Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 12 post(s) |
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
226
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 19:16:57 -
[91] - Quote
Quote: For low and null-security structures, that will be the closest low-security NPC station. Please note the exact destination will be picked automatically to minimize potential for abuse.
why not NPC 0.0 stations/regions? npc 0.0 wil make more sense, since tehy are closer most of the time, also this will stop any form of abuse of the system for "free" delivery of your stuff to empire |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
1417
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 19:16:57 -
[92] - Quote
Opner Dresden wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:Vimsy Vortis wrote:So not only do the contents of a citadel get magically teleported to a station, but at any point during the whole attack process the owner can just unanchor the thing, pick it up and leave?. No they cannot unanchor it while reinforced, they would have to successfully defend it first. However they can remove their personal assets if they wish. Does that mean they can be unanchored and moved while not reinforced? The ROI on these looks horrible if it's a one time deployable that can also be destroyed.
Yes you can unanchor them provided they are not under attack. They will immediately enter a vulnerable state and at the end will eject the personal assets to safety, kickout the docked pilots into space and the unanchor to be scooped.
CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
|
|
naed21
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
25
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 19:19:45 -
[93] - Quote
If I'm reading this correctly, assets are never moved out of a WH when the structure is destroyed. This means you can seed ships in whs and then when you anchor a new structure suddenly have a ton of capital ships out of no where.
It's certainly possible for a group to setup a large structure in every c6 wh, fill them with dreads and carriers, and then blow them up so that in the future they can attack the new residents with this large capital force. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
3599
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 19:25:23 -
[94] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Opner Dresden wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:Vimsy Vortis wrote:So not only do the contents of a citadel get magically teleported to a station, but at any point during the whole attack process the owner can just unanchor the thing, pick it up and leave?. No they cannot unanchor it while reinforced, they would have to successfully defend it first. However they can remove their personal assets if they wish. Does that mean they can be unanchored and moved while not reinforced? The ROI on these looks horrible if it's a one time deployable that can also be destroyed. Yes you can unanchor them provided they are not under attack. They will immediately enter a vulnerable state and at the end will eject the personal assets to safety, kickout the docked pilots into space and the unanchor to be scooped. And, I assume, the rigs are destroyed?
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
Shodan Of Citadel
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 19:26:13 -
[95] - Quote
Create "Research Archive" that players can purchase as a way to secure their BPO's in destructible station from being destroyed when the structure explodes. 10% of BPO value allows alliance, corp, individual to have their BPO rights reinstated at a station of their choosing -high/low indestructible. Could also be a way for alliance to build anywhere instead of using copies.
Maybe using a data or relic analyzer on pieces of the station wreck could have a chance of getting some bpc's from the now dead "research archive".
Yes, lots of wreck pieces... talking thousands -that MTU's can't suck in. Pretty stupid to see a titan wreck get pulled near to an MTU -even for a few seconds.
All other assets -drop as loot, this is eve. |
Zedah Zoid
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
31
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 19:27:13 -
[96] - Quote
naed21 wrote:If I'm reading this correctly, assets are never moved out of a WH when the structure is destroyed. This means you can seed ships in whs and then when you anchor a new structure suddenly have a ton of capital ships out of no where.
It's certainly possible for a group to setup a large structure in every c6 wh, fill them with dreads and carriers, and then blow them up so that in the future they can attack the new residents with this large capital force.
Exactly. This is why the WH mechanics of this need to be re-thought completely. I don't particularly like the K-space mechanics either but I have less experience there so I hesitate to start complaining about it. I'm not really sure why any asset outside of high-sec should be considered safe. But for WH space in particular this is an obvious flaw. We've lived this long with "if you bring it to the WH, it's dead already" mindset. Don't take that away. |
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
1349
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 19:29:13 -
[97] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Opner Dresden wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:Vimsy Vortis wrote:So not only do the contents of a citadel get magically teleported to a station, but at any point during the whole attack process the owner can just unanchor the thing, pick it up and leave?. No they cannot unanchor it while reinforced, they would have to successfully defend it first. However they can remove their personal assets if they wish. Does that mean they can be unanchored and moved while not reinforced? The ROI on these looks horrible if it's a one time deployable that can also be destroyed. Yes you can unanchor them provided they are not under attack. They will immediately enter a vulnerable state and at the end will eject the personal assets to safety, kickout the docked pilots into space and the unanchor to be scooped. But if I have scouted out the vulnerability windows, I will be able to time my wardec to at least catch one vulnerability window? Or will the target be able to change the window and scoop the structure all within the 24h wind-up period to a war? |
Epigene
Cordata Enterprises
52
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 19:34:49 -
[98] - Quote
Cynica Deetric wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:Kel hound wrote:So what I'm getting from this is; never log off docked in a citadel when you have expensive implants, use a cloaky scanning interceptor instead. Got it. This is a really good point and one we discussed. In general we don't like the idea of design that have annoying workarounds like this. So if the structure explodes you would rather log back in space in your pod? EDIT: Far away from the original location so you don't get camped Could you please think about those of us in WH space. I would still have to log off outside of the citadel in my scan boat. On a side note please do not limit asset recovery to only being delivered to a citadel that is built in the same hole. Thera, low sec, and Highsec are all options to quote a previous post "Once again, w-space seems to be a bit of an afterthought."
As far as I understand, us wormholers would experience virtually no change from the POS system. The probability of someone building a new structure in the hole they just lost is pretty slim (but not impossible and certainly a driver for long grudges). But a C2 corporation that gets evicted from their hole is likely to just write off the assets and move on. Pretty much what we do today.
I don't mind, actually, Wormholes are supposed to be the least safe place in EVE. This works for me.
www.splatus.wordpress.com-á
|
Starcruiser Stasarik
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 19:36:37 -
[99] - Quote
Question about the Citadels, related to their different structure attachments.
If a person has BP's in one structure (say, the corp office structure), will those BP's be available for use in other structures (research, factory, etc)? Or will we need to move them around as we do different things with them?
If we have to move them around, will that functionality be available while docked in the Citadel, or will we need to be undocked. If Undocked, are we able to do so while linked with the invuln link, or will we have to break that link?
The same would go for minerals and materials, I suppose, for manufacturing. Is having them in a centralized location possible, or will we need to move them about the Citadel's structures as we need them in different locations?
Can things be delivered from one structure to another (say, for instance, BPC's being made can be delivered to the factory structure, instead of having to move them manually)?
This all may be better-asked on a thread relating to the individual structures themselves, but I don't really see anything like that currently. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
3599
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 19:49:15 -
[100] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:Opner Dresden wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:Vimsy Vortis wrote:So not only do the contents of a citadel get magically teleported to a station, but at any point during the whole attack process the owner can just unanchor the thing, pick it up and leave?. No they cannot unanchor it while reinforced, they would have to successfully defend it first. However they can remove their personal assets if they wish. Does that mean they can be unanchored and moved while not reinforced? The ROI on these looks horrible if it's a one time deployable that can also be destroyed. Yes you can unanchor them provided they are not under attack. They will immediately enter a vulnerable state and at the end will eject the personal assets to safety, kickout the docked pilots into space and the unanchor to be scooped. But if I have scouted out the vulnerability windows, I will be able to time my wardec to at least catch one vulnerability window? Or will the target be able to change the window and scoop the structure all within the 24h wind-up period to a war? I think they can scoop while the structure in in normal operation at any time. So they can always scoop before the war starts. But if its rigged, they lose the rigs.
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
|
Somatic Neuron
Masterwork Productions Inc
77
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 19:54:16 -
[101] - Quote
Serious Question: What's 10% of a T2 Original Blueprint? |
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
3955
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 20:12:53 -
[102] - Quote
Houm...
Lorewise: since the end of the usability of Large POS control towers, Pend Insurance starts buying them, fits them with titan engines and CONCORD grade tank and calls the resulting patch-ship the "Vulture", a NPC ultra-freighter class with 1 billion m3 of capacity. They can't be bumped (seriously... they're 40 kilometers large), cruise at a ponderous speed of 15 m/s and warp at 0.1 AU/S after aligning for up to 1,800 seconds. They become a usual sight whenever a Citadel is facing Doom, and veterans speculate about the contents of the Citadel by counting how many Vultures gather to pick up the loot. Of course, salvage is not for free: a 10% salvage fee is due in order to recover your stuff.
As for the "capsuleer in citadel when it gets blown", it makes no sense that the capsuleer is podded. It is just a invitation to log off safely before loggin out, specially if you plan to leave the game for a while because of RL or whatever. What is the purpose of a dockable structure that punishes you for docking with it?
The only sensible answer would be our friends the Pend Vultures taking pods with them. For a modest fee, of course, paid in advance (say, 100,000 ISK?). The "save my ass" fee would be per individual and Citadel, so it wouldn't escalate by losing clones but would cost more the right to be rescued from a lot of Citadels than just from one.
Disclaimer: the idea of using POS control towers as ships stems from reading about a notorous Buckingham bug where a NPC would spawn NPC stations 100 km large instead of missiles due to a change in item IDs...
73% of EVE characters stay in high security space. 62% of EVE subscribers barely PvP. 40% of all new accounts just "level up their Ravens". Probably that's why PvE content in EVE Online is sub-par and CCP is head over heels for PvP...
|
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
1350
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 20:20:54 -
[103] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote: I think they can scoop while the structure in in normal operation at any time. So they can always scoop before the war starts. But if its rigged, they lose the rigs.
But I thought they had to wait one vulnerability window before scooping? So if the vulnerability window is greater than 24 hours, shouldn't I be able to time the wardec such I can try to reinforce the citadel before it can be scooped?
|
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
4881
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 20:26:44 -
[104] - Quote
Half of the impound fees should be paid to the player that landed the final blow on the citadel. There should be an incentive to go blow up a very very full citadel, and you should get more than a couple of citadel guns for doing so.
CSM 7 Secretary
CSM 6 Alternate Delegate
@two_step_eve on Twitter
My Blog
|
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp Chao3 Alliance
279
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 20:32:18 -
[105] - Quote
Mercer Nen wrote:Honestly these magical mechanics are terrible. If you're going to make things destructible then just do it. This halfway nonsense of creating mechanics that make no logical sense (magic delivery) is really poor. There should always be an immersive element to all mechanics.
There are existing mechanics that are not immersive (bumping for example...). I believe sci-fi explanations can be created once the game design is solidified, but the game design should prime above the immersion factor.
"surrender your ego, be free". innuendo.
solo? There is a new hope...
|
M1k3y Koontz
Respawn Disabled Initiative Mercenaries
774
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 20:35:17 -
[106] - Quote
Lord Okinaba wrote:Ugh. So personal assets and ships get magically transported to another station or system upon destruction?
Seems pretty soft and not at all what I have come to expect from EVE Online.
Everything should spill out into the system in thousands of pieces and at thousands of ms.
If you don't want to risk losing all your stuff, don't put all your eggs in one basket and always keep hold of liquid isk to start again.
I'm not taking my ~10b in combat assets that I have staged in Curse and putting them in an outpost that can be blown up without any way of recovering them. I'd rather go live in Thera instead. And I'd have a better range of content there.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Draconus Lofwyr
UK Corp Goonswarm Federation
115
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 20:36:08 -
[107] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Opner Dresden wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:Vimsy Vortis wrote:So not only do the contents of a citadel get magically teleported to a station, but at any point during the whole attack process the owner can just unanchor the thing, pick it up and leave?. No they cannot unanchor it while reinforced, they would have to successfully defend it first. However they can remove their personal assets if they wish. Does that mean they can be unanchored and moved while not reinforced? The ROI on these looks horrible if it's a one time deployable that can also be destroyed. Yes you can unanchor them provided they are not under attack. They will immediately enter a vulnerable state and at the end will eject the personal assets to safety, kickout the docked pilots into space and the unanchor to be scooped.
well, now comes the next level of espionage, infiltrating, then unanchoring hostile citadels to eject all the logged off pilots into the middle of a bubble camp for the monkey barrel exercise. Plus getting a nice juicy packaged citadel for your troubles. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1788
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 20:37:28 -
[108] - Quote
naed21 wrote:If I'm reading this correctly, assets are never moved out of a WH when the structure is destroyed. This means you can seed ships in whs and then when you anchor a new structure suddenly have a ton of capital ships out of no where.
It's certainly possible for a group to setup a large structure in every c6 wh, fill them with dreads and carriers, and then blow them up so that in the future they can attack the new residents with this large capital force. The delay between the citadel going online and assets being recovered is several days. CCP could easily tweak the asset recovery time in wormholes to allow for the citadel to be destroyed inside the asset recovery window.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Marech Bhayanaka
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
44
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 21:07:53 -
[109] - Quote
Taru Audeles wrote:I really don't see how and why anyone will be using the new citadels the way they are designed now. You still loss 10% of the value if you want your stuff back. They get delivered to a RANDOM NPC station. So if you have stuff in multiple citadels the stuff can and will be delivered to multiple NPC stations.
If you are going to lose so many citadels that a 10% loss is unbearable, maybe you shouldn't be putting them up in the first place?
Marech. |
Draconus Lofwyr
UK Corp Goonswarm Federation
115
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 21:34:32 -
[110] - Quote
Marech Bhayanaka wrote:Taru Audeles wrote:I really don't see how and why anyone will be using the new citadels the way they are designed now. You still loss 10% of the value if you want your stuff back. They get delivered to a RANDOM NPC station. So if you have stuff in multiple citadels the stuff can and will be delivered to multiple NPC stations.
If you are going to lose so many citadels that a 10% loss is unbearable, maybe you shouldn't be putting them up in the first place? Marech.
the fine detail that seems to elude you is, the Corp or Alliance puts up the citadel. the individual members have to pay the 10% of their asset value. While the corp or alliance could eat the value, the individuals might or probably cant. the mantra will change from don't fly what you cant afford to lose, to don't own what you cant afford to loose. this will cause a massive depression in asset ownership as people move to low/high sec or sell what they cant afford to loose. which means a reduction in demand. and the entire eve economy will collapse in on itself. |
|
Mercer Nen
Summicron Holdings
6
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 21:35:30 -
[111] - Quote
Saisin wrote:Mercer Nen wrote:Honestly these magical mechanics are terrible. If you're going to make things destructible then just do it. This halfway nonsense of creating mechanics that make no logical sense (magic delivery) is really poor. There should always be an immersive element to all mechanics.
There are existing mechanics that are not immersive (bumping for example...). I believe sci-fi explanations can be created once the game design is solidified, but the game design should prime above the immersion factor.
I agree, but is this game design, or system design? The magical delivery doesn't add any gameplay as far as I can tell. It's just an unimaginative illogical safety mechanism. If there are technical limitations around a system that force a certain mechanic than that is understandable. Bumping being a good example of this, where proper collision mechanics open up a massive can of worms, such as server load with thousands of players in close proximity.
However this seems to be more a case of creating a new system that is servicing a perceived user need (I don't want to lose all my stuff), without adding any real interaction within the system. In addition to that, this system doesn't seem to have been designed with any relationship or context to the environments it will exist in. It's as abstract and disconnected from New Eden as the capture points in the new sov system.
I've purposely avoided using the "lore" word, because the issue isn't about writing a story to postrationalise a system. The issue is that the "game design" is based on abstract systems that have no legitimate context in the game in which they exist. What exactly am I playing if all I'm doing is triggering arbitrary safety mechanisms? |
Garai Nolen
XYJAX NICE Inter-Celestial Enterprises
45
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 21:39:16 -
[112] - Quote
Ab'del Abu wrote:So ships and items will no longer drop from structures in wormholes? I think it would be more sensible if only part of one's assets was delivered to some NPC station/other citadel while the other part dropped directly as loot.
I think it would be nifty if "asset safety" were tied to a citadel rig, and if the installation of that rig required sov. In WH space, no sov, no rig, no asset safety, stuff would continue to dropslike it does now. In null, you get a choice, dependent on how lucrative the other rig benefits are and whether you are deploying somewhere that you have sov or not.
Since only the rig install would be sov-gated, if you happen to lose sov, any existing citadels that are already "safety rigged" would still have asset safety, but you wouldn't be able to rig new citadels for safety until regaining sov. Would make forward deployment citadels more dangerous too.
EVEoj - EVE Online JavaScript library: http://eve-oj.xyjax.com/
|
Dr Loveless
Viziam Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 21:44:47 -
[113] - Quote
Loot from personal/corporation hangar should drop on 50% rule just like ships. 1. nice loot :) 2. avoid "I don't care about my station my assets are safe." 3. blueprints should drop too
Assets which don't drop will be delivered to NPC station blah, blah, blah... |
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
267
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 21:54:33 -
[114] - Quote
I don't want to feel safe in Citadel city. That is all. |
Marech Bhayanaka
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
44
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 21:59:18 -
[115] - Quote
Draconus Lofwyr wrote:
the fine detail that seems to elude you is, the Corp or Alliance puts up the citadel. the individual members have to pay the 10% of their asset value. While the corp or alliance could eat the value, the individuals might or probably cant.
No, I get that. Let me rephrase for your perspective .... If your corp is losing citadels so often that the 10% fee is becoming a problem, maybe you need to either keep less stuff in dangerous space, or change corps. In a game like Eve, 10% loss as a consequence of something major like losing a citadel is really quite trivial.
Marech. |
Sabriz Adoudel
Black Hydra Consortium. CODE.
5254
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 22:11:16 -
[116] - Quote
I don't like the item teleportation aspect. This is basically NPCs doing courier contracts on behalf of players, and at a lower price than players would agree to do so in comparable circumstances.
There were far better proposals made in the original feedback threads.
There do not seem to be enough incentives to attack citadels here. POSes are lucrative to attack because you can loot hangars.
Finally, was it your design intention to buff tech 2 BPOs with this change? Because this allows you to get the throughput bonus of non-station BPO use without putting the BPO at risk. Crius intentionally removed this functionality from the game for balance reasons.
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
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
32161
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 22:14:10 -
[117] - Quote
That part is simple enough. Citadels have a jump portal for "stuff" with range exceeding the drives on ships.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
Chad Wylder
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
37
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 22:15:41 -
[118] - Quote
Draconus Lofwyr wrote:the fine detail that seems to elude you is, the Corp or Alliance puts up the citadel. the individual members have to pay the 10% of their asset value. While the corp or alliance could eat the value, the individuals might or probably cant. the mantra will change from don't fly what you cant afford to lose, to don't own what you cant afford to loose. this will cause a massive depression in asset ownership as people move to low/high sec or sell what they cant afford to loose. which means a reduction in demand. and the entire eve economy will collapse in on itself. The way it sounds to me, the individual is never required to pay anything to initiate the asset safety transfer (I could be wrong, would love clarification on this)
The person only needs to pay on a per-item basis when they go to claim that item from their plastic-wrapped impound stack. If they don't have the isk to claim their items back, the items will sit in impound until they do have the isk.
On that note, what's the item value going to be based on and when is the 10% cost going to be calculated? Could someone theoretically use market manipulation to either lower the 10% retrieval cost on certain items to almost nothing, or ramp it up super high for other people to have to pay to get their stuff back? |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1783
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 22:18:24 -
[119] - Quote
We talked it over. Purposely sticking your assets in stasis will be a thing. How exploitable is up to your own definition of desired or not I suppose. I don't' really see an issue with it as it falls within emergent gameplay.
Various reasons to do it. Probably won't see it a lot until regular outposts are gone though. WH maybe, but null will do it after that point.
Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.
Creator of Burn Jita
Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
|
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
272
|
Posted - 2015.08.13 22:23:52 -
[120] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Urziel99 wrote:Looks good overall. I would rather have limited choice for where the assets end up. I.e. If we lose a Citadel in Vale we can choose any lowsec station in the nearest constellation for asset packages containing capitals Pilots without restricted items could select a highsec station in the same or adjacent constellation. If the location where the asset will end up is known then the attackers will be able to hellcamp the station where they know the assets will end up.
This prevents heavy abuse (having assets from Branch, for example get magically sent to Aridia.) but provides enough security to not have defacto lost the assets due to camps. This is a good point, however we are also very concerned with players abusing this as an asset delivery system especially in high / low sec. So having any amount of choice creates different problems for us. Having said that we'll have a think about this some more. Thanks.
The abuse is a good point, on both sides. Maybe a better method would simply be to have several nearby, valid NPC stations selected at random as opposed to just the nearest station. This way the assets cannot be camped without insider information and the losing player has a small choice: they can select from a per-determined randomized list generated by the servers. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |