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) |
Sabastian Cerabiam
Seventh Element Shadow of xXDEATHXx
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 02:53:02 -
[151] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote: Another good role for interceptors, speed tanked ceptors - Citadel can't track them to kill them, players can't catch them - Ceptors online for the win.
Citadels can fit webs and scrams. As long as they have a minimum 30km range (T1 entosis range + small buffer) trollceptors are going to have a bad day. Seriously? Ceptor gets yellow boxed by Citadel, ceptor speeds out of range - Yellow box drops Ceptor returns. Unless the Citadel has 1000+ scan res it is not going to catch let alone kill a ceptor. Unless Citadel weapons have perfect tracking, they will not hit a ceptor.
would not smart bombs be the answer to that? I don't know sense I never used them personally but seems AOE weapons don't need to lock so cepter wouldn't see it coming |
Kel hound
The Scope Gallente Federation
132
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 02:54:51 -
[152] - Quote
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
Would it not be possible to have my clone moved to the nearest available clone bay in the same sort of way that my assets are moved?
The general gist of this dev blog as I read it was to make people - line members like me - feel safe using a citadel. That even in the event that the structure is destroyed I don't loose everything. Well if I get auto-podded when the citadel is destroyed I will never feel safe logging off in a citadel. |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards FUBAR.
691
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 03:00:15 -
[153] - Quote
Sabastian Cerabiam wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote: Another good role for interceptors, speed tanked ceptors - Citadel can't track them to kill them, players can't catch them - Ceptors online for the win.
Citadels can fit webs and scrams. As long as they have a minimum 30km range (T1 entosis range + small buffer) trollceptors are going to have a bad day. Seriously? Ceptor gets yellow boxed by Citadel, ceptor speeds out of range - Yellow box drops Ceptor returns. Unless the Citadel has 1000+ scan res it is not going to catch let alone kill a ceptor. Unless Citadel weapons have perfect tracking, they will not hit a ceptor. would not smart bombs be the answer to that? I don't know sense I never used them personally but seems AOE weapons don't need to lock so cepter wouldn't see it coming According to past info, AOE weapons will only be able to be fit to XL Citadels, which will belong to no-one but the richest and largest groups due to extreme costs.
So yes, AOE weapons would be a counter for interceptors but only for the space rich, who really should have enough players on grid to protect their asset anyway. Smaller groups without trillions of isk (the current target of most ceptor trolls) will have yet another barrier to successfully living in their space.
Citadels will end up pricing many smaller groups of out nulsec.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2377
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 03:03:38 -
[154] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote: According to past info, AOE weapons will only be able to be fit to XL Citadels, which will belong to no-one but the richest and largest groups due to extreme costs.
So yes, AOE weapons would be a counter for interceptors but only for the space rich, who really should have enough players on grid to protect their asset anyway. Smaller groups without trillions of isk (the current target of most ceptor trolls) will have yet another barrier to successfully living in their space.
Citadels will end up pricing many smaller groups of out nulsec.
Or the fact that it is almost certain to have max lock range? So even a 10km/s ceptor it has 20+ seconds to lock it while it burns back from off grid. It does need some reasonable sensor res also, but not crazy sensor res. I.E. Pre lock before web range. And yellow box to red box is one second. |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards FUBAR.
691
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 03:08:18 -
[155] - Quote
Kenneth Feld wrote: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. There is a limit before they go poof, they won;t be available indefinitely Also, they are still exploring no asset safety in Wormholes If no asset safety in wormholes becomes a thing combined with structures showing as anoms in ship scanner - it breaks living in wormholes.
CCP need to be VERY careful regarding Citadel mechanics in wormhole space.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2377
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 03:10:29 -
[156] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote: If no asset safety in wormholes becomes a thing combined with structures showing as anoms in ship scanner - it breaks living in wormholes.
CCP need to be VERY careful regarding Citadel mechanics in wormhole space.
Currently you can warp to a pos without probes since they are all at moons. Why does maintaining no probe warping break things? |
M1k3y Koontz
Respawn Disabled Initiative Mercenaries
775
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 03:31:06 -
[157] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote: Another good role for interceptors, speed tanked ceptors - Citadel can't track them to kill them, players can't catch them - Ceptors online for the win.
Citadels can fit webs and scrams. As long as they have a minimum 30km range (T1 entosis range + small buffer) trollceptors are going to have a bad day. Seriously? Ceptor gets yellow boxed by Citadel, ceptor speeds out of range - Yellow box drops Ceptor returns. Unless the Citadel has 1000+ scan res it is not going to catch let alone kill a ceptor. Unless Citadel weapons have perfect tracking, they will not hit a ceptor.
You're kidding right? Current POS webs are 150km, so 30km would be awfully low, it's a number I pulled out of my ass for the sake of argument. Anyway, yellowbox to redbox is only one server tick, so your trollceptor starts turning, my Citadel scrams and dual webs you, then the guns one-shot you. No more trollceptor.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
M1k3y Koontz
Respawn Disabled Initiative Mercenaries
775
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 03:36:47 -
[158] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote: If no asset safety in wormholes becomes a thing combined with structures showing as anoms in ship scanner - it breaks living in wormholes.
CCP need to be VERY careful regarding Citadel mechanics in wormhole space.
Currently you can warp to a pos without probes since they are all at moons. Why does maintaining no probe warping break things?
As it is you have to warp to every moon or d-scan down the POS. If it's an anom you can warp to it immediately after entering system. It speeds up how fast a hostile can get to your tower.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1566
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 03:48:54 -
[159] - Quote
Chad Wylder wrote:
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?
This should only be a real issue with relatively rare items, but it is a good point nonetheless.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1566
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 03:57:40 -
[160] - Quote
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:I like the ISK sink for recovering your goods from an NPC station. 10% sounds about right as straight up loss to NPC's.
As a way to reward the successful attacker, you should consider raising the recovery percentage to 20%. Have 10% go to the NPC faction as ISK sink and 10% go to the alliance that destroyed your structure.
...or you could let 10% of the loot drop in containers; it's less than a POS (ship maintenance array for example) would drop; but then again, with 90% asset security chances are they will be more stored inside. Previous outposts dropped 0%, POS dropped 50%. I believe 10 percent sounds reasonable, no?
What is 10% of a Dreadnought? If that is all I have in the station, then under your system it either drops or it does not.
At least with my proposal, you have a way of rewarding the winner for his victory. If you destroy my structure, and I have a Dreadnought inside it, I have to pay 600m ISK to get my 3b ISK Dreadnought back (no small chunk of change). 300m ISK goes into the ether as an ISK sink and the successful attacker gets 300m ISK. Seems like a reasonable reward for breaking things.
Also, in addition to killmails, can we get some kind of impound reports? By this, I mean, can we get a tracker of how much stuff we have caused to be locked into impound status? If it gets recovered, then it comes off our tracker.
For example, I destroy a structure with 200b worth of someone's stuff in it. They choose to recover only 20b worth of that stuff. The other 180b worth of stuff would show on my tracker as "denied" or something along those lines.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
|
beakerax
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
186
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 03:59:56 -
[161] - Quote
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 Personally, I am not ever ever logging off at one of these things if I can be podded while offline.
Never not safe log. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1566
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 04:03:33 -
[162] - Quote
Two step wrote: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.
Completely agree that half the impound fee needs to be paid to the successful attacker[s].
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Tanewha Todako
Errant Endeavours Sev3rance
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 05:18:06 -
[163] - Quote
How many Citadels can be in a system at one time? I haven't read anything about that yet, although I may have missed something along the way.
Asset safety and people being podded when a structure is destroyed: Not really a "magic wand" for stuff being saved, rather a "lifeboat" system for your stuff. I'd imagine (lore wise etc) that any space faring civilisation would think of redundancies like "what happens if things go **** up?" and plan accordingly. Station / citadel / whatever - under attack and destruction imminent. People would be all geared up to leave not sitting around with their thumbs up their sphincters. Grabbing what they can and loading up from their hangers sounds reasonable.
So, structure gets destroyed. Hell yeah or hell no!! Depending on which side you are on. - Destroyed structure can be mined / salvaged etc for recoverable resources. as you are suggesting. Rigs destroyed etc etc.
- Assets: hangers are ejected from the huge ball of destruction that ensues and the asset recovery system kicks in. Either you pay for it to be delivered to an NPC station or it is delivered to another Player Owned one. How about a refinement to this? Another option is that the ejected hanger / lifeboat is registered as a location in your journal and you can either arrange to try and pick it up yourself or pay for someone to get it for you. Either way this option exposes these assets to further danger as whatever ship(s) used to recover them would be vulnerable as usual, but this allows you control of where the assets end up finally. People could contract specialised Corps that might emerge (like current Haulage corps - Red Frog etc) that deal with salvage and recovery. Rather than a straight 10% going to an NPC people can choose whether to pay a player / corp / alliance and encourage a new style of game play*. - The location remains viable until all assets are removed from the hanger but the hanger is password protected so only authorised people can access it. If you don't remove everything at once you could end up with the location camped / book-marked etc, so as soon as you enter system prepared people can hunt you (similar to Super-cap hunters I guess). Alternatively the location moves, ejected hangers are an un-scanable spatial phenomenon, drifting on random orbits like comets around the system. Owners would be able to warp directly to them whilst potential hunters would have to scan the player down each time. - Once accessed the location starts to degrade, eventually being consumed by the sun for example. This applies a fixed window within which to recover assets from a location.
- Characters are ejected in a ship from aforementioned huge ball of destruction. Mechanic wise maybe they eject in a random (assembled) ship, or can specify one beforehand if they are online and active during the destruction of a structure. Logged out players: choose from whatever assembled and fitted ships were in hanger at the time of destruction when they next log in (the others go into the ejecting hanger, are destroyed or are scattered in the explosion and can be hunted down and recovered by those so inclined maybe). In either case the destruction of a structure produces such a huge ball of destruction that it temporarily overloads all ships (within the system) sensors and the ejecting ships cannot be targeted, they come to rest randomly scattered throughout the system (ignoring bubbles that may have been setup to camp the station etc). People would have to choose wisely which ship they eject in, your shiny battleship may look great but the chances of getting out of a system actively being attacked by enemies might be slim.
- Any inactive clones within the structure are destroyed. (Maybe allow people to jump into whichever clone they prefer as the station is being destroyed. This gives inactive players a chance to save top end clones and gives juicy targets to the people attacking the structure as they hunt down the survivors.)
- Wormhole Asset Safety: Hmmmm..... hmmmmm. As above maybe. Wormhole life is dangerous after all. Specialist groups could emerge dedicated to recovering stuff from WHs. For example, a corp/alliance, based in Thera which is contracted to recover assets from a WH. They then have to find said WH, either scanning it down themselves, or buying that information from someone who has already scanned it down. They then have to arrange a convoy of sufficient size to recover assets, arranging protection for the convoy as they see fit. Contracts with collateral could be used, similar to the ones used for hauling etc. As people can choose which ship they eject from structure in (as I suggested above), I'd imagine WH people would eject in a scanning ship so they can find their way back to inhabited space and arrange help. Wormholes are inherently different from the rest of the game, cut off and isolated, dangerous and unpredictable. The risks and rewards are larger and this would carry through to asset recovery etc, however there should be some form of asset recovery for WHs albeit different from that used in known space. i.e. no automatic recovery to NPC stations.
Oh well that's just my thoughts after reading through stuff here. A few possible ideas to consider maybe and for others more experienced to discuss, build on or just discard.
So far I like the ideas CCP are putting forward and am interested to see how things develop.
|
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
3956
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 06:48:52 -
[164] - Quote
It's funny how some people think that *others* should be stupid. Like they are totally entitled to foreign stupidity...
*Others* should put all their stuff in a Citadel. *Others* should be willing to lose it if anyone with a safe NPC base drops a few entosis links on them. *Others* should be willing to be podded while they're offline. *Others* should be willing to send their freighters to certain death if they want their stuff back. *Others* should be stupid, and if they refuse to, CCP should take away their lunch!
(I will insist in the "Vulture" concept ship. They could be loitering around a WH if needed. Not magic, just NPCs doing something necessary and unfun. Surely the Art Guys could come up with a nice mod of the starbase towers...)
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...
|
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine Second-Dawn
1064
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 06:59:47 -
[165] - Quote
My first pass through this made me feel happier about using a citadel. The point about the manipulation of prices needs to be restricted by a ceiling in terms of the 10% cost, personally I would have it at 5%. People like me have built up a huge asset base over an extended period but don't have a lot of liquid assets, I certainly would not be able to cover my assets at 10% of their value, though of course I would only put a part of them at risk if I could, well I will work that one out when the time comes and of course how you impact NPC stations in NPC 0.0 for example.
I noted on here people wanting the charge for moving stuff to be given to them as the people who destroyed the citadel, ignore that please, there are enough reasons to kill a Citadel as there is without making them ISK fountains for lazy people looking for easy things to shoot.
There is an alternative, I keep asking for a structure for sole players or small groups, that can be cloaked, which has a limited storage capacity for both ships and items. When you arrive in its location it decloaks and can be scanned down while uncloaked, once you are docked it cloaks again. It has the ability to re-ffit and can repair using nano paste. When you undock you break the cloak until you are 5 km from it. What if you just set up a number of these structures in system for the people who lost stuff in a citadel being destroyed, so they still have skin in the game in the area where the lost citadel was. Then just send the bigger items as you have suggested. Maybe that would be a better way to do it. The player will recieve BM's for the location of these structures, as would all those who have CEO or director level in terms of corp assets. This will enable people to keep fighting in that system.
But overall I like what you are doing here because you have realised that just handing assets to people who can blow stuff up easily will mean the majority of people will not risk it, certainly that is my mentality, but I am rather concerned still about your plans for NPC 0.0 because now where I am its not a simple matter of jumping stuff out in Carriers.
Ella's Snack bar. With all the data supplied on API/CREST the game should be renamed to Jabber Online, look something to kill, ping everyone!!!!
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1769
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 07:05:40 -
[166] - Quote
With wormhole space there are some things to take into consideration, 1. The suggested mechanic of transporting assets from the citadel into limbo, awaiting the anchoring of a new citadel is poor for two reasons. A. If one is evicted, that means the chances of refinding the hole, and re anchoring a citadel are slim to none. And a miserable and frustrating experience. Miserable experiences are not good design. B. Removal of loot drops removes a major driver of activity. There is little enough as it is! C. Self destruction or unanchoring of citadels, activates the recovery mechanism. Every hole will become toxic with the potential for "ghost fleets". Of T3's Waiting to be magically restored into a swiftly deployed medium citadel. It is not emergent gameplay when it is an obvious flaw in the initial design. AND pointed out to all.
Suggested Improvements to the Wormhole Mechanism.
1. Let 40% of the contents of personal and corperate hangers be dropped as loot. 2. Let 50% of the contents of personal and corperate hanhers be shipped by interbus, (I love the name Vultures for their ships, named earlier in this thread). With A 10% tax to be paid for return out of interbus storage. 3. Let 10% be handed to BOB to be scattered by the explosion to all parts of the hole. ( much excitement and hilarity trying to recover assets/loot from sleeper sites).
This retains the risk element of living in Wormholes, provides sensible drivers for conflict without turning every citadel into a loot Pi+¦ata. Prevents every eviction from turning into an extinction level event for corporations, and acts as a 20-30% isk sink.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
SiKong Ma
Raging Tapirs Illuminati Confirmed.
20
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 07:52:11 -
[167] - Quote
From what I read, we don't only lose our clone when we are docked in the station, we also lose our jump clones too?
i.e. I am docked in citadel with my active clone +3 implants, and I have a jump clone with full set of +5 implant in the same citadel. When citadel gets destroyed, I lose a total of 1 set of +3 implant and 1 set of +5 implant?
Isn't this mechanic seem quite overwhelming? Say, I take 2 weeks vacation, comes back, found my alliance lost the citadel and find myself docked in a neutral station and lost 2 sets of implants PLUS pay 10% cost to all my assets in station?
|
B0RG 0VERLORD
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 08:53:03 -
[168] - Quote
SiKong Ma wrote:From what I read, we don't only lose our clone when we are docked in the station, we also lose our jump clones too?
i.e. I am docked in citadel with my active clone +3 implants, and I have a jump clone with full set of +5 implant in the same citadel. When citadel gets destroyed, I lose a total of 1 set of +3 implant and 1 set of +5 implant?
Isn't this mechanic seem quite overwhelming? Say, I take 2 weeks vacation, comes back, found my alliance lost the citadel and find myself docked in a neutral station and lost 2 sets of implants PLUS pay 10% cost to all my assets in station?
its all about paying isk out and having no way to gain isk apart from ganking scamming and buying plexs,but dont worry soon there will be no null sec,
COMING TO A REGION NEAR YOU the doughnut with a new expiration date!! |
Axhind
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
84
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 09:27:51 -
[169] - Quote
Langbaobao wrote:TBH, I don't know how I feel about this whole thing, but having this magical NPC teleport that gets your stuff safe from a citadel that gets destroyed sounds extremely risk-averse and un-EVE like. The level of security that it provides (recovering 90% of your stuff that was stuck) sounds really like a reward for not defending. People are just gonna go: "**** this, let the morons waste time killing it and we'll just grab our stuff in some station". It definitely does not feel like a big loss for the enemy that you're trying to punt out of somewhere. You put in the time to burn their **** and they lose only 10% of their stuff (in the form of ISK impound tax), not to mention the attacker does not get rewarded for killing a structure. Currently killing a POS drops you loot from the hangars and all (the famous loot-pinata) and I can tell you, it's a distinct pleasure when you can loot something out of someone's POS like that. I don't see why stuff should be magically teleported from the destroyed structures. After all, the structures will have reinforce timers like outpost currently have, right? So let them evac their stuff like it's done now in outposts, and if they can't, well, they should have fleeted up and tried. Here are some suggestions that I think might make this system better or at least more rewarding for the people that put in the effort to actually attack the structures:
- Corp and personal stuff should at least in part (25-50%) drop for the attacker like in the current POS mechanics. It would be the reward for wasting time on several reinforcement timers and/or fleet actions.
- I still think people should lose stuff from their citadels like happens with POSes today, however if a system is introduced for people to recover stuff from destroyed structures (magical NPC pony freight service) at least make the loss sting. People should lose at least 50% of their assets if not more, and not a miserly 10% (in ISK no less). The ONLY exception should be the pod and the ship the pilot was sitting in when he logged off. This would mimic the current situation when people log off in POSes can log in after the structure is destroyed and get away with the ship they were currently in. This would make sense as well fluffwise since IIRC the idea was that ships 'moor' into the citadel; and scenes of ships scrambling away from a burning space structure are a dime a dozen in SF movies and so on. It would also prevent having to resort to annoying workarounds like the 'log in in space to save the pod', mentioned previously.
- Related to what was mentioned above, the pilot logging in after his citadel is destroyed should respawn with his ship in the same system where the citadel was. In my opinion they should respawn at the same place where the citadel was placed, but I would consider the option that they appear at a random safe spot somewhere in space, although I'm not so sure about this because it would prevent people being 'bubble-caged' and hence 'reward' them with an increased chance of survival. This would need further discussion.
Gotta love such comments from people sitting in NPC stations and talking about risk. If they remove all NPC stations in complete game so that nobody can sit and hide then you have a point. Else nobody sane is going to use the new structures (except maybe us as chances of losing one are low enough). |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards FUBAR.
692
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 10:44:06 -
[170] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Brokk Witgenstein wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:I like the ISK sink for recovering your goods from an NPC station. 10% sounds about right as straight up loss to NPC's.
As a way to reward the successful attacker, you should consider raising the recovery percentage to 20%. Have 10% go to the NPC faction as ISK sink and 10% go to the alliance that destroyed your structure.
...or you could let 10% of the loot drop in containers; it's less than a POS (ship maintenance array for example) would drop; but then again, with 90% asset security chances are they will be more stored inside. Previous outposts dropped 0%, POS dropped 50%. I believe 10 percent sounds reasonable, no? What is 10% of a Dreadnought? If that is all I have in the station, then under your system it either drops or it does not. At least with my proposal, you have a way of rewarding the winner for his victory. If you destroy my structure, and I have a Dreadnought inside it, I have to pay 600m ISK to get my 3b ISK Dreadnought back (no small chunk of change). 300m ISK goes into the ether as an ISK sink and the successful attacker gets 300m ISK. Seems like a reasonable reward for breaking things. Also, in addition to killmails, can we get some kind of impound reports? By this, I mean, can we get a tracker of how much stuff we have caused to be locked into impound status? If it gets recovered, then it comes off our tracker. For example, I destroy a structure with 200b worth of someone's stuff in it. They choose to recover only 20b worth of that stuff. The other 180b worth of stuff would show on my tracker as "denied" or something along those lines. Rewarding the winner? I hope CCP is smart enough to avoid your proposal at all costs..
0.0 is an overwhelmingly unbalanced arena now and you want to unbalance it further by allowing mega groups to profit more from their dominance.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1540
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 11:05:52 -
[171] - Quote
I would still prefer that the entosis link drops a stations resists rather than reinforcing/destroying them. That way station destruction would be significantly sped up but still require shiny big guns... |
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S Affirmative.
426
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 11:21:57 -
[172] - Quote
"remember it is not going to be possible for owners to remove fitted structure modules when the reinforced 1 timer starts." WTF is the Reinforced 1 Timer?
" In cases where items are delivered to a NPC station, players will need to pay an ISK fee based on a percentage of moved item market value (numbers we are considering are around 10% price fee)." Gah, this basically means that we shouldn't store anything of value in a citadel, especially your BPO collection as it will be hideously expensive to recover. |
Drago Shouna
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
279
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 11:51:53 -
[173] - Quote
So if I'm reading this right (doubtful) A guy comes along and gets lucky with the vulnerability timer. He then sets about using the Entosis link, but then I get online, and target him, he then warps off.
Does the entosis reset to 0? ie if he was 20 mins into a 60 min timer would it restart at 40 mins or 60 mins?
To me if the link is disrupted it should revert to 0.
Also this public availability part. Is that for all the facilities, reprocessing, manufacturing etc.
If it is I presume that I would set the tax? If indeed they can use them who provides the fuel? Bearing in mind that the individual structures only use fuel when put online.
Also using them as a market, same thing really. Just me or if it's made public could anyone put stuff up for sale?
Lastly, docking a ship...if the place gets trashed I get back those, but what about the moored ones?
As for the 10% recovery fee, np. I don't leave stuff in my pos anyway so why would I leave it all in a Citadel? |
Anthar Thebess
1277
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 11:53:04 -
[174] - Quote
What i hear, don't store any thing in citadels, as it will transfer your stuff to lowsec system. For us this is 11 jumps (at 5ly range) for capitals , when nearest NPC stations , but this is NPC null - are 3 jumps away.
I think CCP did not check how many assets people in nullsec keep at stations. If you live in nullsec all your assets in nullsec space.
I have like 80bil in null stations , and around 10bil in jita ( small valuable stuff that is slowly selling).
My first impression when CCP posted this dev blogs was : " they don't want people living in null space, just thread it as a temporary staging base , when they are not in low or highsec space. "
This is nonsense CCP, for 4 years i live in null , and mostly in NPC null space - why do you want to change this? Why i cannot keep all my assets in nullsec stations, when someone that is living in lowsec or higsec space can easily do it ?
Why are you forcing people to constantly haul stuff , and don't go to vacations? Because taking a vacation can easily lead to need of paying 10% tax for recovering stuff 10+ capital jumps away.
If my fitted ships will be moved to lowsec space i will need to do at least 40 trips to get them back to space i live for 4 years. So this is 40x10 x2 jumps in a carrier. I will need to also move my materials, modules and all unfitted hulls - that's 20 freighters of stuff , so 60 JF runs.
Call it tears, call it whatever you want it. I HATE hauling , i trained and bought a JF , just to remove need of hauling stuff in T2 indy ships , like 5 jumps by gate.
Rethink what you want to achieve CCP, because this change will make EVE totally second job , as you will not be able to take any longer brake without the possibility to have your assets moved and taxed .
After this people that want to play eve , and live in nullsec will need to forget about : - Vacations - hospitals ( sorry but you are not allowed to have any accident ) - delegations - deployments - .... So totally every thing connected to RL and longer than reinforce timer of a citadel or station.
Capital Remote AID Rebalance
Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
|
Gypsys Bear
Iris Covenant The Gorgon Empire
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 12:03:22 -
[175] - Quote
1. Anchor 3 citadels near gates in 2gate system (Hello Rancer!) 2. Fit Citadel smartbombs 3. Put characters on Citadel gunners role 4. Activate smartbombs 5. Go to sleep 6. ??? 7. KILLMAILS!
Actually, citadel smartbomb will make impossible to use Tech 1 Entosis link. It will destroy all stuff near structure: = and + pods, notank frigates, cynonoobships and other small stuff. |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
3032
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 12:21:52 -
[176] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote: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.
Being able to scoop a structure at any point during its long vulnerability window seems like a recipie for 90% of citadel sieges resulting in the owner just taking it down and leaving without suffering any kind of loss whatsoever. The attackers aren't necessarily going at be able to attack the structure immediately when it comes out of reinforcement after all.
Also I don't really understand what the purpose of the vulnerability 1 window being incredibly small and variable is supposed to be other than to allow you to defend a structure by putting your vulnerability hours in the smallest possible increments at 4AM on weekdays relative to your opponent. The entire concept seems like it's going to be incredibly easy to manipulate it to exploit your enemy's timezone.
|
Archetype 66
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Nulli Secunda
192
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 13:14:46 -
[177] - Quote
I like the idea to see a Citadel entering a scuttling process of 30 sec or whatever, ejecting all pods and rescues ships + Capital and Super emergancy warping out before it explodes.
As long as they will not be destroyed by shooting, it will make sens to have such a protocol and would give a dramatic momentum to the scene + a little bit of realism instead to have all that stuff just volatilized and reappearing X jumps away 5 days later +á la Houdini
http://hpics.li/bbbf7fd |
Aineko Macx
348
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 13:54:21 -
[178] - Quote
So you'll need at least an L citadel to be able to dock a freighter. Since it looks like L's will be considerably more expensive than current POSes, that's quite an extra financial burden for people that used to do industry at POSes...
iveeCore: The PHP engine for industrial activities and CREST library
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
1427
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 14:27:37 -
[179] - Quote
Kel hound wrote:The general gist of this dev blog as I read it was to make people - line members like me - feel safe using a citadel. That even in the event that the structure is destroyed I don't loose everything. Well if I get auto-podded when the citadel is destroyed I will never feel safe logging off in a citadel.
Thanks for this feedback, well put.
CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
|
|
Storm Brightblade Keikira
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 14:30:58 -
[180] - Quote
There seems to be a lot of concern about this magic of goods being in one place then another once a structure is destroyed,or in the case of wormhole hidden until the victim returns and is able to erect a new structure. I have a solution to both that takes suggestions from other posts and add my own twist to it.
Once the structure is destroyed a percentage is destroyed in the explosion. What drops will be split, some immediately available to the aggressors the rest will fall to whatever celestial the structure is anchored on (assuming this mechanic hasnGÇÖt changed). The container that contain the loot will be cloaked and send its owner a beacon of its location on said celestial. Over a period of time (say 45 days) the containers battery dies and it no longer sends out its message and is scanable to all. Using a new module someone can search the surface for loot and upon discovery enter a hacking game to open it. For high cost items (for example BPOs) players can secure them in stronger containers. These containers are for storage only and if you want to use item (using the BPO as an example again) you must retrieve it and it falls under normal drop rules. The advantage of these secure containers is they have extended battery life but limited size.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |