Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME VYDRA RELOLDED
280
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:39:08 -
[61] - Quote
#NOPOORS
Basically if you don't have a gold stash and a share in a blue donut you may as well not bother with manufacturing. Or pretty much using any new structures.
The good thing about poses is they can be made expendable and easy to move.
The new structures are pretty much one-time use (the unanchoring timers) and cost like they're made of gold. |
Anthar Thebess
1651
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:40:22 -
[62] - Quote
Will jobs pause during the reinforce timers? I can reinforce someone citadel just to make him unable to produce for a week?
Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists
Show your support to The Cause!
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
2409
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:43:53 -
[63] - Quote
Agfro Er wrote:Not excited to see the longer timer paired with less HP, no fighter bay, and unable to anchor in range of citadel defenses. I'm worried my future weekends will be entirely consumed warping from structure to structure to keep an eye on them instead of enjoying the game.
It makes sense to have these structures more vulnerable than the citadel, but redistributing asset/defense locations across system, when small corps are built around managing a single central defensive point, will break the parity for small corps and severely limit access to areas of the game that are currently available to them.
Any chance to allow indy structures on same grid as citadel? Maybe extend some penalties to the citadel. Such as extended vulnerability window for the citadel, or increased damage applied.
This definitely presents some new challenges for the common small/single player industrial corporations (and I'm a member of that latter group). I'm not sure that's necessarily a bad thing, though I'm sure there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Single-player industry corps makes a lot of sense under the POS model because I really don't want anyone else, even people I vaguely trust, having access to my arrays, their contents, or my jobs.
The new structure model alleviates most/all of the core problems with larger industrial organizations, and even allows for the practical use of public structures. So, while it is definitely harder for one player to effectively maintain their own infrastructure, they don't necessarily have to do that anymore.
System cost indices are still somewhat discouraging, but I'm not ready to get too worked up over that just yet.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Anna Lightyear
Red Storm Rising
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:44:14 -
[64] - Quote
Overall I like the look of them (citadel skins, so we can get rid of the yellowness? )
While I hate to bust out a bit of common sense/lore here, why on earth do we have an advanced civilisation that applies defensive systems to structures with no real purpose but to be shot at, and the structure that are critical to life, economics and the welfare of all have bugger all?
I'll be happy to see more big things go boom with a chance for some nice bpc's and materials to drop (bringing freighters to pvp ops ftw!), but key assets for industry need some sort of defensive capability, especially one that an be killed by 5 T1 ships in 20 minutes, this seems unwise.
The new rorqual is probably easier to defend than these citadels.
Can we also get an idea on the costs of the BPO's please?
|
RainReaper
RRN Assembly INC
49
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:44:15 -
[65] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Will jobs pause during the reinforce timers? I can reinforce someone citadel just to make him unable to produce for a week?
Well, if you take them down into structure then all services automaticaly go offline. So I would say that yes. But you have to first go through shields and then armor for this. |
Guybrush Threepwoot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:44:15 -
[66] - Quote
1) One XL Structur per Ally or is it possible to build more than one? One per Corp? One per player? 2) How many Indu Slots for SuperCapitals are aviable in a XL Structur? 3) if more than one... possible to use these slots from all ppl from an ally?
|
Ms Michigan
Aviation Professionals for EVE The Ditanian Alliance
94
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:46:14 -
[67] - Quote
It seems elegant; i.e. Risk vs Reward seems balanced..... but still I am struck by the cost overall compared to POS. Maybe this is needed/planned. I would like to see CCP's thoughts on this. Last I checked though, when Citadels were first announced, the granularity of structures and the idea of thus squatting in someone's backyard, was a REAL, planned, thing. Apparently not? I don't know...not sold.
Also, the complexity of it all. So many citadel structures, rigs...I guess you guys are banking on salvage being abundant and fixing drops for that. Also...you are just replacing the same thing we had before. I get it is a "ground up" redesign and reprogram which has been needed for YEARS...but besides tethering and a few other advantages to citadels...I still don't like them compared to POS and Outposts. Bang for the buck....again...stepping backward and not without huge liability.
Structures being able to be destroyed more granularly I guess is the theme of the day.
Jury still out. |
RainReaper
RRN Assembly INC
49
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:46:45 -
[68] - Quote
Anna Lightyear wrote:Overall I like the look of them (citadel skins, so we can get rid of the yellowness? ) While I hate to bust out a bit of common sense/lore here, why on earth do we have an advanced civilisation that applies defensive systems to structures with no real purpose but to be shot at, and the structure that are critical to life, economics and the welfare of all have bugger all? I'll be happy to see more big things go boom with a chance for some nice bpc's and materials to drop (bringing freighters to pvp ops ftw!), but key assets for industry need some sort of defensive capability, especially one that an be killed by 5 T1 ships in 20 minutes, this seems unwise. The new rorqual is probably easier to defend than these citadels. Can we also get an idea on the costs of the BPO's please? I think you forgot the fact that you have to go trought shields,
then wait a day while its reinforced, then armor, then wait a week before you can finaly go trough its structure, and it will have asset safety like citadels. |
Anthar Thebess
1653
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:48:44 -
[69] - Quote
CCP Lebowski wrote:Kronossan wrote:I was hoping to find out more about faction tower reimbursement/replacement. Towers aren't going anywhere for now, as they still have functionality that new structures don't yet offer. Rest assured that you'll be informed when we're closer to reaching feature parity!
Can we simply get reprocessing of all pos related stuff buffed now to 100% ? We can transform materials we invested in post stuff into new structures.
Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists
Show your support to The Cause!
|
Aristide BriandIII
Miners League of Exploration Coalition Requiem Eternal
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:54:37 -
[70] - Quote
I just noticed something. New POSes won't be anchorable after December. Yet, the Mining Arrays do not yet have a scheduled release. This strikes me as a problem for moon miners. If your mining POS is destroyed post December and Mining Arrays are not yet released, we could see wars targeting any moon mining operation because you won't be able to replace it.
This poses a significant risk to Coalition/Alliance level economies. I have looked for some sort of post to reconcile this but haven't seen it yet. |
|
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
457
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:55:08 -
[71] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:CCP Lebowski wrote:Kronossan wrote:I was hoping to find out more about faction tower reimbursement/replacement. Towers aren't going anywhere for now, as they still have functionality that new structures don't yet offer. Rest assured that you'll be informed when we're closer to reaching feature parity! Can we simply get reprocessing of all pos related stuff buffed now to 100% ? We can transform materials we invested in post stuff into new structures.
no cant do that because they forgot to add scrapmetal processing to rigs in the current citadels.. great thinking ccp. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
2720
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:55:10 -
[72] - Quote
Agfro Er wrote:Not excited to see the longer timer paired with less HP, no fighter bay, and unable to anchor in range of citadel defenses. I'm worried my future weekends will be entirely consumed warping from structure to structure to keep an eye on them instead of enjoying the game.
It makes sense to have these structures more vulnerable than the citadel, but redistributing asset/defense locations across system, when small corps are built around managing a single central defensive point, will break the parity for small corps and severely limit access to areas of the game that are currently available to them.
Any chance to allow indy structures on same grid as citadel? Maybe extend some penalties to the citadel. Such as extended vulnerability window for the citadel, or increased damage applied.
I really don't understand why we are not encouraged to put an Engineering Complex a couple of hundred kilometers from a Citadel and make little space cities.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Do Little
Virgin Plc Evictus.
424
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:55:29 -
[73] - Quote
4-5 time the price of a small POS for similar functionality and 4-5 time the fuel cost. These don't seem th have much relevance for smaller industrial operations. Pity. |
JTK Fotheringham
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
120
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:56:43 -
[74] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:e penalties to the citadel. Such as extended vulnerability window for the citadel, or increased damage applied.
I really don't understand why we are not encouraged to put an Engineering Complex a couple of hundred kilometers from a Citadel and make little space cities.[/quote]
Because the Missile / Bomb mechanics work on there only being one of them able to hit a target. |
Scath Bererund
SergalJerk Test Alliance Please Ignore
23
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:56:56 -
[75] - Quote
so will this structure handle the booster and T3 reactions? |
Tash'k Omar
Out of Focus Odin's Call
42
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:57:05 -
[76] - Quote
Does the invention service module also add the ability to run T3 invention jobs (formerly reverse engineering) that are currently limited to research outposts and experimental labs? |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
2409
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:57:22 -
[77] - Quote
Aristide BriandIII wrote:I just noticed something. New POSes won't be anchorable after December. Yet, the Mining Arrays do not yet have a scheduled release. This strikes me as a problem for moon miners. If your mining POS is destroyed post December and Mining Arrays are not yet released, we could see wars targeting any moon mining operation because you won't be able to replace it.
This poses a significant risk to Coalition/Alliance level economies. I have looked for some sort of post to reconcile this but haven't seen it yet.
New OUTPOSTS - not new POS.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Jawen Serce
L I O N
2
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:57:59 -
[78] - Quote
Still nothing about SMALL sizes of those strctures ?
What will become the whole sandbox part of being able to throw our own little tent (POSs) ? What will become the will of players, not very wealthy, to still be able to have his own little house made of wood in the wild ?
This is beautifull and shiny and all, but you are cutting a whole part of what some of those "little ones" loved in this game about structures.
I'm still waiting for some clarifications about what will become POSs, and/or what you are planning to do about this.
These new structures are really well thought and all, but they demande WAY MORE ISK and organisation to be thrown out in space. I know this is an MMO, and social is important, but even for super little corps, or little friends circle, it is a huge amount of ISK to put on the table to be able to have a owned structure. |
RainReaper
RRN Assembly INC
49
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 18:04:33 -
[79] - Quote
With the current amount of ice we get in the highsec anomalies we will go from having around 4/5 to not even close... and us small guys wont be able to sustain even a medium one of these thigns att all. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
2409
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 18:06:30 -
[80] - Quote
Jawen Serce wrote:Still nothing about SMALL sizes of those strctures ?
Why would there be anything about SMALL sizes of those structures? They're not happening.
It's not like they just haven't gotten around to making a dev blog about it just yet - they're not a thing. They're not a planned thing. They've never been a planned thing. They've never said anything to suggest that will ever be a planned thing.
Small structures are mobile depots and MTUs and the like.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
|
Jew Jew Binks
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 18:11:23 -
[81] - Quote
thukker component array will not have a replacement in these structures ?
i also think is a bad idea to make 2 separate rigs for large structures for normal capital components and advanced capital components. large and extra large rigs are too damn expensive |
Echo Mande
83
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 18:13:11 -
[82] - Quote
Can some other type of rigs also get bonused for building fuel blocks? Having only structure rigs get a bonus for fuel blocks seems unbalanced in that they will be more or less 'required', especially if the structure owner doesn't have a POS to build them elsewhere. Currently you can build fuel blocks in component arrays.
Wallet remarks everywhere
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
3956
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 18:13:16 -
[83] - Quote
CCP: The anchoring time is the same as Citadels. Is the decommissioning time the same? (One week?)
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
1114
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 18:15:13 -
[84] - Quote
I'm sure what I'm about to type has been stated multiple times through out the process of this structure rework in EVE.
[quote: Devblog]The Medium Engineering Complex will require 9 hours of vulnerability weekly, with 18 hours and 36 hours for the Large and XL Engineering Complexes respectively[/quote]
Is a stupid mechanic. Give them an extra timer for reinforce or destruction but making something in space invulnerable for all but 9/18/36 hours a week is lame. The most common argument is 'this is the way it worked before technically' and while I agree to some extent with POS's and outposts being easy to change when the timers came out, think of it from a hostile FC standpoint... I want to make a name for myself in my new alliance by going out and reinforcing stuff, picking fights, poking beehives, flying spaceships. With a POS or outpost I can go do that, it's floating in space and I can shoot it to provoke a response. You've made all these structures literally invulnerable for all but a tiny window. It's a giant **** mechanic in a game that used be HTFU or GTFO.
Not today spaghetti.
|
Kynric
Sky Fighters
386
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 18:15:20 -
[85] - Quote
Will it be possible to process gas for boosters, t2 or t3 production within the upwell structure? Will the assembly lines be capeable of supporting pharmacudical manufacture? |
Babbet Bunny
35
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 18:16:20 -
[86] - Quote
Too expensive and too many rigs.
Not worth switching and will make you non competitive to buy in.
Will stick with POS's till they remove them.
Will elaborate more later. |
Ydnari
Estrale Frontiers
429
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 18:17:21 -
[87] - Quote
Will the APIs (XML API and CREST) be updated to be fit for purpose with the new complexes?
--
|
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1163
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 18:17:46 -
[88] - Quote
No new POS from December.
What's happening to moon mining?
Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
|
Ms Michigan
Aviation Professionals for EVE The Ditanian Alliance
94
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 18:19:05 -
[89] - Quote
Anna Lightyear wrote:Overall I like the look of them (citadel skins, so we can get rid of the yellowness? ) While I hate to bust out a bit of common sense/lore here, why on earth do we have an advanced civilisation that applies defensive systems to structures with no real purpose but to be shot at, and the structure that are critical to life, economics and the welfare of all have bugger all? I'll be happy to see more big things go boom with a chance for some nice bpc's and materials to drop (bringing freighters to pvp ops ftw!), but key assets for industry need some sort of defensive capability, especially one that an be killed by 5 T1 ships in 20 minutes, this seems unwise. The new rorqual is probably easier to defend than these citadels. Can we also get an idea on the costs of the BPO's please?
Exactly. Why would the citadel citadel have the most defenses...yet the one that makes the economy go round, less. Makes no sense. |
Winter Archipelago
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
704
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 18:20:12 -
[90] - Quote
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:No new POS from December.
What's happening to moon mining? POS are still available. Outposts are what will be blocked after December (aka, Sov Null stations).
For the Newbies: The 8 Golden Rules - The Magic 14 Skills - Finding the Right Corp - EVE University Wiki
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |