|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 36 post(s) |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
3055
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 14:38:00 -
[1] - Quote
After the high level announcement of the summer expansion EVE Online: Odyssey, to be published on June 4th, 2013, we are excited to update you with some more detailed plans for Odyssey.
CCP Fozzie introduces, in his latest blog, our plans for a first iteration on Starbases. While we are eagerly looking forward to implement these plans, please note that they are a first iteration on a very complex system and therefore not completely set in stone.
Read CCP Fozzie's devblog here: Odyssey summer expansion: Starbase iterations CCP Phantom - Senior Community Representative - Volunteer Manager |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
4785
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 14:38:00 -
[2] - Quote
Alternate title: Removing the S from POS
Big thanks to everyone who has provided us with their Starbase change requests so far and special thanks to the CSM for being extremely helpful at getting your constructive requests to us. Remember that the CSM 8 election starts tomorrow so everyone make sure and vote so you can have the best representatives to bring your concerns to us.
As always, we're very interested in what you think of these changes, and we'll be giving you more status updates as we progress through the Odyssey production schedule. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Goliath
C C P C C P Alliance
1451
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 14:52:00 -
[3] - Quote
Sweet blog! Think this one will push you over 5k? CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
4787
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 14:55:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP Goliath wrote:Sweet blog! Think this one will push you over 5k?
I guess that will depend on whether Starbase users are a small portion of the community or not. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP RubberBAND
CCP Engineering Corp CCP Engineering Alliance
148
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 15:07:00 -
[5] - Quote
I'm so excited! Feel free to poke me on: Twitter |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
4882
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 16:24:00 -
[6] - Quote
I can confirm that we're not removing CHAs, the Personal Hangar structure is a separate structure and the two can exist alongside each other to meet different needs.
Letting directors and/or CEOs access the member's sections of the PHA is not going to be within our scope for the first iteration due to technical limitations, and I am honestly not sold on ever adding it. These structures are not intended to completely replace CHAs for all purposes, and the added difficulty to rapid evacuation provides slightly more incentive for wormhole invasions.
The Personal Hangar does not have any limits to total storage, which significantly reduces the amount of management that needs to be done to keep it running smoothly.
And a reminder once again, we are not allowing people to build supercaps in wormholes or lowsec, don't worry. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
4882
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 16:34:00 -
[7] - Quote
Another quick note, Refining Arrays are definitely on our list of starbase issues. I can't say at this time when a fix will come though. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
4967
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 18:51:00 -
[8] - Quote
Pinky Denmark wrote:This is great and I love to see this aspect get some love - I do however hope everything will be re-invented as the current system won't easily be transformed...
I do wish you think more about the game mechanics for those personal hangars - People always go on 14 day vacations or have computers break down for a week when a corp is about to relocate a tower... So I suspect lots of people will lose assets to repacking the personal hangar arrays.
I know you don't want to make it easy to steal/scam assets from members, but how about those items dropping out in a locked container when repacking an array so corps can save personal assets and save them for their owner. It must be possible to create containers only accessible by 1 character? Have them drop in space with a 72hour decay timer and the option to shoot them if you want to destroy them. You can scoop the container but only the real owner can open the container. Maybe give him the option to open access for others somehow but personal assets in towers can be a pain when you suddenly have to relocate...
Pinky
If people are not willing to take the risk that their corp will move without them, they can always store certain items in the CHAs instead. Having tradeoffs and decisions to make between what to store in each of the two forms of storage is one of our goals.
Count of MonteCylon wrote:I feel that giving starbases a magic amount of unlimited storage space (limited per person, but otherwise it's magic) would damage the sense of realism and consequence in Eve because to my knowledge nothing else has unlimited space. You are forced to deal with and manage all sorts of limitations in other areas, for one small star base to house a hundred million m3 and another one to house only three people's worth of space would be strange.
Customs offices have exactly the same mechanic of unlimited total space but limited space per character. Also stations have infinite interiors. Quantum storage is the wave of the future. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Masterplan
C C P C C P Alliance
1037
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 21:01:00 -
[9] - Quote
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:Quote:Accessing starbase arrays from anywhere within the shield
The requirement to move within range of each and every starbase structure to access their storage is a major annoyance for most starbase users, and one we are working to fix. Thanks to new advances in starbase technology, tiny drones will now carry items to and fro within the shield bubble. This changes the POS module access range to instead check that your ship is inside the shield, allowing players to access all the structures from one location. Interesting... Does this mean if the POS is offline, or online without a shield, you cannot access any materials in any starbase structures because there is no shield to be "within"? Rather than 'within the shield' it will probably end as 'within 15/20/30 km of the tower', which is almost the same thing. But I'll know more for sure once I start working on it this/next week. The normal rules of what can/cannot be accessed when a tower is offline/reinforced will be unchanged.
For those asking about structures that have to be outside the shield, such as guns, those will probably still require you to be within range of the specific structure itself (but this depends on how it looks once I start diving in to it) "This one time, on patch day..." CCP Masterplan -á| -áTeam Five-0: Rewriting the law |
|
|
CCP Masterplan
C C P C C P Alliance
1037
|
Posted - 2013.04.02 21:02:00 -
[10] - Quote
Quote:Lots of questions about roles The role system is responsible for a lot of the limitations of the current behaviour. To solve a lot of those issues, we're going to have to dedicate a good amount of time to reworking that system first. There simply isn't the scope for doing that in this release. This is the sort of thing we'll need to dedicate a team to for a full release cycle. (omg dat roles UI!)
Stegas Tyrano wrote:Will the tiny drones that move stuff around be animated? They better be! They'll only be animated inside the server ;)
Lady Zarrina wrote:- Make sure enhancements to current corp hangers, gets replicated to the new player hangers. For instance I was not sure if I could repackage items in the new proposed player hangers? Yes, the personal hangars should be supporting the new repackage option like CHAs do. (I've already got the CHA version of repackage working, and will extend it to the new hangar once that is completed)
Max Kolonko wrote:Does the new Hangar have MAX TOTAL CAPACITY? or is it working 100% like POCO and have no maximum on sum of member hangars? Like a POCO going loco down in Acapulco "This one time, on patch day..." CCP Masterplan -á| -áTeam Five-0: Rewriting the law |
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5064
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 11:16:00 -
[11] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Why not just add 2 checkboxes to this "personal tabs". 1. Allow access for CEO/Directors 2. Allow access for ALL
Problem solved.
Adding the checkboxes would be really easy. Making the checkboxes do anything is the challenge. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5075
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 16:11:00 -
[12] - Quote
Thanks everyone for their feedback so far both on the proposed changes and on other changes we can make in the future.
Want to remind people once again that we're not removing CHAs from the game with these changes, nor are we talking about limiting PHAs to one per starbase. You can online as many of both structures as your Starbase's fittings allow.
And to also repeat the statement my earlier post, that allowing CEOs to access the storage within the PHA does not currently appear to be an option for the first iteration of the structure. We may consider it for later iterations. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5078
|
Posted - 2013.04.03 17:18:00 -
[13] - Quote
Proddy Scun wrote: OK cool - sounds like PSH may have some limit in total size then. So that would be fair.
The personal hangar has no limit on total size. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5104
|
Posted - 2013.04.04 19:30:00 -
[14] - Quote
Fredric Wolf wrote:I like all the changes. One thing I would like to see changed though is the naming of the CSMA to XLSMA. If it is allowed to be placed in any system it no longer is what it was.
Fred
This is a good idea. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5109
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 13:25:00 -
[15] - Quote
Giving it the ability to repair using nanite paste would be wonderful, although I don't think we'd be able to get that in time for Odyssey. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5111
|
Posted - 2013.04.05 14:01:00 -
[16] - Quote
fukier wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Giving it the ability to repair using nanite paste would be wonderful, although I don't think we'd be able to get that in time for Odyssey. man dont you guys just love nanite paste! i mean its like duct tape it can fix just about anything...
I'd propose we re-name it omnigel if our lawyers would let me. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5175
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 13:04:00 -
[17] - Quote
Update on our current progress:
The Private Hangars have a usable version completed, with the key functionality working. Work is remaining on peripheral issues so the structure is not yet in a shippable state but a lot of progress has been made. Taking your feedback so far into account, the Personal Hangar currently has a storage size of 50,000 m3 per character, slightly larger than had been discussed before. We are interested in your opinions about that change. Repackaging modules in Starbase arrays is done and shippable. Accessing modules everywhere in the shield is done and working for inventory look, give and take actions. The CSMA anchoring change is completed and the structure has been renamed to "Extra Large Ship Maintenance Array" for clarity. As usual your feedback is desired. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5178
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 13:21:00 -
[18] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:"usable version"... meaning it works to the extent you can change t3 subsystems on it already? or is this still a technical hurdle to be overcome?
T3 subsystem swap is a separate story that has not been completed yet. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5178
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 13:31:00 -
[19] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:err 2 quick questions about the change to pos mod handling...
do you have to be inside the shield to do so or @ 0m to the shields (but can still be outside) ?
if you're unable to go in due to the pos having a private pw can u still access and use the mods? (anchor / unanchor / etc..)
You must be a slight ways inside the bubble. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5181
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 13:44:00 -
[20] - Quote
Artctura wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:err 2 quick questions about the change to pos mod handling...
do you have to be inside the shield to do so or @ 0m to the shields (but can still be outside) ?
if you're unable to go in due to the pos having a private pw can u still access and use the mods? (anchor / unanchor / etc..) You must be a slight ways inside the bubble. Is this change going to affect SMA's as well or do we still need to get on top of them?
In the current version it does not affect range required to refit from SMAs. We are considering changing that but undecided atm. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
|
CCP Masterplan
C C P C C P Alliance
1058
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 14:46:00 -
[21] - Quote
For all you players asking about the roles for cancelling jobs (and this applies to regular station jobs also) I'm going to have a look and see if there is something we can do about it. Take this with a hefty slice of Expectation Management Pie, but one simple possibility I'm thinking of is restricting the ability to cancel corp jobs to director roles only. With just the Factory-Manager role, you'd still be able to cancel your own corp jobs, but not those corp jobs belonging to your corpmates. What do you think about this idea? Be aware this is a very specific, focused fix to an problem that has come up a few times. Please don't feature-creep on me, or there's simply no scope for it happening! "This one time, on patch day..." CCP Masterplan -á| -áTeam Five-0: Rewriting the law |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5183
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:22:00 -
[22] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:As usual your feedback is welcomed. But not exceedingly simple yes or no questions, apparently.
Mainly because the answer isn't yes or no. We can't make the call on subsystem swapping in carriers and other ship bays until we are further along with the process for that story. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Masterplan
C C P C C P Alliance
1061
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:35:00 -
[23] - Quote
Marcel Devereux wrote:CCP Masterplan wrote:For all you players asking about the roles for cancelling jobs (and this applies to regular station jobs also) I'm going to have a look and see if there is something we can do about it. Take this with a hefty slice of Expectation Management Pie, but one simple possibility I'm thinking of is restricting the ability to cancel corp jobs to director roles only. With just the Factory-Manager role, you'd still be able to cancel your own corp jobs, but not those corp jobs belonging to your corpmates. What do you think about this idea? Be aware this is a very specific, focused fix to an problem that has come up a few times. Please don't feature-creep on me, or there's simply no scope for it happening! Just to clarify my understanding. Canceling other members jobs will become restricted to directors only. If you have the Factory-Manager role, you will be able to still cancel your jobs. If you do not have the Factory-Manager role and you are not a director, then you will not be able to cancel any jobs, including your own. Is this the correct interpretation? Correct "This one time, on patch day..." CCP Masterplan -á| -áTeam Five-0: Rewriting the law |
|
|
CCP Masterplan
C C P C C P Alliance
1066
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 17:20:00 -
[24] - Quote
Good question. I'd imagine that delivering a finished corp job should still work for anyone with the FM role "This one time, on patch day..." CCP Masterplan -á| -áTeam Five-0: Rewriting the law |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5502
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 16:26:00 -
[25] - Quote
Mark Blema wrote:My question revolves around extra fuel storage. Where.... Because as I see it if I want to store more than 1 month of fuel in the pos I have to use the cha, with personal space now going to be an issue where can I stuff extra fuel with out putting it in the pos or having a bijillion silos hanging about?
You can continue using a CHA. We're not removing CHAs. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5745
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 18:18:00 -
[26] - Quote
Latest Update:
Private Hangers in the 50k size are completed and will be on SISI when it comes up today available for testing. The arrows for placing structures in starbases now scale with your zoom level so that they should never be too small to use. This is also on SISI. The features I listed previously as completed (with the exception of the X-large Ship Maintinance Bay change which I missed putting in this specific build) are on SISI ready for testing. We are in the process of investigating changes to what roles are required to cancel corp jobs in a Starbase. I can't promise that it will make it into Odyssey but we'll do our best. At this point is is looking less likely that we will be able to get the T3 subsystem swapping into the first Odyssey release. Team Superfriends may or may not be able to have the feature polished in time for Odyssey 1.0, we'll keep you updated as new information becomes available. We unfortunately will not be able to get Private SMAs into the initial Odyssey release. It is still something we want to do, possibly in a point release. Let us know what you think about the implementation of the completed features on SISI and we'll be continuing to work hard to fit everything we can into the expansion. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5775
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 11:49:00 -
[27] - Quote
xttz wrote: It might be a minor point, but the arrows for huge modules like the CSAA and XLSMA are bigger than the screen now...
Yup that's a bug that should be fixed soon.
Prinzessin Leia wrote: Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.
You stated that Subsystem swapping is done by adding the Subsystems to the Allowed-to-fit list on CHA-¦s. I had to laugh so hard as I-¦ve seen this statement on Fanfest and now it-¦ll maybe not on Odyssey? Really?! Add something to a list?!
I-¦ve said to my corp that I-¦ll bring in ma Loki as soon as I can swap Subsystems. ATM I would have to bring 3 multi-billion-worth Lokis to get what I need just because I-¦ve to refit these ******* things that were realeased in the WH expansion years ago and stilll not working as intended...
Shame on you once more!
I said adding the subsystems to that list was ONE of the things that would be needed. Allowing the actual subsystems to be swapped in the hanger itself is much more complicated. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5821
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 10:33:00 -
[28] - Quote
xttz wrote:I know it's too late for this release, but I'm gonna try and sneak in some ideas for a later Odyssey patch...
Can we get a review of Starbase weapons please? Specifically:
a) Starbase Defense Management is very much a relic of 2007. The UI forces you to control/drop one module at a time (which often takes longer than the enemy needs to run away), and there's no grouping of similar modules. Plus you need at least 15 modules to be effective in a fight which means 3-4 characters with the right roles + skills in the right place at the right time. Being able to group up weapons then control 1 group per level of the skill would be a step in the right direction.
b) Starbase weapons have never been reviewed in line with ship balancing changes. Most still do levels of damage on par with ship hitpoints in 2005. Ewar mods take the best part of a minute to lock many subcaps, during which time the target has easily moved out of range or off-grid. And the less said about Hybrid or Missile weapons the better...
c) We could really use something that acts as a threat to supercaps. Starbases used to tear up unprepared dreads and carriers, now they just get swept by fighter-bombers in under a minute. Bring back scary neuts or give us a counter to supercarrier tides.
Pretty please :)
Considering the cursing I've been hearing from across the room from Veritas whenever his code somehow intersects with starbase weapons, things like grouping may be a fairly involved process. However changes to the attributes of the weapons would be a much smaller project and might be something we can get in as a change to the current system in a later patch. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5828
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 14:29:00 -
[29] - Quote
Ydnari wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Latest Update:
We are in the process of investigating changes to what roles are required to cancel corp jobs in a Starbase. I can't promise that it will make it into Odyssey but we'll do our best. To be clear does this change apply to all corp jobs as previously posted, not just those in Starbases? I'm much more concerned about the corp jobs in NPC stations - I want to be able to let junior members build their own frigates using locked-down corp BPOs without being able to cancel bigger corp jobs (and that's been a common user story in the threads about this over the years). The solution you posted earlier about only Directors being able to cancel any corp job that wasn't started by them - whether it's in a POS or NPC station or wherever - looked perfect. You've got me a bit worried now that it specifically mentions Starbases; I'm really hoping it includes Starbases but is not limited to Starbases. Also: please please please do implement it
I believe that the implementation that Masterplan is investigating would equally affect all jobs. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5828
|
Posted - 2013.05.13 14:29:00 -
[30] - Quote
Soko99 wrote:Sorry if the question is a repost.. Reading through the last 30 pages I may have missed it, and in all honesty I did skip a few..
As far as the new personal hangar arrays for the POS. How will the security officer role affect them? Ie. Will they be able to see and take from a person's hold as per normal station hangars?
Nobody will be able to take from another character's personal hanger. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5876
|
Posted - 2013.05.16 14:25:00 -
[31] - Quote
Alacrity Fitzhoughs wrote:Silvonus wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: Private Hangers in the 50k size are completed and will be on SISI when it comes up today available for testing. Current Personal Hangar storage size on Singularity is 1,400,000m3. You might need to adjust some numbers. That is what I am seeing also. Bug?
It's the correct size as of today's sisi patch. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
5919
|
Posted - 2013.05.17 18:29:00 -
[32] - Quote
Hey guys, just want to preemptively post here to make sure you all know that no matter what you hear, Personal Hangar Arrays are still in Odyssey. They're on SISI now and they will be hitting TQ on June 4th.
As for the size concerns, we intend these structures to compliment larger volume shared structures like CHAs, and be used primarily for higher value items. CHAs are not being removed or changed as part of this patch, and remember you can always anchor multiple PHAs in the same starbase and access them all from anywhere in the shield.
The Personal Ship Maintenance Array is something we still want to do, but we just didn't have time to get it into Odyssey. I said before, I'm very aware of how helpful it would be to wormholers and we want to make it an iteration on the normal PHA now that we have that structure working and shippable. I can't however promise at this time exactly when we might be able to release a PSMA, as we're still focusing on getting Odyssey as polished as possible. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
6002
|
Posted - 2013.05.20 15:36:00 -
[33] - Quote
Hey guys CCP Masterplan was able to finish the change to the permissions required to cancel corporation jobs.
After Odyssey, the only people who will be able to cancel a corporation job will be the person who installed the job, and directors of the corp. Factory managers will still be able to install and manage their own jobs, but not cancel jobs installed by others.
This applies to all varieties of corporation manufacturing and research jobs, in all locations and facilities. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
6019
|
Posted - 2013.05.21 13:52:00 -
[34] - Quote
Aluminy wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey guys CCP Masterplan was able to finish the change to the permissions required to cancel corporation jobs.
After Odyssey, the only people who will be able to cancel a corporation job will be the person who installed the job, and directors of the corp. Factory managers will still be able to install and manage their own jobs, but not cancel jobs installed by others.
This applies to all varieties of corporation manufacturing and research jobs, in all locations and facilities. so - with this said, can ANYONE deliver said job? or only the person that put in the job and/or directors? not trying to add more to your plate im just tryin to understand the full scope mate - thanks a ton! either way this is a great first step
Anyone with the roles to install a corp job can still deliver any completed corp job. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
6158
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 17:35:00 -
[35] - Quote
Alx Warlord wrote:CCP Fozzie, I know that the plan is to go slow with the POS system upgrade, but there are still plans to upgrade it until it becomes as EPIC as the modular POS? I mean, over the next 5 or 10 years? are these in the to do list? (soon tm list): - Modular POS (not floating buildings) - Removing the buble force field - Docking in POS - Market inside POS - Clone facility in POS - Jump with POS (Starbase jump drive) - mooring supercaps to POS - Battlestations- Logistic "guns" - Growing endless size POS- POS Construction UI. - POS Cloaking device - POS Jump bridge Generator. - Micro POS (personal level POS) - EPIC POS (Alliance size, Station size POS)' - Art/shape customization in POS ???? o/
We're taking this one step at a time for now. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
6167
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 21:25:00 -
[36] - Quote
We definitely want to give players an easier way to deal with offline towers, but exactly how has not been decided yet.
One option is that someday we may expand the hacking system to allow you to hack them, but I can not make any promises to that effect. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
|
|
|