Forums » Suggestions
Pilots should be penalized for failed attempts to take stations
WHAT:
Pilots who attempt to take the station but fail to capture, should not be able to ttake the station for 24 - 48 hours of real world time. Including inability to damage turrets and guards.
WHY:
There is a trend to deliberately tease station defenses to troll station owners even though the pilot has not brought enough force to actually take the station. The intended purpose is to troll other players rather than actually participate in station conquest. There is also the idea that it is too difficult to maintain the station because it can be immediately taken by the same player/s that lost control of it initially.
Pilots who attempt to take the station but fail to capture, should not be able to ttake the station for 24 - 48 hours of real world time. Including inability to damage turrets and guards.
WHY:
There is a trend to deliberately tease station defenses to troll station owners even though the pilot has not brought enough force to actually take the station. The intended purpose is to troll other players rather than actually participate in station conquest. There is also the idea that it is too difficult to maintain the station because it can be immediately taken by the same player/s that lost control of it initially.
+1 "pinging" the stations is very annoying once we arrive to check it out we are just very annoyed because some one just jumped in shoot a station guard then left. some of us come from Deneb.
It sounds like you are annoyed by alerts that a station is under attack. You can simply disable the alerts, or perhaps suggest a modification to the alerts such that they only ring your bell when the attack results in a concerning amount of damage.
I think this is part of the cost of owning a conquerable station.
-1 to this
I think this is part of the cost of owning a conquerable station.
-1 to this
It sounds like you are annoyed by alerts that a station is under attack. You can simply disable the alerts, or perhaps suggest a modification to the alerts such that they only ring your bell when the attack results in a concerning amount of damage.
I think this is part of the cost of owning a conquerable station.
Please note that this also addresses your suggestion here:
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/37875
Though I find it odd that you would expose your intent in game is to troll station owners by posting here.. I feel your post here violates the rules of this forum as does this response to it.
I think this is part of the cost of owning a conquerable station.
Please note that this also addresses your suggestion here:
https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/msgboard/3/37875
Though I find it odd that you would expose your intent in game is to troll station owners by posting here.. I feel your post here violates the rules of this forum as does this response to it.
Though I find it odd that you would expose your intent in game is to troll station owners by posting here.. I feel your post here violates the rules of this forum as does this response to it.
I don't see that at all. I've spent years arguing with Greenwall about all manner of topics, but I don't find his post here to be responding to anything but the topic at-hand.
Beyond that, this suggestion is fundamentally flawed. It gets into a bad heuristic-problem of what an "attempt" means, then "who" is attempting. Does that mean each character? So you can do six attempts per day? Or do I have to prevent a whole account at a time, and then it turns into an alt-finder? It gets messy pretty quickly, and it's a rather "backwards" way to resolve the given issue.
Down the road, I could see adding features that would allow defenders to set their automated "triggers" to particular levels of concern (basically "sensitivity" of alerts).. like.. an actual Turret had been destroyed, or more than X enemy players had jumped in, or whatever. But these kinds of features are also somewhat specific to the nature of defenses, which are still too much in-flux right now.
So, for the moment, you can use the alerts.. or not. But, I'm not going to be making some kind of automated heuristic judgement-call about "failed attempts" and then magically prevent people from shooting stuff. That seems kind of contrary to our game-philosophy overall.
I don't see that at all. I've spent years arguing with Greenwall about all manner of topics, but I don't find his post here to be responding to anything but the topic at-hand.
Beyond that, this suggestion is fundamentally flawed. It gets into a bad heuristic-problem of what an "attempt" means, then "who" is attempting. Does that mean each character? So you can do six attempts per day? Or do I have to prevent a whole account at a time, and then it turns into an alt-finder? It gets messy pretty quickly, and it's a rather "backwards" way to resolve the given issue.
Down the road, I could see adding features that would allow defenders to set their automated "triggers" to particular levels of concern (basically "sensitivity" of alerts).. like.. an actual Turret had been destroyed, or more than X enemy players had jumped in, or whatever. But these kinds of features are also somewhat specific to the nature of defenses, which are still too much in-flux right now.
So, for the moment, you can use the alerts.. or not. But, I'm not going to be making some kind of automated heuristic judgement-call about "failed attempts" and then magically prevent people from shooting stuff. That seems kind of contrary to our game-philosophy overall.
-1. For all the obvious reasons and what Inc said.