Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1805
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 14:07:00 -
[151] - Quote
Vyktor Abyss wrote:So having more people living and operating in null sec is a bad thing?
I don't disagree with you though that in some respects these structures devalue aspects of Outposts. My knowledge may be a bit out of date but why would anyone now target an Outposts fitting service for example?
Very much like these structures for the most part, except that they all should require anchoring I, and depots perhaps are a bit too cheap considering their near invulnerability - now make them hackable and we're talking interesting stuff.
I'm fine with more people being in null - but the depot offers an advantage normally available only with significant investment. This'd be OK but it's also almost impossible to kill, tedious to kill when you get your chance, and is not really at risk. The locals deserve a proper chance to fight off the guy using the depot. Including the yurt and whatever was left inside. |
Mike Metcalf
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S Northern Associates.
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 14:08:00 -
[152] - Quote
Jeez Guys, even a GSC requires Anchoring 1, and these things provide MORE utility than that does. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1805
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 14:10:00 -
[153] - Quote
CCP Lebowski wrote:The fitting service does NOT work during the Depots activation or during reinforcement, meaning the best way to stop it being effective is shooting it before it comes online or shooting it into reinforcement once it is. In addition to this, depots cannot be rescooped while they are activating, giving aggressors a chance to kill them before the owner can do anything to save them. If I'm a depot owner and it goes into reinforce, I have an entire two days to scoop and anchor. I spend an entire one minute in space in two days to undo what was done, and the aggressor has no idea when I'm going to do it. This is not a drawback for the owner of the depot. In fact, making them this tedious and difficult to kill means it's not worth trying. This is not a good thing. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1805
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 14:18:00 -
[154] - Quote
Milton Middleson wrote:That's literally the opposite of what he said. It's not supposed to be something people fight over. It's supposed to augment a gang's ability operate for an extended period of time in hostile space. At the expense of the people who fought, worked and paid for that space. Those people who can't kick you out! I'm fine with a yurt. But not one that's horrible to destroy even when the guy who owns it doesn't even log on, and if he does it's basically invulnerable. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
4844
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 14:39:00 -
[155] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Milton Middleson wrote:That's literally the opposite of what he said. It's not supposed to be something people fight over. It's supposed to augment a gang's ability operate for an extended period of time in hostile space. At the expense of the people who fought, worked and paid for that space. Those people who can't kick you out! I'm fine with a yurt. But not one that's horrible to destroy even when the guy who owns it doesn't even log on, and if he does it's basically invulnerable. No, but you can render it largely useless to him quite quickly... and then focus on killing the person who deployed it.
If he's not around to scoop or redeploy it, it is a trivial matter to kill it... you just have to remember (and consider it important enough) to show up at the right time to pop it. And they are very easy to kill. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
1805
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 14:56:00 -
[156] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:If he's not around to scoop or redeploy it, it is a trivial matter to kill it... you just have to remember (and consider it important enough) to show up at the right time to pop it. And they are very easy to kill. If he's not around to scoop or redeploy his mobile base. You just have to remember to wait around two days. For a ten-minute window. Hope the guy completely forgot about his yurt and didn't bother logging on. Then shoot it. If the guy did remember to log on, if you looked away from the yurt for one minute during your two-day guarding of the reinforce timer, the yurt is back without a reinforce timer.
What a great mechanic it is, to rely on someone forgetting to log on for two days so you can shoot their yurt. |
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
392
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 15:52:00 -
[157] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote: At the expense of the people who fought, worked and paid for that space. Those people who can't kick you out! I'm fine with a yurt. But not one that's horrible to destroy even when the guy who owns it doesn't even log on, and if he does it's basically invulnerable.
Mobile Depots do not, by any reasonable criteria, allow you to live in hostile space. You have very limited storage. You have no medical facilities. You have no reshipping capability. The only way to safely store the ship you are in is cloaking or logging off. The locals can trivially kick you out by blowing up your ship. If they can't manage that after Rubicon, they probably couldn't manage it before.
Quote:What a great mechanic it is, to rely on someone forgetting to log on for two days so you can shoot their yurt.
Or you could, you know, not shoot their depot, since you seem to think it's a waste of time. I don't know why the premise is giving you so much trouble: the depots are meant to facilitate conflict, not drive it. Shooting someone's depot isn't meant to generate a fight, not the least because they are hardly worth defending unless you stuffed them full of deadspace and faction mods (in which case: stop being an idiot and use a secure container). |
Mara Tessidar
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
988
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 15:59:00 -
[158] - Quote
I can't deny someone fitting services in my space that I own despite an active presence by me and a minimal presence by them. The cost to them is effectively nothing. The cost to me is days of effort to remove a nearly-free fitting services and storage object. And there's nothing stopping them from deploying fifteen or so more.
This really would not be a problem if they were killable. |
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
392
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 16:07:00 -
[159] - Quote
Quote:I can't deny someone fitting services in my space that I own despite an active presence by me and a minimal presence by them.
Your objection has nothing to do with the difficulty of killing them. Anything larger than a shuttle can carry a depot with it, and pick it up again as soon they're done using it. |
Mara Tessidar
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
988
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 16:12:00 -
[160] - Quote
Milton Middleson wrote:Your objection has nothing to do with the difficulty of killing them.
Go back and read my posts. |
|
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
392
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 16:19:00 -
[161] - Quote
Mara Tessidar wrote:Milton Middleson wrote:Your objection has nothing to do with the difficulty of killing them. Go back and read my posts. Perhaps I should have been more specific. Your objection is, apparently, that they're going to exist and actually be usable for their intended purpose. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2268
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 16:24:00 -
[162] - Quote
Mara Tessidar wrote:Assuming you just killed the invader he has a pretty ridiculous two entire days to come back and simply scoop and redeploy his depot. It's simply not feasible to prevent a person--especially in a post-Rubicon interceptor--from returning to a particular spot once for about a minute and a half in two days.
I love how in the devblog it says it will allow an "active" depot owner to save their shit. Yeah. "Active." Uh huh. Hence why I said "Make it clear he is not wanted. Once he decides to move on you can find his depot and kill it without worrying about it getting re-deployed during the 2 day reinforcement." You got to ruin his fun in your system. Convince him to go play elsewhere, in some other system, because its no fun to return to yours. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Mara Tessidar
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
988
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 16:33:00 -
[163] - Quote
Milton Middleson wrote: Perhaps I should have been more specific. Your objection is, apparently, that they're going to exist and actually be usable for their intended purpose.
Mara Tessidar wrote:Uh, no. Now I have a bunch of unkillable problems, because I don't like my enemies having invincible refitting and storage services spread throughout my space.
Unless you're arguing that's a good thing.
Mara Tessidar wrote:Explain to me why there should be invincible anything in this game.
Mara Tessidar wrote:Assuming you just killed the invader he has a pretty ridiculous two entire days to come back and simply scoop and redeploy his depot. It's simply not feasible to prevent a person--especially in a post-Rubicon interceptor--from returning to a particular spot once for about a minute and a half in two days.
I love how in the devblog it says it will allow an "active" depot owner to save their shit. Yeah. "Active." Uh huh.
Mara Tessidar wrote:The effort needed to kill just one is hilariously unreasonable.
Yeah my objection has nothing to do with them being effectively unkillable. Nothing at all. |
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
392
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 16:48:00 -
[164] - Quote
They're only hard to kill if someone is trying to keep one alive, and if you don't want to put out the effort to get rid of one, that sounds like a personal problem to me.
Of course, since the difficulty of destroying them via reinforcement is borderline irrelevant due to there being minimal reason to leave them in space, I presume your objection is more generally that it's almost impossible to stop someone from using their depot to refit in hostile space. That would at least be a reasonable objection. It's just that such an objection is against the depot as a concept rather than their proposed durability. |
Mara Tessidar
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
995
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 17:15:00 -
[165] - Quote
Milton Middleson wrote:They're only hard to kill if someone is trying to keep one alive
Yeah they have to spend a whole minute scooping it up and redeploying it. So much effort needed to keep it alive. So much. |
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
27
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 17:24:00 -
[166] - Quote
Hey Folks,
After reading through your concerns about the small window of opportunity for destruction after a Mobile Depot exits reinforcement, CCP Fozzie has decided to significantly slow down the shield recharge rate of all Mobile Depots.
Therefore, the total shield recharge time of the Mobile Depots has been extended to 24 hours. This means it takes around 3.5 hours to recharge 25% of its shield.
We hope this alleviates some of your concerns and thanks again for your continued feedback! CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0 |
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4656
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 17:34:00 -
[167] - Quote
I am usually quite sceptical (at best) about additions to the game, but I have to say that I appreciated the change of mindset that made CCP Fozzie write:
These Mobile Structures are all personally owned
Unlike Starbases, these Mobile Structures belong to individual pilots, not to corporations ...
This means that even CCP might finally begin to understand that 2003 is over, that modern players don't come with many hours a day to play the nice but demanding "community game".
It's hard to belong to a relevant corporation when one can play 30 minutes a day at random hours.
Now, FW, seen as a "casual way to PvP" begun to fix this issue but we still had the non PvP structure requirements that demanded the players to either be in a good enough corp or forget leaving hi sec. I have lived the low sec lone wolf style and even WH lone wolf but I felt it to be not really fun. Imagine having a pirate corp attacking my low sec POS, who's going to come help me at say Aussie time zone? Being at least able to setup nimble, flexible stuff at my own times and at my own responsibility without having to resort to others might show as a step back from the "forced community, be in a blobby null sec corp" EvE mantra but I and others will definitely enjoy it. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Berluth Luthian
Meltdown.
125
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 17:35:00 -
[168] - Quote
I'm unfamiliar with the mechanics of combat refitting as, up until now, it is mostly a capital fleet activity, of which I'm not very experienced.
If I'm locked/scrammed (+2), can I access the supply depot, put on some extra warp stabs, and then warp away? If I CAN combat refit, what happens to the modules effecting my current state while refitting? If so, I'm thinkin that this will have a drastically positive effect for making lowsec/nullsec mining a little safer.
Example: I'm in half armor while shield tanking. If I refit to a max armor tank, what happens to my HP? I think there are a lot of scenarios in which swapping out modules should have changes in effects on the using ship or the targetted ship... Could someone clarify how this works? |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5487
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 17:53:00 -
[169] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: It's hard to belong to a relevant corporation when one can play 30 minutes a day at random hours.
"please bar all advantages to interacting with other players in this massively multiplayer online game thanks in advance" "I can hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half." |
Sven Viko VIkolander
Aliastra Gallente Federation
108
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 18:27:00 -
[170] - Quote
CCP Lebowski wrote:Hey Folks,
After reading through your concerns about the small window of opportunity for destruction after a Mobile Depot exits reinforcement, CCP Fozzie has decided to significantly slow down the shield recharge rate of all Mobile Depots.
Therefore, the total shield recharge time of the Mobile Depots has been extended to 24 hours. This means it takes around 3.5 hours to recharge 25% of its shield.
We hope this alleviates some of your concerns and thanks again for your continued feedback!
Nice, thanks!! |
|
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Forsak3n.
384
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 19:09:00 -
[171] - Quote
Unfortunately, I have to agree with Mara about the practical invulnerability of the mobile depot. The ability to scoop and then redeploy the unit while reinforced is pretty OP. Coupled with the tiny window of opportunity to actually kill it, it would have been almost impossible to remove one even if you killed the owner. He could just come back in a new bubble proof interceptor and scoop redeploy again. Near zero risk.
However, with the now extended shield recharge timer, it isn't as difficult because the thing will have to now recharge from 0 shields to above 25% before it will benefit from another reinforcement timer. Therefore you will now have a reasonable window of opportunity to warp to the depot and kill it.
If you are lazy and the depot owner is not, it will stay in place. If the owner is lazy and you are not, it will not stay in place.
Systems with a significant and regular population, such as ratting systems, will have people warping to these regularly to check and/or reinforce them.
This rewards an active play-style on both sides. Thanks to CCP Fozzie for the adjustment.
oh, right. inb4 bomber pilots use these to swap between bomb launchers, probe launchers, and covert cyno fits. vOv Free Ripley Weaver! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
17412
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 19:22:00 -
[172] - Quote
CCP Lebowski wrote:Hey Folks,
After reading through your concerns about the small window of opportunity for destruction after a Mobile Depot exits reinforcement, CCP Fozzie has decided to significantly slow down the shield recharge rate of all Mobile Depots.
Therefore, the total shield recharge time of the Mobile Depots has been extended to 24 hours. This means it takes around 3.5 hours to recharge 25% of its shield.
We hope this alleviates some of your concerns and thanks again for your continued feedback! Much more reasonable.
It already has double layers of security (reinforcement + scoop while reinforced) so the third layer of having a ridiculously small time period of actual vulnerability was a bit too much. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: newbie skill plan 2.0. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4469
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 19:58:00 -
[173] - Quote
Haha! I had no idea there was so many null bears outraged about the idea of someone using the space they don't. So many null bear tears and Rubicon is not even out yet. . |
Roime
Quantum Cats Syndicate Samurai Pizza Cats
3658
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 20:14:00 -
[174] - Quote
CCP Lebowski wrote:Hey Folks,
After reading through your concerns about the small window of opportunity for destruction after a Mobile Depot exits reinforcement, CCP Fozzie has decided to significantly slow down the shield recharge rate of all Mobile Depots.
Therefore, the total shield recharge time of the Mobile Depots has been extended to 24 hours. This means it takes around 3.5 hours to recharge 25% of its shield.
We hope this alleviates some of your concerns and thanks again for your continued feedback!
Very nice!
Notify-á-á You cannot do that while warping. |
Tavarus Excavar
Obsidian Firelance Technologies
12
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 20:27:00 -
[175] - Quote
How hard would it be for at least the mobile depot and the auto looter to auto generate bookmarks? |
Mara Tessidar
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
995
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 21:34:00 -
[176] - Quote
CCP Lebowski wrote:Hey Folks,
After reading through your concerns about the small window of opportunity for destruction after a Mobile Depot exits reinforcement, CCP Fozzie has decided to significantly slow down the shield recharge rate of all Mobile Depots.
Therefore, the total shield recharge time of the Mobile Depots has been extended to 24 hours. This means it takes around 3.5 hours to recharge 25% of its shield.
We hope this alleviates some of your concerns and thanks again for your continued feedback!
Not bad. Not bad at all. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2260
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 21:40:00 -
[177] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Haha! I had no idea there was so many null bears outraged about the idea of someone using the space they don't. So many null bear tears and Rubicon is not even out yet.
Expanding the window of vulnerability means that a mobile home that was reinforced living or dying depends far more on the actions of players rather than a passive game system recharging the shields for you. I'd think you'd approve, what with how much you whine about POS and "passive income" - clearly you think passive things are bad! Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
4656
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 22:26:00 -
[178] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Vaerah Vahrokha wrote: It's hard to belong to a relevant corporation when one can play 30 minutes a day at random hours.
"please bar all advantages to interacting with other players in this massively multiplayer online game thanks in advance"
Poor, insignificant victims you are.
All EvE see how pitiful is the poverty status of your organization, I mean you are forced to go beg two cents outside the church! Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Abdiel Kavash
Paladin Order Fidelas Constans
1844
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 23:17:00 -
[179] - Quote
Can someone explain to me why a hostile spaceyurt in your space is such a bad thing?
The spaceyurt consists of two components: an internal storage and a fitting service.
The fitting service is disabled immediately by putting the yurt in reinforced mode.
The internal storage is inferior to that of a secure container, which is unscannable and therefore practically invulnerable.
What is so bad about spaceyurts that doesn't already apply to anchored containers? |
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S Northern Associates.
156
|
Posted - 2013.11.15 01:11:00 -
[180] - Quote
Abdiel Kavash wrote:Can someone explain to me why a hostile spaceyurt in your space is such a bad thing?
The spaceyurt consists of two components: an internal storage and a fitting service.
The fitting service is disabled immediately by putting the yurt in reinforced mode.
The internal storage is inferior to that of a secure container, which is unscannable and therefore practically invulnerable.
What is so bad about spaceyurts that doesn't already apply to anchored containers? They don't even require Anchoring 1 to deploy? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |