Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vol Arm'OOO
Central Co-Prosperity Union
815
|
Posted - 2016.06.17 16:38:43 -
[1] - Quote
The introduction of citadels - while mostly positive - has introduced something that imo is demonstrably bad for the game; namely invulnerable nullsec logistics. Specifically, in the past null sec groups would move jump freighters back and forth mainly through lowsec into highsec for sale and/or resupply as may be required. To do this jump freighter pilot would have to light a cyno - somewhere in an appropriate system - sometimes it would be on a gate, station or pos, depending upon the system and circumstances. In each case, depending upon the skill of pilot, luck and other circumstances, the jump freighter might be vulnerable to interdiction. For instance, the cyno might be lite too close to a station causing the jf to bounce or he might appear out of jump range from the gate. If it is lite on a pos - it would be at a perch allowing the jf to be tackled if the tackle can get there before he warps into the force field of the pos.
Now citadels have changed everything making logistics essentially invulnerable. An alliance sets up a citadel in its homesystem, the jf undocks from the citadel and is instantly immune because of tethering. The Jf jumps while immune to its destination onto another citadel where it is rendered instantly immune by tethering. Bouncing is unlikely because citadels have huge docking rings. The Jf then aligns to its high sec gate while tethered and warps in total safety to highsec.
The reason why this immunity has come about is because CCP has conflated POS'es and outposts. CCP stated that because a jf could jump straight to an outpost and dock - it wanted to retain that same usability for citadels. However, outposts were hugely expensive and could not be put anywhere. POS on the otherhand while being vastly cheaper did not afford the same protection. You could not jump into a pos forcefield to be immune. In fact, you could not garage door - where you have the pos offline jump to the tower and then turn on the forcefield either. Further as POS'es developed you could not lite a cyno within 25k of a pos.
In short for the price of about 1bil isk per citadel, a null sec alliance can now render its logistic chain wholly immune. This circumstances hurts the small pirate groups that live in lowsec the most. Many of these groups are already red headed stepchilden largely ignored by ccp. And while yes citadels can be destroyed - many of the smaller lowsec grps that preyed on the null sec logistics chains lack the wherewithal to go toe to toe in fleet battles with the null sec alliances as the reinforcement timers of citadels encourages.
IMO there should be no situation of perfect safety for a player, yet that is exactly what citadels currently afford the jf pilot. With citadels it is certainly odd that the most dangerous portion of the logistics trip to high sec for a jf pilot is now in high sec.
How would I fix this circumstance? Simple - as with POS'es make it so a cyno cannot be lite within 25k of the medium and large citadels. I would leave the xl alone as it is functionally the equivalent of an outpost and its cost prevents it from being abused for logistic chain immunity.
I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
|
Rivr Luzade
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
2533
|
Posted - 2016.06.17 18:12:32 -
[2] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:How would I fix this circumstance? Simple - as with POS'es make it so a cyno cannot be lite within 25k of the medium and large citadels. I would leave the xl alone as it is functionally the equivalent of an outpost and its cost prevents it from being abused for logistic chain immunity. And render logistics entirely impossible to do? You fight one extreme with another extreme -- the perfect counter. Great work. Citadels are not POS; Citadels are POS, outpost and station replacements. Since stations and outposts (where you were already very safe before) outnumber the POS part of the replacement spectrum, I do not see any problem with cynos lit directly on these structures. What could be argued about is that a ship that just jumped in does not receive tethering for 10 minutes or so, restoring the exact same vulnerability to bumping and attacks that they have on stations and outposts.
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
440
|
Posted - 2016.06.17 19:09:31 -
[3] - Quote
Creating an unbroken Logistics Chain of Citadels from High to Null, especially deep in Null, would be incredibly hard to maintain and fairly expensive. Eve is about risk vs Reward, and that sounds like a fairly acceptable risk for the reward, especially when all of those Citadels are vulnerable to anyone looking for a fight or just something to shoot at. |
Vol Arm'OOO
Central Co-Prosperity Union
815
|
Posted - 2016.06.17 19:32:33 -
[4] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Vol Arm'OOO wrote:How would I fix this circumstance? Simple - as with POS'es make it so a cyno cannot be lite within 25k of the medium and large citadels. I would leave the xl alone as it is functionally the equivalent of an outpost and its cost prevents it from being abused for logistic chain immunity. And render logistics entirely impossible to do? You fight one extreme with another extreme -- the perfect counter. Great work. Citadels are not POS; Citadels are POS, outpost and station replacements. Since stations and outposts (where you were already very safe before) outnumber the POS part of the replacement spectrum, I do not see any problem with cynos lit directly on these structures. What could be argued about is that a ship that just jumped in does not receive tethering for 10 minutes or so, restoring the exact same vulnerability to bumping and attacks that they have on stations and outposts.
Well no I do not suggest going from one extreme to another - rather I suggest going back to what things were prior to the citadel expansion - for purposes of cyno's treat medium and large citadels as poses and xl as outposts. Before citadels existed logistic trains worked just fine - most of the time they got away - but the careless and unskilled would on occasion be killed. Now there is perfect immunity for logistic trains. The changes I propose would return the same risk that existed prior to the update.
As for a tethering cool down - I would be ok with that except that the docking rings on the citadels are huge. There is little chance of someone cynoing in and being bumped off. In short, for there to be balance, there must an element of risk. Riskless game play is the opposite of what eve is supposed to be about.
I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
|
Vol Arm'OOO
Central Co-Prosperity Union
815
|
Posted - 2016.06.17 19:51:23 -
[5] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Creating an unbroken Logistics Chain of Citadels from High to Null, especially deep in Null, would be incredibly hard to maintain and fairly expensive. Eve is about risk vs Reward, and that sounds like a fairly acceptable risk for the reward, especially when all of those Citadels are vulnerable to anyone looking for a fight or just something to shoot at.
Actually its not as hard as you think. It costs about 1.5 bil to drop a small citadel and nothing to maintain it. You get to pick your window of vulnerability (presumably for when you are strongest) when you set a citadel down and it takes at least a week to kill one. So all in all, it costs a little more then a large faction pos did but you get way better protection.
I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
440
|
Posted - 2016.06.17 20:02:50 -
[6] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Actually its not as hard as you think. It costs about 1.5 bil to drop a small citadel and nothing to maintain it. You get to pick your window of vulnerability (presumably for when you are strongest) when you set a citadel down and it takes at least a week to kill one. So all in all, it costs a little more then a large faction pos did but you get way better protection.
So? You're talking about deploying probably dozens of these things across Low and Null just to setup a Logistics chain. You, personally, may not be able to threaten those Citadels, but others can and they're certainly not above blowing something up just because they can, or just to mess with the org that put it up.
Plus I kind of have a hard time getting behind anything that's going to give Logistics Chiefs more grey hairs.
As we can all already agree the POS system was quite safe, and a correctly equipped POS could provide far more protection of the space around it than a Citadel currently can. (you could basically SEBO them up to lock frigates fairly quickly, and throw enough EWAR on them to cook an egg at 200km)
I'm not sure the lack of Cyno restrictions is a fair trade for that lack of space protection, but I'm inclined to default in favor of the option that doesn't potentially cripple game-wide logistics. |
Jones Beach
Central Co-Prosperity Union
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.17 20:09:04 -
[7] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Actually its not as hard as you think. It costs about 1.5 bil to drop a small citadel and nothing to maintain it. You get to pick your window of vulnerability (presumably for when you are strongest) when you set a citadel down and it takes at least a week to kill one. So all in all, it costs a little more then a large faction pos did but you get way better protection. So? You're talking about deploying probably dozens of these things across Low and Null just to setup a Logistics chain. You, personally, may not be able to threaten those Citadels, but others can and they're certainly not above blowing something up just because they can, or just to mess with the org that put it up. Plus I kind of have a hard time getting behind anything that's going to give Logistics Chiefs more grey hairs. As we can all already agree the POS system was quite safe, and a correctly equipped POS could provide far more protection of the space around it than a Citadel currently can. (you could basically SEBO them up to lock frigates fairly quickly, and throw enough EWAR on them to cook an egg at 200km) I'm not sure the lack of Cyno restrictions is a fair trade for that lack of space protection, but I'm inclined to default in favor of the option that doesn't potentially cripple game-wide logistics.
The old system allowed people to place dozens of poses everywhere just like you can do with citadels today (provided ofc that moons were available). As for for poses being quite safe - you are completely wrong. To cyno onto a pos you had to do it at 150k away - which means it was perfectly safe to tackle someone at their perch. You could also just suicide tackle and use dreads to kill the jf.
I believe that the op's point is valid - logistics should be possible but not risk free. The prior system had a semblance of balance. This system with citadels has none. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
441
|
Posted - 2016.06.17 20:19:52 -
[8] - Quote
Jones Beach wrote:The old system allowed people to place dozens of poses everywhere just like you can do with citadels today (provided ofc that moons were available). As for for poses being quite safe - you are completely wrong. To cyno onto a pos you had to do it at 150k away - which means it was perfectly safe to tackle someone at their perch. You could also just suicide tackle and use dreads to kill the jf.
I believe that the op's point is valid - logistics should be possible but not risk free. The prior system had a semblance of balance. This system with citadels has none.
No.... the POS system allows Cynos no closer than 25km of a POS Forcefield, not 150km, and it's absolutely possible to Cyno something in well under the guns (or other defensive modules) of a well kitted out POS. Yes you *can* kill JFs and other Logistics Ops ships under this system that you probably can't with Citadels, but if you reverse things and force people 25km outside a Citadel's docking ring then the risk spikes back up in the other direction.
EDIT: It occurs to me that you may be thinking of Cyno-ing in at 150km and then warping into the POS. Yes, that's a thing you can do but A: it's still well under the range of the guns or other offensive modules of the POS, and B, you can get around this by simply setting up *two* POSes and warping from one to the other. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
4894
|
Posted - 2016.06.17 20:50:25 -
[9] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Jones Beach wrote:The old system allowed people to place dozens of poses everywhere just like you can do with citadels today (provided ofc that moons were available). As for for poses being quite safe - you are completely wrong. To cyno onto a pos you had to do it at 150k away - which means it was perfectly safe to tackle someone at their perch. You could also just suicide tackle and use dreads to kill the jf.
I believe that the op's point is valid - logistics should be possible but not risk free. The prior system had a semblance of balance. This system with citadels has none. No.... the POS system allows Cynos no closer than 25km of a POS Forcefield, not 150km, and it's absolutely possible to Cyno something in well under the guns (or other defensive modules) of a well kitted out POS. Yes you *can* kill JFs and other Logistics Ops ships under this system that you probably can't with Citadels, but if you reverse things and force people 25km outside a Citadel's docking ring then the risk spikes back up in the other direction. EDIT: It occurs to me that you may be thinking of Cyno-ing in at 150km and then warping into the POS. Yes, that's a thing you can do but A: it's still well under the range of the guns or other offensive modules of the POS, and B, you can get around this by simply setting up *two* POSes and warping from one to the other.
You just need a bookmark 151 km from where you cyno in at then warping to the book mark at the appropriate range (e.g. warp to 100 and land in the POS shields).
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
|
Rivr Luzade
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
2533
|
Posted - 2016.06.17 20:52:34 -
[10] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Well no I do not suggest going from one extreme to another - rather I suggest going back to what things were prior to the citadel expansion - for purposes of cyno's treat medium and large citadels as poses and xl as outposts. Before citadels existed logistic trains worked just fine - most of the time they got away - but the careless and unskilled would on occasion be killed. Now there is perfect immunity for logistic trains. The changes I propose would return the same risk that existed prior to the update.
As for a tethering cool down - I would be ok with that except that the docking rings on the citadels are huge. There is little chance of someone cynoing in and being bumped off. In short, for there to be balance, there must an element of risk. Riskless game play is the opposite of what eve is supposed to be about. Yes, you suggest an extreme. You suggest that the station/outpost cyno mechanics should be completely binned and replaced with the POS system, which does not allow for any logistics of solo, small or medium groups without constant and massive protection fleets on every single cyno point every single time you need to do logistics. This is very much an extreme. Your suggestion imposes risk without any countermeasure to it, except for boring, uneventful or outright futile fleets traveling hundreds of jumps every time logistics need to be done. That sounds like a great concept. Your suggestion does not restore the same risk as before as we can cyno inside 0km of a station/outpost docking sphere, your suggestion instead would completely remove that possibility and it is absolutely an opposite extreme counter-mechanic to the current near full-safety citadel cynoing.
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|
|
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
1016
|
Posted - 2016.06.17 21:38:38 -
[11] - Quote
OP raises a perfectly sensible issue with the way citadels work and fails miserably because eve forums are filled with carebears that want more safety in this carebear pandering game.
This game is turning into such a shitshow...
It's not even just the logistics that are invulnerable, supercaps and titans can also be moved in the same fashion if I'm not wrong. Citadels are disgustingly broken non-consensual pvp exclusion zones.
EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
|
Jones Beach
Central Co-Prosperity Union
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.18 00:10:28 -
[12] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Well no I do not suggest going from one extreme to another - rather I suggest going back to what things were prior to the citadel expansion - for purposes of cyno's treat medium and large citadels as poses and xl as outposts. Before citadels existed logistic trains worked just fine - most of the time they got away - but the careless and unskilled would on occasion be killed. Now there is perfect immunity for logistic trains. The changes I propose would return the same risk that existed prior to the update.
As for a tethering cool down - I would be ok with that except that the docking rings on the citadels are huge. There is little chance of someone cynoing in and being bumped off. In short, for there to be balance, there must an element of risk. Riskless game play is the opposite of what eve is supposed to be about. Yes, you suggest an extreme. You suggest that the station/outpost cyno mechanics should be completely binned and replaced with the POS system, which does not allow for any logistics of solo, small or medium groups without constant and massive protection fleets on every single cyno point every single time you need to do logistics. This is very much an extreme. Your suggestion imposes risk without any countermeasure to it, except for boring, uneventful or outright futile fleets traveling hundreds of jumps every time logistics need to be done. That sounds like a great concept. Your suggestion does not restore the same risk as before as we can cyno inside 0km of a station/outpost docking sphere, your suggestion instead would completely remove that possibility and it is absolutely an opposite extreme counter-mechanic to the current near full-safety citadel cynoing. I suggest you do not take your forum signature too literally and instead play the game before you suggest something.
night is day, black is white, up is down. I get it. You live in bizzaro land where everything is backwards. The position i am advocating is a return to what we had pre-citadel. Pre-citadel you did not need constant fleets protecting every jf there was in lowsec - rather you just needed a smart and skilled jf pilot. The current system which you seem to favor is the extreme position as it takes all of the risk out of jf logistics. its ok - you are a null bear and like your logistics - but eve is all about risk - even null bears should have some for the good of the game. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2816
|
Posted - 2016.06.18 01:07:51 -
[13] - Quote
considering we always did it to NPC stations and outposts well within docking range nothing has changed
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Rivr Luzade
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
2533
|
Posted - 2016.06.18 05:40:25 -
[14] - Quote
Jones Beach wrote:rather you just needed a smart and skilled jf pilot. The current system which you seem to favor is the extreme position as it takes all of the risk out of jf logistics. its ok - you are a null bear and like your logistics - but eve is all about risk - even null bears should have some for the good of the game. There is no "smart and skilled" involved if you must rely on luck when you cyno into a system 25 km off the docking sphere. Right now, you can do that occasionally on POS and hope for the best (and that hope is frequently shattered as JF kills in systems without stations show) because not many people do it or need to do it. We also do not need fleets to protect JF trips exactly because we can cyno in inside the 0 sphere of a station/outpost. With a forced 25 km distance to the docking sphere on every single structure that you can build in the future and every other structure removed, that would be gone and mandate protection fleets ... or relying on luck and hoping for the best, which (the best) is a lot more unlikely to happen because people will prey for these cynos on a ridiculous level. And no, webs on the cyno can only do so much and even less in Null sec. As if it was not irritating enough already having to check tons of different citadels to get the cheap and affordable goods to supply the markets, now you would also need to hope that you have a good hand with the dice roll on the cyno. It is your choice whether your forum troll alt wants to ignore a counter suggestion I gave and which restores the same functionality to cynoing as before on outposts/stations, but accusing me of being a null bear is kind of funny coming from a forum troll alt that shows no sign of competence on the subject matter.
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2819
|
Posted - 2016.06.18 11:33:46 -
[15] - Quote
Right because it would take so much skill to kill a JF
With just over 5b of dread you can kill an ark in under 18s
No def fleet can save a JF in this situation
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Ben Ishikela
77
|
Posted - 2016.06.18 12:51:03 -
[16] - Quote
Just remove the jumping capability from freighters. (give the T2 freighters resists and MJD and ..... something creative instead) For obvious reasons! if not, ask.
Spike local economies out there for more industry-guys to shoot at!!! (yes i can find them, but i want more!)
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop fullgrown trees to start a fire.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2819
|
Posted - 2016.06.18 13:35:28 -
[17] - Quote
Make null sec non dependant on hs and I'll support that
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Jones Beach
Central Co-Prosperity Union
1
|
Posted - 2016.06.18 14:04:55 -
[18] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Jones Beach wrote:rather you just needed a smart and skilled jf pilot. The current system which you seem to favor is the extreme position as it takes all of the risk out of jf logistics. its ok - you are a null bear and like your logistics - but eve is all about risk - even null bears should have some for the good of the game. There is no "smart and skilled" involved if you must rely on luck when you cyno into a system 25 km off the docking sphere. Right now, you can do that occasionally on POS and hope for the best (and that hope is frequently shattered as JF kills in systems without stations show) because not many people do it or need to do it. We also do not need fleets to protect JF trips exactly because we can cyno in inside the 0 sphere of a station/outpost. With a forced 25 km distance to the docking sphere on every single structure that you can build in the future and every other structure removed, that would be gone and mandate protection fleets ... or relying on luck and hoping for the best, which (the best) is a lot more unlikely to happen because people will prey for these cynos on a ridiculous level. And no, webs on the cyno can only do so much and even less in Null sec. As if it was not irritating enough already having to check tons of different citadels to get the cheap and affordable goods to supply the markets, now you would also need to hope that you have a good hand with the dice roll on the cyno. It is your choice whether your forum troll alt wants to ignore a counter suggestion I gave and which restores the same functionality to cynoing as before on outposts/stations, but accusing me of being a null bear is kind of funny coming from a forum troll alt that shows no sign of competence on the subject matter.
You cant cyno onto a pos - you have to be 25k away which means you have to slow boat. Which means you can be bumpped. As for docking at 0 on station/outpost - that only works where there are stations and outposts - there never were the equivalent of stations and outposts everywhere - moreover every station/outpost had a different docking ring and configuration meaning that cynoing on some stations is very dangerous. With a 25k cyno ring on small and large citadels - you return the balance - small pos like structures will be treated just like poses have always been treated while xl will be treated like stations/outposts have always been treated. Your comments simply continue demonstrating a lack of knowledge of the way cynoing works and so yea your comments should be ignored. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
441
|
Posted - 2016.06.18 15:31:03 -
[19] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:You just need a bookmark 151 km from where you cyno in at then warping to the book mark at the appropriate range (e.g. warp to 100 and land in the POS shields).
Also works, either way cynoing in under a POS is quite a bit safer than cynoing in 25km from a Citadel's docking ring at present. IMO just throwing the exclusion zone on Citadels would be too much of a swing back the other way, but I'm all for some kind of middle-ground here.
Maybe a 30-second timer that prevents docking after jumping?
This would actually incentivize the creation of Logistics Chain Citadels since NPC Stations and Outposts don't shoot back at enemy Capsuleers, and 30 seconds as opposed to 1 minute because we're removing safety from things that don't involve citadels. |
Ben Ishikela
77
|
Posted - 2016.06.18 16:03:07 -
[20] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Make null sec non dependant on hs and I'll support that On the Contrary. Dependency would just be more costly. when no jumping is available or logistics are more expensive. However, nullsec IS independent. Its just not so good to fly T1 all the time.
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop fullgrown trees to start a fire.
|
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
2593
|
Posted - 2016.06.18 19:13:31 -
[21] - Quote
I think you are confusing "mistake" with "intentional design decision."
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2819
|
Posted - 2016.06.19 01:42:21 -
[22] - Quote
Ben Ishikela wrote:Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Make null sec non dependant on hs and I'll support that On the Contrary. Dependency would just be more costly. when no jumping is available or logistics are more expensive. However, nullsec IS independent. Its just not so good to fly T1 all the time.
Null is far from independent it's why jfs have such a long jump range and industrials have a fatigue reduction. Lucky ccp has stated they want to get null to be independent and once they do jfs will get their 5 ly and industrials will lose their fatigue reduction
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3307
|
Posted - 2016.06.19 09:22:27 -
[23] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote: Null is far from independent it's why jfs have such a long jump range and industrials have a fatigue reduction. Lucky ccp has stated they want to get null to be independent and once they do jfs will get their 5 ly and industrials will lose their fatigue reduction
That's not what CCP said. CCP said they needed to allow time for the systems players have built in null to adapt, because quite frankly null is capable of being independent. The only remote issue is moon goo being region limited in some cases, everything else has been pushing more and more towards null being the best place for everything. Which is ultimately destroying the sand box, and CCP's initial and very important principle of different security levels of space being inter-dependent.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
2821
|
Posted - 2016.06.19 11:52:59 -
[24] - Quote
O.o that's not what they said at all unless they have changed since the original jump fatigue thread? link?
and the only way for them to be interdependent is with long range JFs.
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
1178
|
Posted - 2016.06.20 10:33:07 -
[25] - Quote
citadels are OP in many contextes atm |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |