Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 53 post(s) |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
1207
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:11:05 -
[151] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote: Like I said, it depends a lot on the timers and I'm assuming if you're solo you are in high sec, so in part wardec mechanics too. Fortunately the asset safety means although you lose your structure, you won't lose everything inside it.
If you cannot defend your structure though, you won't be able to keep it, but we want to give you every reasonable chance to defend it including the more casual players.
Whoa there!! Assuming solo players are in highsec is a SERIOUS faux-pas. Solo players and/or small corps abound in lowsec and nullsec, and we have POSs quite often. What ranger brings up is a vlaid point - there isn't always someone online every day to watch the entosis window. Currently it works for small groups because attacking a POS with intent to harm is a serious investment in either time or manpower. Devoting 20 minutes to circling a structure with an entosis link is a lot lower barrier than trying to defang even a small POS.
Vulnerability windows for structures will not necessarily be everyday, and the time to capture will vary depending on the structure and where it is anchored. We are very aware of the concerns of small groups having fewer people online to defend.
We will have more details about the capture timings and vulnerability windows etc in a later dev blog.
CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
|
|
Dradis Aulmais
RW Vindicator Connection Phoebe Freeport Republic
797
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:11:18 -
[152] - Quote
Can we free port these structures and if we have a XL can we free-port but prevent non alliance supers from mooring
Dradis Aulmais, Federal Attorney Number 54896
Free The Scope Three
|
Narcotic Gryffin
Tiny Titans
49
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:16:18 -
[153] - Quote
Wanted some clarification are the citadel structures only going to be limited to nullsec like current outposts? Or will a say medium citadel structure be able to be deployed in lowsec or wh space?
http://www.sortius-is-a-geek.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/history-channel-hd-aliens-thumb.jpg
|
Aeril Malkyre
Knights of the Ouroboros
399
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:18:18 -
[154] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote: Like I said, it depends a lot on the timers and I'm assuming if you're solo you are in high sec, so in part wardec mechanics too. Fortunately the asset safety means although you lose your structure, you won't lose everything inside it.
If you cannot defend your structure though, you won't be able to keep it, but we want to give you every reasonable chance to defend it including the more casual players.
Whoa there!! Assuming solo players are in highsec is a SERIOUS faux-pas. Solo players and/or small corps abound in lowsec and nullsec, and we have POSs quite often. What Ranger 1 brings up is a valid point - there isn't always someone online every day to watch the entosis window. Currently it works for small groups because attacking a POS with intent to harm is a serious investment in either time or manpower. Devoting 20 minutes to circling a structure with an entosis link is a lot lower barrier than trying to defang even a small POS. Quite accurate. Right now, as a solo player, I can afford to field a pretty stout tower in wormhole space that wouldn't be at all vulnerable to the equivalent of one guy in an Entosis linked ship. Without automated defenses, a fully fueled and stronted tower is just waiting to be reinforced every single day. I can't always be on every single day.
A moderately defended POS right now can deter a small gang of attackers just by being fully armed and armored. If you're saying that functionality can't be replicated with one of the new Citadels... That's a huge loss.
|
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
6072
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:19:11 -
[155] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:War Kitten wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote: Like I said, it depends a lot on the timers and I'm assuming if you're solo you are in high sec, so in part wardec mechanics too. Fortunately the asset safety means although you lose your structure, you won't lose everything inside it.
If you cannot defend your structure though, you won't be able to keep it, but we want to give you every reasonable chance to defend it including the more casual players.
Whoa there!! Assuming solo players are in highsec is a SERIOUS faux-pas. Solo players and/or small corps abound in lowsec and nullsec, and we have POSs quite often. What ranger brings up is a vlaid point - there isn't always someone online every day to watch the entosis window. Currently it works for small groups because attacking a POS with intent to harm is a serious investment in either time or manpower. Devoting 20 minutes to circling a structure with an entosis link is a lot lower barrier than trying to defang even a small POS. Vulnerability windows for structures will not necessarily be everyday, and the time to capture will vary depending on the structure and where it is anchored. We are very aware of the concerns of small groups having fewer people online to defend. We will have more details about the capture timings and vulnerability windows etc in a later dev blog.
Ok, that sounds a little more promising.... The devblog just mentioned vaguely that these would work like the sov entosis captures - and those are vulnerable daily.
Assumptions... always making an ass out of u and mptions. ;)
I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
|
Takeo Yanumano
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:19:27 -
[156] - Quote
So, the way I'm understanding this is that you do not wish wormhole dwellers to be able to continue dwelling in wormholes the same way they do now, correct?
In other words, a solo wh-dweller (why he is solo is besides the point; imagine for example he is solo because most of his corp is taking a brief hiatus) who manages to keep two POS fueled by himself would be made effectively an impossible playstyle, yes? Or at very least, he'd have to put even more time into the game than he currently is, as I understand it. |
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
242
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:20:10 -
[157] - Quote
would be nice to give us a timeframe these roll out you know,
I mean folks gotta prepare for the transition into fozzisov.. and now these new structures.. you're putting a stress-test on the little guy that may have dreams of building these things..
so when is this rolling? are you just intentionally putting it out there when in fact it may be actually 6 months from now before it hits live??
or is this coming "this summer" during one of the weird expansion names..
eve online : structure-kana or something??
when?
when??
when???????? |
Manssell
OmiHyperMultiNationalDrunksConglomerate Together We Solo
244
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:22:43 -
[158] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Like I said, it depends a lot on the timers and I'm assuming if you're solo you are in high sec, so in part wardec mechanics too. Fortunately the asset safety means although you lose your structure, you won't lose everything inside it.
If you cannot defend your structure though, you won't be able to keep it, but we want to give you every reasonable chance to defend it including the more casual players.
What! I know dozens and dozens of solo players personally, all in low or null sec.
One of the great promises of these new structures was that they be a great new tool for those brave enough to eke out a living in low and null sec solo, not condemn them to live in high sec to use them. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp Vae. Victis.
6209
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:23:16 -
[159] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:Quote:Structures won't be able to shoot without someone manning the guns. As CCP Nullarbor mentioned, we have options under our sleeves to mitigate the risk from this change. Like having a reduced vulnerability window in specific areas, and / or be able to have NPCs spawn. This is a bit of a slippery slope eh? I know you want individuals to feel that they can use the medium structures, but relying on NPC pirates to provide defense is... questionable on a number of levels. No offense intended. You would not rely in NPC defense at all, it would be a mild deterrent against a lone ship at best, the point is to show up for your timers and defend. As I mentioned the balance will be how frequently this happens so that it's not a chore, but still provides opportunities for an interesting engagement. I realize that is the ultimate goal, encouraging engagement.... and that at best a Citadel is supposed to only act as a force multiplier. When you are a solo player though, there isn't much force there to multiply. It gets a lot easier to defend a structure when you have a number of people in a corp or alliance able to do so... but for the primary user of the medium structure (that being the solo player) there is actually less reason for them to use this than in the current terrible POS system. I'm not trying to be overly critical, just trying to point out something that may have not been a focus during design. Why would a solo player that has a small POS now wish to give up the current system in favor of this system? If he cannot be available during the vulnerability timer one night this new structure is virtually defenseless compared to what he has now. I"m personally not affected by it, but once this truth settles in there will be a lot of "you hate solo players or even small groups" fallout that will be directed towards you... and accusation you are catering to large groups that will have the manpower to defend these STRUCTURES THAT CANNOT DEFEND THEMSELVES. I'm trying to offer extremely constructive criticism here, and warn you of potential (no, actually inevitable) fallout... so if I sounded like a jerk, please forgive. Was not the intention in the slightest. Like I said, it depends a lot on the timers and I'm assuming if you're solo you are in high sec, so in part wardec mechanics too. Fortunately the asset safety means although you lose your structure, you won't lose everything inside it. If you cannot defend your structure though, you won't be able to keep it, but we want to give you every reasonable chance to defend it including the more casual players. Appreciate the reply... although I must point out I am not a solo player in high sec. Yes, asset safety mitigates the risk to a degree.... but that really wasn't my point.
There will be a LOT of solo and small corp players who will look at the small POS that they have now, which CAN defend itself against modest threat at all times... and they will compare it to the medium citadels proposed that cannot defend themselves at all unless someone is physically there.... and there will be a great deal of discontent.
The reality is that the assets inside are perhaps better protected than they currently are in some ways. Vulnerability windows and asset safety (depending on how it is implemented) are powerful passive protection for your belongings.
However, EVE players don't care much for passive safety nets like that. The want to build death stars with automated defenses that only get better when players are actually present, but aren't solely dependent on someone being there.
It's a perception thing more than anything else... and I'm concerned about the backlash undermining what is actually a very good concept.
Heck, even it it could only activate an EW defense on it's own that would go a long way... as that would ensure that a couple of guys in interceptors won't be able to keep trolling you into reinforced mode.
View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
|
Dradis Aulmais
RW Vindicator Connection Phoebe Freeport Republic
798
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:23:36 -
[160] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:would be nice to give us a timeframe these roll out you know,
I mean folks gotta prepare for the transition into fozzisov.. and now these new structures.. you're putting a stress-test on the little guy that may have dreams of building these things..
so when is this rolling? are you just intentionally putting it out there when in fact it may be actually 6 months from now before it hits live??
or is this coming "this summer" during one of the weird expansion names..
eve online : structure-kana or something??
when?
when??
when????????
Soon(TM)
Dradis Aulmais, Federal Attorney Number 54896
Free The Scope Three
|
|
corebloodbrothers
Volition Cult The Volition Cult
1220
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:24:01 -
[161] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:Quote:Structures won't be able to shoot without someone manning the guns. As CCP Nullarbor mentioned, we have options under our sleeves to mitigate the risk from this change. Like having a reduced vulnerability window in specific areas, and / or be able to have NPCs spawn. This is a bit of a slippery slope eh? I know you want individuals to feel that they can use the medium structures, but relying on NPC pirates to provide defense is... questionable on a number of levels. No offense intended. You would not rely in NPC defense at all, it would be a mild deterrent against a lone ship at best, the point is to show up for your timers and defend. As I mentioned the balance will be how frequently this happens so that it's not a chore, but still provides opportunities for an interesting engagement.
This one ccp nullabor mentions now is also being discussed by the csm. Its good ccp nullabor is open about the intention behind no pos or structure guns firing with no player active in control off them. Cause its a major change from current mechanisms. If u add the possibility too it from the structures then u can see a attack with hundreds of timers generated in 1 evening. Being it ton of structurs hit, systems hit with the link spawns to defend, and a buttload of reffed station services. Cause all these attacks have been removed from ehp grind, u can generate a insane amount of timers, which isnt possible under the current system.
Like nullabor said the trolling element is being watched and considered, however the mass storm of a attacker,blitzing a region, and the next hulkageddon being a posgeddon is one the csm is very much in discussion with CCP , and raises once more the debate, why be in null, why own sov. Only to lose it. Personally as a player and a csm i hope a fase 3 would follow the structures and the sov remoddeling. One where owning sov actually benenfits in a way thats both rewarding isk wise, but even more so fofilling deeper drivers. A model where buidable sov and upgrades are earned and can be applied by sovowners too give more sense of ownership would be for me personally, the way forward. |
Ijesz ToKolok
Harmless People
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:27:23 -
[162] - Quote
Quote:Structures having a solar system wide-effect or otherwise impacting some kind of area will be publicly visible in space and in the overview
Are Citadels such structures?
Quote:We are also thinking of having them visible and directly warpable from the on-board scanner to preserve Wormhole space gameplay.
I don't think wormhole space gameplay requires such towers to be warpable. WH folks, is it important? |
Dradis Aulmais
RW Vindicator Connection Phoebe Freeport Republic
798
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:28:00 -
[163] - Quote
Will each empire have its own version? or will this be a one type to begin with and lets see if it works thing
Dradis Aulmais, Federal Attorney Number 54896
Free The Scope Three
|
Takeo Yanumano
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:31:08 -
[164] - Quote
Ijesz ToKolok wrote:Quote:Structures having a solar system wide-effect or otherwise impacting some kind of area will be publicly visible in space and in the overview Are Citadels such structures? Quote:We are also thinking of having them visible and directly warpable from the on-board scanner to preserve Wormhole space gameplay. I don't think wormhole space gameplay requires such towers to be warpable. WH folks, is it important?
Depends. Since wh-ers depend on POS being moon-bound as an important aspect of defense and intel-gathering currently, it would follow that having some way to find the citadel is needed. However, having it directly warpable from the on-board scanner makes that intel basically free, which is contrary to wh principles of skillful utilization of d-scan. |
Scott Ormands
The Desolate Order Brave Collective
8
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:31:13 -
[165] - Quote
Ijesz ToKolok wrote:Quote:We are also thinking of having them visible and directly warpable from the on-board scanner to preserve Wormhole space gameplay. I don't think wormhole space gameplay requires such towers to be warpable. WH folks, is it important?
I'm not psyched about HK QEX and LZHKs or anyone really jumping into my system and INSTANTLY knowing where I am and being able to warp there but they definitely should be scout able and warpable with some effort commensurate to D-scanning them down to a certain accuracy. |
Obil Que
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
242
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:31:22 -
[166] - Quote
Ijesz ToKolok wrote:Quote:Structures having a solar system wide-effect or otherwise impacting some kind of area will be publicly visible in space and in the overview Are Citadels such structures? Quote:We are also thinking of having them visible and directly warpable from the on-board scanner to preserve Wormhole space gameplay. I don't think wormhole space gameplay requires such towers to be warpable. WH folks, is it important?
Warpable from the overview? Maybe not Discoverable and warpable to without launching probes? Yes, 100%
|
Alundil
Isogen 5
946
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:32:17 -
[167] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Scott Ormands wrote:few questions.
1. Larges; if we cant dock caps in them then how will we keep them in WH space especially since it seems that XL's are going to replace stations and hence wont really be allowed in HW's, plus they are supposed to be very expensive.
2. Vulnerability window; how will that work in WH space where we cant claim SOV to boost our indicies to reduce our vulberability timer.
3. Will the office, cloning, and market functions work in WH space.
4. How will these structures accommodate or replace the current practice in WH's to have Squad POS's with members of each POS having a specific corp hanger division assigned to them and their alts.
EX. 10 members are living in a WH, each with multiple alts, there are two towers with 5 members assigned to each with secret passwords to restrict access to those assigned. In tower 1 Scott is assigned division 5 and the other members are assigned the remainder. Scott has 4 alts and each of them have the same hanger division assigned allowing for easy consolidation of modules and items such as PI and minerals/Ore. Will this functionality be preserved?
5. How will ship storage be maintained, will it be similar to the current SMA mechanics or will it be more like stations with hangers divided restricted to each character. Maybe a combination of each allow you the option to set up shared hangers?
Thanks
- You would still have the invulnerability link, but yes, you are right, that's one of the arguments in favor to allow capitals in the Large Citadels.
- What we are thinking so far is to have high-sec and W-space have higher indices that null-sec by default. So they will be naturally less vulnerable there. We are also thinking about modules, rigs and gameplay options to affect the vulnerability window, but at a price.
- It depends on which kind of gameplay we want to have in W-space. So far, office and market functions look fine, cloning does not. Again, not set in stone at this point.
- Sounds so complicated. How about we give you guys personal hangers instead, just like in NPC stations / outposts? And then, if you don't want people to dock in a specific structure you can set restrictions to do so.
- See above
1. This would definitely need to be the case in order for wspace. Leaving capital ships floating, or almost as bad forcing pilots to log off in the capital ship is a non-starter given that this won't be the case is all other capital ship capable space (00 / low / and I'd imagine high with regards to freighters, jump freighters and Rorquals).
2. Would need more detail on how this might play out. But the lack of any automated defense system, even one as bad as the current, is not a good thing for wpsace. Player counts are very limited compared to others areas where structure attack/defense happens. This makes TZ coverage very challenging.
3. I'd be inclined to swap markets and cloning in your statement. I can't think of many reasons why clone swapping (not jumping) would be a negative in wspace. It opens up multiple new combat opportunities. As for the market, I honestly don't see anyone setting up a market in wspace for business outside of their corp/alliance and logistics in wspace really doesn't lend itself well to mass shipping of goods or even mass manufacture of anything other than T1 hulls and mods and T3 hulls and subs. T1 hulls aren't used very much in the scheme of things in wspace PvP and T3 hulls don't exploded frequently enough in all space to need a "market" in a wspace system to sell them form. Imo
4. Personal Hangars for items and ships wouldn't be bad at all. That said, one of the only benefits of currently wspace sieges, aside from the removal of an opponent, is the potential for looting the structures. I'm concerned that the plan as stated "...assets would be safe/saved via methods tbd..." (paraphrased) reduces the spoils of war to a very low probability.
5. Same as 4
I'm right behind you
|
Obil Que
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
245
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:36:00 -
[168] - Quote
corebloodbrothers wrote:This one ccp nullabor mentions now is also being discussed by the csm. Its good ccp nullabor is open about the intention behind no pos or structure guns firing with no player active in control off them. Cause its a major change from current mechanisms. If u add the possibility too it from the structures then u can see a attack with hundreds of timers generated in 1 evening. Being it ton of structurs hit, systems hit with the link spawns to defend, and a buttload of reffed station services. Cause all these attacks have been removed from ehp grind, u can generate a insane amount of timers, which isnt possible under the current system.
Like nullabor said the trolling element is being watched and considered, however the mass storm of a attacker,blitzing a region, and the next hulkageddon being a posgeddon is one the csm is very much in discussion with CCP , and raises once more the debate, why be in null, why own sov. Only to lose it. Personally as a player and a csm i hope a fase 3 would follow the structures and the sov remoddeling. One where owning sov actually benenfits in a way thats both rewarding isk wise, but even more so fofilling deeper drivers. A model where buidable sov and upgrades are earned and can be applied by sovowners too give more sense of ownership would be for me personally, the way forward.
While I have no doubt that this is being brought forward to the CSM, I will state again here that this effect is massively amplified when your entire corporation or alliance assets are wrapped up in that single structure as is the case in wormhole space for many small to mid-sized corporations. Asset safety mechanisms are all fine and good in k-space but these w-space systems are not systems I can return to at my leisure after being removed from them. A journal entry telling me my stuff is floating in J123456 does me zero good after I have been permanently removed. This is no different than the risk I take today in my POS except that the level of attacking force needed to remove my POS is exponentially more than the level of force needed under Entosis mechanisms especially since the new structures refuse to defend themselves.
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
573
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:36:10 -
[169] - Quote
Takeo Yanumano wrote:Ijesz ToKolok wrote:Quote:Structures having a solar system wide-effect or otherwise impacting some kind of area will be publicly visible in space and in the overview Are Citadels such structures? Quote:We are also thinking of having them visible and directly warpable from the on-board scanner to preserve Wormhole space gameplay. I don't think wormhole space gameplay requires such towers to be warpable. WH folks, is it important? Depends. Since wh-ers depend on POS being moon-bound as an important aspect of defense and intel-gathering currently, it would follow that having some way to find the citadel is needed. However, having it directly warpable from the on-board scanner makes that intel basically free, which is contrary to wh principles of skillful utilization of d-scan.
You won't know the configuration of the station once you do warp in there.
TL;DR Station scanning equipment? (a+ç -á-¦ -ƒ+ä-£ -í-¦)a+ç
With a cycle time longer than the target lock + scramble time to your internet spaceship. (a+ç -á-¦ -ƒ+ä-£ -í-¦)a+ç
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
445
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:37:23 -
[170] - Quote
I assume in addition to sizes, there will be Racial versions right? And if so, will there be Faction versions? Like a Blood one that has a bonus to Vamp, or Serpentis that has a bonus to IN YOUR FACE PAWNAGE?
Love the idea of Fighters and Drones for them. This just makes sense, given it's supposed to be a STATION. It would be nice if for these to have mods to increase Bandwidth, so they could have more drones/fighters out, rather than fitting other weapons.
I'd like to see AI Defense.. even if it doesn't use the DD's and other special weapons, give them some anchorable turrents and such that would act like a current POS to defend itself even when you're away.. But like a current POS, they can be Pop'd.
Now, as for dealing with if it goes boom. Here's my suggestion, Asset Insurance. Kinda like household insurance. Higher you pay, the more you get. Station goes boom, lets say 50% Drop 50% Destroyed. The 50% Destroyed is covered by basic insurance, you get the Items [NOT ISK] at your "Home" station, or nearest NPC Station. Note, not FREE Insurance, but a basic entry level. The 50% Dropped, based on insurance level chosen above basic, can be paid out. Won't be cheap, has ISK Cap's, not % cap's.
Anyway those are my few cents. |
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp Vae. Victis.
6212
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:38:04 -
[171] - Quote
corebloodbrothers wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:Quote:Structures won't be able to shoot without someone manning the guns. As CCP Nullarbor mentioned, we have options under our sleeves to mitigate the risk from this change. Like having a reduced vulnerability window in specific areas, and / or be able to have NPCs spawn. This is a bit of a slippery slope eh? I know you want individuals to feel that they can use the medium structures, but relying on NPC pirates to provide defense is... questionable on a number of levels. No offense intended. You would not rely in NPC defense at all, it would be a mild deterrent against a lone ship at best, the point is to show up for your timers and defend. As I mentioned the balance will be how frequently this happens so that it's not a chore, but still provides opportunities for an interesting engagement. This one ccp nullabor mentions now is also being discussed by the csm. Its good ccp nullabor is open about the intention behind no pos or structure guns firing with no player active in control off them. Cause its a major change from current mechanisms. If u add the possibility too it from the structures then u can see a attack with hundreds of timers generated in 1 evening. Being it ton of structurs hit, systems hit with the link spawns to defend, and a buttload of reffed station services. Cause all these attacks have been removed from ehp grind, u can generate a insane amount of timers, which isnt possible under the current system. Like nullabor said the trolling element is being watched and considered, however the mass storm of a attacker,blitzing a region, and the next hulkageddon being a posgeddon is one the csm is very much in discussion with CCP , and raises once more the debate, why be in null, why own sov. Only to lose it. Personally as a player and a csm i hope a fase 3 would follow the structures and the sov remoddeling. One where owning sov actually benenfits in a way thats both rewarding isk wise, but even more so fofilling deeper drivers. A model where buidable sov and upgrades are earned and can be applied by sovowners too give more sense of ownership would be for me personally, the way forward. Interesting point, but if timers can't be started because guns shoot the entosis vessel (or at least breaks their lock with EW) then I don't see an issue unless it is indeed a wide scale assault with significant forces devoted to each and every structure.
Actually, the way forward in Null has always been rather simple, and this system is veering somewhat drunkenly in that direction (which is a huge step forward by the way).
The larger a Sov holding entity is, the more profitable his space becomes AND the more difficult it is to successfully defend.
Advantage to the defender should work for small entities, not large ones. Financial gain is the reward for the big boys if they are smart enough to hang onto it for a while. Wealth is fleeting.
The new Sov system looks likely to get us a lot closer to that state, which is a very good and healthy thing for the game.
View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
|
Takeo Yanumano
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:40:34 -
[172] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Takeo Yanumano wrote:Ijesz ToKolok wrote:Quote:Structures having a solar system wide-effect or otherwise impacting some kind of area will be publicly visible in space and in the overview Are Citadels such structures? Quote:We are also thinking of having them visible and directly warpable from the on-board scanner to preserve Wormhole space gameplay. I don't think wormhole space gameplay requires such towers to be warpable. WH folks, is it important? Depends. Since wh-ers depend on POS being moon-bound as an important aspect of defense and intel-gathering currently, it would follow that having some way to find the citadel is needed. However, having it directly warpable from the on-board scanner makes that intel basically free, which is contrary to wh principles of skillful utilization of d-scan. You won't know the configuration of the station once you do warp in there. TL;DR Station scanning equipment? (a+ç -á-¦ -ƒ+ä-£ -í-¦)a+ç With a cycle time longer than the target lock + scramble time to your internet spaceship. (a+ç -á-¦ -ƒ+ä-£ -í-¦)a+ç
They've already said that cargo scanners and ship scanners would work on citadels, iirc. |
Dalic Thunderer
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:41:01 -
[173] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:Obil Que wrote:w-space isn't a null-sec style occupation of dozens of connected systems. It is an entire corporation putting all their assets on the line in a single space and often structure. To make it trivial to destroy said structure or to occupy or otherwise invade that space isn't balance. It would, however, ensure that w-space occupation goes the way of the dodo.
w-space was never meant to be occupied. You should not be living there. Eve Gold tagging - so useful http://i.imgur.com/57Z2n15.png |
Tyr Dolorem
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
50
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:41:05 -
[174] - Quote
what about lowsec.... |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
6072
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:46:26 -
[175] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote: When people think "Strong defense fortification" they don't tend to think of an appointment calendar... they think about automated defensive batteries.
I'm sorry, but the appointment calendar is full this week, try your attack next week.
...if you can find a parking spot.
:)
I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all.
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
575
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:46:39 -
[176] - Quote
Takeo Yanumano wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:You won't know the configuration of the station once you do warp in there. TL;DR Station scanning equipment? (a+ç -á-¦ -ƒ+ä-£ -í-¦)a+ç With a cycle time longer than the target lock + scramble time to your internet spaceship. (a+ç -á-¦ -ƒ+ä-£ -í-¦)a+ç They've already said that cargo scanners and ship scanners would work on citadels, iirc.
The Rifters. The Reapers. THE INVASION.
Our time has come. For 8 years, we prepared. We grew stronger. While you rested in your cradle of power, believing your people were safe... and protected. You were trusted to lead the new EraGÇöbut you were deceived, as our powers of the Rifter have blinded you. You assumed no force could challenge you... and now... finally... We have returned.
You were deceived. And now, your Citadels shall fall.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Ariete
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
44
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:47:57 -
[177] - Quote
If a person docks in a station, they will be able to see out but would you be able to see them inside from the outside?
So CSM IX ????
|
Takeo Yanumano
State War Academy Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:53:31 -
[178] - Quote
Ariete wrote:If a person docks in a station, they will be able to see out but would you be able to see them inside from the outside?
Only if they leave the lights on. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3229
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:54:09 -
[179] - Quote
Papa Django wrote:[quote=Ranger 1]Is there a number of structures per solar system limitation like a slot fiting system planned ?
Oh wow. This gives me a ridiculously awesome (or possibly just ridiculous) idea.
Fitting slots for celestial bodies. Using the characteristics of a planet or moon to affect the number or characteristics of structures placed around it. Terraforming projects to fundamentally alter the features of a celestial body and the resources available from it.
(this is probably way outside the scope of this particular blog but is way too big to not mention, I may write something up and post it in F&ID later)
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.
|
Dentia Caecus
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 18:57:19 -
[180] - Quote
If I understand the blog correctly, the new structure guns will use existing gunnery and / or missile support skills.
1. Does this mean that a player, who, for whatever reason, is a gunnery pilot only will be a poor or ineffective structure missile user and vice versa for pure missile pilots for structure guns?
2. Does this also hold true for the drones/fighters/fighter bombers proposed later in the blog? Does a player have to be able to use drones/fighters/fighter bombers on a ship to use them from a structure or will the structure drone skills present a new set of skills to train?
Regarding capital docking, please consider the case of the rorqual and orca. Both are capital ships. Many small and medium alliances depend on these vessels for economic survival and need to be able to dock them to both keep them safe-ish and use their toons for other purposes. Players who use these vessels frequently should not find these ships relegated to space-coffin status.
Please allow these classes of ship to be docked in the large citadel structure. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |