open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Proposal] Changes to how outposts are conquered
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Author Topic

Aktaeon Industries
The Black Armada
Posted - 2010.07.27 08:08:00 - [1]

Edited by: Zendoren on 28/07/2010 02:11:28
Issue: The current system makes conquering outposts a means to an end. Instead, conquering outposts should be both a means to an end and an end in its self. Currently, the conquering of an outpost is not a fair balance between risk/reward that should be associated to 0.0 warfare.The current system needs to be changed so that the risks and rewards are in line with other levels of risk and reward that are associated with 0.0 warfare.

Proposal: Once an outpost is conquered, have a destroyed shell (much like how destroyed capital ships are depicted in space) where the outpost once was.

Detailed mechanics:
~Give this destroyed outpost docking rights to everyone with limited functionality to pilots once inside. (Destroyed outpost should have a volume limit so that you can't hide a fleet in a destroyed outpost)

~Once docked, the interior will have a destroyed look to it. Also, the cargo and ship hanger will be shared with all who are dock in the outpost. Any item or ship that was inside the outpost when it was conquered will be subject to drop tables (much like destroyed ships are in pvp) and the dropped items will be placed in this shared hanger. (This makes conquering outposts a means in its self instead of a means to an end for solv.)

~In space: The destroyed shell will have cargo space where a "reclamation egg" (lack of a better term) can be placed. This egg will have space to put required items in it for the reclamation process. (Much like the outpost platform egg has when building a outpost from scratch)

~Item requirements for reclamation will be lower then that of a regular outpost building platform egg.

~outpost reclamation will follow the same game mechanics during down time that newly built outposts currently use; however, anything that remains in conquered outpost that is being reclamed will be destroyed. (pods, ships, items everything)

~Pilots logged off in outpost will be poded and sent back to their medical clone location. Jump clones should be destroyed once the outpost is conquered. (Medical clone Game mechanics will need to be changed so that NPC's will be the only ones to offer medical clones)

~If the outpost is not reclaimed, the destroyed outpost shell will remain in orbit and be dock-able to anyone until reclaimed.

Edit: Sp Errors pointed out by Omara Otawan

Scatim Helicon
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.07.27 17:55:00 - [2]

Result: nobody will leave anything significant in an outpost ever again, just in case some catastrophe hits them and makes every asset in their possession up for grabs whilst they're asleep/at work/on holiday. Congratulations, you just destroyed the concept of the 0.0 market hub and forced everyone who wants a new ship into making Jita Shopping Trips.

(This is a horrible idea)

Omara Otawan
Posted - 2010.07.28 00:04:00 - [3]

Originally by: Zendoren

I lol'd.

Terrible idea, though having all services disabled until a conquered outpost is repaired isnt that bad.

Drake Draconis
Shadow Cadre
Shadow Confederation
Posted - 2010.07.28 01:36:00 - [4]

Honestly... because outposts can't be destroyed... this issue/problem is going to get increasingly worse as alliances continue to build them.

I get the reasons why they won't allow them to be destroyed... but if this isn't sorted out soon... its just going to get worse.

Biggest reason for allowing them to be destroyed - Makes them much more valuable than they are.

As to HOW they are destroyed... that's up to you to sort out.

Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2010.07.29 08:28:00 - [5]

We talked about this awhile ago, and after living in 0.0 for awhile now, I would have to say no.

It's just that much more of a risk to lose all your stuff, and that could completely bankrupt people VERY fast.

Imagine having 50B worth of BPO's in an outpost. You go on vacation and are away for a week thinking everything is all good.. Then you come back to find out that the outpost all your stuff was in, got blown up and all of those BPO's are gone.

Sure you could leave expensive things like that in an NPC station, but when you live in deep 0.0, you dont have any NPC stations, and you NEED stations to leave your ships, fuel, moon goo, etc..

I think the ability to conquer the station and deny docking rights to people is more than enough. Atleast that way you still technically own your items, you just cant really get em out of the station..

Zheren Huli
Above the Law
ESSE Imperium
Posted - 2010.07.29 08:52:00 - [6]

Edited by: Zheren Huli on 29/07/2010 09:03:11
out of pure interest and a sudden idea....

how would you stay to the point of having 1 main outpost per constelation that is indestructuable, while every other outpost in the constellation can be treated as suggested by zendoren?

this way you can keep the more unique stuff safe and stil have the ability to keep your capitals split between several constellation to not end in a lockdown by the enemy camping a single station.

As for the medical clone thing. I dont like the npc only option. Exspecial in deepspace its a pain to get there. I would rather prefer an option that sends you to the closest indestructable outpost your alliance owns / if none is there to empire. However, you would stil have cloning bay issues if you are on a low sp clone and the safe outpost gets taking over while your on holiday -> you cant use the medical bay. a free jumpclone in empire could fix that.

As for the last idea. I would like something like a capital salvaging system, just so that an attacker can do continously damage by removing the station fully (say after a timer of xx days) when they leave the station behind their own battlelines.

Smelly Bait
Posted - 2010.07.29 11:17:00 - [7]

A outpost cost around 20 - 40 bil to create. Losing a asset like that and a way to control the area (docking = contolling) is a big loss on its selve. I like the out of the box idea but its a little bit to much.

Zheren Huli
Above the Law
ESSE Imperium
Posted - 2010.07.29 15:17:00 - [8]

Originally by: Smelly Bait
A outpost cost around 20 - 40 bil to create. Losing a asset like that and a way to control the area (docking = contolling) is a big loss on its selve. I like the out of the box idea but its a little bit to much.

well let me try to bring arguments against that:

motherships + decent fitting cost 20b+ yet a lot people not in spaceholding alliances have them and their number is continously increasing. sure unlike a station they can be hidden but see the positive side. people acctualy would commit in groups for this asset which means there would be more fights.

if half your alliance were afk, would it be fair to hold those outposts against equal strike forces just because if they take something you will take it again the next time you have a bigger fleet as disposal with less possible losses?

sure you can bring timezones as an argument but ccp inventeded several timer in the new sovereign system, if a station could be put in this miserable state after the first timer it would surely force the attacker to show up on more occasions than its now.

but to come back on the cost factor, Zendoren said himself:

Originally by: Smelly Bait

~Item requirements for reclamation will be lower then that of a regular outpost building platform egg.

so the cost will allready be less anyway when the outpost is just in a burned out state. (i would prefer total anhilation through aslong as theres a reasonable safe hub per constelation as described above :P)

Sure it hurts to loose something, but eve was never ment to be a save haven, so given more opportunity for people to fight (exspecial with the current state of 0.0) as this idea does would be a decent thing.

On a sidenode also have a look at newer eve alliances. People wanna accomplish something and building an outpost if you arent a long time spaceholder is something! If you make them destructable sure people will be hurt, but other people also will have joy in reconstructing their own fortune again.

As for your docking controlling point smelly bait, i am not sure if you mean docking as a mean to control the local space or as controlling the docking. But...

1) if its the earlier, i would say you simple have the same chances as the attacker and can just as him use pos to keep your fleet close by. evening chances is not a bad thing.

2) if its the later, Zendoren also said that everyone is able to dock, so dominating the space arround the station would be a mean in itself and just another mean for combat.

I am starting to become all for it :)

Drake Draconis
Shadow Cadre
Shadow Confederation
Posted - 2010.07.29 18:35:00 - [9]

Edited by: Drake Draconis on 29/07/2010 18:36:54
Agreed.... with last post that is.
I find the excuse of losing valuables is no different (And rather carebearishly pathetic) then getting a JF blown up by a gank fleet carrying goods. People lose that kind of crap ALL the time EVERY day.

That is the cost/risk for the privilege of holding 0.0 territory. As it should be! This is EVE Online people... why stop it the inevitable doom.

If your going to go AFK For a long period of time... have the brains enough to store these goods someplace where they can be retrieved... and that's just the top of a long list of solutions to make sure your "Stuff" is safe.

The whole point of 0.0 is its conquerable space... it's not supposed to be safe... I think the danger of 0.0 to alliances who hold outposts is not high enough.

Outposts that are built and become permanent fixtures will continue to grow in numbers and litter dozens if not soon hundreds of systems in the not too distant future.

It's rather easy to make ISK down there if you know what your doing... and I do mean a crapload of ISK mind you.

I don't mind the idea of an single Outpost in a region being flagged as an HQ but there should be a cost to that.... and it should be "un-flaggable" if its conquered.

Double Dee
Posted - 2010.10.25 00:40:00 - [10]

*sigh* another person not doing their research. this idea has been brought up i don't know how many times. just get the most recent thread and build on that. no reason to keep spamming the same idea over and over.


This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only