Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 23 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 34 post(s) |
Hali-Marmora
2
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:04:32 -
[61] - Quote
What about worm hole space? |
Damjan Fox
Fox Industries and Exploration
116
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:09:29 -
[62] - Quote
Awesome stuff! The concept sounds really interesting and i think you are heading the right way.
The only thing i disagree with, is point 6. "Fate of stored items on structure destruction"
First of all, having the option between the "Wreck" and the "Container" method, i think the first one is far better. When destroyed, the structure breaks into several pieces, each becoming a lootable wreck. But, in my opinion, they should be lootable by everyone, not just the owners. This would be a great opportunity to provide potential for conflict and additional fighting.
Quote:Player docked inside the structure would be spread around the solar system Only players, that are currently online and docked? What about those players, who docked at that station and logged off?
Just off the top of my head, but i could imagine some kind of emergency eject from station. Before destruction the station ejects all docked active players in their currently boarded ships, to prevent them from certain death. If you are in a capsule your pod will be emergency evacuated and shot out in space to a random point in the system. Offline players logging in would also spawn in a random spot in system, but in their pods (actually not sure about this point )
Anyway, good job CCP and keep up the good work! |
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3740
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:12:10 -
[63] - Quote
Hey guys,
Just quickly coming in here to say thanks for the feedback, we're hyped for those new structures as well. We'll have a detailed pass at your comments on Monday, and we'll also start creating threads in the Features & Ideas discussion part of the forum to gather more specific comments on each type of structure, or on individual features, like mooring.
We've also received a good chunk of awesome feedback from the round table at Fanfest, let's put all of that to use and work together to get your guys proper structures. |
|
Lord Battlestar
Faulcon de Lazy
210
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:13:38 -
[64] - Quote
Looks promising but I will wait before more information is out. This could go either way really easy.
I once podded myself by blowing a huge fart.
|
luobote kong
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:13:51 -
[65] - Quote
In your slide you said one of the goals was that
"Everyone who wants to use a structure, does: ..."
Does this mean solo players will be able to do this or will the corp restriction remain? |
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
374
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:17:01 -
[66] - Quote
It seems to me that there is not enough room for asshatry. Either you are moored to the structure or docked - either way you are 100% safe unless the structure is destroyed - which for larger structures is likely to be rare and for the smaller pos like structures will still take a considerable fleet. There should be room for people to make dumb decisions and for activities such as bumping from forcefields - the game design should not promote near perfect safety.
Also the pos redesign seems lacking - Right now - there is some thought put into pos design, e.g. guns on the bottom or top or balanced all around? This leads to strategic decisions as to how to attack pos - for instance you can attck from the top and be out of range of the guns on the bottom, etc.... Now the Pos is just being turned into just another red + to shoot. So all of the strategic decisions are being removed with nothing new added - seems to be just a needless dumbing down.
Finally structure management should not be too perfect - there should be room for corp theft.
I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
|
Alain Colcer
Agiolet Security and Logistics
130
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:19:12 -
[67] - Quote
everything looks great!,
but please avoid using the word "rig" for a type of upgrade that fine tunes the behavior of the structure..
Instead try to make "crews", hired personnel that are assigned to a structure. And that way you have combat gunners, manufacturing specialists, enginner support, traders, scientists...etc....might finally give a use to all those "homeless" market items we have lying around. |
CompleteFailure
DAWGS Corp. Phoebe Freeport Republic
223
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:19:44 -
[68] - Quote
luobote kong wrote:In your slide you said one of the goals was that
"Everyone who wants to use a structure, does: ..."
Does this mean solo players will be able to do this or will the corp restriction remain?
Try actually reading the dev blog:
Quote: We donGÇÖt want to force the user to select which group they wish to use it for before deploying anymore. Instead, we want the user to make a conscious choice after it has been deployed, and decide if they want personal, corporation, alliance or public use. ThatGÇÖs right, we want those structures to be used for the wider audience, so if you wish to establish your own Market Hub somewhere, make it open to everyone and set your taxes to be shamelessly expensive go right ahead. In a similar manner, if you have permission from your corporation or alliance, nothing should prevent you to deploy a structure for your own personal use.
|
Damjan Fox
Fox Industries and Exploration
117
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:25:40 -
[69] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:Defenses. Currently there are major deathstars protecting the larger investments, how will we protect our investments now with only 8 guns? Well, at this point, you can't tell how powerfull or effective those guns will be. 8 might be plenty enough.
Drones could be an interesting approach too. A POS ejecting a swarm of drones
Alain Colcer wrote:but please avoid using the word "rig" for a type of upgrade that fine tunes the behavior of the structure..
Instead try to make "crews", hired personnel that are assigned to a structure. And that way you have combat gunners, manufacturing specialists, enginner support, traders, scientists...etc....might finally give a use to all those "homeless" market items we have lying around. That sounds like an interesting idea and i think might be worth to think about. |
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
727
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:26:27 -
[70] - Quote
Stick to your guns in terms of letting people put these things anywhere, including hisec, do not listen to people who do not want people to be able to put Administration HQ's in hisec. If I want to do that then why not... Why all this Grrr hisec?
I hope and expect that all these structures can be used in WH's, though of course wonders about NPC agents in WH stations, seems a bit odd, but no big beef on my part.
The destruction of stations is a tricky one, the realities of this along with the issues of time zone requiring TZ play cannot be ignored, we all like realism, but we have to accept that this is a game not RL. That being said there is of course risk management, you should only put into stations what you need, in reality that was always the case when you went to 0.0, though after a while bloat sets in... I like the suggestions that you have come out with here in terms of access to your stuff, but people have made a point in terms of ships that they have made but are not able to fly, but they will need to be in fleet with someone who can fly them and so easy to deal with. I think your suggestion works for me and is what I would define at just the right level of hand holding.
The changes will really open up the game, this is damn exciting and all credit to you CCP.
Ella's Snack bar
|
|
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1754
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:28:19 -
[71] - Quote
one more thing:
do you really think it's a good idea to keep manufacturing and reprocessing separate ?
countless freighter runs are not exiting for anyone involved. period.
there really should be a way to move things from the best available reprocessing thing to the best available manufacturing thing without boring someone to death.
Build your empire !
Rent Space in Feythabolis and Omist
Contact me for details :)
|
Mnemonyss
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:28:58 -
[72] - Quote
If the new structures are fittable, will they also have drone bays and allow for drones to be deployed when under attack? |
Kel'Taran
Lightfoot Pestisss and Blake Enterprises
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:30:53 -
[73] - Quote
So with the Large size structures (New POS) only being attackable via entosis (look at the pics in the blog attack method all says entosis) you have gone and taken away the primary use for dreads once new sov goes into effect and carriers have no more repping use either.
|
Mnemonyss
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:32:36 -
[74] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:one more thing:
do you really think it's a good idea to keep manufacturing and reprocessing separate ?
countless freighter runs are not exiting for anyone involved. period.
there really should be a way to move things from the best available reprocessing thing to the best available manufacturing thing without boring someone to death.
I think it would be more beneficial to be able to manufacture and reprocess within close proximity or same station. Maybe not best available in one station as that might not be balanced enough, but at least give the option. |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
239
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:38:28 -
[75] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote: Also the pos redesign seems lacking - Right now - there is some thought put into pos design, e.g. guns on the bottom or top or balanced all around? This leads to strategic decisions as to how to attack pos - for instance you can attck from the top and be out of range of the guns on the bottom, etc.... Now the Pos is just being turned into just another red + to shoot. So all of the strategic decisions are being removed with nothing new added - seems to be just a needless dumbing down.
Sadly it doesn't work like that; turret fire is calculated as though from the control tower, hence why blaster batteries are pointless.
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
Resa Moon
New Eden Miners Association
3
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:40:38 -
[76] - Quote
One of the great things about last year's changes to highsec POSes (dropping the standings requirement and the sec system restriction) was the quick and simple nomadic lifestyle made possible for otherwise cumbersome occupations like light manufacturing and mining groups.
Retain this so we continue to feel like all of Eve is at our disposal.
Otherwise, very exciting possibilities.
New Eden Mining Blog
|
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
2064
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:43:58 -
[77] - Quote
Great stuff. Will be fun to test once it hits sisi
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
CCP Goliath wrote:
Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
|
Brain Gehirn
Reikoku Pandemic Legion
69
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:46:00 -
[78] - Quote
Questions:
- How are you going to handle multiple structures affecting the same system wide effects? - How are you going to deal with the amount of structures in space that this is going to generate? (imagine systems near Jita.. the amount of structures on each) - Why the total removal of the shield forcefield? This is still better than mooring for supercaps unless you want they all to die at some point - What is the strategical benefit of this system over the old system in combat situations? - What is the limit of on grid structures? Otherwise we could just build a giant lag city of hell to protect ourselfs since there is no forcefield - How would you handle the pain that is going to be for players if we start to spam systems with little market hubs? Am I going to warp 20 times inside the same system to fit a ship? - Why a player will prefer the new system over outposts since his itens are (by far) better 'defended' inside outposts? Isnt this going to nerf nullsec A LOT instead of making people a little more happier?
What is a signature?
|
Ix Method
Guilty Pleasures
425
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:48:25 -
[79] - Quote
I love you all for this.
Just wanted to say that.
Travelling at the speed of love.
|
Zuel Aaoiric
Obsidian Oracle
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:48:34 -
[80] - Quote
This is exciting news! I beg you, CCP to hear my plea. Let the deployment of these types of structures be done by "tug boats" or special mobility modules. This may sound crazy, but the idea that we could have these new structures as a galactic command ship with an independently functional manufacturing capacity and military hub as you migrate from space to space. The one thing Wormholes had the capacity to do was to open a universe of exploration. What it has become is a new dimension of the old world, which is traversed nearly as regularly - leaving no more room from exploration. Give us the chance to drift a bit. We don't need planets and solar systems... we can use comets and spacial anomalies to subsist with. Give us something to discover. Eve needs more game play and not just reworking of the old stuff. This may not be a complete idea but it has potential. Like it and make adjustments and expansions to the idea, but don't let it die! |
|
Ren Oren
ArchTech Logistics and Trading
79
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:50:25 -
[81] - Quote
hackerus wrote:Im posting this on one of my indy toons cause they are the one affected.
I have 30 carriers on market and 10 in build. Most of them I cant fly. Ive also got 33 million m3 in my hanger
How exactly do I rescue the carriers I have built that are up for sale and 33 million m3 in cargo from a container?
Are indy toons goign to need to fly what they built to rescue it? Why would I build in zero if im going from not risking losing my minerals and stuff for sale if the station is captured to being totally screwed.
Are you trying to prevent people building in zero to encourage it?
Risk reward |
Justa Hunni
State War Academy Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:51:27 -
[82] - Quote
Nyctef wrote:
tl;dr being able to put together a small town of individual structures would make me feel more like I'm building a home rather than just renting someone else's
I really like the changes but I'm quoting above as I had a totally different understanding of what is being contemplated. Right now I can have my POS do almost anything I want it to do (within PG and CPU) but your new structures seem to be role dependent. Does this mean I'll have to have separate research, manufacturing and refining "arrays" within my WH system rather than a single or two POS with all the necessary current arrays (with all the extra fueling etc headaches that enforces)? |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1107
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:55:54 -
[83] - Quote
on the stations destruction you were talking about only the owners being able too access the ships/assets from the wreck, i would rather be able as the attacker too get some reward for my effort or whats the point?
- make them hackable like relic sites - make the difficulty very high at least on the more valuable stuff and after 2 failed tries they lock so only the owner can access them.
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists.
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic, nerf sentries.
Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
|
Kahawa Oban
New Groton Industrial Works
22
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 18:58:03 -
[84] - Quote
This looks great. I will be looking forward to the individual threads coming out next week.
And thank you for this: Adding a mini-game to deploy Starbase structures and link them together was not something with enough perceived value to pursue. |
Ren Oren
ArchTech Logistics and Trading
79
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 19:00:00 -
[85] - Quote
MuppetsSlayed wrote:I want to reiterate a point someone else mentioned.
A lot of indy characters build stuff they cant fly. In eve we have always had to run multi accounts to get anywhere.
With the new mechanics about destructable outposts, etc. How they hell do our indy toons loot what they cant fly?
Is there any thought beign put into the fact that most of us are two, three or four characters in game. And we need our "group" of characters to be able to loot our wreck cans.
Some thought needs to be put into how you allow a designated person, or your corp/alliance to help loot your stuff. Or you will be introducing a scenario where an indy toon in zero must be able to fly what they build or be at a disadvantage. This is somethign that I see favoring older toons with many years of skill points who are likely to be less specialised than younger characters.
... ask a friend who can... maybe? |
adriaans
Ankaa. Nair Al-Zaurak
20
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 19:01:48 -
[86] - Quote
Everything seems amazing with the exception of one thing, the datacore bit...
Is this all going to be fueled by fuel blocks? because surely that is going to skyrocket fuel prices?
----True oldschool solo pvp'er----
My latest vid: Insanity IV
|
Cervix Thumper
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
44
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 19:05:56 -
[87] - Quote
watching the twitch and reading this sounds kind of like a cash grab.
we have to purchase new material while the old become obsolete?
existing structures / purchases can't be upgraded or transitioned into the new system?
for those purchases that have already been made and not deployed.. players are S.O.L?
A transition period is nice but, all said and done, it seems like scrap the old and buy the new.
|
Bel Boma
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 19:09:20 -
[88] - Quote
I'm disappointed to see that these new station mechanics don't come with a little WiS. This seems like the perfect time, place, and content to slip WiS in. |
luobote kong
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 19:10:41 -
[89] - Quote
CompleteFailure wrote:luobote kong wrote:In your slide you said one of the goals was that
"Everyone who wants to use a structure, does: ..."
Does this mean solo players will be able to do this or will the corp restriction remain? Try actually reading the dev blog: Quote: We donGÇÖt want to force the user to select which group they wish to use it for before deploying anymore. Instead, we want the user to make a conscious choice after it has been deployed, and decide if they want personal, corporation, alliance or public use. ThatGÇÖs right, we want those structures to be used for the wider audience, so if you wish to establish your own Market Hub somewhere, make it open to everyone and set your taxes to be shamelessly expensive go right ahead. In a similar manner, if you have permission from your corporation or alliance, nothing should prevent you to deploy a structure for your own personal use.
Erm.. I did. But what I haven't seen explicitly said is whether the user that deploys the structure can be a solo player or indeed can't be. Just seeking a clarification. |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
1051
|
Posted - 2015.03.21 19:13:19 -
[90] - Quote
Cervix Thumper wrote:watching the twitch and reading this sounds kind of like a cash grab.
we have to purchase new material while the old become obsolete?
existing structures / purchases can't be upgraded or transitioned into the new system?
for those purchases that have already been made and not deployed.. players are S.O.L?
A transition period is nice but, all said and done, it seems like scrap the old and buy the new.
This was something missing from the blog but we discussed in our roundtable at Fanfest today. We will make sure you get some reasonable value back from your old structures and not just nerf them until they don't do anything. This includes the tower, modules and blueprints to build them.
We did a similar thing during the industry expansion.
Oh and for the wormholers, yes you will be able to anchor some (or maybe all of these structures). However there will be some activities / bonuses that remain tied to sovereignty. The exact details of this need to be discussed with the wormhole community to see what best fits their needs and play style.
CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 23 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |