Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hir Miriel
Elves In Space
185
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 23:07:04 -
[1] - Quote
I'm in the throes of planning for a small POS with researching and reprocessing abilities.
Or I was until I read the dev blog http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/shake-my-citadel/
Which changes things somewhat.
Currently I need to get higher standing with Amarr Empire to place a control tower in Amarr high sec.
I also need to balance the books to make sure I can pay for supplies like the 5,000,000 ISK per day running costs.
But with the Citadel dev blog things look like they change a fair bit.
For example one thing is that fuel might only be used when an Array is used. Which I assume to mean that costs may be lower than they are now. Which is understandable if CCP wants to encourage everyone to become owners of space bait, oh sorry, meant space habitats.
It also means if I put up a control tower now, that I need to go through the whole erection process again later this year, with different structures and rules.
And erections can be such painful affairs.
Which also leads me to think about what happens to my old control tower if I put one up now?
Will it become useless? Will CCP delete them at a certain time?
Does anyone have any insights?
~
~~
Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox.
~~
~
|
Marsha Mallow
2113
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 23:34:24 -
[2] - Quote
Hir Miriel wrote:And erections can be such painful affairs.
Which also leads me to think about what happens to my old control tower if I put one up now?
Will it become useless? Will CCP delete them at a certain time?
Does anyone have any insights? If it's only a small one I'm sure no one will even notice it.
The initial structure devblog answers part of your question. The proposed maintenance costs for the new structures aren't in the blog released today. Bear in mind at FF they stated that these will take a while to roll out and the earliest structures will probably be the only ones released this year. These are very early phase discussions so I'd just keep an eye on blogs/announcements for the time being, participate with questions and feedback, but otherwise carry on with whatever you were planning.
Solecist Project wrote: See, the issue isn't the rubbing
ISD Ezwal wrote: Nope, no one will get banned for 'rubbing'
Benny Ohu wrote: fire up the argument calibrators set phasers to outraged overheat keyboards reinforce the thread
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
37272
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 23:37:37 -
[3] - Quote
Hir Miriel wrote:IFor example one thing is that fuel might only be used when an Array is used. Which I assume to mean that costs may be lower than they are now. Which is understandable if CCP wants to encourage everyone to become owners of space bait, oh sorry, meant space habitats.
It also means if I put up a control tower now, that I need to go through the whole erection process again later this year, with different structures and rules.
And erections can be such painful affairs.
Which also leads me to think about what happens to my old control tower if I put one up now?
Will it become useless? Will CCP delete them at a certain time?
Does anyone have any insights? Hope I answer these ok:
1. Yep, seems new structures might not use fuel just to exist, but only when doing somehing (see Service Slots under Structure Fitting here about 1/3rd the way down the page: http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/back-into-the-structure/ )
2. Yes most likely and with different skill requirements possibly as well. The skill requirement bit is mentioned in the latest devblog.
3. We don't know exactly, but CCP will plan a transition period (see Transition Plan at the bottom of the page linked above)
4. Yep, most likely. See previous answer
5. Don't know if I have any insights at all. Hope those answers provide something based on available information though.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Hippinse
University of Caille Gallente Federation
68
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 23:54:44 -
[4] - Quote
Hir Miriel wrote:And erections can be such painful affairs.
Especially if it lasts for more than four hours.
|
Ripblade Falconpunch
Centurion Logistics
123
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 00:14:18 -
[5] - Quote
Hippinse wrote:Hir Miriel wrote:And erections can be such painful affairs. Especially if it lasts for more than four hours.
I don't care what they say, that's not a medical emergency - that's a MIRACLE! |
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
21306
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 00:22:07 -
[6] - Quote
So we're just done with phrasing, right, that's not a thing anymore?
Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
|
kyoukoku
The Scope Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 00:25:05 -
[7] - Quote
Hippinse wrote:Hir Miriel wrote:And erections can be such painful affairs. Especially if it lasts for more than four hours.
I'm sorry....
Hey... |
Hir Miriel
Elves In Space
185
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 01:41:01 -
[8] - Quote
Okay, wait and see is it.
~
~~
Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox.
~~
~
|
DaReaper
Net 7
2039
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 01:44:46 -
[9] - Quote
ib4l for redundancy btw
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
|
Jasmine Cheryu
Perkone Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 03:33:42 -
[10] - Quote
Hir Miriel wrote: Currently I need to get higher standing with Amarr Empire to place a control tower in Amarr high sec.
Just if you're not aware.. you can place any control tower, anywhere in highsec now, without standings. The only limitation (that I'm currently aware of) is that your corp needs to be more than 7 days old
|
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2357
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 03:55:03 -
[11] - Quote
I anticipate these things being a monumental pain in the ass in highsec. Particularly if a single structure intended for use by one player is going to be able to repel attacks by capital ships. |
Hir Miriel
Elves In Space
187
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 04:10:58 -
[12] - Quote
Jasmine Cheryu wrote:Hir Miriel wrote: Currently I need to get higher standing with Amarr Empire to place a control tower in Amarr high sec.
Just if you're not aware.. you can place any control tower, anywhere in highsec now, without standings. The only limitation (that I'm currently aware of) is that your corp needs to be more than 7 days old
Thank you!
Been reading the wrong notes, and stuck in a time warp it seems.
~
~~
Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox.
~~
~
|
Hir Miriel
Elves In Space
187
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 04:17:41 -
[13] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:I anticipate these things being a monumental pain in the ass in highsec. Particularly if a single structure intended for use by one player is going to be able to repel attacks by capital ships.
I'm not too concerned about being efficient. From that perspective they don't seem worth it.
As to them being a pain to kill, well they should be, otherwise nobody will use them and it will all be a waste of time.
Time that CCP could have used better elsewhere.
Personally I don't think that there is a better way of creating content than by tying it into some sense of belonging.
That the player actually owns a piece of Eden and belongs there.
Maybe especially so since in the real world fewer and fewer will ever live the dream of owning property. Real estate, to coin a phrase.
I'm wondering about the storyline for the introduction of Citadels.
Especially any possible links to Drifters (don't try to kill them by the way).
Drifters are homeless too, perhaps they become mercenary guards for Citadels in certain cases and we see a lessening of the power of Concord.
All good fun to think about.
~
~~
Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox.
~~
~
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2357
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 05:00:54 -
[14] - Quote
There's a difference between something being survivable enough to be practical and it being excessively difficult to destroy them.
POSes being able to equip modules intended to protect them against fleets of capital ships in space where capital ships are inherently cannot be used for offense is fundamentally unbalanced. Particularly considering the low time and isk investment required to set up tower and the near zero risk of losing its contents in highsec versus the fairly expensive fleet, 50+ man hours, severe risk and total lack of reward (due to the ability to remove or trash all POS contents at any time) when attacking it.
The current mechanics make organic conflicts over active POS structures really, really uncommon and when they do exist they're typically carried out by mercenaries which in turn results in carebear whine about faction battleship+logistics fleets and them being horribly outnumbered.
Structure mechanics should give people prizes they want to take and assets worth defending against their rivals and competitors who have similar resources to them. They should not be unassailable fortresses capable of repelling almost anything that can hold billions upon billions of assets with near zero risk of anyone ever being able to harm them.
Being the aggressor in a highsec conflict being too hard is a real problem, it allows merc alliances like mine to monopolize PVP in highsec because we are good at it and that's super unhealthy.
Future highsec structures should be closer to POCOs than towers, people can actually fight over those. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
37277
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 05:17:56 -
[15] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:I anticipate these things being a monumental pain in the ass in highsec. Particularly if a single structure intended for use by one player is going to be able to repel attacks by capital ships. That and with them being anchorable anywhere in space and not only at moons, there'll be **** stars at all major instaundock locations ready to scram and pop unlucky pilots.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Lew Dicrous
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 05:55:21 -
[16] - Quote
Meh, they will undoubtedly stick in some entosis-link loophole to turn these into huge "come troll me" signs.
It burns when I PVP
|
Solecist Project
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
24236
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 06:58:41 -
[17] - Quote
*pus on Beavis&Butthead*
He said Erection. hehe hehehe. hehehe.
hehehe.
Errrrrrrrection. hehehehehe.
hehehehe.
hehe.
Erections definitely can be a PITA. Sheesh, so subtle sense of humour, OP has. ^_^
S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD
Abolish Rookiecorps.
|
Hir Miriel
Elves In Space
187
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 07:53:43 -
[18] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:There's a difference between something being survivable enough to be practical and it being excessively difficult to destroy them.
POSes being able to equip modules intended to protect them against fleets of capital ships in space where capital ships are inherently cannot be used for offense is fundamentally unbalanced. Particularly considering the low time and isk investment required to set up tower and the near zero risk of losing its contents in highsec versus the fairly expensive fleet, 50+ man hours, severe risk and total lack of reward (due to the ability to remove or trash all POS contents at any time) when attacking it.
The current mechanics make organic conflicts over active POS structures really, really uncommon and when they do exist they're typically carried out by mercenaries which in turn results in carebear whine about faction battleship+logistics fleets and them being horribly outnumbered.
Structure mechanics should give people prizes they want to take and assets worth defending against their rivals and competitors who have similar resources to them. They should not be unassailable fortresses capable of repelling almost anything that can hold billions upon billions of assets with near zero risk of anyone ever being able to harm them.
Being the aggressor in a highsec conflict being too hard is a real problem, it allows merc alliances like mine to monopolize PVP in highsec because we are good at it and that's super unhealthy.
Future highsec structures should be closer to POCOs than towers, people can actually fight over those.
It is very important to have content that helps bind people to being a part of this world.
I'd say making everyone have a house in space is a great idea, and sure make it safe, no biggie, it helps get new players in and attached, CCP can always add much more challenging siege PvP so that expert PvPers like yourself can enjoy content.
Having content such as safeish Citadels is an idea along the lines of not letting players lose skillpoints.
CCP changed that, and I think that was a good idea, skill gains are very strongly attached to the character, best to keep them forever.
I'd say make small Citadels safe in high sec, and make the gloriously huge content out in the wilds of space.
Variety for everyone, and a path players can tread as they learn more of EVE.
~
~~
Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox.
~~
~
|
Solecist Project
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
24243
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 08:06:40 -
[19] - Quote
You cqn expect that citadels in highsec will not be safe at all.
Anything else would just be silly.
If you can't defend it, you can't have it.
The newplayerargument does not apply.
Growing people into a safe world will render most incapable of dealing with how the world actually is.
You can not own stuff you can not defend !
S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD
Abolish Rookiecorps.
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2363
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 11:06:10 -
[20] - Quote
There's no value at all in something that doesn't actually require effort to have.
If "new players" can just crap out multi-million EHP death stars all over space without there being any reasonable possibility of anyone destroying them then there's no achievement in having one to begin with. Particularly if the thing is able to defend itself without assistance against a 20 man battleship fleet.
One of thing things high security space is in dire need of is points of conflict, which is something new structures can be. It is not in need of more perfectly safe, invulnerable assets. POCOs are a great example of an actually good mechanic, people continuously fight over the rights for them, they're cheap as hell but can't defend themselves, as a result conflicts of various scale happen involving them depending on where they are.
I don't care about me personally having things to shoot at, I've never had problems finding reasons to shoot things. What I'm tired of is nobody but us dedicated PVP people ever having the desire or ability to shoot at things. I want to see carebears reinforcing eachothers POS structures like they occasionally do POCOs. |
|
Solecist Project
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
24262
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 11:17:45 -
[21] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:There's no value at all in something that doesn't actually require effort to have.
If "new players" can just crap out multi-million EHP death stars all over space without there being any reasonable possibility of anyone destroying them then there's no achievement in having one to begin with. Particularly if the thing is able to defend itself without assistance against a 20 man battleship fleet.
One of thing things high security space is in dire need of is points of conflict, which is something new structures can be. It is not in need of more perfectly safe, invulnerable assets. POCOs are a great example of an actually good mechanic, people continuously fight over the rights for them, they're cheap as hell but can't defend themselves, as a result conflicts of various scale happen involving them depending on where they are.
I don't care about me personally having things to shoot at, I've never had problems finding reasons to shoot things. What I'm tired of is nobody but us dedicated PVP people ever having the desire or ability to shoot at things. I want to see carebears reinforcing eachothers POS structures like they occasionally do POCOs. I predict a full revamp of wardecs ... ... or complete removal for something much better.
Good times ahead !
S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD
Abolish Rookiecorps.
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2364
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 11:44:06 -
[22] - Quote
Wars weren't presented as being anywhere on CCPs time line at all and given that CCP staff are literally prohibited from doing anything "mean" to people in the game and take all of their cues from people who want wars to be ineffective and/or nonexistent it's entirely unlikely that a revamp will happen at all and if it does happen it will essentially amount to nerfs that furthersolidify the current meta.
The current meta bring the total dominance of dedicated PVP groups over all highsec PVP and a trend on larger and larger PVP groups with hundreds of wars at any one time.
What's really great is the upcoming merger of marmite and forsaken. Carebears will finally get to see the monster they've created, I'm sure they'll love being continuously at war with a 500 man alliance. |
Solecist Project
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
24264
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 11:53:01 -
[23] - Quote
Your attitude towards the matter only makes it worse. You people yourself only make it worse, tbh.
Try being reasonable at some point.
The new structures leave them no other way than to revamp wardecs. The drifters also show that it will be happening, because there's a huge change coming.
Of course I can be wrong, but so far everything points into that direction.
The best explanation I can give you about the lack of talks ... ... is that it's still to come.
In any way is your approach to this situation not helpfull at all. The attitude even more so.
So then we have a 500man alliance. You only dig your own graves by only caring about your side, FORCING ccp to do something.
It has been like this with ganking as well. It's not the complaints on the forums, it's people constantly pushing it tk a level that leaves CCP no choice and then exactly these people cry the most.
Let's hope the leaders of this alliance have a bit more thoughtfullness.
S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD
Abolish Rookiecorps.
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2365
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 12:03:58 -
[24] - Quote
My side is the one that has benefitted the most from the inferno war changes. The various nerfs to the aggressor side eliminated all competition from non-dedicated groups, trivialized finding targets and made contracts super easy.
Which is bad. |
Solecist Project
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
24271
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 12:30:59 -
[25] - Quote
Sorry but that post makes not much sense. It sounds contradictionary.
Please elaborate. Why did you benefit and what competition would you expect to see anyway? I have a followup question to this... but one after the other.
S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD
Abolish Rookiecorps.
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
2366
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 12:40:07 -
[26] - Quote
Me personally benefitting from something does not mean the net effect that thing has on the game is good.
For example the same changes that solidified the existent merc groups also made it totally impossible for small groups of low SP players to get into highsec PVP without joining an established group. Even though the current conditions work really well for my alliance, if those conditions had existed 4.5 years ago when I made this character forming my corp would have been impossible both practically and financially.
Which is bad. |
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
1013
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 12:45:36 -
[27] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:There's no value at all in something that doesn't actually require effort to have.
If "new players" can just crap out multi-million EHP death stars all over space without there being any reasonable possibility of anyone destroying them then there's no achievement in having one to begin with. Particularly if the thing is able to defend itself without assistance against a 20 man battleship fleet.
One of thing things high security space is in dire need of is points of conflict, which is something new structures can be. It is not in need of more perfectly safe, invulnerable assets. POCOs are a great example of an actually good mechanic, people continuously fight over the rights for them, they're cheap as hell but can't defend themselves, as a result conflicts of various scale happen involving them depending on where they are.
I don't care about me personally having things to shoot at, I've never had problems finding reasons to shoot things. What I'm tired of is nobody but us dedicated PVP people ever having the desire or ability to shoot at things. I want to see carebears reinforcing eachothers POS structures like they occasionally do POCOs. They will destroyable by entosis modules - no EHP involved. If anything, this makes it easier to destroy a structure as if unopposed, you can do it in a T1 frigate (or perhaps a little more to avoid the automated defenses). That's way better the hours of boredom for a dozen players required to take down a large POS in highsec now even if the other side is logged off.
The only question is whether this can be done without a wardec, or if a war is declared, does the defending corporation have the option to take down the space assets and decline the fight. Those answers will determine whether these structures will actually drive conflict or just be another toy for players in highsec.
|
Solecist Project
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
24289
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 13:10:11 -
[28] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:... made it totally impossible for small groups of low SP players to get into highsec PVP without joining an established group. Great, verbose, no-nonsense post.
The question I was mentioning ... ... as response to the line above ... ... and yeah I predicted your post a bit:
Have you tried it for yourself ? If so, how ? If not, would you listen ?
Surprise me with another no-nonsense, verbose response. :D
S.O.L. GANKING4GOOD
Abolish Rookiecorps.
|
Hir Miriel
Elves In Space
187
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 16:02:15 -
[29] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:Vimsy Vortis wrote:There's no value at all in something that doesn't actually require effort to have.
If "new players" can just crap out multi-million EHP death stars all over space without there being any reasonable possibility of anyone destroying them then there's no achievement in having one to begin with. Particularly if the thing is able to defend itself without assistance against a 20 man battleship fleet.
One of thing things high security space is in dire need of is points of conflict, which is something new structures can be. It is not in need of more perfectly safe, invulnerable assets. POCOs are a great example of an actually good mechanic, people continuously fight over the rights for them, they're cheap as hell but can't defend themselves, as a result conflicts of various scale happen involving them depending on where they are.
I don't care about me personally having things to shoot at, I've never had problems finding reasons to shoot things. What I'm tired of is nobody but us dedicated PVP people ever having the desire or ability to shoot at things. I want to see carebears reinforcing eachothers POS structures like they occasionally do POCOs. They will destroyable by entosis modules - no EHP involved. If anything, this makes it easier to destroy a structure as if unopposed, you can do it in a T1 frigate (or perhaps a little more to avoid the automated defenses). That's way better the hours of boredom for a dozen players required to take down a large POS in highsec now even if the other side is logged off. The only question is whether this can be done without a wardec, or if a war is declared, does the defending corporation have the option to take down the space assets and decline the fight. Those answers will determine whether these structures will actually drive conflict or just be another toy for players in highsec.
From what I read of (the subject to change) dev post was that one account trolling attacks of citadels wouldn't be possible, so it it will require multi boxing at least.
There was also some mention of wanting players to have a spot they feel safe in.
If citadels don't provide that, then why would players change their behaviour when they can just stay safe in NPC buildings?
~
~~
Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox.
~~
~
|
Hir Miriel
Elves In Space
187
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 16:13:40 -
[30] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:There's no value at all in something that doesn't actually require effort to have.
If "new players" can just crap out multi-million EHP death stars all over space without there being any reasonable possibility of anyone destroying them then there's no achievement in having one to begin with. Particularly if the thing is able to defend itself without assistance against a 20 man battleship fleet.
One of thing things high security space is in dire need of is points of conflict, which is something new structures can be. It is not in need of more perfectly safe, invulnerable assets. POCOs are a great example of an actually good mechanic, people continuously fight over the rights for them, they're cheap as hell but can't defend themselves, as a result conflicts of various scale happen involving them depending on where they are.
I don't care about me personally having things to shoot at, I've never had problems finding reasons to shoot things. What I'm tired of is nobody but us dedicated PVP people ever having the desire or ability to shoot at things. I want to see carebears reinforcing eachothers POS structures like they occasionally do POCOs.
What you say about losing things you cannot defend is true of everything.
It includes CCP losing players if they cannot defend EVE from attrition to other games.
And I know EVE is meant to have a learning cliff, but if you want new players you need to let them learn.
That's one of the purposes of high security zones. People can wade into the shallow waters of EVE first, before heading into the darker waters where some of us live.
But high security isn't just about new players, it's about playstyles.
Not everyone is like me, nor are they like you.
Having a variety of arenas lets players choose what they want to do.
Sandboxes should have a variety of toys in them.
Me, I don't care about PvP, maybe once I did in RTS type games, but nowadays I'm fine with being boring.
EVE lets me do that quite happily, doesn't force me to confront other players all up and flossing in my face.
If high security citadels are easy to defend, I'll get one, if they aren't, I won't.
I'd prefer them to be easily defensible, because I like having more content, more things to do. Last thing I want to do is stress about a game I pay money for, and have to log in at odd hours to make sure I haven't lost my stuff.
That's just yuk.
And hey it would be nice to have some SKINS for Citadels and other cosmetic whatnots, especially if we can make them.
~
~~
Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox.
~~
~
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |