EVE Search - Sticky:[New structures] Item safety mechanics on structure destruction

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[New structures] Item safety mechanics on structure destruction

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)

CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 3751	Posted - 2015.03.23 12:14:11 - [1] - Quote Hello people, We would like your feedback on the various new structure lines presented during Fanfest and on our latest structure blog. This particular thread is going to focus what happens to items stored inside structures when they blow up (or end up captured) in a blaze of glorious space explosions. First option is to have the structure turn into a wreck - fitted structure modules could drop as loot, while items inside the structure would only be accessible to their rightful owner(s), possibly through salvaging. Users docked at the time of the structure destruction would still be docked inside the wreck, but unable to dock back should they exit. Another option is to use the same mechanic we have for planetary launches. When a structure is destroyed, all assets are moved into special containers. A container exists for each individual that stored items in the structure, as well as corporation entities and are spread around planets. When this happens, an entry would appear on the owner journal giving a warp-in point to go to. Please note such containers would not be destructible at all, and could not be scanned until the rightful owner comes to retrieve his or her loot. The duration at which those entries would stay remains entirely dependent to the structure type and player condition when it was destroyed (logged off, account lapsed etcGÇª). Player docked inside the structure would be spread around the solar system. Third option could be to have the items inside the structure moved to another structure belonging to the same owners. Such gameplay is necessary if we wish players to use those new structures and not stash all of their items in NPC stations. Also, please note, it is possible for such mechanics to only be available in the largest structures (most likely XL) since existing Starbases do not have any kind of item safety mechanic (and would likely end up as L size equivalent in the new model).

xttz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 534	Posted - 2015.03.23 12:23:01 - [2] - Quote The second option isn't very feasible in a few scenarios: 1) How would it interact with significant volumes of items that would take some time to recover? Would the container 'despawn' when not in use, and come back again? 2) What about extremely bulky items such as station containers or assembled capital ships? They can't be picked up even by freighters. 3) How would it interact with corporation assets; who gets to spawn and access them? Would you consider adding the option to rebuild / restore structure wrecks generated by the first method?
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 1489	Posted - 2015.03.23 12:43:52 - [3] - Quote Agreed that some mechanism of recovering assets is vital to encourage use of these destructible structures. Perhaps a last-ditch option GÇö NPCs airlift half (or less) your stuff to the nearest npc 0.0 or lowsec area, chosen randomly from the stuff that you have? Retain one or more of the other options as a way to get back all your stuff, but using the airlift makes the stuff not randomly chosen be destroyed. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Vicar2008 Mindstar Technology Get Off My Lawn 131	Posted - 2015.03.23 12:45:18 - [4] - Quote Quick question, not sure if this has been asked yet? Are these types of structures going to be along the old line of one per system?
Lu Ziffer Jelly Baby Corporation Fidelas Constans 7	Posted - 2015.03.23 12:48:24 - [5] - Quote How about you can send SoE to retrieve your assets but you have to pay 0,5% of the value per ly between the destroyed structure and the delivery station?
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 1014	Posted - 2015.03.23 12:53:21 - [6] - Quote Would containers be able to be found by ninja looters scouring the are of a destroyed station to de-cloak the can (like the standard sleeper cache cans)?
Elenahina agony unleashed Agony Empire 272	Posted - 2015.03.23 12:53:29 - [7] - Quote Another (potential) issue. What about people who have unsubbed? If stuff ends up in containers scattered around, you could be adding lots of objects to the servers over time that may never (?) go away. Agony Unleashed is Recruiting - Small Gang PvP in Null Sec
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12248	Posted - 2015.03.23 13:02:11 - [8] - Quote There should be a difference between what is lost in the hangar normally, and what is in station containers. The containers should be whole, with their loot inside. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Phoenix Jones Isogen 5 1174	Posted - 2015.03.23 13:11:51 - [9] - Quote Maybe the best of all worlds. There has to be a benefit to the killer of the structure (aka loot), but you cannot screw over those already inside the structure either (making them poor). So maybe doing all three of those at once. You destroy a structure, 10% of it drops as loot immediately, 40% of it remains in space for indeterminent amount of time to be picked up, if not, becomes free for all loot, the other 50% gets moved another structure belonging to the same owner. Basically, the person loses 10% of their belongings immediately, can recover 40% if they go get it, and has HALF of their stuff moved to the next structure. So you guaranteed lose half of your stuff, with the ability to recover up to 90% of your stuff if you go get it. You aren't spacepoor because you at least got 50% of it. Evacing stuff out isn't mandatory anymore because you'll at least get half of it back, but the attacker gets some immediate benefit for attacking (loot), and some more loot if they catch or camp the spot of destruction. The numbers can be played with. 10% seems low, 20% seems high, maybe 15% is the good drop loot rate. Yaay!!!!
Ix Method Guilty Pleasures 426	Posted - 2015.03.23 13:14:39 - [10] - Quote If it is to be a wreck or something similar it would be nice to have your kerpsloded stuff contractable to a courier contract. Travelling at the speed of love.

MiliasColds The Elite Few Inc. The Methodical Alliance 51	Posted - 2015.03.23 13:16:36 - [11] - Quote something that my ceo brought up was that for corporations, and even players these assets include many ships, and if you couldn't re-dock, and only salvage from wreck how do you get the ships you didn't undock in, and also that the volume can be very large. most importantly though as it stands even if you never get access to the outpost things are trapped in now, you can at least use jump clones to sell the things. so perhaps there should be an option to take an insurance style payout at some % of value and then have the items dissapear ? moslty he brought up that you have to consider that there may be A LOT of assets in these structures, not something you can fit in one or two freighters, but more like 15-20
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1684	Posted - 2015.03.23 13:24:01 - [12] - Quote In my opinion, being able to undock from wreck and unable to dock back is rather odd. However, the idea of using the same thing than planetary-launches sound rather cool! You could see emergency ejection capsules going off in all directions when you kill a structure, with the number of ejection capsules reflecting the amount of stuff that was inside. For docked ships, you would log-in docked in your ejection capsule (or just undocked) at a safe. And you'd be able to collect your stuff by warping to another safe with your loot, only known to you. Otherwise, the idea of having it teleported to another structure is also interesting. But less realistic. Signature Tanking Best Tanking
GeeShizzle MacCloud 571	Posted - 2015.03.23 13:27:35 - [13] - Quote Considering the value of the items currently in a freeform 'mooring' in POS's any significant reduction to the safety of those assets when moving from the current system to this new system will be met with significant resistance, and rightly so in my opinion. considering that in the devblog it reads: Quote: ...if your e-peen is too large for docking, mooring will be preferred option. ...Wreck: when a structure is destroyed ... Moored ships would however become vulnerable and up for grabs by anyone. im paraphrasing slightly but the intent is pretty obvious from what i see. This goes entirely against the 1st Improvement Goal set out at the start of the devblog and states: Quote: Support and enhance existing gameplay this change does not Support or enhance gameplay, it removes gameplay options and endangers assets owned by players when they may not even be logged in. which is entirely unfair. Im not going to lie, for people hunting e-peens its fantastic news, and is why i fully expect some severe polarisation of views on this. My personal opinion on what should be done with regards to logged off supers that arent aggro'd but are moored onto a structure thats about to die, is that a ship cuts off mooring ties and 'blind' jumps to a random location in a randomised system. In terms of specific eve context this random location could be within base jump range attribute of the super from its previous location, and due to its blind jump there's would be no cyno to speak of. Its Jump would be conducted from within the mooring forcefield that counteracts any warp disruption field around it. This action could not and should not be available to an active player or in any other situation except the cataclysmic destruction of the structure containing the mooring service. Once the jump is completed the super e-warps off using base attributes for the ship in terms of align speed and warp. The blind jump direction and distance is trackable due to how eve jump portals work, so it does give a hint of its direction. Knowledge of this and the configuration of nearby star systems can be key to planning a trap with sufficient skill, knowledge and preparation, alongside a good amount of luck. This would also add to the necessity of strategic placement of supercapital mooring pens, thatther than just wehre its convenient.
Scatim Helicon GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 3179	Posted - 2015.03.23 13:35:07 - [14] - Quote Magic teleporters transporting all your stuff to the next nearest npc station sounds like the sort of thing that could be hilariously exploitable - blow up your own structure and get an instant ship cache for the alliance in the NPC space a couple of regions over! (Yes we will do this). Post on the Eve-o forums with a Goonswarm Federation character that drinking bleach is bad for you, and 20 forum warriors will hospitalise themselves trying to prove you wrong.
Yroc Jannseen Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation 86	Posted - 2015.03.23 14:13:31 - [15] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: There should be a difference between what is lost in the hangar normally, and what is in station containers. The containers should be whole, with their loot inside. There could be something interesting to this. Not necessarily saying that everything in containers should be safe. But what if there was some sort of vault storage in station. Something in station that is maybe safer than other forms of storage. Either auto transports to a new location or that locked container has a longer despawn time or something. Obviously you would want some sort of downside, either size or perhaps limits on when you can move things in and out. IE it's locked in there for a certain amount of time.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 57	Posted - 2015.03.23 14:31:22 - [16] - Quote Elenahina wrote: Another (potential) issue. What about people who have unsubbed? If stuff ends up in containers scattered around, you could be adding lots of objects to the servers over time that may never (?) go away. Said containers could be spawned only if the rightful owner warps to their journal entry. Or something. ( -í° -£-û -í°)

CCP Nullarbor C C P C C P Alliance 1071	Posted - 2015.03.23 14:37:12 - [17] - Quote Elenahina wrote: Another (potential) issue. What about people who have unsubbed? If stuff ends up in containers scattered around, you could be adding lots of objects to the servers over time that may never (?) go away. Someone suggested an interesting solution for this at Fanfest, just pause their journal entry expiry times while inactive and have them resume when they rejoin. CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones


CCP Nullarbor C C P C C P Alliance 1071	Posted - 2015.03.23 14:41:37 - [18] - Quote An option we are considering to provide loot even while having a safety for personal assets would be dropping some percentage of anything "in progress" like industry job build materials for example. So that along with the structure fittings should provide some goodies for an aggressor to take home. Dedicated aggressors could also attempt to camp out the system to prevent collection of assets from safed cans, especially in nullsec or wormholes. Evac ops where big fleets form up to collect their stuff later on could also be a thing. CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones

knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 536	Posted - 2015.03.23 14:51:59 - [19] - Quote Wouldn't this just reinforce what alliances already do and put caches in NPC stations at the first sign of? Or do you plan on allowing us to blow up NPC stations as well? Also consider legacy items - like many I have a ton of stuff in different stations around null and never had to consider that one day the whole mechanics would change and there is no chance with the current space aids mechanics of me ever getting these items out in bulk and moving them. Would you put a one time only plan in place to move said assets to a safe station?
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2759	Posted - 2015.03.23 14:52:14 - [20] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: An option we are considering to provide loot even while having a safety for personal assets would be dropping some percentage of anything "in progress" like industry job build materials for example. So that along with the structure fittings should provide some goodies for an aggressor to take home. Dedicated aggressors could also attempt to camp out the system to prevent collection of assets from safed cans, especially in nullsec or wormholes. Evac ops where big fleets form up to collect their stuff later on could also be a thing. You could have the items roll for drops more than once, first time is for the original owner, second time determines if any of the loot the owner doesn't get is distributed as dropped loot. Roleplaying Trinkets for Explorers and Collectors

Terranid Meester Tactical Assault and Recon Unit 287	Posted - 2015.03.23 15:08:40 - [21] - Quote No destroy all the items! Let the victors take the spoils! Let us hear the lamentation of their exotic dancers! GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote: this change does not Support or enhance gameplay, it removes gameplay options and endangers assets owned by players when they may not even be logged in. which is entirely unfair. CCP changed my ship roles while I was away, its unfair. The new meta is ishtars when I trained for xyz, its unfair. New crimewatch meant I got killed in high sec, its unfair. EVE is unfair, deal with it B) I like the planetary launch idea, though an alternative is to simply transfer the items to the next alliance station, if there is NO next alliance station then it is all destroyed, if the last station is destroyed. People should be podded when inside a station when destroyed too even if offline, we no longer have clone costs anymore so it seems feasible :D
Literally Space Moses GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 151	Posted - 2015.03.23 15:31:25 - [22] - Quote The planetary launch thing is probably the best mechanic. Just say give the players a month or two to gather their stuff, then let it be scanned out by anyone. Split up the pods into different categories, and have multiple lauches. So like one launch has my machariel, one has my titan BPO, one has a carrier, one has 1m m^3 of trit. I can say, warp to the BPO in an inty and retrieve it without putting everything at risk. Then later i can grab the carrier, use it to grab the mach, and jump out. After a month, the trit goes FFA and some dude scans it out. #T2013
Simsung Padecain Hard Knocks Inc. Hard Knocks Citizens 57	Posted - 2015.03.23 15:35:00 - [23] - Quote Would it work the same way in wormholes? I do see the reasoning behind these proposals, but i absolutely disagree they fit within wormhole mechanics/expectations. Before I go into a forum warrior mode, would some CCP folk be kind enough and clarify that these mechanics are going to be applied the same way in wormhole space?
Madeleine Lemmont Divide et Impera DE 13	Posted - 2015.03.23 15:37:11 - [24] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: This particular thread is going to focus what happens to items stored inside structures when they blow up (or end up captured) in a blaze of glorious space explosions. I'm really excited to see the structures work in space. But maybe I should ask my favorite carebear questions at this place. Which thoughts have made about structures and their safety in HiSec? I know, nothing is safe finally. Should they be able to blow up at once or running a reinforced mode? Under which circumstances I'm allowed to build structures in Hisec or "NPC sovereignity" areas? Does it works with security status and/or faction standing? What would me prevent from "item destruction wardecs"? It makes no sense to own expensive structures only to provide destructable items for wardeccers. Are highsec structures in general limited to PvP alliances or corps who are protected by them who are online 24x7, like POCOs yet? Or should they are possible for everybody easily to flood the highsec with? Would NPC stations become destructable? Should I move my stuff around every week? This could be a reason to quit for me. Promised. Love and fear run hand in hand...
thatonepersone Son's of Plunder The Marmite Collective 13	Posted - 2015.03.23 15:39:53 - [25] - Quote All three options are bad. If i go into a worm hole and siege somebodys pos, i should get all of the loot not just a couple of rigs.. If im at war with somebody in highsec and i blap the tower, i should get the loot. There 50-100 bill of loot shouldn't be safe inside there 1-2bill tower. Now if the only place the safe loot feature was on XL towers in null, i would be fine with it. Otherwise, there is not enough risk.
John McCreedy Eve Defence Force The Kadeshi 181	Posted - 2015.03.23 15:43:03 - [26] - Quote My Alliance has eight doctrines. That's probably about average for coalition-based alliances. Of those doctrines, four have alternate fits. Two are Caps. I also own a Dreadnought (like many null sec people). - I go on holiday for two weeks, lying on a beach somewhere. I'm still subscribing to the game therefore I'm still technically an active account but I'm away from the game for legitimate real life reasons. I get back, I log on and everything has gone boom, and the timer has expired. All my stuff has gone. Billions of ISK of assets are gone because I wanted to go on holiday with the wife and kids. Why would I live in Sov-null? - I am on deployment with my Alliance somewhere, taking the fight to enemy territory. Our stuff is attacked and we loose the timer. It goes boom. I've now got to bring in a freighter to haul my Caps, my Battleships, my Cruisers, my Frigates plus whatever roaming and ratting/mining assets I have in the area back to the nearest station/structure. Rather than being on deployment, having fun with my space-friends, I'm sat hauling my stuff day after day because I need an escort and/or scouts to reclaim my stuff. What happens if I don't own a Freighter? Can't move my Caps. Why would I live in Sov-null? Just a couple of scenarios. I can think of others. Let me be clear. I do not want total safety of our investment but having anything you dock in and store assets in being able to be destroyed is a unimaginably bad idea. The system works perfectly fine right now. I can blow up POS, POCOS, iHubs and TCUs but I cannot blow up Stations/Outposts. Why do you have to change this dynamic of the game? It works perfectly fine. In the new system we could blow up moon miners, scanning arrays, billboards, monuments, administration hubs and it will be no different to how the game is played now. If you persist in this ridiculous idea of making people's assets vulnerable to ejection then forcing them in to a gameplay element they find about as fun as a poke in the eye then people will simply cease to store their assets in destructible structures and use NPC stations (where available) or simply move out of null sec altogether (where NPC stations are unavailable). These plans are ill advised and will drive people out of sovereign null. Leave the dynamic as it is, please. 11 years and counting. Eve Defence Force is recruiting.
Yroc Jannseen Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation 87	Posted - 2015.03.23 15:49:30 - [27] - Quote Have you considered some sort of insurance option? Although I suppose capsuleers blowing up your station is an act of (demi)gods.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1108	Posted - 2015.03.23 16:05:51 - [28] - Quote First option is to have the structure turn into a wreck - fitted structure modules could drop as loot, while items inside the structure would only be accessible to their rightful owner(s), possibly through salvaging. Users docked at the time of the structure destruction would still be docked inside the wreck, but unable to dock back should they exit. this is the only reasonable option - there must be a reason and reward for attacking a structure or whats the point? - if a station gets destroyed (turned into wreck) whats too suggest a launch would still be working? - for ships and items they should be hackable too retrieve for aggressors ( again reward for the effort) 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.
Lunivarus Pedel Bladesworn 0	Posted - 2015.03.23 16:19:51 - [29] - Quote Protecting all of the assets inside a base doesn't sound eve.. It would also make me never want to attack a starbase or any type of structure. Why should a corporation/alliance put up at risk billions of isk worth of ships that they could lose when the people they are attacking will have all of their assets protected? If you want your stuff 100% protected you should keep it in high sec and never fly a ship. However I can also understand the desire to protect people from losing 100% of their items as that would make people want to quit or to never put their valuable stuff in dangerous space. So here are some ideas to hopefully make the attackers happy and make the loss not as unbearable. The player gets a roll first for all of his or her loot. (enter some number) if they make the roll the stuff was successfully put onto a blockade runner and the stuff will appear in a station the player has assigned within 7 days. This plays into the blockade runner avoiding any and all gate camps, dscanning, finding the safest route etc. However you want to play up the lore. Any items that did not make the cut then gets rolled by the attackers for (enter some number) chance to drop as the actual item. If that roll fails then the item is destroyed and salvageable material is left over that can be collected and refined or sold as isk which would be a percentage of the actual item's value. Players can buy "insurance" for any of their items now, not just ships. If a ship is insure you buy yourself a little extra chance of the loot being rolled in your favor. So lts say the default value is 80%, you buy insurance this would bring it up to 90% chance you get the item back. However this insurance would come at the added cost of having to pay extra in the event your items are re-located. You 'prepay' insurance which is 'hiring' a dedicated crew that in the event of an attack they promise to get your crap to a safe haven. Once they do this, you are then billed for their time (distance the loot had to travel) and depending on the M3 (jump fuel costs). Your items would be contraced to you for this rate. This way if you have 100 billion worth of loot on average you would receive 80 billion of it back (90 billion if you insure everything). And the attackers could potentially make off with 10 billion in assets as well.
Antonia Iskarius Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 8	Posted - 2015.03.23 16:27:19 - [30] - Quote This sounds like a hilariously bad idea if it is going to apply to outposts. If I want to unsub for a while, or go on vacation, or even just take a break, there is a chance I could lose my ships and stuff through no fault of my own? If that were the case every time I wanted to step away from the game I would need to evacuate everything I own in null to either an NPC station (assuming they will still in invulnerable), sell it, or stash it all into freighter/bowhead/carrier alts and log off in safe spots in lowsec? Sounds like an incredible hassle. Not my idea of fun gameplay.

Akrasjel Lanate Naquatech Conglomerate Naquatech Syndicate 1751	Posted - 2015.03.23 16:29:50 - [31] - Quote Quote: First option is to have the structure turn into a wreck - fitted structure modules could drop as loot, while items inside the structure would only be accessible to their rightful owner(s), possibly through salvaging. Users docked at the time of the structure destruction would still be docked inside the wreck, but unable to dock back should they exit. How long such "wreck" remain in space, is there an expiry time after which it's lootable to anyone ? What happens when the space where this "wreck" is located is controled by enemy and the owner is unable to salvage it back ? What prevents enemy from "death campin" those more important "wrecks" for example from a staging system ? Akrasjel Lanate General Director(CEO) of Naquatech Conglomerate Executor of Naquatech Syndicate Citizen of Solitude
Mucks Boosh Intentionally Dense Easily Excited 1	Posted - 2015.03.23 16:33:53 - [32] - Quote I appear to be able to see only one option. It goes a little like: Give us the bloody loot, this is EVE, not Hello Kitty Online, if your **** gets blown up and stolen, deal with it. "Safety" Mechanics are completely illogical. Why not do the same for destroyed ships. I'm sure it'll be the same demographic as this. If I have something stored in a POS and it gets blown up, boo-hoo. My fault for leaving my assets in a vulnerable location. And the aggressors get to enjoy a nice load of loot. TL,DR; "Safety" Mechanics are bad. Risk vs Reward. CCPlis, gieff loot.
Harkin Issier Incorporated Corporations INC 22	Posted - 2015.03.23 16:50:29 - [33] - Quote Interbus Shipping Station Insurance: When your station is destroyed, you have X days from your next login to move your stuff using Interbus' invulnerable Jump Freighter network. The cost to move your items and ships scales up exponentially with the volume you wish to move (with a big reduction for ships given their size), but you get to choose what exactly you want moved (Your PLEX will be dirt-cheap to shift over). When you have completed your transaction with Interbus, or the X days have expired, everything else drops in a can near the nearest celestial with a bookmark in your journal (just like the proposed system). The difference is that this can is able to be scanned down by any passersby (with some pretty high sensor strength, of course). That day is going to be an absolute field-day for the winning team, and it will be the site of frantic fights as the groups spar over getting their stuff back. You can move your small-expensive stuff quite easily. Your PLEX, a few deadspace/faction mods, your Exotic Dancers, your collection of T1 frigates, etc. If you want to move your capital(s) it's gonna cost you, and if you want to move an entire corporate hangar's worth of ammo you're gonna lose money big time. This feature: Prevents Alliances from abusing the mechanics to move stuff Doesn't punish the small fry too-harshly for being out-of-game when their station went down. Gives serious rewards to the attacking party for winning Generates content on the Xth day when all those cans start spawning. Imagine the insanity as Covops frigates frantically scan down cans looking for loot, and the can owners show up with any number of industrials and escorts to try and nab their stuff back.
Faimmoni Tactical Stables Nulli Tertius 0	Posted - 2015.03.23 16:51:55 - [34] - Quote Not a fan of 100% destruction of assets, but a solution may be in the insurance that can be bought for ships. What if all assets were insurable at levels of 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% using the averaged values that show in the inventory window at the time of the insurance purchase. This would become an ISK sink to remove excess ISK from the game, and provide payouts for insured items when/if a station is destroyed. The valuation would need to look at the full replacement cost of a ship (hull, rigs, and modules). Maybe the insurance is a set value of assets in that station rather than per item, say 50% insurance on up to 100 bil of assets at station X. If station X gets destroyed I get 50% the value of the loss as long as I bought the insurance and had over 100 bil in assets in the station. This would be easier than per item insurance, and better than having to try to go back to hostile space to retrieve a ton of ships. Would also also hostiles to get loot from the station as there is no thoughts of returning to gather assets by the previous holders. This would require so work on the insurance system clearly, but would help server load by requiring payout calculation on when stations are destroyed and maybe put it off until the following downtime for payouts to be calculated.
Axloth Okiah Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 611	Posted - 2015.03.23 16:54:34 - [35] - Quote Launching stuff into some safe caches logged in journal seem weird. I would prefer the first option (ie. wreck with stuff inside) with gradual and slow decay. The speed would be dependent perhaps on the size of the structure and can even have some "retention" rigs. So when the base gets exploded, some very small part of loot drops immediatly to satiate the hunger of attackers and the wreck will still majority of the stuff for its rightfull owners (as well as whoever was docked). After that, the wreck will gradually (logaritmic) decay with time, releasing the loot and making it available to anyone as salvage... and there should be some appropriate number salvageable "points" all over the wreck, not just one as it is now... or maybe some minigame even? This would allow victims to recover their stuff sooner rather than later because the longer they wait, the less there will be. But the rate of loss would be slowing down and the less stuff there is locked inside the wreck, the more slowly it would turn into salvageable loot. Another benefit I can imagine is that such wrecks would become long term monuments of sorts, attracting scavengers looking for fortunes even weeks and months after great battles, as the slowly decaying wreck releases the goodies. And the totally AFG players who are gone for months can maybe get some insurance? Or NPC slavage service moving parts of the loot to other base? W-Space Realtor
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5928	Posted - 2015.03.23 17:05:09 - [36] - Quote XL Structure Loot Kersplosion Brainstorming: People inside die and wake up at their clone station, or clone station moves per normal rules if that base was your clone base. Moored ships break free - maybe should take some amount of damage. Small ships die? Generate 10 wreckage/can things with unlimited capacity, (extraction only of course). Everything goes randomly into these cans. You use salvagers to recover loot. You hack your way in to recover blueprints, datacores. Only structure modules can be directly looted from the wreck. Rorquals could get a new role as super salvagers, capable of extracting ships from this wreckage. Maybe the Bowhead gets a ship tractor beam. 1 wreckage can is accessible to everyone - at the main wreckage site. The other 9 could scatter to their own grids and only allow loot you own to drop when salvaged. The area could turn into a non-warpable deadspace pocket (too much debris to warp) and the other 9 just float around in that pocket. After X+64 days, these other cans could start to become hackable/salvageable by anyone, where X is a slightly random number and 64 is replaced by whatever is deemed reasonable for vacationers/bittervets to login and figure out how to get their stuffs. Each salvage / hack attempt should only generate maybe 5k m^3 of stuff, or one container of any size - this should be a drawn-out process. Talk about content generation for the next few weeks! Let's face it - these are alliance+ level structures. It took that many people to build it, live in it an defend it. It should take a lot of people to go salvage it and protect that operation. It took hundreds of trips to fill with goodies - it should take a good while to extract it all too. Teleportation anywhere is lame and exploitable. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
Phig Neutron Rubicon Cubism 88	Posted - 2015.03.23 17:09:40 - [37] - Quote My proposal, which I mentioned in another thread, is to have "cold storage" by landing your ships and modules on the surface of a planet (terrestrial, barren, ice) or moon. The structure could be a Space Elevator with some capacity at the top (maybe 500,000m3 of moored ships and 10,000m3 of modules/materials), unlimited capacity on the surface, and there could be a 10 minute delay to move things between the accessible structure and the planet surface. When the Space Elevator is destroyed or conquered, you no longer have access to the stuff on the surface... but it's still there and can one day be recovered. This solution allows avoids the problem of players having unlimited, invulnerable inventory that can be accessed immediately -- so there's no "station games" here. You can't just dock, switch ships, undock, etc, because of the 10 minute delay to retrieve stuff from the surface. But it does allow dedicated industrialists to bring in massive quantities of materials to invest in nullsec, and it does solve the problem of what to do when real life takes you away from EVE for a few weeks or months or years. When the new structures are implemented, existing nullsec assets for inactive players could simply be transferred to planetary surfaces. While there, they could not be bought/sold/traded, so you'll have to put assets at real risk (by moving them to a trade hub structure) if you want to sell them. This would also create a strategic element because if limited to planets, it would make those three planet types (barren, temperate, ice) very important locations for structures. This would in turn determine how many stations make sense in a given system, where the enemy is likely to have his most valuable assets, and which ones are worth fighting for.
Dreiden Kisada GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 21	Posted - 2015.03.23 17:13:38 - [38] - Quote I had an idea of using a mechanic that slowly degrades the items inside the wreck slowly over time. And that the original owners should get first option of looting it, but it should be open to anyone after a period of time. An example of what I mean is this: 1) John T Miner owns 2 ventures and a stack of veldspar that is 100,000 units in size in a destructible station. 2) On a Friday night, Bad Guy Alliance comes and reinforces the station using the entosis links during the vulnerability window. 3) Sunday evening is when the station comes out of reinforced mode, John T Miner's alliance fails to keep the station, allowing it to go into freeport mode. 4) On Tuesday evening, Bad Guy alliance destroys the station instead of capturing it, through whatever mechanic exists for that system. 5) For the next 3 days, until Friday night, only the owners of the items inside the wreck may loot their items. Every time the server comes up from down time, all items receive some percentage of damage. Say 0 % to 5%. The damage should apply to all modules and ships, either stored or fitted. Any stacks of non-module materials would have 0% to 5% go away every downtime. I suggest 3 days because at this point, the defenders have had every day of the week to apply some effort in saving their items. Either in defense, or evacuation. This way, people who have limited play days are still engaged. 6) After the 3rd downtime after the station is exploded, now anyone can loot the wreck. The wreck would contain a different sub-container for each person's unique hanger, and corporate hangers. I suggest that the identity of the hanger owner be displayed on the container because this allows things such as spies trying to get things returned, or allows ransoming of someone's hanger, or other emergent gameplay. In order to access it, you need to activate a salvage module on it, even if it's your hanger container. This is tied to the previous reason, but also makes it so even the owners need to have some kind of grid control after their grace period. 7) The damage mechanic continues to apply every downtime, only the chances increase to 5% to 10%. Once a module or ship goes to 0%, in it's place should be some salvage items based on meta level and size. 8) After 2 more weeks the wreck becomes destructible. I believe a system as I describe above, or something similar, allows for various types of gameplay between groups of players. If someone is coming by and reffing your station just to be jerks, then it still sucks, but you don't lose everything. If someone wants to loot your stuff though, they have to control the space, which is a big part of what the new sov system seems to be trying to do.
Lady Omanor The Mining and Manufacturing Corporation The Imperial Union 2	Posted - 2015.03.23 17:28:56 - [39] - Quote I have a surgestion Why not make 2 types of storage in all structures. Type number one storage is secure - You have to pay a monthly percentage in rental fee of the value of the items you store, if the value is below a certain amount, you will have to pay this amount in rental. - If you don't pay your monthly rental fee, your stuff will move to type number two storage the unsecure one. - There should be the possiblity for automatic payment, as long as there is money in your account, and you have an active account. - If the structure is blown up, the secure storage unit will still be intact, and the owners can pick up their belongings there within a month, after that it will self destruct. Type number two storage is unsecure - It is free. - If the structure is blown up, the unsecure storage will still be intact but it can be access by anyone to pick the items, and when empty it will self destruct. Plus the structure might drop some of its fittings because they are intact, for the killer to pick up or not. This way - People would have to option to keep their items safe. - The Killer might get some loot or not, there should also be a risk for the killer for not getting a pay day. - If your account is not active you have the risk of losing your items.
Oktavius Aera Servantes 0	Posted - 2015.03.23 17:43:36 - [40] - Quote At least blowing up a large and xtra-large structure should not be desirable at all. My goal would be capturing structures in order to get access to features, that the recent owner not has self-destructed. Ninja production or stealing blueprints from running slots. Temporary or finally take over of sovereignity. Grab the taxes from market orders and so on. Well you might no get your hands at all foreign assets in hangars but you can thief a lot of running stuff. In 0.0 sovereignity will bring bonusses to defenders. So far it should be possible to carry away some stuff in providence of loosing a structure. Maybe we should not divide one topic from another one.

Aeril Malkyre Knights of the Ouroboros 392	Posted - 2015.03.23 17:46:57 - [41] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Another option is to use the same mechanic we have for planetary launches. When a structure is destroyed, all assets are moved into special containers. A container exists for each individual that stored items in the structure, as well as corporation entities and are spread around planets. When this happens, an entry would appear on the owner journal giving a warp-in point to go to. Please note such containers would not be destructible at all, and could not be scanned until the rightful owner comes to retrieve his or her loot. The duration at which those entries would stay remains entirely dependent to the structure type and player condition when it was destroyed (logged off, account lapsed etcGÇª). Player docked inside the structure would be spread around the solar system. This one seems best, to a point. In terms of the game world, emergency launches of all goods when the structure reaches critical makes enough sense, as does the kicking out of docked players. If the place blows with you inside, you find yourself emergency warping in your capsule (or ship I guess if you're in one?) to a random spot in the system. If you're not online, you come online in e-warp, just like logging out at a safe spot, again to a random spot in system. The structure should drop fitted loot as usual, and I think something like 10-20% of all goods from all users should also be lost in this way before the emergency launches. Some things just don't make it to the launch ports. This gives attackers an immediate pay out, and preserves the bulk of the goods lost, though they still have to be retrieved. The launch system bookmark should be asset searchable, so you can see what survived and what it will take to evac it all. The expiration timer should be long, weeks or months.
Nirnaeth Ornoediad GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 208	Posted - 2015.03.23 17:53:01 - [42] - Quote If the second option (Journal Entries) is used "I can't get my own stuff, but will have someone else get it for me." A few other ideas: Allow the player to create a Bookmark from that entry, and give (or contract) that Bookmark to others. The time the loot cans become available should have some variability by person. The loot cans should become scannable after a significant period of time. "Weeks" might be appropriate to handle more casual players. This time may be variable as well. Multiple loot cans should spawn, based on the volume of ships and items. They may or may not be in the same grid. These events should show up as notifications or EVE mails for the affected player. Fix POSes.-á Every player should want one (even if all players can't have one).
Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 731	Posted - 2015.03.23 18:08:37 - [43] - Quote I rather like the second option, but would like that in conjunction with this: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5605523#post5605523 I would make a distinction between personal items and those owned by a corp, because I have an eye on hisec here that the ones owned by a corp can only be picked up by those people who stay in the corp, so that war deccers can have a chance to grab them and get rewarded. Ella's Snack bar
Yroc Jannseen Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation 94	Posted - 2015.03.23 18:19:10 - [44] - Quote As I think about this more it seems that by allowing us to destroy structures, you are actually taking away the choice of, not destroying structures. Hate to draw real world comparisons, but I'd say completely levelling your opponent and then rebuilding is an exception not the norm. If we look at null wars in the past, of course the only option has been capturing. Yes players became clever and started things like deadzoning. But that really has only been used a few times, albeit it was a fairly late development in the dominion sov cycle. Point is in a lot of cases players have found it beneficial to capture stations and then use that infrastructure against their enemy as a staging point. Having the option to destroy everything is great, is it possible within the architecture of the new system to just capture structures instead? Of course I think it would make sense to limit this to XL structures only.
War Kitten Panda McLegion 5929	Posted - 2015.03.23 18:28:23 - [45] - Quote Yroc Jannseen wrote: As I think about this more it seems that by allowing us to destroy structures, you are actually taking away the choice of, not destroying structures. Hate to draw real world comparisons, but I'd say completely levelling your opponent and then rebuilding is an exception not the norm. If we look at null wars in the past, of course the only option has been capturing. Yes players became clever and started things like deadzoning. But that really has only been used a few times, albeit it was a fairly late development in the dominion sov cycle. Point is in a lot of cases players have found it beneficial to capture stations and then use that infrastructure against their enemy as a staging point. Having the option to destroy everything is great, is it possible within the architecture of the new system to just capture structures instead? Of course I think it would make sense to limit this to XL structures only. This is a good point too - Nullarbor mentioned boarding these structures by hostiles IIRC in the keynote. And FFS, why are we terribly bent out of shape about getting stuff back to the original owners if an outpost blows up? If an outpost is captured now, all you get is one ship-load of stuff out - and only if you happened to be docked before your alliance lost it. I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
Soldarius Kosher Nostra The 99 Percent 1181	Posted - 2015.03.23 18:29:12 - [46] - Quote John McCreedy wrote: My Alliance has eight doctrines. That's probably about average for coalition-based alliances. Of those doctrines, four have alternate fits. Two are Caps. I also own a Dreadnought (like many null sec people). - I go on holiday for two weeks, lying on a beach somewhere. I'm still subscribing to the game therefore I'm still technically an active account but I'm away from the game for legitimate real life reasons. I get back, I log on and everything has gone boom, and the timer has expired. All my stuff has gone. Billions of ISK of assets are gone because I wanted to go on holiday with the wife and kids. Why would I live in Sov-null? - I am on deployment with my Alliance somewhere, taking the fight to enemy territory. Our stuff is attacked and we loose the timer. It goes boom. I've now got to bring in a freighter to haul my Caps, my Battleships, my Cruisers, my Frigates plus whatever roaming and ratting/mining assets I have in the area back to the nearest station/structure. Rather than being on deployment, having fun with my space-friends, I'm sat hauling my stuff day after day because I need an escort and/or scouts to reclaim my stuff. What happens if I don't own a Freighter? Can't move my Caps. Why would I live in Sov-null? Just a couple of scenarios. I can think of others. Let me be clear. I do not want total safety of our investment but having anything you dock in and store assets in being able to be destroyed is a unimaginably bad idea. The system works perfectly fine right now. I can blow up POS, POCOS, iHubs and TCUs but I cannot blow up Stations/Outposts. Why do you have to change this dynamic of the game? It works perfectly fine. In the new system we could blow up moon miners, scanning arrays, billboards, monuments, administration hubs and it will be no different to how the game is played now. If you persist in this ridiculous idea of making people's assets vulnerable to ejection then forcing them in to a gameplay element they find about as fun as a poke in the eye then people will simply cease to store their assets in destructible structures and use NPC stations (where available) or simply move out of null sec altogether (where NPC stations are unavailable). These plans are ill advised and will drive people out of sovereign null. Leave the dynamic as it is, please. Finally, what if you're sat in the Captain's Quarters when the thing blows up? Honestly, CCP, for all the world this sounds like someone had an idea and you've posted it as a proposal without thinking things through. Really? You think a strategy game where you can literally never lose anything is a good thing? What is the point to playing if there is no risk of losing things, and no reward for taking something? Response to Case 1: The log entry will have a long subscribed timer; 30 days minimum. 2ez. Response to Case 2: If you go on deployment and leave your home undefended for too long, you run the risk of your home burning down, squatters, etc. Solution is simple: make sure to leave a jump clone behind in case of emergency. As far as the proposed ideas, a wreck from which one can only undock once is not really effective. A player will be limited to one ship, probably an expensive faction BS and a few hundred m3 of cargo unless they own a carrier or other jump capable ship. This is pretty much a guaranteed lossmail. Hell camp the wrecks for a week and farm kills. Almost nothing will ever be saved or killed. May as well just destroy everything and be done with it. The canisters idea has potential for a great deal of recovery, loss, and pvp for those willing to take the time to keep an eye on things. It has risks and rewards for all players. Spawning the cans on individual grids means no massive jet can lag. I support this idea. But the log entry needs to be significantly long so that a subscribed player that happens to be on vacation, business trip, military deployment, etc can get back in time to retrieve their things. I think that station vaults and other station containers could have the potential for protecting assets beyond the random loot drop mechanics. This would give them added value beyond just organizing your hanger contents. Can this be done? http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Pingpong Chingchong Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2015.03.23 18:40:39 - [47] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Hello people, We would like your feedback on the various new structure lines presented during Fanfest and on our latest structure blog. This particular thread is going to focus what happens to items stored inside structures when they blow up (or end up captured) in a blaze of glorious space explosions. First option is to have the structure turn into a wreck - fitted structure modules could drop as loot, while items inside the structure would only be accessible to their rightful owner(s), possibly through salvaging. Users docked at the time of the structure destruction would still be docked inside the wreck, but unable to dock back should they exit. Another option is to use the same mechanic we have for planetary launches. When a structure is destroyed, all assets are moved into special containers. A container exists for each individual that stored items in the structure, as well as corporation entities and are spread around planets. When this happens, an entry would appear on the owner journal giving a warp-in point to go to. Please note such containers would not be destructible at all, and could not be scanned until the rightful owner comes to retrieve his or her loot. The duration at which those entries would stay remains entirely dependent to the structure type and player condition when it was destroyed (logged off, account lapsed etcGÇª). Player docked inside the structure would be spread around the solar system. Third option could be to have the items inside the structure moved to another structure belonging to the same owners. Such gameplay is necessary if we wish players to use those new structures and not stash all of their items in NPC stations. Also, please note, it is possible for such mechanics to only be available in the largest structures (most likely XL) since existing Starbases do not have any kind of item safety mechanic (and would likely end up as L size equivalent in the new model). I think the third option is best, given you want to encourage their use. Ship their loot that survives (you DO plan on causing some of it to be lost right?) to the nearest owned structure. Barring the existence of another structure, send it to the nearest NPC low/null station.
Alexis Nightwish 132	Posted - 2015.03.23 18:41:30 - [48] - Quote Option Four: 50% of the contents are destroyed, and the other 50% are lootable by the victors, just like normal drop mechanics. You want people to defend their space? Put their assets at risk and I guarantee this will happen. The other options sound like weaksauce, security blanket crap suited for games other than EVE Online. CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Sin Kash KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 0	Posted - 2015.03.23 18:51:43 - [49] - Quote #1 - Only XL structures should have all these fancy asset saving features. Keep S/M/L structures like POS and how they currently drop items when the structure explodes. This will keep the eve people happy with loot pinatas from most structures. #2 - I like the idea of cold storage on the planet/moon mentioned before. So an XL structure is exploded. All the assets fall to the moon. And you cannot retrieve those assets unless you are in the corp/alliance that owns the structure at the moon. If no structure is there, one has to be setup for your corp/alliance to get the assets. Or maybe there are access rights that can be setup for blues to get assets off the planet. In this way, asset recovery can still act much of the same way as it does with stations for XL structures only. #3 - barring #2 working I think some kind of insurance payout is the most realistic option for asset recovery. It just seems like all the other options are convoluted and don't really feel natural or real.
Dunkle Lars Lemon Half Moon 59	Posted - 2015.03.23 18:52:27 - [50] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: An option we are considering to provide loot even while having a safety for personal assets would be dropping some percentage of anything "in progress" like industry job build materials for example. So that along with the structure fittings should provide some goodies for an aggressor to take home. Dedicated aggressors could also attempt to camp out the system to prevent collection of assets from safed cans, especially in nullsec or wormholes. Evac ops where big fleets form up to collect their stuff later on could also be a thing. As you mention in the OP, safety for stored items should only be for XL class structures. Everything thing else should drop stored items+ items in progress. I sometimes decide to shoot a pos when I need some isk. If nothing would drop then why would I bother to attack? There needs to be a strong motivator if you want people to continue shooting poses. XL level Buildings = provide NPC station level security. Everything else = same as now

Milla Goodpussy Federal Navy Academy 203	Posted - 2015.03.23 18:54:15 - [51] - Quote none of this is feasible unless you're finally going to re-introduce cargo hold limits on freighters or........JUMP FREIGHTERS. ccp nullabor have you forgotten the cargo nerf fozzie did? im still trying to wrap my head around the part of recovering the items from the station cans for a friend. he lights cyno.. I jump in, and welp I cant haul everything he has back to where ever. that's broken, everyone has a huge inventory you know how many pack rats there are in a station hanger in null sec? and I find it incredible how you guys are not clearly thinking about members of our community that may not be able to play the game 23/7 due to 1) being deployed in real life 2) Vile-rats and other people like him 3) real life changes 4) Persons fighting illness or cancer list can go on and on.
Scatim Helicon GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 3182	Posted - 2015.03.23 19:02:52 - [52] - Quote Soldarius wrote: Response to Case 1: The log entry will have a long subscribed timer; 30 days minimum. 2ez. 30 days is nothing. Eve commonly sees players who serve in the armed forces and are deployed away for literally months or years, or who go through long periods of serious illness, or others who are unable to play for a variety of other reasons. If their hangers are ransacked during their time away while there's nothing they can do about it they're much less likely to bother to resubscribe. What you're saying effectively is that if anyone thinks they may find Real Life interfering with their ability to play Eve for a while, then the new structures/nullsec environment is not for them. Post on the Eve-o forums with a Goonswarm Federation character that drinking bleach is bad for you, and 20 forum warriors will hospitalise themselves trying to prove you wrong.
Taladool NexGen Industries. Foundations Rising 4	Posted - 2015.03.23 19:21:21 - [53] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Hello people, We would like your feedback on the various new structure lines presented during Fanfest and on our latest structure blog. This particular thread is going to focus what happens to items stored inside structures when they blow up (or end up captured) in a blaze of glorious space explosions. First option is to have the structure turn into a wreck - fitted structure modules could drop as loot, while items inside the structure would only be accessible to their rightful owner(s), possibly through salvaging. Users docked at the time of the structure destruction would still be docked inside the wreck, but unable to dock back should they exit. Another option is to use the same mechanic we have for planetary launches. When a structure is destroyed, all assets are moved into special containers. A container exists for each individual that stored items in the structure, as well as corporation entities and are spread around planets. When this happens, an entry would appear on the owner journal giving a warp-in point to go to. Please note such containers would not be destructible at all, and could not be scanned until the rightful owner comes to retrieve his or her loot. The duration at which those entries would stay remains entirely dependent to the structure type and player condition when it was destroyed (logged off, account lapsed etcGÇª). Player docked inside the structure would be spread around the solar system. Third option could be to have the items inside the structure moved to another structure belonging to the same owners. Such gameplay is necessary if we wish players to use those new structures and not stash all of their items in NPC stations. Also, please note, it is possible for such mechanics to only be available in the largest structures (most likely XL) since existing Starbases do not have any kind of item safety mechanic (and would likely end up as L size equivalent in the new model). Option 2 and 3, Start with option 3, if things in the station are not collect after x amount of time (few days) then the assests get transferred to your new home station by npc's over the period of days/weeks depending on how far away it is. There should also be an option to skip the collect in person and have it shipped right away, taking however long it would take the npcs to move the stuff.
Scatim Helicon GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 3183	Posted - 2015.03.23 19:23:06 - [54] - Quote CCP: Is the intention that existing outposts will be converted into the new equivalent structures once the new system is fully in place? Or will they remain in place in their current form? Post on the Eve-o forums with a Goonswarm Federation character that drinking bleach is bad for you, and 20 forum warriors will hospitalise themselves trying to prove you wrong.
Varg Krugar Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 12	Posted - 2015.03.23 19:29:21 - [55] - Quote i'm not entirely sure there is any valuable gameplay to be had from this, but there is this real world problem that an abundance of space litter in orbit around a planet hampers space launches. i'm not implying that blowing up an outpost should cause damage clouds to spawn at POCOs or something, i'm just putting this out here on the off chance it inspires a good idea in someone else https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ablation_cascade
Angry Mustache GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 254	Posted - 2015.03.23 19:31:30 - [56] - Quote I think the difference in safety between NPC stations and XL structures can't be stressed enough in the new system. People would minimize the amount of stuff they have in XL structures, only bringing the minimum necessary, and valuables/"luxuries" would be safely stored in NPC systems, that already happens now, with capital stockpiles in lowsec outposts as they can't be conquered or bubbled in. Player owned sov wouldn't feel like "home" if none of your valuable were there, but rather a hunting camp where you bring what you need to go hunt some big game. An official Member of the Goonswarm Federation Complaints Department.
Aryth GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1706	Posted - 2015.03.23 19:35:05 - [57] - Quote Why not use the impounding code? All assets are moved to closest NPCstation (or HQ) and taxxed (like impounding code does) at say 10-25% of assets value. Something very stiff cost wise but not the end of the world of super discouraging if someone was a victim of a short window to evac. It could also be paired with a launching of a can system. Give people 2 options, one, you get your crap back but have to hold the space. Option two, you take a big ISK tax to unimpound your stuff but it is moved for you. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal. Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
Terranid Meester Tactical Assault and Recon Unit 287	Posted - 2015.03.23 19:47:40 - [58] - Quote One reason for destroyable outposts for those wondering, is that if all of 0.0 becomes full of stations then there is no longer any need to build more. Therefore the process of building a station becomes redundant and CCP may as well put npc stations in all of 0.0 space to replace the player built ones. Another reason is that CCP stated themselves that pretty much everything in eve should be destroyable. As to the goon guy who mentioned that completely leveling of assets is not the norm but mostly levelling is the usual way of warfare. In war, things get destroyed, not generally saved. It is 'preferable' that assets survive but it is not the usual outcome. Bridges get blown up and eventually get replaced. Cities survive [excepting atomic weapons] but the buildings in them generally don't.
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1896	Posted - 2015.03.23 20:00:13 - [59] - Quote OP wrote: Also, please note, it is possible for such mechanics to only be available in the largest structures (most likely XL) since existing Starbases do not have any kind of item safety mechanic (and would likely end up as L size equivalent in the new model). I like this thinking, thanks for considering it. I very much like the idea of asset protection for huge investments (I'm thinking of provi getting burned to the ground). Equally, it is important that there is incentive to attack forgotten and abandoned structures in empire (I'm thinking of current unfuelled tower with tasty loot). This could be balanced effectively by size of structure. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Saisin State War Academy Caldari State 219	Posted - 2015.03.23 20:05:11 - [60] - Quote Even if stations can't be destructible now, whatever system is used for these structures in space should account for the fact that it will be applied in the future to destruction of stations. I have beenreally happy to hear CCP say that everything should be destructible in the future! I like Phoenix Jones idea about mixing the three options, but I would replace option 3 teleport with insurance money paid to the owner, as I am strongly against teleporting assets (except for contract only items like BPO or BPC). Those item that do not have a market value should be spread around randomly in the various steps below. So 10% to 20% are lootable when the destruction occurs. 20% to 40% is spread around in cans in the system, each can getting an equal share of the value as much as possible (including contract only items, that could throw the values of each can off), but with a very long timer where the cans stay only visible to their owner. They would still not remain that way indefinitely, and every week or month, one of the can starts popping up for all to scan and loot. The remaining value (except for contract only items) is reimbursed through an insurance paid to the player the next time they log in, while the items are automatically recycled by the game and destroyed forever for all. Contract only items that have not been spread/lost in 1 and 2 are simply contracted back to the player, within an infinite period of time. "surrender your ego, be free". innuendo. solo? There is a new hope...

Rroff Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 960	Posted - 2015.03.23 20:18:57 - [61] - Quote The original attacking party should have the option in there in rights for "recovery" fees - this could also open up the potential for salvage/recovery opportunities (missions) to 3rd parties even if it had to be done in a bit of a gimmicky fashion. EDIT: I guess this could also make scanning WHs and stuff a little more rewarding if those recovery opportunities are around to collect.
Lil' Brudder Too Pistols for Pandas 115	Posted - 2015.03.23 20:29:21 - [62] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: Dedicated aggressors could also attempt to camp out the system to prevent collection of assets from safed cans, especially in nullsec or wormholes. Evac ops where big fleets form up to collect their stuff later on could also be a thing. This will only happen in Null/Low, unless the aggressors perma dec the victims until they eventually log in to try to obtain their loot. Personally i'm not excited at the prospect of keeping each victim perma dec'd waiting for them to eventualy try to get their stuff. Which they likely won't do while the dec is still active and the aggressors are online and nearby. There NEEDS to be a better looting system for those of us who follow very inactive players (research/indy alts) and their POS's to get nice loots. As it stands we would lose the incentive to grind through the structure in the first place.
1Robert McNamara1 The Graduates Forged of Fire 74	Posted - 2015.03.23 20:32:30 - [63] - Quote Let's turn this on its head a bit. Attackers want spoils, Defenders won't ante up anything if the risk is viewed as too great, and we have lots of legit reasons to not be at the game for months at a time.... Also the end goal is to drive conflict and encourage fights, perhaps even sure to lose fights. Have a capture event, lead to a loot event, which finishes with all un-looted items going to the nearest NPC station. How it could work: A structure with spoils is in the capture event. Depending on how one sided the event goes to the attacker determines their 'loot event' duration. Say the attacker barely won, the loot duration is only N minutes. If it's a total route, then the loot event will last N*N minutes. The loot event is a window of time where anyone can hack the wreck with either Entosis links or Data/Relic modules and gain access to a few items to loot, say 5-10 items each hack. Don't like the draw? re-hack it. love all those BPOs? loot all and go again until the loot event is over. Anything not nailed down after that goes to the nearest NPC station. Players/corps/alliances who lost goods get a notification of which character took which parts so revenge and back room deals can be brokered. Strengths: Gives Attackers real intensive to maximize their gains, and defenders reasons to show up even if they know they're going to lose. Plays on player's optimism vs. pragmatism and requires both sides to make conflicting decisions in order to maximize any given part of the event. Allows Defenders to retrieve un-looted stuff after the event, no timers or weird stuff. Defenders or 3rd parties could re-take the field during the loot event and gain or protect the spoils. Weaknesses: Complicated approach with some fuzzy hand-waving in there to get the bones out. May still be too much risk for null players, the loot event window may need to be carefully tweeked. Hacking mini-game. Other thoughts: I kind of like the Data/Relic modules and the hacking mini game as it requires split attentions, faster module cycle time, allows for interdiction, makes attackers decide what kind of 'loot fits' they need in reserves as hacking strength and pvp strength are opposing forces.
John McCreedy Eve Defence Force The Kadeshi 192	Posted - 2015.03.23 20:35:21 - [64] - Quote Soldarius wrote: John McCreedy wrote: My Alliance has eight doctrines. That's probably about average for coalition-based alliances. Of those doctrines, four have alternate fits. Two are Caps. I also own a Dreadnought (like many null sec people). - I go on holiday for two weeks, lying on a beach somewhere. I'm still subscribing to the game therefore I'm still technically an active account but I'm away from the game for legitimate real life reasons. I get back, I log on and everything has gone boom, and the timer has expired. All my stuff has gone. Billions of ISK of assets are gone because I wanted to go on holiday with the wife and kids. Why would I live in Sov-null? - I am on deployment with my Alliance somewhere, taking the fight to enemy territory. Our stuff is attacked and we loose the timer. It goes boom. I've now got to bring in a freighter to haul my Caps, my Battleships, my Cruisers, my Frigates plus whatever roaming and ratting/mining assets I have in the area back to the nearest station/structure. Rather than being on deployment, having fun with my space-friends, I'm sat hauling my stuff day after day because I need an escort and/or scouts to reclaim my stuff. What happens if I don't own a Freighter? Can't move my Caps. Why would I live in Sov-null? Just a couple of scenarios. I can think of others. Let me be clear. I do not want total safety of our investment but having anything you dock in and store assets in being able to be destroyed is a unimaginably bad idea. The system works perfectly fine right now. I can blow up POS, POCOS, iHubs and TCUs but I cannot blow up Stations/Outposts. Why do you have to change this dynamic of the game? It works perfectly fine. In the new system we could blow up moon miners, scanning arrays, billboards, monuments, administration hubs and it will be no different to how the game is played now. If you persist in this ridiculous idea of making people's assets vulnerable to ejection then forcing them in to a gameplay element they find about as fun as a poke in the eye then people will simply cease to store their assets in destructible structures and use NPC stations (where available) or simply move out of null sec altogether (where NPC stations are unavailable). These plans are ill advised and will drive people out of sovereign null. Leave the dynamic as it is, please. Finally, what if you're sat in the Captain's Quarters when the thing blows up? Honestly, CCP, for all the world this sounds like someone had an idea and you've posted it as a proposal without thinking things through. Really? You think a strategy game where you can literally never lose anything is a good thing? What is the point to playing if there is no risk of losing things, and no reward for taking something? I think you misunderstood me, friend. Let me explain. I'm talking about the XL housing structure and possibly also the market structure but I'm waiting for CCP clarification on that so for the time being, assume only the housing structure. All other structures should be destructible. The reason for this is because for the most part, CCP are not changing anything, we'll still have moon miners, we'll still have manufacturing services, we'll still have laboratories and all of these structures be they on a POS or a service on an Outpost can be killed or 'incapped'. So nothing should change. The only structure that should not be destructible is (for now) housing structure. 11 years and counting. Eve Defence Force is recruiting.
Chad Wylder Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 28	Posted - 2015.03.23 20:36:15 - [65] - Quote Really like the idea of having items emergency warp away in cans similar to planetary launches, and I like the thought of the journal entry only counting down on the player's next log-in (so if they're already logged in when stuff goes ker-blammo, then it starts counting down immediately) Maybe introduce some new emergency cans at various sizes and build costs that: A) Have less storage space than the size of the actual can (a 100m3 can that can hold 50m3 inside of it for a small container or something like that). B) Have varying timers based on the size of the can (so the countdown timer after a small emergency container warps off is less than the countdown timer for a large or even station sized emergency container) C) Becomes scannable and lootable by anyone when either the owner warps to it for the first time, or the timer runs out. D) Can NOT be re-scooped after it goes to its emergency warp spot (you can get the items back, but not the can) And then, to shake things up, allow them to be put in ships and go into emergency warp on ship destruction. :D (I foresee rotten vegetables being thrown my way). In the case of ship destruction however, I'd say start the can's timer if the pilot is online OR there's an active aggression timer on the ship (to avoid logging off in combat and having a decay timer that never starts). Having these in ships would be super powerful so maybe it could be balanced by the timer for the cans. Like, maybe 5 or 10 minutes for a small can so the pilot has to scramble to get there stuff back before it's open for anyone to scan and loot. As far as docked ships go... not really fond of the structure wreck idea simply because it seems bad to have giant wrecks that never go away. I think insurance may be an alright solution, where you get insurance for the ship, rigs, and any destroyed modules/items (but not for dropped items. Those go to whoever exploded the station)
Kenneth Skybound Skyefleet 118	Posted - 2015.03.23 21:37:25 - [66] - Quote OPTIONS is the key thing imo. Whether through use of fittable modules, dedicated rigs or something else, players/corporations/alliances should be able to CHOOSE the result of destruction of their station, and have bonuses or debuffs as a result of that choice. In order of protection, from least to most. 0) Everything is destroyed, gone. I rate this option 0 as it gives no one anything, so doesn't serve a good mechanic. 1) Starbase style wreck - total access for everyone to loot freely. This option would be the least protection for your assets, but would come with no cost in terms of fitting, upkeep or whatever other metric. (In terms of cost, one that cannot scale infinitely is required. Powergrid is limited, as would be a new "fitting" such as personnel. Money is not limited, so an ISK cost would not suffice in terms of limitations). As it'd have next to no fitting cost, this would leave room for additional benefits like better defenses or better utility etc. 2) One wreck - limited access for everyone. This option means the station or container becomes a lootable container of whatever diameter for anyone to retrieve their stuff. Additionally, thieves can use salvaging modules or some other extraction means to begin siphoning off stored loot. Such an option would be perhaps reinforced warehouses, with little cost. 3) One wreck - individual access only. Only those who own the items can access them. Being in one spot, getting there can be an issue. Such an option would be perhaps strontium activated warehouses, with moderate cost. 4) Multiple journal locations - individual access. Gives very high means of securely re-obtaining one's assets as they are distributed across the system. Such an escape-pod deployment perhaps would come with moderate cost to fitting. 5) NPC export - NPC ships begin retrieving the items to accessible locations. Their delivery would be to the character's current clone location unless otherwise specified. Such exports could be made targetable by various means, such as on wrekc appearance (low security design) or as random cosmic signatures with spawning weighted towards the wreck system area, the signatures only lasting an hour each and randomly spawning across the next X time period (high security design). 6) Instant delivery to new station - single most secure option, would require extreme cost to install (and spool up time I guess to prevent abuse). Such would use perhaps compact jump gates and require pairing with another such station. Some contents may get lost in the emergency jump tunnel. ALL options should include some form of loss for subscribed players (the cost of failure), with the ability to determine the level of that loss or risk of loss through player choice. Each option can come with bonuses, debuffs or fitting requirements of some kind in order to make each preferable to a group of a certain persuasion. For example, those with the instant delivery to new station (6) may come with significant fitting issues, but then may also allow for reduced jump clone cooldown between paired stations. Option (3) could come with reduction costs for industry, as the very private warehouses means the owner can hide their jobs in bureaucracy to reduce the apparent value (and thus fee). Option (1) could mean the lack of asset-defense modules lead to more space for mooring options. In instances where someone chooses to be subscribed, but cannot play (aka skill training online for our deployed friends etc), an option to put one's account into protected mode would be nice. Choosing such an option would have a 48 hour spool up (to help prevent abuse). Once activated, any assets the player personally owns in structures with asset protection (ie, the structures in question for this discussion) would become entirely invulnerable, but also inaccessible. Any location under attack at the time (eg a station going to stage 2 of a contest) would not be protected until back to the safe idle state. Coming back out of the protected mode would have a 24 hour spool down (again, to help prevent abuse) and result in the unlocking of the player's assets. Any which would be located in no longer extant locations would be transferred to the character's medical clone location (if storage provides), or a random low sec station proximal to the destroyed storage location. This is designed to help skirt the problem of differentiating between someone who has just been logged off for a couple days and someone who is utterly incapable of defending their assets, but wishes to remain subscribed
Sol Ferrum Organized-Chaos Apocalypse Now. 8	Posted - 2015.03.23 21:54:18 - [67] - Quote For XL stations only anything smaller should be looted as normal I feel like any mechanic has a chance of destruction of property stored assets does Three things. Further encourages the formation of larger groups for the protection of those items. Discourages smaller groups from placing a stake in null due to the constant risk of larger groups burning everything they have built to the ground just because they can or for profit. Punish players who have to take long hiatuses from the game. Additionally anything that would move your items out of the station for you feels against the nature of eve. I think what happens currently with the access to the station and the assets within is actually the best system that just needs to be modified to keep up with new changes. As loosing access to the contents but being able to fight for access would be desirable. Proposition Destroyed XL stations become Station ruin All assets inside remain where they are, but the cargo bays they are inside have their allowed volume set to zero. This should create the situation where items can only be removed Becomes a contestable piece of terrain with the entosis module, owner can control who can and cannot dock. This creates conflict drives for control of, and access to the assets It has no services, only allows the ability to dock and remove items from the cargohold Maybe has some sort of debris field surrounding it station to prevent warping within certain range. The ruin can be GÇ£rebuiltGÇ¥ by building a new XL station on top of it If a second XL station gets destroyed while a ruin is already active the contents of the second merge into the first.
oohthey ioh Republic University Minmatar Republic 27	Posted - 2015.03.23 22:17:20 - [68] - Quote How about it's not retrievable until a new is build to replace it. Edit: this will save on the sever load when it goes pop
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1971	Posted - 2015.03.23 22:17:37 - [69] - Quote Debates seem to be already in circles. However I'm in favour of a mix of 1 & 3. 50% of the assets (or some percentage), with priority given to ships (or all ships) since they can be flown wildly by a skeleton crew, get moved to a nearby station that is npc, or alliance owned. If there isn't an alliance owned station this should be the nearest NPC station regardless of inconvenient location surrounded by enemies. The rest can be salvaged back from the wrecks of the stations. At the very least this should apply to L & XL structures. L structures are the current Outposts, M structures are the current POS, so M structures dropping everything is fine. But L & XL structures should be more protected. But the mechanic should apply in ANY space. Including WH space. There has to be a reason for people to build these structures in other space than Null. We need to reinforce the idea that you can play EVE how you like including in the sec space you like, not that Null is the end game space of EVE, because the idea of an end game space goes against EVE principles.
Somatic Neuron Masterwork Productions Inc 65	Posted - 2015.03.23 22:22:43 - [70] - Quote Here's another alternative that you might not have considered. Just throwing it out there... Make it a wreck Any jobs in progress have a chance to spawn as loot, all others are lost (and on the killmail) Allow anyone to dock at it and retrieve their items After 14 days, interbus comes and moves remaining items (securely) to a secure facility in highsec and the wreck despawns. Anyone that was still docked in station is ejected randomly in the solar system. Items are put into Probate at 30% market value. If you want those items back, you need to pay off the tax. After an additional 30 days, Probate taxes drop to 20% After an additional 30 days, Probate taxes drop to 10% until they are retrieved by the owner. This would Provide a way to get some possible benefit from destroying a used structure Provide a way for players to obtain their assets normally Provide a way to safeguard assets for people that are not able to recover assets due to subscription Provide a way to provide a penalty to people who don't come to claim their assets (either because they are unwilling or cannot) Provide a significant penalty to people who want to claim their freely transported items quickly

Tengu Grib Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 1014	Posted - 2015.03.23 22:34:25 - [71] - Quote Elenahina wrote: Another (potential) issue. What about people who have unsubbed? If stuff ends up in containers scattered around, you could be adding lots of objects to the servers over time that may never (?) go away. Not if they only spawn when the owner warps to them, till then they would just be a bookmark entry with a list of contained assets. Wouldn't be 'that' bad.
Tengu Grib Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 1015	Posted - 2015.03.23 22:36:51 - [72] - Quote Phoenix Jones wrote: Maybe the best of all worlds. There has to be a benefit to the killer of the structure (aka loot), but you cannot screw over those already inside the structure either (making them poor). So maybe doing all three of those at once. You destroy a structure, 10% of it drops as loot immediately, 40% of it remains in space for indeterminent amount of time to be picked up, if not, becomes free for all loot, the other 50% gets moved another structure belonging to the same owner. Basically, the person loses 10% of their belongings immediately, can recover 40% if they go get it, and has HALF of their stuff moved to the next structure. So you guaranteed lose half of your stuff, with the ability to recover up to 90% of your stuff if you go get it. You aren't spacepoor because you at least got 50% of it. Evacing stuff out isn't mandatory anymore because you'll at least get half of it back, but the attacker gets some immediate benefit for attacking (loot), and some more loot if they catch or camp the spot of destruction. The numbers can be played with. 10% seems low, 20% seems high, maybe 15% is the good drop loot rate. Yay all 2 million of my bullets survived, oh my dread didn't. I kinda like it, but think it could still use some work. I like the idea of at least a little bit being available as loot though.
Siginek BAND of MAGNUS 12	Posted - 2015.03.23 22:40:49 - [73] - Quote Hi Ytterbium ... i think there is lot of questions from players that doesnt quite fit into any of new structure topics, so could you please create some kind of official thread about structures in general? (something where we coudl ask about limits per system, wormhole availability and so on ...) and not to talk only offtopick in this thread ... as wormhole player i think that 0.0 should be little risky too ... so if you move there you should be prepared for loses .... so my opinion is simple ... move loot to nearest planet and make it available again when owner regains control over system, until then items will wait on planet ...
w1ndstrike Strange Energy The Bastion 17	Posted - 2015.03.23 23:30:37 - [74] - Quote there are multiple serious problems with this, and as devs you need to realize that your current goals are mostly mutually exclusive. first of all, EvE is a game about risk, both taking calculated risks and mitigating those risks. a HUGE amount of effort is put in every day by players to minimize their risk profile against systemic threats (inherent in the game) and player created threats (caused by player use of game mechanics) a good example of this is freighter ganking, most freighters usually travel well below full utilization (whatever cargo amount equates to 1bn market value) as a response to the player created threat of suicide ganking freighters for profit. the above works very well as an analogy to your structure goal, because as a dev team you would like to see full utilization of the assets you are pouring time and effort in to create. but as long as there is any significant risk involved to player assets, they will min/max use of structures to reduce the risk profiles to only what is absolutely necessary to achieve a goal; the rest of the assets will be moved to an NPC station. additionally, there are several forms of emergent gameplay that currently RELY on having a stable, secure place to store assets, most notably region market trading and seeding. as someone who has done high-level region seeding in the past, I can tell you that in the future I would be extremely wary of ever investing in an outpost/null market ever again unless it was from a true station in the region and not an outpost. there are quite a few people in here saying "give loot" or "htfu" but I don't think any of them actually realize the consequences of that option for the gameplay they actually want. currently Null space sees decent utilization, because most people can keep assets close by where they want to live and regardless of the asset pool know that when they log off in station it is secure barring the station being flipped in a war, and even then they still have the option to sit and slow-sell assets in a worst case scenario. in this new model, with only bare minimum assets and ships being used because "give loot" most people will not keep a full stable of pvp ships to fight with, they will only keep exactly what they need to engage in their preferred style of play and no more. (lots of folks will probably keep only as many ships as a carrier will fit) lots of space will be empty as a result of logistics difficulties and ease of attack (assuming the entosis link plan goes through without change) currently some of null is a PVP wasteland. that percentage will increase drastically as players do exactly what they have been taught for years to do in EvE: minimize all possible risk. additionally, this change also risks damaging your subscriber numbers, since many players take long breaks from the game, and 99% of them currently have an expectation from years of gameplay that assets in outposts are 100% safe. changing this without offering some kind of out or alternative risks the goodwill that CCP might hope to have with a returning player to reengage them with the game. the only winners in this scenario are logistics people who are going to make bank whem people evacuate non-essential assets, and the region maps as you have just turned true station systems into the most valuable real-estate in eve. as an aside: from current corp/alliance jabber: should this become a thing 95% of the people talking about these changes are of the opinion that even a risk to 10% assets at random would cause them to move anything not essential, and would likely reduce the ships and modules they currently keep around "just for fun"
Max Kolonko WATAHA. Unseen Wolves 498	Posted - 2015.03.23 23:47:03 - [75] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: An option we are considering to provide loot even while having a safety for personal assets would be dropping some percentage of anything "in progress" like industry job build materials for example. So that along with the structure fittings should provide some goodies for an aggressor to take home. Dedicated aggressors could also attempt to camp out the system to prevent collection of assets from safed cans, especially in nullsec or wormholes. Evac ops where big fleets form up to collect their stuff later on could also be a thing. I really dont like Idea that loot is "safe" after blowing up of structures. I'm talking POS-size structures here, not Station-sized ones just to be clear. Idea of loot removal via cans etc... might be good as a solution to "destructible stations"-like structures, but not to "pos"-like structures that will be used in new mechanics. Remember that today ONLY stations have that full safety of assets. POS'es drop loot just like ship. The only reason people discussed way to deal with personal assets is because of potential outrage of people that will loose them because they are sooo used to safety of stations. As a WH person I look at my pos just like I look at ships. I dont put anything in it that I would not be ready to loose. What happened to consequences of actions? There should be loot from new poses, at least in WH (its a meat of any wh siege. How much dropped from this piniata... hundreds of millions? Billions? Tens of billions? Why take that away from us? Why someone should be rewarded for lack of foresight? If they put that deadspace blingy ship in hangar and log off for weekend they need to take assumption that its not gonna be there when they come back. Thats why we log off in WH in coverts on a spot and not on a pos. Because once we log on pos may be gone and death-trap bubble pos might be there instead. WH is not null, people rarely siege other WH to take over the system. They will not stick around for weeks to hount down loot-cans form people logging. Once last structure drops, last wreck is looted and last death-trap setted up, they will go home. Removal of loot is just remowal of WH sieges in general. Many of them at least. Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Wulfy Johnson NorCorp Security 69	Posted - 2015.03.23 23:49:03 - [76] - Quote If youre dead set on having loot drop, a 10-20% of building cost of structure should be incentive enough, which with todays station cost is 2b+ in drops. The moment you put player assets on that line you will force a N+1 gameplay worse than we are seeing today, as people will be forced into even bigger groups than we are seeing to keep their assets somewhat safe under the new sov mechanics. For contrast, even a light deployment to get some fights will see personal hangars exceed 1b in assets very fast, and if those assets is not somewhat safe, it wont take long before the new mechanics to be counterproductive as people wont deploy more than a ship or two at most. Cans, please ccp, sometimes i feel you should force your staff to play.. I was one of those advocating more ships to carry assembled hulls a few years back.. We currently have 6 that can, bowhead, orca, carriers, sc, titans, rorqual(indy), any in that list you'd fancy taking on your own into 0.0 to retrive your ships in a warsone? Even worse will it be for players logged off and players that cant play 24/7 erryday, logging in to find all that they own floating in deep space, that will kill some motivation to play for sure. A mechanic to "pay" to get your assets out will be equally counterproductive, because when this comes online 0.0 will be torn a new one just for the fun of it, which in turn will force the 0.0 residents to become fulltime iskfarmers to get new gear rather than fighting.. So this is me, opting for C, have it teleported to next station so the fight can go on. As not all of us can grind isk 24/7 or be online for that matter..
Sabriz Adoudel Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 4895	Posted - 2015.03.23 23:53:14 - [77] - Quote By far the best option, IMO, is to have a limited amount of 'safe storage' and unlimited 'risky storage'. If the station dies, all stuff in risky storage is up for grabs (50% destroyed, 50% free lootable, Crimewatch considers this theft if relevant to the space). Safe storage would be fairly volume limited and rigs available to increase it. Structure owners would be able to specify who could use it, and under what terms (e.g. 'Anyone +10 to my alliance can use as much safe storage as they want', 'Anyone +5 to me personally can use up to 2000m^3 of safe storage', 'Anyone neutral to me can use up to 2000m^3 of safe storage if they pay me a once-ever fee of 250m ISK', 'Noone -5 or -10 to me can ever use this facility'). If someone's access rights change (say you mark someone -10 because they are caught stealing from the ship replacement fund), their safe storage rights are revoked and things in safe storage become remove-only. Stuff in safe storage would, on station destruction, be dumped at a random location within 4 AU of the station and would be safe until collected. Docked players and their active ship would always be deemed to be in safe storage. Going on holidays for six weeks but not unsubbing? That's fine, pay for more safe storage so your Dreadnought can sit in it. Shoot everyone. Let the Saviour sort it out. I enforce the New Haliama Code of Conduct via wardec ops. Ignorance of the law is no excuse - read about requirements for highsec miners at www.minerbumping.com
Arthur Aihaken Narada 4209	Posted - 2015.03.23 23:56:15 - [78] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Another option is to use the same mechanic we have for planetary launches. When a structure is destroyed, all assets are moved into special containers. A container exists for each individual that stored items in the structure, as well as corporation entities and are spread around planets. When this happens, an entry would appear on the owner journal giving a warp-in point to go to. Please note such containers would not be destructible at all, and could not be scanned until the rightful owner comes to retrieve his or her loot. The duration at which those entries would stay remains entirely dependent to the structure type and player condition when it was destroyed (logged off, account lapsed etcGÇª). Player docked inside the structure would be spread around the solar system. I think I prefer this option the best. Any thoughts on what would or could happen to moored ships? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Soleil Fournier Ultimatum. The Bastion 33	Posted - 2015.03.24 00:37:39 - [79] - Quote A few options I would be in favor of: * Asset insurance. You insure your belongings in a structure. Covers 90% of assets in that structure. In the event the structure is destroyed by way of naturally occurring space disaster (or bloodthirsty capsuleers set on destruction), your 'secured' stuff gets moved to your highsec station. Has the added benefit of a huge Isk sink. * When you lose your ship or POS, attackers are able to loot some items out of the wreck. I think a similar thing should happen with structures, as players stuff should never be 100% safe on principal alone. Lets say 10% of a players assets are spawned in a loot can that the attackers have access to, and the other 90% gets put in a secure can that only the owner has access to. (owner would then have to loot and transport his assets, assuming he didn't buy insurance of course) Rewards for attackers and consequences for the vanquished, but the vanquished still keep the vast majority of their stuff.
Schwein Hosen DuckPus Fightclub 22	Posted - 2015.03.24 01:20:04 - [80] - Quote I think you should consider making some small percentage of the stuff in the station drop as loot available to anyone. That way, no one person loses that much, but everyone can have a fun reward once the station blows up. I mean, at say 5% people can't complain that much and I feel like they do deserve to lose something since the thing did blow up. 5% would still mean billions in most cases, plenty enough for looting chaos to ensue. Also, you better have actual structure killmails that actually show the loot. (unlike most POS modules currently)

Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2367	Posted - 2015.03.24 01:22:31 - [81] - Quote Phoenix Jones wrote: Maybe the best of all worlds. There has to be a benefit to the killer of the structure (aka loot), but you cannot screw over those already inside the structure either (making them poor). So maybe doing all three of those at once. You destroy a structure, 10% of it drops as loot immediately, 40% of it remains in space for indeterminent amount of time to be picked up, if not, becomes free for all loot, the other 50% gets moved another structure belonging to the same owner. Basically, the person loses 10% of their belongings immediately, can recover 40% if they go get it, and has HALF of their stuff moved to the next structure. So you guaranteed lose half of your stuff, with the ability to recover up to 90% of your stuff if you go get it. You aren't spacepoor because you at least got 50% of it. Evacing stuff out isn't mandatory anymore because you'll at least get half of it back, but the attacker gets some immediate benefit for attacking (loot), and some more loot if they catch or camp the spot of destruction. The numbers can be played with. 10% seems low, 20% seems high, maybe 15% is the good drop loot rate. Something like this, but with the stuff being scattered to planets rather than teleported to the next structure. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Somatic Neuron Masterwork Productions Inc 67	Posted - 2015.03.24 02:58:54 - [82] - Quote Another option is just leaving the wreck as dockable by all. You cannot use any station services, and cannot add to your hangars, but you can take all your stuff. Leaving it dockable by all lets the assets stay in harms way...doesn't give you any free, immersion-breaking movement of goods, and solves all the other problems. When the structures are destroyed, the loot comes from structure modules dropping, or structure rig parts as a loot cans. Loot also comes from popping ships trying to sneak their assets out...
The Tallman Krannon of Sherwood Carthage Empires 1	Posted - 2015.03.24 03:10:55 - [83] - Quote I like the idea of changing the stick in a bubble crap we got now. I am very glad to see new designs etc. on POS's. But when you live in a POS in Null or WH there are things you need to be careful with else there will be no reason to live in one or stay in Null/WH. Without a semi safe POS to live in in WH space, there is no reason to be there, we could just leave our stuff in HS and un sub. The new POS needs to be able to defend it's self at least as well as the current towers do. (I already have a Full time job, I don't need to pay CCP to have another job keeping the EVE client running.)
Max Deveron Deveron Shipyards and Technology 194	Posted - 2015.03.24 04:32:05 - [84] - Quote Seeing as these structures wil most likely be Corporation/Alliance Assets i would think an insurance idea would work best. Both on individual Hangars and Corporate Hangars. Keep the insurance at a 30 day period like ships. and allow for increments in percentages 10%, 20%, 25%, 50%.........etc etc with upscaling costs for such insurance. It would provide an ISK sink. Each item or stack of items would be randomly selected if 100% is not selected. What gets protected then is shipped to either another Player structure or NPC station of choice. What is not protected is then decided by the loot fairy if dropped or not. This i think would be fair for all types of security space, besides these structures are going to be a huge investment.....1 man corps most likely will never have them.
Arya Regnar Darwins Right Hand 684	Posted - 2015.03.24 05:40:47 - [85] - Quote More promoting safety and removing the looting and rewards of offensive gameplay styles. Sigh... EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Amarisen Gream The ArK's Hammer ArK Alliance 66	Posted - 2015.03.24 05:57:47 - [86] - Quote I am going to vote for a CONCORD decree that A) has SOE and Interbus save all player items in their hangers from large and XL structures. it would be placed in a contract to the player/corp with a % of the assets value as cost. The player could pick a NPC station or other alliance building at a cost. All items in production would drop loot, all items on market plus the escrow would drop as loot. With standard loot chance. xoxo Amarisen Gream
Alavaria Fera GoonWaffe 6676	Posted - 2015.03.24 06:01:43 - [87] - Quote Thank goodness we always can rely on the npcs ^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears. Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
Sean Parisi Fugutive Task Force A T O N E M E N T 666	Posted - 2015.03.24 08:15:23 - [88] - Quote How will this apply to ships that are currently docked and assembled? The bulkiness of them would be exponential - so would you be able to enter them with a POD and fly off? (Like a ship maintenance array) or will you need a bowhead? Assumption would be Super Capitals and Titans would either be destroyed or hijacked on destruction.
Ben Ishikela 25	Posted - 2015.03.24 10:00:03 - [89] - Quote Phoenix Jones wrote: (...) You destroy a structure, 10% of it drops as loot immediately, 40% of it remains in space for indeterminent amount of time to be picked up, if not, becomes free for all loot, the other 50% gets moved another structure belonging to the same owner. (...) Of everything i read, this has the biggest potential imho. Additional Ideas: . "Interbus cargo insurance" lets you insure your hangar. If anything is lost -> payout. . "Interbus emergency Shipping" lets you set a destination. All assets inside destroyed structures will be traveling there in cloaky containers (only the 50%. see above). (takes time). pay X% per LY of its worth. (If you did not pay the premium service, only 25% or less is delivered) I very much like the idea of nomadic pilots warping around battlefields several days later and try to control the grid of a blown up stations in hope to find something valuable (And i like little games inside big ones). Therefore idea to incentivice this kind of gameplay: . Spawn wrecks (that are parts of the station)/refill the initial wreck randomly over time until 7days later. Then all is lost. Until then the 40%+ from above get slowly/bit by bit accessible to everyone over time. (Lore: Secure Compartments/Safe. Loose their backup energy systems and their cloak fails. See Sleeper Cache or unidentified structures for reference that it is possible within EVE). Somehow if the owner comes back immediatly, then he can recover more of his stuff than if he comes back later. The bleeding value is evenly distributed among all assetholders (40/7=5.7% of total per person drops each at a random time of day. OR 5.7/24= 0.24% drop each hour at a random minute) (this is a model for a linear rate. but does not have to be linear). . the activation of a relic analyzer / cargo scanner would reveal the list of assets that are still present. . cloaked containers can not be decloaked. (their objects simple do not exist in space yet. "hyperspace jo!") Ninja looting is compelling but i much better like to have to control the grid first (teamwork and conflict). Therefore this: . a former Asset-holder can click the wreck and select "disable own loot-safety". ("disable all loot-safety". for owner(/see corp roles also)). Then all his assets are decloaked in a single can at a random spot in space 150km+ around the wreck (same grid!). As warpin for everyone. ->To encourage fights between 2nd and 3rd party scavengers, i would make these cans needed to be hacked first in order to get access. @new structure/ largeTractorBeam: I'd love them to collect/tractor these randomly overtime uncloaking cans. When they are full, they pop up as signature. Someone can then probe them, hack them and steal. (see relic sites) Just some stuff to think about. Have fun with it! Add new modules or ships that can use tactics and strategies to beat the current meta or use totaly different gameplay to do so! yay :)
Kjode Gauk Aerodyne Collective. Kadeshians 0	Posted - 2015.03.24 11:35:58 - [90] - Quote Why not dump the cargo from exploding stations to the nearest planet? I see There's always a planet nearby and it's a static item that CCP / Players shouldn't be able to destroy? I hope. Makes custom offices more relevant. Gives somewhat of a penalty for trusting the loosing side (in the form of the tax) and potentially pays the other side if they move fast enough to replace the customs office. Gives you an incentive to PVP in the form of the custom station. Destroying it might save you billions you won't have to pay to the persons that destroyed the station (and possibly moved in). Doesn't have a problem with death by 10% if your items are moved to the nearest station you have access to (which sounds like a standing nightmare, could easily be manipulated). Doesn't cause space clutter. Possibly easier to understand to newbies than: go to X spot, but once you go you only have y time and z could happen while you're there. No available inventory size shenanigans.

Aralyn Cormallen Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 913	Posted - 2015.03.24 11:51:29 - [91] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: First option is to have the structure turn into a wreck - fitted structure modules could drop as loot, while items inside the structure would only be accessible to their rightful owner(s), possibly through salvaging. Users docked at the time of the structure destruction would still be docked inside the wreck, but unable to dock back should they exit. Another option is to use the same mechanic we have for planetary launches. When a structure is destroyed, all assets are moved into special containers. A container exists for each individual that stored items in the structure, as well as corporation entities and are spread around planets. When this happens, an entry would appear on the owner journal giving a warp-in point to go to. Please note such containers would not be destructible at all, and could not be scanned until the rightful owner comes to retrieve his or her loot. The duration at which those entries would stay remains entirely dependent to the structure type and player condition when it was destroyed (logged off, account lapsed etcGÇª). Player docked inside the structure would be spread around the solar system. Third option could be to have the items inside the structure moved to another structure belonging to the same owners. Option 1 is by far the better of the three, but in order to prevent a massive wreck accumulation there might need to be some limitation on it (such as having wrecks only for Large and Extra-Large structures, with option 2 for anything smaller), or some solution to consolidate wrecks (maybe have further destroyed structures on the same grid merge with the older wrecks). Maybe allow former-owners to rebuild their old wreck, rather than have to plant a new one. As for btaining your stuff from a wreck, I would even go so far as say accessing "your" part of the wreck should be a one-time deal, and as soon as you disengage from the wreck, everything else gets ejected (either on the wreck grid, or in to space as in option 2), forcing you to prioritise your possessions. Option 3 is far too safe and easy, and renders the whole point of destroying them rather than capturing them moot (since you are actually helping your enemy by moving their possessions to safety for them!), and as Scatim pointed out, could be used hilariously by organisations to move whole alliances in the blink of an eye.
Cpt Patrick Archer Quam Singulari Northern Associates. 44	Posted - 2015.03.24 14:10:56 - [92] - Quote I vote option 2. Maybe add a 'small' structure like a salvage platform that has to be deployed next to the wreck of the old structures. This would allow (jump)freighters or Bowheads to moor (or dock) here. I think this is needed since my corp alone has about 1.000.000.000 m3 worth items spread out between various members and hangers. It will be impossible to 'safely' extract that much stuff from a destroyed structure.
GeeShizzle MacCloud 581	Posted - 2015.03.24 15:29:03 - [93] - Quote Maybe we should iterate entirely on the mechanics of Wrecks, salvaging and looting? instead of individual wrecks, maybe a debris field that you use a t1 or t2 salvager on and it gives a random selection of mods from ships that have died along with a few bits of salvage? Would remove the annoyance of people rushing carrier and super wrecks, or the ridiculous situation where a MTU grabs a titan wreck and pulls it about at 1000m/sec (which tbh in b-r was hilariously and frustratingly absurd) I do prefer the idea of outpost wrecks having a majority of player / corp hangars stuff go to the nearest planet and having to either move it back up via a POCO or via planetary launches, but feel that the victor should get some spoils at least. there needs to be a mechanic though where a conquering hostile force can choose to capture structures like outposts and ihubs without destroying them, with a longer capture time to do so.
John McCreedy Eve Defence Force The Kadeshi 199	Posted - 2015.03.24 18:23:56 - [94] - Quote Forgetting the individual concerns I've raised in the threads, there's a design feature I don't like about this. Note, design not gameplay. Why individual structures for each thing, deployed in different places? It would be much cooler if these where designed in a modular fashion so that alliances had single large sprawling complex in space that encompassed all services with everything physically interconnected. Hundreds of kilometres of structures. You want a sense of scale, that would give it to you. 11 years and counting. Eve Defence Force is recruiting.
Alexis Nightwish 137	Posted - 2015.03.24 18:46:38 - [95] - Quote Reading through this thread it blows me away how much wailing and gnashing of teeth there is about structure destruction. What kind of culture does nullsec have when people lose their minds over a mechanic in which you get to keep all your stuff when you lose? There's no real consequence beyond the inconvenience of having to go pick it up and move it. And the proposed changes are even a change from the current system where if a station is flipped you can be denied docking access, thus losing access to all your stuff, so the new mechanic placates the risk averse even more! I just don't get why CCP won't let stuff drop as loot. Isn't killing people and taking their stuff a content driver? Isn't fighting people to defend your stuff a content driver? Wouldn't the potential of your assets being at risk encourage you to live in and use your space? Sadly, this thread isn't about what manner, or how much you'll lose if a housing structure is destroyed, but how will CCP protect your stuff when you failed to do so. CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button
GeeShizzle MacCloud 582	Posted - 2015.03.24 18:57:59 - [96] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: Reading through this thread it blows me away how much wailing and gnashing of teeth there is about structure destruction. What kind of culture does nullsec have when people lose their minds over a mechanic in which you get to keep all your stuff when you lose? There's no real consequence beyond the inconvenience of having to go pick it up and move it. And the proposed changes are even a change from the current system where if a station is flipped you can be denied docking access, thus losing access to all your stuff, so the new mechanic placates the risk averse even more! I just don't get why CCP won't let stuff drop as loot. Isn't killing people and taking their stuff a content driver? Isn't fighting people to defend your stuff a content driver? Wouldn't the potential of your assets being at risk encourage you to live in and use your space? Sadly, this thread isn't about what manner, or how much you'll lose if a housing structure is destroyed, but how will CCP protect your stuff when you failed to do so. yah cause if i have a RL emergency that keeps me away from the game for days and my super is moored onto a L structure, itd be great to come back after say a week of being in hospital to find my super was taken from under me just because something unfortunate happened in the real world and hostile attacked that pos. Yahh that's a fun game. Go back and rethink your argument in a way that doesn't penalises people for not playing 23.5/7.
oohthey ioh Republic University Minmatar Republic 27	Posted - 2015.03.24 19:02:16 - [97] - Quote Amarisen Gream wrote: I am going to vote for a CONCORD decree that A) has SOE and Interbus save all player items in their hangers from large and XL structures. it would be placed in a contract to the player/corp with a % of the assets value as cost. The player could pick a NPC station or other alliance building at a cost. All items in production would drop loot, all items on market plus the escrow would drop as loot. With standard loot chance. that would work as a great isk sink
The Tallman Krannon of Sherwood Carthage Empires 1	Posted - 2015.03.24 20:26:55 - [98] - Quote The new pos's still need timers when they fall under attack. No one can drive home from work to play eve in the middle of the day. The new pos's also still need some kind of shield or bubble of some sort as a visual reference as to when you are within control distance of the pos. When docked: my suggestion is you switch to a view of your station like it was your ship with ship overview and UI interface. If you are to defend your POS manually, you will need to be able to see the battle. Makes sense that in scifi you could see whats happening outside your POS from within it. Option for docking and being inside, screens/new UI that still shows you what's going on outside.
John McCreedy Eve Defence Force The Kadeshi 200	Posted - 2015.03.24 20:44:12 - [99] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: Reading through this thread it blows me away how much wailing and gnashing of teeth there is about structure destruction. What kind of culture does nullsec have when people lose their minds over a mechanic in which you get to keep all your stuff when you lose? There's no real consequence beyond the inconvenience of having to go pick it up and move it. And the proposed changes are even a change from the current system where if a station is flipped you can be denied docking access, thus losing access to all your stuff, so the new mechanic placates the risk averse even more! I just don't get why CCP won't let stuff drop as loot. Isn't killing people and taking their stuff a content driver? Isn't fighting people to defend your stuff a content driver? Wouldn't the potential of your assets being at risk encourage you to live in and use your space? Sadly, this thread isn't about what manner, or how much you'll lose if a housing structure is destroyed, but how will CCP protect your stuff when you failed to do so. It's because you're missing the point. The issue isn't structure destruction, the issue is Outpost (and its replacement) destruction and couple that with the current 'trollceptor' proposal. Would you store Carriers, Dreads, BS, HACs etc. in a station, especially if a ceptor can cause it to blow up? Let's make Jita destructible. Then see how many people start 'wailing' on the forum. 11 years and counting. Eve Defence Force is recruiting.
Dr Cedric Independent Miners Corporation Care Factor 84	Posted - 2015.03.24 21:31:51 - [100] - Quote Somatic Neuron wrote: Another option is just leaving the wreck as dockable by all. You cannot use any station services, and cannot add to your hangars, but you can take all your stuff. Leaving it dockable by all lets the assets stay in harms way...doesn't give you any free, immersion-breaking movement of goods, and solves all the other problems. When the structures are destroyed, the loot comes from structure modules dropping, or structure rig parts as a loot cans. Loot also comes from popping ships trying to sneak their assets out... To add to this idea: Once the structure has been "blown-up" the attacker can hack/salvage/archeology the structure to gain access to the hangars/cans of people inside the station. Hacking is impossible for 1st day (week), then becomes (insert fancy math/logarithm/function) easier as time goes on. Likewise, add a hack/salvage/archeology mechanic to allow the structure owner(s) to repair it over time with some optimal time frame that is slightly randomized. Cedric

Phig Neutron Rubicon Cubism 96	Posted - 2015.03.24 21:32:58 - [101] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: What kind of culture does nullsec have when people lose their minds over a mechanic in which you get to keep all your stuff when you lose? It's not about "when you lose", it's about when you're not in game at all. Game designers have to balance "realism" within the game universe with the fact that people don't really live in the virtual world. That's why POS's have reinforcement timers -- the attackers have the advantage of choosing the time of attack at a time when the defenders may not even be logged in, so reinforcement allows the defenders to try to choose the dime of defense. People leave stuff in outposts not because they're afraid of permaloss, but because they're going to log out. (People who don't like permaloss don't play EVE beyond the trial.) Under the new outpost destruction mechanics, you're essentially saying that if someone is logged out for more than 48 hours or so, they're going to lose all of their assets and be required to bring a freighter into an active war zone in order to recover them. That's absolutely incompatible with most people who have real lives, children, jobs, not to mention those who serve in the military. EDIT: Maybe CCP wants to change the way people play the game, such that nobody will keep more than one ship at a time, people will be nomadic and specialize instead of switching ships for different jobs. If that's their intention, I really wish they'd say so.
Alexis Nightwish 138	Posted - 2015.03.24 21:50:11 - [102] - Quote GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote: Alexis Nightwish wrote: Reading through this thread it blows me away how much wailing and gnashing of teeth there is about structure destruction. What kind of culture does nullsec have when people lose their minds over a mechanic in which you get to keep all your stuff when you lose? There's no real consequence beyond the inconvenience of having to go pick it up and move it. And the proposed changes are even a change from the current system where if a station is flipped you can be denied docking access, thus losing access to all your stuff, so the new mechanic placates the risk averse even more! I just don't get why CCP won't let stuff drop as loot. Isn't killing people and taking their stuff a content driver? Isn't fighting people to defend your stuff a content driver? Wouldn't the potential of your assets being at risk encourage you to live in and use your space? Sadly, this thread isn't about what manner, or how much you'll lose if a housing structure is destroyed, but how will CCP protect your stuff when you failed to do so. yah cause if i have a RL emergency that keeps me away from the game for days and my super is moored onto a L structure, itd be great to come back after say a week of being in hospital to find my super was taken from under me just because something unfortunate happened in the real world and hostile attacked that pos. Yahh that's a fun game. Go back and rethink your argument in a way that doesn't penalises people for not playing 23.5/7. As I understand it, your alliance mates are perfectly capable of moving the super to a safe location during your absence. CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Petrified Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance 239	Posted - 2015.03.24 21:50:28 - [103] - Quote Querns wrote: Agreed that some mechanism of recovering assets is vital to encourage use of these destructible structures. Perhaps a last-ditch option GÇö NPCs airlift half (or less) your stuff to the nearest npc 0.0 or lowsec area, chosen randomly from the stuff that you have? Retain one or more of the other options as a way to get back all your stuff, but using the airlift makes the stuff not randomly chosen be destroyed. A Half and Half option, but without the destruction. Half the items, chosen at random get 'rescued' and moved to the nearest station - owned by the player losing their items or NPC station - in the event . The other half remains in the "wreck" to be recovered by the player when they can. Or, you could also have anything not a capital salvaged by an independent crew and moved to an NPC station. The owner of the items then pays a fee for the recovery, much like a corp paying for items that become impounded. Anything capital and up has to be recovered from the wreck itself.
Alexis Nightwish 138	Posted - 2015.03.24 21:51:24 - [104] - Quote John McCreedy wrote: Alexis Nightwish wrote: Reading through this thread it blows me away how much wailing and gnashing of teeth there is about structure destruction. What kind of culture does nullsec have when people lose their minds over a mechanic in which you get to keep all your stuff when you lose? There's no real consequence beyond the inconvenience of having to go pick it up and move it. And the proposed changes are even a change from the current system where if a station is flipped you can be denied docking access, thus losing access to all your stuff, so the new mechanic placates the risk averse even more! I just don't get why CCP won't let stuff drop as loot. Isn't killing people and taking their stuff a content driver? Isn't fighting people to defend your stuff a content driver? Wouldn't the potential of your assets being at risk encourage you to live in and use your space? Sadly, this thread isn't about what manner, or how much you'll lose if a housing structure is destroyed, but how will CCP protect your stuff when you failed to do so. It's because you're missing the point. The issue isn't structure destruction, the issue is Outpost (and its replacement) destruction and couple that with the current 'trollceptor' proposal. Would you store Carriers, Dreads, BS, HACs etc. in a station, especially if a ceptor can cause it to blow up? Let's make Jita destructible. Then see how many people start 'wailing' on the forum. If an interceptor is able to flip a station that you have 100s of billions of ISK floating at, maybe SOV isn't for you. CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Alexis Nightwish 138	Posted - 2015.03.24 21:57:08 - [105] - Quote Phig Neutron wrote: Alexis Nightwish wrote: What kind of culture does nullsec have when people lose their minds over a mechanic in which you get to keep all your stuff when you lose? It's not about "when you lose", it's about when you're not in game at all. Game designers have to balance "realism" within the game universe with the fact that people don't really live in the virtual world. That's why POS's have reinforcement timers -- the attackers have the advantage of choosing the time of attack at a time when the defenders may not even be logged in, so reinforcement allows the defenders to try to choose the dime of defense. People leave stuff in outposts not because they're afraid of permaloss, but because they're going to log out. (People who don't like permaloss don't play EVE beyond the trial.) Under the new outpost destruction mechanics, you're essentially saying that if someone is logged out for more than 48 hours or so, they're going to lose all of their assets and be required to bring a freighter into an active war zone in order to recover them. That's absolutely incompatible with most people who have real lives, children, jobs, not to mention those who serve in the military. EDIT: Maybe CCP wants to change the way people play the game, such that nobody will keep more than one ship at a time, people will be nomadic and specialize instead of switching ships for different jobs. If that's their intention, I really wish they'd say so. Aren't the mechanics of the tug of war, freeport, and a 48 hour RF + the time it takes to capture command nodes enough for most players? Not to mention your friends and allies being there to evac your supers (which I consider to be in the realm of corp or alliance strategic assets, not personal ships). As for ships you have docked, I wouldn't put all my eggs in one basket, but that's just me. CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Gabriel Karade Noir. No Not Believing 240	Posted - 2015.03.24 22:11:45 - [106] - Quote Option #1, allow anyone to salvage the wreck, add insurance for station hanger contents War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Phig Neutron Rubicon Cubism 96	Posted - 2015.03.24 22:27:23 - [107] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: Aren't the mechanics of the tug of war, freeport, and a 48 hour RF + the time it takes to capture command nodes enough for most players? That's not what we're discussing. This is a discussion of the new structures CCP is proposing to replace outposts and POS's, all of which will be destructible.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1975	Posted - 2015.03.24 22:39:46 - [108] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: Aren't the mechanics of the tug of war, freeport, and a 48 hour RF + the time it takes to capture command nodes enough for most players? Not to mention your friends and allies being there to evac your supers (which I consider to be in the realm of corp or alliance strategic assets, not personal ships). As for ships you have docked, I wouldn't put all my eggs in one basket, but that's just me. None of which DESTROYS or LOOTS existing assets in the station. You may lose access to the assets but they are still yours and they are still present. So you can find someone who can get them out on contract for you, fire sale them to get isk quick, slow sell them to get full market value, infiltrate the alliance to move your assets back out or launch a campaign to get them back by force. What is being discussed is the possible outright destruction & theft of assets while offline, something that is currently only possible in POS, which match MEDIUM structures. Bolded for emphasis, POS are not large structures they are medium in the proposed sizes coming in. Outposts are large. And we currently do not have any XL structures at all. So while medium structures should still be vulnerable to looting like currently, with a reinforcement mechanic, large and extra large structures are quite different kettles of fish. Small structures of course can be attacked with a simple suspect flag for the most part, and a short reinforcement timer in most cases also. Which works well.
Alexis Nightwish 138	Posted - 2015.03.24 23:01:34 - [109] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Alexis Nightwish wrote: Aren't the mechanics of the tug of war, freeport, and a 48 hour RF + the time it takes to capture command nodes enough for most players? Not to mention your friends and allies being there to evac your supers (which I consider to be in the realm of corp or alliance strategic assets, not personal ships). As for ships you have docked, I wouldn't put all my eggs in one basket, but that's just me. None of which DESTROYS or LOOTS existing assets in the station. You may lose access to the assets but they are still yours and they are still present. So you can find someone who can get them out on contract for you, fire sale them to get isk quick, slow sell them to get full market value, infiltrate the alliance to move your assets back out or launch a campaign to get them back by force. What is being discussed is the possible outright destruction & theft of assets while offline, something that is currently only possible in POS, which match MEDIUM structures. Bolded for emphasis, POS are not large structures they are medium in the proposed sizes coming in. Outposts are large. And we currently do not have any XL structures at all. So while medium structures should still be vulnerable to looting like currently, with a reinforcement mechanic, large and extra large structures are quite different kettles of fish. Small structures of course can be attacked with a simple suspect flag for the most part, and a short reinforcement timer in most cases also. Which works well. If, under the new system, ships of any size at an XL structure could not be stolen/looted, why would anyone build anything smaller? CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2028	Posted - 2015.03.24 23:03:58 - [110] - Quote Antonia Iskarius wrote: This sounds like a hilariously bad idea if it is going to apply to outposts. If I want to unsub for a while, or go on vacation, or even just take a break, there is a chance I could lose my ships and stuff through no fault of my own? If that were the case every time I wanted to step away from the game I would need to evacuate everything I own in null to either an NPC station (assuming they will still in invulnerable), sell it, or stash it all into freighter/bowhead/carrier alts and log off in safe spots in lowsec? Sounds like an incredible hassle. Not my idea of fun gameplay. You can already lose access to all the same stuff under the current system. The space spread thing looks fine until you bring up the issues of the assembled ships..... I think the SOE Idea could be nice (or other group) they send you a table into your journal with names of the ships they found that belong to you, with a price for witch they can collect those ships and deploy them in a low sec system of your choice. THat price could be something like 5-10% of the ship hull price "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment

Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2028	Posted - 2015.03.24 23:07:04 - [111] - Quote Alavaria Fera wrote: Thank goodness we always can rely on the npcs Problem is.. without using the NPCs how woudl you retrieve a dread? Sicne you cannot dock on the wreck to board it, and neither youc an scoop a dread even o nthe most gigantic cargo hold of the game. You need a way of magic movement. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1976	Posted - 2015.03.24 23:12:21 - [112] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: If, under the new system, ships of any size at an XL structure could not be stolen/looted, why would anyone build anything smaller? Cost, Logistics, because they like the ability to move around much easier than an XL structure would allow. Simply because they don't need them and they don't have that much at risk. If you aren't using super caps or caps you don't have any moored ships after all. WH's may not allow XL structures because of 'Gravitational tides' on a big structure being too much while smaller structures can survive them. Plenty of reasons to not build an XL really. Especially if the main way to attack them is not direct HP grind, so you don't gain huge amounts from having the bigger structure in terms of defence.
Alexis Nightwish 138	Posted - 2015.03.24 23:18:04 - [113] - Quote Phig Neutron wrote: Alexis Nightwish wrote: Aren't the mechanics of the tug of war, freeport, and a 48 hour RF + the time it takes to capture command nodes enough for most players? That's not what we're discussing. This is a discussion of the new structures CCP is proposing to replace outposts and POS's, all of which will be destructible. Yes I understand that. What I was saying is that don't the proposed SOV mechanics give a lot of power to the defender? The structure can only be "attacked" during a four hour window, which is supposed to be set during the time your alliance is most active. If your alliance fails to defend during that small window, the structure goes into RF for 48hrs. Then after that it goes into freeport mode while the command nodes start spawning. After all of that, AND if your alliance loses the tug of war, then and only then does the station pop. To me, this looks like a lot of time to move some or all of your assets out, even if you can't play 23/7. CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Ambrosse Brutus Cyborg Infomorph Technologies Stain Confederation 7	Posted - 2015.03.24 23:18:09 - [114] - Quote Option one or two sound feasible. I always imagined it would work in a fashion similar to how planetary launches currently operate, although option one sounds like it could be also very interesting although I'm not sure how practical it would be. Option three is the least desirable.
Alexis Nightwish 138	Posted - 2015.03.24 23:23:46 - [115] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Alexis Nightwish wrote: If, under the new system, ships of any size at an XL structure could not be stolen/looted, why would anyone build anything smaller? Cost, Logistics, because they like the ability to move around much easier than an XL structure would allow. Simply because they don't need them and they don't have that much at risk. If you aren't using super caps or caps you don't have any moored ships after all. WH's may not allow XL structures because of 'Gravitational tides' on a big structure being too much while smaller structures can survive them. Plenty of reasons to not build an XL really. Especially if the main way to attack them is not direct HP grind, so you don't gain huge amounts from having the bigger structure in terms of defence. So basically CCP has to ask themselves "If the costs and logistic overhead of XL structures is only feasible to alliances that can also handle the costs and logistics of building supercaps, do we want to make all supercaps un-lootable/un-stealable? Because if we give this immunity only to XL structures, and only supercap owners can build the XLs, supercaps will always be moored at XLs without exception." CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Medreena Burstin Thunder Aerospace Incorporated 1	Posted - 2015.03.25 01:41:22 - [116] - Quote Im all for 100% loot drop per the loot ferry on all structures. Make it really simple. You can explode the wrecks like the old hacking mini game too! My ONLY concern is inactive players who are actually unsubbed and have been for awhile. They left the game with a certain set of rules in place and probably dont keep on changes. i suggest the following: For accounts inactive at least: - 60 days prior explode thier cans like a planetary launch, turns on at next login. Email explaining what happened. Destroy their current clone and relocate them to a random jc. - More than 60 days relocate to their birth system with an email from interbus explaining where the stuff is and why. Move their current clone there as well. To me this solves 100% of the problems simply.
GeeShizzle MacCloud 582	Posted - 2015.03.25 01:53:01 - [117] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote: yah cause if i have a RL emergency that keeps me away from the game for days and my super is moored onto a L structure, itd be great to come back after say a week of being in hospital to find my super was taken from under me just because something unfortunate happened in the real world and hostile attacked that pos. Yahh that's a fun game. Go back and rethink your argument in a way that doesn't penalises people for not playing 23.5/7. As I understand it, your alliance mates are perfectly capable of moving the super to a safe location during your absence. so you're advocating account sharing? i think you'll find thats against the EULA/TOS.
Alexis Nightwish 138	Posted - 2015.03.25 02:29:31 - [118] - Quote GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote: Alexis Nightwish wrote: GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote: yah cause if i have a RL emergency that keeps me away from the game for days and my super is moored onto a L structure, itd be great to come back after say a week of being in hospital to find my super was taken from under me just because something unfortunate happened in the real world and hostile attacked that pos. Yahh that's a fun game. Go back and rethink your argument in a way that doesn't penalises people for not playing 23.5/7. As I understand it, your alliance mates are perfectly capable of moving the super to a safe location during your absence. so you're advocating account sharing? i think you'll find thats against the EULA/TOS. ... and i do hope that your whimsical disregard for such a breach of the rules of play isn't indicative of you or your corp / alliance mates activities. At what point did supers get locked to accounts? Moor super at structure. Eject. Log out. **** happens. Ally boards super. Ally gets super to safety. Where in the above is the EULA breach? CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Felter Echerie SL33P3R C3LL 3	Posted - 2015.03.25 06:22:35 - [119] - Quote what about the servant sisters of eve? as i understand they already do this kind of job acording to the lore... couldn't they go looking for those assets to secure them? and have their own forward station that holds said assets? but it would be a central hub of wrecks of sorts... probly in npc null; so to get your assets back u would need to go to a soe base to get them back.
Masao Kurata Z List 199	Posted - 2015.03.25 07:42:19 - [120] - Quote I kept hearing the phase "rightful owner" in the presentation but am unfamiliar with what those two words could mean in that combination in EVE. I get it, you want people to be involved in the loss of their stuff, and it's no longer just the corp owning the structure that stands to lose. This is fundamentally at odds with the asynchronous gameplay offered by structures so you're trying to offer magic safety measures. But these are too absolute, especially in highsec. Magically transporting items First, null. Bubbled gates provide a pretty good chance of SOMEONE catching the prior owner when he goes to retrieve his stuff........ but it probably won't be the guys who blew up the structure, nor even anyone affiliated with them, especially if there's a long delay before they come back. Low: good luck catching that blockade runner. High: oh god the abuse. Do you even realise how impossible it'll be to stop anyone with half a brain from getting their items to npc station safety? Neutral alts to carry the items, the original owner only moving items to them (fleet bay / putting in a jettisoned can), npc station in system pretty much guarantees the safety even if the owner doesn't know about such methods, even without this if the original owner isn't at war he's probably safe anyway, hauling in highsec is incredibly safe as a neutral. How about this? Let's expand on the "in progress" idea with secured and unsecured assets. You're never going to get people to consent to putting everything they own in a structure which can potentially be looted, there isn't a carrot big enough in the universe to make EVE players do that. But you could convince them to put assets they are using or have available for immediate use at risk. The unscannable can idea has potential, and if it's only "secured" assets we can even lift restrictions on it, the owner can come pick it up whenever he chooses. Let's say that can is in fact part of your hangar in this structure, every hangar comes with an independent covert ops emergency warp thingamabob I don't care about the role playing excuse for this existing, but regardless it's your warping can idea, except it's part of your hangar. Here's the catch: you can deposit items and ships to that hangar immediately, and in case you change your mind they're actually in an airlock like area for an hour or so but after that they're secure but inaccessible. If you want to remove something from the spacesafe, for some obscure reason to do with quantum physics this will take 20 hours. Basically you can't have it until tomorrow. Unsecured assets have normal drop mechanics. Flip a coin to choose its fate and it ends up in the wreck, loot for all! You can't run jobs or place market orders with the secure area of course, so these drop too. Incidentally regarding industry jobs, could you treat it as Runs * Time Since Job Started / Job Time output items plus Input Materials * Time Remaining / Job Time for the purpose of loot?

Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1907	Posted - 2015.03.25 09:14:15 - [121] - Quote I really dislike the concept of NPC couriers. Why on earth would you add this when there are already courier corps? Logistics should be a player solved problem. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
GeeShizzle MacCloud 582	Posted - 2015.03.25 11:33:59 - [122] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote: Alexis Nightwish wrote: GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote: yah cause if i have a RL emergency that keeps me away from the game for days and my super is moored onto a L structure, itd be great to come back after say a week of being in hospital to find my super was taken from under me just because something unfortunate happened in the real world and hostile attacked that pos. Yahh that's a fun game. Go back and rethink your argument in a way that doesn't penalises people for not playing 23.5/7. As I understand it, your alliance mates are perfectly capable of moving the super to a safe location during your absence. so you're advocating account sharing? i think you'll find thats against the EULA/TOS. ... and i do hope that your whimsical disregard for such a breach of the rules of play isn't indicative of you or your corp / alliance mates activities. At what point did supers get locked to accounts? Moor super at structure. Eject. Log out. ** happens. Ally boards super. Ally gets super to safety. Where in the above is the EULA breach? The bit where you realise you need to keep the the fking context of the discussion and not assume that someone can do that from a hospital bed in an unconscious state with broken arms etc...
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 1025	Posted - 2015.03.25 11:52:30 - [123] - Quote For getting stuff out of a station perhaps expensive emergency mooring and storage containers could be built. In the event of a station going down the mooring jump bridges itself and any ship moored to it to a safe spot and cloaks up. The jump drive would need to be fuelled up to operate and would only be a one way jump to a pre-determined set of co-ords or a random location stored under planetary launches. On arrival the mooring would cloak or simply not be visible on d-scan but still visible if someone happens to fly near it. This gives players a means to save their stuff if away from the game but at a cost. The location would be stored in their planetary launches tab to allow a player who is away from the game to go back and grab their stuff. Other players could locate their stash by tracking down the player in space.
thatonepersone Son's of Plunder The Marmite Collective 14	Posted - 2015.03.25 13:02:15 - [124] - Quote There should be no asset safety except on xl structures in so null. Anything more than that and you might as well be in a high sec war dec Corp.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2028	Posted - 2015.03.25 14:34:28 - [125] - Quote Zappity wrote: I really dislike the concept of NPC couriers. Why on earth would you add this when there are already courier corps? Logistics should be a player solved problem. Problem is there is no ship in game that can scrrop a capital ship that was in the hangar and was spilled into space! There is no way to solve it with current mechanics, unless you allow peopel to board things that are inside a container.... but I bet ccp do not want to implement that. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Masao Kurata Z List 200	Posted - 2015.03.25 17:12:50 - [126] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Zappity wrote: I really dislike the concept of NPC couriers. Why on earth would you add this when there are already courier corps? Logistics should be a player solved problem. Problem is there is no ship in game that can scrrop a capital ship that was in the hangar and was spilled into space! There is no way to solve it with current mechanics, unless you allow peopel to board things that are inside a container.... but I bet ccp do not want to implement that. They already implemented that, you can do that with SMA, orca, carrier, super and titan wrecks.
Phig Neutron Rubicon Cubism 97	Posted - 2015.03.25 17:15:43 - [127] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: To me, this looks like a lot of time to move some or all of your assets out, even if you can't play 23/7. To me it looks like 3 or 4 days. So if I'm a guy who plays only on the weekend, I could come back every time to a pod floating in space with all my assets gone. Nevermind if I take a few weeks or months off from the game.
Masao Kurata Z List 201	Posted - 2015.03.25 17:18:31 - [128] - Quote I realised that if a secure/insecure split for accessibility with a delay on getting things in or out, like I suggested, was implemented, it should actually have a significant delay on putting things into long term storage, although it should be possible to queue things to go in or out remotely. I'm thinking 28 hours to secure items, which can be cancelled at any point in that time, 20 hours to extract items ready for use. For a physical explanation of what's going on, let's say the items are being physically sealed off by whatever tech that we don't use in spaceship manufacturing because of Reasons, and when you want items out the workers inside move them then seal off that area before breaching the outer wall.
Phig Neutron Rubicon Cubism 97	Posted - 2015.03.25 17:22:03 - [129] - Quote Masao Kurata wrote: EDIT: Well I should've read the whole thread, the secure/insecure split was suggested earlier, although not with the ready for use mechanic that I'm suggesting, and later there's an inaccessible protected mode mentioned, although for the entire hangar. I like my solution best of course but I'm biased. It's a lot like my "space elevator" idea -- secure items on planet surface, insecure items at the orbital structure, and some substantial delay involved in moving assets between the two. My idea also has the benefit of giving the DUST players something to see on the horizon. Quote: Say, lieutenant, what's that potato-shaped lump over there with the camo webbing over it?
Idgarad Yulai Guard Yulai Federation 9	Posted - 2015.03.25 18:18:20 - [130] - Quote Report from old thread: Simple solution for the "structure destroyed, what to do with everyones ****" solution. Throw it into impound and charge a per m3 free to get it out of impound with the first 50,000m3 free of charge (or whatever m3 value is appropriate). They can go to any station and get their stuff but charge a fee to prevent creative item transferring over a distance. Moored ships fair game. To further temper the impound solution have it transfer only Xm3 per hour. Someone with 300,000,000m3 of cargo in a station might have to pay (say for argument and easy math 10isk per m3) would fork over 3,000,000,000 isk to get it all out but only 1,000,000m3 per hour so you'd be looking at 3000 hours (128 days) to get it all out of impound. (Obviously tweak those numbers to something appropriate). It prevents someone loading up a crap ton of capitals and blowing their own POS up to quick move stuff around while giving people the ability to get their loot from a station that got whacked while there were gone. Think of it as Interbus handling the salvaging of the massive wrecks. Hell let those on the killmail get a % cut of the impound fee as compensation. Moored ships I would assume are normal fair game but this seems a simple, lightweight solution and compromise. Nothing worse then someone who only plays say in the winter, and comes back after 4 months.

Tessaline Tessaract Industries 0	Posted - 2015.03.25 18:34:07 - [131] - Quote I do not like the idea of limiting the time that players have to rescue their stuff after a station has been destroyed. There are many players, like me, that leave and return to EVE after months or even years. Sometimes we are torn away from EVE suddenly unwillingly because of RL. Like when my my first child was born with medical complications that necessitated him/us living within a hospital in another state for 8 weeks... (He's perfectly normal now all because we were able to relocate him to a center of excellence for his condition. Had we not done that, his life would have been plagued by health issues and never have been able to play athletic sports because the local (cowboy/hack) doctors would have left him with hips only capable of waddling...) Also think about people in the military who sometimes have to leave for long periods with relatively short notice. Aside from that, I know there are a lot of players that leave and return to EVE sporadically. I STRONGLY suggest you research subscriber statistics before implementing anything that has a timer. My brother came back a few months ago and found that his 0.0 player built station, containing a large amount of assets, had changed hands multiple times. He was at least able to jump clone into it and sell most of his things on the local market. Even with a mechanic that permanently relocated his items somewhere in the solar system (like a deep safe), he would not have been able to get to them for a long time because he no longer belonged to a corp. Even if he did, he didn't have station access so he would have had to spend weeks cautiously ferrying (losing) some his stuff on the way to high-sec (through wormholes if he was lucky). He's told me that he would not be playing anymore if he would have lost a large amount of what his 10 year old character had accumulated/stashed there. When he left, stations were invulnerable. What if he came back after the upcoming structure patch to find his stuff completely gone due to some timer he'd never heard about? Though personally moving your stuff should be possible, I think that you should at least be able to pay a PLEX or something to have your stuff relocated to a chosen station. To prevent abuse the transfer service would have to only be available when the station is destroyed, otherwise rich people/alliances could use it to safely move trillions of isk/items very cheaply. We want more people and content in 0.0...
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2163	Posted - 2015.03.25 19:12:19 - [132] - Quote why not have some sort of anomaly like a wreckage feild for each personal hangar? If the structure dies you have the normal single loot point that everyone has access to, then after a period of time the wreck disperses throughout the system. The locations of these personal loot sites remain unknown (and as far as server is concerned, non-existant) until you accept some sort of time or memo in your journal which then creates a location in space with your own wreck. So you have all the time in the world to come back and get your belongings, but you wont have to be perfectly safe either. This would mostly apply to subcapital ships and items. Not exactly sure how it might affect capital ships and such. Quick layout: - Structure dies - Single wreck spawns with everyone's belongings - after a period of time (anywhere from a week to a month) the main wreck vanishes and each character gets all of the assets transferred to the 'loot cloud' (kind of difficult to explain - players then get a notice in journal of location of personal wreck site - player acknowledges or accepts the memo - wreck site spawns as a warpable site for the player and a scannable location for everyone else - only the owning player has access to wreck - player can then get to wreck and grab what he can with the safety depending on factors normally attributable to operating in space you lost and a similar process for corp/alliance hangars. You dont permanently lose your belongings, but your access is restricted for a period and then easier to get to later on.
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1907	Posted - 2015.03.25 20:20:30 - [133] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Zappity wrote: I really dislike the concept of NPC couriers. Why on earth would you add this when there are already courier corps? Logistics should be a player solved problem. Problem is there is no ship in game that can scrrop a capital ship that was in the hangar and was spilled into space! There is no way to solve it with current mechanics, unless you allow peopel to board things that are inside a container.... but I bet ccp do not want to implement that. I was talking about this bit from the dev blog under Market and Office Hubs: dev blog wrote: Finally, we are considering adding Interbus Shipping abilities, which could reduce logistic hassle for small volume of items to fit a ship, but at a specific cost: a NPC convoy would spawn and manually move to the destination, being highly susceptible to disruption from other player groups. Very artificial and takes away player roles. Bad. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Sky Cloud Austrene KISIN Enterprises 7	Posted - 2015.03.25 20:34:32 - [134] - Quote Why can't assets in destroyed stations just be transfered to an NPC station, in order to protect players who only play casually, instead of daily or players that are away from the game due to some other RL reason? I know CCP might like it, but fact is there is no incentive to store anything in these destructable structures. At least the current mechanics provide a safety net, because although you may lose a station, it will only be your access to the items that is stopped, you don't actually lose anything. But, if do proceeded with this very bad idea; How will you avoid people exploiting the proposed jettison can system by utilising the hell camp senario ? I cant see any way you could reasonably stop that, given if, by chance, the first time someone warps to a can to retrieve their stuff, & they get scanned down, bingo hostiles bookmark it & they then know where exactly to camp & wait for the person trying to get their stuff to come back, before not only killing them but also their stuff. I would also like to know, what happens in the case's like B-R, where sov was dropped and every thing became instantly vunerable ? There would be no warning, no time to plan & mount a defence & no time to evac, because there isn't any freeport timer. Upon logging in, you discover what has transpired & that bang, you have lost your stuff, all thanks to the first hostiles/ drop bears, that decided to kill the structure instead of going for sov. Sorry, but cant see this mechanic benefiting anyone, except those that are saying they want to blow structures up in order to gain loot and looking through the replies to the thread it seems most people do not want this in its current proposed form.
Memphis Baas 260	Posted - 2015.03.25 21:03:24 - [135] - Quote My suggestion is: Upon structure destruction, put every user and all their items into a "fortified escape bunker" and warp it to orbit the nearest planet. Send out an in-game mail to everyone that has stuff in the bunker that their stuff will be destroyed in a week unless they pick it up. Give them the option to extend the duration by another week or two by paying storage fees based on the value of the stuff they have (this can be an ISK sink or a payment to the owners of the solar system). Let anyone dock so they can pick up their stuff or set up contracts or fire sales to get rid of their stuff, but with a limited number of visits, contracts, or market orders, so that the bunker isn't used as an alternative to a regular station. The idea is that people who have stuff inside get a reasonable amount of time to get their stuff out, with the option to pay to extend the time a little, then the bunker explodes and it's all gone.
Tessaline Tessaract Industries 2	Posted - 2015.03.25 22:59:18 - [136] - Quote Memphis Baas wrote: My suggestion is: Upon structure destruction, put every user and all their items into a "fortified escape bunker" and warp it to orbit the nearest planet. Send out an in-game mail to everyone that has stuff in the bunker that their stuff will be destroyed in a week unless they pick it up. Give them the option to extend the duration by another week or two by paying storage fees based on the value of the stuff they have (this can be an ISK sink or a payment to the owners of the solar system). Let anyone dock so they can pick up their stuff or set up contracts or fire sales to get rid of their stuff, but with a limited number of visits, contracts, or market orders, so that the bunker isn't used as an alternative to a regular station. The idea is that people who have stuff inside get a reasonable amount of time to get their stuff out, with the option to pay to extend the time a little, then the bunker explodes and it's all gone. A man finally logs back into EVE after 9 months. What a perfect way to immerse himself and pass the time. The following is his impression upon logging back into eve. Dear patriot, CCP has the utmost respect for your service to your country. In true EVE style, we wanted to say thank you by destroying your dread, carrier, and everything else you had in this station. You see, we think that this game is at least as important as real life, and we design it that way. You should have thought about that before you signed up for the army reserves and could be called to active duty on short notice. I know you wish you could have been deployed longer, but that IED had other plans for you and your leg. At least you now have all the time in the world to start over, while coping with agonizing rehabilitation and thoughts of suicide. Welcome back to Eve Online. Please accept our this generous gift of a newbie ship and one tritanium to speed you on your recovery both in and out of game!
Sabriz Adoudel Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 4909	Posted - 2015.03.25 23:12:50 - [137] - Quote Why would people bring large amounts of wealth to a destructible station? Strikes me as a silly decision. Shoot everyone. Let the Saviour sort it out. I enforce the New Haliama Code of Conduct via wardec ops. Ignorance of the law is no excuse - read about requirements for highsec miners at www.minerbumping.com
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2028	Posted - 2015.03.25 23:29:53 - [138] - Quote Gathering pieces from what others suggested, woudl make sense if everythign was spilled in spac ein cans. They stay there for a time. THEN they are relocated to the PLANETS in the system ( you know.. gravity does stuff) fromt here you can still retrieve them, but you will need more effort. FOr example deploy an exploration probe and check every planet or moon in system then use appropriated devices to retrieve them. That is a place where things can stay FOREVER! Because they will be bothering no one and breaking no immersion. "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 2028	Posted - 2015.03.25 23:30:40 - [139] - Quote Sabriz Adoudel wrote: Why would people bring large amounts of wealth to a destructible station? Strikes me as a silly decision. you are in CODE...a nd kill people that fly by with lage ammounts of wealth in fragile industrials while in auto pilot. And you still asks that? "If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!" For the rest hire PoH \| Recruitment
MicroNova Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy 5	Posted - 2015.03.26 02:23:34 - [140] - Quote If you want your stuff to be 100% safe keep it in an NPC station. If you need some equipment for a deployment, then take what you are willing to risk. Never fly what you aren't willing to lose the second you undock. Loot is necessary to help motivate structure destruction, loot fairy takes what she needs, victor gets the rest.

w1ndstrike Strange Energy The Bastion 20	Posted - 2015.03.26 05:27:58 - [141] - Quote MicroNova wrote: If you want your stuff to be 100% safe keep it in an NPC station. If you need some equipment for a deployment, then take what you are willing to risk. Never fly what you aren't willing to lose the second you undock. Loot is necessary to help motivate structure destruction, loot fairy takes what she needs, victor gets the rest. ok, what do you propose to do for the people on hiatus from the game that have no idea this change is coming? that is the core of this issue. not the risks in the future, its the risks to past actions made under a completely different set of assumptions that there was no reason to second guess at the time that they might ever change. whatever happens will need to be carefully considered, UNLESS the devs do a one-time move of assets currently in outposts to "clean slate" the board. at that point nearly any design works because you can present the new set of risks as a choice, instead of an imposition.
Anthar Thebess 978	Posted - 2015.03.26 10:28:42 - [142] - Quote Probably every region have 1-2 NPC made stations. I assume that they will be still the only ones not destroyable at any point ( good for history and eve law, leaves many possibles open for the future). When applicable structure is destroyed in region , assets are being transferred : To nearest Alliance Owned NPC XL structure or to nearest NPC made station. If it is not owned by your alliance - well you will need to take it over. Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
Tiberius StarGazer Nerd Panic Brave Collective 456	Posted - 2015.03.26 14:41:34 - [143] - Quote I'm all in favour of the simplest option. How about an insurance style rebate? So at the moment, you fly ship, you can insure it, you lose ship, you get the hull back, but no fittings. So at least your going to be able to buy the hull back. So how about apply the same sort of thing to stations. Station explodes and all items drop based on a loot table. The player docked in station will if they log in over the next 48 hours will appear in whatever ship they were in somewhere randomly in a safe. If longer they log back in in their usual home station back in highsec in whatever ship they were in. A mail message pops up explaining the station was destroyed but pend insurance has kindly reimbursed them the insurance value of their ship hulls and (maybe) the war market value of all modules - a %. As for the loot, it drops and people can salvage and collect as per normal. Maybe eve repurpose the noctus with an ability to specifically salvage items from destroyed stations? Which will then prompt massive salvage operations which will be good fun to fight over?
Tiberius StarGazer Nerd Panic Brave Collective 456	Posted - 2015.03.26 14:42:31 - [144] - Quote Duplicate post.
Wulfy Johnson NorCorp Security 70	Posted - 2015.03.26 14:48:00 - [145] - Quote There is another solution that could be done, but dont know if its viable.. Planetary storage vaults.. Name pretty much says what im thinking..
Phig Neutron Rubicon Cubism 98	Posted - 2015.03.26 15:55:22 - [146] - Quote Sabriz Adoudel wrote: Why would people bring large amounts of wealth to a destructible station? Strikes me as a silly decision. They want to make all stations destructable. Inevitably they will back off from this, and keep NPC stations in lowsec and highsec. So guess where everybody's going to move their stuff.
oohthey ioh Republic University Minmatar Republic 28	Posted - 2015.03.26 15:58:54 - [147] - Quote Phig Neutron wrote: Sabriz Adoudel wrote: Why would people bring large amounts of wealth to a destructible station? Strikes me as a silly decision. They want to make all stations destructable. Inevitably they will back off from this, and keep NPC stations in lowsec and highsec. So guess where everybody's going to move their stuff. I think they are leaving null sec stations as non destructible, just outpost and pos's.
Marseillefrog Blueprint Mania 7	Posted - 2015.03.26 19:07:41 - [148] - Quote New hacking mini game on a structure can drop anyone?
Phig Neutron Rubicon Cubism 99	Posted - 2015.03.26 20:17:55 - [149] - Quote oohthey ioh wrote: Phig Neutron wrote: Sabriz Adoudel wrote: Why would people bring large amounts of wealth to a destructible station? Strikes me as a silly decision. They want to make all stations destructable. Inevitably they will back off from this, and keep NPC stations in lowsec and highsec. So guess where everybody's going to move their stuff. I think they are leaving null sec stations as non destructible, just outpost and pos's. "Outpost" means "Station" in the current EVE. They are talking about transforming them into destructible structures. They have hinted at wanting to do this in highsec and nullsec, too. (I think they'll back off from this, though.)
w1ndstrike Strange Energy The Bastion 20	Posted - 2015.03.26 22:11:42 - [150] - Quote Phig Neutron wrote: oohthey ioh wrote: Phig Neutron wrote: Sabriz Adoudel wrote: Why would people bring large amounts of wealth to a destructible station? Strikes me as a silly decision. They want to make all stations destructable. Inevitably they will back off from this, and keep NPC stations in lowsec and highsec. So guess where everybody's going to move their stuff. I think they are leaving null sec stations as non destructible, just outpost and pos's. "Outpost" means "Station" in the current EVE. They are talking about transforming them into destructible structures. They have hinted at wanting to do this in highsec and nullsec, too. (I think they'll back off from this, though.) there are two types of structures that most people in eve call stations right now, nullsec player-built outposts, and true stations that have existed since the game was created. currently the development team have indicated they would like to make changes that would render the player-built outposts only destructible, along with the new structures that will replace both outposts and POSes the big problem is that there are a LOT of old player assets in these outposts, because of previous game mechanics and CCP indications that these would remain 'safe havens' for player assets a big part of the design challenge is either designing a system that allows emergent gameplay without causing massive harm to affected players, or doing a one-time "clean slate" of all assets in null outposts to allow for a better design that will then not have to account for unsubscribed accounts/legacy assets.

Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 891	Posted - 2015.03.26 23:53:32 - [151] - Quote As a wh gal I find this whole discussion of the safety of ones assets after you get your poop pushed in kind of amusing. I'm seeing a couple of 1000 eve players that really haven't embraced the core concept of loss that is eve. Very amusing indeed. I'm seeing folks feeling entitled to the rewards of living in null but also demanding the safety of empire stations. This dicotamy is quite interesting.
w1ndstrike Strange Energy The Bastion 20	Posted - 2015.03.27 01:06:02 - [152] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: As a wh gal I find this whole discussion of the safety of ones assets after you get your poop pushed in kind of amusing. I'm seeing a couple of 1000 eve players that really haven't embraced the core concept of loss that is eve. Very amusing indeed. I'm seeing folks feeling entitled to the rewards of living in null but also demanding the safety of empire stations. This dichotomy is quite interesting. as a wormholer you made a conscious choice with full knowledge of the risks/rewards and with a specific set of expectations. you are correct is saying that loss is a part of eve, however in nearly all cases you know the risks before you choose (or not) to take them. choice vs imposition is a big deal. impositions cause massive changes in player psychology because they set a precedent of "even if you calculate your risks you can still get **** by changes on a whim" which is bad for the continued health of the game. loss in eve should be meaningful, and usually that's a result of choosing to take a calculated risk and succeeding or failing. getting screwed by something you had no way to expect or plan for is not meaningful, its just ** game design. basic premise: outpost destruction is cool, loss of assets for those that put them there when a different set of assumptions was in play is not.
Phig Neutron Rubicon Cubism 99	Posted - 2015.03.27 15:31:41 - [153] - Quote w1ndstrike wrote: Phig Neutron wrote: oohthey ioh wrote: Phig Neutron wrote: Sabriz Adoudel wrote: Why would people bring large amounts of wealth to a destructible station? Strikes me as a silly decision. They want to make all stations destructable. Inevitably they will back off from this, and keep NPC stations in lowsec and highsec. So guess where everybody's going to move their stuff. I think they are leaving null sec stations as non destructible, just outpost and pos's. "Outpost" means "Station" in the current EVE. They are talking about transforming them into destructible structures. They have hinted at wanting to do this in highsec and nullsec, too. (I think they'll back off from this, though.) there are two types of structures that most people in eve call stations right now, nullsec player-built outposts, and true stations that have existed since the game was created. currently the development team have indicated they would like to make changes that would render the player-built outposts only destructible, along with the new structures that will replace both outposts and POSes YOU see a difference between "outposts" and "stations" but I don't see any indication that the developers see "stations" as sacred and untouchable while they're re-designing "outposts". I'm pretty sure that whatever changes they're proposing are intended to affect both of them alike.
Phig Neutron Rubicon Cubism 99	Posted - 2015.03.27 15:35:01 - [154] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: I'm seeing a couple of 1000 eve players that really haven't embraced the core concept of loss that is eve. Another high school kid that doesn't grasp the concept that there is life outside of EVE. If the game demands a 24 hour commitment, it will lose most of its players. Permanent loss of assets is a great mechanic when you are actually playing the game, not when it means you can't log out for a family vacation.
w1ndstrike Strange Energy The Bastion 20	Posted - 2015.03.27 15:57:24 - [155] - Quote Phig Neutron wrote: YOU see a difference between "outposts" and "stations" but I don't see any indication that the developers see "stations" as sacred and untouchable while they're re-designing "outposts". I'm pretty sure that whatever changes they're proposing are intended to affect both of them alike. go check out the fanfest stream, ytterbium was pretty clear they mean outposts only (the things XL structures are designed to replace)
Sarah Eginald Git-R-Done Logistics Git-R-Done Inc 0	Posted - 2015.03.27 16:43:51 - [156] - Quote I say clean slate works good to clean all outposts of members that have in inactive or let there subscription lapse. After CCP does then change to a new system. Simple idea to make use of station vaults. Stuff in hanger gets dropped as loot however if you have things in a station vault is has and emergency broadcast system that SOE gathers all the stuff and ships it to your home station. So you can put your ships and any high priced items in your station vault. if you forget or don't think about it then you loose your stuff.
Metal Icarus Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Squad. 736	Posted - 2015.03.27 18:22:25 - [157] - Quote As a reminder before you say "If I go on vacation it will get blown up!" Currently: If you go on vacation and the POS runs out of fuel, you're SOL. If someone reinforces your POS and you don't respond, you're SOL. If you don't put stront in your POS, you're SOL when they attack. Anyways, I am all for that optional insurance to transfer non-dropped loot to the nearest CORP office station upon outpost destruction. To prevent exploitation, put it on lockdown in the office until the insurance contract is paid. If you go on vacation without dealing with your assets in space, that's like leaving your car at an airport parking lot unlocked for your whole vacation. I hear that is not a very smart thing to do. The insurance can be optional, but without it, you're risking 100% to destruction/loot. The value of the insurance can be a ratio of value of the loot, m3 and distance to corp office. I am referring to post 29 in this thread.
Tessaline Tessaract Industries 5	Posted - 2015.03.27 18:47:08 - [158] - Quote As far as how to transition from the old system to the new system, there is an additional consideration. There are people with automatic monthly subscription that are letting their characters train, but don't log in or read the patch notes. I'm starting to lean heavily towards an optional clean-slate. (Dons flame-resistant gear...) After Patch: A list of items in destructible station(s) is saved server-side. Only these items are eligible for relocation, to prevent abuse post-patch. (This way corps can't continuously transfer items to old characters to abuse the system.) (Unfortunately, pre-patch preparations are hard to account for.) On each login, for a week until a selection is made, a popup appears if you have stuff in destructible station(s) with a link to explain what is happening. Players who got the popup and didn't choose anything within a week, have their stuff moved to a station automatically after the timer expires. If a station is destroyed before a player has chosen an option, their stuff is moved to a safe station. (Maybe from all destructible stations.) Popup choices (select one): 1) Move ALL personal items from ALL destructible stations to a single high or low security station. (Low sec would be the only option for those with capital sized ships.) 2) Leave all items in all destructible stations Once a player's stuff was moved, and they are logged in, a popup explains that their items (that were in destructible stations) have been automatically moved to another station (specified). CCP options for people who don't login for 1-2 months after patch: A) All characters that aren't logged in within 1 month (maybe two) will have their items moved automatically. B) Save list of items, possibly forever, until the character logs in next. (I'm pretty sure this is a really bad option from a maintainability perspective...) Though this can be abused to an extent, it is fair to everyone.
oohthey ioh Republic University Minmatar Republic 28	Posted - 2015.03.27 19:36:14 - [159] - Quote Phig Neutron wrote: YOU see a difference between "outposts" and "stations" but I don't see any indication that the developers see "stations" as sacred and untouchable while they're re-designing "outposts". I'm pretty sure that whatever changes they're proposing are intended to affect both of them alike. During the steam they made it clear you keep your items so people use the player made structures over stations and has CCP has been referring to outpost and stations separately. plus there are lores be hide some stations.
Phig Neutron Rubicon Cubism 100	Posted - 2015.03.27 20:37:52 - [160] - Quote oohthey ioh wrote: Phig Neutron wrote: YOU see a difference between "outposts" and "stations" but I don't see any indication that the developers see "stations" as sacred and untouchable while they're re-designing "outposts". I'm pretty sure that whatever changes they're proposing are intended to affect both of them alike. During the steam they made it clear you keep your items so people use the player made structures over stations and has CCP has been referring to outpost and stations separately. plus there are lores be hide some stations. Quoting in order to boggle future grammarian-archaeologists. Dev blog states: Quote: There are currently five different types of structures available in the game, each with a unique purpose, which we shall quickly review now. And then enumerates them: deployables, POCO, POS, sov structures, and Outposts. No distinction is made between player-built or NPC-owned outposts. Then under the heading "Keep Calm, Your Stuff is Safe" it says "Not removing existing structures without transition time." In other words, existing structures will be removed. I don't know what some dev might have said at Fanfest while drunk, but this is what they've written down. There is every indication that they are thinking about removing all stations and going over to the new system, albeit gradually.

Phig Neutron Rubicon Cubism 108	Posted - 2015.03.27 20:43:48 - [161] - Quote Metal Icarus wrote: If you go on vacation without dealing with your assets in space, that's like leaving your car at an airport parking lot unlocked for your whole vacation. I hear that is not a very smart thing to do. We're not talking about "assets in space". We're talking about assets in stations. How do you "deal with your assets" in the station? Only thing I can think you mean is that we have to sell everything we own before logging out for more than a couple days. So the only "safe asset" is ISK. But why should ISK be safe? It's stored in a bank or something, right? If we're going to take this stupid idea to its logical conclusion, shouldn't we also make player wallets destructable? Or maybe your account is stored in one of those NPC bank stations (Garoun Investment Bank etc), and when it's blown up you should lose everything. That's the true spirit of EVE or something isn't it? Only a carebear would oppose this idea, right?
oohthey ioh Republic University Minmatar Republic 28	Posted - 2015.03.28 04:37:56 - [162] - Quote Phig Neutron wrote: oohthey ioh wrote: Phig Neutron wrote: YOU see a difference between "outposts" and "stations" but I don't see any indication that the developers see "stations" as sacred and untouchable while they're re-designing "outposts". I'm pretty sure that whatever changes they're proposing are intended to affect both of them alike. During the steam they made it clear you keep your items so people use the player made structures over stations and has CCP has been referring to outpost and stations separately. plus there are lores be hide some stations. Quoting in order to boggle future grammarian-archaeologists. Dev blog states: Quote: There are currently five different types of structures available in the game, each with a unique purpose, which we shall quickly review now. And then enumerates them: deployables, POCO, POS, sov structures, and Outposts. No distinction is made between player-built or NPC-owned outposts. Then under the heading "Keep Calm, Your Stuff is Safe" it says "Not removing existing structures without transition time." In other words, existing structures will be removed. I don't know what some dev might have said at Fanfest while drunk, but this is what they've written down. There is every indication that they are thinking about removing all stations and going over to the new system, albeit gradually. https://youtu.be/sOGnPAbHKDk?t=1h9m27s form 1:09 in he talks about about the player made structures, and he clearly says "player made outposts", ccp has made no indication that they are touching stations just player made structures.
Nasar Vyron S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS. 18	Posted - 2015.03.28 07:28:49 - [163] - Quote 1 a) Only anchorable in systems you hold sov in. 1 b) Only anchorable if "permits" by NPC/player faction items are within structure's hold and are consumed on hourly basis. 2) While the alliance holds sov and/or "permits" are available the structure is invulnerable to being flipped/destroyed -Entosis may offline the structure stopping all current functions. 3) If alliance loses sov over the space or structure runs out of "permits" the structure become vulnerable to being flipped/destroyed. -Player with entosis is given a message to either Flip control or destroy. Pretty self explanatory. 4) Any items still within the structure are put into limbo until the owning player comes online. They will be prompted that their assets are in possession of the structure's previous inhabitants who fled before it's destruction/re-acquisition and to please give them a location to deliver their assets. 5) Player must select a station with a corp office or high standing NPC station. Reason for this is pretty simple. Imagine your job/country/family forcing a break from the game then coming back several months later. It was abrupt so your corp has kicked you for inactivity and moved on. Your stuff was in a station that was destroyed. It's all gone, you're back to square one. You quit because frankly, it's not worth it anymore. This idea also answers the question of "when is a player's personal structure vulnerable?" which is acceptable and still very vulnerable to harassment at all hours. --- Null is already a risky place to live because you do risk losing access to your assets with a single click of a button by your CEO/alliance leader. But worst case scenario you have the option to sell your assets and get something back. This idea of destroying the items outright makes unexpected breaks or being unable to play every day to monitor personal structures to be potentially disastrous. This is not "good" nor is it "fair" as this is a game and expecting such a high level of devotion is a horrid game mechanic. Item's appearing in the system in which the structure was destroyed is just as devastating for all the same reasons. Their assets may as well have been destroyed in the volumes most players have in their possession as they must now likely risk moving in a FJ/carrier to scoop their assets and try to escape assuming the known location(s) have not been bubbled/scouted prior to their arrival. TL ; DR - Invulnerable to destruction/flip while sov is held, but can be offlined at all hours for harassment. Destruction/flip can occur upon sov loss. Assets are relocated to location of owner's choosing upon log in.
John Podiene Fist Of The Red Dragon Grand Dragon Alliance 0	Posted - 2015.03.29 13:38:47 - [164] - Quote No matter where you fall on whether the stuff you had in an outpost should be lootable or not, option #3 is the only feasible option when dealing with things like station containers, and packaged freighters, dreadnaughts on up. The reason being it simply will not be possible for either attacker or defender to retrieve said items because of current cargo-hold limits on freighters.
Masao Kurata Z List 204	Posted - 2015.03.29 14:11:22 - [165] - Quote John Podiene wrote: No matter where you fall on whether the stuff you had in an outpost should be lootable or not, option #3 is the only feasible option when dealing with things like station containers, and packaged freighters, dreadnaughts on up. The reason being it simply will not be possible for either attacker or defender to retrieve said items because of current cargo-hold limits on freighters. Not necessarily, what if the vault was given the ability to assemble items, disassemble, move items in and out of containers and launch ships? You might need friends or multiple trips but everything should be retrievable.
Airane Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 0	Posted - 2015.03.29 15:27:06 - [166] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Hello people, We would like your feedback on the various new structure lines presented during Fanfest and on our latest structure blog. This particular thread is going to focus what happens to items stored inside structures when they blow up (or end up captured) in a blaze of glorious space explosions. First option is to have the structure turn into a wreck - fitted structure modules could drop as loot, while items inside the structure would only be accessible to their rightful owner(s), possibly through salvaging. Users docked at the time of the structure destruction would still be docked inside the wreck, but unable to dock back should they exit. Another option is to use the same mechanic we have for planetary launches. When a structure is destroyed, all assets are moved into special containers. A container exists for each individual that stored items in the structure, as well as corporation entities and are spread around planets. When this happens, an entry would appear on the owner journal giving a warp-in point to go to. Please note such containers would not be destructible at all, and could not be scanned until the rightful owner comes to retrieve his or her loot. The duration at which those entries would stay remains entirely dependent to the structure type and player condition when it was destroyed (logged off, account lapsed etcGÇª). Player docked inside the structure would be spread around the solar system. Third option could be to have the items inside the structure moved to another structure belonging to the same owners. Such gameplay is necessary if we wish players to use those new structures and not stash all of their items in NPC stations. Also, please note, it is possible for such mechanics to only be available in the largest structures (most likely XL) since existing Starbases do not have any kind of item safety mechanic (and would likely end up as L size equivalent in the new model). other good idea is to make isk an item where you have to carry it about or keep it in a NPC bank, just like the idea to make eve feel real in way you buying stuff,
John Podiene Fist Of The Red Dragon Grand Dragon Alliance 0	Posted - 2015.03.29 16:19:05 - [167] - Quote Masao Kurata wrote: John Podiene wrote: No matter where you fall on whether the stuff you had in an outpost should be lootable or not, option #3 is the only feasible option when dealing with things like station containers, and packaged freighters, dreadnaughts on up. The reason being it simply will not be possible for either attacker or defender to retrieve said items because of current cargo-hold limits on freighters. Not necessarily, what if the vault was given the ability to assemble items, disassemble, move items in and out of containers and launch ships? Maybe even allow reprocessing at a fairly poor rate. You might need friends or multiple trips but everything should be retrievable. I get what your saying, but that doesn't make logical sense. If the station has been blown up, logically It stands to reason that services like assembling ships, containers, ect. would not be available as a matter of course. It's a wreak. If the content of said outpost has been scattered then they should receive no special assembly in space service just to make the mechanic work. I believe option 3 is the best solution because increasing the freighter's cargo hold space isn't an option.
Masao Kurata Z List 205	Posted - 2015.03.29 16:36:10 - [168] - Quote John Podiene wrote: Masao Kurata wrote: Not necessarily, what if the vault was given the ability to assemble items, disassemble, move items in and out of containers and launch ships? Maybe even allow reprocessing at a fairly poor rate. I get what your saying, but that doesn't make logical sense. If the station has been blown up, logically It stands to reason that services like assembling ships, containers, ect. would not be available as a matter of course. It's a wreak. If the content of said outpost has been scattered then they should receive no special assembly in space service just to make the mechanic work. I believe option 3 is the best solution because increasing the freighter's cargo hold space isn't an option. It's not a wreck, it's some kind of magical vault, I really don't care about the lore explanation.
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2400	Posted - 2015.03.29 17:27:20 - [169] - Quote I was thinking that the destroyed structure could drop an indestructible box containing all items which could be accessed by item owners, or this box could have a new structure built around it for a reduced cost. The new structure would take on the ownership and access settings of the old structure, regardless of who (re)built it. A Caldari is just a Gallente who begged to have their civil liberties taken away.
John Podiene Fist Of The Red Dragon Grand Dragon Alliance 0	Posted - 2015.03.29 20:43:07 - [170] - Quote [quote=CCP Ytterbium]Hello people, We would like your feedback on the various new structure lines presented during Fanfest and on our latest structure blog. This particular thread is going to focus what happens to items stored inside structures when they blow up (or end up captured) in a blaze of glorious space explosions. [list] First option is to have the structure turn into a wreck - fitted structure modules could drop as loot, while items inside the structure would only be accessible to their rightful owner(s), possibly through salvaging. Users docked at the time of the structure destruction would still be docked inside the wreck, but unable to dock back should they exit. John Podiene wrote: Masao Kurata wrote: Not necessarily, what if the vault was given the ability to assemble items, disassemble, move items in and out of containers and launch ships? Maybe even allow reprocessing at a fairly poor rate. I get what your saying, but that doesn't make logical sense. If the station has been blown up, logically It stands to reason that services like assembling ships, containers, ect. would not be available as a matter of course. It's a wreak. If the content of said outpost has been scattered then they should receive no special assembly in space service just to make the mechanic work. I believe option 3 is the best solution because increasing the freighter's cargo hold space isn't an option. It's not a wreck, it's some kind of magical vault, I really don't care about the lore explanation. apparently your wrong. you want "magical vaults" go play wow. You can cal it whatever you want, but if i destroy an outpost and expect to get loot from it, the outpost will leave a wreck even if the loot appears elsewhere. I highly doubt that if loot is allowed to drop from outposts that ccp is going to have a "special vault" to allow item assembly. no other object that leaves behind loot has such a mechanic.

Destiny Dain2 Your Destiny Corporation 0	Posted - 2015.03.29 22:13:54 - [171] - Quote I think you should have it where if your structure is blown up the contents are shipped to an NPC Station, where it is impounded until you pay a fee for safe transport of the goods.
Masao Kurata Z List 206	Posted - 2015.03.30 05:12:54 - [172] - Quote John Podiene wrote: apparently your wrong. you want "magical vaults" go play wow. You can cal it whatever you want, but if i destroy an outpost and expect to get loot from it, the outpost will leave a wreck even if the loot appears elsewhere. I highly doubt that if loot is allowed to drop from outposts that ccp is going to have a "special vault" to allow item assembly. no other object that leaves behind loot has such a mechanic. You can make lore explanations for anything. The game design comes first. Having loot "scatted" over vast distances is nonsense in the first place, so let's say it gets there by warping. The "vault" is form of automated spaceship fitted with a single use warp drive that functions like the emergency warp on our ships. Inside the vault, and remember that this thing is spacious and TARDIS like containers are a thing in EVE lore, is a small reactor and some equipment and workers. Happier? I didn't change the game design aspect one bit.
Insurance Agent Perkone Caldari State 0	Posted - 2015.03.30 07:00:29 - [173] - Quote If the jet can option is going to be the chosen one, could we have the possibility to booby trap our can and have it explode for enough damage to blap BC sized hulls?
SecretService Secret Services 0	Posted - 2015.03.30 09:42:47 - [174] - Quote Overall destructible stations replacements, I don't see it feasible. Sounds cool but the hassle it brings kills the joy. As for the other stuff, POS replacements... probably not too much changes in behaviour if things will not be safe. People will just keep the stuff they afford to lose (not talking about exceptions). The most desired thing and a huge improvement will be the player experience in setting the base and likely the security within corp. First we say that we want stuff to be blown up. Nothing bad with that... Then we say we want players not to stash their stuff in NPC stations. Obviously there is a conflict. If you lose your stuff, you'll not stash stuff. Similarly with POS now, living in wormhole, I have the minimum and don't care much if I lose that. Everything else is stored in the safety of NPC stations. Basically, and mostly griefers, posts follow the idea "we want your stuff to be lost so that we can grab them". Ok, but then you have to trick the players to put their valuable stuff there. Is it worth it? No, so far. It is often mentioned teleportation of stuff. Doesn't suit EVE and as many mentioned, exploitable to some extent. To a structure in same system may not be too bad. Safespots (the journal entry idea) or planets (#37) sound decent but varies on the context. If you have several subcaps and a couple caps, mods, and not too much other stuff it's not that difficult to get it. But if it's, let's say, a null staging system that was lost... you can imagine the panic and assets lost there. It will be a bloody masacre and very expensive for all. If you let it drop, kiss goodbye to the party that lost. Winners get even more powerful/richer and losers will have to retreat and probably not many enthusiastics on establishing such a base. But null is not my domain.. I'm sure others will figure it out. -my 2 eurocents.
BugraT WarheaD 162	Posted - 2015.03.30 11:20:56 - [175] - Quote I really like the proposal made somewhere on this thread : the mix of proposal 2 and 3. Your assets are in a safe can near a planet, but you can pay a NPC corporation to retrieve your loot back to an NPC station, costing you a percentage of your stuff value.
Milla Goodpussy Federal Navy Academy 210	Posted - 2015.03.30 11:45:31 - [176] - Quote form 1:09 in he talks about about the player made structures, and he clearly says "player made outposts", ccp has made no indication that they are touching stations just player made structures.[/quote] umm sorry boo boo.. once their was sov everyone built their station or umm platform eggs to become stations.. which is all player-made.. these structures are indeed going bye-bye. they're closing services in the old to force the new as well, but im sure they'll wait to give a heads up (and also soften the raging on forums) once more dev-blogs hit. oh there's some twisting in their words cause they're petrified of folks leaving and no longer playing the game (which is going to happen regardless how they try to smooth it over) be prepared... low sec isn't safe, no where is safe.. all except high-sec for a long time.. but everyone in caps is impacted, everyone building from stations is impacted.. everything is going to get touched in null sec. you wont lose your stuff but good luck on retrieving it once the mess hits the fan.. THAT they will not discuss openly, good luck to fending off all those trolls and griefers as well cause oh man its coming as well.
Jezza McWaffle No Vacancies Lost Alliance 183	Posted - 2015.03.30 13:38:07 - [177] - Quote I think CCP has completely forgotten about wormholes in this change. From what I can see pos's will be replaced by these new large structures and non one in wormhole space wants outposts. Currently loot from the sma and cha etc drops in wrecks and is lootable by anyone, getting rid of this drop mechanic is a terrible idea in my opinion, I do not see why you cannot keep it ins current state since your basically saying we don't want any hostile aggression against structures in wormholes. C6 Wormhole blog http://holelotofwaffle.wordpress.com/
Scuzzy Logic Nightmare Machinery 148	Posted - 2015.03.30 14:09:24 - [178] - Quote Personally, I think Option 1 would be the most sensible to implement. There is no need to overcomplicate such a feature.
Quintessen Messengers of Judah 484	Posted - 2015.03.30 14:58:48 - [179] - Quote Perhaps the destroyed wreck becomes a market location with storage where you sell the salvage rights to other people. You can contract out of there, use the market to buy and sell, but not deposit things. This allows you to offload your stuff the same way you do with an outpost that's been conquered that you're never getting back. You get back some ISK if you can't get back your stuff logistically. And if you reclaim the space you can get your actual stuff back. You could still add NPC or PC shipping options since you could contract out. Some amount of stuff should drop, but some items should be excluded. No PLEX, no pure collectibles (e.g. Piece of Steve), no aurum-purchased items. BPOs should have a much lower drop rate than other items along with anything else that can have a multi-year investment put into it. And some percentage of things should also be outright destroyed using the same logic. EVE is harsh and the idea of any player property loss already puts it ahead of most other games. EVE doesn't need to be rage-quit inducingly harsh though.
Baljos Arnjak Dark Praetorian Order 72	Posted - 2015.03.30 22:47:09 - [180] - Quote Just an idea: I heard either on the Fanfest stream or on one of Fozzie's recent podcast interviews that there is a new feature being planned that allowed NPC's to deliver small volumes of goods. The risk of using the service was that those NPC's were actually in space traveling and targetable by players. Why not use the same mechanic here? So, lets say the installation management can designate an Evacuation Point for an NPC evacuation effort. These NPC's would undock over a period of time in groups/convoys and head to that point with the goods that the installation contained and be vulnerable to attack and destruction, dropping the loot. The more stuff at a station, the more convoys launch. Once they arrive at their destination, be it a station, planet, another installation, or even just an invulnerable container in space, they make their delivery and despawn. The way I see it, this gives both the previous owners and the attackers two chances to loot/save that stuff (freeport evac + NPC evac). It would incentivize both defense and offense, spread the battle around, and add another dynamic to a battle. It would also be an incentive to attack large entrenched alliances because they would have the most stuff to loot. The only problem that I see with it is that unsubbed players would be vulnerable to having their stuff destroyed/looted. But, to be honest, that's a risk you take when you live in Null. You can lose access to your stuff at any time and it's just a cost of living there. If you don't want to lose your stuff while unsubbed, move it to empire space.

Fzhal Anoikis Vergence The Last Chancers. 3	Posted - 2015.03.31 04:45:54 - [181] - Quote If I were an alliance that built a station, and had the technology level in Eve, I'd want to build in some insurance for my stuff. I'd probably want it engineered so that the item/ship storage was centralized into a large covert jump drive container. Since other station owners would want that too, there might be a Hangar Emergency Jump Drive network administered by SOE. There, I just created a lore-friendly explanation that really can't be stopped because you can't bubble a titan sized jump drive and you couldn't lock it and it separates/jumps as soon as the station is destroyed. As for moored Cap ships... As part of the mooring service, the station will piggyback the Caps into the titan sized cyno created by the Hangar Emergency Jump Drive and route it through the network to a safer station. Or you could just call it an insurance/replacement service... Victims can "repurchase" lost items for 35% of their value. 35% of all things in station are ejected intact at high velocity (hidden among debris). Over the course of the week, the intact hangars drift far enough away from the scraps to be probed by players scavenging throughout the system. (Imagine the swarms of greedy ninja scavengers and battles that would be waged over "Scavenging Rights") That way, 65% is an ISK sink. But oh man, imagine the "content" and backstabbing possible! All that destruction aside, I'm concerned about CCP's limited mooring idea. What happens when a lot of players moore their ships and leave them or unsubscribe... It could get to the point of people not un-mooring for fear of losing their spaces.
Hakan MacTrew MUTED VOID Takahashi Alliance 889	Posted - 2015.03.31 16:39:10 - [182] - Quote I percieve Nullsec as an investment, and a long term one at that. Wars have waged for years, (litterally,) over these territories. It needs something tangible and permentant. I do revel in the level of destructability that is potentially at hand, but at the same time, if you destabilise everything to this extent, then why would people invest in their Sov? If you can flip control of systems with a handful of ships over the space of a couple of days, AND blow up people stations that are full of their belongings, why would anyone risk their assets when the benefits of staging from NPC stations in lowsec would be so much more favourable? I can take 'most' stations becoming destructable, but I still think that a certain number of 'super stations' should be made available depending on the size and layout of the space around them. This could be offset against the strategic positioning of destructable stations by players. Friends
Phig Neutron Rubicon Cubism 120	Posted - 2015.04.01 15:58:27 - [183] - Quote Baljos Arnjak wrote: But, to be honest, that's a risk you take when you live in Null. You can lose access to your stuff at any time and it's just a cost of living there. If you don't want to lose your stuff while unsubbed, move it to empire space. You never actually "lose access to your stuff", you just lose docking rights. You can always sell the stuff by contract (and I think some skills allow you to set up market sell orders? maybe?) so it's fairly simple to exchange your old stuff for the same type of stuff elsewhere. I don't think this has prevented people from coming back to the game, much.
Baljos Arnjak Dark Praetorian Order 73	Posted - 2015.04.02 14:00:05 - [184] - Quote Phig Neutron wrote: Baljos Arnjak wrote: But, to be honest, that's a risk you take when you live in Null. You can lose access to your stuff at any time and it's just a cost of living there. If you don't want to lose your stuff while unsubbed, move it to empire space. You never actually "lose access to your stuff", you just lose docking rights. You can always sell the stuff by contract (and I think some skills allow you to set up market sell orders? maybe?) so it's fairly simple to exchange your old stuff for the same type of stuff elsewhere. I don't think this has prevented people from coming back to the game, much. I was thinking in more of a general sense there but yeah, you can still get some value from it even if you can't dock there. Thinking about it a bit more, I'm on the fence. On one hand, EVE is harsh and shouldn't reward people who don't take precautions, but on the other, it's not a good idea to penalize a player that left and is now coming back. You could always add a check to see if the owning account has been inactive for a certain amount of time, say 3 months or whatever, Then that character's stuff doesn't get moved via the NPC's but put into a "Storage Crate" that you redeem like a gift item when you reactivate the account. This might also have a nice benefit of cleaning up the item database as inactive accounts' items could be moved to a different database instead of cluttering up the whole thing. Once redeemed, the indestructible container suggestion could be used and they can get their stuff out that way.
Beta Maoye 59	Posted - 2015.04.02 16:06:48 - [185] - Quote I don't get it. Why looting tower is allowed but looting station is forbiddened? If properties in station require protection, shouldn't properties in tower be protected too? Why they are treated differently?
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1927	Posted - 2015.04.02 19:03:15 - [186] - Quote Beta Maoye wrote: I don't get it. Why looting tower is allowed but looting station is forbiddened? If properties in station require protection, shouldn't properties in tower be protected too? Why they are treated differently? The risk/reward of the current status is balanced partly around POS being lootable, thus encouraging people to spend the time bothering to attack. If this was removed then I would argue that current POS features are overpowered because they would be much less risky. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Wizzard117 Wizzard117 Corporation 17	Posted - 2015.04.02 21:17:32 - [187] - Quote How about - some sort of special container named like "Escape container". They have module like MJD and some sort of cloaking device - these containers fly away upon station destruction aligning in a random direction just like the containers in old scanning sites - everybody can catch these containers just like the old way - within a limited amount of time - when the time has passed these containers turn on their "MJD" and jumps away off-grid in any direction then cloaks and remains in space. Bookmark to its location is available to container's owner - however container may be found by roaming nearby space and decloaking this container (chances are low but still). Decloaked container can be hacked to gain access to its content
Desert Ice78 Gryphons of the Western Wind 453	Posted - 2015.04.02 21:33:12 - [188] - Quote Couldn't we just pay some NPC asset retrieval guy to go collect everything for us? Too much hassle otherwise. As for everyone remaining docked inside the "wreck;" this is just a terrible idea from the realism point of view, if nothing else. I am a pod pilot: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused.
Slykar Weltenschmiede 5	Posted - 2015.04.03 07:38:33 - [189] - Quote Hello CCP, first i say sorry, my english isnt that good. i think that this topic is most important for the future. so i will give some thinks about it. some of us play games cus they want to feel strong or want a long e-***** and if they lose all there stuff because in eve is no one alone strong they quite. ppl lose there station, there stuff, because of the weakness of its group. so the pilot gets punishable. not by his own fault but by his alliance / corp fault or just by eve-¦s nature. im not real sure if this will be a good way. ok he can be inactive or leave the battlefield but that doesnt count for everyone :) Here are some problems more and possible solutions. did u think about a station which builds capitals? heres a szenario: My Corp want to build 2 wyvern but before we start they attack our station and we cant escape with the materials. So in our corp-drop (container / site / spawn) are about 40.000.000 loot. only for 2 ships we wanted to build. if we want this stuff we need an ops to get this. we need 40 freighters. 40 freighters in an unsecure space... cus if we wouldnt have lost the fights there we wouldnt need to haul. now we have to go there again with 40 men less (they fly a freighter) that makes an convo of 100-200 ppl to get the stuff of 2! ships. either i think that is in balance with risk vs reward. 2 wyvern = 40kkk 40 freighter = 54kkk (pvp ships not counted) maybe an titan-freighter with 10 or 20kk storage should be released. I think you should let us chose another station where our stuff lands in. Heres my idea: the station is destroyed and before i log in i have to chose another station where my asstes go to. And this takes time. much time. for every m-¦ or kk isk a few secends. so if i have about 20kkk it should take about a month. 5 sec for each kk isk. if i dont want to wait so long or i need a specific item i can go there and take it (risk vs reward). the timer goes down by the worth of items i take. Even if i take some items i can leave all other there and let it spawn by timer to my selected station. an item drop of 5% should be enough to make the attackers happy and take out some stuff from the game (50% of the 5% could get destroyed) . if an 200 men corporation lose its station there are billions of isk. take a look how much 5% could be and let me know it this can we expanded by skills or isk sink. a skill for a shorter timer and an insure even for a shorter timer. empty
Blastil Aideron Robotics 116	Posted - 2015.04.03 20:37:36 - [190] - Quote Listen, I stand on principal here. Eve is a harsh place. Its a world where you can risk everything and gain a lot, or risk nothing and gain little. If you choose to live in 0.0 space (you weren't enslaved into nullsec, sorry) then you also consent to the violent player vs player interacitons there. up to and including losing all your stuff. If you were asleep, too bad. If you were awake and your alliance leader was an idiot, too bad. if you played it too close to the wire, and failed to evac a critical station after having 48 hours notice of serious military action resulting in its reinforcement, TOO BAD. Did you do a stupid and unsub your account while docked in 0.0 with all his assets? TOO EFFING BAD. Were you an absolute idiot carebear who thought that no one would ever conceivably possibly want to hurt you and the big bad pvp pilots broke their e-word of honor and launched a virtual pearl harbor and blew up your assets while they were docked and you were busy playing DOTA or whatever the hell current 0.0 residents play OTHER than EVE online, THEN TOO EFFING BAD FOR YOU!. Lets not keep some kind of bandaid on the problem here. If you have all your stuff in 0.0 stations and no back up plan you deserve to lose your stuff. Pilots have gotten too comfortable from a time and age when their space assets were perfectly protected and have never been in danger thanks to station mechanics, and so on. Implementing a harsh your stuff gets dumped into space in a free-for-all looting frenzy is NOT too harsh for eve, ANYTHING LESS IS FOR DIRTY WOW CAREBEARS, and you can GB2WOW. I hear they have pandas you can cuddle now. Do you want to get out of your space coffin? Its not going to be safe! Its a really great tool, so keep it protected and safe, not through game mechanics, but through ACTUALLY PLAYING THE GAME. Is that REALLY so much to ask?

Fzhal Anoikis Vergence The Last Chancers. 4	Posted - 2015.04.03 23:48:09 - [191] - Quote Blastil wrote: Listen, I stand on principal here. THEN TOO EFFING BAD FOR YOU! Personal principles and opinions have little bearing on good game design. Especially when someone says (paraphrasing) "All of your opinions are invalid... because I have a principal!", even when they are associated with the Aura Android app. Maybe Aura isn't on top anymore because, as shown above, you've lost the ability to construct logical arguments. If Sov is getting a 4 hour window, and it is, you are going to be very disappointed in the outcome of this issue. If you have nothing constructive to contribute, go complain in your Corp chat instead. As for me saying something on topic... I think that an insurance mechanic is probably the best solution. It should be easy to implement and tweak as needed. Pay a portion of the cost for the items you want replaced to get them back in an NPC station. Drop some of their actual items in space to create the scavenger orgy. A month before patch, or first ACCOUNT login, let players know the change is coming. This gives them a month to move stuff. If their station is destroyed within a month (paid time) of notification, insurance is free. Make it known that abuse of this gift from CCP should be dealt with harshly. I think that is pretty simple and fair to everyone. Insurance percentages and loot drops would be up to game designers.
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode ISD Community Communications Liaisons 5161	Posted - 2015.04.04 00:17:50 - [192] - Quote Removed some off topic posts. ISD Dorrim Barstorlode Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department
Fzhal Anoikis Vergence The Last Chancers. 4	Posted - 2015.04.04 01:09:56 - [193] - Quote You could have at least left my on topic stuff. I was just trying to shame the other poster to be constructive, and not waste our time with in insubstantial opinions. I'm lucky that I still had it in my clipboard. As for me saying something on topic... I think that an insurance mechanic is probably the best solution. It should be easy to implement and tweak as needed. Pay a portion of the cost for the items you want replaced to get them back in an NPC station. Drop some of their actual items in space to create the scavenger orgy. A month before patch, or first ACCOUNT login, let players know the change is coming. This gives them a month to move stuff. If their station is destroyed within a month (paid time) of notification, insurance is free. Make it known that abuse of this gift from CCP should be dealt with harshly. I think that is pretty simple and fair to everyone. Insurance percentages and loot drops would be up to game designers.
LuckyQuarter Lucky Galactic Expeditions 36	Posted - 2015.04.04 03:38:50 - [194] - Quote NPC stations should be destructible, with the possibility of players losing all their possessions and being thrown into space. Make npc stations XXXL class structures in highsec, XXL in lowsec, and XL in nullsec. Empire High-Sec NPC stations will still be the safest place to store stuff but not perfectly so. This will definitely encourage players to risk moving their gear to player made structures. NPC stations with their agents should automatically rebuild themselves when destroyed over a period of 30 days so that things aren't too chaotic. Go ahead and offer some kind of insurance program against station destruction, but the insurance should cost least for npc stations in highsec, and most for player structures in null sec.
Rionan Nafee 452	Posted - 2015.04.04 05:44:36 - [195] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: First option is to have the structure turn into a wreck - fitted structure modules could drop as loot, while items inside the structure would only be accessible to their rightful owner(s), possibly through salvaging. Users docked at the time of the structure destruction would still be docked inside the wreck, but unable to dock back should they exit. Another option is to use the same mechanic we have for planetary launches. When a structure is destroyed, all assets are moved into special containers. A container exists for each individual that stored items in the structure, as well as corporation entities and are spread around planets. When this happens, an entry would appear on the owner journal giving a warp-in point to go to. Please note such containers would not be destructible at all, and could not be scanned until the rightful owner comes to retrieve his or her loot. The duration at which those entries would stay remains entirely dependent to the structure type and player condition when it was destroyed (logged off, account lapsed etcGÇª). Player docked inside the structure would be spread around the solar system. How about the rightful owner can give someone others an "access key" (or something like that) so that they can grab his or her items from the wreck structure or container? In that way you could hire a "recovery corp" to bring your assets to you. I think this could be a new and interesting profession.
Max Deveron Deveron Shipyards and Technology 198	Posted - 2015.04.04 05:48:07 - [196] - Quote LuckyQuarter wrote: NPC stations should be destructible, with the possibility of players losing all their possessions and being thrown into space. Make npc stations XXXL class structures in highsec, XXL in lowsec, and XL in nullsec. Empire High-Sec NPC stations will still be the safest place to store stuff but not perfectly so. This will definitely encourage players to risk moving their gear to player made structures. NPC stations with their agents should automatically rebuild themselves when destroyed over a period of 30 days so that things aren't too chaotic. Go ahead and offer some kind of insurance program against station destruction, but the insurance should cost least for npc stations in highsec, and most for player structures in null sec. Uhm yeah, cool......NOT!! There goes Jita 4-4, or any other trade hub as a trade hub.....and for those that haent moved their stuff or stopped doing market orders when Burn Jita happens.....BOOM!!!! yep ther goe the neighborhood.....everyones stuff in a ball of fire.
LuckyQuarter Lucky Galactic Expeditions 36	Posted - 2015.04.04 06:16:09 - [197] - Quote Max Deveron wrote: Uhm yeah, cool......NOT!! There goes Jita 4-4, or any other trade hub as a trade hub.....and for those that haent moved their stuff or stopped doing market orders when Burn Jita happens.....BOOM!!!! yep ther goe the neighborhood.....everyones stuff in a ball of fire. If we truly want to have the new market structures take the place of the old major hubs, there isn't any other way to do it. Nor, do I think it is healthy for eve that so much trade is dependent on so few major trade systems as it is. Plus, being the largest by far structures should make the npc stations quite hard to kill....yes, only a burn jita type event could possibly do it. But, no place in eve should be perfectly safe...not even jita 4-4.
Eryn Velasquez 99	Posted - 2015.04.04 06:27:46 - [198] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: Option Four: 50% of the contents are destroyed, and the other 50% are lootable by the victors, just like normal drop mechanics. You want people to defend their space? Put their assets at risk and I guarantee this will happen..... No, the only thing what's gonna happen then is - no more industrialists in nullsec. Except in the largest alliances/coalitions, which can defend their space. _GÇ£A man's freedom consists in his being able to do whatever he wills, but that he should not, by any human power, be forced to do what is against his will.GÇ¥-áGÇò Jean-Jacques Rousseau-á_
Eryn Velasquez 99	Posted - 2015.04.04 06:52:45 - [199] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: Probably every region have 1-2 NPC made stations. I assume that they will be still the only ones not destroyable at any point ( good for history and eve law, leaves many possibles open for the future). When applicable structure is destroyed in region , assets are being transferred : To nearest Alliance Owned NPC XL structure or to nearest NPC made station. If it is not owned by your alliance - well you will need to take it over. Perhaps CCP should add one NPC owned system to each region, name it region capital, connected with every constellation through one or two gates and more than one NPC station in it? (a bit like Thera). _GÇ£A man's freedom consists in his being able to do whatever he wills, but that he should not, by any human power, be forced to do what is against his will.GÇ¥-áGÇò Jean-Jacques Rousseau-á_
Cichlid Brood Team Pizza Good at this Game 1	Posted - 2015.04.04 18:17:45 - [200] - Quote I dont quite KnoW where to post this so I'm going to post this here and pray this gets noticed. I play eve with multiple accounts and multiple characters on each account. I know I am not alone on this and I am willing to bet ccp is aware of just how much this is the case. I live out of a POS currently as a wh entity. As such with the current breakdown of roles I have a shared inventory of ships and modules with all of my characters. This is a big deal to me as I love playing spaceships, not playing " EVE, the station trade screen game. Now with cross client login/out trading as the endgame." But in all seriousness, I'd like to request that the new structures have a similar ability to assign a shared inventory space like our current POS infrastructure. Having assignable group access that goes beyond the corp/alliance level (AKA any pilot who has access to this structure could be granted access to another's personal or "group" space) makes living in space with multiple toons on multiple accounts much more bearable. If these structures also gain the ability to be free-ports, this could open up more possibilities. Cichlid

Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 135	Posted - 2015.04.04 18:26:43 - [201] - Quote Beta Maoye wrote: I don't get it. Why looting tower is allowed but looting station is forbiddened? If properties in station require protection, shouldn't properties in tower be protected too? Why they are treated differently? The volume of stuff one can put in a given POS is limited, station hangar space on the other hand, is not. Multiply that by the number of pilots services by each concept and you have your answer. ( -í° -£-û -í°)
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1998	Posted - 2015.04.04 21:44:53 - [202] - Quote LuckyQuarter wrote: If we truly want to have the new market structures take the place of the old major hubs, there isn't any other way to do it. Nor, do I think it is healthy for eve that so much trade is dependent on so few major trade systems as it is. Plus, being the largest by far structures should make the npc stations quite hard to kill....yes, only a burn jita type event could possibly do it. But, no place in eve should be perfectly safe...not even jita 4-4. 1. EVE isn't dependant on the hubs. We as players have decided we like that Meta. 2. The new structures aren't 'intended to take the place' of the old hubs anyway. It's up to the players to decide where the markets are. 3. Since NPC's don't respond properly, NPC stations should be unkillable. As they simply don't have realistic responses to attacks nor is it possible to program realistic responses by the Empires.
Arctic Estidal Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club 18	Posted - 2015.04.05 03:34:11 - [203] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Hello people,Such gameplay is necessary if we wish players to use those new structures and not stash all of their items in NPC stations. Also, please note, it is possible for such mechanics to only be available in the largest structures (most likely XL) since existing Starbases do not have any kind of item safety mechanic (and would likely end up as L size equivalent in the new model). This thread should really have received some more thought before its creation. If POS's are going to be the L size in the new structure systems, then as stated above, we are really only talking about asset destruction for XL structures as the current, no-safety mechanic for POS's and other structures should continue. Trade Hub's & Staging Regions in null generally have one maybe two significant trade hubs. These trade hubs are the staging system for the major alliance in the region and contains all the ships, assets, manufacturing and market sell and buy orders. Here is a link to the list of market hubs by value across New Eden. http://eve-marketdata.com/station.php?step=Rank If a station is destructible with all its assets, the risk/reward ratio is completely out of balance. The above link only shows the market orders. The assets in the base which includes ships, modules, minerals, manufacturing materials and blueprint originals are not seen. This value per player is easily in the tens of billions which when multiplied by the 1,000 to 4,000 man alliances this quickly adds up to trillions of isk worth of assets which are all vulnerable to destruction and looting. Example The recent attack by PL against Brave would have resulted in GE- and HED being destroyed and all the assets with them. This would have been just from market orders a total value of $293 billion for GE- and $144 billion for HED. (This is current data and therefore the numbers are post the loss of GE-). The individual members of this new bro alliance will each have in excess of $1 billion in ships and items therefore this represents trillions of isk at risk. It would completely destroy an alliance's individual members who own all those assets. Remember it is not owned by an alliance, so when members items are locked in a station they aren't reimbursed by an alliance. Current Tactics The current strategy generally involves stripping an enemy of their income which comes from their moons, taxes on ratting, refining etc. You whittle an alliances income sources down, and defeat them on the field costing them billions in ships which eventually enables you to defeat them as they are unable to continue replacing ships. If you take their main station, there is no isk reward for the attacking alliance. The losing alliance generally have jump clones setup and can still get into the station to sell the items over time etc. If their alliance takes the station back (which could be months later) they get all their items back. This provides an incentive for the losing alliance to return to take the station. New Tactic If a station and the assets inside are destructible, you could head shot an alliance and destroy all their assets in one blow, which for most would be unrecoverable. If items drop, you have increased the reward for groups to attack only the staging station for an alliance and nothing else, removing this one structure destroys the alliance and you can then easily conquer the rest of the space. You would create groups who would head shot alliance staging systems to loot and then move on, they donGÇÖt want the space they are just raiding trillions of isk and then moving to the next staging system. They are staged in highsec or NPC stations and have their assets completely protected. Away from the game As many people have stated, if you are AFK for any period of time, your risk increases exponentially but your reward does not exist. If someone returns and all their assets are gone, they will generally not continue. For people who reference wormholers and POS assets. Lets be serious, your main assets are in NPC or HS stations, so you are never risking your primary assets and isk generation is so good in WH you can quickly replace any loss in a POS. POSGÇÖs are L size structures and should continue to have items inside have a chance to drop. Option 1 Review Having the structure turn into a wreck and the modules fitted to the structure drop as loot, is a nice idea and provides a reward to the attacking group. Having the items in the structure owned by individuals and corps dropping and requiring them to go back and salvage their items doesnGÇÖt work. Firstly, they lost the station which means they donGÇÖt control the grid, system or the constellation. The items inside the structure are billions of m3 and are unable to retrieved. The attacking group would perma camp the wreck and gates and continue to kill all who come to retrieve their items.
Arctic Estidal Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club 18	Posted - 2015.04.05 03:34:58 - [204] - Quote Option 2 Review This wonGÇÖt work either. I alone have billions of isk in a staging system, 600+ sale orders which contains millions of individual items, representing millions of m3 of items. How many containers am I going to have to go around too. The issue still remains that in this situation, my alliance would have lost the station, system and constellation. The gates are perma camped, because now we have 1,000+ people all trying to get back into the system to get to our containers to transport trillions of isk out of system. Option 3 Review This is the only logical and practical option. When the station is destroyed all items, market orders, ships and items in the hangar, are packaged in an emergency container (unlimited m3) which has warp capability and is delivered to a designated station of the players choosing within a designated period of time. There could be an isk recovery fee being a percentage of the item value and you could choose which items you want to keep and items you want to leave. Lets not forget before a station is destroyed, the defending alliance has already thrown billions of isk worth of ships at the attacking enemy. The Alliance loses billions of isk worth of structures, upgrades and POSGÇÖs in the systems. They have lost a lot. Taking all their personal assets as well, is a step too far and the rewards in null sec are not large enough to offset this risk. Small Groups CCP wants small groups to move into unused areas of null sec, which currently there is heaps of unused and under-utilised space. If a small group move out to null sec and havenGÇÖt blued everyone in the area, they will quickly be head shot and all their items raided. There has to be protection for groups to take the time and effort to take sov and not just be renters and create large blue donuts. If they lose their systems, there will be a significant cost in the lost structures, income and assets. Individuals also losing all their personal assets, will cause people to not move into null sec.
Iiridayn Old Spice Syndicate Intrepid Crossing 7	Posted - 2015.04.05 03:55:08 - [205] - Quote I might suggest a variation on the third option - to move by preference user's assets to their home station. Creating a contract at some small percentage of the value based on distance moved would be feasible to prevent exploitation. I find option 1 potentially quite limiting with respect to ship hulls, and that option 2 suffers from similar issues. However, as I've never evacuated an outpost I cannot comment on how feasible these would be in practice.
Hakan MacTrew MUTED VOID Takahashi Alliance 890	Posted - 2015.04.05 09:32:44 - [206] - Quote Iiridayn wrote: I might suggest a variation on the third option - to move by preference user's assets to their home station. Creating a contract at some small percentage of the value based on distance moved would be feasible to prevent exploitation. I find option 1 potentially quite limiting with respect to ship hulls, and that option 2 suffers from similar issues. However, as I've never evacuated an outpost I cannot comment on how feasible these would be in practice. This sounds like the best option. Part of the assets get destroyed Part of the assets are dropped as loot Part are returned to the player at their "Home Station" by contract for a fee based on their market value. It leaves the option for players who may have heavily invested in an area, (by putting 95% of all their assets in a given region,) who could not evac out for whatever reason. It would also mean that if a player was unsubbed at the time if the stations destruction the attacker would not have to wait for a potentially excessive amount of time before they had a chance to get their loot. Also, when the player resubbed and logged back in, he may find that the territory where these assets were stored are now extremely deep in hostile territory, where they have no realistic capacity to retrieve them. This does seem the most balanced option over all. Friends
Awkward Pi Duolus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 38	Posted - 2015.04.05 16:17:46 - [207] - Quote This will be a terribly disruptive force, but I love it. Indestructible outposts never made real sense from a gameplay point of view. In line with some of the suggestions made earlier, I would suggest having a special 'chest' in our hanger where we can move 100k or 1m m3 of stuff (not ships, unless packaged..) that gets teleported to a highsec NPC station of choice. Perhaps the one with the corporate office. The rest is destroyed, and up for loot. Though given the amount of stuff that people store in a station.. you may want to find a better way than just putting it in wrecks in space. The idea of loot spew in space is just bad. Edit: As for moored ships, for folks worried about losing them while on extended afk, just board them, warp to SS and safe logoff =P
Hakan MacTrew MUTED VOID Takahashi Alliance 891	Posted - 2015.04.06 08:54:49 - [208] - Quote I probably missed it, (I can't be bothered to read through the whole thread and my "Search-Fu" is weak,) but are there any plans to allow the destruction of Empire assets? If our stuff can blow up, wouldn't it be obvious that theirs can too? Friends
SpaceSaft Capts Deranged Cavaliers Gentlemen's.Club 142	Posted - 2015.04.06 19:33:23 - [209] - Quote Ok to summarize: Different people want loot, danger and safety for their assets, This is pretty much mutually exclusive as someone said earlier. As I understand it right now, anyone could just come to said structure, win two structure cap fights and then destroy the structre? That's way too easy for the amount of assets we're talking about. I see two ways to deal with destructible stations: Make them completely destructible, kill anything inside. People are notified 3 months in advance of this change, people who are not subscribed or logged in during that time get their stuff moved to a highsec station. Basically enough time and the choice whether to participate in the new system or not risk it. After that time, all hands are off, no safety is given. The big big disadvantage of that would be that you could not build anything reliable in nullsec anymore. It would kill markets, industry and in the long run residency of dangerous areas. This doesn't have to be bad mind you, I would be perfectly fine with a nullsec zone where only small investments are feasible, where only corps using ventures and stuff up to cruisers can run proftiable operations. It would probably be very bad for large alliance and coalition warfare though. It's a choice, if you at CCP want to reduce the size of ships and assets in nullsec, this would be way to do it, discouraging large investments. This would be fair because you knew what you were getting into and you lost. Tough luck, such is eve. You would have had the choice and you chose wrong. Make them free to loot after destruction but give owners to option to spend time and pilot effort to increase the defenses. Things like secondary structures that have to be captured first, shield generators, docking control systems, invulnerabillity if you own 50% or more of all structures in your constellation, that kind of stuff. Basically making defense of XL structures in lived in space really really easy. It's ok that people can take all that stuff if it takes literally weeks or months and lots of effort to do so. This would be fair because if you could not defend your assets long enough to move them out, you're basically incompetent and deserve to lose it. Unsubscribed people's assets would be locked down until they resub and log in, then option #1 applies. Option #2 seems weird and fiddely to me Option #3 is really easily exploited to move assets as someone pointed out. The UI is still bad.
Masada Koraka State War Academy Caldari State 0	Posted - 2015.04.06 20:33:23 - [210] - Quote To me, making this a simple A or B scenario will greatly under utilize the possible game-play mechanics we could see here. I see this as a function of infrastructure and mechanics. To me, if you have a structure capable of holding loot, everything left within when it is destroyed should either be destroyed or strewn about the solar system. Smaller items remaining on grid, larger items thrown further away and items within specialized containers thrown into scannable data/relic sites that are instantly bookmarked for the owners via a beacon on the container(s). Containers can be made of varying specifications to affect different volumes, scan signature or even a pre-defined cloak period (delay in appearing on map but warp-able to by the owner via the beacon). This goes hand in hand with the grand nature of the destruction of such a structure without stretching into invulnerable vaults or everything being immediately destroyed or lootable to only those who are on grid with the structure. Now, a key point in my first suggestion is the "everything left" statement. I believe that with one structure, you should either have to ferry the stuff out yourself or risk losing it, but once you have more than one structure that you should be able to establish links between them that can be used to ferry goods. These links could start out as NPC convoys, susceptible to attack and expend into matter transportation if Gates are added to your network. It is up to the owners to decide what and when to move via these links and links should also have a volume limiter (which would be another infrastructure item to upgrade). If you have a sophisticated enough infrastructure, than perhaps you could also move stuff to and from HS The key is that with only 1 structure you are very limited in what you can do, but as your investment and infrastructure expands your options become richer and your protection from loss is greater as well. This can be opening up to include Freeports as possible destinations or structures within alliances, etc... tldr: 1. Provide transportation infrastructure options as structures are upgraded and more structures are build within star-system/constellation. Structure owners/operators can move things if they need to based on the volume supplied by links that are established/upgraded. Movement could take varying forms and provides a way to offload things in the face of destruction or just move things around during normal ops. 2. Provide specialized containers that are not destroyed when a structure is destroyed but instead are strewn about the solar system in relic/data sites, perhaps include advanced containers that are cloaked for x time period before showing up. Owners receive bookmarks via beacon. 3. Everything else in the structure is either lost or strewn about grid / solar system depending on size. Structure itself can be left as hack-able wreck(s)

SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 283	Posted - 2015.04.06 21:02:54 - [211] - Quote I think its way too soon before Fozziesov to change how assets are stored. Changing this mechanic is NOT going to increase 'content'. I'd much rather keep the current system. Having your assets locked in a station you no longer own is more than enough to encourage getting a station back. Ask yourself, did Solar finally get their stuff back from RPO or whatever system that was? Those are now assets that can be used again, to create content. Also lets not forget that this mechanic will be exploited for the sole purpose of grrreifing.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2225	Posted - 2015.04.06 21:22:43 - [212] - Quote SFM Hobb3s wrote: I think its way too soon before Fozziesov to change how assets are stored. Changing this mechanic is NOT going to increase 'content'. I'd much rather keep the current system. Having your assets locked in a station you no longer own is more than enough to encourage getting a station back. Ask yourself, did Solar finally get their stuff back from RPO or whatever system that was? Those are now assets that can be used again, to create content. Also lets not forget that this mechanic will be exploited for the sole purpose of grrreifing. its going to be hard to get the structure back when its been blown to smithereens.
Arctic Estidal Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club 19	Posted - 2015.04.07 13:08:15 - [213] - Quote If a station is destructible and contents inside. remove fatigue from Jump Freighters and increase the hold size by x100 so I can fit everything I own in it. Everyone keeps talking about how good it is going to be looting structures. But no one will invest in null sec and its costs billions in upgrades etc already if you have little protection from being raided and you cannot perform an evac because of the jump fatigue, limit on jump freighter holds, capital ship jump reduction etc, makes the process impossible.
Lil' Brudder Too Pistols for Pandas 116	Posted - 2015.04.07 16:28:50 - [214] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Also, please note, it is possible for such mechanics to only be available in the largest structures (most likely XL) since existing Starbases do not have any kind of item safety mechanic (and would likely end up as L size equivalent in the new model). Is it also possible to make sure that Large POS's maintain their ability to ward off attacks (or discourage) like they currently are in HS. As hinted the new "large" structures will be much easier to dispatch than what current "large POS's" are...at which point what is the motivation for even putting one up if it takes very little relative commitment to be destroyed...hyperdunking these new structures might become a thing if you are not careful.
Fzhal Anoikis Vergence The Last Chancers. 5	Posted - 2015.04.07 17:36:54 - [215] - Quote SFM Hobb3s wrote: I think its way too soon before Fozziesov to change how assets are stored. Changing this mechanic is NOT going to increase 'content'. I'd much rather keep the current system. Having your assets locked in a station you no longer own is more than enough to encourage getting a station back. Ask yourself, did Solar finally get their stuff back from RPO or whatever system that was? Those are now assets that can be used again, to create content. Also lets not forget that this mechanic will be exploited for the sole purpose of grrreifing. Yep, within the next 3-5 releases they are going to be re-sculpting everything that is 0.0. This is going to be one of the biggest events in Eve's history. Upcoming Changes: Null belts/ore content (has put the markets in limbo) Null mineral increase in BPOs Structures, which primarily affect Null (specifically, ship safety will be re-defined no matter how hard they try to keep it the same) Sovereignty mechanics This is too much at once. There will be too much noise between these factors to the point that CCP is will be unable to pinpoint the right things to tweak among all the changes that were made in null's interconnected system.
Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1668	Posted - 2015.04.07 19:10:16 - [216] - Quote Arctic Estidal wrote: If a station is destructible and contents inside. remove fatigue from Jump Freighters and increase the hold size by x100 so I can fit everything I own in it. Everyone keeps talking about how good it is going to be looting structures. But no one will invest in null sec and its costs billions in upgrades etc already if you have little protection from being raided and you cannot perform an evac because of the jump fatigue, limit on jump freighter holds, capital ship jump reduction etc, makes the process impossible. Don't worry, the attacking side will be stuck with the exact same problem if it happen. How the hell will they haul all that loot anyway? "Hahahahahha I can loot whatever I can!!!!" open can window client load content client freeze CTD "WTF CCP???!?!?!?!!"
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 284	Posted - 2015.04.07 19:56:55 - [217] - Quote Let us also consider that Eve is about shooting spaceships and blowing up spaceships. Destructible stations that risk stored assets, station market stores or contracts, are going to have at least two CATASTROPHIC effects to this: 1. People will keep as few ships as possible in stations (resulting in much less pew pew) 2. People will keep far less things on market or contracts (resulting in even less pew pew as less replacements are available)
Fzhal Anoikis Vergence The Last Chancers. 7	Posted - 2015.04.07 20:01:08 - [218] - Quote SFM Hobb3s wrote: Let us also consider that Eve is about shooting spaceships and blowing up spaceships. Destructible stations that risk stored assets, station market stores or contracts, are going to have at least two CATASTROPHIC effects to this: 1. People will keep as few ships as possible in stations (resulting in much less pew pew) 2. People will keep far less things on market or contracts (resulting in even less pew pew as less replacements are available) 3. Alliance staging systems will move to Low-Sec
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2233	Posted - 2015.04.07 21:48:56 - [219] - Quote SFM Hobb3s wrote: Let us also consider that Eve is about shooting spaceships and blowing up spaceships. Destructible stations that risk stored assets, station market stores or contracts, are going to have at least two CATASTROPHIC effects to this: 1. People will keep as few ships as possible in stations (resulting in much less pew pew) 2. People will keep far less things on market or contracts (resulting in even less pew pew as less replacements are available) Why are you assuming the assets are going to be destroyed?
w1ndstrike Strange Energy The Bastion 25	Posted - 2015.04.07 23:16:48 - [220] - Quote Rowells wrote: SFM Hobb3s wrote: Let us also consider that Eve is about shooting spaceships and blowing up spaceships. Destructible stations that risk stored assets, station market stores or contracts, are going to have at least two CATASTROPHIC effects to this: 1. People will keep as few ships as possible in stations (resulting in much less pew pew) 2. People will keep far less things on market or contracts (resulting in even less pew pew as less replacements are available) Why are you assuming the assets are going to be destroyed? he doesn't assume asset destruction, he assumes loss of assets (someone looting them still means the original owner loses them) this is my primary concern with this as I have outlined in previous postings. I have yet to see a good reason for having asset loss from destruction or looting that would actually be healthy for the game as a whole. for anyone else who hasn't read the whole thread: try to think about the whole game ecosystem before you form an opinion. looting might sound cool until you realize it's also why you'll have to go 50+ jumps to find anyone to fight in nullsec.

Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2234	Posted - 2015.04.07 23:33:08 - [221] - Quote w1ndstrike wrote: Rowells wrote: SFM Hobb3s wrote: Let us also consider that Eve is about shooting spaceships and blowing up spaceships. Destructible stations that risk stored assets, station market stores or contracts, are going to have at least two CATASTROPHIC effects to this: 1. People will keep as few ships as possible in stations (resulting in much less pew pew) 2. People will keep far less things on market or contracts (resulting in even less pew pew as less replacements are available) Why are you assuming the assets are going to be destroyed? he doesn't assume asset destruction, he assumes loss of assets (someone looting them still means the original owner loses them) this is my primary concern with this as I have outlined in previous postings. I have yet to see a good reason for having asset loss from destruction or looting that would actually be healthy for the game as a whole. for anyone else who hasn't read the whole thread: try to think about the whole game ecosystem before you form an opinion. looting might sound cool until you realize it's also why you'll have to go 50+ jumps to find anyone to fight in nullsec. I'm not seeing where personal belongings are being looted either, unless you're referring to another players suggestions
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 925	Posted - 2015.04.08 13:30:01 - [222] - Quote Phig Neutron wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: I'm seeing a couple of 1000 eve players that really haven't embraced the core concept of loss that is eve. Another high school kid that doesn't grasp the concept that there is life outside of EVE. If the game demands a 24 hour commitment, it will lose most of its players. Permanent loss of assets is a great mechanic when you are actually playing the game, not when it means you can't log out for a family vacation. Actually, when folks in my wh corp take a break 1 of several options occur. 1. We help them put their stuff in HS for safe storage (it's a big pita when you consider wh mass a good route and so on) 2. They just donate all thier non evac'd assets to corp (they donate them, we don't confiscate them) 3. If they leave unexpectedly, then we move out what we feel is appropriate and contract it to them when they get back. (Use a corp contract from a random station you don't use and let it go to the corp hangar when it expires) As a HS graduate that has raised 3 college graduates I do grasp that there is life outside of eve. Heck, I even have a responsible job - I've had one my entire life. If you don't have enough faith in your corp/alliance that you fear losing all your poop while on vacation, then I'll recommend a better corp/alliance or moving stuff to a safe haven until you get back. Every WH player / director / CEO really understands that they could lose everything. Heck you could personally be dunking my system as I type this (I'm at work... read up about that job thing I have). Yeah I do laugh at you big bad null bears and your need to not lose assets. In my mind it comes down to this. Mega alliance leadership can't realistically protect all their minion's assets, so they rely on CCP to provide protection for them. Your only justification for not being able to manage your assets and/or those of your corpmates comes down to lazy (It's too difficult for me to haul all my / his stuff to an npc station) or you're group is just too big to be able to take care of itself logistically. Either way - I think your a bunch of lazy crybabies and there really isn't anything you can say on this forum to change that. I would think it fair for CCP to give 8months to a year heads up that null stations will actually be destroyed and lootable after sustaining millions of points of damage. (I've never gotten my arms around shooting a station for millions of points of damage 3 times and then occupying a perfectly useable station via... magic?? TL/DR Blow the crap up for real and loot the spoils. If you still want a station there - build a new one.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 928	Posted - 2015.04.08 13:39:24 - [223] - Quote w1ndstrike wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: As a wh gal I find this whole discussion of the safety of ones assets after you get your poop pushed in kind of amusing. I'm seeing a couple of 1000 eve players that really haven't embraced the core concept of loss that is eve. Very amusing indeed. I'm seeing folks feeling entitled to the rewards of living in null but also demanding the safety of empire stations. This dichotomy is quite interesting. as a wormholer you made a conscious choice with full knowledge of the risks/rewards and with a specific set of expectations. you are correct is saying that loss is a part of eve, however in nearly all cases you know the risks before you choose (or not) to take them. choice vs imposition is a big deal. impositions cause massive changes in player psychology because they set a precedent of "even if you calculate your risks you can still get **** by changes on a whim" which is bad for the continued health of the game. loss in eve should be meaningful, and usually that's a result of choosing to take a calculated risk and succeeding or failing. getting screwed by something you had no way to expect or plan for is not meaningful, its just ** game design. basic premise: outpost destruction is cool, loss of assets for those that put them there when a different set of assumptions was in play is not. I agree, CCP should give 8 months notice that things are changing. Feel free to conquer any stations containing stranded assets in the interim. I really don't want to hear that everyone will quit eve if station destruction were to come about. I have more faith in the player base than that. They just won't put their crap in poorly defended stations. A station owner should have 3 options. 1. Cut some sort of deal and hand it over in one piece (negotiate asset removal as needed). 2. Fight it out, and if need be - cut a deal during the defense and hand over a broken station. 3. Fight it out until the end and leave only loot and a great story. I think grinding down a station over time and then getting a shiny new one w/ no damage is the work of magic and belongs in other types of games.
w1ndstrike Strange Energy The Bastion 25	Posted - 2015.04.08 23:45:05 - [224] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: I agree, CCP should give 8 months notice that things are changing. Feel free to conquer any stations containing stranded assets in the interim. I really don't want to hear that everyone will quit eve if station destruction were to come about. I have more faith in the player base than that. They just won't put their crap in poorly defended stations. A station owner should have 3 options. 1. Cut some sort of deal and hand it over in one piece (negotiate asset removal as needed). 2. Fight it out, and if need be - cut a deal during the defense and hand over a broken station. 3. Fight it out until the end and leave only loot and a great story. I think grinding down a station over time and then getting a shiny new one w/ no damage is the work of magic and belongs in other types of games. the one major problem that we have to acknowledge is that entities DO exist that will headshot major systems just to get tears. not for any other reason. this creates several problems in nullsec environments that wormholes currently mitigate to some degree by nature. for wormholes, there is a limit to how much of an attacking force can enter the hole and threaten your stuff, no such inherent protection really exists in null, if someone who wants to watch your system burn feels inclined and has them available, they could drop 300 caps in your system and destroy everything you own. the scenario above would give people even more reason to blob together with the most powerful single entities (or get held hostage by them); precisely the scenario that CCP has openly stated they're working to prevent. personally I have loved WH space since its creation because it represents the ultimate risk/reward system in eve that actually has an artificial limiter to give the defender a decent advantage (unless you plan poorly then its your own damn fault). null doesn't have that by it's nature as a static system and the existence of blops/jump drives/null T3s/etc. null does get some things wormholes don't, mostly the ability to create region markets and have actual supported economies, but both of these rely on some level of protections for the assets involved given the timescales. market hubs aren't just something you can "pack up" and move when threatened. these would disappear entirely as the risk would be so ridiculously out of proportion to the reward, or markups to mitigate risks would be so severe no one would buy anything anyway. nullsec heavy industry would be completely FUBAR aside from supercap production by necessity. there is a middle ground to be found somewhere, as destructible stations could be done (and proivide loot) without unduly damaging the individual player.
Fzhal Anoikis Vergence The Last Chancers. 7	Posted - 2015.04.09 03:17:10 - [225] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: Actually, when folks in my wh corp take a break 1 of several options occur. 1. We help them put their stuff in HS for safe storage (it's a big pita when you consider wh mass a good route and so on) 2. They just donate all thier non evac'd assets to corp (they donate them, we don't confiscate them) 3. If they leave unexpectedly, then we move out what we feel is appropriate and contract it to them when they get back. (Use a corp contract from a random station you don't use and let it go to the corp hangar when it expires) If you don't have enough faith in your corp/alliance that you fear losing all your poop while on vacation, then I'll recommend a better corp/alliance or moving stuff to a safe haven until you get back. Every WH player / director / CEO really understands that they could lose everything. Heck you could personally be dunking my system as I type this (I'm at work... read up about that job thing I have). Yeah I do laugh at you big bad null bears and your need to not lose assets. In my mind it comes down to this. Mega alliance leadership can't realistically protect all their minion's assets, so they rely on CCP to provide protection for them. A C6 WH can support how many before before holes get massed and make people stranded? Can you spend a week down chain and get back in 6 minutes? Alliances have thousands, most of which are just a number. Would you have the faith to let 500 people have access to your stuff so they could move it for you? Would you mind moving 5 people, with capitals and unlimited space, every week? Let's face it, as much as we like them, wormholes are a bad comparison.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 936	Posted - 2015.04.09 16:37:52 - [226] - Quote Of course there are vast differences between running a wh corp and a null empire. I think an underlying problem in eve right now is that currently there is no real incentive for the leadership of large organisations to actually play the game. Folks play other games until a ping of sufficient value comes up. I know CCP is working to change that. I think the destruction and looting of stations would be a great way to reach that end. I think it would be a great set of options if stations were destructable and lootable. Here's just one idea that could create both a measure of security and a possibility for loots. I'll call it an 'evac button' but you can call it whatever you like. Here's how it might work. Blob A wants the station belonging to Blob B. 1. Blob B is a bunch of risk averse ninnies, so the CEO owner of the station agrees w/ the agressor CEO to negotiate a withdrawal from the system. CEO B enters the evac option. This allows the agessor CEO to confirm they have a deal. The station becomes invulnerable for a set period of time (48 hours, 3 hours, a week - whatever the reasonable time is - the actual value has little meaning in this discussion). So the station is safe and the evac is on. The retreaters have some time to get their stuffs out. Once the timer times out, then CEO A now owns the station. He can loot what's left. He can flush clones down the vat bay drain. Whatever. It's his station now. 2. Blob B decides to fight it out. Pew pew pew. Pew pew. On no! Blob B is losing. CEO B enters into an evac situation as above. If CEO A agrees, then the timer starts. Evac happens. The new owner gets a broken station at the end of the timer and has some form of activity to repair the station back up to fully operational. 3. Blob B is HARD CORE. Screw you Blob A, we're goning down with the ship. Pew pew pew. Pew pew. Blob B either fights off the attackers or the station is in ruins, gets looted and is gone forever. Link this to the entosis mini game and much fun will be had. Stations will go from something you build everywhere to a strategic asset you have to think about before you put it up. Sure folks will pull stuff out of stations. So what? If I lived in deep null and had assets in a poorly defended station I didn't trust, then I'd put up a POS or maybe 3 to split out my stuff. I understand that POS will be a thing of the past, so think of it as moving my booty out of the XL alliance loot pinata structure and spreading it around in several large/medium/small structures. You can spread your loots over several small structures over several systems in your home constellation. And a final note. I really truely deep deep down could give a ratsassafrass about the stuff that belongs to a guy that hasn't logged in for 2 years. Really - I don't care.
Arctic Estidal Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club 19	Posted - 2015.04.10 00:13:55 - [227] - Quote The question which hasn't been answered, is why would groups build multi-billion isk structures which can be destroyed, where the benefits of the structures is small compared to the risk they now create as a signficiant target. Remember each region has one major staging station, so the attacker only has to headshot one station. Finally - Can we stop comparing WH to Null-Sec they are completely different.
Malcaz Addicted to Shljivovica The Looper Collective 36	Posted - 2015.04.10 16:05:37 - [228] - Quote Making stations destructible is a mistake. All stations belonging to smaller alliances will be shortly destroyed by trolls with super fleets that nobody can defend against except for the strongest alliances, and it will not be worth the investment to build them anymore.
X Gallentius Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 2876	Posted - 2015.04.10 16:53:20 - [229] - Quote I love the idea of the Red Cross (Sisters of Eve) coming to the station after the fight and retrieving all the dead bodies (loot) and hauling it back to their loved ones (to their current cloning station). Make is so 10% of the items are dropped for the attacking forces to be picked up as loot. The rest gets shipped back to that player's current cloning station. DONE. BUT, I must insist that you actually spawn Sisters of Eve Jump Freighters, which would be protected by CONCORD, to retrieve those items and then have them jump out. One transporter for each player. It would be a really cool thing to see in local, and I'm pretty sure the attacking force would be more than willing to give up quite a few gank Taloses to kill a SoE NPC for lols. JUSTK is recruiting.
X Gallentius Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 2876	Posted - 2015.04.10 16:58:37 - [230] - Quote Also, the solution to whether or not to build stations is to make stations less expensive (time/isk/operations) to build perhaps? Then the cost of taking one down (wrt time needed) will be weighed against how easily one can be deployed. JUSTK is recruiting.

Chen Chillin Deep Structure. The Bastion 0	Posted - 2015.04.11 07:15:14 - [231] - Quote along with all of this excellent point and counter point.. lets add... Hey CCP you want more 0.0 Sov and people to use the structures? get rid of NPC Stations in Null Sec. Hold Sov or run back to low sec to play station games and troll! ok.. I know it was a bit off topic... am still trying to digest the previous 14 pages, but.... lets break this down a bit. Assembly arrays - go ahead and destroy, loot and salvage. Unless the bonuses for these are majorly advantageous... there is nothing you can't do adequately in an XL station including super construction if i understand the new station structures and mods correctly. Research labs - same.... they became obsolete 2 patches ago. Drilling platforms - destroy, loot, salvage - really no difference then now. Observatory arrays - new but yeah... destroy, loot, salvage. Advertisement Centers - LOL... just what we need, Commercials on TV are bad enough... Definitely Destroy these. so the following are the only controversial ones if I understand correctly. Market and Office Hubs, Gates, Administration Hubs. Hmmmmm Definately need to think more on those myself, will have to compose a post off line to get this one close to what i want to say.
Jacob Holland Weyland-Vulcan Industries 395	Posted - 2015.04.11 09:55:18 - [232] - Quote Why does there need to be any loot? There does need to be an option to capture rather than destroy (that castle you just reduced may be pointing in the wrong direction but it's still a castle) and it makes sense to allow some of the infrastructure to be salvaged if destruction is chosen but I don't see a reason to add incentives to destroy structures (at least with regard to those too large to scoop and run away with) beyond destroying the structure. If it's in the wrong place, if it's an Amarr Outpost and you really want a Caldari Station...etc. then what you can do afterwards is the motive for destruction; if you don't think you can hold the system when the original owners turn their attentions back to you and you don't want them using that station as a stage for their counterstrike then that is the motive for destruction. Although we all like explosions I would also suggest that we need an alternative method of destruction. You can plant charges or bombard it to the point of unusability of course... But could you not also send in a bunch of guys with plasma cutters and lifting equipment, spanners and serious demeanours to slowly break it up, salvaging all of that useful material for use in another, nearby project? With regard to people's stuff... I feel that the scale of the "stuff" many people are likely to be dealing with is such that One-time undocks or planetary launches (particularly in what is now hostile space) are insufficient to the task. Not only that but the timeframe involved is far too short given that we're not looking at months of siege but a terrain which can change completely in a few weeks. However, we also don't want to create a situation where capsuleers do stuff which is completely incompatible with the world in which they reside - like blowing up their own stations to save their logistics guys from having to transport the stuff within it...
Arctic Estidal Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club 19	Posted - 2015.04.11 11:51:19 - [233] - Quote I re-read the dev log regarding entosis and stations. When the station is attacked and the defenders lose the station goes into 48 freeport mode. If this is designed to be used as evac, then there has to be an effective zone around the station that ships can cyno in and out of safely to enable the evac. If this is not possible, then the purpose of the freeport only benefits the attackers. They will be able to dock and use services, providing a significant advantage not currently available to attackers, when the second battle commences to determine final ownership of the station. There has to be defensive bonuses for the current owner of the station. Potentially defensive turrets, etc which can provide a numbers advantage for the defender. Defenders should always have the advantage instead of the attacker. The current mechanic proposed for the station provides no advantage for the defender. Making the attacker take longer to undertake the capture is not a defensive bonus, it must be the ability to shut the capture down.
Alexis Nightwish 147	Posted - 2015.04.13 20:45:01 - [234] - Quote The prevailing philosophy for nullsec is "bring everything I own out to one virtually impervious location, and in the off chance we lose the station, I may have to sell all my stuff but I won't actually lose any of it so it's all good." Why? Even with the current mechanics why bring all your stuff out there? Other than a few PvE ships aren't most of what you fly doctrine ships provided by the alliance? So why bring all your personal assets out there? Instead of adapting the mechanics to continue supporting this mentality, perhaps adapting one's mentality to the new mechanics would be a better solution? CCP wants to distribute fights. If station loss resulted in asset loss I think that not only would people fight harder to defend their space, but also would distribute assets so as to not lose everything if they lose one station. Distributed fights would reduce TIDI, blobs, and would make nullsec wars much more dynamic. CCP has an opportunity to really shake things up for the better, but I don't think they will because of the outcry of so many nullsec residents who are stuck in the old paradigm of having all their eggs in one basket in complete safety. Complete safety. In nullsec. Wasn't that supposed to be risky, dangerous space? CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fzhal Anoikis Vergence The Last Chancers. 8	Posted - 2015.04.13 21:06:57 - [235] - Quote No Dev input for 3 weeks (day of posting). At this point, discussions are all rehash without direction. Pointless.
O2 jayjay Tit-EE Sprinkles Stratagem. 22	Posted - 2015.04.14 05:07:26 - [236] - Quote I honestly think it should all drop and be on a first come first serve bases. There is plenty of isk to be made in null sec and if you have the isk to put up your own station then you should have the players and isk to defend it. At this point you should own enough space and make enough income to replace your assets 3 times over. If not then that's bad planning and financing on the players part. My 2 cents
O2 jayjay Tit-EE Sprinkles Stratagem. 22	Posted - 2015.04.14 05:09:47 - [237] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: The prevailing philosophy for nullsec is "bring everything I own out to one virtually impervious location, and in the off chance we lose the station, I may have to sell all my stuff but I won't actually lose any of it so it's all good." Why? Even with the current mechanics why bring all your stuff out there? Other than a few PvE ships aren't most of what you fly doctrine ships provided by the alliance? So why bring all your personal assets out there? Instead of adapting the mechanics to continue supporting this mentality, perhaps adapting one's mentality to the new mechanics would be a better solution? CCP wants to distribute fights. If station loss resulted in asset loss I think that not only would people fight harder to defend their space, but also would distribute assets so as to not lose everything if they lose one station. Distributed fights would reduce TIDI, blobs, and would make nullsec wars much more dynamic. CCP has an opportunity to really shake things up for the better, but I don't think they will because of the outcry of so many nullsec residents who are stuck in the old paradigm of having all their eggs in one basket in complete safety. Complete safety. In nullsec. Wasn't that supposed to be risky, dangerous space? Well said. This is how null should be. Risk vs Reward
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2256	Posted - 2015.04.14 05:40:14 - [238] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: The prevailing philosophy for nullsec is "bring everything I own out to one virtually impervious location, and in the off chance we lose the station, I may have to sell all my stuff but I won't actually lose any of it so it's all good." Why? Even with the current mechanics why bring all your stuff out there? Other than a few PvE ships aren't most of what you fly doctrine ships provided by the alliance? So why bring all your personal assets out there? Instead of adapting the mechanics to continue supporting this mentality, perhaps adapting one's mentality to the new mechanics would be a better solution? CCP wants to distribute fights. If station loss resulted in asset loss I think that not only would people fight harder to defend their space, but also would distribute assets so as to not lose everything if they lose one station. Distributed fights would reduce TIDI, blobs, and would make nullsec wars much more dynamic. CCP has an opportunity to really shake things up for the better, but I don't think they will because of the outcry of so many nullsec residents who are stuck in the old paradigm of having all their eggs in one basket in complete safety. Complete safety. In nullsec. Wasn't that supposed to be risky, dangerous space? people would start hiding things in actually safe locations like NPC space is what they would do. the idea of risk vs reward needs consider that the other options comparably. Free station that I can never lose my stuff or access to sounds much better than "I will lose everything here if I lose two fights, while the winner takes the loot back to his safe NPC station. You won't encourage more anything so long as better options are available.
Eryn Velasquez 99	Posted - 2015.04.14 06:02:17 - [239] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: The prevailing philosophy for nullsec is "bring everything I own out to one virtually impervious location, and in the off chance we lose the station, I may have to sell all my stuff but I won't actually lose any of it so it's all good." Why? Even with the current mechanics why bring all your stuff out there? Other than a few PvE ships aren't most of what you fly doctrine ships provided by the alliance? So why bring all your personal assets out there? This is not the right question. Why should any industrialist ever want to invest time and effort to build up a big business in a system, when he's in danger to loose millions of m-¦ stuff worth billions of ISK within days? Alexis Nightwish wrote: Instead of adapting the mechanics to continue supporting this mentality, perhaps adapting one's mentality to the new mechanics would be a better solution? CCP wants to distribute fights. If station loss resulted in asset loss I think that not only would people fight harder to defend their space, but also would distribute assets so as to not lose everything if they lose one station. That's no solution. If you want to kill nullsec industry completely, this would be the way. _GÇ£A man's freedom consists in his being able to do whatever he wills, but that he should not, by any human power, be forced to do what is against his will.GÇ¥-áGÇò Jean-Jacques Rousseau-á_
Iris Bravemount Golden Grinding Gears 363	Posted - 2015.04.14 10:49:55 - [240] - Quote First of all I haven't read through all the pages, so this may have been suggested before. So, about the risk/reward ratio of using those new structures vs NPC stations for safety could be kept in check by a simple feature: Just limit the overall storage capacity of any station, even the biggest ones. If mooring slots are finite, so should the items and ship hangars be finite. This way, if an alliance has enormous storage needs, they would just have to use multiple stations. Those could even be on the same grid, so that their combined firepower would provide additional safety and the assets would be protected by more EHP as well. Fuel costs would decentivize abusive station spamming on a same grid. Actually, fuel needs could be increased by nearby structures (additional maneuvering required to prevent collisions). Maybe a function of total structure mass on the grid (using a 250km radius as grid, since it's the hard limit for locking range anyway), so that smaller structures wouldn't increase the cost as much. Distance could also decrease the fuel need increase. This would also be a step towards the idea of cities in space. You could have an XL industrial structure surrounded by M and L military structures to protect it. The synergy created increases fuel costs, so that players have to decide how much - if any - military presence they need and/or can afford. On grid distance would also be a tactical element, considering that the minimal warp range is 150km. Do you want your structures packed for a maximal concentration of firepower, or do you spread them out some more for decreased fuel usage and easier warping around? That being said, the proposed mechanic, inspired by planetary launches, seems fine to me. The above is just an idea to mitigate the increased risk when compared to npc stations. "I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed

h4kun4 Heeresversuchsanstalt The Bastion 29	Posted - 2015.04.14 21:49:08 - [241] - Quote a little suggestion to add: you can insure your stuff by paying a percentage amount of the estimated, average value (incl. the fittings of ships and the stuff inside contis) and upon destruction your items and ships will be moved to the redeem system immediately. I would suggest something between 10 and 20% (could possibly be lowered with station rigs or skills) Only avaliabe to the current owner of the station (everybody when its a freeport) and has the same duration as Ship Insurance. Valid as long as they be contracted/traded or otherwise moved to another station.
Arctic Estidal Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club 19	Posted - 2015.04.15 03:54:03 - [242] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: The prevailing philosophy for nullsec is "bring everything I own out to one virtually impervious location, and in the off chance we lose the station, I may have to sell all my stuff but I won't actually lose any of it so it's all good." Why? Even with the current mechanics why bring all your stuff out there? Other than a few PvE ships aren't most of what you fly doctrine ships provided by the alliance? So why bring all your personal assets out there? This is not how Alliances operate. Alliance's define doctrine ships which outlines the ships each member must own and the exact fitting that the ship has to have. The ships, modules, etc are all supplied by individual members importing the items or manufacturing in null sec. The alliance doesn't just say, "here have these ships". They are paid by the individual and owned by the individual. Why would you just not bring out some PVE ships? Well because you have to own at least 10 PVP doctrine ships then if you have a captial pilot, 2 - 5 captial ships as well. This is before you have your PVP ships for roams and fun PVP. Manufacturing Any real industrialist has all their BPO's in null sec as this is the only way to manufacture effectively. No one keeps them in low or high sec, makes copies and ships them out. This is only done with capital BPO's due to the expense of the BPO. Living in Null Stop thinking that this is a day trip out to null sec. When people move to null sec, they live there 24/7. Everything they own is in their null sec station. There is trillions of isk sitting in stations that you want at risk to destruction. Why are large Alliances moving now to low-sec to be merc's for hire. Because they see the risk of assets will be too high, on the current mechanic, and they will just deal out tears like PL just did to HERO.
Valenthe de Celine Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 191	Posted - 2015.04.15 16:31:18 - [243] - Quote You know, having operated in W-space on and off for almost 2 years (on other characters) I am shocked by the number of people who are attached to their stuff yet live in structures created and operated by players, and in an area I once considered as dangerous as wormholes. I am struck by the fact all these guys are, in fact, pansies, who all want NPC station level safety from their stuff in non-NPC held space. The icing on that cake was the mentioning by someone of an SoE bailout for your lost stuff should your last bastion fall. I get to say "HTFU" now. How many of you are logged out in your most expensive ship, in a safe, with a cloak on, far enough from a celestial to not be on D-scan, with everything else potentially being written off as a complete loss? How many of you keep your fittings and ships and other necessities to the bare bones of what you need, not your entire character's life savings out in the middle of null? My POS can disappear in a weekend. If I don't get the warning in time to intervene with a potential invader, all I own in that system, other than what I'm flying, is lost. No insurance payout, no compensation, no SoE bailout cause I wasn't there... just gone. This has been the life for me for some time now. I have taken steps to prevent losses from being complete. I have alts ready to do an emergency evacuation of my more valuable ships not currently flown should system control stay in enemy hands. Even if my attackers turn the POS fishbowl into a ****-cage, most of my value will still escape. I will burn the rest to spite the invaders if I can't get enough help to repel them in time. I believe in scorched planet warfare, and will do my best to deny a prize to my attackers. That said, I am ready to have to walk away and lose it all, thats part of (I thought) EVE. That's also part of why I like living where I do. (I can do the same to someone else, and that's also a thrill.) So, to reiterate, you null guys need to HTFU. I am seriously disappointed with the volume of complaints here, and the dilettante mentality thats coming through in these posts.
Hakan MacTrew MUTED VOID Takahashi Alliance 893	Posted - 2015.04.16 08:51:25 - [244] - Quote Valenthe de Celine wrote: How many of you are logged out in your most expensive ship, in a safe, with a cloak on, far enough from a celestial to not be on D-scan, with everything else potentially being written off as a complete loss? How many of you keep your fittings and ships and other necessities to the bare bones of what you need, not your entire character's life savings out in the middle of null? A counter point to this is: "How many Wormholers have to worry about being invaded by litterally thousands of hostiles who could potentially commit hundreds of capials to a fight at a moments notice?" Wormholes are a totally different animal to any other part of space. You can't compare the two, they have their own Pro's, Con's benefits and vulnerabilities. The point of Wormholes was always to be inhospitable, living there should have been 'temporary' at best. The purpose of Sov Null is to be invested in, to be taken and held. Sov, by default and design, is something you commit to. Commiting yourself to the task of taking and holding a System or a station, only to have all your assets there destroyed, (and realisitically, whatever was left could well be completely inaccessible for an unknown period of time - potentially forever,) that just seems more troubple than its worth. If you could lose a ship, that's avoidable by pilot action, simply don't put it in harms way. POS's are not generally lived out of in K-space exactly because of their vulnerability. Blowing up Stations, potentially worth insanely high amounts, (YAO-XJ has over 1.1 Trillion isk in sell orders alone, not to mention how much hardware the residents have stashed in their hangers,) is not the nearly the same as blowing up a POS in a Wormhole. I know you guys are filthy space rich, but it doesn't come close. Let's say that Goons have triple, if not quadruple, the hardware docked up that they have on the market in that station. Who wouldn't jump in a ship and fly clear across the whole of new eden to ***** on a 5 Trillion isk Killmail? When you look at it like that, nomadic power blocs like PL, (and I assume NC. are trying to emulate them - "#livingtheDREAM",) will almost certainly use data like THIS as a check list for what stations they want to blap for the new uber-killmails. When null stations become destructable, I'll have already pulled all my stuff out to lowsec. Friends
Eryn Velasquez 99	Posted - 2015.04.16 18:00:02 - [245] - Quote Hakan MacTrew wrote: ................. When null stations become destructable, I'll have already pulled all my stuff out to lowsec. You're absolutely right - in the moment when this happens without any possibility to save the stuff, my nullsec industry will shut down completely and be relocated. _GÇ£A man's freedom consists in his being able to do whatever he wills, but that he should not, by any human power, be forced to do what is against his will.GÇ¥-áGÇò Jean-Jacques Rousseau-á_
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 285	Posted - 2015.04.16 18:22:08 - [246] - Quote Valenthe de Celine wrote: How many of you are logged out in your most expensive ship, in a safe, with a cloak on, far enough from a celestial to not be on D-scan, with everything else potentially being written off as a complete loss? Can you log out with a cloak on? I know you can't safe-log with a cloak on... /troll off I've played Eve as a combat line member for many years in many different environments (though I will admit living in wormholes was by far the shortest I did). I appreciate the lifestyle, for sure. But on the other hand, apart from my Eve 'career', I do like to have a nice collection of goodies. Rare ships, modules, stuff given out by the dev's...limited edition stuff. It's nice to have a stash of these somewhere and know they cannot be taken or destroyed.
Anthar Thebess 1006	Posted - 2015.04.17 10:19:55 - [247] - Quote NPC stations not destroyable both in NPC space and Sov space. This will create new important points all across eve - it will prohibit from deadzoning some of the regions - by destroying all infrastructure and leaving space unclaimed. Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
Valenthe de Celine Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 192	Posted - 2015.04.17 15:59:44 - [248] - Quote SFM Hobb3s wrote: Valenthe de Celine wrote: How many of you are logged out in your most expensive ship, in a safe, with a cloak on, far enough from a celestial to not be on D-scan, with everything else potentially being written off as a complete loss? Can you log out with a cloak on? I know you can't safe-log with a cloak on... /troll off I've played Eve as a combat line member for many years in many different environments (though I will admit living in wormholes was by far the shortest I did). I appreciate the lifestyle, for sure. But on the other hand, apart from my Eve 'career', I do like to have a nice collection of goodies. Rare ships, modules, stuff given out by the dev's...limited edition stuff. It's nice to have a stash of these somewhere and know they cannot be taken or destroyed. Excuse me, I meant to say installed as opposed to running. If you have to failtroll so hard to try to rebut a point, perhaps grammar and spelling are next?
Valenthe de Celine Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 192	Posted - 2015.04.17 16:15:55 - [249] - Quote Hakan MacTrew wrote: [...] Who wouldn't jump in a ship and fly clear across the whole of new eden to ***** on a 5 Trillion isk Killmail? Count the zero's with me: 5,000,000,000,000.00 When you look at it like that, nomadic power blocs like PL, (and I assume NC. are trying to emulate them - "#livingtheDREAM",) will almost certainly use data like THIS as a check list for what stations they want to blap for the new uber-killmails. When null stations become destructable, I'll have already pulled all my stuff out to lowsec. Wow. I never saw such a great advert for joining up with a nullsec corp before! But in all seriousness, that is exactly the kind of issue that should be brought up here, from both sides of the fight. If people know ahead of time that stations are destructible, that means industry is going to shift heavily. If people know those modules and collections are in danger of being lost, time to evac them into an NPC station for safety. Its not like preparations can't be done in the wake of whatever direction these decisions go. The static and immovable powers that be of Nullsec may no longer be able to sit there and know that a station will remain in their control for years to come, or even months, and maybe even weeks isn't definite. Having the knowledge that a base of operations could be wiped out means changes might happen. Change is good, or at least that was what all the WHers were told when these changes started rolling out half a year ago. Nullsec is just starting to feel what that might be like for them. As to the 5 trillion ISK figure, even if that is accurate, how much of that was directed at supercap production? How useful are supercaps even going to be in the new meta? Will titans get their AoE DD beam of death back? Who knows? Because capitals are changing their roles as the new Entosis warfare magical hacking beams take their place, are we even looking at a game of blowing up stations, or just handing them back and forth between alliances? I never saw destruction as the goal of that new stuff, but it might be possible instead of the passing back and forth to simply erase those structures from existence, but thats not really been focused on much.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 943	Posted - 2015.04.17 16:53:50 - [250] - Quote There are too many stations in null. It's too empire-ish. Player stations should be destructible. Player assets should be at risk. If you're a null group that can't handle that, feel free to take and hold Delve and live in it's NPC built stations. The fact that a player can build something that can never be destroyed in a sandbox MMO is silly to begin with. Anyone have a count of the current number of player built stations presently in eve? How many null systems currently don't have a non destructible station. It's just crazy. Player built stations was a reasonable idea by CCP that has gone too far. Like force projection, non destructible stations need to go. Let's put the mean and lean back in null living. Until player built stations become destructible claiming null should get higher rewards due to higher risk is just common hypocracy.

Hakan MacTrew MUTED VOID Takahashi Alliance 896	Posted - 2015.04.17 17:01:38 - [251] - Quote Valenthe de Celine wrote: As to the 5 trillion ISK figure, even if that is accurate, how much of that was directed at supercap production? How useful are supercaps even going to be in the new meta? Will titans get their AoE DD beam of death back? Who knows? Because capitals are changing their roles as the new Entosis warfare magical hacking beams take their place, are we even looking at a game of blowing up stations, or just handing them back and forth between alliances? I never saw destruction as the goal of that new stuff, but it might be possible instead of the passing back and forth to simply erase those structures from existence, but thats not really been focused on much. Of that 5T figure, I estimate a minimal amount of it being for super cap production, given that its inside a station and not in a POS with a CSAA. If you look at the 1.1T on the market, most of it is sub cap stuff. Destruction is ALWAYS the goal in EVE. It's part of the cycle: Aquire, Create, Destroy. Rince, repeat. Also, show me one major change to EVE in the last 6 years that has not been manipulated in some way by major power blocs. The same will go with this. I have reservations about station destruction, but I agree that it is something that needs to happen. My issue is with the amount of destruction that entails and how far reaching the effects are. (Also, who is most likely to be in a position to dish out the most detruction while preventing the destruction of their own assets.) Friends
Arctic Estidal Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club 20	Posted - 2015.04.18 01:42:13 - [252] - Quote Valenthe de Celine wrote: As to the 5 trillion ISK figure, even if that is accurate, how much of that was directed at supercap production? How useful are supercaps even going to be in the new meta? Will titans get their AoE DD beam of death back? Who knows? Because capitals are changing their roles as the new Entosis warfare magical hacking beams take their place, are we even looking at a game of blowing up stations, or just handing them back and forth between alliances? I never saw destruction as the goal of that new stuff, but it might be possible instead of the passing back and forth to simply erase those structures from existence, but thats not really been focused on much. This is hilarious. The $1.1 trillion on sell orders and potential $5 trillion in items has nothing to do with super caps. You can't fit them in a station and you cannot sell them on the market. This is all sub cap items, ammo etc. People are already shutting down super cap construction in null sec, even capital construction is being reconsidered. Just the current sov changes are making everything riskier to manufacture in a pos in null sec, and you think destroying stations won't have an impact. The reason alliances and coalitions, blue everyone in an area, is because that is the only way you can setup some sort of protection to your very experience, capital and super capital construction operations. The length of time it takes for the manufacturing cycle to complete, puts these assets at significant risk during this period. The new sov, is going to make capture mechanics of sov, quicker. So the risk has increased significantly, while the reward has reduced due to the changes and unbalanced state of capitals and super capitals. If an alliance invests billions in structures, upgrades and activity, there MUST be a signficant advantage to defence. An attacker who has done nothing, should be significantly disadvantaged. The proposed mechanic is going to provide a bonus to the defender by making the capture for the defender quicker than the attacker but up to 4x. This is a good start, but the only element that impacts this bonus is activity. What about the investment in the structures, super capital construction, pos's etc. This also must provide defensive bonuses.
Alia Ravenswing DARK HAT 35	Posted - 2015.04.19 19:01:06 - [253] - Quote This is fantastic. I have long wanted all these features. The only thing I don't like is how some destroyed items are some how protected by magic, preventing anybody other than the original owner from salvaging them. My entire reason for launching an attack, may be to get the items that may be in the salvage.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2309	Posted - 2015.04.19 19:42:19 - [254] - Quote Alia Ravenswing wrote: This is fantastic. I have long wanted all these features. The only thing I don't like is how some destroyed items are some how protected by magic, preventing anybody other than the original owner from salvaging them. My entire reason for launching an attack, may be to get the items that may be in the salvage. The problem is, there wouldnt be much to get, since the owner wont risk it as much as he would under some safety.
Anthar Thebess 1007	Posted - 2015.04.20 09:32:32 - [255] - Quote Each region have NPC build station. I hope no one in CCP thinks about making them destructible (yet they might be damaged). Make those stations gathering points for assets located in a region. If some of your structure dies - all your assets are moved to this station. They can be bought off by paying 0.5% off theirs value. Like i stated before , make those station un-destroyable , but at the same time give the possibility for attacker to damage them to the point no one can dock or use them - and even more you need to rebuild them to the point you can get access to assets stored in them. We already have the graphics ready , as on DED's / missions you can find destroyed stations. We need to be fair. This is not new start but big change in in game rules. We don't have the possibility for all players to have clean start. We have big and organized groups that will simply abuse mechanics connected to station destruction. If you can get % of the assets stored in a station - they will just circle all around eve killing station after station - i don't say it is bad, i only state that if CCP is willing to allow this , we need to have first 1 simple button : [MOVE ALL MY ASSETS TO THIS STATION] Sorry but moving stuff for next 3 months that i acquired all around the eve while playing this game for a years is not something i consider fun, intend or expect to do. I have friends that don't play eve , they return form time to time checking if the game changed in they way they like it - and now what they need to do? Resub accounts and for the next months try to evac stuff from stations all around the eve? Recoverable stuff from containers that expire when you login to game? Who will return to eve just to have 2 or 3 hundred of cans crying "take me home or i die". This is not something easy to do , and for sure nothing that will persuade someone to return. I think CCP can be 100% sure that people will not return to the gate , because they have so many assets , and they will loose them all when they return ( or instead of having fun they will spend weeks of moving their stuff using cloacky hauler ) Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
Nostonica Calibrated Chaos Dead Terrorists 8	Posted - 2015.04.20 11:25:47 - [256] - Quote Can You imagine if lost items(location & item list) could be sold like killrights, new profession Treasure Hunter.
Ncc 1709 Fusion Enterprises Ltd Shadow of xXDEATHXx 179	Posted - 2015.04.20 12:10:06 - [257] - Quote CCP want more people in null. by destroying stations / all their assets, your forcing people to keep all their assets in npc stations and either stick with a carrier or not bother will null. unlike wh's, theres nothing limiting people from taking 250 dreads and destroying every single pos in a region in the space of a few hours. announce destructible stations, and you will see Mass exodus from null. ive been in null 6 years, and I wouldn't stay without em. hell id probably just play starcitizen instead. would their be insurance on stations? and their upgrades.... simplest change to null would be to allow multiple stations in the same system. this would make some alliance put all their eggs in one basket
Vorll Minaaran Centre Of Attention Middle of Nowhere 48	Posted - 2015.04.20 12:13:43 - [258] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: Each region have NPC build station. I hope no one in CCP thinks about making them destructible (yet they might be damaged). I wouldnt be so sure about it. As we saw in the trailers and the evolving storyline, the capsuleers're slowly growing stronger than Empires. It would be logical at some point, to be able to destroy/conquer ie. the FW lowsec or later even the highsec NPC stations. How knows? So this "Item safety mechanics" could affect anyone in the near or far future, be HS mission runner, WH resident or anyone. This topic shouldnt take lightly as nullbear crying.
knowsitall Adeptus iNdustry and Logistics Silent Eviction 31	Posted - 2015.04.21 16:25:11 - [259] - Quote My 2 cents Not sure what is the best options are but I would like the following use cases considered 1) As a person that destroyed a structure i deserve a reward beyond a kill mail. 2) As a person that stored items in a structure, that structure being destroyed I should have some influence over what i lose. 3) As a person that stored items in a structure, that structure being destroyed I should be able to securely pay another player to retrieve my stuff. 4) As a person that stored items in a now destroyed structure I should be able to get my stuff even if I don't log on for months. My justification for above 1) Make destroying structures profitable to players that do it as well for leadership strategic reasons. 2) I think without this you will see certain items never going into a structure. Same reasoning locking down BPOs in corp hangars was added. 3) Extension to the hauling profession. 4) Many people have very good real life reasons to not log in for months. Eg military get posted for 6 months. My suggestions 1) I like the idea of everything "in transit" being lootable. I think this should include silos and stuff, Only place that should be secure is a corp/personal hangar. Only once a player has manually interacted/moved it to a hangar it should it become safe. ie delivery of build job, delivers to a hangar in the manufacturing area, only when a player physically goes to the structure and moves it to secure storage is it not lootable. Want an easy life and do everything remotely you risk more. 2) I like some of the ideas of some type of insurance for this, but not with isk insurance, the item is guaranteed to be safe at a cost. 3) Easiest way to do this is to make the assets courier contractible. 4) The items are not even in game, just a journal entry, allow the player to "start" the retrieval that spawns it back into the game, then they can have a limited time to retrieve. I know this can be used to store stuff by destroying your own structures, but even once you spawn them you still have to actually go and retrieve them. But this post is less about my suggestions and more about rasing the use cases KIA
Anthar Thebess 1011	Posted - 2015.04.23 13:22:30 - [260] - Quote Valenthe de Celine wrote: You know, having operated in W-space on and off for almost 2 years (on other characters) I am shocked by the number of people who are attached to their stuff yet live in structures created and operated by players, and in an area I once considered as dangerous as wormholes. I am struck by the fact all these guys are, in fact, pansies, who all want NPC station level safety from their stuff in non-NPC held space. The icing on that cake was the mentioning by someone of an SoE bailout for your lost stuff should your last bastion fall. I get to say "HTFU" now. How many of you are logged out in your most expensive ship, in a safe, with a cloak on, far enough from a celestial to not be on D-scan, with everything else potentially being written off as a complete loss? How many of you keep your fittings and ships and other necessities to the bare bones of what you need, not your entire character's life savings out in the middle of null? My POS can disappear in a weekend. If I don't get the warning in time to intervene with a potential invader, all I own in that system, other than what I'm flying, is lost. No insurance payout, no compensation, no SoE bailout cause I wasn't there... just gone. This has been the life for me for some time now. I have taken steps to prevent losses from being complete. I have alts ready to do an emergency evacuation of my more valuable ships not currently flown should system control stay in enemy hands. Even if my attackers turn the POS fishbowl into a ****-cage, most of my value will still escape. I will burn the rest to spite the invaders if I can't get enough help to repel them in time. I believe in scorched planet warfare, and will do my best to deny a prize to my attackers. That said, I am ready to have to walk away and lose it all, thats part of (I thought) EVE. That's also part of why I like living where I do. (I can do the same to someone else, and that's also a thrill.) So, to reiterate, you null guys need to HTFU. I am seriously disappointed with the volume of complaints here, and the dilettante mentality thats coming through in these posts. Simply you agreed, and like this kind of game experience thats why you moved to wormholes. I agree that we have to many stations in the game, thats why for example i suggest to make only NPC build stations in SOV space indestructible , while at the same time give ability for all playing people to move their stuff from other sov stations to secure locations. Additionally give the same ability to all not subscribed players. I have frew dozens of freighters of stuff sitting in NPC space in NPC station , multiple capitals - and i would never obtained so much stuff ( sometimes worthless but BIG) if under any conditions this station could be destructible. I also don't want to spend weeks in moving stuff because CCP is changing base game mechanic i play game this game for fun. Now as other stuff , eve must have stations accessible by all , and safe. Without this smaller and new organizations will just die out. Best way to kill small group - wait for them to move most of their assets , and then burn this place without allowing them to evacuate any thing. Those are 2 very important issues that CCP must face before moving forward. Again perfect solution for me : 1. All NPC stations are indestructible ( no mater where they are located now ) 2. Players ability to move their stuff from all sov outposts to NPC space using some automated script. This station must be in 0.1 or lower system. Yes it can be in still in sov , but it MUST be NPC made. ( clean start for every one ) stuff from unsubscribed people goes to redeeming system as a single can per station 3. All player made outposts can be destroyed after this. Mechanic is simple : - you need to be the owner od the station , and disable station safety , 7 day countdown starts - when the count down reaches 0 , you can drop tons of supers on it and grind it down - after destruction of outposts you get 65% of materials used for its construction ( including all upgrades ) - station wreck becomes beacon for the next 3 months ( stations will have people assets that put them there under new rules) - during this 3 months you can still dock in this station and pull your stuff out. You CANNOT leave something or log out in station , and you are "auto ejected" from station every 5-10minutes , and you can redock after next 10 minutes, lets say that this is docking timer on a station wreck. - during this 3 months system owner can rebuild this station to level 0 by delivering enough materials. - if during this 3 months no one will try to rebuild this station , wreck explodes taking all remaining stuff to hell :) Every one happy Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.

Memphis Baas 318	Posted - 2015.04.23 19:38:39 - [261] - Quote One of the reasons why people play this game as opposed to other MMO's is the fact that players can affect the map. Ultimately, we want to shape nullsec however we see fit, and the "too many stations in nullsec" indicates, to me at least, that the majority of people want null to look like highsec. Also interesting the recent statistic that 75% of pilots are in high-sec. Obviously HTFU will have an impact on the accounts bottom line, with this particular change. And it doesn't look like everyone is in agreement about what should be done. So my second suggestion in this thread is this: Rather than implementing the "final version" of the station death mechanic, CCP should plan on implementing SEVERAL "save your stuff" scenarios, and just hit us with the one they think will appease the current nullsec population (safe or not, CCP's call). Then let us adjust for 6 months and plan on switching to the next (harsher) "save your stuff" system after that. Then let us adjust again. Then go on to the next harsher one, and so on until they see evidence that everyone's abandoning nullsec and it's a deserted wasteland or whatever. Point being, the safety of our stuff is a big enough issue that I don't think we'll cope with the shock of a sudden change to a full HTFU system.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2075	Posted - 2015.04.24 01:38:43 - [262] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: Every one happy Except for that guy on a six month military deployment who comes back to find all his stuff blown up. All the people away for a fortnight who now have to deal with the cloaky campers and the constant ejection to try and get all their stuff back. And all the people who have to grind it down. Item Safety is a huge deal, and it does need to be 'perfect' to allow station destruction to happen, otherwise people simply won't move assets out into Null. And we want valuable things to be moved to Null as that makes for valuable things getting blown up at various stages of the process.
Anthar Thebess 1011	Posted - 2015.04.24 07:44:35 - [263] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Anthar Thebess wrote: Every one happy Except for that guy on a six month military deployment who comes back to find all his stuff blown up. I agree. You can go to hospital , and loose every thing. Outposts should be destroyable , but not NPC stations. CCP might upgrade some of the outpost to NPC stations ( randomly 1 per 2-3 constellations , of course if someone constructed one) - this way we will get around 3 NPC stations in each region , so 3 alliances per region can have their capitol and keep most of their major assets there. If you keep your assets elsewhere after this change - well this is your decision. I don't like idea about assets destruction either - as this will make this game much more "work" than game at some point. Yet i think we cannot do any thing more to change CCP mind , i prepared myself , by training 4 JDC V carrier chars and JF pilot. Now wherever i move i take 4 carriers with ships , and JF with equipment - i really feel sorry for people without this possibility. This is good move, but it should be made 10 years ago , now we have groups that will simply grind regions killing all stations just to have profit from those who cannot move their assets. Proposed timers mechanic is shorter from bigger holidays. "Oh you dared to go to grandparents for Christmas, we are SO SORRY , but look at this nice station wreck" There are also groups that will just grid station after station for tears ( heh i might even help them ) but new players , and smaller groups will be very bad position. Yes EVE will finally not become easier and easier game - and this is good , but how this will impact number of players - time will tell. Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
Spugg Galdon Nisroc Angels 666	Posted - 2015.04.24 10:21:12 - [264] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: Nevyn Auscent wrote: Anthar Thebess wrote: Every one happy Except for that guy on a six month military deployment who comes back to find all his stuff blown up. I agree. You can go to hospital , and loose every thing. Outposts should be destroyable , but not NPC stations. CCP might upgrade some of the outpost to NPC stations ( randomly 1 per 2-3 constellations , of course if someone constructed one) - this way we will get around 3 NPC stations in each region , so 3 alliances per region can have their capitol and keep most of their major assets there. If you keep your assets elsewhere after this change - well this is your decision. I don't like idea about assets destruction either - as this will make this game much more "work" than game at some point. Yet i think we cannot do any thing more to change CCP mind , i prepared myself , by training 4 JDC V carrier chars and JF pilot. Now wherever i move i take 4 carriers with ships , and JF with equipment - i really feel sorry for people without this possibility. This is good move, but it should be made 10 years ago , now we have groups that will simply grind regions killing all stations just to have profit from those who cannot move their assets. Proposed timers mechanic is shorter from bigger holidays. "Oh you dared to go to grandparents for Christmas, we are SO SORRY , but look at this nice station wreck" There are also groups that will just grid station after station for tears ( heh i might even help them ) but new players , and smaller groups will be very bad position. Yes EVE will finally not become easier and easier game - and this is good , but how this will impact number of players - time will tell. Felix Judge has suggested a good idea in the market hub thread. If the station is destroyed, why don't the assets move to a planet. Planets can't be destroyed so your items are safe. I guess the way it would work is that if a station is destroyed, the closest habitable planet would spawn a PI style launch pad for you to then transfer what you have on the surface into a ship (or if it is a capital ship, launch it into orbit). Then it's simply a case of logistics to recover it all when it is convenient
Raphendyr Nardieu Unpublished Chapter Chapters. 3	Posted - 2015.04.24 13:18:13 - [265] - Quote Idea: Escape pod containers. Similar to Station and freight containers, except when station is destroyed it will launch to planet's orbit.
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 290	Posted - 2015.04.24 15:15:10 - [266] - Quote I just don't think Eve is ready for this. Trying to bring nullsec sov back from stagnation and generating content is CCP's primary goal with Fozziesov, but this is going to work against that. People are going to avoid storing caches of ships (many for pvp), seeding local markets, etc. this means that the supplies and other war materiel you have are going to be spread much further apart than they are now...meaning less pvp, meaning less content... ...and then lets not forget the technical limitations. Eve couldn't even handle it when a few thousand people killed that freebie revenant some months back....and generated no killmail. What's going to happen if a station pops when it contains countless thousands of modules, ships...assets...is this not going to outright kill some hamsters?
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 949	Posted - 2015.04.24 19:44:02 - [267] - Quote I demand safety for all my stuff in player owned null. CCP is obligated to protect the stuff my alliance can't/won't. There should be no risk in null to balance the greater rewards of this space. It's my stuff.... NO ONE has the right to take my station stuff. I'm entitled to the protection of space magic for my assets in player owned null.
sabre906 Old Spice Syndicate Intrepid Crossing 1699	Posted - 2015.04.25 05:58:58 - [268] - Quote The whole "destructible outposts" idea itself is horribly broken, cannot be fixed, and will be abused to hell and back until it's taken out of the game. PL will destroy all of Brave's outposts because, you know, newbies aren't allowed to have stations... You'll also have Goons and NC. burn down Providence because public stations aren't allowed.
Alavaria Fera GoonWaffe 6715	Posted - 2015.04.25 06:36:05 - [269] - Quote Just go and rely on the good old alternative to players NPCs ^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears. Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
Memphis Baas 325	Posted - 2015.04.26 13:43:23 - [270] - Quote Also, with the new structures (or even earlier than the patch if you wish), please consider changing the TYPE of all the structures so that it fits more neatly into the second OVERVIEW column, which is rather narrow, and with the most important information presented first. For example: - For stations, the current overview type is "Caldari Trading Station" when in fact the more important info should be "Sisters of Eve Bureau." We differentiate stations by whom they belong to. - For gates, "Stargate (Ama" is just about all that fits in the type. For stations, what I see is "Caldari Tradi", which, again, is much less useful than "Sisters of Ev" would be. - For NPCs, their name repeats in their type; would be nice if the type were "frigate, destroyer, cruiser," etc., or their role or whatever.

Anthar Thebess 1013	Posted - 2015.04.28 08:38:52 - [271] - Quote Allow Blockade Runners to dock to enemy stations. Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
Spugg Galdon Nisroc Angels 667	Posted - 2015.04.28 08:40:07 - [272] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: Allow Blockade Runners to dock to enemy stations. This is actually a really good idea!
Dustpuppy New Eden Ferengi 94	Posted - 2015.05.01 08:43:38 - [273] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: Outposts should be destroyable , but not NPC stations. I share this opinion because you should have at least some places where you can leave your stuff and go on holidays or do something else for a while without the fear of loosing everything. In case CCP decides in a different way then I propose that not only null sec/low sec stations can be blown up but also Highsec ones - with the same results for the poor ones who are hit by this "accident". Being forced to move out their goods, loose stuff, collecting floating cans and so on. And then I really would just sit around laughing about the ones who up voted this idea when Jita IV is blown up in the next "burn Jita" event.
Pidgeon Saissore Dark Neutron Star Metatron Inc. Alliance 41	Posted - 2015.05.02 05:08:28 - [274] - Quote There needs to be some limit on the safety of the structure wreck. It wouldn't be eve unless there was considerable danger of losing all your stuff. Something like reinforcement timer mechanics right now though probably considerably longer. At this point the wreck starts to disintegrate and throw off hackable cans over time. What I am more interested in is the firepower that structures can have and the number of them you can pile in a grid. If everything is destructible they will need to be considerably stronger then even the best death star tower currently. This should come simply from the ability to put several structures on the same grid all with offensive modules. Also between them they need some kind of cohesion when attacked. If that can only be from player control there needs to be a vulnerability window.
Praal Bearded BattleBears Brave Collective 20	Posted - 2015.05.08 01:51:39 - [275] - Quote For XL structures only: If another XL structure exists in the system, move all assets into hangars in that stucture (the nearest or ranom one, same for all inhabitants, if multiple) If no XL structure exists in the system, spawn a debris cloud (permanent celestial "wreck"). If a debris cloud already exists, add all the items to that one, only accessable by their owner. A debris cloud would allow cargo removal, Jettison, Launch Ship, Board, Destroy on items within If an XL structure is built in a system with a debris cloud, give each individual/corp a button which would allow them to move all their assets from the debris cloud into the new XL structure Allow pilots to approach a hostile XL structure, hack it and access their hangar if successful (remove only / launch / jettison / board) If industry/science jobs are in progress at an XL structure when it is destroyed, put the BPO with the owners' assets safely and run a drop chance for all materials/datacores for the killers. If there are undelivered jobs waiting, run the drop chance on the finished products instead.
Arya Ikahrus 2	Posted - 2015.05.14 08:18:38 - [276] - Quote Not particularly bothered so long as whatever protections are in place are only for XL.
Toggl3 Wormhole. 0	Posted - 2015.05.14 23:11:44 - [277] - Quote Every station could have Emergency Automated Recoverable Storage (EARS). These would need to be purchased by the controlling alliance, and would be outwardly visible to anyone looking at the station. In the event of the destruction of the station, the EARS would detach and jump away, regardless of interdiction. The destination of the EARS would be determined by the owner of the station, be it another nearby station owned by the Alliance, or an NPC station of their choice. You could even choose to set the destination to a highsec station, if you have enough fuel. To be fully effective, two EARS would need to be purchased for each station. One of the EARS would recover all assets stored inside personal hangars within that station, and the other would recover all assets stored within corporate hangars. Each of the EARS would have a fuel bay, and would need to be filled with appropriate fuels based on the model of EARS chosen (all EARS are different). The amount of fuel required would be based on how far away the destination station is. If insufficient fuel is provided, the EARS fail to jump to their destination, and are able to be freely looted by anyone in the area (more than likely the attacker). The EARS themselves would be fairly expensive to produce (1-2bn each), and the fuel costs would be immense, but the safety provided to the assets could be invaluable!
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2156	Posted - 2015.05.14 23:23:27 - [278] - Quote Arya Ikahrus wrote: Not particularly bothered so long as whatever protections are in place are only for XL. POSes have been fine without any special item protections all this time, but I can see the need for something for the Outposts. Except POS haven't been fine. They are an absolute PITA to live in, people don't move significant amount of assets into them normally, and they do not encourage people to break lose from NPC stations. Simply saying 'POS don't have it' is not a good argument.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12985	Posted - 2015.05.14 23:57:22 - [279] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Arya Ikahrus wrote: Not particularly bothered so long as whatever protections are in place are only for XL. POSes have been fine without any special item protections all this time, but I can see the need for something for the Outposts. Except POS haven't been fine. They are an absolute PITA to live in, people don't move significant amount of assets into them normally, and they do not encourage people to break lose from NPC stations. Simply saying 'POS don't have it' is not a good argument. Poses are broken for lots of reasons, but "my stuff isn't 100% immune" is not one of them. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Flashrain Vanguard Frontiers 21	Posted - 2015.05.15 00:25:53 - [280] - Quote Generate a graphic of escape pods / automated cargo drones escaping into space and crashing into nearby planets. Players can then goto that planet and retrieve their assets. Maybe through planetary offices or some kind of planetary landing mechanic in the future. Can also work this into that first person shooter game CCP has - have hired mercenaries retrieve your assets from planetary surfaces.

Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 601	Posted - 2015.05.15 10:39:38 - [281] - Quote Arya Ikahrus wrote: Not particularly bothered so long as whatever protections are in place are only for XL. POSes have been fine without any special item protections all this time, but I can see the need for something for the Outposts. POSes don't have unfinite personal hangar volumes, nor do they provide what space there is in a leisurely manner. You know how it goes: Dock... Don't deposit anything this time... Dock again... Yeah, I'll leave it here... Dock... Tritanium by Tritanium and you have enough to be worried about. Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Nevyn Auscent wrote: Arya Ikahrus wrote: Not particularly bothered so long as whatever protections are in place are only for XL. POSes have been fine without any special item protections all this time, but I can see the need for something for the Outposts. Except POS haven't been fine. They are an absolute PITA to live in, people don't move significant amount of assets into them normally, and they do not encourage people to break lose from NPC stations. Simply saying 'POS don't have it' is not a good argument. Poses are broken for lots of reasons, but "my stuff isn't 100% immune" is not one of them. Well, the point is the new structures are an inverse of that - you can dock in them now. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
M1k3y Koontz Bio Troll Surely You're Joking 756	Posted - 2015.05.15 11:45:10 - [282] - Quote Arya Ikahrus wrote: Not particularly bothered so long as whatever protections are in place are only for XL. POSes have been fine without any special item protections all this time, but I can see the need for something for the Outposts. POSs aren't fine, that why CCP are replacing them. And its long overdue. The main problem with POSs is the lack of security, so why would i move into a large citadel, which my medium alliance can afford (XLs will likely be on par with outposts, which are expensive), when all my stuff goes up in flames if the CFC or PL decide they want a laugh. How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Destiny Dain2 Your Destiny Corporation 1	Posted - 2015.05.15 21:40:56 - [283] - Quote Dustpuppy wrote: Anthar Thebess wrote: Outposts should be destroyable , but not NPC stations. I share this opinion because you should have at least some places where you can leave your stuff and go on holidays or do something else for a while without the fear of loosing everything. In case CCP decides in a different way then I propose that not only null sec/low sec stations can be blown up but also Highsec ones - with the same results for the poor ones who are hit by this "accident". Being forced to move out their goods, loose stuff, collecting floating cans and so on. And then I really would just sit around laughing about the ones who up voted this idea when Jita IV is blown up in the next "burn Jita" event. I completely agree, and if you choose not to join a huge alliance, just going to sleep at night could be the time when you lose everything do to trolls. New players will feel like anything that they put up has no security and they won't bother, they will just join an alliance causing the map to be split between a few alliances. People going on vacation will quit, because what's the point of coming back when all their work will be gone by the time they get back. You always need NPC station for newbies and for safe retreat for people who just lost everything and need to rebuild..
Sayod Physulem EVE University Ivy League 27	Posted - 2015.05.17 18:12:56 - [284] - Quote Maybe some inspiration: The station owner can call "Evacuation" that means escape pods with all the assets will be jettisoned into the system. If you call Evacuation when the station is undamaged, the Evacuation will go smootly and ALL the assets will be jettisoned in escape pod with cloaks. The more damaged the station gets the more Escape pods get damaged. Maybe their cloak has malfuntions and the pods can be scanned down after a certain amount of time. Maybe the escape pod is so badly damaged that it can't even be jettisoned and all the assets stay in the station wreck. Next thing - how damaged is the firewall? If it is fully intact the escape pod can only be accesed by the owner of the assets. If it is partly damaged you need to hack it, and the hacking difficulty decreases with the damage. So basically you have escape containers with 3 modules: - Launch module (if damaged it stays in the wreck) ---------------------------------------------- where (wreck or scattered with bookmark) - cloak module (if damaged it will be scanable after a certain amount of time) ------------ time (until able to be accessed by everyone) - access firewall (if damaged it will be hackable - difficulty depending on the damage) -by whom (and how easy) Damage to the station has a chance of damaging the escape container modules. If all the modules are completely intact it is impossible for the attacer to retrieve any loot. So you might just want to jettison all the assets when the station gets attacked the first time? Well you can do that. But if you win the siege you have to collect all your items spread in space So you might want to wait with the evacuation? Well the longer you wait the less likely it is that your assets are still safe So there it is Risk vz Reward. Do you risk waiting with the evacuation? Or do you want to play it safe certainly have to do a retrieval op? You could maybe buy escape pod of different quality and use them just like station containers to store and sort your assets in the station. This could also explain the origin of relic and data sites and make the spawn of them more related to the player driven events.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2411	Posted - 2015.05.17 18:33:08 - [285] - Quote Sayod Physulem wrote: Maybe some inspiration: The station owner can call "Evacuation" that means escape pods with all the assets will be jettisoned into the system. If you call Evacuation when the station is undamaged, the Evacuation will go smootly and ALL the assets will be jettisoned in escape pod with cloaks. The more damaged the station gets the more Escape pods get damaged. Maybe their cloak has malfuntions and the pods can be scanned down after a certain amount of time. Maybe the escape pod is so badly damaged that it can't even be jettisoned and all the assets stay in the station wreck. Next thing - how damaged is the firewall? If it is fully intact the escape pod can only be accesed by the owner of the assets. If it is partly damaged you need to hack it, and the hacking difficulty decreases with the damage. So basically you have escape containers with 3 modules: - Launch module (if damaged it stays in the wreck) ---------------------------------------------- where (wreck or scattered with bookmark) - cloak module (if damaged it will be scanable after a certain amount of time) ------------ time (until able to be accessed by everyone) - access firewall (if damaged it will be hackable - difficulty depending on the damage) - by whom (and how easy) Damage to the station has a chance of damaging the escape container modules. If all the modules are completely intact it is impossible for the attacer to retrieve any loot. So you might just want to jettison all the assets when the station gets attacked the first time? Well you can do that. But if you win the siege you have to collect all your items spread in space So you might want to wait with the evacuation? Well the longer you wait the less likely it is that your assets are still safe So there it is Risk vz Reward. Do you risk waiting with the evacuation? Or do you want to play it safe certainly have to do a retrieval op? You could maybe buy escape pod of different quality and use them just like station containers to store and sort your assets in the station. (There could maybe even be very expensive escape pods with jump drives that can jump to a cyno lighted in a nearby system) This could also explain the origin of relic and data sites and make the spawn of them more related to the player driven events. there is no station damage.
Sayod Physulem EVE University Ivy League 27	Posted - 2015.05.17 18:36:43 - [286] - Quote Rowells wrote: there is no station damage. And how do you destroy a station then?
Gorbs el OAK NULL Company BLACK NEEDLES 0	Posted - 2015.05.18 03:56:24 - [287] - Quote Hi, I would like to give an idea. You can allow players to fitting a module in a L and XL structure. It can be add a module named as "hangar jump bright" or something like that. In the station the corporation/alliance will need to have this device in one of modules space (low slot, hi slot or rig (I think fomenting this big and important must be placed as a rig) and therefore it will be up to you to use ir or not. If you think you can defend your base and don't need this "insurance" you can have another module instead. This is far more fare with others players. If you don't have, all that you have inside can be salvage or be recovered, if the attacker or other one in the area have the appropriated ship. If the station company don't have this kind of "rig/module" in the station, because they don;t want to have the rig ou the have a Small station, they can have a special container, encrypted container and you must use data analyzers and others stuff (the same you do in exploration). How cool is that? There is a limitation on how far you can send your stuff. You need fuel to make this work, depending how much stuff do you have inside the station. If the auto destruction is activated this module is activated and send your stuff to the near NPC station, or to another structure of yours (this other one must have the same device in it) and the near npc station (must to have a special hangar for your corporation/alliance were you keep fuel to allow the portal to be opened. (this station must have this service to supply like the clone bay or other service, and you must pay a fee to use it). In this way it can be far more realistic (as possible) and have all your stuff send to safety if you are careful to keep all your station with fuel, and have setup this device prior the attack at least one day in advanced (to prevent plug in the module only if the attack is eminent). This could be a big rig to the station and will change the station appearance like a portal or something like that. It must to be very large and have all the parts to form it, maybe the same of the jump bright but bigger. I love this idea! I didn't see any one coming here with a better one and I will appreciate an answer! Best regards, sorry about the English!
Pine Marten Viziam Amarr Empire 93	Posted - 2015.05.18 08:52:30 - [288] - Quote It is horrible to see all the risk aversion going on in this thread. Lets take a lesson from the Cold hars real life. If a station blows up, almost nothing is recoverable. lets say 15 % survives as loot, and the rest is just junk and salvage parts.
Gorbs el OAK NULL Company BLACK NEEDLES 0	Posted - 2015.05.18 13:15:05 - [289] - Quote Pine Marten wrote: It is horrible to see all the risk aversion going on in this thread. Lets take a lesson from the Cold hars real life. If a station blows up, almost nothing is recoverable. lets say 15 % survives as loot, and the rest is just junk and salvage parts. CCP knows no one will use this kind of station as they use a NPC station if all they have will be lost for a massive fleet, or some times even a small one. Losing a Station (for more expensive it can be) is something, but losing all yours ships, modules, sometimes big amount of isk in equipment and products, will make this kind of station no more than a big and expensive outpost, or a weapon station... How can you expect start a Comercial Hub in Null sec if your stuff isn's secure? Is just my opinion, but even if you don't like the complexity of my idea, you can remove the necessity of fuel, or the range limit of it, but send all your container station over a jump bright to the near npc station, is a good idea.
w1ndstrike Strange Energy The Bastion 31	Posted - 2015.05.18 21:23:24 - [290] - Quote Pine Marten wrote: It is horrible to see all the risk aversion going on in this thread. Lets take a lesson from the Cold hars real life. If a station blows up, almost nothing is recoverable. lets say 15 % survives as loot, and the rest is just junk and salvage parts. its not risk aversion as much as "what is required to keep the game healthy and functional?" having barren wastelands for 20 jumps in every direction is not content, it is death.

Kenneth Fritz DND Industries 0	Posted - 2015.05.19 08:05:22 - [291] - Quote What about a modified form of insurance through the use of InterBus. It would work similarly to how clones use to work. Each grade of coverage safeguards progressive amounts of stuff. The distance moved can cap out using either jumps or light years. The bigger the coverage the shorter the distance to say (if using jumps) 3 jumps. For anything capital size or bigger but them of the list of drop-able items from the station's destruction. If they are destroyed you get the normal insurance payout provided you kept it current. If they drop they are free game to whomsoever picks it up first. This would typically mean abandoning whatever it is you're flying at the time. Furthermore the items insured by InterBus would be prioritized by the est. cost. Then higher the est. cost the higher on the priority list. Pricing for the policies could follow similar guideline to current insurance or even use the old clone grade scale. This would make it affordable to most and would further add an element of risk/gain. You would have to ask yourself how much of your stuff are you willing to lose when purchasing the insurance if you weren't able/willing to pay for coverage that would cover all you own.
Saberlily Whyteshadow Perkone Caldari State 70	Posted - 2015.05.19 13:00:21 - [292] - Quote I'll say that this is the perfect place to bring back the loot spew mechanic When a structure gets destroyed, all the cargo will be randomly selected at random stacks to be spewed into space. This will be the only time the aggressor can capture spewed containers just like the old mechanic. But instead of the spew containers just disappearing, they will warp of to a safe spot using the planetary rocket mechanic. So instead of just one rocket that has everything, there will be a dozen rockets with random cargo
Grorious Reader Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 13	Posted - 2015.05.19 15:45:07 - [293] - Quote Make item safety part of the exploration mechanic. When a structure is destroyed, put the relevant objects in a container (per person, per corp, whatever) and scatter them throughout the system. For some amount of time (a few days maybe) the cans can't be destroyed and can't be opened except by their owner. After that timer is expired, the cans can be hacked by anyone using the data or relic analyzer module. If you can hack them, you get all the loot inside. If you fail the hack twice, the container explodes, leaves a wreck, and the loot fairy takes some of your loot as per the regular drop mechanics. It should be a hard hack, similar to the tough cans in -1.0 space. The owner of the object should be given a bookmark for their can, but anyone should be able to scan it down. Maybe even spawn pirates around the can after the timer is expired.
Nasar Vyron S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS. 59	Posted - 2015.05.19 23:01:26 - [294] - Quote It's pretty simple, I don't see why people want to suddenly add additional risk to simply logging out of the game to a feature since the dawn of the game has been considered universally "safe." All POSes and small (Non L/XL) structure act as they currently do. If/When they die, so does your stuff. All larger structures actually NEED, yes need, the security of knowing when you log off for a weekend, go on vacation, are hospitalized, etc. that when you return your assets will be intact just as they were prior to the patch. I am a fan of player's assets being "saved" by the citadel's inhabitants and transported to their home station/nearest npc station. Appearing within 24/48 hours at their destination to force a type of denial to assets for a short period for losing the citadel. NO LOOT PINATA! Allowing such a mechanic into the game will only serve to punish and push out the small groups of players or those who are misfortune/busy in real life. Moored super capitals and titans create a whole new set of problems. So basic stored assets we currently see residing in station aside, these cannot currently dock so are not owed the same protections. I personally like the idea of moored ships being enveloped by a cloaking device while moored to make active tracking of their location a requirement, not just a quick sweep of dscan which any clueless monkey can accomplish. Destruction of a citadel with moored supers or titans should be treated the same as being stored in a CSAA currently, which is the current form of leaving a super "safely" - yet horribly stupid. Players will still log out in their supers and titans just as they currently do simply because it is the only "sure" way to protect these assets. Citadels and stations will also not be destroyed over night, so unmooring and jumping to a new location is still completely possible, and much easier than moving possibly hundreds of thousands of m3 in loose assets by comparison. TL ; DR - Assets maintain same "safety" as current mechanics allow. Assets currently allowed to be docked/stored within stations will be transported withing 2 days of destruction of new L/XL citadels are transported to player's home station/npc station. All other size structures and assets are treated as current, and will drop what they contain and have a chance of destruction. Moored super's and titans treated the same as if they were left in a CSAA.
Enya Sparhawk Black Tea and Talons 56	Posted - 2015.05.25 22:26:43 - [295] - Quote Grorious Reader wrote: Make item safety part of the exploration mechanic. When a structure is destroyed, put the relevant objects in a container (per person, per corp, whatever) and scatter them throughout the system. For some amount of time (a few days maybe) the cans can't be destroyed and can't be opened except by their owner. After that timer is expired, the cans can be hacked by anyone using the data or relic analyzer module. If you can hack them, you get all the loot inside. If you fail the hack twice, the container explodes, leaves a wreck, and the loot fairy takes some of your loot as per the regular drop mechanics. It should be a hard hack, similar to the tough cans in -1.0 space. The owner of the object should be given a bookmark for their can, but anyone should be able to scan it down. Maybe even spawn pirates around the can after the timer is expired. Instead of having a bunch of cargo containers being left around the wreck in space, why not have each one get swallowed up by a micro black hole/WH only big enough for everything within the hanger's contents, that you have to scan for to find (the owners of the cargo would already have the location to the WH in their journal) something accessible to everyone but much, much harder to find for anyone else (though not impossible). Access degrades like a WH. Blame it on the Planck generators colliding or something... Just shoot everything off into a different randomized location, systems, even regions away. (a corporate skill could hone/define the direction it gets shot into) with two or more access points also randomized... Just little pockets of loot tucked away out in the void... Fíorghrá: Grá na fírinne Déan gáire...Tiocfaidh ár lá
Trinkets friend Sudden Buggery Prolapse. 2360	Posted - 2015.05.26 00:38:00 - [296] - Quote To be honest, i don't really care either way on this mechanic. I mean, i think it's stupid that special space hobbit / leprechauns collect all your things and hide them in Mordor / some pot of gold at the end of a rainbow and you go around like Mario picking them up. If you've seen inside the SMA of most wormhole POSs you'll realise that's a lot of space hobbitting. How long do your leprecans hang about secretly in space? A month? A week? Permanently? What happens if you don't collect them? Does he gear just disappear? if it does, why are you even putting this mechanic in the game? I posit that your objective here, in introducing item safety, is to stop people's lives being ruined by station destruction in nullsec, where you know there's trillions of ISK kept in stations and trillions of cubic metres of suff. Whereas now it just gets stranded in a hostile station (until you get an alt in that alliance, contract it over, and smuggle it out / flog it off) in future when people douche canoe each other's outposts, it risks total destruction. So, in comes lepcrecans to hide the loot. but if they don't expire, it's patently ridiculous. If they do, you may as well not have them, because there's always going to be that one guy who has to stop playing for 2 months when his sation gets waxed, then loses all his stuff because he can't scrabble around picking up his teeth. And if they expire in space, and then magic teleport to the nearest friendly station, why not just this anyway? I mean, we're talking magic gnomes. Let the magic gnomes train a level 9 spell and be able to transport the stuff however far away, and save people the pain and stupidity of scuttling around like hoboes picking up their gear. It makes just as much lore sense as leprecans, will be easier on the server, the coding, the players, everything. Secondly, the loot you get from structures is never enough to justify their destruction. So I can't give a toss if you get zero loot. It does, however, reduce the incentive to absolutely zero. Which is fine - now i won't have any reason at all to destroy a hostile POS in a wormhole, assuming i can even find it. Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA ~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 996	Posted - 2015.05.26 09:31:52 - [297] - Quote Cross-posted from the other thread: I understand the need to not completely kill null sec industry - or make it something that is only possible for the strongest coalitions in the most secure space. Something needs to be done about that - but empire building should never be completely safe. I would hate to see all industry continue to remain in high or low sec, but if most of the materials were readily available in 0.0, you could find ways to encourage folks to continue building stuff in 0.0. The issues really come into play with Capital and Supercapital production. In Eve thus far, those have been essentials for having and holding space. It would be awful to have new groups unable to compete because they cannot ever build a Capital or Supercapital fleet. It would be even more awful to have those ships produced exclusively in the relative security of low sec or NPC null sec. I hate the idea that a player, such as myself, who is currently deployed and far from being able to play the game, could lose all of his possessions. With that said, I also hate the suggestions I have seen thus far. I don't need space fairies pixie dusting my stuff off to safety for me. Just put a couple of NPC stations in each region. If I know I will be away from game for weeks, I move my stuff to the relative safety of an NPC station. I run the risk of moving it. I take the time. Not some space magic. Anything I leave behind is fair game for someone else who beats the stuffing out of my friends while I am gone. I've been playing for over eight years. I have a ton of stuff. Moving, especially post-Phoebe, is a huge pain in the ass. But that is the price I pay for going off to serve my country in the Middle East. I'll come back to a trail of tears. It will probably take me months to move my stuff. Some of it may die. This is Eve. Doing things in 0.0 is not supposed to be easy. Ships are made to die. As long as I have a choice in whether it dies or not, that is all I care about. The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
Goochan derp Elewaitor 15	Posted - 2015.05.26 11:39:55 - [298] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: Elenahina wrote: Another (potential) issue. What about people who have unsubbed? If stuff ends up in containers scattered around, you could be adding lots of objects to the servers over time that may never (?) go away. Someone suggested an interesting solution for this at Fanfest, just pause their journal entry expiry times while inactive and have them resume when they rejoin. ive read much of this thread and havent seen anyone bring this up yet. i have 2 accounts and pay once per year for them. what if somethiing happpens to me where i cant access my account for months, like i get injured or something. sure, my eve account isnt going to be something im worried about at the time but once im recovered id really like to have a chance to get my things back. i know its a fringe case but its something i just wanna make sure was/will be considered. just because an account is active dosent nessecarily mean its being used. that said im in full support of the direction this game is going. ive been a member of provibloc for going on 3 years now and i dont know how ive lasted so long in null, its so boring and i honestly feel more safe there than i do in high sec belive it or not. i hope this brings back some of the thrill i felt when i first moved out to null.
Enya Sparhawk Black Tea and Talons 56	Posted - 2015.05.26 22:47:47 - [299] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: I hate the idea that a player, such as myself, who is currently deployed and far from being able to play the game, could lose all of his possessions. With that said, I also hate the suggestions I have seen thus far. I don't need space fairies pixie dusting my stuff off to safety for me. Just put a couple of NPC stations in each region. If I know I will be away from game for weeks, I move my stuff to the relative safety of an NPC station. I run the risk of moving it. I take the time. Not some space magic. Anything I leave behind is fair game for someone else who beats the stuffing out of my friends while I am gone. You should know better than anyone... In War, there is no neutral ground... anywhere. Why should 0.0 be any different? I know for a fact that there is a lot of loot to be had from players in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, United States and the Isle of Great Britain. I plan of doing my share of the reaping... Fíorghrá: Grá na fírinne Déan gáire...Tiocfaidh ár lá
Midnight Hope Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 163	Posted - 2015.05.27 03:37:38 - [300] - Quote Mucks Boosh wrote: I appear to be able to see only one option. It goes a little like: Give us the bloody loot, this is EVE, not Hello Kitty Online, if your **** gets blown up and stolen, deal with it. "Safety" Mechanics are completely illogical. Why not do the same for destroyed ships. I'm sure it'll be the same demographic as this. If I have something stored in a POS and it gets blown up, boo-hoo. My fault for leaving my assets in a vulnerable location. And the aggressors get to enjoy a nice load of loot. TL,DR; "Safety" Mechanics are bad. Risk vs Reward. CCPlis, gieff loot. Totally agree. In w-space you keep ALL your stuff in a POS. That includes dreads and several T3s. Guess what happens when someone blows it up. Everything goes puff and you are space poor once more. No "oh! my assets are safe from the bad guys so I can sleep in peace at night". No insurance. No nothing. WTF? This is EVE. HTFU.

SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 298	Posted - 2015.05.27 14:24:41 - [301] - Quote The smack-down simple answer is this: If station destruction results in a players loss of stored assets, there will be LESS content in eve. 1. Player loses all his PVP ships/supplies=less content 2. Player learns not to store PVP ships/supplies in a destructible station=less content If you think most of null is empty now...just wait.
Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1839	Posted - 2015.05.27 20:29:39 - [302] - Quote Midnight Hope wrote: Mucks Boosh wrote: I appear to be able to see only one option. It goes a little like: Give us the bloody loot, this is EVE, not Hello Kitty Online, if your **** gets blown up and stolen, deal with it. "Safety" Mechanics are completely illogical. Why not do the same for destroyed ships. I'm sure it'll be the same demographic as this. If I have something stored in a POS and it gets blown up, boo-hoo. My fault for leaving my assets in a vulnerable location. And the aggressors get to enjoy a nice load of loot. TL,DR; "Safety" Mechanics are bad. Risk vs Reward. CCPlis, gieff loot. Totally agree. In w-space you keep ALL your stuff in a POS. That includes dreads and several T3s. Guess what happens when someone blows it up. Everything goes puff and you are space poor once more. No "oh! my assets are safe from the bad guys so I can sleep in peace at night". No insurance. No nothing. WTF? This is EVE. HTFU. The fact that you decided to live in space with no protection to your assets in any way does not mean it should be the same for other part of the game. Null always featured some form of protection. Scrapping the current systems because WH space has it harder would have massive consequence on how the game is played.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1004	Posted - 2015.05.28 03:57:26 - [303] - Quote Not to mention that WH space has at least some ability to keep people out. It's not like a vastly superior force can appear overnight on your doorstep. The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 298	Posted - 2015.05.28 13:40:06 - [304] - Quote Also I'm sure the smart wormholers frequently move their extra loot and assets to where? Safe indestructible stations/market hubs. It's not like absolutely everything you ever owned is stockpiled in your wormhole tower. And it wouldn't surprise me if the majority of wormholers have at least small caches of ships in many npc stations around Eve. I know I would (and do, although I live in null)
Dersen Lowery Drinking in Station 1589	Posted - 2015.05.28 20:24:03 - [305] - Quote SFM Hobb3s wrote: Also I'm sure the smart wormholers frequently move their extra loot and assets to where? Safe indestructible stations/market hubs. It's not like absolutely everything you ever owned is stockpiled in your wormhole tower. And it wouldn't surprise me if the majority of wormholers have at least small caches of ships in many npc stations around Eve. I know I would (and do, although I live in null) Meh. The problem with this strategy is that you cache your stuff in, say, Amarr, and your next week's worth of Empire connections are to Molden Heath, maybe Placid or Devoid. Anything that has any tactical value is in the WH, because you have no guaranteed access to any assets in K-space. It's easier and faster to just get what you need when you can. We had a running "shopping list" of requests. When someone got a good Empire connection they'd pop out, find the nearest non-awful market, and satisfy as many of the requests as possible. Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables. I voted in CSM X!
Johny Tyler Synapse. Diplomatic Immunity. 19	Posted - 2015.06.04 10:44:32 - [306] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Such gameplay is necessary if we wish players to use those new structures and not stash all of their items in NPC stations. I think it is a big problem to start designing mechanics around what you "wish" players to do. Make good solid game mechanics and leave it up to the player what they "wish" to do with it. IMO epic loss of a structure could/should be best balanced by making the structure useful enough to be worth the risk. A possibility to preserve a few key assets would be to install an emergency compartment in a structure of a specific size. Items in the compartment at the time of destruction are ejected in a capsule similar to one of your options, not scanable or destructible until the player has retrieved it. Such a compartment could come standard on a structure, but I would recommend making it another module option that requires fitting space and a choice to use it over something else.
Trinkets friend Sudden Buggery Prolapse. 2401	Posted - 2015.06.05 00:04:45 - [307] - Quote kreschun. OK, so these Citadels have no fuel use. So they never go offline, never get weakened by inactivity. So they are still as theretically deadly when not inhabited as when inhabited. Then the junk inside them get squirelled away to sekrit space cans by space hobbits. Well, OK, not a question. So here's the real one: When i unanchor the Citadel, what happens to the junk inside it? Right now, I have 82 toons in corp. Divide by 2 for alts, I have about 40 meatbods. Some of these meatbods go AFK for long periods. At the moment what I do is hump all their stuff out of their hangars, then take their ships out of the SMA, and either liquidate or contract it back to them. This is predicated on the ability of a CEO like me, not only dashing and handsome, but able to peek into every nook and cranny of the POS and extract nuggets of caca from it before jacking it down and unanchoring it. So...in the space hobbit milieux how does it work if my members have their own private space? Do you get the same problems you get with PHA's in that you can't unanchor them because of reasons? Do you get to force the issue and make Space Hobbits come along and steal your member's stuff and hide it in invisible leprecans around system, which will then expire and destroy all their stuff because your members are AFK? Or soes the act of unanchoring the Citadel just trash everything? I haven't heard anything either way on this issue. It would be interesting to hear, because I suspect that the way t deal with items being destroyed or space hobbitted is to just move out of the Citadel, leave it sitting there abandoned (just like now! except with no SMA killmail risk!) and take a bet that ecause it's 40 AU's off dscan no one will ever find it, and my members can come back from AFK and eventually get their stuff out. I dunno. I mean, i hate moving out quitter's gear, but by the same token, this is a bit odd. Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA ~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Rat Sotken Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2015.06.26 04:41:05 - [308] - Quote Okay, so I just found this thread and I'm going to contribute my two cents. First option, not going to work. Noone in their right mind will re-enter a hostile WH or system to retrieve all of their stuff. Second option, not going to work, some of those containers would have to be massive and require hundreds of trips. Third option, not going to work, large entities will use it as an easy way of moving cargo. I can easily see it being used as a way to setup an immediate staging base. That much value should not be able to be moved without considerable cost. As covering the obvious, citadels will be found in many areas, the three main ones are WH, Null, and HS. In that order of safety. WH dwellers have a devil may care attitude and combined with the limiting feature of the WH's themselves, are the truest EVE players imo, standing by the creed "I am going to lose everything tomorrow." Null, is where the most destruction occurs. Lack of CONCORD retribution and freedom to kill who they want. That destruction first requires a lot of assets to be built up to be used, before the actual battle. Who stand by the creed, "Pew, pew, pew" HS, is where the carebears live. And where only guerilla tactics survive before the hammer of CONCORD arrives. "I don't care what you do, but leave me alone" Easiest solution is I forsee is in WH, leave them as it is, no recovery, no safety. Only currently available defensive systems. Null, you'll most probably need to add some modicum of safety, a warning and time. I was thinking effectively choosing a base of operations and where every user has to pay excessively high to keep that base, effectively as a NPC station. But you'll always end up with the scenario where the offense moves faster than the defense can muster or organise and where you'd end up as an island. In Eve, that would require entosis sovereignty to slow down by orders of magnitude. Personally, I am on the side of everything is destructible. That's the only way you're going to get gang guerilla warfare. Because then there will be no more big targets. It'll be too costly to store everything in one place. And therefore people will have caches everywhere. I'm also going to suggest pockets of dynamic high sec, maybe 10% of the systems in any single region. Then you'd only need Medium Citadels. But you're hitting against people's laziness. The bigger the group, the safer they want to be. There's an inherent safety in numbers. Yes, its a mindset shift. And it'll be greater for some than others. There will be attrition, no matter how you cut it. You decide what kind of gameplay you want and the players that fit that mould will stay/arrive. Use Quant, for those who subscribe with money what do they spend their time doing and use that as your guide. Follow the money. If you make null destructible, they'll just base out of HS. If you want to tweak, upon release of fozzie sov, move everything in null to systems within 5 jumps of Jita, and let null start anew. In politics, you know what you want, so you pick the extreme version of it, then you'll seem reasonable when they bargain you down to your original intent and vision. TL;DR Make everything destructible with the same current loot mechanics for ships. Let the insecurities reveal themselves!
Barrogh Habalu Forever Winter Absolute Zero. 885	Posted - 2015.06.26 06:43:05 - [309] - Quote Enya Sparhawk wrote: You should know better than anyone... In War, there is no neutral ground... anywhere. Why should 0.0 be any different? I know for a fact that there is a lot of loot to be had from players in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, United States and the Isle of Great Britain. I plan of doing my share of the reaping... This won't work. What that does is pushing people and their assets to empire. That: SFM Hobb3s wrote: The smack-down simple answer is this: If station destruction results in a players loss of stored assets, there will be LESS content in eve. 1. Player loses all his PVP ships/supplies=less content 2. Player learns not to store PVP ships/supplies in a destructible station=less content If you think most of null is empty now...just wait.
LujTic Green Visstick High 12	Posted - 2015.06.26 09:13:54 - [310] - Quote I wouldn't make any radical changes that creates a risk a large number of people would unsub or leave nullsec. I would take it slow and step by step. First step would be to make them conquerable with the new mechanic. That's already a major change that risks driving people out of nullsec. Then you can add an option to destroy stations, moving the items stored inside (possibly with a chance to lose part of it). You can then increase the chance of losing stuff if it doesn't drive people away.

Styphon the Black Forced Euthanasia Soviet-Union 32	Posted - 2015.06.26 18:36:40 - [311] - Quote GÇó Third option could be to have the items inside the structure moved to another structure belonging to the same owners. I wouldn't have it move to another stucture by the same owner but have the SoE recover the lost items and ship them to a fiendly NPC station. Someone might not have another structure that they own.
GordonO Caldari Provisions 126	Posted - 2015.06.29 02:34:32 - [312] - Quote This doesn't encourage anyone to live anywhere but Highsec. lets say I live in some null system, my wife has a baby, I get hit by a bus, or whatever. I come back a week later to find 2 freighter loads of stuff in one container. How do you honestly expect someone to move their stuff if they AFK for a few days and log back in to a space container? ... What next ??
Kasia en Tilavine School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 5	Posted - 2015.06.30 16:29:52 - [313] - Quote I would like to reiterate on the planetary vault idea, which I think is a great way of shifting the current "safety" that outposts provide to a structure that is just as safe but with far less access ability. Barren or ice planets can have a "space elivator" built on them, granting infinite cold storage options for players. Once per hour or day perhaps, a single "retrieval request" can be made for any and all belongings, you drag and drop everything you want to retrieve out of storage and it is sent up for you in the elivator. You can also do a single "deposit request" every hour or day. Drag and drop into a queue container with potentially infinite space and it will be immediately and safely stored for you. With this in place, the bulk of expensive valuables would be stored there, with a small assortment of pvp and pve equipment stored in L or XL structures for quick fitting and flying options. No terrible loot can mechanic, teleporting capitals, interbus shipping costs, itemized insurance, journal can bull$&@# or hellcamping trillions in assets until the 30 day timers expire "just for lulz or profit". No unlimited access to all your stuff free of loss at any time like right now, your ease of use items will still be destroyable and loot able by attackers, but you will have potentially trillions safe from harm, out of sight out of mind. No retreating to npc stations. Only your local HOTH. A new structure to be built monitored maintained and protected. If it is destroyed and a new one is built you are in the same boat as you are now with the new outpost owners locking you out. All you have to do to let your alliance retrieve their things is blow your enemies space elevator and build your own. Requiring you to take the system back anyways. Just like now. And since its in system, if you have to go on vacation for extended time, you don't have to ship back to high sec, only to the planet that's a single safe, all blues in local warp away.
Rat Sotken Wazzat Conglomerate 0	Posted - 2015.06.30 22:21:35 - [314] - Quote This thread has been bugging me. Its a critical issue. And it'll affect how everyone plays the game. So here are more ideas. Seperate null. -0.5 to -1.0, caters for blops and alliances. (BLOP Null) 0.0 to -0.5 caters for small gang pvp. No alliance support and corp size limitations. Maybe even fleet size limitations. (Small Null) Null is dead because very few people want to be disturbed by a cyno and a BS fleet, when they aren't expecting one. When people know the size of fleet to expect, there's better odds of getting an even fight. The main consideration here is, you want Blop Null to still go to Small Null, just without the fleet support. You'll still people docking up when they meet another fleet too large for them to take on, but at least you would be more likely to find another small gang fleet. You could make BLOP space like Shattered WH's, enourmous systems but in null, and there would be 20 systems. And with one central and 3 sub-central systems connecting all of them in the center. You could implement a reverse reinforce, where the longer your Citadel is up, you can add more shield, armor, etc. Exponential curve time delay between each stage, maybe can upgrade 3 times. Which would force any attacker to go through additional reinforce timers. It'd even help the server load since you've aggregated all of the major null alliances. Or even thats the only place you can build XL Citadels which replace Outposts in terms of all functionality and are non-destructible. Another idea is based on the number of people who use a Citadel, determines its upkeep costs. So Customs tax or Maintenance, w/e. This would especially apply to Small Null where you could group people to two bands. So say under 20 Citadel users, is the most value. Then you'd go 21-50 users, which would cost like 60% more. Essentially the less people that use a single Citadel the cheaper it is to run. I've sort of come around to every character having access to what is effectively a single cloaked station container. If they keep their stuff in it, then its safe for pickup similar to what happens in Planetary. However there has to also be support where people can contract up the pickup, so put up the contract for those daring enough to pick them up in their Cov Ops ships. When a station blows up, the owners will get a master pass, which they can make a single copy at any one time, which will allow people to open their station container.
Wooly Akachi What Could Go Wrong Lethal Intent. 44	Posted - 2015.07.01 05:07:07 - [315] - Quote Ok here's my version - most likely is bad or has a big hole somewhere in it. The Outpost have been damaged or attacked by drifters doing "Stuff". They are slowly deactivating - shutting down. The new structures that are being rushed into service are not as good as what they are replacing (Destructable) The old structures remain in space but no services are able to be run on them. You can still dock in them and store stuff (Limited space 20mil m3? dread plus a bit). when changing ship and then undocking you have no sheild or cap. anyone can dock in it as security services are disabled. No refitting or other station services This will provide a safe storage for people but only a small amount per person and will make current station systems a potential conflict driver.
Nortion Adoulin Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 4	Posted - 2015.07.07 18:47:45 - [316] - Quote Everything should be Destructible Start with the problem the station itself will keep this short and to the point Limit the space available inside the station for hangers and storage. The larger the station the more space available. Small station should be able to dock upto cruier size and larger sized stations battleships and the XL upto capitals but very limited numbers (4 max). EXCEPTION you can always dock a FREAGHTER. Limited space = less assets = less loss of assets. Limit hanger space for assembled ships. You want more space pay for it! The station owner can buy insurance to become a BONDED secure station. An NPC corp. (most likely one of the existing large NPC corps) offers secure asset protection for all hanger items excluding Assembled ships. Alternately there should be an office in the station to allow charters for a one off fee to buy bonded status in the station the cost dependant on their standings and max payout. E.g. pay 1 mil less 2% because you well known and friendly to us for 200mil cover. Standings of -5 and your cover is refused or if you drop to -5 any cover is revoked. The owing corp. alliance has to pay a fee for this so that can chose not to but that wonGÇÖt encourage neutrals to visit. Also any chanter whose property falls under bonded status keeps that status until they opt to use it; no matter how many times the station changes hands. Items held can be left indefinitely or until the owner revisits the station. When a station is forced into reinforced the contents become secured buy the Bond Corp. If it remains in the holderGÇÖs possession afterwards nothing changes. If lost there are several options for the attacker. 1 Destroy the station = Major loss of standing for the attacking corp. alliance and pilots with the bond holder corp. (becomes -10) Bond holder has to replace or pay for replacement of all assets lost excluding assembles ships. Lots of wreckage and containers drifting about for weeks/months afterwards. 2 Loot the station = Major loss of standing with the bond holder corp. (becomes -10) Bond holder has to replace or pay for replacement of all assets lost not belonging to the owning faction or corp. Attacker steals 50-70% of the contents of the station also all items currently up for sale in the station. Note must be able to remove the loot from the station buy their own corp. /faction ships. They cannot just move it to their own hanger space and contract it to neutral haulers also they must abandon the station within 2 hours after which time it becomes a free port again except they are refused docking access until the station has changed hands once more. 3 If captured the new owners can occupy and honour the bonded status. The owners of the bonded items can have then shipped to a neutral station of there choice or to a Hi sec station. Shipping takes 2-7 days. The new owner will have to buy bonded status if they wish they do not inherit the previous ownerGÇÖs status. 4 Strip the station of assets which removes upgrades and services and receive large amounts of salvage i.e. electronic components scrap, computers food medical items ( basically anything not nailed down to hard) Every day a station being stripped produces X million isk of salvage .But leaving personnel items untouched and the station largely intact. Again these items must be shipped out by their own ships not contracted to neutrals. Useful if you donGÇÖt think you can hold a station for long. Striping a station gives a major negative to Sovereignty Industry hub and station control and can actively make it go negative.
Punx Evangeline Repracor Industries 148	Posted - 2015.07.12 01:21:19 - [317] - Quote I like the third option, have all your stuff be able to move to another structure like the one that is demolished. If you don't have a structure, then you have to build one to get it back. I for one wouldn't move my stuff into player owned structures on a mass scale if they can be destroyed and lost. If I have to go pick it up somewhere in a freighter, I'm not likely to put very much in it. If you want people to use it, keep their stuff as safe as their stuff is in NPC stations.
Nortion Adoulin Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 4	Posted - 2015.07.12 18:19:42 - [318] - Quote Punx Evangeline wrote: I like the third option, have all your stuff be able to move to another structure like the one that is demolished. If you don't have a structure, then you have to build one to get it back. I for one wouldn't move my stuff into player owned structures on a mass scale if they can be destroyed and lost. If I have to go pick it up somewhere in a freighter, I'm not likely to put very much in it. If you want people to use it, keep their stuff as safe as their stuff is in NPC stations. EXACTLY! This gives the owners of the assets the option to protect them but does not guarantee that any one attacking a station will let them get there stuff back. Also the attackers who take a station have options on how they are going to get benefit of taking the station after the fight. BUT having real consequences for destroying the station or looting the valuables inside. With all the corp. members and the corp. getting there standing trashed then there never going to get bonded status on their own stations. Negative standings could also be extended to Hi sec say having docking rights at NPC Corporation stations refused along with trading rights for all items for sale at their stations it would act as a restraining mechanism on the whole scale destruction in Null. These NPC Corporation are not like CONCORD whose authority stops Hi-sec. They have indirect influence beyond and financial interests out there. TheyGÇÖre going to punish anyone who cost them ISK any way they can. More importantly anyone who really wants to live out in null totally independent of Hi sec and not relying on them to protect their assets can do so if they want to. They can destroy as much as they want to it just destroys there standings with the Hi sec factions and corporations. They just have to remember that like the mirror on NULL they cannot enter without being attacked by anyone who wants to or that there are few if any stations they can dock in to buy and sell stuff. They turn Hi sec into their care bear Null-sec.
O2 jayjay Hunter Killers. Forsaken Asylum 26	Posted - 2015.07.18 06:30:13 - [319] - Quote Item safety sound like world of war craft. I'm playing eve. High risk high reward. All items should drop just like everything else.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2625	Posted - 2015.07.26 03:52:05 - [320] - Quote O2 jayjay wrote: Item safety sound like world of war craft. I'm playing eve. High risk high reward. All items should drop just like everything else. So where's the high reward?

Josef Kennet Zima Corp Infinity Space. 0	Posted - 2015.07.26 11:08:39 - [321] - Quote I think the full destriction of station is bad idea at all. Because if you make stations destructible than it is logical to make ALL of them destructible including LS\HS\NPC Stations. And when you think what will happen if lets say Jita - m4 will be destroyed you will understand why this mechanic is so bad with any of assets evacuation mechanics. So, my idea is: 1) Stations have reinforcement timers (armor\shield). Damage is done by regular firepower or if you wish by entosis links (i prefer regular firepower because destroying station by entosis is kinda lol) 2) Station services( + market + contracts + direct trade + whatever station activity you like) are station modules (fitted to stations). 3) When station recieve damage on some point (like 75% shiled, 25% shield etc) one random service(which is fitted to station) is destroyed (and station changes its model to some damaged variant). In addition it may be followed with some loot (minerals for example). 4) During reinforcement (plus some time for a fight like ~2h) station owner cannot fit any new station services. 5) When station gets to 0% all services should be destroyed and some of fitting will be dropped as loot, station enters freeport mode. 6) In freeport mode only dock\undock and moving your staff in hangars is available. 7) To gain control over station you need to bring some materials to station (maybe docking support service or just random basic things like capital plates\construction blocks\whatever so you do not know in advance what to bring with yourself) and then use entosis link. After that you probably want to repair station (if it on 0% you cant fit any services, if it for example on 50% structure you can fit only one - theopposite to their destruction: 100% station - all fitting slots for services are available, 0% - none). 8) During repair station model returns to is normal undamaged state. The results are: 1) Any items are always safe on station (because its not destroyed fully) 2) A lot of visual candys (because its probably the only thing that is cool in station destructions) 3) Unexpected gameplay because of random fittings and random destroying of services (you can probably lost your ship fitting services on 75% shield and replace it only when and if you will win)
Lu Ziffer Jelly Baby Corporation Fidelas Constans 27	Posted - 2015.07.26 12:06:30 - [322] - Quote The big question behind this how should station or space structure conquering work? I would come up with 3 ideas 1. Hack the station disable the defences and take over the station. 2. Invade it you start a battle land troops and fight for the control of station inside and outside of it. 3. Siege the station with two options of taking over and repairing a badly damaged station or destroying it. The first is like the new SOV System The second is the old with some Project Legion added The third is something which is only reasonable with stations that have defence systems and massive hp . This means if you want to destroy a station you have to bring the Dreadnaughts and Superscapitals. It is more like a last resort option if you can not get control otherwise. In the event of station destruction I would propose that everything that has a volume of small container 100m-¦ and is worth more then 10000ISK per m-¦ is evacuate and can be retrived from a SOE holdingsite. Everything else ressource stacks and ships gets blown up and can be retrived from the wreackage of the station.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1490	Posted - 2015.07.26 16:41:30 - [323] - Quote If destructible stations come, they should only be player built stations in 0.0. If they are destroyed, they need to have 50% of the contents get destroyed. The other 50% ends up in a huge, indestructible wreck, which players can salvage to recover the station's contents. Once all the contents have been salvaged, the wreck goes away. All this cuddly little "SOE fairies magic it off to another station" has no place in Eve - once people have an opportunity to decide how much risk they want to take. It would not be an incentive to come back to Eve if you resubscribed to find all your stuff had been blown up. For that reason, implementation of this system would be preceded by the option to have a one-time move of all your possessions to any single 0.0 or low sec station. Possessions belonging to inactive players automatically get moved to the closest non-destructible station prior to implementation. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.
Shallanna Yassavi Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 7	Posted - 2015.08.04 02:23:11 - [324] - Quote If you're going to make things in null more destructible/possible to steal, you need to also answer this question: Why would I leave my stuff there for someone to steal? We already have half the answers: Because I need to be able to fight off the people who are trying to steal the stuff out of my station (smaller ships, gear). Because we've been mining, ratting, and tech 1 manufacturing, but haven't quite got everything ready to go to market/hisec storage. Because I can't keep them anywhere else (caps). I've also heard tech 2 production is mostly done in hisec precisely because that's a huge and complicated logistical system with a lot of opportunities for someone to stop it from working. If any job which required more skills than Industry required a player-owned facility to build, that would make POS very much worth keeping some stuff in, and maybe even worth stealing stuff from. A signature :o
Borg Stoneson SWARTA Mostly Clueless 46	Posted - 2015.08.04 05:00:18 - [325] - Quote My own thoughts. People docked: Players who are currently docked get moved to a spot in the system via "Station Emergency Evacuation Catapult System" (SEECS for short), those who are offline then dissapear, those who are online are now in space as normal, but away from the station. Loot: Anything in shared corp/alliance storage acts the same as in a current POS CHA. Personal Storage: Ship hanger drops ships the same way as a current SMA if the structure is destroyed. New item for players personal hangers, an emergency asset evac container. Basicly something like the current station containers and in a variety of sizes. They act like the special PL style containers that were mentioned in the original post, thing that are in them are "safe" things that are left behind drop in a manner similar to current CHA mechanics. Other ideas, "SEECS" module/rig for ships? So that if they're unpiloted they act similar to the PL style containers. Rig would be better, means there's an actual cost to using it. Despite what was said in the OP there is a "safety mechanic" of sorts for starbases, people can move around in the shield and have options when it comes to moving things out (DST with a MJD, Sneaky cov ops stuff, if there's bubble cage you can warp out and in in anything. Vastly different to what will essentialy be a station camp with the new structures.
TigerXtrm Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance 1206	Posted - 2015.08.05 02:47:34 - [326] - Quote Suggestion: Upon destruction of a station all hangar modules are ejected towards the planet the station was anchored on. After surviving reentry and killing a few thousand peasants down on the planet (are null-sec planets inhabited?) the hangar modules start broadcasting a beacon signal to their owner. Upon paying the surviving peasants a moderate fee for the trouble, the capsuleer may cherry pick their cargo through the use of a Customs Office in orbit around the planet, being able to only take as much as their ship is able to carry. Alternatively the capsuleer can pay an even bigger sum to some NPC mercenary deep space hauling service to ship the crash landed cargo to a station of their choosing. Price based on size of cargo and distance to drop-off location. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
Borg Stoneson SWARTA Mostly Clueless 47	Posted - 2015.08.05 09:15:11 - [327] - Quote TigerXtrm wrote: Suggestion: Upon destruction of a station all hangar modules are ejected towards the planet the station was anchored on.... From what I understand the new structures wont be locked to moons or planets but rather can be placed anywhere
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 346	Posted - 2015.08.05 12:09:18 - [328] - Quote Still convinced its technically not feasible for the code to change the location of all items in a station at one go. Haven't any of you ever seen what happens when 200 slowcats undock and deploy drones? We're talking MILLIONS of objects here. You are going to have TIDI so bad it'll reach -88 miles per hour and send you back to to 1984.
TigerXtrm Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance 1206	Posted - 2015.08.05 14:14:36 - [329] - Quote Borg Stoneson wrote: TigerXtrm wrote: Suggestion: Upon destruction of a station all hangar modules are ejected towards the planet the station was anchored on.... From what I understand the new structures wont be locked to moons or planets but rather can be placed anywhere Closest available planet then. Quote: Still convinced its technically not feasible for the code to change the location of all items in a station at one go. Haven't any of you ever seen what happens when 200 slowcats undock and deploy drones? We're talking MILLIONS of objects here. You are going to have TIDI so bad it'll reach -88 miles per hour and send you back to to 1984. It's not remotely the same. Displaying and tracking entities in space is something completely different from moving database entries from one place to another. Server impact would be minimal. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 346	Posted - 2015.08.05 14:58:16 - [330] - Quote TigerXtrm wrote: Borg Stoneson wrote: TigerXtrm wrote: Suggestion: Upon destruction of a station all hangar modules are ejected towards the planet the station was anchored on.... From what I understand the new structures wont be locked to moons or planets but rather can be placed anywhere Closest available planet then. Quote: Still convinced its technically not feasible for the code to change the location of all items in a station at one go. Haven't any of you ever seen what happens when 200 slowcats undock and deploy drones? We're talking MILLIONS of objects here. You are going to have TIDI so bad it'll reach -88 miles per hour and send you back to to 1984. It's not remotely the same. Displaying and tracking entities in space is something completely different from moving database entries from one place to another. Server impact would be minimal. Having been in a system where the inhabitants of a station started making contracts with the express purpose of generating lag, and succeeding, I would beg to differ.

TigerXtrm Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance 1206	Posted - 2015.08.05 15:13:26 - [331] - Quote SFM Hobb3s wrote: TigerXtrm wrote: Borg Stoneson wrote: TigerXtrm wrote: Suggestion: Upon destruction of a station all hangar modules are ejected towards the planet the station was anchored on.... From what I understand the new structures wont be locked to moons or planets but rather can be placed anywhere Closest available planet then. Quote: Still convinced its technically not feasible for the code to change the location of all items in a station at one go. Haven't any of you ever seen what happens when 200 slowcats undock and deploy drones? We're talking MILLIONS of objects here. You are going to have TIDI so bad it'll reach -88 miles per hour and send you back to to 1984. It's not remotely the same. Displaying and tracking entities in space is something completely different from moving database entries from one place to another. Server impact would be minimal. Having been in a system where the inhabitants of a station started making contracts with the express purpose of generating lag, and succeeding, I would beg to differ. At worst the database move could always be done during downtime, but CCP is always improving their server infrastructure. If something like this is ever implemented I'm assuming they'll do it in a way that does not put insane strain on the server. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 347	Posted - 2015.08.07 13:35:30 - [332] - Quote I imagine before something like this ever gets implemented, everyone will be selling off all but the most basic necessities. There's going to be a massive surplus of ships and modules re-injected into the trade hubs, and there will be a LOT more liquid isk being held onto. Don't think CCP would want either of those things to happen. The harbinger of this mechanic change will be inflation, coupled with the exponential decrease of content (ie ships sploding)
Nasar Vyron S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS. 117	Posted - 2015.08.15 19:31:52 - [333] - Quote To the newest dev blog I must say a few things: First, players everywhere thank you for finding a happy medium on the loot pinata only dropping items that would have been normally just been lost in the normal destruction of a POS/build job. Players don't lose more than they would have normally, and the attackers can have some loot. Second, love the way vulnerability is designed for these. THIS is what sov vulnerability should be changed into as well! Below are a few concerns and what I feel is an acceptable adaptation: 1- Delivery of personal/corp assets 5-20 days is seriously way too long, especially for a service you're telling us we need to pay for (based on market values we all know are never correct). I suggest the following: -Flat rate based on distance to station/structure being delivered to. -Free xfer: 2 weeks -Paid xfer: 48 hours (delivery fee) -Rush paid xfer: 1 hour (X% market + delivery fee) Remember EVE is still a game. You are asking players in some areas to literally stop playing the game for 5-20 days after losing a battle. A 48 hour lockout simply makes more sense as "punishment" for not defending your structure, anything more than that is simply kicking a player while they're down and encouraging them to look elsewhere for their entertainment. And some players keep most of their wealth in assets, given the time limit to made a decision a free option that keeps them locked out for an extended period before delivery makes sense where as those in a rush to receive some of their items ASAP may pay for rushed delivery. I say this with emphasis on WH players who will be living out of these structures. Telling them they effectively can't play for 5 days even after they rebuild the structure will not go over well. Secondly, any sort of delivery service for destroyed structures can and will be "abused" by larger entities with massive amounts of isk. But designing mechanics to avoid such abuse to the detriment of the individual player is still bad game design. Remember you have the power to leave such fringe abuse cases possible and make a statement warning that abuse will result in bans and loss of alliance assets and leave it at that. 2- Time limit on claiming personal assets People will always have to step away from the game for extended periods of time; be it deployment/family emergency/hospitalization/etc. You currently start the timer for 5 days after structure destruction. This must be changed to 1 week from return of player. There simply is no discussing this matter. You cannot punish a player who had to leave for reasons out of their control. 3- Super cap relocation If you lost the fight for a timer, the likelihood of your being able to return to that space and construct a new XL structure within 5 days of it's destruction is extremely unlikely. You are effectively saying it's gone forever. Simply put, you need to allow the option for these to be thrown into the nearest alliance XL citadel or to be picked up from a cloaked container a random location in space placing it's location within the player's journal. Again, CCP you can take a stance against abuse cases they won't be hard to identify. You need to design mechanics around what is fair for the individual player keeping in mind limited playtime, and the time and effort the individual had to put into obtaining these assets to begin with. You need to give them a fair -not perfectly safe- chance at recovery. Just those three things need looking at in my opinion. And raising awareness to the problems now will do us a lot of good so it doesn't become another jump fatigue or aegis sov fiasco where Tranq become test server 2.0.
Max Kolonko WATAHA. Unseen Wolves 536	Posted - 2015.08.15 20:25:34 - [334] - Quote Nasar Vyron wrote: I say this with emphasis on WH players who will be living out of these structures. Telling them they effectively can't play for 5 days even after they rebuild the structure will not go over well. Errr... WH'ers dont get loot transfer, we need to rebuild citadel to get stuff back. Also, most WH'ers I know actually advocate for full hardcore where loot drops for the victor. Nasar Vyron wrote: Secondly, any sort of delivery service for destroyed structures can and will be "abused" by larger entities with massive amounts of isk. But designing mechanics to avoid such abuse to the detriment of the individual player is still bad game design. Remember you have the power to leave such fringe abuse cases possible and make a statement warning that abuse will result in bans and loss of alliance assets and leave it at that. You cant choose where it goes, but indeed You can predict based on Your location which one will be chosen as closest npc station. To have NAY usage of that (uninterrupted stuff transport) You need in the first place to get that stuff into Your citadel, so whatever it was You could as well move to low sec Yourself. 20 days timer makes it even less plausible. Ofc we will probable see some fringe usages but I except them to have minor usage. Nasar Vyron wrote: 2- Time limit on claiming personal assets People will always have to step away from the game for extended periods of time; be it deployment/family emergency/hospitalization/etc. You currently start the timer for 5 days after structure destruction. This must be changed to 1 week from return of player. There simply is no discussing this matter. You cannot punish a player who had to leave for reasons out of their control. What time limit, cant find anything about it in the blogs. Only time limit is based on when EARLIEST You can move Your stuff. Nasar Vyron wrote: 3- Super cap relocation If you lost the fight for a timer, the likelihood of your being able to return to that space and construct a new XL structure within 5 days of it's destruction is extremely unlikely. You are effectively saying it's gone forever. Again - What 5 days? Cant find anything in blog saying You have to do it in 5 days. Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Nasar Vyron S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS. 117	Posted - 2015.08.15 21:59:46 - [335] - Quote Max Kolonko wrote: Again - What 5 days? Cant find anything in blog saying You have to do it in 5 days. You are 100% correct on that, I reread those blogs three times and each time I kept reading 5 days to make a choice. I'm terribly sorry and made the edit. And I never said you can choose where it goes, but the act of making a structure and throwing everyone's assets into a single corp tab then killing the structure with an alt alliance to quickly transport goods is abuse of the system and what I am referring to.
Grorious Reader Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 28	Posted - 2015.08.19 22:41:38 - [336] - Quote Some suggestions with regard to citadels in WH space... The current itteration of the asset safety rules laid out in the recent dev blogs really seem to leave WH space as an afterthought. CCP seems to have just gone with "well, that won't work in WH. Meh." as their solution. Here are my ideas for making citadels more WH friendly. First; clone bays as they are in k-space won't work in WH for obvious reasons. But with a couple tweaks they would work fine. Restrict the clones to medical clones only. No jumping in and out of WH with jump clones. You have to get podded in the same system as your medical clone or you go back to a k-space clone. No podding yourself back into your WH system. This allows you to actively defend WH systems. Without these, anyone who gets podded defending a WH has to make a potentially very lengthy and dangerous trip just to get back to the citadel they're trying to defend. This amounts to a whole lot of time not defending. Without clones, this will make for very short defenses when the attacker has superior numbers or firepower. Under the current POS system this isn't such a problem because POSes take a long time to reinforce. The process is much faster with the entosis model, and that's going to make defending WHs harder. The second issue is asset safety. Part of the reason for attacking POSes is to get loot from the hangars and silos. Just destroying it all is such a huge waste, and not rewarding at all for the attacker. Perhaps a better system would be to allow the alliance that destroys a citadel to build their own citadel in that system and have the loot (maybe just some of it, like a regular loot drop) delivered to their citadel after 7 days (2 days beyond the victim's 5 day minimum wait time). That gives the defender plenty of time to try to retake their system, but if they can't then to the victor go the spoils.
Masao Kurata Perkone Caldari State 267	Posted - 2015.08.20 11:12:20 - [337] - Quote EDIT: should post in the thread that actually might be read.
Justin Cody Hard Knocks Inc. Hard Knocks Citizens 306	Posted - 2015.08.21 00:41:19 - [338] - Quote I have a better idea than anyone. Station gets destroyed - you can move your stuff to another citadel in the same constellation once with no penalty within 24 hours. Once all in the constellation are destroyed or the 24 hour timer runs out...the citadel wreck spawns a bunch of satelite wrecks with all that juicy leftover lewtz on it. Ships just drop in space and float there. 100% drops. get risky! get some more dank memes!
Orca Platypus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 66	Posted - 2015.08.22 19:19:18 - [339] - Quote I just thought of a funny idea. You get some cheaper citadel and ask allies to put it up in your system, then load it with all your pyerite... and BOOM... it's in the lowsec in 5 days. Cheapest jump freighter service ever.
Grognard Commissar EVE University Ivy League 6	Posted - 2015.08.31 02:56:52 - [340] - Quote Orca Platypus wrote: I just thought of a funny idea. You get some cheaper citadel and ask allies to put it up in your system, then load it with all your pyerite... and BOOM... it's in the lowsec in 5 days. Cheapest jump freighter service ever. actually... that's the best problem with this system yet... you found an exploit before it was even deployed!

Wulfy Johnson NorCorp Security 81	Posted - 2015.09.05 12:22:17 - [341] - Quote One way to approach this feature would be to get a new line of containers, specifically for the hangars and inventory with emergency jumpdrives, which will bring the stuff to nearest npc station. Blueprints and manufacturing leaves the Security of assets in the hands of the players, and even how much of the assets to be secure. This will leave unsecure assets for drops if station gets blown. Second feautre of this line of containers could be, if allowed trough the assets menu, to be retrived In cases where stations are flipped, inactivity which turnes the area hostile or just moving out. This will also remove asset movements from GM's, and allow players going afk a quick route out of harms way. Yes, this will interfere a small bit with jf's role, but not so much as you would think as it is a one jump to npc. You can also consider fuel requirments, towards what range these "liferafts" need to go, to balance things off. Hope this makes sence to some.
Tycho VI Bearded BattleBears I N F A M O U S 19	Posted - 2015.09.17 22:08:14 - [342] - Quote If supercaps could be docked on them in the future, and the citadel itself is destroyed with supers docked, should they really be given a nearly free pass with no pilot interaction? What do you think the difference would be between whether they are safely moved or not in the bigger picture?
Lotus Ambrosia Mad Men Inc 4	Posted - 2015.10.01 07:30:03 - [343] - Quote OK GG 17 pages I have some questions nr1 what will happen to the old stations in null/lowsec? nr2 what will happen to the items/ships in the old stations, i guess a lot of people have **** in station they don't have access to. nr3, what happens to clones(with implants) in station that are destroyed.
Aendoren Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 0	Posted - 2015.10.04 18:17:08 - [344] - Quote http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/67433/1/Structuredestruction-01.png I was just checking out how the new system would work and i have to say It just does not belong in Eve. Eve is a hard game and you stuff sitting in the outpost shouldn't just magically move into some other station, you shouldn't be just magicly jerked out of the ship your docked in your corpse thrown into space and that ship magically moved to safety in some npc station. Also it creates problems with the bounty system. How it should work is your stuff ejected in cans, your ships ejected into space without a pilot if its not blown up in the explosion, and you and the ship your sitting in should be ejected into space either to warp away or fight for your survival. What would fix everything is if you should be able to insure everything you own in station, you can already insure the ships, that way the game can stay realistic, the bounties work just like they do now. This is Eve not Hello Kitty Eve adventure lets keep it that way.
Lugh Crow-Slave 1243	Posted - 2015.10.04 21:07:36 - [345] - Quote Aendoren wrote: http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/67433/1/Structuredestruction-01.png I was just checking out how the new system would work and i have to say It just does not belong in Eve. Eve is a hard game and you stuff sitting in the outpost shouldn't just magically move into some other station, you shouldn't be just magicly jerked out of the ship your docked in your corpse thrown into space and that ship magically moved to safety in some npc station. Also it creates problems with the bounty system. How it should work is your stuff ejected in cans, your ships ejected into space without a pilot if its not blown up in the explosion, and you and the ship your sitting in should be ejected into space either to warp away or fight for your survival. What would fix everything is if you should be able to insure everything you own in station, you can already insure the ships, that way the game can stay realistic, the bounties work just like they do now. This is Eve not Hello Kitty Eve adventure lets keep it that way. These would not be able to do there job if items were at risk It does have its place in eve just like invulnerable structures Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
Aendoren Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 0	Posted - 2015.10.04 23:59:55 - [346] - Quote Your items should be at risk, you should be able to insure them so you can rebuy them again. The idea is for you to defend your outpost and not let your stuff blow up. You want it to easy you want the magic ferry to make your blown up stuff appier somewhere else with no hauling or risk.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2762	Posted - 2015.10.05 00:10:01 - [347] - Quote Aendoren wrote: Your items should be at risk, you should be able to insure them so you can rebuy them again. The idea is for you to defend your outpost and not let your stuff blow up. You want it to easy you want the magic ferry to make your blown up stuff appier somewhere else with no hauling or risk. So, you're saying I should live in NPC space? Since there isn't much benefit aside from a few extra percentage points of bonus for my activities. I mean, what's the point of risking billions in assets, if I miss a couple days of playtime, it could be gone by then? Btw, you're making the assumption that a 10% value cost is not risk. I'm not sure how that came across.
Aendoren Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 0	Posted - 2015.10.05 00:54:00 - [348] - Quote This is Eve player built fantasy lands don't belong. What's next you want jump freighters/freighters to magically have there hauls dumped into the nearest npc station because the risk is to hi? That is the mentality you're taking. Basically i'm just saying you need a good cheap insurance plan that covers your losses that way you're covered if thing go south. And no one should build game mechanics on helping you if your missing a couple of days of playtime. Quote: Btw, you're making the assumption that a 10% value cost is not risk. I'm not sure how that came across 10% risked are you kidding me! Yes i am absolutely saying 10% is not adequate risk. The way ccp is showing it now there is almost no reason to fight to save your outpost.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2762	Posted - 2015.10.05 04:47:05 - [349] - Quote Aendoren wrote: This is Eve player built fantasy lands don't belong. What's next you want jump freighters/freighters to magically have there hauls dumped into the nearest npc station because the risk is to hi? That is the mentality you're taking. Basically i'm just saying you need a good cheap insurance plan that covers your losses that way you're covered if thing go south. And no one should build game mechanics on helping you if your missing a couple of days of playtime. Quote: Btw, you're making the assumption that a 10% value cost is not risk. I'm not sure how that came across 10% risked are you kidding me! Yes i am absolutely saying 10% is not adequate risk. The way ccp is showing it now there is almost no reason to fight to save your outpost. That first sentence makes me really question your thinking. Seeing as it's kind of the basic premise Eve was built on. Maybe you could try not seeing things in black and white rather than assuming my 'mentality' is the polar opposite of yours. If I were to take your logic a step further, we should remove all loot drops. Doesn't make any sense that you have a chance to salvage your losses right? I bet it just infuriates you that the pilot even has the chance. I'm sure that, in solidarity with your beliefs, you don't insure your ships or use SRP or take handout ships. I'm sure every time you lost access to assets in a station you or your alliance don't own, you turned around, opened assets, selected all, and trashed it. Or you could possibly realize that 10% to you might be nothing, whereas 10% loss to an industrialist (not including aborted jobs) could run a few billion, not to mention eclipsing the potential margin they would have gotten from the structure. Or a marketeer, who likely has the same if not more in assets tied up there. Nor have you seemed to remember the cost of the structure itself. Upwards of a billion possibly reaching 50bil+. And of course let's not forget the loot drop. Too much safety there, gotta remove it. No reason to fight for it either. Costs astronomically more than a POS, but definitely not worth fielding anything for that. No way, that's crazy talk. I'm not sure you understand how much the measure of perceived safety affects the decisions of pilots.
Aendoren Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 0	Posted - 2015.10.05 05:51:16 - [350] - Quote What I said was dead on, I do not want to see items magically teleport to another station, so if the structure can be blow up the items should follow the same rules that have made Eve such a great game for years and be sitting right there in space ejected from the outpost wreck. Im not saying you should lose everything as far as monetary value, and you would definitely need a better insurance system then is out now because it sucks. Now I would like to know why you are so dead set against using the insurance system to recoup your losses instead of having all your stuff handed to you unscratched in some nearby npc station? You wouldn't be out any more isk my way then the system that is being talked about now but my way is a lot more realistic. True what I am proposing is harder on the outpost owners because i want them ejected in their ships still intact, but that at least does give them a chance to get away or win the fight and scoop there own loot back up and haul it away. Example Outpost is holding 10 billion in ship fittings and assorted parts, player insures contents for 200mill 3 month duration. Ships themselves use the regular insurance system already in place. Outpost is attacked and destroyed: Player get ejected in his ship. Fate is in his hands. Parts are destroyed or ejected in cans and are looted by anyone in area. Player receives insurance pay out of 10bill on destruction of outpost. Players unmanned ships are destroyed or survive to be ejected into space without pilot. Ships destroyed player receives insurance, ships ejected player receives nothing. Something like this has the same outcome and remains a realistic space sym. No magic ferry's needed.

Aendoren Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 0	Posted - 2015.10.05 06:20:32 - [351] - Quote Quote: This is Eve player built fantasy lands don't belong. Well eve might be a player built fantasyland but at least is has realism and i don't want to see that taken away, I love how the npc hauler ships move stuff from station to station, I love how when i haul hi value freight in hi sec i'm more nervous then i am flying in 0.0. And I will fight to keep the game designers on the path of realism, and not have magical game mechanics whisking away stuff without at least some form of destructible hauling.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2762	Posted - 2015.10.05 20:29:00 - [352] - Quote Alright, I likely misinterpreted what your intent was, I apologize for that. Now to make sure I'm understanding this correctly, your issue is not (or less) the safety mechanic itself, but more the realism (or lore reason, correct those if I'm wrong)?
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2304	Posted - 2015.10.05 21:10:09 - [353] - Quote Aendoren wrote: And no one should build game mechanics on helping you if your missing a couple of days of playtime. CCP want their player to have their stuff if they come back after months/years. Would your insurance at least cover unlimited time frame?
Aendoren Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 0	Posted - 2015.10.05 21:15:11 - [354] - Quote Im ok with unlimited or 6 month/1 year.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2304	Posted - 2015.10.05 21:24:44 - [355] - Quote Aendoren wrote: Im ok with unlimited or 6 month/1 year. I dont even care if insurance is cheap. Im looking at this from living in them and being involved in killing them. And what about the inevitable trillions of ISK injected in the system from that insurance system?
Aendoren Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 0	Posted - 2015.10.05 22:36:56 - [356] - Quote Well im having trouble wrapping my head around that problem, yes alot of isk worth of stuff should drop, i mean you did just blow up a small station, but then again it cant be worth so much that it is just to profitable for the invaders either.
Tackly Tackleson UNITAS. SpaceMonkey's Alliance 0	Posted - 2015.10.26 23:48:45 - [357] - Quote What about removing the trash and reprocess function of a reinforced citadel? That would have some interesting effects especially in wormholes.

CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4379	Posted - 2015.10.28 14:11:36 - [358] - Quote Removing sticky. Still want your feedback but we need room for other thread in this subforum. New pinned thread will be pointing to this one.


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4380	Posted - 2015.10.28 15:48:00 - [359] - Quote Proper recap of everything we've said so far tied to this. Assets & Asset safety: All citadels have infinite personal and corporation hangar capacity to fulfill their defense and housing role. This may not be the case for all the future structures however. All citadels have asset safety feature. When it is destroyed, all assets are impounded. When impounded, players have to wait a minimum amount of time before being able to access them again. There are 2 ways to recover impounded assets: Deliver to the same solar system: assets can be delivered locally if there are NPC stations or Citadels in the same solar system. Players will have to wait a minimum of 5 days before being able to deliver them. Deliver to another solar system: players will have to pay 15% of the total item value and wait a minimum of 20 days before being able to deliver them. Players cannot choose destination in that case. It will always be the top station in the closest low-security system if the destroyed Citadel was in null or low-security space. If the Citadel was in high-security space, it will be the closest high-security solar system. If there is a NPC station in the same solar system as the destroyed Citadel in high-security or low-security space this option is not available. Further information on asset safety: The timer starts counting down as soon as the structure is destroyed, no button needs to be pressed. This ensure players with lapsing accounts do not need to wait the full duration when coming back into the game. We will automatically move items if no choice is set after 20 days. If there is a NPC station in the solar system, we will move them there. If there aren't, we will move them as discussed in option 2 above. This avoids players to build local ship caches in a null-security system that cannot be removed. In case of remote delivery, the payment can be done on a one item basis for players not having enough cash to pay for the whole fee at once. Current plan is to move capitals and supercapitals as well, so yes they can go to low-security NPC stations. Citadels in wormhole spaces do not benefit from asset safety. All items are lost when the structure is destroyed there.

Carmaine The Awesome Corp 15	Posted - 2015.10.28 23:42:54 - [360] - Quote Long time player here, always been a huge fan of the perma destruction and risks in this game, and sorry, there should be no security of assets, I don't even get how this is being thought up without people saying this is removing all the freaking risks for the game. One of the biggest issue in the game is that risk is going down, ISK is going up, inflation is taking place. And now you make it even easier to keep your stuff. The only fun I've had in this game in the past year is from wardeccing/getting wardecced for small pos in lowsec/high sec. You had a chance at good loots, possibly good BPOs and what not. Now there will be absolutely no reason to wardec randoms for funsies other than to grief them. It's been like 6 patches in a row now that you made things more carebeary, more "safe". Next patch is going to be consensual PVP only, and then removal of permanent destruction of asset, so when you die, you pay 15isk and your opponent gets a Victory Star that he can put on his ship?

Hans Inkura Chimera Research and Development 0	Posted - 2015.11.02 03:36:15 - [361] - Quote What if for asset safety it had to be enabled during siege? i.e individuals or the CEO's (CEO being able to do it for every member of the corp )would have to signal out to whatever NPC courier corp when they think they are going to lose the citadel? I personally don't feel it should be automatic Put some risk to it, if you or the CEO forgets or have long abandoned the game then they lose everything. or if we really really want some degree of safety for these maybe just partially? whatever loot fairy doesn't drop is "saved" by some angelic npc corp and delivered to a safe haven as described. You still chance losing stuff which puts emphasis trying to strategically evac yourself, but there's some asset safety so you're not completely screwed. Which i believe has been suggested from what i've glanced But I will say if mediums/larges are primarily aimed at individual ownership/small groups those should fully drop based on loot fairy mechanics. I don't think I should personally be able to dump one of those out in deep low or npc null sec to operate out of and feel safe that everything i keep in it will be safe at a small cost and time even if my "house" is destroyed while im away. Pos mechanics were a good way to keep players engaged who went out into hostile space to live. There was a lot of safety but there was also a lot of risk to which kept players engaged and up to date and that risk was increased based on the level of activity you were doing. If you set up research/design labs, capital construction/maintenance arrays, etc that draws attention and with it more risk. Citadels take away almost all of that. Even if players can tell what can be built at it or researched at it, if the stored loot wont drop I honestly have less incentive to attack or even pay attention to it.
Justin Cody Hard Knocks Inc. Hard Knocks Citizens 323	Posted - 2015.11.06 03:14:03 - [362] - Quote Null Sec and W-space should operate under the same loss rules. Give people a reason to go all scorched earth.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.