The idea of the transition with the factional stuff and monuments was to reward the players who invested in them the most, right?
So here is a suggestion on how to give the rewards to the players who did the heavy lifting in whatever phase of life of a station via a simple points-system:
1 point for the group that built the station
1 point for the group that held the station for the longest time (e.g. whole time since built or just during the last year)
1 point for the group that holds the station during transition
-> The group with the majority of points gets the station and the monument.
Imo this would be a lot fairer to the more deserving people (whatever that might mean in the cutthroat-universe of EVE). Remember that stations can still be attacked after transition (if someone happens to find an enemy base on his doorstep - should not be much of an issue in the home region, right?).
Why does someone complain about every single potential conflict driver and asked it to be nerfed out of the game? We are suppose to be fighting over things - not have them awarded to “fairly” based on logging in or whatever.
It is perfectly fine, even good for the game for there to be something of value that someone wants to take from someone else by force. It’s much more healthy to fight of things than the than the more common “fun fights” where people randomly roam around hoping to bump into someone to fight, and no one really gets hurt or loses something they notice. Let’s let this one play out as intended and give some meaning for people to actually log in and have a goal to work towards whether that is defending these outposts or taking them from someone else.
Maybe so - but that’s the way of changes/patches.
When things change, there always are unhappy people (especially in EVE) - as well as there are happy people.
One day it’s PL, another day it’s someone else. I don’t care about PL or any other group in particular and I’m not here to take sides.
I’m just trying to give something to think about and trying to find a fair solution for the issue, because changing outposts into destructible/movable assets is a huge change.
There are plenty of opportunities to fight over stuff all the time. Of course it’s fine to fight over stuff - that’s not the point.
To me, using meta-information about upcoming changes for personal gain in preparation (before they are implemented) seems like cheating or an exploit.
Rewards should go to the people who deserve them - that’s all. And I think this can’t only be defined by who has the bigger guns in just a moment. Building and holding stuff for a long time are just as important.
Trust me… I’d love for NCPL’s invasion of Providence to be for naught. But it’s kind of late in the game to make a change like that.
Plus in many cases you’d end up with 3 entities with 1 point in your system… or just two because the alliance that dropped the initial outpost or held it longest no longer exists.
No need to roll with anything - I don’t have sov and nothing is final until it is really done.
Even 1 point would yield a majority somewhere, and ties can be broken easily or the target can be made neutral until forcefully claimed - there are enough reasonable ways to solve this easily without overthinking it.
Hehe - it’s funny how quick the trigger-happy faction is forced to comment when something just smells of fewer targets to shoot - like flies to the honey.
On the contrary - of course the whole change is made to create conflict and there is nothing wrong with that. Let all these stations burn for all I care - but not before they really can!
I just think the way this is executed looks totally crappy. Either
by design to achieve whatever or to help whoever
– or –
due to releasing critical information too early (creating an exploit)
Yes they did - but that doesn’t make the way they planned it any better.
Let me add a few more things to think about.
The monuments are supposed to be about the story of the place. Years of history and effort just vanish for some stations in favor of a quick recent conquest (-> content lost).
Not taking ALL the efforts of the players into account by just handing the things over to the latest owner isn’t just the easy way. it also is a very lazy way.
Looking at the development you might even think that some players were outright tricked from the start. Maybe this imaginary sketch will explain:
Devs: “Outposts are indestructible.”
Players: “Oh, great - let’s build a lot of them.”
Years later …
Devs: “Haha, we lied and now we are cheating you. Not only will stations be destructible, it will even be possible to steal them and place them somewhere else.”
Griefers: “Excellent, even more things to make them cry, muhaha. Who cares for storylines, let’s just use this meta-info to our advantage and attack right away.”
Shouldn’t just the players be the ones cheating each other?
NCPL invested a ton of capital invading providence to take those stations. They just 800 billion isk in a battle in Providence that never would have happened if not for them wanting those faction citadels. They lost a bunch of capitals in a battle earlier this year too. They spent huge amounts of time grinding sov.
I hope the faction citadels end up being worthless piles of crap and the sales price is only a billion each or so… but I don’t think it’s particularly fair to change the rules on who gets them now.
no content was lost in fact the mad dash to grab them created content see you said so yourself
that’s not how it happened at all, we knew for years that this was coming, hell originally we were just told they would be destructible getting a faction citadel out of it is a bonus.
Just a point… but the fact they’re unanchorable citadels (as opposed to just destructible stations) is a big change.
If you can’t move the structure… there’s little point to conquering the space to “take it”. You may go blow it up when that’s possible, but you won’t spend 3 months entosising stuff.
hehe - right, I forgot - destroying things is considered to be content - it can be “created” pretty much anywhere at any time.
Of course I was refering to content like the background of a certain station and its reason to be where it is etc. - something to enrich the universe, permanently.
I hope so - it would be a shame.
It seems like people so far see this station update as a fixed fact and totally written in stone because it’s already implemented - wait, it’s not.
But let’s not learn from mistakes once we see them unfold. There is nothing to be done, a plan is a plan is a plan. Aaand another half-baked update coming right up …
and nothing is final until it is really done.
