Hello, the enemy can damage an ansiblex until it reaches hull and then it shuts down for a long time. Does that seem right to you?
Imagine if for example a fortizar couldnt be used if it reached hull
Many functions of the Fortizar also cannot be used if it reaches hull.
Industry, clone services, they all shut off when the structure reaches hull.
So yes, it seems right to me that an Ansiblex can be turned off by bringing it to hull. It’s a much better alternative than only disabling the Ansiblex when it’s truly dead - this way partially bashing an Ansiblex already has some effect.
It renders it useless, cant even be repaired for a long time which seems excessive
That’s kind of the entire purpose of attacking an ansiblex: to disable it. Be glad people can disable it even without killing it, as that means you can enable it again without paying for a new Ansiblex each time it’s disabled.
Also are you going to ignore that your previous comparison (with a Fortizar) was wrong?
1 Like
Afaik you can bash the ansi and make it useless for almost 24 hours including not being able to repair it, then when it can finally be repaired it can be bashed right away again and made useless.
Last i checked you can dock and tether to for example a fortizar even when its at 1%
Do you even have access to ansiblexes as part of Absolute Honor?
You don’t have any sov as far as I know.
What are you even complaining about?
Alliances can use each others ansis. This particular one gets bashed outside of its vulnerability window and shuts down. Then we have to wait for the vulnerability window until it can be repaired and used again and then it just get bashed again. So its down most of the time and it seems like theres nothing we can do because we cant form people to defend it 24/7. So i dont think ansis should shut down unless they are destroyed.
Ansiblexes actually got harder to reinforce in the recent major update.
I do actually agree with the OP to a point. Here’s an idea that might make it a bit fairer to smaller alliances:
Ansi loses shield → goes into reinforced mode and requires significantly more ozone to jump as well as a few seconds delay between landing and jumping. This makes it slightly more annoying for users and logistics and makes it a bit easier to camp especially vs nullified ships.
After reinforce → ansi is destroyed, new one can’t be anchored for X days due to “unstable conduit radiation” or whatever. This allows an attacker to deny usage for an increased period of time, but only if they can beat the defenders.
Sounds like the alliance whose ansiblex you are using should do better in defending it’s ansiblex.
I know that feeling, I’ve lived in a part of space without ansiblex for a long time because they were always bashed in our off-timezone.
They also were defended and repaired each time, so even though it was easily disabled it luckily wasn’t a constant drain on our alliance.
It’s good that there are multiple states to bashing an ansiblex:
- Alive
- Alive yet not functional
- Dead
Because if the game were to remove the 2nd step the balance would be much more binary; either you have to destroy the ansiblex to disable it or it’s not disabled at all.
Such a binary system would be much harder to balance than the current system. After all if you can immediately kill it without reinforcement timers balance is way too much in favour of the attacker.
On the other hand if you cannot disable an ansiblex unless you bash through multiple timers balance is way too much in favour of the defender.
The current setup with one reinforcement timer and the ability to disable yet not destroy the ansiblex after reinforcing it seems a fair middle ground to me.
Maybe ask your allied alliance to warn you when their ansiblexes are being attacked, so you can help save them when it happens.
Seems like ansiblexes should only be disabled if they are destroyed
You are repeating yourself, again.
Repeating something does not make it true.
Why not try to convince the reader of your point of view by bringing in arguments supporting your case and arguments against what has already been said above?