CB Destroy (Good or Bad?)

HWS General Discussion
7

So are lagshots part of the game or a bug? im confused?..

and look there is no need to be agresive its just constuctive critisism.

8

It’s a feature until Eleon fixes the netcode.

3 Likes
9

So it’s not a bug it’s a feature? :joy:

2 Likes
10

squirrels reasoning is for blunt pvp rules… but as ive stated with my current problem, it is disrupting my ability to destroy a base out of the pvp aspect as well… im sure in time more people will notice this

1 Like
11

My suggestion is either set it public, remove the core or set it private so it gets repossessed.

12

Jascha is working on this feature by the day first pass will always have bugs Feedback - cb:destroy should have a range limit the same as egs recycle is where the original discussion and ongoing dialogue is.

13

More fun here.

14

I can see the benefits of both cb:destroy in cleaning up the battlefield and also the ability to take the spoils of war from the playfield. What I’m suggesting is the ability to destroy/remove say HV’s and SV’s to remove lag but disable it from bases so we have spoils of war and a target to fight/defend.
The ability to remove bases ie spawn pads will still be needed so I can see the cb:destroy distance from enemy still being needed or we end up with a lag cluster.

1 Like
15

But what is the point of having it on a PvP play field if it means an easy cleanup?

I’ll give some on PvP use of cb:destroy but using egs:recycle should be an only PvE command.

Or turn them off and make people bust out a damn multi tool. It’s PvP, it’s difficult and dangerous and someone can come up and kill me at any time while doing so.

16

the whole system was fine until it was abused

17

Please do the same enemy-range-blocking thing for Warp Drives … o_O

Then we can have Interdictions like Elite : Dangerous :rofl:

image

18

Hey @everyone,

thanks for your feedback overall.
Interesting how crucial this feature is we implemented in the first place.

Three points to mention:

  1. maybe you have some time and think about specifications for prevent players from blueprinting captured structures. Then I can ask Eleon to implement it code wise. Either for certain playfields or globally. Like PreventBlueprinting: True / False in the playfield.yaml. Then we could say for example no blueprinting allowed on Golden Globe.

  2. cb:destroy was implemented in the past to give people a chance to destroy bugged ships like the ones in the red pole or glitched inside planets. Nowadays these bugs do not occur or under different conditions. But what you did instead was to use it as “self destruction” method to prevent others stealing your blueprint / prevent loot. For free. Yolo.
    But TWO major things here I have decided:

    1. In human history every war had these stories were technology and weapons got stolen. (for example in WW2 or Amys took rather the AK-47 in Vietnam than their own one). Good or bad doesn’t mater. I want to have this kind of feeling that you either protect it or don’t use it at all in PvP. Up to you.
    2. Looting the others is part of PvP and taking this away by a “magical vacuum self destruction bomb” is not what I want!

  3. EGS Recycle level 5 should give you the special feeling of having a super global power following you (Elemental Galactic Services) you can call for help in any situation. It cost you but it helps you (like Lester in GTA 5).
    So my consideration is to remove the restriction for EGS recycle. Letting you recycle always and everywhere no matter who is near. (regarding disconnects…)

Feedback on those points? (rather the first and third one)

RexXxuS

19

Just that 2.2 and 3 are conflicting.

I have recycle 5 and I would rather it not work while an enemy is around. I prefer 2.2 whether I am losing or winning.

I just wish it was real time :frowning:

20

I know… I’ve added the above quote because of that.

So yes, it would be in conflict with 2.2 but since disconnects can really bother some very good PvP builder they have at least a goal to achieve EGS level 5 and pay for each recycle

21

I am not understanding this

22

Context again:

What I mean is just a “compromise”. cb:destroy for free and everywhere, always is not good. But EGS recycle lvl 5 is a compromise.

23

snip
Sorry that’s a little too snarky for my tastes.

I feel like there is a concept of entitlement to intellectual property for vehicle designs.

I feel that this is an unhealthy entitlement and game mechanisms built around this will be at the cost of gameplay.

If this is the driving reason on the compromise for recycle being allowed for “in case of disconnect” situations… it’s being enabled for very edge case scenarios.

It’s only useful if:
the enemy can reach and core the vehicle without doing serious damage. and they should not know where the core is, and the cores right now are so strong that all blocks around them are destroyed before the core. floating cores are normal in husked vehicles right now.

*continuing…

2 Likes
24

Perfect image! You see? Both need to pay to get their cars back :rofl:

25

It’s only useful if:(cont)
if it’s safe to approach the vehicle (not hv’s)

it’s easy to approach the vehicle (not sv’s in the air)

you are able to reconnect before the vehicle is cored

you are able to survive for ~2 minutes for hws connect to register your position to allow the recycling

you are close enough to the vehicle to recycle it in the first place

so… if the driving factor of the compromise is IP… my 2 cents is it’s not worth consideration. but I do not feel that players that take assets to pvp are entitled to any special protection of their work.

26

I’m good with protection of blueprints at the play field level. A bp of a nearly intact CV/SV/HV is well more than worth the gold.