The abuse would have been mostly on the defender side. If the enemy manage to kill your refinery, they obviously have control on grid so the guy who lost it should not be able to just drop a new one with invulnerability only because he managed to cyno it a suicide ship to drop it faster than the attacker.
1 Like
btw timezone tanking especially on Astrahi is the bigger problem
And what do you suggest should be done with it? Any solution I can think from top of my head will ultimately drive any smaller group out from deploying upwell structures out of sheer inability to cover all possible timezones in manner that would give them enough protection. This will only further shift the power towards biggest alliances leading to even deeper stagnation since those groups rarely seem invested enough in generating content
Timers need to get longer with the size of the structure. A 600m Raitaru has no business having a timer longer than 24 hours. A Keepstar on the other hand is perfectly legit having a 7 day timer. Same for vulnerability periods. A Raitaru needs to be more vulnerable than a Keepstar, not less. That doesnāt make any sense.
You are probably right. Too many mechanics favor a playstyle of ābiggest allianceā over everything else. This could include timezone-tanking, because the largest Alliances usually cover enough timezones to be able to aggress enemy structures no matter how their timer is set. To solve the general problem I would think weād need to solve issues like: too much ISK generation through easy PVE in Null, too many mechanics that favor risk-averse behaviour, how Sov works etc. Of course for every argument people will find a counter because the risk-averse behaviour of Player 1 can be a result of risk-averse PVP of player 2. Just take gatecamping as an example. It is ridicoulously easy to set up a proper gate camp which is almost risk-free. At the same time it is necessary within current mechanics, because it is one of very few ways to force people into content. There are so many examples, Iām relatively new but can easily think of 50 or more issues and each of them is complicated, because a) historic damage already been done and b) they require in-depth analysis and multi-layered solutions. Iām positive that all of that can be done. All it needs is the true willingness to realize it. The question is: shall EVE be a game focussed on PVP in its manifold ways, being and staying hard for everyone or should it be mainly an empire building game where the weak feed the strong (as in: old, already rich, large groups etc.)? For me it is clear what I want and EVE advertisements also speak a clear voice, but the reality of the game mechanics is clear as well. Itās not up to me or any other player to change it, all we can do is deliver analysis and hope someone at CCP grabs that and uses player feedback in a sensible way.
Back to topic: I think most people who use timezone tanking for their structures are avoiding content and are using these structures as a base for ratting or other PVE. If people want to do that, they should carry the risk of it. 3 hours weekly on an Astrahus is just not enough.
My solution to this concrete issue would be: Astrahus, 10 hours weekly, split in not more than two blocks. That or: groups without PVP activity in this region automatically lose their structure after two weeks 
P.S. you mention stagnation. I really think the largest problem is that pvp-friendly new players will realize not too long after joining EVE that people telling them āISK and SP donāt matter, just experience and smartmessā are lying to them? They will realize that this game is much harder for them as new players than for old players. They will realize that only with enough SP and ISK they will be able to gain the necessary experience to be good pvpers. They will then realize that they either have to spend massive amounts of time in this game to have a slight chance of competing against older good players and/or lots of real cash in order to at least be able to afford SP and ISK. Then they will realize that this game is ruled by old money and all the talk about risk in EVE really only applies to new players who are play the role of cattle - feeding killmails to others. I think this is the huge problem of EVE now. Too many forms of PVP are actually PVE: boring, repetetive and risk-free farming of killmails. Surely there are always these new players who make the best out of it and work their way up. These are great guys. But Iām curious about how many of them actually stay and how many sooner or later lose faith in CCP to do more than cosmetic corrections? I couldnāt tell. All I know is that as a new player I had several awfully demotivating moments of realizing how predictable this game actually is. Again, I think there are solutions to these issues, but they require radical change of thought and decisive action. A clean slate once a year, where every player loses 90% of their ISK/assets could be one such drastic way. Taxation of larger amounts in wallets or assets could do the trick too. Just examples, a real solution would be more complex.
Timezone tanking might be - in some cases - a means for PVP focussed small groups to hold their ground. But there should be better ways than strategies of avoidance lest small entities could just stop logging in, because thatās the most successful way of avoiding content.
Iāve got to say that it looks like they just didnāt want to spend anymore time writing code that would allow multiple structures around a moon so they decided to create a beacon. Then when they realized the beacon could be an issue they decided the āfirst come first serveā wasnāt what they liked and added this silly timer.
K I S S M Y A S S
its very easy for a newbro to get into pvp, and everyone has at some point had to knuckle down and play the game and research mechanics not just skill up to get gud.
Thatās exactly it.
The fact you font see it affecting other situations shows how well this solution works
I mean it is nice that you shaved it and put lipstick on, but still smells awfully bad. Good luck finding someone.
Hey
While your at it! Can you please remove this annoying clean ship button.
Cheers
\o Plan Neun
These timers seem kinda arbitrary and not immersive.
What if instead the timers simply governed an engagement delay multiplier. If you attacked outside of the defenders preferred window, you had the normal wait time plus a multiple of that time.
The key then is to just make that window rather uncomfortable. Make the ship forcing an engagement have to do something inconvenient, like siege or engage entosis.
How are they arbitrary? They follow a pattern of
Attacker picks time and day, attacker picks day defender picks time and defender picks time and day.
As for immersion it fits the lore and other mechanics better.
It doesnāt have the energy to be constantly invulnerable so it only becomes invulnerable when itās in danger
This thread has nothing to do with the changes announced in Vegas.
This is a new 15minutes vunerability timer at the very start of the onlining process, on top of the 15min in the end of the onlining process.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.