might need to invest monetarily before being allowed to siege an installation.
I also think it will be good idea for attackers had to pay some money ( depends on POB level ) to be able to attack POB , kinda like expedition costs , it makes sense , equipping army/fleet is costly . If they won , they got re-funded and get some form of LOOT :
That's pushing it, it'll encourage people to siege every base they find.
RE: PoBs | Factions - Balance & Motivation (open discussion) - sasapinjic - 05-08-2017
(05-08-2017, 08:06 AM)diamond1 Wrote:(05-08-2017, 07:18 AM)sasapinjic Wrote:(05-07-2017, 07:41 AM)sindroms Wrote: We are currently looking into the mechanic as a whole. This also includes situations where the attackers might need to invest monetarily before being allowed to siege an installation.
I also think it will be good idea for attackers had to pay some money ( depends on POB level ) to be able to attack POB , kinda like expedition costs , it makes sense , equipping army/fleet is costly . If they won , they got re-funded and get some form of LOOT :
That's pushing it, it'll encourage people to siege every base they find.
"some form of loot" , like some drop from base when it is destroyed , like scientific data , CODENAME gun or something . Hardly worth organizing base attack and pay deposit of 100 M or more for some little data for quickest one to press tractor beam button .
RE: PoBs | Factions - Balance & Motivation (open discussion) - Alestone - 05-08-2017
I'll agree with rewarding a destruction if the punishment for a frivolous base siege is the permanent loss of all ships involved.
That is a Teat for Tat arrangement.
RE: PoBs | Factions - Balance & Motivation (open discussion) - Sylvie557 - 05-08-2017
EDIT: Wrong thread