open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Offline towers should not have shields
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

CRUISE CONTROL FORCOOL
Posted - 2011.08.28 05:20:00 - [1]
 

When a tower's shields are offline, it should not have shields.

steave435
Caldari
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2011.08.29 08:10:00 - [2]
 

The bubble is not a shield, it's a forcefield.

Breaker77
Gallente
Reclamation Industries
Posted - 2011.08.29 09:44:00 - [3]
 

Originally by: steave435
The bubble is not a shield, it's a forcefield.


True

An offline POS has shields, armor, and hull.

An online POS has shields, armor, hull, and a forcefield.

Next time know what you are talking about before you post.




William Cooly
Sol Enterprises
Posted - 2011.08.29 13:22:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: William Cooly on 29/08/2011 13:22:41
Originally by: steave435
The bubble is not a shield, it's a forcefield.

Originally by: Breaker77
An offline POS has shields, armor, and hull.

An online POS has shields, armor, hull, and a forcefield.

Next time know what you are talking about before you post.



He never said that he thought the forcefield was the shield.. A shield is a large amount of a POS's EHP, getting rid of it on offlining would make it easier to destroy. It's also a layer of health that, if we were to get lore-ish, probably depends on some sort of generator to keep it up. A generator that needs power. That it doesn't have.

steave435
Caldari
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2011.08.29 13:47:00 - [5]
 

Read his post again.
Quote:
When a tower's shields are offline, it should not have shields.

It's pretty obvious he's talking about the forcefield being down.
If you wanna go lore, then an "offline" tower don't have the power to maintain a forcefield and modules, but it has enough solar panels and whatever to maintain its shield for self defense.

If you have a gameplay reason to make POS shields go to 0% when the tower is offline, fair enough, list it, but otherwise this is pointless.

Ingvar Angst
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.29 15:11:00 - [6]
 

Nah, I'd like to see it where if a POS is offline for a period of time, be it 30 or 90 days or whatever, then anyone can unanchor it.

Jack Tronic
Posted - 2011.08.29 17:06:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: steave435
Read his post again.
Quote:
When a tower's shields are offline, it should not have shields.

It's pretty obvious he's talking about the forcefield being down.
If you wanna go lore, then an "offline" tower don't have the power to maintain a forcefield and modules, but it has enough solar panels and whatever to maintain its shield for self defense.

If you have a gameplay reason to make POS shields go to 0% when the tower is offline, fair enough, list it, but otherwise this is pointless.


Not everyone owns a supercap fleet purely for pos bashing like your alliance does.

Baaldor
Black Sail Anarchists
Yarr Collective
Posted - 2011.08.29 17:10:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Jack Tronic
Originally by: steave435
Read his post again.
Quote:
When a tower's shields are offline, it should not have shields.

It's pretty obvious he's talking about the forcefield being down.
If you wanna go lore, then an "offline" tower don't have the power to maintain a forcefield and modules, but it has enough solar panels and whatever to maintain its shield for self defense.

If you have a gameplay reason to make POS shields go to 0% when the tower is offline, fair enough, list it, but otherwise this is pointless.


Not everyone owns a supercap fleet purely for pos bashing like your alliance does.


If you need a Super Cap fleet to take down an offline POS, then you are doing it wrong.

William Cooly
Sol Enterprises
Posted - 2011.08.29 17:15:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Baaldor
If you need a Super Cap fleet to take down an offline POS, then you are doing it wrong.

You don't need anything more than a stealth bomber to take down an offline POS. It's taking it down in a timely manner that's the issue, and offline POSes, which mainly are just **** clogging up moons leftover by someone who will never come back, are not fun to shoot at for a few hours. They should be easy to remove.

Yolo
SmellsOFelderbarry
Posted - 2011.08.29 18:57:00 - [10]
 

its easy really, if CCP reduces the shield by 90% but give it a 10x shield bonus while online.

Problem solved, and offline towers would be easier targets.

However, I prefer the decay discussion in other threads where unattended towers get unachored after a certain amount of time.

Baaldor
Black Sail Anarchists
Yarr Collective
Posted - 2011.08.29 19:13:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: William Cooly
Originally by: Baaldor
If you need a Super Cap fleet to take down an offline POS, then you are doing it wrong.

You don't need anything more than a stealth bomber to take down an offline POS. It's taking it down in a timely manner that's the issue, and offline POSes, which mainly are just **** clogging up moons leftover by someone who will never come back, are not fun to shoot at for a few hours. They should be easy to remove.


Really? Are you that friggin' lazy to get 30 dudes in BS's to drop an un-armed, off line POS?

GavinCapacitor
Posted - 2011.08.30 14:44:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Baaldor
Really? Are you that friggin' lazy to get 30 dudes in BS's to drop an un-armed, off line POS?


You don't even need 30 guys, *one* will do just fine - get an alt in a cap-stable amarr BS with t1 crystals. Problem solved.


 

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


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only