Forums » Suggestions
Okay, so we have a LOT of people thinking that the NFZ's enforcement is a joke.
Add:
Station Mounted Neutron Accelerator Turret (8 per station)
Velocity: 300m/s
Damage: 700 per shot
Delay: 0.5s
This is added to all stations, and only used when NFZ is violated, or player is KOS.
Add:
Station Mounted Neutron Accelerator Turret (8 per station)
Velocity: 300m/s
Damage: 700 per shot
Delay: 0.5s
This is added to all stations, and only used when NFZ is violated, or player is KOS.
+ lots
+1, but...
Instead of 8 per station, add different amounts based on size and proximity to the training sectors.
It may not be all that effective, as NFZs extend beyond a kilometer, and blasters usually have a range of 500-600m. Even if the neutron range is increased, autoaim becomes significantly less useful past a second delay.
Also, there's a problem with projectiles at certain ranges. This is evident with railguns: VO has a limited number of rays out from the player that projectiles can follow (at least, I think that's how it works.) It's like a grid: you shoot at the target, but your shots align to these rays that may not be close enough together for the closest one to the target to intercept the target. Someone with a greater knowledge of the technical aspect (devs) would be able to give a better explanation; the above is based on observation and my limited knowledge of three dimensional simulations. Essentially, where you aim isn't always where your shots go, and it gets worse the farther out the target is from the shooter and the smaller the target.
Instead of 8 per station, add different amounts based on size and proximity to the training sectors.
It may not be all that effective, as NFZs extend beyond a kilometer, and blasters usually have a range of 500-600m. Even if the neutron range is increased, autoaim becomes significantly less useful past a second delay.
Also, there's a problem with projectiles at certain ranges. This is evident with railguns: VO has a limited number of rays out from the player that projectiles can follow (at least, I think that's how it works.) It's like a grid: you shoot at the target, but your shots align to these rays that may not be close enough together for the closest one to the target to intercept the target. Someone with a greater knowledge of the technical aspect (devs) would be able to give a better explanation; the above is based on observation and my limited knowledge of three dimensional simulations. Essentially, where you aim isn't always where your shots go, and it gets worse the farther out the target is from the shooter and the smaller the target.
I thought of suggesting station turrets, but that involves physically adding stuff, where as beefing up the NFZ enforcement should require only tweaking what spawns, and how many (as I understand it, thouhg I admit I'm no programmer).
If turrets were easier, why have them attatched to the station? Why not place them in a 500m radius around the station? This would make them effective to around 700-800m away from the station.
One could even have multiple "rings" of turrets for better defended stations, extending the effective range beyond the NFZ if desired.
Faille.
If turrets were easier, why have them attatched to the station? Why not place them in a 500m radius around the station? This would make them effective to around 700-800m away from the station.
One could even have multiple "rings" of turrets for better defended stations, extending the effective range beyond the NFZ if desired.
Faille.
-1 for turrets physically mounted on stations
The fire would interfere with docking and they wouldn't be particularly effective anyway since the station would block at least half the field-of-view.
It would also be easier to use station mounted turrets for nefarious purposes since traffic would naturally fly past the turrets while approaching/leaving the station, whereas newbies wouldn't be as likely to fly really close to freestanding turrets away from the station.
The fire would interfere with docking and they wouldn't be particularly effective anyway since the station would block at least half the field-of-view.
It would also be easier to use station mounted turrets for nefarious purposes since traffic would naturally fly past the turrets while approaching/leaving the station, whereas newbies wouldn't be as likely to fly really close to freestanding turrets away from the station.
Station turrets is kinda cool, probably developmentally easier than other 'solutions', but there is no problem here to solve.
The problem is a lack of quick response to NFZ violations. Takes a good 10-15 seconds for the station guards to even get close enough to shoot.
"The fire would interfere with docking"
Fixing the stupid Corvus allowing KOS players to dock in their stations.
"The fire would interfere with docking"
Fixing the stupid Corvus allowing KOS players to dock in their stations.
"The fire would interfere with docking"
I was talking about people docking legitimately getting caught in crossfire.
I was talking about people docking legitimately getting caught in crossfire.
meh. One of the hazards of space travel ;)
Faille.
Faille.
"I was talking about people docking legitimately getting caught in crossfire."
Shit happens ;)
But seriously wrong place wrong time. If we wanted people to dock safely it'd be Carebears Online.
Putting so much protection on "real newbs" is making my stomach turn as it is, but we need more players for the game to survive, so it's a necessary change (for now).
Shit happens ;)
But seriously wrong place wrong time. If we wanted people to dock safely it'd be Carebears Online.
Putting so much protection on "real newbs" is making my stomach turn as it is, but we need more players for the game to survive, so it's a necessary change (for now).
You apparently haven't ever followed the other discussions regarding turrets (both defensive and on ships) and problems with large numbers of them with weapons that have a high rate of fire. To boil it down, "Ain't gonna happen."
As i suggested in one of the other threads, probably the best approach is to have a Strike Force launch as soon as an infraction is detected and say something to Sector chat informing the aggressor to, "Stand down or be destroyed." The strike force should also be beefed up to be faster and more responsive with nastier weapons to make them a serious threat. Possibly they should also be able to follow someone to the edge of a system, or at least through monitored space.
As i suggested in one of the other threads, probably the best approach is to have a Strike Force launch as soon as an infraction is detected and say something to Sector chat informing the aggressor to, "Stand down or be destroyed." The strike force should also be beefed up to be faster and more responsive with nastier weapons to make them a serious threat. Possibly they should also be able to follow someone to the edge of a system, or at least through monitored space.
Oh whoops. I messed that up actually heh. Fixed.
Who said anything about accidents? No doubt the pirates will use the station-mounted turrets to do their dirty work for them. Sit 5m outside range of one of the turrets, wait for a hapless newbie to pass in-front of the turret, move into range, and dead newb.
Maybe getting chased by the SF could make that tricky to pull off, but no problem; just have two pirates with positive standing loiter about. When the newbie is in position, one pirate fires a single shot at his partner in crime who is parked in the NFZ, and boom.
Plus the pirate could just turbo around the station and with a bit of strategic positioning would be a menace to the sector without even firing a shot.
Freestanding turrets wouldn't be as exploitable because players don't regularly fly immediately in front of them.
Maybe getting chased by the SF could make that tricky to pull off, but no problem; just have two pirates with positive standing loiter about. When the newbie is in position, one pirate fires a single shot at his partner in crime who is parked in the NFZ, and boom.
Plus the pirate could just turbo around the station and with a bit of strategic positioning would be a menace to the sector without even firing a shot.
Freestanding turrets wouldn't be as exploitable because players don't regularly fly immediately in front of them.
So don't place the turrets right at the docking bay, so that nobody has to fly immediately in front of them.
+1 to MUCH stronger defenses for NFZs.
+2 to use same turrets as ConqStations already use, with more missiles. Nations' capitals can have beam turrets, near-instakill, same as training sector have. Why reinvent what we already have?
Turrets should be placed exactly at NFZ borders, and Number of turrets is tied to stations' size and role.
+2 to use same turrets as ConqStations already use, with more missiles. Nations' capitals can have beam turrets, near-instakill, same as training sector have. Why reinvent what we already have?
Turrets should be placed exactly at NFZ borders, and Number of turrets is tied to stations' size and role.
Why does everyone seem to think that shooting people around stations is a Bad Thing(TM)?
Rules are only interesting becaus they can be broken. If you make them unable to be broken, you remove the fun. All I have to say on the matter.
@ARF, Espionage.
Why? Because any decent nation would enforce a safety zone around its "cities in space". Keep military patrols around them, and add lots of turrets. Just imagine any major modern city, then a small town in the edge of civilization and next the open desert. Where do you expect to have the laws more seriously enforced? Shooting all witness in the Desert ensures no consequences, and while in the small town you probably can evade, in the capitals any repeating offender will be hunted down by a larger force and newest technology...
Cross-posting, for integration of ideas:
+2 Adding turrets exactly in NFZ borders inside nations, only respond to events inside NFZ, but can shoot outside.
-Capitals should have lots of turrets, including a few instakill ones around its NFZ
-Medium stations should have the same ConqStations' turrets, maybe more missiles.
-Small outposts remains as is, no turrets. Same for grayspace-based ones.
+Diversify the number and type of station guards, from 2 to 12, relating to stations size and role
+3 to reduce the number of monitored sectors to only those neighbouring stations and wormholes. Blame it to light speed limit and lack of monitoring equipment.
Whole nation's station sectors should be seriously defended, and stronger emphasis on NO-Fire zone meaning no-fire-at-all!
Why? Because any decent nation would enforce a safety zone around its "cities in space". Keep military patrols around them, and add lots of turrets. Just imagine any major modern city, then a small town in the edge of civilization and next the open desert. Where do you expect to have the laws more seriously enforced? Shooting all witness in the Desert ensures no consequences, and while in the small town you probably can evade, in the capitals any repeating offender will be hunted down by a larger force and newest technology...
Cross-posting, for integration of ideas:
+2 Adding turrets exactly in NFZ borders inside nations, only respond to events inside NFZ, but can shoot outside.
-Capitals should have lots of turrets, including a few instakill ones around its NFZ
-Medium stations should have the same ConqStations' turrets, maybe more missiles.
-Small outposts remains as is, no turrets. Same for grayspace-based ones.
+Diversify the number and type of station guards, from 2 to 12, relating to stations size and role
+3 to reduce the number of monitored sectors to only those neighbouring stations and wormholes. Blame it to light speed limit and lack of monitoring equipment.
Whole nation's station sectors should be seriously defended, and stronger emphasis on NO-Fire zone meaning no-fire-at-all!
Find a rusty pickaxe and attempt to create little baby pickaxes with it. That is the penalty for making suggestions that involve using instakill-anything outside of magic training sectors.
+1 to turrets; why would a large space station not have some turrets around it to shoot at everyone who is tempKOS or KOS.
+1 to reduce the number of monitored sectors. Frankly, I think that monitoring a sector should require a physical presence in the sector, either of a patrol or of stationary defenses like turrets.
It would be nice if "killing all witnesses" would be a viable strategy. I think there is no cross-sector communication (otherwise why can't I radio another station to get an up to date price list? OTOH, faction status, channel chat etc is instantly communicated across the galaxy), so even a system with turrets would need to send a courier back to the capital to get a status hit communicated. But this is probably too complicated...
+1 to reduce the number of monitored sectors. Frankly, I think that monitoring a sector should require a physical presence in the sector, either of a patrol or of stationary defenses like turrets.
It would be nice if "killing all witnesses" would be a viable strategy. I think there is no cross-sector communication (otherwise why can't I radio another station to get an up to date price list? OTOH, faction status, channel chat etc is instantly communicated across the galaxy), so even a system with turrets would need to send a courier back to the capital to get a status hit communicated. But this is probably too complicated...