EVE Search - Sticky:Dev blog: Building your Citadel, one block at a time

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

Sticky:Dev blog: Building your Citadel, one block at a time

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 29 post(s)

CCP Phantom C C P C C P Alliance 6239	Posted - 2015.10.26 15:04:38 - [1] - Quote Citadels in all sizes will give New Eden a new shape - and they all will arrive with the next big expansion EVE Online: Citadels this Spring! Those Citadels are true behemoths and powerful structures, now is the time to see what it takes to manufacture them and components for them. Rejoice as we have plenty of details ready! Check out CCP Ytterbium's latest blog Building your Citadel, one block at a time with all the info! CCP Phantom - Senior Community Developer - Volunteer Manager

Aryth GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1873	Posted - 2015.10.26 15:20:13 - [2] - Quote These seem awfully cheap at the medium level given their really small vulnerability window. Is there a concern we end up with a very spammable and essentially throwaway level of citadels? Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal. Creator of Burn Jita Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
Moac Tor Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation 278	Posted - 2015.10.26 15:21:45 - [3] - Quote Nothing is there. I guess it is still being updated.. Modulated ECM Effects An Alternative to Skill Trading
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1172	Posted - 2015.10.26 15:25:41 - [4] - Quote What bonus is outpost construction V going to give people if I is all you need to build an XL citadel?
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1172	Posted - 2015.10.26 15:33:11 - [5] - Quote not that i'm complaining as i lounge upon a stack of trillions of isk but don't you think that 700b might be a bit expensive for the bpo
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2205	Posted - 2015.10.26 15:35:15 - [6] - Quote I'm glad to see citadels moving forward. The market speculation should be very nice, as a bonus. I, of course, have to ask again -- has there been any discussion on how legacy outposts will be handled at their end of life? It would be nice to know, so we can act in the short term. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Unholythrash Davaham Respawn Disabled Initiative Mercenaries 21	Posted - 2015.10.26 15:36:34 - [7] - Quote Why not just homogenize ice and isotope across the board? If the citadels aren't going to use race specific fuel blocks it seems silly to keep racial blocks moving forward. The whole purpose of them previously was because towers force you to choose based on bonus's vs personal needs. I feel like this is probably the one place where homogenization would be a good thing. Edit: You would need to increase module/service consumption to match current total fuel block consumption but it seems like the smartest and easiest path forward.
Torgeir Hekard I MYSELF AND ME 207	Posted - 2015.10.26 15:38:34 - [8] - Quote [paranoia] I've noticed that medium citadel does not require factory and lab construction components to build. [/paranoia] Does it mean that research/invention/manufacturing would not be available in medium citadels, or it's just an arbitrary component set that in no way reflects the structure capabilities?
Gilbaron Free-Space-Ranger Northern Coalition. 1844	Posted - 2015.10.26 15:41:24 - [9] - Quote brb, buying salvage
DJWiggles Eve Radio Corporation Eve Radio Alliance 241	Posted - 2015.10.26 15:42:03 - [10] - Quote the bp costs will maybe salt my food for a while from people ... 700B isk Live on Eve Radio Sundays 15:00 GMT with me & friends talking about Eve and stuff. Twitter, Facebook TotalEve

EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1172	Posted - 2015.10.26 15:43:16 - [11] - Quote Are those research/copy times in minutes or in seconds? Can't seem to find anything online to clarify those units.
Aryth GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1873	Posted - 2015.10.26 15:56:01 - [12] - Quote What are the units per run of the fuel block bpo? Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal. Creator of Burn Jita Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
SilentAsTheGrave Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Squids 361	Posted - 2015.10.26 15:59:19 - [13] - Quote I like these new Citadels, but one thing kinda bothers me. Why do you have three different sizes? What you are part of a small group and you build a Medium Citadel, but as time goes on your group grows. Now you need a bigger Citadel. OK, but that means either building it someplace new, or having to tear down the Medium to make room. That is kinda lame. Why can't there just be one Citadel that you can just keep upgrading over? Sure keep the cost investment the same, but there would no longer be the annoyance to move all assets out of the structure just to turn around and replace it with the next level up. Maybe that is part of the plan and I missed it in the blog?
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1172	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:03:30 - [14] - Quote SilentAsTheGrave wrote: I like these new Citadels, but one thing kinda bothers me. Why do you have three different sizes? What you are part of a small group and you build a Medium Citadel, but as time goes on your group grows. Now you need a bigger Citadel. OK, but that means either building it someplace new, or having to tear down the Medium to make room. That is kinda lame. Why can't there just be one Citadel that you can just keep upgrading over? Sure keep the cost investment the same, but there would no longer be the annoyance to move all assets out of the structure just to turn around and replace it with the next level up. Maybe that is part of the plan and I missed it in the blog? blow up the old one and use asset safety to automove
Utremi Fasolasi La Dolce Vita 476	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:10:06 - [15] - Quote Torgeir Hekard wrote: [paranoia] I've noticed that medium citadel does not require factory and lab construction components to build. [/paranoia] Does it mean that research/invention/manufacturing would not be available in medium citadels, or it's just an arbitrary component set that in no way reflects the structure capabilities? Service modules.
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1172	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:10:40 - [16] - Quote So this is linked in the devblog: CSM Citadel FAQ GÇô A detailed FAQ covering all important aspects of the new structures. Compiled by the CSM in conjunction with CCP. Available in English only. - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mEbMx9xUXje3KH4AppvcjSSoALUVtVEaK6ZZ-zy2Lrs/edit?pli=1 Yet in this, there's such things as: Quote: How may I attack someone's Citadel? Medium, Large and X-Large structures will use a version of the Sovereignty capture mechanic, which means they will only be attacked through the use of the Entosis module. What information in here is reliable and what is not? Clearly it's not up to date.
Exia Lennelluc Unholy Knights of Cthulhu Test Alliance Please Ignore 1	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:10:53 - [17] - Quote For fuel block production why not add a ice upgrade for null like the ore upgrade that span all 4 racial ice
Saede Riordan Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 7821	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:21:52 - [18] - Quote Quote: A Medium structure hull may be deployed from an Industrial, Large and X-Large require a freighter. Yes, we do are aware this make things more complicated to deploy a Large or X-Large structure in low class wormhole space. This is intended. CCPlease. Give us low-class wormholers so sort of break here. You're essentially saying that we'll need to build an otherwise completely useless freighter which will be trapped in our wormhole solely for the purpose of deploying large citadels. And make no mistake we need large citadels many of us have large numbers of capitals and we'll need places to put them. I get not wanting us to easily put up XLs, (not that it'd be easy anyway with the ISK cost involved), but come on. None of us are going to leave our capital fleets floating in space outside mediums, we just won't use these structures and we'll keep using towers. You have to give us some realistic option to store our capitals and telling us to build a two billion isk ship that we can't use for anything else is not realistic. Either make them fit into something other then a freighter, or give us a way to shove freighters through our wormholes. This feels like a slap across the face to low class space. Fear and Loathing in Internet Spaceships
Torgeir Hekard I MYSELF AND ME 207	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:25:06 - [19] - Quote What about nomads? I mean you can offline and unanchor a tower and go away. The citadels seem to be permanent. Are there any plans for basic mobile bases?
SilentAsTheGrave Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Squids 362	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:25:45 - [20] - Quote Saede Riordan wrote: Quote: A Medium structure hull may be deployed from an Industrial, Large and X-Large require a freighter. Yes, we do are aware this make things more complicated to deploy a Large or X-Large structure in low class wormhole space. This is intended. CCPlease. Give us low-class wormholers so sort of break here. You're essentially saying that we'll need to build an otherwise completely useless freighter which will be trapped in our wormhole solely for the purpose of deploying large citadels. And make no mistake we need large citadels many of us have large numbers of capitals and we'll need places to put them. I get not wanting us to easily put up XLs, (not that it'd be easy anyway with the ISK cost involved), but come on. None of us are going to leave our capital fleets floating in space outside mediums, we just won't use these structures and we'll keep using towers. You have to give us some realistic option to store our capitals and telling us to build a two billion isk ship that we can't use for anything else is not realistic. Either make them fit into something other then a freighter, or give us a way to shove freighters through our wormholes. This feels like a slap across the face to low class space. You know that to build really tall buildings and such, cranes are built on site and taken down when the building is done. Sacrificing a freighter to get that medium structure seems like small potatoes when it comes to wormholes.


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4346	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:27:34 - [21] - Quote Aryth wrote: These seem awfully cheap at the medium level given their really small vulnerability window. Is there a concern we end up with a very spammable and essentially throwaway level of citadels? They are destructible, so the smaller sizes should be relatively spammable. Also remember 600m ISK it the base hull price.

Aryth GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1875	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:28:25 - [22] - Quote We want to point out that anyone buying the BPO with these stats would need to be ********. Imagine 6 are bought day one. How many BPCs in 1 year? Heh. Yeah.... Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal. Creator of Burn Jita Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
Torgeir Hekard I MYSELF AND ME 207	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:29:14 - [23] - Quote Saede Riordan wrote: CCPlease. Give us low-class wormholers so sort of break here. You're essentially saying that we'll need to build an otherwise completely useless freighter The more interesting question is, how to build a freighter when there are no more towers. Also it also means that if you are invaded, the enemy has to build a freighter before he can build a citadel.
Aryth GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1875	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:30:57 - [24] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Aryth wrote: These seem awfully cheap at the medium level given their really small vulnerability window. Is there a concern we end up with a very spammable and essentially throwaway level of citadels? They are destructible, so the smaller sizes should be relatively spammable. Also remember 600m ISK it the base hull price. I think the greater concern is the cheap cost with the very tiny vuln window per week. You can effectively make these stagers that are immune to being blown up. POS today are attackable anytime and you can eliminate hostile stagers. These things will have some tiny window in the middle of a week night and immune the rest of the week. A bit overpowered. Even at 3x the cost shown it would be overpowered. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal. Creator of Burn Jita Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4346	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:31:35 - [25] - Quote EvilweaselSA wrote: What bonus is outpost construction V going to give people if I is all you need to build an XL citadel? That is a good point, thanks for bringing it out. We should probably have a bonus tied to it. No promises though.


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4346	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:34:06 - [26] - Quote Querns wrote: I'm glad to see citadels moving forward. The market speculation should be very nice, as a bonus. I, of course, have to ask again -- has there been any discussion on how legacy outposts will be handled at their end of life? It would be nice to know, so we can act in the short term. So far, the plan is the same that the one shown during the first dev blog on structures. The interesting part however is that Outposts can be depreciated faster than Starbases, since they don't offer reactions. More details as we get them.

Azahar Ortenegro Astromechanica Maxima Astromechanica Federatis 48	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:34:09 - [27] - Quote So you're entirely removing Small and Medium POSes. Bad move, small corps won't be able to settle as easily as before. And you're putting the BPO price at 6B instead of 500 millions for a Large POS (250 for a Medium, 125 for a Small.) Nice way to tell part of the players "Get the **** out.", taking what we already have and demanding 6B (plus the prod cost \o/) to get it back.
M3phistopheles Oruze Cruise White Stag Exit Bag 3	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:34:20 - [28] - Quote Quote: A Medium structure hull may be deployed from an Industrial, Large and X-Large require a freighter. Yes, we do are aware this make things more complicated to deploy a Large or X-Large structure in low class wormhole space. This is intended. Why is it intended?

CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4346	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:36:33 - [29] - Quote EvilweaselSA wrote: Are those research/copy times in minutes or in seconds? Can't seem to find anything online to clarify those units. Seconds. If those were in minutes you would be waiting 1805 days to manufacture a X-L Citadel .

Saede Riordan Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 7822	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:36:38 - [30] - Quote Torgeir Hekard wrote: Saede Riordan wrote: CCPlease. Give us low-class wormholers so sort of break here. You're essentially saying that we'll need to build an otherwise completely useless freighter The more interesting question is, how to build a freighter when there are no more towers. Also it also means that if you are invaded, the enemy has to build a freighter before he can build a citadel. This is for larges specifically which is only important for the larger low class groups that have dozens of capitals needing to be stored. Mediums will be able to be brought in with transports, so an attacking group can just use medium citadels. Fear and Loathing in Internet Spaceships

Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2206	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:37:28 - [31] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Querns wrote: I'm glad to see citadels moving forward. The market speculation should be very nice, as a bonus. I, of course, have to ask again -- has there been any discussion on how legacy outposts will be handled at their end of life? It would be nice to know, so we can act in the short term. So far, the plan is the same that the one shown during the first dev blog on structures. The interesting part however is that Outposts can be depreciated faster than Starbases, since they don't offer reactions. More details as we get them. Any idea on how reimbursement for outposts and upgrades will occur? This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Eodp Ellecon Northstar Cabal Tactical Narcotics Team 23	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:40:52 - [32] - Quote "You know that to build really tall buildings and such, cranes are built on site and taken down when the building is done. Sacrificing a freighter to get that medium structure seems like small potatoes when it comes to wormholes" "A Medium structure hull may be deployed from an Industrial, Large and X-Large require a freighter" Dev Blog So a Medium can be done from a DST. Freighter does Large (and then can dock) Reading w/o panic is hard.

CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4346	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:42:08 - [33] - Quote Aryth wrote: What are the units per run of the fuel block bpo? As yes, forgot that. Same as existing fuel block blueprints. You get 40 fuel blocks per manufacturing run. You have a maximum of 200 copy run.

Rek Seven Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering 2077	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:43:00 - [34] - Quote I'm pretty disappointed with the list of fittings. I was hoping that we would be able to do something cool like cloak the structure or at least making it invisible to D-scan, so we could have a secret base somewhere... I may have missed it but will XL Citadels be deployable in wormhole space? Dear eve players, please try and use the word "content" less and instead, be specific. Thanks

CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4346	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:43:50 - [35] - Quote EvilweaselSA wrote: So this is linked in the devblog: CSM Citadel FAQ GÇô A detailed FAQ covering all important aspects of the new structures. Compiled by the CSM in conjunction with CCP. Available in English only. - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mEbMx9xUXje3KH4AppvcjSSoALUVtVEaK6ZZ-zy2Lrs/edit?pli=1 Yet in this, there's such things as: Quote: How may I attack someone's Citadel? Medium, Large and X-Large structures will use a version of the Sovereignty capture mechanic, which means they will only be attacked through the use of the Entosis module. What information in here is reliable and what is not? Clearly it's not up to date. Outdated. They use HP, pew pew and a maximum DPS cap.

EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1172	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:48:50 - [36] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: Are those research/copy times in minutes or in seconds? Can't seem to find anything online to clarify those units. Seconds. If those were in minutes you would be waiting 1805 days to manufacture a X-L Citadel . As Aryth pointed out this basically means that when you buy a 700b bpo, you make copies every 5 days (before bonuses). That means a single BPO will effectively flood the market with copies. It means that anyone buying a bpo will have more copies than they can possibly use, which they'll sell in jita...driving down the cost of a bpc to miniscule prices on your 700b bpo. It means it's a really dumb purchase and it's hard to even justify as a means to ensure you always have the ability to build an XL, or to make a profit, or really any reason. Its especially odd how much less time it is to copy these things than a titan bpo, which requires copies to be usable, and which costs 1/10th of what this costs. It puts these bpos in a really awkward spot for a 700b investment that just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. You don't get exclusivity, you don't have any hope of a profit, I'm not sure why anyone would buy one instead of waiting around for someone to not do the math.
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1172	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:53:47 - [37] - Quote Saede Riordan wrote: This is for larges specifically which is only important for the larger low class groups that have dozens of capitals needing to be stored. Mediums will be able to be brought in with transports, so an attacking group can just use medium citadels. If you've been building "dozens" of capitals you can build one more.
Chavez Domingo Gambrini 0	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:53:59 - [38] - Quote What about SMA*s? Do we get a Corporate Shiphangar or something like that? Many W-Space Corps are sharing their ships with their Corp
Aryth GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1875	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:54:02 - [39] - Quote EvilweaselSA wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: Are those research/copy times in minutes or in seconds? Can't seem to find anything online to clarify those units. Seconds. If those were in minutes you would be waiting 1805 days to manufacture a X-L Citadel . As Aryth pointed out this basically means that when you buy a 700b bpo, you make copies every 5 days (before bonuses). That means a single BPO will effectively flood the market with copies. It means that anyone buying a bpo will have more copies than they can possibly use, which they'll sell in jita...driving down the cost of a bpc to miniscule prices on your 700b bpo. It means it's a really dumb purchase and it's hard to even justify as a means to ensure you always have the ability to build an XL, or to make a profit, or really any reason. Its especially odd how much less time it is to copy these things than a titan bpo, which requires copies to be usable, and which costs 1/10th of what this costs. It puts these bpos in a really awkward spot for a 700b investment that just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. You don't get exclusivity, you don't have any hope of a profit, I'm not sure why anyone would buy one instead of waiting around for someone to not do the math. I will point out we debated even mentioning this point. But as it stand I can see no one with any economic sense buying one of these BPOs. We plan to watch the market day 1 to see how many sold and forecast out. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal. Creator of Burn Jita Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4347	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:57:50 - [40] - Quote EvilweaselSA wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: Are those research/copy times in minutes or in seconds? Can't seem to find anything online to clarify those units. Seconds. If those were in minutes you would be waiting 1805 days to manufacture a X-L Citadel . As Aryth pointed out this basically means that when you buy a 700b bpo, you make copies every 5 days (before bonuses). That means a single BPO will effectively flood the market with copies. It means that anyone buying a bpo will have more copies than they can possibly use, which they'll sell in jita...driving down the cost of a bpc to miniscule prices on your 700b bpo. It means it's a really dumb purchase and it's hard to even justify as a means to ensure you always have the ability to build an XL, or to make a profit, or really any reason. Its especially odd how much less time it is to copy these things than a titan bpo, which requires copies to be usable, and which costs 1/10th of what this costs. It puts these bpos in a really awkward spot for a 700b investment that just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. You don't get exclusivity, you don't have any hope of a profit, I'm not sure why anyone would buy one instead of waiting around for someone to not do the math. We can always tweak copy times around, those numbers aren't final, just a first draft. Which number would you have in mind?


Fredric Wolf Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team 111	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:58:49 - [41] - Quote EvilweaselSA wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: Are those research/copy times in minutes or in seconds? Can't seem to find anything online to clarify those units. Seconds. If those were in minutes you would be waiting 1805 days to manufacture a X-L Citadel . As Aryth pointed out this basically means that when you buy a 700b bpo, you make copies every 5 days (before bonuses). That means a single BPO will effectively flood the market with copies. It means that anyone buying a bpo will have more copies than they can possibly use, which they'll sell in jita...driving down the cost of a bpc to miniscule prices on your 700b bpo. It means it's a really dumb purchase and it's hard to even justify as a means to ensure you always have the ability to build an XL, or to make a profit, or really any reason. Its especially odd how much less time it is to copy these things than a titan bpo, which requires copies to be usable, and which costs 1/10th of what this costs. It puts these bpos in a really awkward spot for a 700b investment that just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. You don't get exclusivity, you don't have any hope of a profit, I'm not sure why anyone would buy one instead of waiting around for someone to not do the math. Would these be better sold as BPC from NPC's then? It would be a constant isk sink but you would have no way of getting a better researched copy?
Soldarius Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore 1401	Posted - 2015.10.26 16:59:39 - [42] - Quote The quantities of T2 salvage required for an XL rig are absolutely batshit insane. There is not enough available market supply across the entire eve universe to build more than a couple of any of these. The price of T2 salvage will go so high no one will ever be able to afford T2 rigs for anything ever again. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Alain Colcer Agiolet Security and Logistics 141	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:00:26 - [43] - Quote Please consider adding Hydrogen batteries to the Component fuel block, those items have hardly any use, besides t2 shield extenders.
xttz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 702	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:00:49 - [44] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: Are those research/copy times in minutes or in seconds? Can't seem to find anything online to clarify those units. Seconds. If those were in minutes you would be waiting 1805 days to manufacture a X-L Citadel . As Aryth pointed out this basically means that when you buy a 700b bpo, you make copies every 5 days (before bonuses). That means a single BPO will effectively flood the market with copies. It means that anyone buying a bpo will have more copies than they can possibly use, which they'll sell in jita...driving down the cost of a bpc to miniscule prices on your 700b bpo. It means it's a really dumb purchase and it's hard to even justify as a means to ensure you always have the ability to build an XL, or to make a profit, or really any reason. Its especially odd how much less time it is to copy these things than a titan bpo, which requires copies to be usable, and which costs 1/10th of what this costs. It puts these bpos in a really awkward spot for a 700b investment that just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. You don't get exclusivity, you don't have any hope of a profit, I'm not sure why anyone would buy one instead of waiting around for someone to not do the math. We can always tweak copy times around, those numbers aren't final, just a first draft. Which number would you have in mind? At the very least they should take longer than Titan BPCs to be worthwhile.
Rek Seven Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering 2077	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:01:23 - [45] - Quote 5 years should do it.... Dear eve players, please try and use the word "content" less and instead, be specific. Thanks
Soldarius Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore 1401	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:03:51 - [46] - Quote Torgeir Hekard wrote: [paranoia] I've noticed that medium citadel does not require factory and lab construction components to build. [/paranoia] Does it mean that research/invention/manufacturing would not be available in medium citadels, or it's just an arbitrary component set that in no way reflects the structure capabilities? This. Does this mean if I want to run reactions I will need to invest in a 7B isk Large citadel? Because currently every reaction in the eve universe is done at a POS. If the minimum investment becomes 7B isk, you can pretty much kiss the entire T2 and 3 markets goodbye. Only the people with direct access to moons and gases will ever run them, because buying gasses and moon goo off the market will be a complete loss for years. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Yadaryon Vondawn Alius Itineris Virtus 63	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:03:53 - [47] - Quote Will these citadels in any way make use of the high-tech items found in the data sites? Seems to me like an opportune moment! I quote : CCP RedDawn wrote: * High Tech items are on my list to make useful CCP RedDawn
Aryth GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1876	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:04:43 - [48] - Quote Yeah, as Xttz said it needs to be at least a titan. Or failing that at least a month on the BPO baseline. That is the area this makes economic sense and the market not blown out within 90-120 days. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal. Creator of Burn Jita Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2206	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:05:15 - [49] - Quote Soldarius wrote: Torgeir Hekard wrote: [paranoia] I've noticed that medium citadel does not require factory and lab construction components to build. [/paranoia] Does it mean that research/invention/manufacturing would not be available in medium citadels, or it's just an arbitrary component set that in no way reflects the structure capabilities? This. Does this mean if I want to run reactions I will need to invest in a 7B isk Large citadel? Because currently every reaction in the eve universe is done at a POS. If the minimum investment becomes 7B isk, you can pretty much kiss the entire T2 and 3 markets goodbye. Only the people with direct access to moons and gases will ever run them, because buying gasses and moon goo off the market will be a complete loss for years. Reactions aren't likely to exist in the same form that they do now. Same for moon minerals. I wouldn't think too hard about it at this juncture. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Saede Riordan Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 7822	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:06:27 - [50] - Quote EvilweaselSA wrote: Saede Riordan wrote: This is for larges specifically which is only important for the larger low class groups that have dozens of capitals needing to be stored. Mediums will be able to be brought in with transports, so an attacking group can just use medium citadels. If you've been building "dozens" of capitals you can build one more. Those capitals have a purpose, and are useful for a lot of things. Its not about the cost, its about the usefulness. A freighter that can't leave is only useful for one thing, deploying large and XL citadels. Why would they make us build a ship that is entirely and completely useless out of deploying large structures? What's wrong with POCO type gantries? And if you want to look at cost, consider that currently, you can store your capitals at a tower with an XL SMA for less then a billion ISK. With these changes, you need to invest in a 7+ billion isk structure, and then another 2 billion isk to build the freighter whose only job is to drop off the citadel. I could have used that isk to build more capitals! Fear and Loathing in Internet Spaceships

Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1236	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:06:49 - [51] - Quote Soldarius wrote: The quantities of T2 salvage required for an XL rig are absolutely batshit insane. There is not enough available market supply across the entire eve universe to build more than a couple of any of these. The price of T2 salvage will go so high no one will ever be able to afford T2 rigs for anything ever again. thats my biggest concern here as rigs are usually a fair chunk of a fully fitted ship as it is, surely there are enough worthless salvage components that could be used as the bulk for the new rigs instead. T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely. ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 highslots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
xttz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 702	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:07:39 - [52] - Quote Eodp Ellecon wrote: "You know that to build really tall buildings and such, cranes are built on site and taken down when the building is done. Sacrificing a freighter to get that medium structure seems like small potatoes when it comes to wormholes" "A Medium structure hull may be deployed from an Industrial, Large and X-Large require a freighter" Dev Blog So a Medium can be done from a DST. Freighter does Large (and then can dock) Reading w/o panic is hard. Has it been stated yet if Freighters can be built (or even dock) in mediums, or just L / XL structures? Azahar Ortenegro wrote: So you're entirely removing Small and Medium POSes. Bad move, small corps won't be able to settle as easily as before. And you're putting the BPO price at 6B instead of 500 millions for a Large POS (250 for a Medium, 125 for a Small.) Nice way to tell part of the players "Get the **** out.", taking what we already have and demanding 6B (plus the prod cost \o/) to get it back. Citadels are not the only structure type that will replace starbases. Starbases will also not be removed from the game until their functionality is fully replaced. Please take your reactionary shitposting to another thread.
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1174	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:08:40 - [53] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: We can always tweak copy times around, those numbers aren't final, just a first draft. Which number would you have in mind? Copy time or cost probably should be changed - I think copy time is the big outlier here. You have some idea of how many of these structures you expect will exist but my guess is a few dozen at most in the first year. You shouldn't be able to make many more bpcs than structures intended to be deployed. You need a bpc market of course - not every null alliance can be expected to put up 700b to get their foot in the door - but you've got to have it so the bpcs any one bpo can produce are some fraction of expected demand. With a base build time of 30 days, I'd set copy time to at least 30 days and probably much more - unlike supercapitals, there is no need for you to copy this bpo to produce with it safely. You can produce in-station off the bpo itself so copy time can be a freebie for when the bpo is not in use and can be longer than the production time, even several multiples of it without it being a big problem for the market. The bpo cost of these is 10x what a titan bpo costs, the bpc copy time is ~1/6th of a titan bpo copy time, and most titan bpcs are pretty cheap. Leviathans are the only one where the bpo isn't glutted but even those run only 1-2b each. I'd probably make it a several month base copy time so that you get people buying the bpos initially so they can get a leg up on deploying them and use of the bpo is tilted more towards manufacturing than copying. At a minimum producing them and copying them should be roughly the same time or at a minimum at the ratio of t2 bpos. Copying in 1/6th of the time to build it seems way, way off.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2206	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:08:52 - [54] - Quote xttz wrote: Has it been stated yet if Freighters can be built (or even dock) in mediums, or just L / XL structures? IIRC, freighters can enter mediums, as a special case. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1174	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:09:57 - [55] - Quote Saede Riordan wrote: And if you want to look at cost, consider that currently, you can store your capitals at a tower with an XL SMA for less then a billion ISK. With these changes, you need to invest in a 7+ billion isk structure, and then another 2 billion isk to build the freighter whose only job is to drop off the citadel. I could have used that isk to build more capitals! on the other hand, your large citidel is like a million times more useful than your pos with weak-ass weapons, easy theft, and the like which is why you're desperate to deploy one
Captain StringfellowHawk Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation 257	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:11:06 - [56] - Quote If racial fuel is being moved away from in caps, and now in citadels with the removals of POS's, just make one two of ice needed and jack the amounts on it up. It's goto be easier converting one of the current ice types that are generic to each area vs making bpos or convention kits for nullsec. What is being done besides the Structure fuel with the rest of the racial ice? If its not being repurposed its sitting in bellt a wastes system resources. Make some story line lore about a new mining technique that extracts some new element from the ice and that makes the fuel. This element is found in all racial ices, so it just gets added to the table and reuse some image for it in cargo. That has to be easier then making conversion tables for each fuel type?
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2206	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:11:33 - [57] - Quote Regarding freighter requirements in wormholes, remember that, with sufficient trust, you only need one freighter for an unlimited number of deployed citadels. It also puts a measure of security for your wormhole, as enemies attempting to set up inside your hole will have to anchor a medium to build their OWN freighter. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Chavez Domingo Gambrini 0	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:14:27 - [58] - Quote wasnt a large citadel at 80.000m-¦ that can fit into a orca... no need for a freighter than...
Soldarius Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore 1401	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:18:46 - [59] - Quote Querns wrote: Soldarius wrote: Torgeir Hekard wrote: [paranoia] I've noticed that medium citadel does not require factory and lab construction components to build. [/paranoia] Does it mean that research/invention/manufacturing would not be available in medium citadels, or it's just an arbitrary component set that in no way reflects the structure capabilities? This. Does this mean if I want to run reactions I will need to invest in a 7B isk Large citadel? Because currently every reaction in the eve universe is done at a POS. If the minimum investment becomes 7B isk, you can pretty much kiss the entire T2 and 3 markets goodbye. Only the people with direct access to moons and gases will ever run them, because buying gasses and moon goo off the market will be a complete loss for years. Reactions aren't likely to exist in the same form that they do now. Same for moon minerals. I wouldn't think too hard about it at this juncture. Thx, I'll try not to panic too much. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Azahar Ortenegro Astromechanica Maxima Astromechanica Federatis 50	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:18:59 - [60] - Quote xttz wrote: [quote=Eodp Ellecon]Citadels are not the only structure type that will replace starbases. Starbases will also not be removed from the game until their functionality is fully replaced. Please take your reactionary shitposting to another thread. I'm working with what CCP provides. Since this devblog, nothing has been said about the other types of structures except for the Market and Office structures, merged and renamed Citadels in this devblog. Basic functionalities provided by Small and Medium POSes will be moved to citadels with: 1/ A loss in size choice. 2/ A BPO 12 to 48 times more expensive than it currently is. Saying i'm shitposting isn't going to make my posts less relevant.

Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 350	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:19:37 - [61] - Quote Soldarius wrote: The quantities of T2 salvage required for an XL rig are absolutely batshit insane. There is not enough available market supply across the entire eve universe to build more than a couple of any of these. The price of T2 salvage will go so high no one will ever be able to afford T2 rigs for anything ever again Additionally, I'm not sure that the fuel requirements for using service modules plus the fuel block use during construction is going to be enough to replace the fuel use from POSes when they are eventually sunset'ed. Might be worth considering having the structure fuel blocks also be a component in the destructible rig construction adding more to the demand for those elements and relieving some of the pressure on the salvage market.
Streya Jormagdnir Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 366	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:19:37 - [62] - Quote Saede Riordan wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: Saede Riordan wrote: This is for larges specifically which is only important for the larger low class groups that have dozens of capitals needing to be stored. Mediums will be able to be brought in with transports, so an attacking group can just use medium citadels. If you've been building "dozens" of capitals you can build one more. Those capitals have a purpose, and are useful for a lot of things. Its not about the cost, its about the usefulness. A freighter that can't leave is only useful for one thing, deploying large and XL citadels. Why would they make us build a ship that is entirely and completely useless out of deploying large structures? What's wrong with POCO type gantries? And if you want to look at cost, consider that currently, you can store your capitals at a tower with an XL SMA for less then a billion ISK. With these changes, you need to invest in a 7+ billion isk structure, and then another 2 billion isk to build the freighter whose only job is to drop off the citadel. I could have used that isk to build more capitals! Yo dawg I herd you like capitals, so we're gonna make you build a capital to deploy a structure to store yo capitals. No other area of space needs to do this, just low-class wormhole space that only we wormhole hillbilly folk care about. Builds space-character! Puts space-hair on your space-chest! Seriously though, low-classers are used to having to perform extra feats of logistics that other small corps need not bother with. More of the same from CCP really. Besides, a freighter serves another purpose: bait. Hull tanking Obelisk gogo! I am also a human, straggling between the present world... and our future. I am a regulator, a coordinator, one who is meant to guide the way. Destination Unreachable: the worst Wspace blog ever
xttz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 702	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:20:13 - [63] - Quote Soldarius wrote: The quantities of T2 salvage required for an XL rig are absolutely batshit insane. There is not enough available market supply across the entire eve universe to build more than a couple of any of these. The price of T2 salvage will go so high no one will ever be able to afford T2 rigs for anything ever again. Currently outpost upgrades require a quantity of other materials such as: Construction Blocks Hydrogen Batteries Plutonium Superconductors It would make sense if rigs also required a quantity of these materials to produce as they're intended to replace outpost upgrades. This would relieve some pressure on the PI market and ensure these materials are still used at least as often as before.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1236	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:20:55 - [64] - Quote perhaps adding more salvage too ship wrecks could help with keeping T2 rig prices down, although i suppose the new stations will also drop some salvage. T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely. ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 highslots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2206	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:22:49 - [65] - Quote Azahar Ortenegro wrote: xttz wrote: [quote=Eodp Ellecon]Citadels are not the only structure type that will replace starbases. Starbases will also not be removed from the game until their functionality is fully replaced. Please take your reactionary shitposting to another thread. I'm working with what CCP provides. Since this devblog, nothing has been said about the other types of structures except for the Market and Office structures, merged and renamed Citadels in this devblog. Basic functionalities provided by Small and Medium POSes will be moved to citadels with: 1/ A loss in size choice. 2/ A BPO 12 to 48 times more expensive than it currently is. Saying i'm shitposting isn't going to make my posts less relevant. You don't need to own a citadel/other structure BPO to own one of the structures. Purchase one from someone else. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1175	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:23:38 - [66] - Quote Azahar Ortenegro wrote: Since this devblog, nothing has been said about the other types of structures except for the Market and Office structures, merged and renamed Citadels in this devblog. Basic functionalities provided by Small and Medium POSes will be moved to citadels with: 1/ A loss in size choice. 2/ A BPO 12 to 48 times more expensive than it currently is. Saying i'm shitposting isn't going to make my posts less relevant. they're not relevant Quote: Please note the Citadel Hulls and their associated blueprints are the most expensive structure set due to the importance regarding asset safety and home defense. Other structures will vary in price based on their role and intended persistence.
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 350	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:23:44 - [67] - Quote Saede Riordan wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: Saede Riordan wrote: This is for larges specifically which is only important for the larger low class groups that have dozens of capitals needing to be stored. Mediums will be able to be brought in with transports, so an attacking group can just use medium citadels. If you've been building "dozens" of capitals you can build one more. Those capitals have a purpose, and are useful for a lot of things. Its not about the cost, its about the usefulness. A freighter that can't leave is only useful for one thing, deploying large and XL citadels. Why would they make us build a ship that is entirely and completely useless out of deploying large structures? What's wrong with POCO type gantries? And if you want to look at cost, consider that currently, you can store your capitals at a tower with an XL SMA for less then a billion ISK. With these changes, you need to invest in a 7+ billion isk structure, and then another 2 billion isk to build the freighter whose only job is to drop off the citadel. I could have used that isk to build more capitals! Don't forget you're also going to have to purchase a BPC for the Citadel and build the actual citadel in system vs. buying a packaged one off the market.

CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4348	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:24:38 - [68] - Quote Soldarius wrote: Torgeir Hekard wrote: [paranoia] I've noticed that medium citadel does not require factory and lab construction components to build. [/paranoia] Does it mean that research/invention/manufacturing would not be available in medium citadels, or it's just an arbitrary component set that in no way reflects the structure capabilities? This. Does this mean if I want to run reactions I will need to invest in a 7B isk Large citadel? Because currently every reaction in the eve universe is done at a POS. If the minimum investment becomes 7B isk, you can pretty much kiss the entire T2 and 3 markets goodbye. Only the people with direct access to moons and gases will ever run them, because buying gasses and moon goo off the market will be a complete loss for years. Arbitrary components, do not reflect actual capability. Remember you can fit service modules into the proper slots as long as you have fittings. Some modules may be specialized in the future, but none of the basic service modules should be. Remember though that you'll get more bonuses if you fit rigs and modules into the hull that fits the proper theme (ex: citadel rigs into a citadel hull).


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4349	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:27:11 - [69] - Quote EvilweaselSA wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: We can always tweak copy times around, those numbers aren't final, just a first draft. Which number would you have in mind? Copy time or cost probably should be changed - I think copy time is the big outlier here. You have some idea of how many of these structures you expect will exist but my guess is a few dozen at most in the first year. You shouldn't be able to make many more bpcs than structures intended to be deployed. You need a bpc market of course - not every null alliance can be expected to put up 700b to get their foot in the door - but you've got to have it so the bpcs any one bpo can produce are some fraction of expected demand. With a base build time of 30 days, I'd set copy time to at least 30 days and probably much more - unlike supercapitals, there is no need for you to copy this bpo to produce with it safely. You can produce in-station off the bpo itself so copy time can be a freebie for when the bpo is not in use and can be longer than the production time, even several multiples of it without it being a big problem for the market. The bpo cost of these is 10x what a titan bpo costs, the bpc copy time is ~1/6th of a titan bpo copy time, and most titan bpcs are pretty cheap. Leviathans are the only one where the bpo isn't glutted but even those run only 1-2b each. I'd probably make it a several month base copy time so that you get people buying the bpos initially so they can get a leg up on deploying them and use of the bpo is tilted more towards manufacturing than copying. At a minimum producing them and copying them should be roughly the same time or at a minimum at the ratio of t2 bpos. Copying in 1/6th of the time to build it seems way, way off. Fair point, duly noted, we'll iterate on copy time. Thanks!

Anthar Thebess 1363	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:28:48 - [70] - Quote What about current outposts - to what size of the of citadel they will be changed. What about NPC stations in sov space - will they be changed? Finally what about NPC stations in NPC null - if you make them destructible - i think 'next day' MOA , or SOE will be homeless . Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.

Don Aubaris 140	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:32:37 - [71] - Quote What is going to happen with the current POS elements and the current fuel blocks? Don't you think it warrants some attention how you are going to do the conversion? Just so I can rage quit early
Centurax Unsettled Unsettled. 69	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:34:10 - [72] - Quote Nice work on the Citadels, really cant wait. I have 2 comments on the information so far: 1. Price for the BPO's as stated are 10 times market value, don't you think this will price out so many people even for the Medium Citadels. How about the following prices: * 1bil for the Medium * 10bil for the Large * 100bil for the XL 2. Also how about making a freighter (repackaged) able to fit in a DST for those who might want to deploy a Large Citadel in a WH? Cant see a good reason as to why we have to build a expensive and practically useless ship in a C1-C4 wormhole to be able to deploy a Large. You would still have to deploy a Medium with a factory (when they are available) or a POS to build the Large tower before transferring it to a ship big enough to launch it, just seems like a pointless step to build a Freighter first, so I offer the suggestion of having the repackaged volume of a freighter small enough to fit in a DST so it can be moved in and out but not give the advantage of being able to haul large amounts of materials in or out.
Azahar Ortenegro Astromechanica Maxima Astromechanica Federatis 50	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:38:14 - [73] - Quote Querns wrote: You don't need to own a citadel/other structure BPO to own one of the structures. Purchase one from someone else. True. But since Citadels replace Ship Maintenance Arrays, Corporate and Personal Hangar Arrays and Control Towers, anyone already owning those BPOs should be able to afford a Medium-siezd Citadel BPO. We're not even close. The current tag price goes from 625 millions (Small Tower) to 1B (Large Tower), for the same services. EvilweaselSA wrote: they're not relevant Quote: Please note the Citadel Hulls and their associated blueprints are the most expensive structure set due to the importance regarding asset safety and home defense. Other structures will vary in price based on their role and intended persistence. Please read what you quote, and think about it before posting. It will save some database space.
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 350	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:40:45 - [74] - Quote Azahar Ortenegro wrote: Querns wrote: You don't need to own a citadel/other structure BPO to own one of the structures. Purchase one from someone else. True. But since Citadels replace Ship Maintenance Arrays, Corporate and Personal Hangar Arrays and Control Towers, anyone already owning those BPOs should be able to afford a Medium-siezd Citadel BPO. We're not even close. The current tag price goes from 625 millions (Small Tower) to 1B (Large Tower), for the same services. It's not apples to apples. POSes have fuel requirements from 100-400M/mo. Citadels do not use fuel to provide basic services, only service modules will require them (Market, Cloning, Reprocessing, Compression)
Lady Rift What Shall We Call It 235	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:43:25 - [75] - Quote Obil Que wrote: Azahar Ortenegro wrote: Querns wrote: You don't need to own a citadel/other structure BPO to own one of the structures. Purchase one from someone else. True. But since Citadels replace Ship Maintenance Arrays, Corporate and Personal Hangar Arrays and Control Towers, anyone already owning those BPOs should be able to afford a Medium-siezd Citadel BPO. We're not even close. The current tag price goes from 625 millions (Small Tower) to 1B (Large Tower), for the same services. It's not apples to apples. POSes have fuel requirements from 100-400M/mo. Citadels do not use fuel to provide basic services, only service modules will require them (Market, Cloning, Reprocessing, Compression) from the blog. Modules: these are structure modules that fit into a structureGÇÖs high, medium and low slots. Similar to their ship module counterparts, they require powergrid and CPU to be properly fitted. Active modules also require capacitor, fuel, or both depending on the circumstances thus its still in the air if defense things need fuel.
Azahar Ortenegro Astromechanica Maxima Astromechanica Federatis 50	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:45:19 - [76] - Quote Obil Que wrote: It's not apples to apples. POSes have fuel requirements from 100-400M/mo. Citadels do not use fuel to provide basic services, only service modules will require them (Market, Cloning, Reprocessing, Compression) It's not really the point. Currently, only the Tower requires fuel. That cost is being moved to the service modules. It has nothing to do with the BPO price, and the removal of small/medium in-space storage facilities.
Bellasarius Baxter Zilog Enterprises 47	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:49:01 - [77] - Quote I havent read through alle the comments, so this might be a duplicate. The structure fuel block estimated price calculation seems bugged to me. There is no way that I can come up with, that will add up to an estimated price of around 45K ISK. Or am I missing something ?
Grorious Reader Mongorian Horde 40	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:51:59 - [78] - Quote Dear CCP, Please for the love of god, do not change the name of the Missile Guidance Thingie. Leave it exactly as it is. Thank you.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2206	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:54:16 - [79] - Quote Bellasarius Baxter wrote: I havent read through alle the comments, so this might be a duplicate. The structure fuel block estimated price calculation seems bugged to me. There is no way that I can come up with, that will add up to an estimated price of around 45K ISK. Or am I missing something ? There was a correction -- those listings are for a run of fuel blocks. Each run produces 40 blocks. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Elizabeth Norn Nornir Research 721	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:54:41 - [80] - Quote Azahar Ortenegro wrote: Querns wrote: You don't need to own a citadel/other structure BPO to own one of the structures. Purchase one from someone else. True. But since Citadels replace Ship Maintenance Arrays, Corporate and Personal Hangar Arrays and Control Towers, anyone already owning those BPOs should be able to afford a Medium-siezd Citadel BPO. We're not even close. The current tag price goes from 625 millions (Small Tower) to 1B (Large Tower), for the same services. EvilweaselSA wrote: they're not relevant Quote: Please note the Citadel Hulls and their associated blueprints are the most expensive structure set due to the importance regarding asset safety and home defense. Other structures will vary in price based on their role and intended persistence. Please read what you quote, and think about it before posting. It will save some database space. When POS were introduced you couldn't make ISK like you can now. There's so many other differences between a POS and a Citadel, you can't expect the prices to be 1:1. WTS ME 10 TE 20 BPOs & BPO Packs WTS Collectible Large Rigged Small/Medium Ships

Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2206	Posted - 2015.10.26 17:55:41 - [81] - Quote Azahar Ortenegro wrote: Querns wrote: You don't need to own a citadel/other structure BPO to own one of the structures. Purchase one from someone else. True. But since Citadels replace Ship Maintenance Arrays, Corporate and Personal Hangar Arrays and Control Towers, anyone already owning those BPOs should be able to afford a Medium-siezd Citadel BPO. We're not even close. The current tag price goes from 625 millions (Small Tower) to 1B (Large Tower), for the same services. Who says the costs have to be congruent? I see no reason to guarantee that. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1849	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:02:08 - [82] - Quote I really like the amount of salvage required to build these rigs. That will be a much needed shot in the arm for explorers (and those who hunt them). Currently T2 small and medium rigs are so cheap it's pretty much a no brainer to use them on just about everything. My recommendation would be to add some required components to the data sites as well, to encourage an equal level of competition for those sites. All around, I would love to see tons of T1 minerals, T1 and T2 salvage, PI, and other basic materials go into these new structures. ISK is relatively worthless right now in Eve. Increasing the demand for the basic building blocks will go a long way towards curbing some of the horrific inflation we have seen. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.
Alt Pilot1 Hysera Innovations 30	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:02:16 - [83] - Quote Guys, XL Citadels are supposed to be the end-game structure for large alliances, so they are supposed be a huge investment. Think about it: it's an uber structure that you can use to dock Titans and Supercarriers - and the structure also has a Doomsday itself. How powerful is that? Now to mention the strategic advantage of being able to dock supercaps. So they are supposed to be a major investment, even for a large alliance. And I don't think CCP want players to be able to deploy XL Citadels en masse, like they are doing with Titans and Supercarriers.
Sizeof Void Ninja Suicide Squadron 609	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:04:51 - [84] - Quote The price of the XL is too low. I'd bump it up another 10x, at least. Sometimes, I think you devs underestimate how much ISK already exists in the game, and how much more can be easily generated per month by an alliance. Go look at supercap production numbers, to get a better idea.
Sir SmashAlot The League of Extraordinary Opportunists Intergalactic Conservation Movement 186	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:06:02 - [85] - Quote The price for the Citadel BPOs are fair. But the copying/ME/PE stats are far too short considering the price of the BPO and structure. A few BPOs in circulation would be able to satisfy market demand. Why should I train Outpost Construction V? T2 salvage requirements for T2 Citadel Rigs are quiet high (already missed the boat in both primary and secondary markets, good job market friends ) Will current station components get converted to the new ones on patch day? Will Citadels in Amarr space require slaves or janitors?
Eodp Ellecon Northstar Cabal Tactical Narcotics Team 23	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:10:36 - [86] - Quote From Back Into Structure - http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/back-into-the-structure/?_ga=1.30661311.1259036344.1410318126 "Service modules possibilities: manufacturing of modules, ammunition, components, fuel blocks, capital components, subsystems and ships, among other things. One module will be required for the manufacturing of each category mentioned above. This means manufacturing will be less generalized as it is currently working within Starbases. GÇó Rigs possibilities: Material Efficiency (ME), Time Efficiency (TE) and NPC cost reduction bonuses. We want to ensure those new rigs provide more specialization than currently offered by Starbases and Outposts to offset for the generalization changes." So you are adding complexity to Industrial building processes while also... From I Feel Safe blog - http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/i-feel-safe-in-citadel-city/ "Some of the input materials used in manufacturing or science jobs will drop as loot. " yet, "Items located in personal or corporation hangars will be impounded and saved from destruction." ... putting active Industrialist efforts in disparity with other character assets while still not having a mechanism for contributing to either ADM or Citadel defense statistics.
TigerXtrm KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1296	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:12:24 - [87] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Arbitrary components, do not reflect actual capability. But... why? That makes absolutely no sense. That's like making a Doomsday Mount part of the requirements to build a freighter. Or to make a more relevant example, to have a freighter blueprint that doesn't require Capital Cargo Bay component. If you're gonna do something, do it right. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
Azahar Ortenegro Astromechanica Maxima Astromechanica Federatis 50	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:13:04 - [88] - Quote Elizabeth Norn wrote: When POS were introduced you couldn't make ISK like you can now. There's so many other differences between a POS and a Citadel, you can't expect the prices to be 1:1. Good, because I'm not asking for a 1:1 ratio. Only for a BPO price that people currently owning a set of POS/POS module BPOs set can afford. That's not the case right now. Alt Pilot1 wrote: Guys, XL Citadels are supposed to be the end-game structure for large alliances, so they are supposed be a huge investment. Think about it: it's an uber structure that you can use to dock Titans and Supercarriers - and the structure also has a Doomsday itself. How powerful is that? Not to mention the strategic advantage of being able to dock supercaps. So they are supposed to be a major investment, even for a large alliance. And I don't think CCP want players to be able to deploy XL Citadels en masse, like they are doing with Titans and Supercarriers. I'm talking about Medium Citadels, and the lack of in-space storage facilities to replace Small and Medium POSes.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2206	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:20:46 - [89] - Quote Eodp Ellecon wrote: From Back Into Structure - http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/back-into-the-structure/?_ga=1.30661311.1259036344.1410318126 "Service modules possibilities: manufacturing of modules, ammunition, components, fuel blocks, capital components, subsystems and ships, among other things. One module will be required for the manufacturing of each category mentioned above. This means manufacturing will be less generalized as it is currently working within Starbases. GÇó Rigs possibilities: Material Efficiency (ME), Time Efficiency (TE) and NPC cost reduction bonuses. We want to ensure those new rigs provide more specialization than currently offered by Starbases and Outposts to offset for the generalization changes." So you are adding complexity to Industrial building processes while also... From I Feel Safe blog - http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/i-feel-safe-in-citadel-city/ "Some of the input materials used in manufacturing or science jobs will drop as loot. " yet, "Items located in personal or corporation hangars will be impounded and saved from destruction." ... putting active Industrialist efforts in disparity with other character assets while still not having a mechanism for contributing to either ADM or Citadel defense statistics. You of all people should know that CCP won't give ADM benefits for manufacturing. It's far too easy to game. Also, considering that any industry jobs started in a POS are lost if the POS is destroyed, the effect for the industrialist is the same. The fact that some of the materials drop as loot is just giving attackers a cherry on top; it wouldn't cost anything outside of what is normal for an industrialist unfortunate enough to suffer such a disruption. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Grorious Reader Mongorian Horde 40	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:30:24 - [90] - Quote I'd just like to point out that "X will be so expensive that only a handful will be built by the biggest alliances" is a demonstrably horrible design philosophy. I'm pretty sure CCP Fozzie previously stated this fact in regard to titans and super caps. Now CCP is doing it again with XL Citadels. I predict Deklein will be filled to the brim with XL citadels within a year. Billions of isk is not cost prohibitive when you have individual players toting around trillions.

Pic'n dor Wild Sentinels Honorable Third Party 43	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:36:14 - [91] - Quote Citadels is a major change in eve. A all new way of thinking the game so there's nothing worth commenting the work in progress except that we want eve to evolve and that first preview make people dream. More of that, CCP, you learnt the hard way how to deal with us : spreadsheet porn to let our imagination bloom ! BUT You forgot one thing !! We want billboard service everywhere around like in real shopping mall and scam everyone with leaks photo of our beloved CEO naked ! So please, release Ad Services with citadels xD COUCOU TOUCHE TOUCHE
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 350	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:37:18 - [92] - Quote Grorious Reader wrote: I'd just like to point out that "X will be so expensive that only a handful will be built by the biggest alliances" is a demonstrably horrible design philosophy. I'm pretty sure CCP Fozzie previously stated this fact in regard to titans and super caps. Now CCP is doing it again with XL Citadels. I predict Deklein will be filled to the brim with XL citadels within a year. Billions of isk is not cost prohibitive when you have individual players toting around trillions. You really shouldn't paraphrase with quoting: Quote: we want the X-Large to be quite an expensive goal to achieve. This should require significant effort to complete, not something easily achieved by just anyone. That isn't the same as saying that only a handful should be built nor is it designing with cost as a limiting factor.
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1180	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:39:12 - [93] - Quote Grorious Reader wrote: I'd just like to point out that "X will be so expensive that only a handful will be built by the biggest alliances" is a demonstrably horrible design philosophy. I'm pretty sure CCP Fozzie previously stated this fact in regard to titans and super caps. Now CCP is doing it again with XL Citadels. I predict Deklein will be filled to the brim with XL citadels within a year. Billions of isk is not cost prohibitive when you have individual players toting around trillions. I'm not seeing the benefit to dozens of these in the same region versus other things we could do with that isk. They're massive, cool, and have great defenses but each new one has a declining marginal utility in a region.
Marox Calendale Human League 61	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:48:05 - [94] - Quote What Skills will be needed to deploy Citadels in Space? Will Cloning Centers be fittable in WH-Space? And if yes, how will they work there?
Sabastian Cerabiam Seventh Element Coalition of the Unfortunate 3	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:50:54 - [95] - Quote I wana know whats gona happen with those of us that have POS bpos. Will they get converted to equivalent citadel ones or will we somehow get reimbursed the isk we spent to buy them?
Andre Vauban Quantum Cats Syndicate Spaceship Bebop 429	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:51:39 - [96] - Quote Can you provide any information about how/if existing fuel blocks can be converted to structure fuel blocks? Or do we have to reprocess them to take a material loss(reprocessing efficiency)? .
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1181	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:58:56 - [97] - Quote Andre Vauban wrote: Can you provide any information about how/if existing fuel blocks can be converted to structure fuel blocks? Or do we have to reprocess them to take a material loss(reprocessing efficiency)? pos won't be deleted for a good long while, year+ minimum no reason to sort this out now but the best solution would be market buy orders or just converting them into their base constituent parts
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 350	Posted - 2015.10.26 18:59:41 - [98] - Quote The structure blog link regarding the hull composition has the Large Citadel structure size at 80km3 http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/68671/1/Structurecompositioncomponent.png Unless my EFT is wrong, a max cargo Orca tops out over 100km3 of cargo. That would mean, unless there is a launching restriction to the freighter class, that a Large Citadel could be transported in an Orca which does fit inside lower class wormhole systems. Is there a launching restriction on L and XL Citadels limited them to Freighters or is it purely a cargo limitation, in which case, the Freighter comment in the devblog was incorrect?
Kismeteer GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 854	Posted - 2015.10.26 19:02:56 - [99] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: Copy time or cost probably should be changed - I think copy time is the big outlier here. You have some idea of how many of these structures you expect will exist but my guess is a few dozen at most in the first year. You shouldn't be able to make many more bpcs than structures intended to be deployed. You need a bpc market of course - not every null alliance can be expected to put up 700b to get their foot in the door - but you've got to have it so the bpcs any one bpo can produce are some fraction of expected demand. With a base build time of 30 days, I'd set copy time to at least 30 days and probably much more - unlike supercapitals, there is no need for you to copy this bpo to produce with it safely. You can produce in-station off the bpo itself so copy time can be a freebie for when the bpo is not in use and can be longer than the production time, even several multiples of it without it being a big problem for the market. The bpo cost of these is 10x what a titan bpo costs, the bpc copy time is ~1/6th of a titan bpo copy time, and most titan bpcs are pretty cheap. Leviathans are the only one where the bpo isn't glutted but even those run only 1-2b each. I'd probably make it a several month base copy time so that you get people buying the bpos initially so they can get a leg up on deploying them and use of the bpo is tilted more towards manufacturing than copying. At a minimum producing them and copying them should be roughly the same time or at a minimum at the ratio of t2 bpos. Copying in 1/6th of the time to build it seems way, way off. Fair point, duly noted, we'll iterate on copy time. Thanks! http://imgur.com/a/XJHbH Created a pair of graphs (and log versions) to show how badly out of wack the new blueprints are with a cart of other large scale items. I can provide the source spreadsheet as well if people want it. You can work backwards to make these numbers match up with the rest of the universe. These numbers are cost of BPO / Blueprint time in seconds to build, copy or ME/TE.
Andre Vauban Quantum Cats Syndicate Spaceship Bebop 429	Posted - 2015.10.26 19:05:23 - [100] - Quote Can you please consider adding a defensive module (or rig) for something like "Overview Inhibitor"? The idea being that the citadel (or structure) will NOT show up on the overview but instead will need to be found by dscan and then probing it down (non-trivial to probe down, maybe even requiring sister's+virtues)? The idea being to give the little guy a chance to hide a medium citadel in unused space. The system "owner" will require real work (probing down each system) to find any unwelcome guests rather than just flying a fast interceptor through space and looking at the overview. My main concern (in lowsec) is that the more powerful groups will just go after citadels for giggles because they can. If they want to actively hunt me and look for targets, then so be it. However, they should at least put in some effort to find me. Yes, they can still dscan/probe them down, but that takes time and they probably cannot keep looking in EVERY system but rather systems they want to control or systems they suspect people they don't like live. .

Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1236	Posted - 2015.10.26 19:32:37 - [101] - Quote Andre Vauban wrote: Can you please consider adding a defensive module (or rig) for something like "Overview Inhibitor"? The idea being that the citadel (or structure) will NOT show up on the overview but instead will need to be found by dscan and then probing it down (non-trivial to probe down, maybe even requiring sister's+virtues)? The idea being to give the little guy a chance to hide a medium citadel in unused space. The system "owner" will require real work (probing down each system) to find any unwelcome guests rather than just flying a fast interceptor through space and looking at the overview. My main concern (in lowsec) is that the more powerful groups will just go after citadels for giggles because they can. If they want to actively hunt me and look for targets, then so be it. However, they should at least put in some effort to find me. Yes, they can still dscan/probe them down, but that takes time and they probably cannot keep looking in EVERY system but rather systems they want to control or systems they suspect people they don't like live. i've always liked the idea of a secret research facility, so something like scientists have too be recruited and obviously it only does research but how would it work? - only defense is being hidden, so no invulnerability/defenses of any kind - big bonuses too research more than any citadel etc could achieve. - relatively cheap as it would be only a small building so how would it stay hidden? - has too be probed - maybe a complex probing game, so when being probed it has decoys and every failure too probe the correct one means ghost sigs spawn up increasing the amount of sigs overall. T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely. ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 highslots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Owen Levanth Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration 417	Posted - 2015.10.26 19:43:43 - [102] - Quote Soldarius wrote: The quantities of T2 salvage required for an XL rig are absolutely batshit insane. There is not enough available market supply across the entire eve universe to build more than a couple of any of these. The price of T2 salvage will go so high no one will ever be able to afford T2 rigs for anything ever again. What actually will happen: Some explorers get filthy rich, then a goldrush happens when everyone notices what happens with T2-salvage, then the price drops back to sane levels.
Soleil Fournier Ultimatum. The Bastion 48	Posted - 2015.10.26 19:45:19 - [103] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Aryth wrote: These seem awfully cheap at the medium level given their really small vulnerability window. Is there a concern we end up with a very spammable and essentially throwaway level of citadels? They are destructible, so the smaller sizes should be relatively spammable. Also remember 600m ISK it the base hull price. And you thought the sov grind was hellacious. Think about 20 medium citadels in a system you need to clear out. Each having a different vulnerability timer set for maximum trolling. That means 20 initial reinforcement fights, 20 command node huntings, 20 second reinforcement fights, another 20 command node hunting parties....the implications on the grind here are pretty scarry. Maybe not for highsec, but sov definately will suffer from this type of issue. Then think about the next 5 systems next to it that have the same setup, and that they won't ever go offline because the hulls don't take fuel. There are rich players/alliances out there that will do this. A hard cap doesn't make sense. But I think the above scenerio should at least be discussed before the sov grind gets sent into overdrive.
iSP Boost Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2015.10.26 19:48:27 - [104] - Quote Soleil Fournier wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Aryth wrote: These seem awfully cheap at the medium level given their really small vulnerability window. Is there a concern we end up with a very spammable and essentially throwaway level of citadels? They are destructible, so the smaller sizes should be relatively spammable. Also remember 600m ISK it the base hull price. And you thought the sov grind was hellacious. Think about 20 medium citadels in a system you need to clear out. Each having a different vulnerability timer set for maximum trolling. That means 20 initial reinforcement fights, 20 command node huntings, 20 second reinforcement fights, another 20 command node hunting parties....the implications on the grind here are pretty scarry. Maybe not for highsec, but sov definately will suffer from this type of issue. Then think about the next 5 systems next to it that have the same setup, and that they won't ever go offline because the hulls don't take fuel. There are rich players/alliances out there that will do this. A hard cap doesn't make sense. But I think the above scenerio should at least be discussed before the sov grind gets sent into overdrive. Citadels don't spawn nodes. You just shoot the structure.
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 351	Posted - 2015.10.26 19:49:00 - [105] - Quote Soleil Fournier wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Aryth wrote: These seem awfully cheap at the medium level given their really small vulnerability window. Is there a concern we end up with a very spammable and essentially throwaway level of citadels? They are destructible, so the smaller sizes should be relatively spammable. Also remember 600m ISK it the base hull price. And you thought the sov grind was hellacious in dominion. Think about 20 medium citadels in a system you need to clear out. Each having a different vulnerability timer set for maximum trolling. That means 20 initial reinforcement fights, 20 command node huntings, 20 second reinforcement fights, another 20 command node hunting parties....the implications on the grind here are pretty scarry. Maybe not for highsec, but sov definately will suffer from this type of issue. Then think about the next 5 systems next to it that have the same setup, and that they won't ever go offline because the hulls don't take fuel. There are rich players/alliances out there that will do this. A hard cap doesn't make sense. But I think the above scenerio should at least be discussed before the sov grind gets sent into overdrive. There are no command nodes for Citadel reinforcement and destruction. That is only for sov.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1236	Posted - 2015.10.26 19:49:39 - [106] - Quote Soleil Fournier wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Aryth wrote: These seem awfully cheap at the medium level given their really small vulnerability window. Is there a concern we end up with a very spammable and essentially throwaway level of citadels? They are destructible, so the smaller sizes should be relatively spammable. Also remember 600m ISK it the base hull price. And you thought the sov grind was hellacious. Think about 20 medium citadels in a system you need to clear out. Each having a different vulnerability timer set for maximum trolling. That means 20 initial reinforcement fights, 20 command node huntings, 20 second reinforcement fights, another 20 command node hunting parties....the implications on the grind here are pretty scarry. Maybe not for highsec, but sov definately will suffer from this type of issue. Then think about the next 5 systems next to it that have the same setup, and that they won't ever go offline because the hulls don't take fuel. There are rich players/alliances out there that will do this. A hard cap doesn't make sense. But I think the above scenerio should at least be discussed before the sov grind gets sent into overdrive. intriguing, but surely you can still take sov without having too destroy these? , but i think making all citadels have too use fuel should be mandatory. T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely. ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 highslots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Amarisen Gream Divine Demise Apocalypse Now. 142	Posted - 2015.10.26 19:56:04 - [107] - Quote I want to know about Alliance Income There was talk about redoing it so it wasn't all one way. (top down and wanted to move from a bottom up) "The Lord loosed upon them his fierce anger All of his fury and rage. He dispatched against them a band of Avenging Angels" - The Scriptures, Book II, Apocalypse 10:1 DIDE- is open to new members
Soleil Fournier Ultimatum. The Bastion 48	Posted - 2015.10.26 20:00:38 - [108] - Quote Right, I specified that it was a sov issue. I guess it depends on whether citadels will take the place of node spawning outposts within the system capture rules set once outposts are removed from the game, or if they go in another direction.
probag Bear Xiong Offices 88	Posted - 2015.10.26 20:02:06 - [109] - Quote Thank you very much for taking the time to make Structure Rigs require the lower-demand salvage! It was an idea I was hoping for, but didn't actually expect to see on the very first pass for the numbers. On that note though. Acronyms used in the following paragraph, for convenience: Core Defense Field Extender = CDFE, Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer = EMSF, Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer = THSF. Most frequently-bought = MFB; this refers to the volume of purchases made by end-users, with the fluff volume created by re-sellers being filtered out. Med CDFE IIs are the MFB T2 rigs in Jita. Med EMSF IIs are the 2nd MFB T2 rigs in Jita. Small CDFE IIs and Small EMSF IIs are the 4th and 6th MFB T2 rigs in Jita. They are the 1st and 2nd MFB small T2 rigs in Jita. Large EMSF IIs, THSF IIs, and CDFE IIs are, respectively, the 2nd, 4th, and 6th MFB large T2 rigs in Jita. The primary component of the aforementioned rigs are Enhanced Ward Consoles and Intact Shield Emitters, respectively. I had a few more paragraphs written up, but you can easily come up with better solutions than me should you agree that there's a problem. So, long story short: the fact that T2 Large Structure rigs will be competing for Enhanced Ward Consoles with the most frequently-bought T2 rigs concerns me. With the current material requirements for Enhanced Ward Consoles, and with it being both the most pricey and most volatile raw material on that list, I fear that the increased demand pressure will raise its cost far too high (tripling it in the short-term, perhaps doubling it in the long term), significantly driving down the usage of T2 ship shield rigs.
Winter Archipelago Autumn Industrial Enterprises 459	Posted - 2015.10.26 20:09:36 - [110] - Quote In regard to the rigs, having them take lower Relic site materials and throw in some of the trash from Data sites would probably be a huge boon for data sites. With the quantity of Relic salvage in the Structure rigs, the disparity between Relic and Data sites is only going to grow wider, despite the current attempts to improve Data sites. Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections. Once you've made your choice, join the *EvE-Scout* channel and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!

Petrified Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance 302	Posted - 2015.10.26 20:20:04 - [111] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Aryth wrote: These seem awfully cheap at the medium level given their really small vulnerability window. Is there a concern we end up with a very spammable and essentially throwaway level of citadels? They are destructible, so the smaller sizes should be relatively spammable. Also remember 600m ISK it the base hull price. Not to mention that if you catch one as it exits the 24 anchoring stage, these things are likely as good as dead. But... can you use the defenses on the citadel immediately after it finishes anchoring?
Terranid Meester Tactical Assault and Recon Unit 312	Posted - 2015.10.26 20:21:19 - [112] - Quote Building these citadels is a great moment to increase the lucrativity of data sites by using the relatively unused items [second-hand parts etc] that people end up having a ton of but never being able to do anything major with them apart from using the odd one to build a cosmos module. Using them to build citadel parts should be kept in mind along with any other relatively unused construction items.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1236	Posted - 2015.10.26 20:31:05 - [113] - Quote Winter Archipelago wrote: In regard to the rigs, having them take lower Relic site materials and throw in some of the trash from Data sites would probably be a huge boon for data sites. With the quantity of Relic salvage in the Structure rigs, the disparity between Relic and Data sites is only going to grow wider, despite the current attempts to improve Data sites. surely data sites should be all about tech stuff, bp's that kind of stuff rather than salvage T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely. ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 highslots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
probag Bear Xiong Offices 88	Posted - 2015.10.26 20:32:17 - [114] - Quote Soldarius wrote: The quantities of T2 salvage required for an XL rig are absolutely batshit insane. There is not enough available market supply across the entire eve universe to build more than a couple of any of these. The price of T2 salvage will go so high no one will ever be able to afford T2 rigs for anything ever again. For everything except Enhanced Ward Consoles (and arguably Intact Shield Emitters), there is more than enough available market supply across the entire eve universe to build thousands of these. This would not even affect the price of most rigs, would raise the price of almost all the rest by less than ~0.25mil, and would raise the price of shield rigs by ~85% in the short-term and ~40% in the long-term. Harvey James wrote: thats my biggest concern here as rigs are usually a fair chunk of a fully fitted ship as it is, surely there are enough worthless salvage components that could be used as the bulk for the new rigs instead. You're absolutely right: there's lots of worthless salvage components like that! Good thing that (with the exception of Enhanced Ward Consoles and arguably Intact Shield Emitters) the new rigs use exactly those worthless components, rather than the higher-demand ones. Owen Levanth wrote: What actually will happen: Some explorers get filthy rich, then a goldrush happens when everyone notices what happens with T2-salvage, then the price drops back to sane levels. This. Most of the salvage materials in those spreadsheets is currently not even looted by explorers; it's left to de-spawn in space. An exception, however, is Enhanced Ward Consoles, which are currently one of the main attractions of exploring non-Sansha space, and are already being exploited almost to their limit. Hard to have a gold-rush when there's no new gold to lay claim to.
Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 284	Posted - 2015.10.26 20:32:53 - [115] - Quote The XL artwork is seriously cool..... that Avatar looks positively puny in comparison War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Winter Archipelago Autumn Industrial Enterprises 459	Posted - 2015.10.26 20:39:08 - [116] - Quote Harvey James wrote: Winter Archipelago wrote: In regard to the rigs, having them take lower Relic site materials and throw in some of the trash from Data sites would probably be a huge boon for data sites. With the quantity of Relic salvage in the Structure rigs, the disparity between Relic and Data sites is only going to grow wider, despite the current attempts to improve Data sites. surely data sites should be all about tech stuff, bp's that kind of stuff rather than salvage I'm not saying to put Relic salvage into Data sites, but to have the Structure rigs use materials from Data sites along with the lower-end salvage materials. Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections. Once you've made your choice, join the *EvE-Scout* channel and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!
Terranid Meester Tactical Assault and Recon Unit 312	Posted - 2015.10.26 20:45:20 - [117] - Quote ISK as a material used to build citadels? Going on the vein of CCP wanting everything to be destructible which will soon include skillpoints the fact that isk is basically indestructible and just gets transferred from either individuals, corporations, alliances and npc and ccp owned corps and alliances is something that will probably need to be addressed eventually. I would say 500 million for a medium, 2 billion for a large and 10 billion for an extra large will help to fight inflation. Maybe even turn isk into aurum tokens via blueprints and use them instead.
probag Bear Xiong Offices 88	Posted - 2015.10.26 20:49:08 - [118] - Quote Terranid Meester wrote: ISK as a material used to build citadels? Going on the vein of CCP wanting everything to be destructible which will soon include skillpoints the fact that isk is basically indestructible and just gets transferred from either individuals, corporations, alliances and npc and ccp owned corps and alliances is something that will probably need to be addressed eventually. I would say 500 million for a medium, 2 billion for a large and 10 billion for an extra large will help to fight inflation. Maybe even turn isk into aurum tokens via blueprints and use them instead. ISK is already used as a material for the manufacturing of all items in Eve. That's why we've been having a nothing but deflation since Crius came out.
Ice Cold Beer To The Stars 4	Posted - 2015.10.26 21:15:12 - [119] - Quote I see the CSM has been busy. More nul sec crap of no interest to empire dwellers. My mates and I have around 30 accounts mothballed and mothballed they will remain. Eve will die slowly one nul sec expansion at time. CSM, hang your heads in shame.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2637	Posted - 2015.10.26 21:18:29 - [120] - Quote Soleil Fournier wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Aryth wrote: These seem awfully cheap at the medium level given their really small vulnerability window. Is there a concern we end up with a very spammable and essentially throwaway level of citadels? They are destructible, so the smaller sizes should be relatively spammable. Also remember 600m ISK it the base hull price. And you thought the sov grind was hellacious in dominion. Think about 20 medium citadels in a system you need to clear out. Each having a different vulnerability timer set for maximum trolling. That means 20 initial reinforcement fights, 20 command node huntings, 20 second reinforcement fights, another 20 command node hunting parties....the implications on the grind here are pretty scarry. Maybe not for highsec, but sov definately will suffer from this type of issue. Then think about the next 5 systems next to it that have the same setup, and that they won't ever go offline because the hulls don't take fuel. There are rich players/alliances out there that will do this, because it has been a strategy employed before with towers to wear out the opponent without ever fighting. A hard cap doesn't make sense. But I think the above scenerio should at least be discussed before the sov grind gets sent into overdrive. You mean the above scenario where you made about 6 billion killing those structures off just the hulls, + any module drops on them, for maybe an extra billion. And they might not go offline, but they only defend themselves with a pilot actively doing so, otherwise they are pure targets in space. And if they had assets in those citadels (which they must to make them relevant) then they also have to pay the cost of recovering those assets. So yea...... I don't think that scenario is very scary. And for Wormhole space.... The question you want to be asking is this. "CCP, Can I tether a Capital to a M Citadel even though it can't dock" If the answer is yes, and Tethered ships can use station services like repair and refitting, you get 99% of the current ability of a large POS, as well as a bunch of abilities the large POS doesn't have.

Ransu Asanari AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse 461	Posted - 2015.10.26 21:21:08 - [121] - Quote I'm glad we're finally talking about build components for Citadels. I have to say, it's pretty much what I expected, and that disappoints me somewhat. I'm glad the PI requirements are staying equivalent so there is still demand for products in the PI chain. The plan to use T1 and T2 Salvage will greatly increase the value of salvage from Relic Sites, as well as salvaging wrecks from sites. So the planned change will be a net boost to the value of Relic Sites - but I don't see anything in the devblog on helping fix value for Data Sites. The current Faction POS Tower and Module BPCs are only found in Data Sites via Exploration. Since these will be made obsolete when Citadels come along, I was hoping there would be some mention of how they would be replaced. Since the Citadels are not Faction specific anymore, that precludes the base structure having faction versions. In the devblog it was stated "If and when we release Tech II or faction modules the material build-up will be properly modified to match." So that means there aren't plans to release Faction Citadel Modules to replace Faction POS Modules at this launch? The "High-Tech" items, as well as the Faction Materials (Positron Cords, Electric Conduits) that used to be for building Interfaces for invention before they were removed from the game still have no real use in manufacturing. I was hoping maybe they would find some use in the Sovereignty or Citadel Structure build chain to give them some value. CCP RedDawn stated in the current Exploration Site feedback that there is a plan to replace the POS based drops once Citadels come out, but I don't see anything in this Devblog on how. Could you elaborate, or is this still in the works?
Indahmawar Fazmarai 4077	Posted - 2015.10.26 21:29:34 - [122] - Quote Can you imagine someone joining EVE just to owe one of this new structures...? Neither I... CCP Seagull: "EVE should be a universe where the infrastructure you build and fight over is as player driven and dynamic as the EVE market is now". 62% of players: "We're not interested. May we have Plan B, please?" CCP Seagull: "What Plan B?"
Sir SmashAlot The League of Extraordinary Opportunists Intergalactic Conservation Movement 186	Posted - 2015.10.26 21:41:14 - [123] - Quote Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: Can you imagine someone joining EVE just to owe one of this new structures...? Neither I... When the story breaks out about the fight that resulted in the destruction of the first XL citadel with x number of supers docked. I would say Hells Yah! Or the number of supers/capitals/sub caps expended in its destruction. Or a coalitions attempt to dead zone an asset holding system to force users to pay for relocation fees effectively shotguning the losing groups assets all over new eden. I would say Hells Yah!
Destiny Dain2 Your Destiny Corporation 25	Posted - 2015.10.26 21:44:41 - [124] - Quote Andre Vauban wrote: Can you please consider adding a defensive module (or rig) for something like "Overview Inhibitor"? The idea being that the citadel (or structure) will NOT show up on the overview but instead will need to be found by dscan and then probing it down (non-trivial to probe down, maybe even requiring sister's+virtues)? The idea being to give the little guy a chance to hide a medium citadel in unused space. The system "owner" will require real work (probing down each system) to find any unwelcome guests rather than just flying a fast interceptor through space and looking at the overview. My main concern (in lowsec) is that the more powerful groups will just go after citadels for giggles because they can. If they want to actively hunt me and look for targets, then so be it. However, they should at least put in some effort to find me. Yes, they can still dscan/probe them down, but that takes time and they probably cannot keep looking in EVERY system but rather systems they want to control or systems they suspect people they don't like live. I agree with this to a point. I think the Citadels should only appear on the overview if you set it to public. That way you can be found if you start selling items or they have to hunt you. Plus with everyone that is going to build a Citadel will completely flood the overview with 100 Citadels in the list. It will be crazy.
Rek Seven Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering 2080	Posted - 2015.10.26 21:56:57 - [125] - Quote Destiny Dain2 wrote: Andre Vauban wrote: Can you please consider adding a defensive module (or rig) for something like "Overview Inhibitor"? The idea being that the citadel (or structure) will NOT show up on the overview but instead will need to be found by dscan and then probing it down (non-trivial to probe down, maybe even requiring sister's+virtues)? The idea being to give the little guy a chance to hide a medium citadel in unused space. The system "owner" will require real work (probing down each system) to find any unwelcome guests rather than just flying a fast interceptor through space and looking at the overview. My main concern (in lowsec) is that the more powerful groups will just go after citadels for giggles because they can. If they want to actively hunt me and look for targets, then so be it. However, they should at least put in some effort to find me. Yes, they can still dscan/probe them down, but that takes time and they probably cannot keep looking in EVERY system but rather systems they want to control or systems they suspect people they don't like live. I agree with this to a point. I think the Citadels should only appear on the overview if you set it to public. That way you can be found if you start selling items or they have to hunt you. Plus with everyone that is going to build a Citadel will completely flood the overview with 100 Citadels in the list. It will be crazy. I agree to. For wormhole space, being able to just warp to the citadel beacon takes away from the scout role. We should be able to have them not show up on overview and even D-scan if we are willing to sacrifice slots/rigs. Dear eve players, please try and use the word "content" less and instead, be specific. Thanks
destinationunreachable Hello Kitty Fanclub 1	Posted - 2015.10.26 22:02:52 - [126] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: For wormhole space, being able to just warp to the citadel beacon takes away from the scout role. We should be able to have them not show up on overview and even D-scan if we are willing to sacrifice slots/rigs. make them invisible even for a d-scan ? - no, but as a compromise: make only XL (and maybe L?) show up in the overview and leave the M like the control towers behave now. edit: speling
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2799	Posted - 2015.10.26 22:08:57 - [127] - Quote I'm assuming you can build a citadel, in a citadel? as opposed to not building POSes in a POS? (unless I missed something)
Rek Seven Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering 2080	Posted - 2015.10.26 22:13:20 - [128] - Quote destinationunreachable wrote: Rek Seven wrote: For wormhole space, being able to just warp to the citadel beacon takes away from the scout role. We should be able to have them not show up on overview and even D-scan if we are willing to sacrifice slots/rigs. make them invisible even for a d-scan ? - no, but as a compromise: make only XL (and maybe L?) show up in the overview and leave the M like the control towers behave now. edit: speling I think it would be a really cool feature if you make it invisible from D-scan... Any ships around the citadel would still be visible on D-scan, and both and the citadel would still be scalable using combat probes. What's wrong with that? Dear eve players, please try and use the word "content" less and instead, be specific. Thanks
destinationunreachable Hello Kitty Fanclub 1	Posted - 2015.10.26 22:28:43 - [129] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: What's wrong with that? Balance. An invisible station is nearly un-scannable if in this system there are already 10+ other ones. You can only find it if you know what you are looking for, with invisibility going on when logged out etc - no, it's not balanced.
Rek Seven Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering 2080	Posted - 2015.10.26 22:43:49 - [130] - Quote destinationunreachable wrote: Rek Seven wrote: What's wrong with that? Balance. An invisible station is nearly un-scannable if in this system there are already 10+ other ones. You can only find it if you know what you are looking for, with invisibility going on when logged out etc - no, it's not balanced. It is 100% scalable! Why wouldn't you know what you're looking for? If a scout wants to know if there is a hidden citadel, he/she simply has to launch probes. This deepens the gamplay for scanners and the potential of structures. Is feature alone has nothing to do with balance. Balance comes in by ccp increasing fitting requirements/penalties for fitting strong modules. Dear eve players, please try and use the word "content" less and instead, be specific. Thanks

Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2637	Posted - 2015.10.26 23:01:53 - [131] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: It is 100% scalable! Why wouldn't you know what you're looking for? If a scout wants to know if there is a hidden citadel, he/she simply has to launch probes. This deepens the gamplay for scanners and the potential of structures. This feature alone has nothing to do with balance. Balance comes in by ccp increasing fitting requirements/penalties for fitting strong modules. For me this comes under the "free intel" issue. If you want to gather basic intel then you can send a interceptor ahead of your fleet to check for systems with citadels but if you want more detailed intel, that would indicate the presence of a hidden citadel, you need to send a combat probe capable ships. That is balance and that is fun gameplay! Currently, POS'es are all at moons. Having a structure that can be located anywhere require probes to warp to it massively changes access to the Citadel, hence why you can warp to them direct. And honestly, they won't be spammed like you keep claiming, because they are worth attacking for profit from the loot drops, and don't take that much to hit.
Sizeof Void Ninja Suicide Squadron 609	Posted - 2015.10.26 23:25:56 - [132] - Quote Hmm... I find it interesting that, with one exception, CCP Ytterbium has only been responding to posts by Goons. (The one exception is a TEST post.) Is everyone else's post simply being ignored? Where are the conspiracy trolls when you need them? lol....
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2211	Posted - 2015.10.26 23:28:26 - [133] - Quote Sizeof Void wrote: Hmm... I find it interesting that, with one exception, CCP Ytterbium has only been responding to posts by Goons. (The one exception is a TEST post.) Is everyone else's post simply being ignored? Where are the conspiracy trolls when you need them? lol.... It's because we actually have relevant questions about small details that are easy and possible to answer. Most of the rest of the posting is complaining. If it makes you feel any better, they didn't answer a few of mine. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2637	Posted - 2015.10.26 23:29:49 - [134] - Quote Querns wrote: It's because we actually have relevant questions about small details that are easy and possible to answer. Most of the rest of the posting is complaining. If it makes you feel any better, they didn't answer a few of mine. Other people also have had relevant questions and do get nowhere near the Dev response time that goons have in this thread. So.... it's a fair complaint, even if your questions have all been pertinent.
Maraner The Executioners Shadow Cartel 332	Posted - 2015.10.26 23:36:50 - [135] - Quote SUPER excited for all of this. Just saying but I want my own death star.. Some details on where they can be anchored would be nice (bit off topic sorry). Citadel looks like the best expansion since they added wormholes and T3's Can I anchor one of these on a gate and blap stuff as it jumps in?? Can they be anchored in range of each other stations and shoot each other? etc etc
Saede Riordan Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 7827	Posted - 2015.10.26 23:41:12 - [136] - Quote Chavez Domingo wrote: wasnt a large citadel at 80.000m-¦ that can fit into a orca... no need for a freighter than... Is this actually going to be the case CCP, or is it an oversight? I want to know whether I need to start building an in-system freighter or not. Dev blog says freighters needed to deploy a large, but by the volume an orca will be able to do it with currently listed value. I don't want to have to build a freighter in my wormhole but I will if I need to. Just yes or no on that. Do I need a freighter to deploy a large, or can I do it with an orca? Fear and Loathing in Internet Spaceships
Unholythrash Davaham Respawn Disabled Initiative Mercenaries 27	Posted - 2015.10.26 23:42:50 - [137] - Quote Maraner wrote: SUPER excited for all of this. Just saying but I want my own death star.. Some details on where they can be anchored would be nice (bit off topic sorry). Citadel looks like the best expansion since they added wormholes and T3's Can I anchor one of these on a gate and blap stuff as it jumps in?? Can they be anchored in range of each other stations and shoot each other? etc etc I'm fairly certain they said somewhere that they can not share a grid with other structures and that seems to be the only requirement so far
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2212	Posted - 2015.10.26 23:44:06 - [138] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Querns wrote: It's because we actually have relevant questions about small details that are easy and possible to answer. Most of the rest of the posting is complaining. If it makes you feel any better, they didn't answer a few of mine. Other people also have had relevant questions and do get nowhere near the Dev response time that goons have in this thread. So.... it's a fair complaint, even if your questions have all been pertinent. Timing is also important. Note that we were the first responders in the thread. You also might look slightly past the "lol goonie" label and take a closer look at the individuals being responded to. Notice any patterns? It's almost like the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal has some experience in the realms of "interacting sanely with other human beings," "analyzing game features and finding the weak areas," and "having the reputation necessary to lend weight to our words." This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Rek Seven Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering 2080	Posted - 2015.10.26 23:51:55 - [139] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Rek Seven wrote: It is 100% scalable! Why wouldn't you know what you're looking for? If a scout wants to know if there is a hidden citadel, he/she simply has to launch probes. This deepens the gamplay for scanners and the potential of structures. This feature alone has nothing to do with balance. Balance comes in by ccp increasing fitting requirements/penalties for fitting strong modules. For me this comes under the "free intel" issue. If you want to gather basic intel then you can send a interceptor ahead of your fleet to check for systems with citadels but if you want more detailed intel, that would indicate the presence of a hidden citadel, you need to send a combat probe capable ships. That is balance and that is fun gameplay! Currently, POS'es are all at moons. Having a structure that can be located anywhere require probes to warp to it massively changes access to the Citadel, hence why you can warp to them direct. And honestly, they won't be spammed like you keep claiming, because they are worth attacking for profit from the loot drops, and don't take that much to hit. Who keeps claiming what now? I simply said that I think the ability to remove them from the overlay and d-scan would be fun an interesting gameplay. If you had to sacrifice something for the ability to do the above, what's wrong with the proposal? Dear eve players, please try and use the word "content" less and instead, be specific. Thanks
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2637	Posted - 2015.10.26 23:54:53 - [140] - Quote Querns wrote: Timing is also important. Note that we were the first responders in the thread. You also might look slightly past the "lol goonie" label and take a closer look at the individuals being responded to. Notice any patterns? It's almost like the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal has some experience in the realms of "interacting sanely with other human beings," "analyzing game features and finding the weak areas," and "having the reputation necessary to lend weight to our words." Indeed, as individuals nearly every goon is actually a nice person. A few are outright trolls but that is true of every group. My problem with the goons is what happens as a collective once you are all together with regards to manipulating things. Anyway, to get back on topic. Other pertinent questions that have been asked and apparently ignored. Tethering, we need more details, especially for the WH folk. L Citadel and Orca's, does it work and the Dev blog misspoke, or is there a missing detail. New question. Repulsor & Tractor. Available in high sec since they are just bumping thus legal? Or not for some reason.

Aryth GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1880	Posted - 2015.10.27 00:03:59 - [141] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Querns wrote: It's because we actually have relevant questions about small details that are easy and possible to answer. Most of the rest of the posting is complaining. If it makes you feel any better, they didn't answer a few of mine. Other people also have had relevant questions and do get nowhere near the Dev response time that goons have in this thread. So.... it's a fair complaint, even if your questions have all been pertinent. It is likely many things. The ones Querns identified above. The fact that we have a longer history of exploiting or taking advantage of new mechanics than really anyone in the game. We give early, informed , and accurate feedback when we are presented with the option to do so. I also cannot think of a time any of the serious business characters have lied or even mislead in feedback. Plus, we do run the largest coalition and alliance in the game. That probably helps too. Nah, it is just because we are pro posters. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal. Creator of Burn Jita Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
Maraner The Executioners Shadow Cartel 332	Posted - 2015.10.27 00:05:55 - [142] - Quote Also 700b for the BPO is that right? If it is so then it will generate the single most expensive killmail in the history of the game when derpy undocks in his rifter with one. I would drop the cost of the BPO and up the materials and cost of the stations. I noted that the XL size cost around 70b plus another 20-30 in rigs and fittings. Less than a Titan, I'd add 20-30% to that at least. Fuel the minerals market etc as well. Boy....good time to be a miner.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2213	Posted - 2015.10.27 00:15:38 - [143] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Querns wrote: Timing is also important. Note that we were the first responders in the thread. You also might look slightly past the "lol goonie" label and take a closer look at the individuals being responded to. Notice any patterns? It's almost like the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal has some experience in the realms of "interacting sanely with other human beings," "analyzing game features and finding the weak areas," and "having the reputation necessary to lend weight to our words." Indeed, as individuals nearly every goon is actually a nice person. A few are outright trolls but that is true of every group. My problem with the goons is what happens as a collective once you are all together with regards to manipulating things. I don't see a problem with people with similar interests and goals banding together for common good. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Rena'Thras Strategic Insanity FUBAR. 27	Posted - 2015.10.27 00:23:25 - [144] - Quote Aryth wrote: These seem awfully cheap at the medium level given their really small vulnerability window. Is there a concern we end up with a very spammable and essentially throwaway level of citadels? Well, something to consider is that the Mediums are basically POSes. They're meant to replace the POS and what people use POSes for. The blog did say they're trying to make it cost about as much as a fully fitted POS...I think...? My guess is that's why. The Larges are kinda more equivalent to Outposts now, and the XLs super-Outposts. So that's why their costs are more on par with Outposts as we know them today. The Mediums are for wealthy individuals, large Corps, or small Alliances - like POSes today. Larges are for super wealthy individuals, very big Corps, or moderately large Alliances. . SilentAsTheGrave wrote: I like these new Citadels, but one thing kinda bothers me. Why do you have three different sizes? What you are part of a small group and you build a Medium Citadel, but as time goes on your group grows. Now you need a bigger Citadel. OK, but that means either building it someplace new, or having to tear down the Medium to make room. That is kinda lame. Why can't there just be one Citadel that you can just keep upgrading over? Sure keep the cost investment the same, but there would no longer be the annoyance to move all assets out of the structure just to turn around and replace it with the next level up. Maybe that is part of the plan and I missed it in the blog? Unless I'm mistaken, in the Eve Vegas Keynote, they said you can have as many of these new Structures in a system as you want. As with the first guy I quoted - they're changing the paradigm. Don't think of these as "Outposts". Think of them as "POSes/POCOs/Outposts/Etc." You will want the POCO ones (released later?) on every planet, so at the least you'll have several of those in your systems. . Centurax wrote: Nice work on the Citadels, really cant wait. I have 2 comments on the information so far: 1. Price for the BPO's as stated are 10 times market value, don't you think this will price out so many people even for the Medium Citadels. How about the following prices: * 1bil for the Medium * 10bil for the Large * 100bil for the XL 2. Also how about making a freighter (repackaged) able to fit in a DST for those who might want to deploy a Large Citadel in a WH? Cant see a good reason as to why we have to build a expensive and practically useless ship in a C1-C4 wormhole to be able to deploy a Large. You would still have to deploy a Medium with a factory (when they are available) or a POS to build the Large tower before transferring it to a ship big enough to launch it, just seems like a pointless step to build a Freighter first, so I offer the suggestion of having the repackaged volume of a freighter small enough to fit in a DST so it can be moved in and out but not give the advantage of being able to haul large amounts of materials in or out. What if the Large would SQUEEZE into an Orca? Would that help? (If nothing else, Orcas are never entirely useless...) . Obil Que wrote: The structure blog link regarding the hull composition has the Large Citadel structure size at 80km3 http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/68671/1/Structurecompositioncomponent.png Unless my EFT is wrong, a max cargo Orca tops out over 100km3 of cargo. That would mean, unless there is a launching restriction to the freighter class, that a Large Citadel could be transported in an Orca which does fit inside lower class wormhole systems. Is there a launching restriction on L and XL Citadels limited them to Freighters or is it purely a cargo limitation, in which case, the Freighter comment in the devblog was incorrect? Guess I wasn't the only one wondering this. :) . Andre Vauban wrote: Can you please consider adding a defensive module (or rig) for something like "Overview Inhibitor"? The idea being that the citadel (or structure) will NOT show up on the overview but instead will need to be found by dscan and then probing it down (non-trivial to probe down, maybe even requiring sister's+virtues)? The idea being to give the little guy a chance to hide a medium citadel in unused space. The system "owner" will require real work (probing down each system) to find any unwelcome guests rather than just flying a fast interceptor through space and looking at the overview. My main concern (in lowsec) is that the more powerful groups will just go after citadels for giggles because they can. If they want to actively hunt me and look for targets, then so be it. However, they should at least put in some effort to find me. Yes, they can still dscan/probe them down, but that takes time and they probably cannot keep looking in EVERY system but rather systems they want to control or systems they suspect people they don't like live. I'm also kinda wondering about this. For the Large and XL, I guess it makes sense (considering they're basically the replacement for Outposts, which show up in the Overview), but unless I'm terribly mistaken, POSes don't show up in Overviews until you fly to the moon/grid they're on. So why should the Mediums show up from the time someone jumps into system?
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2639	Posted - 2015.10.27 00:33:47 - [145] - Quote Rena'Thras wrote: For the Large and XL, I guess it makes sense (considering they're basically the replacement for Outposts, which show up in the Overview), but unless I'm terribly mistaken, POSes don't show up in Overviews until you fly to the moon/grid they're on. So why should the Mediums show up from the time someone jumps into system? Because Moons show up on your overview and can be warped to directly. So they are keeping that part of your gameplay intact, you can't hide a POS currently, it has to be at a moon. So you can't hide a Citadel. It's not 'perfect' mirroring of mechanics, but the alternatives are far worse for gameplay.
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 306	Posted - 2015.10.27 01:24:25 - [146] - Quote There seems to be some confusion about overview and warping etc If you have docking rights, the citadel shows up on overview If you don't Open scanner window and it should up green, like an anomoly now and you can warp to it, no dscan or probes needed, but you get ZERO intel until you arrive at the citadel, at which point you can scan it, see who is docked, scan its fitting etc, it can also lock and shoot you. Obviously for high sec any aggression requires a wardec, citadels will have a permanent green gun safety
M1k3y Koontz Respawn Disabled Initiative Mercenaries 804	Posted - 2015.10.27 01:39:16 - [147] - Quote Exia Lennelluc wrote: For fuel block production why not add a ice upgrade for null like the ore upgrade that span all 4 racial ice What about NPC null dwellers? Lowsec dwellers? Even the unwashed hoards of highsec dwellers? I'm guessing that it would be a coding nightmare to have one blueprint with 5 inputs (1 input with 4 racial isotopes and 4 input with one racial isotope), so having five blueprints to make the fuel blocks that allow for a single isotope is likely the best answer here, if isotope differentiation is kept around because of capital fuels. I'm glad CCP realizes requiring players to haul in three isotopes just isn't feasable, especially given the emphasis on localization. How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Destiny Dain2 Your Destiny Corporation 25	Posted - 2015.10.27 01:40:30 - [148] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: There seems to be some confusion about overview and warping etc If you have docking rights, the citadel shows up on overview If you don't Open scanner window and it should up green, like an anomoly now and you can warp to it, no dscan or probes needed, but you get ZERO intel until you arrive at the citadel, at which point you can scan it, see who is docked, scan its fitting etc, it can also lock and shoot you. Obviously for high sec any aggression requires a wardec, citadels will have a permanent green gun safety Thanks for clearing that up. I like that idea actually.
Destiny Dain2 Your Destiny Corporation 25	Posted - 2015.10.27 01:50:33 - [149] - Quote Can a Citadel change their fit on the fly with weapons and ammo? I picture a sub-capital fleet come in and the persons Citadel is fitted for them and then when the timer starts, in come the Capitals with no way to defend.
Siobhan MacLeary Hole Violence Whole Squid 218	Posted - 2015.10.27 02:00:32 - [150] - Quote Saede Riordan wrote: Quote: A Medium structure hull may be deployed from an Industrial, Large and X-Large require a freighter. Yes, we do are aware this make things more complicated to deploy a Large or X-Large structure in low class wormhole space. This is intended. CCPlease. Give us low-class wormholers so sort of break here. You're essentially saying that we'll need to build an otherwise completely useless freighter which will be trapped in our wormhole solely for the purpose of deploying large citadels. And make no mistake we need large citadels many of us have large numbers of capitals and we'll need places to put them. I get not wanting us to easily put up XLs, (not that it'd be easy anyway with the ISK cost involved), but come on. None of us are going to leave our capital fleets floating in space outside mediums, we just won't use these structures and we'll keep using towers. You have to give us some realistic option to store our capitals and telling us to build a two billion isk ship that we can't use for anything else is not realistic. Either make them fit into something other then a freighter, or give us a way to shove freighters through our wormholes. This feels like a slap across the face to low class space. As long as Larges have a volume equal to or less than 100k m3, it will be possible to deploy them from a max-cargo Orca. Unfortunately, it looks like we'll have to wait for CCP to tell us exactly how much volume a Large Citadel will take up. GÇ£Point out to me a person who has been harmed by an AFK cloaker and I will point out a person who has no business playing this game.GÇ¥ - CCP Soundwave

Trinkets friend Sudden Buggery 2847	Posted - 2015.10.27 02:07:27 - [151] - Quote My only comment is....given the apparent hurdles to getting enough of these built (70B BPO cost for a large, plus other BPO's for all these components, etc etc)....I would expect that we will not be seeing the end of POS's for at least a year after the Citadel BPO's drop. Mein got in himmel, 70B for a BPO. Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA ~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2215	Posted - 2015.10.27 02:13:22 - [152] - Quote Trinkets friend wrote: My only comment is....given the apparent hurdles to getting enough of these built (70B BPO cost for a large, plus other BPO's for all these components, etc etc)....I would expect that we will not be seeing the end of POS's for at least a year after the Citadel BPO's drop. Mein got in himmel, 70B for a BPO. Do yourself a favor and don't look at the cost for an XL Citadel BPO. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Siobhan MacLeary Hole Violence Whole Squid 218	Posted - 2015.10.27 02:21:25 - [153] - Quote Soleil Fournier wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Aryth wrote: These seem awfully cheap at the medium level given their really small vulnerability window. Is there a concern we end up with a very spammable and essentially throwaway level of citadels? They are destructible, so the smaller sizes should be relatively spammable. Also remember 600m ISK it the base hull price. And you thought the sov grind was hellacious in dominion. Think about 20 medium citadels in a system you need to clear out. Each having a different vulnerability timer set for maximum trolling. That means 20 initial reinforcement fights, 20 command node huntings, 20 second reinforcement fights, another 20 command node hunting parties....the implications on the grind here are pretty scarry. Maybe not for highsec, but sov definately will suffer from this type of issue. Then think about the next 5 systems next to it that have the same setup, and that they won't ever go offline because the hulls don't take fuel. There are rich players/alliances out there that will do this, because it has been a strategy employed before with towers to wear out the opponent without ever fighting. A hard cap doesn't make sense. But I think the above scenerio should at least be discussed before the sov grind gets sent into overdrive. Citadels don't require anything except straight damage application to destroy. GÇ£Point out to me a person who has been harmed by an AFK cloaker and I will point out a person who has no business playing this game.GÇ¥ - CCP Soundwave
Cat Harkness Twilight Labs 38	Posted - 2015.10.27 02:38:33 - [154] - Quote Destiny Dain2 wrote: Can a Citadel change their fit on the fly with weapons and ammo? I picture a sub-capital fleet come in on the final round and the persons Citadel is fitted for them and then when the timer starts, in come the Capitals with no way to defend. No. Slots can not be changed while the Citadel is under attack (any time the shields, armor, hull is not 100%). So not even during the repair cycle. Cat Harkness CEO Twilight Labs
Sir SmashAlot The League of Extraordinary Opportunists Intergalactic Conservation Movement 186	Posted - 2015.10.27 02:39:15 - [155] - Quote Siobhan MacLeary wrote: Soleil Fournier wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Aryth wrote: These seem awfully cheap at the medium level given their really small vulnerability window. Is there a concern we end up with a very spammable and essentially throwaway level of citadels? They are destructible, so the smaller sizes should be relatively spammable. Also remember 600m ISK it the base hull price. And you thought the sov grind was hellacious in dominion. Think about 20 medium citadels in a system you need to clear out. Each having a different vulnerability timer set for maximum trolling. That means 20 initial reinforcement fights, 20 command node huntings, 20 second reinforcement fights, another 20 command node hunting parties....the implications on the grind here are pretty scarry. Maybe not for highsec, but sov definately will suffer from this type of issue. Then think about the next 5 systems next to it that have the same setup, and that they won't ever go offline because the hulls don't take fuel. There are rich players/alliances out there that will do this, because it has been a strategy employed before with towers to wear out the opponent without ever fighting. A hard cap doesn't make sense. But I think the above scenerio should at least be discussed before the sov grind gets sent into overdrive. Citadels don't require anything except straight damage application to destroy. Bring all the DPS you want, you are still committed for 30 minutes. For the tiny window of the medium and 20 in a system, it would take dedicated attacks over 3 weeks to clear out. Not counting more being spammed as they will be relatively cheap.
DaReaper Net 7 2641	Posted - 2015.10.27 03:35:02 - [156] - Quote Azahar Ortenegro wrote: So you're entirely removing Small and Medium POSes. Bad move, small corps won't be able to settle as easily as before. And you're putting the BPO price at 6B instead of 500 millions for a Large POS (250 for a Medium, 125 for a Small.) Nice way to tell part of the players "Get the **** out.", taking what we already have and demanding 6B (plus the prod cost \o/) to get it back. poses will not die right away, it will take time to phase pout as new stuff comes on. you have at min a year before pos' go away form the time of the first citadel i my guess. plenty of time for small corps to save up money for a medium citadel OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining! Yes i am optimistic about eve.. i'm giving it till dec 31st 2016 before i doom n gloom
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2639	Posted - 2015.10.27 04:03:23 - [157] - Quote Sir SmashAlot wrote: Bring all the DPS you want, you are still committed for 30 minutes. For the tiny window of the medium and 20 in a system, it would take dedicated attacks over 3 weeks to clear out. Not counting more being spammed as they will be relatively cheap. Except it won't. Because the vulnerability after first reinforce is not going to be a week to the next timer. CCP have already said they don't want that. So it will be about 3 days because you can hit multiple at once, since the DPS threshold is so low, you don't need 50 Dreads bashing eash Citadel. And they aren't that cheap and you are giving your opponent isk by spamming them. So I really don't see it happening.
Justa Hunni State War Academy Caldari State 12	Posted - 2015.10.27 04:18:24 - [158] - Quote EvilweaselSA wrote: blow up the old one and use asset safety to automove Except of course if you are in a wormhole since only nullbears and other empire scum get asset protection.
Lelira Cirim The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 250	Posted - 2015.10.27 05:19:32 - [159] - Quote Sizeof Void wrote: Sometimes, I think you devs underestimate how much ISK already exists in the game ... You say that like it would require more than a database query? Not sure if passive aggressive. If I worked at CCP I would install a LED stock ticker showing exactly what the key universe metrics are, every downtime. Do not actively tank my patience.
Burl en Daire M.O.M.S. Corp 146	Posted - 2015.10.27 05:28:48 - [160] - Quote If I build a XL with a market hub can I package and sell a titan? Sounds like a nerf to scamming and titan traps. Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why. Hunter S. Thompson

Zappity Black Aces I N F A M O U S 2549	Posted - 2015.10.27 05:29:46 - [161] - Quote Copy times are way too short to make BPO purchase a realistic investment. Missed opportunity on data sites. Somewhat concerned about T2 rigs market but I don't know it well enough to justify that. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Burl en Daire M.O.M.S. Corp 146	Posted - 2015.10.27 05:33:10 - [162] - Quote Harvey James wrote: perhaps adding more salvage too ship wrecks could help with keeping T2 rig prices down, although i suppose the new stations will also drop some salvage. Upping the need for salvage gives new players a way to make ISK and allows ninja slavagers to make more by doing what they like. I have heard plenty of pilots say that they just leave the salvage because it's worthless, now it won't be and if a null corp has some new blood it is just another way for them to make money. Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why. Hunter S. Thompson
Darkstar01 Republic University Minmatar Republic 10	Posted - 2015.10.27 06:35:41 - [163] - Quote Burl en Daire wrote: Harvey James wrote: perhaps adding more salvage too ship wrecks could help with keeping T2 rig prices down, although i suppose the new stations will also drop some salvage. Upping the need for salvage gives new players a way to make ISK and allows ninja slavagers to make more by doing what they like. I have heard plenty of pilots say that they just leave the salvage because it's worthless, now it won't be and if a null corp has some new blood it is just another way for them to make money. This. In the current game, some salvages are worthless and never used, while other salvages are expensive and used very often. The new Citadels will mainly be using the salvages that are currently worthless and never used - this has the effect of balancing the salvage system, so that all salvages will have a purpose. It would also make the game more accessible to newer players because it boosts the overall salvage income.
Ranamar Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind 89	Posted - 2015.10.27 06:39:45 - [164] - Quote Lelira Cirim wrote: Sizeof Void wrote: Sometimes, I think you devs underestimate how much ISK already exists in the game ... You say that like it would require more than a database query? Not sure if passive aggressive. If I worked at CCP I would install a LED stock ticker showing exactly what the key universe metrics are, every downtime. From what I hear, they have one of those, showing various stats, posted over the entrance to the cafeteria. I'm not sure what it has other than concurrent player count, though.
Ben Hocking Nothing on Dscan 0	Posted - 2015.10.27 07:59:06 - [165] - Quote @CCP Phantom would it be possible for you to post a spreadsheet of the various picture spread sheets displayed thought the blog. That's assuming there is already a spreadsheet in CCP land, If not I'm happy to transcribe into google spreadsheets and make it public [I understand you guys will have tight schedule atm, time being the bane of all programmers]. Thanks again, Ben
Sizeof Void Ninja Suicide Squadron 612	Posted - 2015.10.27 09:05:41 - [166] - Quote Querns wrote: Sizeof Void wrote: Hmm... I find it interesting that, with one exception, CCP Ytterbium has only been responding to posts by Goons. (The one exception is a TEST post.) Is everyone else's post simply being ignored? Where are the conspiracy trolls when you need them? lol.... It's because we actually have relevant questions about small details that are easy and possible to answer. Most of the rest of the posting is complaining. I knew you'd say something like this... ;)
Iski Zuki DaSen Icarus Academy 11	Posted - 2015.10.27 09:14:33 - [167] - Quote what will happen to the current station components that already has been build by the time you change the bpos from "station" to "structure"?... are you gona rename those as well from "station" to "structure"? are they going to be just junk to trash? are they going to be things to reprocess to at least get some matterials back?
Sizeof Void Ninja Suicide Squadron 612	Posted - 2015.10.27 09:38:20 - [168] - Quote Lelira Cirim wrote: Sizeof Void wrote: Sometimes, I think you devs underestimate how much ISK already exists in the game You say that like it would require more than a database query? Not sure if passive aggressive. I say this because they frequently don't seem to know how to write a SQL query (or ask one of the db guys to do it for them) to look up these numbers. 30B-70B ISK in materials for an XL Structure hull? That is chump change in today's EVE universe. Not even considering the financial resources of the corps and alliances, hundreds of individual players have more than that in their personal wallets. For example, I've got 100B+ ISK currently in wallet, sitting idle, plus a stockpile of 50+ PLEX, bought in-game - and I'm not even close to being in the same wealth class as Gevlon, Chribba, or any of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal members. And, I didn't get the ISK via any extraordinary prolitable method, such as scamming, ganking, running bot fleets, incursions, FW plex'ing, 24/7 mission running or other newsworthy nonsense - I'm just a low-to-middle of the road market trader, buying/selling cheap items (less than 100K ISK, on average), plus selling a few subcap ship BPCs on the side, on a single account (mostly on a single toon, in fact). Nothing spectacular at all, yet it looks like even I can afford to build one of these XL Citadels. So, if these XL Citadels are meant to be expensive tools for the corps/alliances, and not meant to be something that players can individually afford, then the cost needs to be significantly higher.
Onslaughtor Occult National Security Phoenix Naval Systems 160	Posted - 2015.10.27 10:09:50 - [169] - Quote The large should be able to squeeze into a orca. 80km3 would be a healthy number, or 90km3 if you want things to be tougher. I personally feel that the prices on the BPO's stray very far from the conventions set by most ships and structures in the game. I understand the desire to make these rare but the numbers given seem rather extreme. Im not sure how you could balance this better because the high price point is designed to enforce the largest groups to have to build these in house. But at the same time these structures provide a necessity to smaller groups that need some of these functions, specifically the ability to dock caps and supers. Realistically a few more variants of the M and L sizes with less slots or something but room for caps and super caps would go a long way.
X Mayce Manson Family Advent of Fate 4	Posted - 2015.10.27 10:14:42 - [170] - Quote o7 Do I get this correct: nowadays, if I want to get dreadnoughts into position within jumprange to a system to siege that system (and I dont have any stations for docking available): I place a pos within 5lys (max dread jump range) or less, get my dreads there to have some sort of "safe"-starting point. future use of dreadnoughts for sieging something, and you dont have a station for docking yet means: place at least a large building (citadel) with minimal costs of around 3b (optimistic value)? is this, how it's gonna work, or did I get something wrong? Looking for a good ship? - Try friendship

Siliya Critical Mass Project The Void Collective 5	Posted - 2015.10.27 10:24:05 - [171] - Quote the question I have for this is about construction location what type of Location will be required to build one of these will it need to be constructed in a station or will an Array work and if an array works what type of Array - I would guess CSA or XL-SAA based on Size or will you be including a new array for the purpose of Citidels
Skia Aumer Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC Desman Alliance 199	Posted - 2015.10.27 10:27:52 - [172] - Quote I feel bad because the diversity of racial isotope consumption is being lost. If I want to run reactions, I mostly choose gallente or caldari. If I want a deathstar or a resistar - I choose minmatar. If I live in the South, I have to choose amarr, which are a bit subpar to those above. But all of these are meaningful choices and it's fun to make them. Soon, it's gone. Do you remember one of your disign goals was "to support existing gameplay"? Any chance you still manage to incorporate isotope diversity in Citadels?
Rek Seven Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering 2083	Posted - 2015.10.27 10:44:56 - [173] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: There seems to be some confusion about overview and warping etc If you have docking rights, the citadel shows up on overview If you don't Open scanner window and it should up green, like an anomoly now and you can warp to it, no dscan or probes needed, but you get ZERO intel until you arrive at the citadel, at which point you can scan it, see who is docked, scan its fitting etc, it can also lock and shoot you. Obviously for high sec any aggression requires a wardec, citadels will have a permanent green gun safety It is the same thing. You can still instantly warp to a citadel without any effort as apposed to the current requirement to locate the correct moon to find a pos. We should be able to fit a mod to a citadel, which prevents a warp to without the use of combat probes. Dear eve players, please try and use the word "content" less and instead, be specific. Thanks
Firvain Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 29	Posted - 2015.10.27 11:01:22 - [174] - Quote Sizeof Void wrote: Lelira Cirim wrote: Sizeof Void wrote: Sometimes, I think you devs underestimate how much ISK already exists in the game You say that like it would require more than a database query? Not sure if passive aggressive. I say this because they frequently don't seem to know how to write a SQL query (or ask one of the db guys to do it for them) to look up these numbers. 30B-70B ISK in materials for an XL Structure hull? That is chump change in today's EVE universe. Not even considering the financial resources of the corps and alliances, hundreds of individual players have more than that in their personal wallets. For example, I've got 100B+ ISK currently in wallet, sitting idle, plus a stockpile of 50+ PLEX, bought in-game - and I'm not even close to being in the same wealth class as Gevlon, Chribba, or any of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal members. And, I didn't get the ISK via any extraordinary prolitable method, such as scamming, ganking, running bot fleets, incursions, FW plex'ing, 24/7 mission running or other newsworthy nonsense - I'm just a low-to-middle of the road market trader, buying/selling cheap items (less than 100K ISK, on average), plus selling a few subcap ship BPCs on the side, on a single account (mostly on a single toon, in fact). Nothing spectacular at all, yet it looks like even I can afford to build one of these XL Citadels. So, if these XL Citadels are meant to be expensive tools for the corps/alliances, and not meant to be something that players can individually afford, then the cost needs to be significantly higher. Nice of you that you can build one, can you actully defend one too?
L iriel Tillistrian Enterprises Stella Nova 8	Posted - 2015.10.27 11:13:05 - [175] - Quote It's such a shame these are going to be priced like this... 700bil for a raw print is totally ridiculous. Very few individuals will be able to afford this, Prints will only be accessible to major alliances, even though they will be "seeded" you won't be able to buy them. Many of the indy players that I know have decided to no longer sub their accounts, because living in 0.0 is becoming impossible with all the changes
Sizeof Void Ninja Suicide Squadron 612	Posted - 2015.10.27 11:22:51 - [176] - Quote Firvain wrote: [quote=Sizeof Void]Nice of you that you can build one, can you actully defend one too? Sure, why not? As is the current case with high-sec POS, if everyone has one, then the chances of yours being singled out and attacked is actually pretty low (unless you are Gevlon and go out of your way to make enemies of the Goons). POS bashing has never been fun, and I don't think Citadel bashing is going to be significantly more fun, is it? :)
Dracnys 85	Posted - 2015.10.27 11:35:00 - [177] - Quote As others already mentioned, the copy time for the 700b XL Citadel BPO is too short. Make it last at least as long as a titan BPO copy time. The price seems fine. Generally not affordable by individuals (except maybe a few dozen?) but doable for medium to large alliances. The price of building the XL Citadel itself seems a bit on the low side for me. I was expecting them to cost way more than a titan, something in the 200-500b range. Then they are really something special. Remember, even the empire couldn't afford to build more than one death star at a time.
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 307	Posted - 2015.10.27 11:50:10 - [178] - Quote Destiny Dain2 wrote: Can a Citadel change their fit on the fly with weapons and ammo? I picture a sub-capital fleet come in on the final round and the persons Citadel is fitted for them and then when the timer starts, in come the Capitals with no way to defend. Once it is being attacked it is locked
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 307	Posted - 2015.10.27 11:54:12 - [179] - Quote Do we know for sure what is happening with BPO's Nullarbor has been saying all new BPO's on slack, but now it seems it is a name change, not sure if that is in theory or reality on TQ If there is a name change on TQ, that effectively ends outpost construction So, will the outpost BPO's change name on TQ, if so, when, or will there be all new BPO's and then at some point in the future you can sell or trade in your old outpost BPO's?
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 307	Posted - 2015.10.27 11:55:55 - [180] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: There seems to be some confusion about overview and warping etc If you have docking rights, the citadel shows up on overview If you don't Open scanner window and it should up green, like an anomoly now and you can warp to it, no dscan or probes needed, but you get ZERO intel until you arrive at the citadel, at which point you can scan it, see who is docked, scan its fitting etc, it can also lock and shoot you. Obviously for high sec any aggression requires a wardec, citadels will have a permanent green gun safety It is the same thing. You can still instantly warp to a citadel without any effort as apposed to the current requirement to locate the correct moon to find a pos. We should be able to fit a mod to a citadel, which prevents a warp to without the use of combat probes. That kind of stuff will come with the observatory array, the possibilities for that are endless

FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1852	Posted - 2015.10.27 12:01:12 - [181] - Quote I do not think the XL structure is nearly expensive enough. Needs to use more T1 minerals. Additionally, the copy time for the BPC's is too short. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn Department 10 254	Posted - 2015.10.27 12:07:18 - [182] - Quote As I understand the changes the new Citadels will eventually replace POSes and POSes will be removed from the game. Currently if someone wanted to, for example, compress ore in high sec they would probably use a small POS tower and a compression array along with a little fuel. A small POS tower and compression array would cost somewhere in the region of 100 million ISK plus the negligible fuel cost to compress a billion ISK worth of ore. If in the new system a medium sized Citadel has to be used to complete the same task the outlay will be six BILLION ISK plus costs of additional modules and maybe rigs as well instead of the previous 100 million ISK initial outlay. So my question is will there be a new structure type other than Citadels to complete tasks such as compression of ore in high sec systems If not I suppose the alternatives are to either allow compression as a service in NPC stations or allow the Rorqual to operate in high sec systems. Unfortunately both of these alternatives come with obvious problems. So I would suggest a new type of smaller structure needs to developed to complete compression of ore in high sec systems. " They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. "-áRick. " Find out what ? "-áAbraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. "-áRick. Season four.-á-á ' The Walking Dead. ' .
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 307	Posted - 2015.10.27 12:19:46 - [183] - Quote Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote: As I understand the changes the new Citadels will eventually replace POSes and POSes will be removed from the game. Currently if someone wanted to, for example, compress ore in high sec they would probably use a small POS tower and a compression array along with a little fuel. A small POS tower and compression array would cost somewhere in the region of 100 million ISK plus the negligible fuel cost to compress a billion ISK worth of ore. If in the new system a medium sized Citadel has to be used to complete the same task the outlay will be six BILLION ISK plus costs of additional modules and maybe rigs as well instead of the previous 100 million ISK initial outlay. So my question is will there be a new structure type other than Citadels to complete tasks such as compression of ore in high sec systems If not I suppose the alternatives are to either allow compression as a service in NPC stations or allow the Rorqual to operate in high sec systems. Unfortunately both of these alternatives come with obvious problems. So I would suggest a new type of smaller structure needs to developed to complete compression of ore in high sec systems. So, you can afford several billion for a rorqual, but not 600 mil for a medium citadel to compress.......
Gauro Charante Vile Duck Pond 13	Posted - 2015.10.27 12:21:35 - [184] - Quote Too many people are scared about the cost of the Citadel compared to a small POS (as in just using a compression or maybe some invention etc.). This is NOT the main fucntion of a Citadel. The other new structure will handle that at prolly a fraction of the cost of a Citadel. Like the Mobile Drilling station (or whatever the name was) will handle compresseion of ore and aid mining way more than a Citadel. Yes these structures wont be coming now but neither are the POSes going anywhere so just contunie using them. What i would like to know, are the POS batteries (guns/ecm and so on) going to maybe be convertd to Citadel guns? Maybe keep the better stats? I know you said that no faction modules will be as of yet, but later on? Also the cost of the BPOs are not going to really matter, if even just a cuople would be bought now, after a year or so there are so many copies that the prices will be stable. Tou the X-L might be still pretty exotic :)
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 2308	Posted - 2015.10.27 12:23:13 - [185] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote: As I understand the changes the new Citadels will eventually replace POSes and POSes will be removed from the game. Currently if someone wanted to, for example, compress ore in high sec they would probably use a small POS tower and a compression array along with a little fuel. A small POS tower and compression array would cost somewhere in the region of 100 million ISK plus the negligible fuel cost to compress a billion ISK worth of ore. If in the new system a medium sized Citadel has to be used to complete the same task the outlay will be six BILLION ISK plus costs of additional modules and maybe rigs as well instead of the previous 100 million ISK initial outlay. So my question is will there be a new structure type other than Citadels to complete tasks such as compression of ore in high sec systems If not I suppose the alternatives are to either allow compression as a service in NPC stations or allow the Rorqual to operate in high sec systems. Unfortunately both of these alternatives come with obvious problems. So I would suggest a new type of smaller structure needs to developed to complete compression of ore in high sec systems. So, you can afford several billion for a rorqual, but not 600 mil for a medium citadel to compress....... He's mixed up BPO cost with build cost.
Firvain Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 29	Posted - 2015.10.27 12:29:15 - [186] - Quote Sizeof Void wrote: Firvain wrote: [quote=Sizeof Void]Nice of you that you can build one, can you actully defend one too? Sure, why not? As is the current case with high-sec POS, if everyone has one, then the chances of yours being singled out and attacked is actually pretty low (unless you are Gevlon and go out of your way to make enemies of the Goons). POS bashing has never been fun, and I don't think Citadel bashing is going to be significantly more fun, is it? :) it only takes 30 minuts with a few friends and you stand to lose 70+ billion isk. I am sure i can get 40 friends to spend an hour of Eve 3 times a week to do that no problem
Ottoburner Sicarian Special Forces 0	Posted - 2015.10.27 12:37:04 - [187] - Quote EvilweaselSA wrote: not that i'm complaining as i lounge upon a stack of trillions of isk but don't you think that 700b might be a bit expensive for the bpo Dude that is gonna make your ass rich. people with loads of isk will have an easier time getting into what I think will be a lucrative bpc market.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2215	Posted - 2015.10.27 12:47:53 - [188] - Quote Justa Hunni wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: blow up the old one and use asset safety to automove Except of course if you are in a wormhole since only nullbears and other empire scum get asset protection. I can't actually tell if you're boasting or complaining, but in the latter case, you can blame the wormhole community for that being the case. Asset safety was originally going to apply to wormholes. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2215	Posted - 2015.10.27 12:49:26 - [189] - Quote Sizeof Void wrote: Querns wrote: Sizeof Void wrote: Hmm... I find it interesting that, with one exception, CCP Ytterbium has only been responding to posts by Goons. (The one exception is a TEST post.) Is everyone else's post simply being ignored? Where are the conspiracy trolls when you need them? lol.... It's because we actually have relevant questions about small details that are easy and possible to answer. Most of the rest of the posting is complaining. I knew you'd say something like this... ;) I've always considered myself fairly predictable. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn Department 10 254	Posted - 2015.10.27 13:06:11 - [190] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote: As I understand the changes the new Citadels will eventually replace POSes and POSes will be removed from the game. Currently if someone wanted to, for example, compress ore in high sec they would probably use a small POS tower and a compression array along with a little fuel. A small POS tower and compression array would cost somewhere in the region of 100 million ISK plus the negligible fuel cost to compress a billion ISK worth of ore. If in the new system a medium sized Citadel has to be used to complete the same task the outlay will be six BILLION ISK plus costs of additional modules and maybe rigs as well instead of the previous 100 million ISK initial outlay. So my question is will there be a new structure type other than Citadels to complete tasks such as compression of ore in high sec systems If not I suppose the alternatives are to either allow compression as a service in NPC stations or allow the Rorqual to operate in high sec systems. Unfortunately both of these alternatives come with obvious problems. So I would suggest a new type of smaller structure needs to developed to complete compression of ore in high sec systems. So, you can afford several billion for a rorqual, but not 600 mil for a medium citadel to compress....... The dev blog price for a medium citadel is stated as six billion ISK and not 600 million. If it was 600 million I wouldn't have raised this issue. I could afford a Rorqual but the Rorqual cannot be used currently in high sec. I would not advocate the use of the Rorqual in high sec either with its current stats as that would further collapse the ore/mineral prices. Relatively new pilots and probably many others would not be able to gather six billion up to access compression in high sec. I am asking for CCP to retain a reasonable, in terms of ISK cost, method of compression and increased reprocessing yield as we currently have with the POS system in high sec systems. " They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. "-áRick. " Find out what ? "-áAbraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. "-áRick. Season four.-á-á ' The Walking Dead. ' .

Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2215	Posted - 2015.10.27 13:11:06 - [191] - Quote Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote: The dev blog price for a medium citadel is stated as six billion ISK and not 600 million. If it was 600 million I wouldn't have raised this issue. You're confusing the price for the blueprint and the actual citadel. The built medium citadel will only cost an estimated 600m isk. You don't need to own the BPO to own a citadel. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 307	Posted - 2015.10.27 13:22:29 - [192] - Quote Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote: As I understand the changes the new Citadels will eventually replace POSes and POSes will be removed from the game. Currently if someone wanted to, for example, compress ore in high sec they would probably use a small POS tower and a compression array along with a little fuel. A small POS tower and compression array would cost somewhere in the region of 100 million ISK plus the negligible fuel cost to compress a billion ISK worth of ore. If in the new system a medium sized Citadel has to be used to complete the same task the outlay will be six BILLION ISK plus costs of additional modules and maybe rigs as well instead of the previous 100 million ISK initial outlay. So my question is will there be a new structure type other than Citadels to complete tasks such as compression of ore in high sec systems If not I suppose the alternatives are to either allow compression as a service in NPC stations or allow the Rorqual to operate in high sec systems. Unfortunately both of these alternatives come with obvious problems. So I would suggest a new type of smaller structure needs to developed to complete compression of ore in high sec systems. So, you can afford several billion for a rorqual, but not 600 mil for a medium citadel to compress....... The dev blog price for a medium citadel is stated as six billion ISK and not 600 million. If it was 600 million I wouldn't have raised this issue. I could afford a Rorqual but the Rorqual cannot be used currently in high sec. I would not advocate the use of the Rorqual in high sec either with its current stats as that would further collapse the ore/mineral prices. Relatively new pilots and probably many others would not be able to gather six billion up to access compression in high sec. I am asking for CCP to retain a reasonable, in terms of ISK cost, method of compression and increased reprocessing yield as we currently have with the POS system in high sec systems. Buy a BPC for cheap and build it for 600 mil
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn Department 10 254	Posted - 2015.10.27 13:23:36 - [193] - Quote Gauro Charante wrote: Too many people are scared about the cost of the Citadel compared to a small POS (as in just using a compression or maybe some invention etc.). This is NOT the main fucntion of a Citadel. The other new structure will handle that at prolly a fraction of the cost of a Citadel. Like the Mobile Drilling station (or whatever the name was) will handle compresseion of ore and aid mining way more than a Citadel. Yes these structures wont be coming now but neither are the POSes going anywhere so just contunie using them. What i would like to know, are the POS batteries (guns/ecm and so on) going to maybe be convertd to Citadel guns? Maybe keep the better stats? I know you said that no faction modules will be as of yet, but later on? Also the cost of the BPOs are not going to really matter, if even just a cuople would be bought now, after a year or so there are so many copies that the prices will be stable. Tou the X-L might be still pretty exotic :) It is highly likely if not certain that the Mobile Drilling Platform structure will be for only null-sec & low sec use and will largely be concerned with moon mining operations. I have asked on the dev blog for the mining platform structures and await a reply. I have also started a new proposal there for a new Mining Outpost structure to enable only compression and the higher POS rate of ore reprocessing in high sec. Regarding the Citadels it does seem logical to me that they should be used to replace the outposts in nullsec and some other new type of structures should be designed to replace the POSes for use elsewhere in low/WH/high sec systems. This approach makes sense as the outposts are made from similar parts to the new citadels. As opposed to POSes which are made from P4 sourced from planetary interaction. The main reason for these structure changes after all is to get around the old source code which cannot be repaired so that corp/alliance roles & permissions can be fixed. The 'eye candy' element is secondary to this issue. " They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. "-áRick. " Find out what ? "-áAbraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. "-áRick. Season four.-á-á ' The Walking Dead. ' .
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn Department 10 254	Posted - 2015.10.27 13:32:06 - [194] - Quote Querns wrote: Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote: The dev blog price for a medium citadel is stated as six billion ISK and not 600 million. If it was 600 million I wouldn't have raised this issue. You're confusing the price for the blueprint and the actual citadel. The built medium citadel will only cost an estimated 600m isk. You don't need to own the BPO to own a citadel. Ugh. I really daft now. Apologies to all for my mistakes there. So it will be more expensive to do than currently but not that much more. Problem solved then on that one. Wasted my time typing didn't I . " They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. "-áRick. " Find out what ? "-áAbraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. "-áRick. Season four.-á-á ' The Walking Dead. ' .
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn Department 10 254	Posted - 2015.10.27 13:57:28 - [195] - Quote Reading the blog again I agree with others that 30 billion-ish is going to be too cheap in terms of ISK available for alliances. I don't know what price they should be but it needs to be more than that. PS I'm referring to the price of the XL sized citadel. " They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. "-áRick. " Find out what ? "-áAbraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. "-áRick. Season four.-á-á ' The Walking Dead. ' .
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2215	Posted - 2015.10.27 14:07:04 - [196] - Quote Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote: Reading the blog again I agree with others that 30 billion-ish is going to be too cheap in terms of ISK available for alliances. I don't know what price they should be but it needs to be more than that. PS I'm referring to the price of the XL sized citadel. Good thing the estimated price is more than twice this. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 307	Posted - 2015.10.27 14:10:39 - [197] - Quote Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote: Reading the blog again I agree with others that 30 billion-ish is going to be too cheap in terms of ISK available for alliances. I don't know what price they should be but it needs to be more than that. PS I'm referring to the price of the XL sized citadel. You might want to take some time and read the blog again You seem to be pulling numbers of out thin air The numbers are even given to you int he blog, you don't have to calculate anything XL is estimated to be 70 bil to build and 1-23 bil for rigs So total is estimated to be 73 to 130 bil depending on rigs, service modules and other fittings will add even more isk
Kynric Sky Fighters 366	Posted - 2015.10.27 15:04:23 - [198] - Quote Please reconsider needing a freighter to deploy large citadels. There are existing capitals in many low class wormhole systems. Once POS' go away those pilots will either be trapped in their ships, have to self destruct or have to build a land locked freighter, all ofcwhich seem rather burdensome. Alternatively lower class wormholes could be enlargerd to allow freighters through.
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 351	Posted - 2015.10.27 15:20:24 - [199] - Quote Kynric wrote: Please reconsider needing a freighter to deploy large citadels. There are existing capitals in many low class wormhole systems. Once POS' go away those pilots will either be trapped in their ships, have to self destruct or have to build a land locked freighter, all ofcwhich seem rather burdensome. Alternatively lower class wormholes could be enlargerd to allow freighters through. Building a freighter isn't THAT big of a deal. There's no reason to rage about self destructing capitals. Anyone with the ISK and resources to build one or more capitals in C1-C4 space can afford to factor in the cost of a freighter to the cost of your 7-10B ISK citadel. I'd still like a response to the fact that the Large Citadel is listed at 80km3 which is within the size of an Orca's cargo bay. Is the Freighter restriction a launch restriction (cannot launch from an Orca even if it fits) or a size restriction (in which case the blog is wrong or the size is wrong).
Winter Archipelago Autumn Industrial Enterprises 466	Posted - 2015.10.27 15:21:15 - [200] - Quote Kynric wrote: Please reconsider needing a freighter to deploy large citadels. There are existing capitals in many low class wormhole systems. Once POS' go away those pilots will either be trapped in their ships, have to self destruct or have to build a land locked freighter, all ofcwhich seem rather burdensome. Alternatively lower class wormholes could be enlargerd to allow freighters through. You can fit a Large in an Orca, which will be cheaper than a freighter (and if you do any mining, you probably already have an Orca or Rorqual). Any group who have capitals in a C1 should be able to handle the cost of an Orca (or even a Freighter) to set up a large, especially considering the Medium can then be pulled down and sold for almost no loss (or even a net gain if you buy with Buys and sell with Sells). As for it being a one-use thing, it's only a one-use set-up if you never have your sandcastle knocked over. Edit :: With so many people complaining about the need for an Orca or Freighter to launch a Large, I'm tempted to resub my Orca pilot (when Citadels are released) for cartage and set-up of Large Citadels in peoples' C2's and C3's. A service where the character would join their corp temporarily and would haul the Citadel into the hole and launch it at the desired location, then leave the hole and move on to the next group. This would require more trust than most wormholers are willing to give, though. Planning a trip to Thera? Check out http://eve-scout.com/ for a list of the current connections. Once you've made your choice, join the *EvE-Scout* channel and request a scout to make sure your connection is clear!

L iriel Tillistrian Enterprises Stella Nova 9	Posted - 2015.10.27 15:37:57 - [201] - Quote Querns wrote: Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote: The dev blog price for a medium citadel is stated as six billion ISK and not 600 million. If it was 600 million I wouldn't have raised this issue. You're confusing the price for the blueprint and the actual citadel. The built medium citadel will only cost an estimated 600m isk. You don't need to own the BPO to own a citadel. You are absolutely right! No one needs the BPO to have a citadel everyone can just wait until you spend the isk to buy, then research, and everyone can buy the copies you produce Actually come to think about it....figuring the laws of supply and demand.... If absolutely NO ONE buys any of the prints they will eventually go down in price because of the surplus
Captain Awkward Republic University Minmatar Republic 88	Posted - 2015.10.27 15:48:38 - [202] - Quote Awesome. Just awesome.
Fredric Wolf Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team 113	Posted - 2015.10.27 16:01:34 - [203] - Quote Ransu Asanari wrote: I'm glad we're finally talking about build components for Citadels. I have to say, it's pretty much what I expected, and that disappoints me somewhat. I'm glad the PI requirements are staying equivalent so there is still demand for products in the PI chain. The plan to use T1 and T2 Salvage will greatly increase the value of salvage from Relic Sites, as well as salvaging wrecks from sites. So the planned change will be a net boost to the value of Relic Sites - but I don't see anything in the devblog on helping fix value for Data Sites. The current Faction POS Tower and Module BPCs are only found in Data Sites via Exploration. Since these will be made obsolete when Citadels come along, I was hoping there would be some mention of how they would be replaced. Since the Citadels are not Faction specific anymore, that precludes the base structure having faction versions. In the devblog it was stated "If and when we release Tech II or faction modules the material build-up will be properly modified to match." So that means there aren't plans to release Faction Citadel Modules to replace Faction POS Modules at this launch? The "High-Tech" items, as well as the Faction Materials (Positron Cords, Electric Conduits) that used to be for building Interfaces for invention before they were removed from the game still have no real use in manufacturing. I was hoping maybe they would find some use in the Sovereignty or Citadel Structure build chain to give them some value. CCP RedDawn stated in the current Exploration Site feedback that there is a plan to replace the POS based drops once Citadels come out, but I don't see anything in this Devblog on how. Could you elaborate, or is this still in the works? While they are making POS obsolete they are introducing new CAP mods with meta, fation and T2 why cant they just put these in the data sites
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2215	Posted - 2015.10.27 16:12:00 - [204] - Quote L iriel wrote: Querns wrote: Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote: The dev blog price for a medium citadel is stated as six billion ISK and not 600 million. If it was 600 million I wouldn't have raised this issue. You're confusing the price for the blueprint and the actual citadel. The built medium citadel will only cost an estimated 600m isk. You don't need to own the BPO to own a citadel. You are absolutely right! No one needs the BPO to have a citadel everyone can just wait until you spend the isk to buy, then research, and everyone can buy the copies you produce Actually come to think about it....figuring the laws of supply and demand.... If absolutely NO ONE buys any of the prints they will eventually go down in price because of the surplus You are overreacting. You are aware that some eve players build items specifically for sale, yes? This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 1872	Posted - 2015.10.27 16:22:40 - [205] - Quote Querns wrote: ... You are overreacting. You are aware that some eve players build items specifically for sale, yes? Shhhh don't tell everyone or they'll all start doing it....
Ransu Asanari AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse 462	Posted - 2015.10.27 16:24:35 - [206] - Quote Fredric Wolf wrote: While they are making POS obsolete they are introducing new CAP mods with meta, fation and T2 why cant they just put these in the data sites Navy Faction Cap Mods will probably be in the Faction Warfare LP and regular LP stores. Pirate faction could possibly be drops for Data sites. Meta cap mod BPCs could be dropped uniquely from Data Sites, but it's debatable how valuable they would be. Adding T2 Citadel Rig BPCs to Data Sites is a possibility, but since they can also be invented, they aren't a unique drop, and even the capital BPC drops now aren't very good since they have an ME0 compared to ones you can invent. Because they are random, a lot of them are quite useless - I've only seen one Phoenix with Capital Gravity Capacitor Upgrade rigs. The requirement for salvage to build the Citadel rigs will further increase the value of Relic sites, while doing nothing to fix the already low value of Data sites.

CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4360	Posted - 2015.10.27 16:39:17 - [207] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: What about current outposts - to what size of the of citadel they will be changed. What about NPC stations in sov space - will they be changed? Finally what about NPC stations in NPC null - if you make them destructible - i think 'next day' MOA , or SOE will be homeless . Outposts will not be replaced with Citadels. They'll be reimbursed, along with their upgrades. NPC stations will most likely not be touched. We'll give you more details on that as we get closer of feature parity with them.


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4360	Posted - 2015.10.27 16:44:15 - [208] - Quote TigerXtrm wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Arbitrary components, do not reflect actual capability. But... why? That makes absolutely no sense. That's like making a Doomsday Mount part of the requirements to build a freighter. Or to make a more relevant example, to have a freighter blueprint that doesn't require Capital Cargo Bay component. If you're gonna do something, do it right. Yep, you're right here, we'll probably change the names of those components. Remember service modules provide the functionality you're looking for here, which have to be fitted on top of the hull.


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4360	Posted - 2015.10.27 16:47:01 - [209] - Quote Marox Calendale wrote: What Skills will be needed to deploy Citadels in Space? Will Cloning Centers be fittable in WH-Space? And if yes, how will they work there? Probably going to need anchoring skill to deploy one. Cloning centers probably will have limited functionality next to other areas of space.


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4360	Posted - 2015.10.27 16:47:37 - [210] - Quote Sabastian Cerabiam wrote: I wana know whats gona happen with those of us that have POS bpos. Will they get converted to equivalent citadel ones or will we somehow get reimbursed the isk we spent to buy them? When we get rid of Starbases they will be reimbursed, not converted.


Azahar Ortenegro Astromechanica Maxima Astromechanica Federatis 57	Posted - 2015.10.27 16:58:21 - [211] - Quote And what will replace the Small and Medium?
Fredric Wolf Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team 113	Posted - 2015.10.27 16:58:46 - [212] - Quote So is there any information on what type of drones a citadel will use? I see tracking and damage mods but no info of if they will use capital squadrons or normal drones. Will a characters skill be required to use these?

CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4361	Posted - 2015.10.27 16:58:51 - [213] - Quote Ice Cold Beer wrote: I see the CSM has been busy. More nul sec crap of no interest to empire dwellers. My mates and I have around 30 accounts mothballed and mothballed they will remain. Eve will die slowly one nul sec expansion at time. CSM, hang your heads in shame. You do realize those can be used in high-security space right?


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4361	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:00:17 - [214] - Quote Ransu Asanari wrote: I'm glad we're finally talking about build components for Citadels. I have to say, it's pretty much what I expected, and that disappoints me somewhat. I'm glad the PI requirements are staying equivalent so there is still demand for products in the PI chain. The plan to use T1 and T2 Salvage will greatly increase the value of salvage from Relic Sites, as well as salvaging wrecks from sites. So the planned change will be a net boost to the value of Relic Sites - but I don't see anything in the devblog on helping fix value for Data Sites. The current Faction POS Tower and Module BPCs are only found in Data Sites via Exploration. Since these will be made obsolete when Citadels come along, I was hoping there would be some mention of how they would be replaced. Since the Citadels are not Faction specific anymore, that precludes the base structure having faction versions. In the devblog it was stated "If and when we release Tech II or faction modules the material build-up will be properly modified to match." So that means there aren't plans to release Faction Citadel Modules to replace Faction POS Modules at this launch? The "High-Tech" items, as well as the Faction Materials (Positron Cords, Electric Conduits) that used to be for building Interfaces for invention before they were removed from the game still have no real use in manufacturing. I was hoping maybe they would find some use in the Sovereignty or Citadel Structure build chain to give them some value. CCP RedDawn stated in the current Exploration Site feedback that there is a plan to replace the POS based drops once Citadels come out, but I don't see anything in this Devblog on how. Could you elaborate, or is this still in the works? Still being worked on


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4361	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:04:06 - [215] - Quote Sizeof Void wrote: Hmm... I find it interesting that, with one exception, CCP Ytterbium has only been responding to posts by Goons. (The one exception is a TEST post.) Is everyone else's post simply being ignored? Where are the conspiracy trolls when you need them? lol.... Did I? Hmm didn't pay attention to the poster affiliations. Now of course, if there was a bock / alliance named "Ze Croissant Juggernauts" or "the Mighty Baguette Conglomerate" that'd probably focus my attention .


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4361	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:05:05 - [216] - Quote Maraner wrote: SUPER excited for all of this. Just saying but I want my own death star.. Some details on where they can be anchored would be nice (bit off topic sorry). Citadel looks like the best expansion since they added wormholes and T3's Can I anchor one of these on a gate and blap stuff as it jumps in?? Can they be anchored in range of each other stations and shoot each other? etc etc Nope, you have a minimum anchoring range to celestials, existing NPC stations, structures etc.. of 600-700km.


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4361	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:05:52 - [217] - Quote Saede Riordan wrote: Chavez Domingo wrote: wasnt a large citadel at 80.000m-¦ that can fit into a orca... no need for a freighter than... Is this actually going to be the case CCP, or is it an oversight? I want to know whether I need to start building an in-system freighter or not. Dev blog says freighters needed to deploy a large, but by the volume an orca will be able to do it with currently listed value. I don't want to have to build a freighter in my wormhole but I will if I need to. Just yes or no on that. Do I need a freighter to deploy a large, or can I do it with an orca? Probably an oversight

FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1853	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:06:08 - [218] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Anthar Thebess wrote: What about current outposts - to what size of the of citadel they will be changed. What about NPC stations in sov space - will they be changed? Finally what about NPC stations in NPC null - if you make them destructible - i think 'next day' MOA , or SOE will be homeless . Outposts will not be replaced with Citadels. They'll be reimbursed, along with their upgrades. NPC stations will most likely not be touched. We'll give you more details on that as we get closer of feature parity with them. This is wonderful to hear! Keeping the NPC stations is essential to having a healthy null sec ecosystem. It would, however, be awesome to see the outpost models get replaced with the citadel models. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 351	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:12:58 - [219] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Saede Riordan wrote: Chavez Domingo wrote: wasnt a large citadel at 80.000m-¦ that can fit into a orca... no need for a freighter than... Is this actually going to be the case CCP, or is it an oversight? I want to know whether I need to start building an in-system freighter or not. Dev blog says freighters needed to deploy a large, but by the volume an orca will be able to do it with currently listed value. I don't want to have to build a freighter in my wormhole but I will if I need to. Just yes or no on that. Do I need a freighter to deploy a large, or can I do it with an orca? Probably an oversight Can we get a straight answer? Some of us looking towards building a Large citadel in C1-C4 space have to possibly consider training time for building and/or flying a freighter as well as the resource collection and building of the actual ship. I know the Spring seems like a long way away, but 5 months is not that long when training to fly freighter could be a 30 day plan and the skills to build one another 15 days if you're not an existing industrialist. Add on the 15 days or so to actually build it and we're already to the end of the year if we started today.

CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4363	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:13:58 - [220] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: There seems to be some confusion about overview and warping etc If you have docking rights, the citadel shows up on overview If you don't Open scanner window and it should up green, like an anomoly now and you can warp to it, no dscan or probes needed, but you get ZERO intel until you arrive at the citadel, at which point you can scan it, see who is docked, scan its fitting etc, it can also lock and shoot you. Obviously for high sec any aggression requires a wardec, citadels will have a permanent green gun safety This man. He gets it.



CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4363	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:15:26 - [221] - Quote Destiny Dain2 wrote: Can a Citadel change their fit on the fly with weapons and ammo? I picture a sub-capital fleet come in on the final round and the persons Citadel is fitted for them and then when the timer starts, in come the Capitals with no way to defend. You can swap modules as long as the structure hasn't been reinforced after is shields are gone. You can swap ammo any time however.


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4363	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:17:53 - [222] - Quote Cat Harkness wrote: Destiny Dain2 wrote: Can a Citadel change their fit on the fly with weapons and ammo? I picture a sub-capital fleet come in on the final round and the persons Citadel is fitted for them and then when the timer starts, in come the Capitals with no way to defend. No. Slots can not be changed while the Citadel is under attack (any time the shields, armor, hull is not 100%). So not even during the repair cycle. Hmmm I tend to remember we stated after shields were gone. You make me doubt because I can see some crazy module swapping game in combat. Let me double-check and come back at you on that one.

Sir SmashAlot The League of Extraordinary Opportunists Intergalactic Conservation Movement 186	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:23:08 - [223] - Quote Does the citadel need to be manned by a player for the weapons / defenses to work? Will groups in High Sec (During War), Low, WH, and, Null be forced to have station alts sitting in these things 23/7 in order to blap anyone on grid?
Fredric Wolf Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team 113	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:24:45 - [224] - Quote Even during war decs your citadel will only have small windows of vulnerability during the week, so you might want to man it during that time and not there will be no automated defense in these.
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 351	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:25:58 - [225] - Quote Sir SmashAlot wrote: Does the citadel need to be manned by a player for the weapons / defenses to work? Will groups in High Sec (During War), Low, WH, and, Null be forced to have station alts sitting in these things 23/7 in order to blap anyone on grid? Yes. This has been the case since the first devblog You don't have to man them 23/7, only during your vulnerable windows (3 hours / wk for a M)
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 1873	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:29:29 - [226] - Quote Obil Que wrote: Sir SmashAlot wrote: Does the citadel need to be manned by a player for the weapons / defenses to work? Will groups in High Sec (During War), Low, WH, and, Null be forced to have station alts sitting in these things 23/7 in order to blap anyone on grid? Yes. This has been the case since the first devblog You don't have to man them 23/7, only during your vulnerable windows (3 hours / wk for a M) I'm assuming ships can still scan citadels outside the vuln window though, so if you want to stop intel gathering in WH's for instance then an alt would be required to blap nosy parkers...
Firvain Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 29	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:30:46 - [227] - Quote Sir SmashAlot wrote: Does the citadel need to be manned by a player for the weapons / defenses to work? Will groups in High Sec (During War), Low, WH, and, Null be forced to have station alts sitting in these things 23/7 in order to blap anyone on grid? Pretty much, same as a pos now, because a pos at the moment even when outfitted wiht a **** ton of guns isnt much of a threath to anyone
Khorrdum The Bairshir Conglomerate Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners 0	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:36:00 - [228] - Quote 1. Where can we build a Large Citadel Hull? The Blog says a Large Hull will need 127 Structure Components at 10'000 m3 per unit, that's a total of 1,27mio m3 without any ME modifier. A Equipment Assambly Array has only 1mio m3 cargo capacity. That means it would not be possible to produce them at a POS. Is this intended? If No: Adjusting the cargo of the Equipment Assambly Array (and ofc the Rapid one, in case someone would prefer to use it) could be a relatively simple solution. 2. 80'000 m3 and the need for a freighter Quote: Structure hull volumes are set so that: A Medium structure hull may be deployed from an Industrial, Large and X-Large require a freighter. Yes, we do are aware this make things more complicated to deploy a Large or X-Large structure in low class wormhole space. This is intended. The Volume of the Large hull is listed with 80'000 m3. That would also fit into a accordingly fitted Orca or Rorqual. (And after the Capital-rebalance perhaps also into resized fleethangars of carriers&dreads?) I guess especially the Orca would violate your intention as it is able to travel into everything except class 1 WH's. Some further explanations would be desired: What is exactly meaned with 'low class wormhole space'? Is the freighter-mandatory only intended for X-Large or for Large and X-Large? What are the design-goals behind it? More informations about that could possibly allow us to give more solution-oriented feedback.
Sir SmashAlot The League of Extraordinary Opportunists Intergalactic Conservation Movement 186	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:39:41 - [229] - Quote Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: Obil Que wrote: Sir SmashAlot wrote: Does the citadel need to be manned by a player for the weapons / defenses to work? Will groups in High Sec (During War), Low, WH, and, Null be forced to have station alts sitting in these things 23/7 in order to blap anyone on grid? Yes. This has been the case since the first devblog You don't have to man them 23/7, only during your vulnerable windows (3 hours / wk for a M) I'm assuming ships can still scan citadels outside the vuln window though, so if you want to stop intel gathering in WH's for instance then an alt would be required to blap nosy parkers... I figured as such, thank you! I am sure there will be no shortage of players wanting to "pilot" a citadel understanding the potential firepower they could hold.
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 308	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:43:25 - [230] - Quote Sir SmashAlot wrote: Does the citadel need to be manned by a player for the weapons / defenses to work? Will groups in High Sec (During War), Low, WH, and, Null be forced to have station alts sitting in these things 23/7 in order to blap anyone on grid? NOTHING is automated defense if citadel is not manned it will do NOTHING

naed21 The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People 39	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:43:25 - [231] - Quote Can directors kick people out of controlling a citadel? What happens when a spy takes control and shots your own fleet? Can that spy stay in control forever? (Well, until downtime that is, but I know they want to get rid of downtime). I could imagine 3 spys taking turns getting burned for each reinforcement cycle and basically giving away an XL kill.
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 351	Posted - 2015.10.27 17:59:28 - [232] - Quote Khorrdum wrote: Some further explanations would be desired: What is exactly meaned with 'low class wormhole space'? Is the freighter-mandatory only intended for X-Large or for Large and X-Large? What are the design-goals behind it? More informations about that could possibly allow us to give more solution-oriented feedback. I can answer the first. Low-class wormhole space is C1-C4 noted for not allowing capital ships (and freighter) to enter them.
Lady Rift What Shall We Call It 235	Posted - 2015.10.27 18:30:03 - [233] - Quote Firvain wrote: Sir SmashAlot wrote: Does the citadel need to be manned by a player for the weapons / defenses to work? Will groups in High Sec (During War), Low, WH, and, Null be forced to have station alts sitting in these things 23/7 in order to blap anyone on grid? Pretty much, same as a pos now, because a pos at the moment even when outfitted wiht a **** ton of guns isnt much of a threath to anyone POS's can get lucky.
Siobhan MacLeary Hole Violence Whole Squid 218	Posted - 2015.10.27 18:38:47 - [234] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Saede Riordan wrote: Chavez Domingo wrote: wasnt a large citadel at 80.000m-¦ that can fit into a orca... no need for a freighter than... Is this actually going to be the case CCP, or is it an oversight? I want to know whether I need to start building an in-system freighter or not. Dev blog says freighters needed to deploy a large, but by the volume an orca will be able to do it with currently listed value. I don't want to have to build a freighter in my wormhole but I will if I need to. Just yes or no on that. Do I need a freighter to deploy a large, or can I do it with an orca? Probably an oversight A simple yes or no will suffice. Is that 80k m3 figure correct or not? GÇ£Point out to me a person who has been harmed by an AFK cloaker and I will point out a person who has no business playing this game.GÇ¥ - CCP Soundwave
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 309	Posted - 2015.10.27 18:46:26 - [235] - Quote naed21 wrote: Can directors kick people out of controlling a citadel? What happens when a spy takes control and shots your own fleet? Can that spy stay in control forever? (Well, until downtime that is, but I know they want to get rid of downtime). I could imagine 3 spys taking turns getting burned for each reinforcement cycle and basically giving away an XL kill. Yes
Dusty Meg Echelon Research SpaceMonkey's Alliance 99	Posted - 2015.10.27 19:07:50 - [236] - Quote I would really like to see that Outpost Construction 5 being a requirement for building the XL structures. Some of us put a lot of days training into getting 5. This isnt me being a bitter vet, but the requirement of 5 will give a nice bonus to the people who have trained it to 5 so that they can be used by the alliances and potentially gain some extra isk over people who havnt trained it. Creater of the EVE animated influence map http://www.youtube.com/user/DustMityEVE
Esrevid Nekkeg Justified and Ancient 520	Posted - 2015.10.27 19:09:14 - [237] - Quote Firvain wrote: Sir SmashAlot wrote: Does the citadel need to be manned by a player for the weapons / defenses to work? Will groups in High Sec (During War), Low, WH, and, Null be forced to have station alts sitting in these things 23/7 in order to blap anyone on grid? Pretty much, same as a pos now, because a pos at the moment even when outfitted wiht a **** ton of guns isnt much of a threath to anyone Eh....no. Our WH tower has killed quite a few nosy characters over the years. It's actually the biggest killer in our entire corporation. Well, actually it's the only in-corp thing that might deserve that title at all... On the topic of the thread, thanks CCP Ytterbium for shedding some light on questions I had but others asked before me. Here I used to have a sig of our old Camper in space. Now it is disregarded as being the wrong format. Looking out the window I see one thing: Nothing wrong with the format of our Camper! Silly CCP......
Max Kolonko WATAHA. Unseen Wolves 568	Posted - 2015.10.27 19:09:50 - [238] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Saede Riordan wrote: Chavez Domingo wrote: wasnt a large citadel at 80.000m-¦ that can fit into a orca... no need for a freighter than... Is this actually going to be the case CCP, or is it an oversight? I want to know whether I need to start building an in-system freighter or not. Dev blog says freighters needed to deploy a large, but by the volume an orca will be able to do it with currently listed value. I don't want to have to build a freighter in my wormhole but I will if I need to. Just yes or no on that. Do I need a freighter to deploy a large, or can I do it with an orca? Probably an oversight So which one is oversight? Do we need orca or freighter for large citadel? Also have any thought been put on replacement mechanics for current moon coverage in WH as defense mechanics? I remember during Structure Town Hall there was discussions about it and some proposal from CCP side but nothing mentioned about it in blog or during presentation. During presentation there was (very brief) slide that showed that RF in WH will be shorter, but it was very quick so I could not look at it and it was not mentioned by presenter at all (something something only 24h for second rf???) Could You elaborate on how current plans for RF are loking, especially in WH? Also have any thought been put on probplem of trust, access to player hangars by directors? With poses (unless You use those stupid personal hangars) thief can only take what he can cary by himself, everything else is in corporate structures accessible by directors. With new citadels he have unlimited personal hangar to take everything from Your corp You gave access too. We in WH use shared ships in many situations (no reason for EVERY member to get for example a WH-collapsing BS when you only need few for entire corp, better to have corp accessible ones). A thief or a spy would need to take those ships one at a time, now he just scoops them all to his hangar. Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Vivi Masivi Lavina Holding MATOU Alliance 0	Posted - 2015.10.27 20:00:34 - [239] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Outposts will not be replaced with Citadels. They'll be reimbursed, along with their upgrades. Am I right in thinking that you will remove Outposts from game? As previously I saw picture that in the end of transition process we will be banned of building new Outposts and upgrades will be reimbursed in some way. Now you're thinking to remove Outposts as well?
Max Kolonko WATAHA. Unseen Wolves 569	Posted - 2015.10.27 20:08:55 - [240] - Quote Vivi Masivi wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Outposts will not be replaced with Citadels. They'll be reimbursed, along with their upgrades. Am I right in thinking that you will remove Outposts from game? As previously I saw picture that in the end of transition process we will be banned of building new Outposts and upgrades will be reimbursed in some way. Now you're thinking to remove Outposts as well? they stated from the beginning that this will be the end goal, all pos and player stations removed as more and more functionality is being migrated into new structures Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?

Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 309	Posted - 2015.10.27 20:15:46 - [241] - Quote Vivi Masivi wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Outposts will not be replaced with Citadels. They'll be reimbursed, along with their upgrades. Am I right in thinking that you will remove Outposts from game? As previously I saw picture that in the end of transition process we will be banned of building new Outposts and upgrades will be reimbursed in some way. Now you're thinking to remove Outposts as well? outposts will go away, PERIOD when, where, what timeframe and how has not been decided yet
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 309	Posted - 2015.10.27 20:16:55 - [242] - Quote Max Kolonko wrote: Vivi Masivi wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Outposts will not be replaced with Citadels. They'll be reimbursed, along with their upgrades. Am I right in thinking that you will remove Outposts from game? As previously I saw picture that in the end of transition process we will be banned of building new Outposts and upgrades will be reimbursed in some way. Now you're thinking to remove Outposts as well? they stated from the beginning that this will be the end goal, all pos and player stations removed as more and more functionality is being migrated into new structures PLEASE stop saying player "Stations" they are called OUTPOSTS Normally, I wouldn't care but the difference between an outpost and a station kinda matters here and is causing a cubic fuckton of confusion
Rek Seven Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering 2083	Posted - 2015.10.27 20:24:23 - [243] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: Rek Seven wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: There seems to be some confusion about overview and warping etc If you have docking rights, the citadel shows up on overview If you don't Open scanner window and it should up green, like an anomoly now and you can warp to it, no dscan or probes needed, but you get ZERO intel until you arrive at the citadel, at which point you can scan it, see who is docked, scan its fitting etc, it can also lock and shoot you. Obviously for high sec any aggression requires a wardec, citadels will have a permanent green gun safety It is the same thing. You can still instantly warp to a citadel without any effort as apposed to the current requirement to locate the correct moon to find a pos. We should be able to fit a mod to a citadel, which prevents a warp to without the use of combat probes. That kind of stuff will come with the observatory array, the possibilities for that are endless I hope you are right but we don't know that for sure do we? The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Lady Rift What Shall We Call It 235	Posted - 2015.10.27 20:28:46 - [244] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: Max Kolonko wrote: Vivi Masivi wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Outposts will not be replaced with Citadels. They'll be reimbursed, along with their upgrades. Am I right in thinking that you will remove Outposts from game? As previously I saw picture that in the end of transition process we will be banned of building new Outposts and upgrades will be reimbursed in some way. Now you're thinking to remove Outposts as well? they stated from the beginning that this will be the end goal, all pos and player stations removed as more and more functionality is being migrated into new structures PLEASE stop saying player "Stations" they are called OUTPOSTS Normally, I wouldn't care but the difference between an outpost and a station kinda matters here and is causing a cubic fuckton of confusion they are player stations called outposts. get over it.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2216	Posted - 2015.10.27 20:29:31 - [245] - Quote Here's a quick glossary for Things You Dock In. Outpost: A player-built structure. Limited to one per system. Can only be erected in conquerable space. Cannot be placed in a system with a Conquerable Station (read below.) Comes in racial flavors, and are highly upgradable, with a fully-upgraded outpost costing in excess of 100b ISK. Conquerable Station (aka "conq"): Structures seeded by CCP when the game was released. Three conqs exist in every region without native NPC space, except for the Drone Regions, and Delve (which has conqs because its NPC space was added later.) These structures can be claimed by players in the same manner as Outposts, but their inability to be upgraded and their inferior services make them largely useless in TYOOL 2015. In Deklein, VFK-IV, 3JN9, and CZD are conqs. Station: An NPC-owned structure in empire, or NPC-controlled nullsec such as the pockets of Pure Blind and Venal. When everything surrounding new structures (including Citadels) is complete, Outposts will be gone, for sure. The fate of conqs is unknown. Stations in NPC nullsec will likely remain, barring any one-time shuffling by CCP. Stations in Empire, most likely, won't change. Nothing is completely off the table, however, especially with Asset Safety making it trivial to fold, spindle, and mutilate player assets. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Rek Seven Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering 2083	Posted - 2015.10.27 20:31:43 - [246] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: There seems to be some confusion about overview and warping etc If you have docking rights, the citadel shows up on overview If you don't Open scanner window and it should up green, like an anomoly now and you can warp to it, no dscan or probes needed, but you get ZERO intel until you arrive at the citadel, at which point you can scan it, see who is docked, scan its fitting etc, it can also lock and shoot you. Obviously for high sec any aggression requires a wardec, citadels will have a permanent green gun safety This man. He gets it. It's a shame you don't Warping to an anomaly is essentially the same thing as warping to something on overview. Conciser intel is gathered in wormhole space. Are you adding new scanners that can be used while cloaked, or will we have to decloak to gather intel? If it's the latter, that is not good! Maybe you don't understand what the issues? I have tried to explain multiple times if you care to look. The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 309	Posted - 2015.10.27 20:32:27 - [247] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: Rek Seven wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: There seems to be some confusion about overview and warping etc If you have docking rights, the citadel shows up on overview If you don't Open scanner window and it should up green, like an anomoly now and you can warp to it, no dscan or probes needed, but you get ZERO intel until you arrive at the citadel, at which point you can scan it, see who is docked, scan its fitting etc, it can also lock and shoot you. Obviously for high sec any aggression requires a wardec, citadels will have a permanent green gun safety It is the same thing. You can still instantly warp to a citadel without any effort as apposed to the current requirement to locate the correct moon to find a pos. We should be able to fit a mod to a citadel, which prevents a warp to without the use of combat probes. That kind of stuff will come with the observatory array, the possibilities for that are endless I hope you are right but we don't know that for sure do we? I don't think CCP knows, at this point there are 10000000 possibilities, but if that one was to happen, it would be in the obs array realm
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 309	Posted - 2015.10.27 20:34:13 - [248] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: There seems to be some confusion about overview and warping etc If you have docking rights, the citadel shows up on overview If you don't Open scanner window and it should up green, like an anomoly now and you can warp to it, no dscan or probes needed, but you get ZERO intel until you arrive at the citadel, at which point you can scan it, see who is docked, scan its fitting etc, it can also lock and shoot you. Obviously for high sec any aggression requires a wardec, citadels will have a permanent green gun safety This man. He gets it. It's a shame you don't Warping to an anomaly is essentially the same thing as warping to something on overview. Conciser intel is gathered in wormhole space. Are you adding new scanners that can be used while cloaked, or will we have to decloak to gather intel? If it's the latter, that is not good! Maybe you don't understand what the issues? I have tried to explain multiple times if you care to look. the issue is there can be upwards of 2000 citadels in a single system, do you really want 2000 items on your overview? I don't even want that many in probe results screen, but that is better than waiting for overview to load. Maybe i don't understand you question fully. If you are asking about cloaked, you get little to no intel cloaked, you will have to uncloak and scan
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 309	Posted - 2015.10.27 20:35:27 - [249] - Quote Also, I wasn't answering you specifically, there were plenty of people who didn't understand when and what would be on overview and warpable
Octoven WIFI Express Phoebe Freeport Republic 392	Posted - 2015.10.27 20:50:00 - [250] - Quote Saede Riordan wrote: Quote: A Medium structure hull may be deployed from an Industrial, Large and X-Large require a freighter. Yes, we do are aware this make things more complicated to deploy a Large or X-Large structure in low class wormhole space. This is intended. CCPlease. Give us low-class wormholers so sort of break here. You're essentially saying that we'll need to build an otherwise completely useless freighter which will be trapped in our wormhole solely for the purpose of deploying large citadels. And make no mistake we need large citadels many of us have large numbers of capitals and we'll need places to put them. I get not wanting us to easily put up XLs, (not that it'd be easy anyway with the ISK cost involved), but come on. None of us are going to leave our capital fleets floating in space outside mediums, we just won't use these structures and we'll keep using towers. You have to give us some realistic option to store our capitals and telling us to build a two billion isk ship that we can't use for anything else is not realistic. Either make them fit into something other then a freighter, or give us a way to shove freighters through our wormholes. This feels like a slap across the face to low class space. This of course will only work until the removal of POSes from the game and then youre boned because you cant dock a freighter to a med citadel sooo id imagine you wont be able to construct one there either. Unless that gets clarified you essentially will have to build the freighter while POSes are still around and hope your L or XL doesn't go pop after they get removed.

Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 309	Posted - 2015.10.27 20:52:04 - [251] - Quote Octoven wrote: Saede Riordan wrote: Quote: A Medium structure hull may be deployed from an Industrial, Large and X-Large require a freighter. Yes, we do are aware this make things more complicated to deploy a Large or X-Large structure in low class wormhole space. This is intended. CCPlease. Give us low-class wormholers so sort of break here. You're essentially saying that we'll need to build an otherwise completely useless freighter which will be trapped in our wormhole solely for the purpose of deploying large citadels. And make no mistake we need large citadels many of us have large numbers of capitals and we'll need places to put them. I get not wanting us to easily put up XLs, (not that it'd be easy anyway with the ISK cost involved), but come on. None of us are going to leave our capital fleets floating in space outside mediums, we just won't use these structures and we'll keep using towers. You have to give us some realistic option to store our capitals and telling us to build a two billion isk ship that we can't use for anything else is not realistic. Either make them fit into something other then a freighter, or give us a way to shove freighters through our wormholes. This feels like a slap across the face to low class space. This of course will only work until the removal of POSes from the game and then youre boned because you cant dock a freighter to a med citadel sooo id imagine you wont be able to construct one there either. Unless that gets clarified you essentially will have to build the freighter while POSes are still around and hope your L or XL doesn't go pop after they get removed. Can tether a titan to a medium, can tether a freighter to a medium and access hangars, where you can drag the citadel to your cargo bay on your freighter
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 352	Posted - 2015.10.27 20:55:44 - [252] - Quote Octoven wrote: Saede Riordan wrote: Quote: A Medium structure hull may be deployed from an Industrial, Large and X-Large require a freighter. Yes, we do are aware this make things more complicated to deploy a Large or X-Large structure in low class wormhole space. This is intended. CCPlease. Give us low-class wormholers so sort of break here. You're essentially saying that we'll need to build an otherwise completely useless freighter which will be trapped in our wormhole solely for the purpose of deploying large citadels. And make no mistake we need large citadels many of us have large numbers of capitals and we'll need places to put them. I get not wanting us to easily put up XLs, (not that it'd be easy anyway with the ISK cost involved), but come on. None of us are going to leave our capital fleets floating in space outside mediums, we just won't use these structures and we'll keep using towers. You have to give us some realistic option to store our capitals and telling us to build a two billion isk ship that we can't use for anything else is not realistic. Either make them fit into something other then a freighter, or give us a way to shove freighters through our wormholes. This feels like a slap across the face to low class space. This of course will only work until the removal of POSes from the game and then youre boned because you cant dock a freighter to a med citadel sooo id imagine you wont be able to construct one there either. Unless that gets clarified you essentially will have to build the freighter while POSes are still around and hope your L or XL doesn't go pop after they get removed. They've already said that you can dock freighters to a M or larger, regardless of what happens with the launching requirement
Vivi Masivi Lavina Holding MATOU Alliance 0	Posted - 2015.10.27 21:23:17 - [253] - Quote I know that POSes will not removed instantly after Citadel release. When CCP will add all new structures to replace old system - POSes will gone... But I have a question How does new system will replace cynosural system jammers, jump bridges, cynosural generator arrays?? Will it be new stand alone structures, or we will have service modules to fit into citadels???
Rek Seven Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering 2083	Posted - 2015.10.27 21:31:08 - [254] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: the issue is there can be upwards of 2000 citadels in a single system, do you really want 2000 items on your overview? I don't even want that many in probe results screen, but that is better than waiting for overview to load. Maybe i don't understand you question fully. If you are asking about cloaked, you get little to no intel cloaked, you will have to uncloak and scan You have got it backwards. I DON'T want hostile to be able to warp to my Citadel (using overview or scan window) without any real effort. If that means i need to put a mod/rig on my citadel, so be it... As a wormhole I would love it it went further and i could hide my pos from d-scan but i doubt ccp would do anything that cool. In case you are not experienced how wormholes/pos scouting works; we can currently gather intel without decloaking so to take this away would be a bad move IMO. The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Terranid Meester Tactical Assault and Recon Unit 313	Posted - 2015.10.27 21:45:44 - [255] - Quote probag Bear wrote: ISK is already used as a material for the manufacturing of all items in Eve True but it isn't actually removed from the game [as far as I know] it just gets transferred elsewhere even if that elsewhere is an npc corp. You could also regard the reduction of inflation as a consequence of less players than there used to be. If there are more players you will see an increase in inflation.
Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 285	Posted - 2015.10.27 21:47:57 - [256] - Quote Might have been answered already but... will you be able to tether unmanned ships to a citadel, and what sort of access controls will be available? War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Balthizarr Unknown Skies Eve Engineering 7	Posted - 2015.10.27 21:50:50 - [257] - Quote Are there any plans to finally make walking in stations possible with these new citadels, seeing as were now getting these new massive buildings we can dock with and call home????
Terranid Meester Tactical Assault and Recon Unit 313	Posted - 2015.10.27 21:52:01 - [258] - Quote Ice Cold Beer wrote: I see the CSM has been busy. More nul sec crap of no interest to empire dwellers. CSM, hang your heads in shame. You can build them in high sec you moron.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2217	Posted - 2015.10.27 21:55:33 - [259] - Quote Terranid Meester wrote: probag Bear wrote: ISK is already used as a material for the manufacturing of all items in Eve True but it isn't actually removed from the game [as far as I know] it just gets transferred elsewhere even if that elsewhere is an npc corp. You could also regard the reduction of inflation as a consequence of less players than there used to be. If there are more players you will see an increase in inflation. Industry job costs actively remove the isk spent from the game. Crius added a fairly significant isk sink in this form. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 309	Posted - 2015.10.27 21:57:04 - [260] - Quote Vivi Masivi wrote: I know that POSes will not removed instantly after Citadel release. When CCP will add all new structures to replace old system - POSes will gone... But I have a question How will new system replace cynosural system jammers, jump bridges, cynosural generator arrays?? Will it be new stand alone structures, or we will have service modules to fit into citadels??? Read the FIRST blog from like 6 months ago, it is all explained cyno jammer and beacon is on gates gates are essentially jump bridges there might be a temp cyno beacon on citadels until gates are introduced yes, no, maybe, sort of, yes

Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 309	Posted - 2015.10.27 21:58:19 - [261] - Quote Balthizarr wrote: Are there any plans to finally make walking in stations possible with these new citadels, seeing as were now getting these new massive buildings we can dock with and call home???? When you dock, you are still in space overview is gone, citadel services appears, but you see space, just like you did in your ship There is no "Station" to walk in
Karash Amerius Sutoka 213	Posted - 2015.10.27 22:00:11 - [262] - Quote This is more of a thematic question...one I really don't expect a solid answer to, but it will be important once things are implemented. Scale. Right now, the system sizes...planet and moon diameters, and even NPC stations are laughably out of scale for how they compare to ships. You just need to zoom out completely to notice it. How are Citadels with their huge size going to compound this visual problem? Some of the prelim artwork I am looking at will dwarf a lot of background celestials...or at the very least, continue to break the immersion of Eve. Karash Amerius Operative, Sutoka
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 309	Posted - 2015.10.27 22:02:31 - [263] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: the issue is there can be upwards of 2000 citadels in a single system, do you really want 2000 items on your overview? I don't even want that many in probe results screen, but that is better than waiting for overview to load. Maybe i don't understand you question fully. If you are asking about cloaked, you get little to no intel cloaked, you will have to uncloak and scan You have got it backwards. I DON'T want hostile to be able to warp to my Citadel (using overview or scan window) without any real effort. If that means i need to put a mod/rig on my citadel, so be it... As a wormhole I would love it it went further and i could hide my pos from d-scan but i doubt ccp would do anything that cool. In case you are not experienced how wormholes/pos scouting works; we can currently gather intel without decloaking so to take this away would be a bad move IMO. Listen, i don't have a dog in this fight, i just don't care I am explaining the way it is currently being developed, of course it could change If you don't like it, don't **** on the messenger, contact your CSM and convey how bad it is
Malakai Asamov Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion 37	Posted - 2015.10.27 22:06:58 - [264] - Quote Bit early but what's the ball park for Citdael DPS? Should it be enough to break a Force Auxiliaries local tank? Cause at that point your welping alot of caps to take a citadel... Also can we apply ewar to citadels?
Homer Simpson Amatin Central Builders Incorporated Short Bus Syndicate 0	Posted - 2015.10.27 22:31:13 - [265] - Quote What would happen to any EXISTING station parts that anyone may happen to have? will they get re-named and still be useful or will they get removed from the game? Same question fro any copies for station component BPC's ?
Rek Seven Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering 2083	Posted - 2015.10.27 22:34:20 - [266] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: Rek Seven wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: the issue is there can be upwards of 2000 citadels in a single system, do you really want 2000 items on your overview? I don't even want that many in probe results screen, but that is better than waiting for overview to load. Maybe i don't understand you question fully. If you are asking about cloaked, you get little to no intel cloaked, you will have to uncloak and scan You have got it backwards. I DON'T want hostile to be able to warp to my Citadel (using overview or scan window) without any real effort. If that means i need to put a mod/rig on my citadel, so be it... As a wormhole I would love it it went further and i could hide my pos from d-scan but i doubt ccp would do anything that cool. In case you are not experienced how wormholes/pos scouting works; we can currently gather intel without decloaking so to take this away would be a bad move IMO. Listen, i don't have a dog in this fight, i just don't care I am explaining the way it is currently being developed, of course it could change If you don't like it, don't **** on the messenger, contact your CSM and convey how bad it is Dude what are you talking about? I'm not having a go at you i'm explaining my stance to you because you indicated you didn't get where I was coming from. I also though we wanted the same thing after reading the highlighted parts of your posed... I'm so confused The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Terranid Meester Tactical Assault and Recon Unit 313	Posted - 2015.10.27 22:34:21 - [267] - Quote Querns wrote: Industry job costs actively remove the isk spent from the game. Crius added a fairly significant isk sink in this form. I stand corrected. guess I didn't get the memo Cheeky to ask but anyone got a link? Also regarding the number of citadels a person can put up at a time, will there be restrictions? We all know titans were supposed to be rare so what is stopping anyone from spamming single systems with hundreds of citadels?
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 309	Posted - 2015.10.27 22:43:41 - [268] - Quote Terranid Meester wrote: Querns wrote: Industry job costs actively remove the isk spent from the game. Crius added a fairly significant isk sink in this form. I stand corrected. guess I didn't get the memo Cheeky to ask but anyone got a link? Also regarding the number of citadels a person can put up at a time, will there be restrictions? We all know titans were supposed to be rare so what is stopping anyone from spamming single systems with hundreds of citadels? Welcome to Crius July 2014 job install costs There are several 100+ page threadnaughts on it from over a year ago Google -> that way
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2217	Posted - 2015.10.27 22:52:32 - [269] - Quote Terranid Meester wrote: Querns wrote: Industry job costs actively remove the isk spent from the game. Crius added a fairly significant isk sink in this form. I stand corrected. guess I didn't get the memo Cheeky to ask but anyone got a link? Also regarding the number of citadels a person can put up at a time, will there be restrictions? We all know titans were supposed to be rare so what is stopping anyone from spamming single systems with hundreds of citadels? Man, you must not have done any manufacturing in the last 18 months. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Balthizarr Unknown Skies Eve Engineering 7	Posted - 2015.10.27 22:54:37 - [270] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: Balthizarr wrote: Are there any plans to finally make walking in stations possible with these new citadels, seeing as were now getting these new massive buildings we can dock with and call home???? When you dock, you are still in space overview is gone, citadel services appears, but you see space, just like you did in your ship There is no "Station" to walk in I know how the citadels are going to work as of now, my question was are there any plans to make these citadels as I described ie dockable like stations and there for making it a possibility to walk around inside them! These are going to be MASSIVE floating stations, so not letting you walk around them one day making a use for the character we created SO LONG AGO, would be as pointless as having the planets you will never be able to land on that other similar games will allow you to do!

Circumstantial Evidence 232	Posted - 2015.10.27 23:04:14 - [271] - Quote Balthizarr wrote: These are going to be MASSIVE floating stations, so not letting you walk around them one day... WIS has to be left for a future year and/or decade, when CCP has the funds they'd need to create detailed interior environments, with things to do inside, all without sacrificing ongoing development of the spaceship game. It probably needs to be a separate game, an expansion to Dust / Legion. EVE is spaceships.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2641	Posted - 2015.10.27 23:10:20 - [272] - Quote Circumstantial Evidence wrote: Balthizarr wrote: These are going to be MASSIVE floating stations, so not letting you walk around them one day... WIS has to be left for a future year and/or decade, when CCP has the funds they'd need to create detailed interior environments, with things to do inside, all without sacrificing ongoing development of the spaceship game. It probably needs to be a separate game, an expansion to Dust / Legion. EVE is spaceships. More it has a complete lack of compelling game play reasons to be done. Not a single thing people have suggested for it actually adds to gameplay, just pure fluff or in one or two cases pure griefing.
Circumstantial Evidence 233	Posted - 2015.10.27 23:26:22 - [273] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Circumstantial Evidence wrote: Balthizarr wrote: These are going to be MASSIVE floating stations, so not letting you walk around them one day... WIS has to be left for a future year and/or decade, when CCP has the funds they'd need to create detailed interior environments, with things to do inside, all without sacrificing ongoing development of the spaceship game. It probably needs to be a separate game, an expansion to Dust / Legion. EVE is spaceships. More it has a complete lack of compelling game play reasons to be done. Not a single thing people have suggested for it actually adds to gameplay, just pure fluff or in one or two cases pure griefing. I read a planned idea about a supplement to exploration mechanics. You would enter a mysterious asteroid / abandoned station, wander around, find mysterious objects - perform mini-games on them and/or take loot back to your ship.
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 352	Posted - 2015.10.27 23:34:41 - [274] - Quote Karash Amerius wrote: This is more of a thematic question...one I really don't expect a solid answer to, but it will be important once things are implemented. Scale. Right now, the system sizes...planet and moon diameters, and even NPC stations are laughably out of scale for how they compare to ships. You just need to zoom out completely to notice it. How are Citadels with their huge size going to compound this visual problem? Some of the prelim artwork I am looking at will dwarf a lot of background celestials...or at the very least, continue to break the immersion of Eve. Watch this. It's not EVE, it's your camera https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OttpSwaATl4
Garrett Howe New Eden Shipbuilding 15	Posted - 2015.10.28 01:37:25 - [275] - Quote This may be an obvious question, but Citadels are replacing Outposts, not Starbases, correct?
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. 3682	Posted - 2015.10.28 02:11:02 - [276] - Quote Obil Que wrote: Sir SmashAlot wrote: Does the citadel need to be manned by a player for the weapons / defenses to work? Will groups in High Sec (During War), Low, WH, and, Null be forced to have station alts sitting in these things 23/7 in order to blap anyone on grid? Yes. This has been the case since the first devblog You don't have to man them 23/7, only during your vulnerable windows (3 hours / wk for a M) I assume this time is extended if the citadel is under attack? That means the enemy just needs to shoot now and then, extending the time, until some real life issue forces me log off. This means that, for small or one man corps, a citadel is not a viable option. Note that the present POS is a viable option, because I can take it down during the 24 hour warm-up period of the war. Know a Frozen fan? Check this out Frozen fanfiction
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 309	Posted - 2015.10.28 03:37:07 - [277] - Quote Vincent Athena wrote: Obil Que wrote: Sir SmashAlot wrote: Does the citadel need to be manned by a player for the weapons / defenses to work? Will groups in High Sec (During War), Low, WH, and, Null be forced to have station alts sitting in these things 23/7 in order to blap anyone on grid? Yes. This has been the case since the first devblog You don't have to man them 23/7, only during your vulnerable windows (3 hours / wk for a M) I assume this time is extended if the citadel is under attack? That means the enemy just needs to shoot now and then, extending the time, until some real life issue forces me log off. This means that, for small or one man corps, a citadel is not a viable option. Note that the present POS is a viable option, because I can take it down during the 24 hour warm-up period of the war. 1. You have to meet a minimum dps threshold or it doesn't count as "damage" you can't take a potshot every 15 min and call it DPS 2. If it goes 15 minutes with no dps applied it reps hull, armor, shield to full and vulnerability window is over
Abaddon Nergal WiNGSPAN Delivery Services The WINGSPAN Logo Alliance 1	Posted - 2015.10.28 08:16:48 - [278] - Quote So my 2 isk, Wormholers IIRC the large citadel will be able to be set up/deployed by an Orca, (yes you need cargo rigs and expanders). Now for most C2 and higher wh's you have a static that will allow said Orca to fit through the hole. So whilst in a C1 you would need to build an Orca anything else is relatively easy to set the large up. I personally don't see an issue here. Copy/research times Running the numbers through excel shows that I can run a medium to produce a copy in 8 hours Large @ 13hrs X-Large @ 17hrs I second the comments of those that think this is too low, I would think that a week minimum for mediums is a good starting point L - 2 weeks XL - A month Manufacturing time should ALWAYS be greater then copy time IMHO, why? copying market and it encourages those that want it now, to pay for it. the price point does go some lengths in achieving this however. Abaddon Nergal p.s. my views are my own and not that of Wingspan Delivery Services.
Siliya Critical Mass Project The Void Collective 6	Posted - 2015.10.28 08:35:40 - [279] - Quote Abaddon Nergal wrote: So my 2 isk, Wormholers IIRC the large citadel will be able to be set up/deployed by an Orca, (yes you need cargo rigs and expanders). Now for most C2 and higher wh's you have a static that will allow said Orca to fit through the hole. So whilst in a C1 you would need to build an Orca anything else is relatively easy to set the large up. I personally don't see an issue here. aside from the fact that somewhere they said this was an oversight (was a few pages back).. I expect it to be bumped up past Max Orca range of 105k the one thing we aren't getting info on is what type of installation is required to construct it ... will we be able to construct it inside a wormhole (put the BPC into the cooker and pop a citidel out) in an array - and if so what array will we be able to use or will we have to haul it in via freighter or Jump freighter after constructing it in a NPC station(or outpost) in K-space
Abaddon Nergal WiNGSPAN Delivery Services The WINGSPAN Logo Alliance 1	Posted - 2015.10.28 08:43:08 - [280] - Quote Siliya wrote: aside from the fact that somewhere they said this was an oversight (was a few pages back).. I expect it to be bumped up past Max Orca range of 105k the one thing we aren't getting info on is what type of installation is required to construct it ... will we be able to construct it inside a wormhole (put the BPC into the cooker and pop a citidel out) in an array - and if so what array will we be able to use or will we have to haul it in via freighter or Jump freighter after constructing it in a NPC station(or outpost) in K-space So I have this straight you are worried about something that hasn't happened, I think it is more constructive to say "CCP we agree with the volumes of the citadels, thank you" I for one agree with the currently selected volumes In respect of creating the citadel, agreed no information yet however I would suggest that only stations (the one you dock at) will be the only thing capable of building them.

Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 468	Posted - 2015.10.28 09:04:21 - [281] - Quote It should be noted that if you have caps in a c4, with the fact that all caps are getting all the magic hangers and the change that you can deploy from fleet hangers (Others?), you probably can deploy these from a capitol that is not a freighter. Yep, 100% speculation there. But it is more fun that reading all the blogs. AmIRight. AKA the scientist. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Siliya Critical Mass Project The Void Collective 6	Posted - 2015.10.28 09:26:36 - [282] - Quote Abaddon Nergal wrote: Siliya wrote: aside from the fact that somewhere they said this was an oversight (was a few pages back).. I expect it to be bumped up past Max Orca range of 105k the one thing we aren't getting info on is what type of installation is required to construct it ... will we be able to construct it inside a wormhole (put the BPC into the cooker and pop a citidel out) in an array - and if so what array will we be able to use or will we have to haul it in via freighter or Jump freighter after constructing it in a NPC station(or outpost) in K-space So I have this straight you are worried about something that hasn't happened, I think it is more constructive to say "CCP we agree with the volumes of the citadels, thank you" I for one agree with the currently selected volumes if in the case of this being an oversight well you still have tethering right? It should be stated I have no issue with Capitals in C1-4 being.... punished. You want them? you'll find a way to build them. In respect of creating the citadel, agreed no information yet however I would suggest that only stations (the one you dock at) will be the only thing capable of building them. you've pretty much nailed my concern however I expect CCP to do the most unpopular thing possible here (forced to build in K-space, Raise Volume on Larges beyond Orca Range) I also dont have an issue with caps in c1-4, I feel this will end up being an unintentional consequence of this change, I also feel that if they intend to stay with this model then caps that exist in Lower class wormholes NEED to be Reimbursed to the owning players as a change like this will end up forcing owners to eat a multi-billion cost asset because of a game change that was not even a Blip on their Radar when they were constructed CCP has all but said that you cannot put a large in a c1-4 by stating that freighters are required to deploy (I am ignoring the Orca deploying because I truly believe this will not be possible) "we understand that this may prevent certain ships - blah blah - this is intended ... they have just not Confirmed it yet as a side note on construction - and I am just raising a point, not complaining is that if we are indeed forced to haul these in it needs to be mentioned that some c5/6 wormholes dont see 1/2way viable capital K-space connections for Weeks (and no Deep Null doesnt count) I feel if this is NOT Taken into account then this may indeed just become another "screw Wormholers" change and before you start talking about the static ... just remember - freighters cant fit through an M267 or an E175
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 468	Posted - 2015.10.28 09:33:13 - [283] - Quote Siliya wrote: as a side note on construction - and I am just raising a point, not complaining is that if we are indeed forced to haul these in it needs to be mentioned that some c5/6 wormholes dont see 1/2way viable capital K-space connections for Weeks (and no Deep Null doesnt count) I feel if this is NOT Taken into account then this may indeed just become another "screw Wormholers" change That is life in a WH. Where the isk loss of a Capitol is not really the problem. But getting more in and the fits. However we knew that when we moved in. Running C5/C6 chains to find something or get something in is standard op for even the smallest of these corps (I have only me as an active person right now). Leroy a unfitted dread through 3 c5/c6 connections with a hyena for support. Well when stuff lands on grid, you get that PVP rush..... AKA the scientist. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Siliya Critical Mass Project The Void Collective 6	Posted - 2015.10.28 09:39:49 - [284] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: Siliya wrote: as a side note on construction - and I am just raising a point, not complaining is that if we are indeed forced to haul these in it needs to be mentioned that some c5/6 wormholes dont see 1/2way viable capital K-space connections for Weeks (and no Deep Null doesnt count) I feel if this is NOT Taken into account then this may indeed just become another "screw Wormholers" change That is life in a WH. Where the isk loss of a Capitol is not really the problem. But getting more in and the fits. However we knew that when we moved in. Running C5/C6 chains to find something or get something in is standard op for even the smallest of these corps (I have only me as an active person right now). Leroy a unfitted dread through 3 c5/c6 connections with a hyena for support. Well when stuff lands on grid, you get that PVP rush..... agreed tho like I said ... this is a forced mechanic change with an unknown amount of time to adapt (we dont know how long PoS's will stay once citadels land) I know we still have Months for all the rest of this information to come out but the sooner some Details are released... the sooner we can start preparing ....
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2648	Posted - 2015.10.28 10:20:12 - [285] - Quote Siliya wrote: agreed tho like I said ... this is a forced mechanic change with an unknown amount of time to adapt (we dont know how long PoS's will stay once citadels land) I know we still have Months for all the rest of this information to come out but the sooner some Details are released... the sooner we can start preparing .... tho in hindsight if I follow my own train of thought it becomes pretty obvious we wont be able to construct them inside holes You've probably got something like two years before PoS's go, since PoS's will remain until after all the other structures are also implemented. And there are what, six classes of structures to be added?
Nillus K'varr Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2015.10.28 10:30:44 - [286] - Quote Quote: As a consideration for players living in null-security space, we are investing coming up with more ways to build such fuel block to reduce the logistic hassle to haul four types of isotopes around. For example, we are considering adding 4 more blueprints to build the new fuel block with one racial isotope instead of 4, but increasing the amount to compensate. I beg you to not do this, please. This new fuel block gives you the perfect opportunity to encourage people to leave the overpopulated Caldari space and drive conflict between nullsec entities. The more self-sufficiency you pump into nullsec space the less conflict there will be among stablished nullsec entities. Also, having a standard fuel block that requires all 4 racial isotopes will drive miners to fill the other 3 empires and after the miners there will follow gankers and industrialists, then mission runners, explorers and PvPers. When I was thinking about ways to make the 'Simon's Patterned' high sec, 4 isolated empires divided by low sec strips, viable, this new fuel block was literally extacly what I was thinking.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2217	Posted - 2015.10.28 10:43:40 - [287] - Quote Siliya wrote: I also dont have an issue with caps in c1-4, I feel this will end up being an unintentional consequence of this change, I also feel that if they intend to stay with this model then caps that exist in Lower class wormholes NEED to be Reimbursed to the owning players as a change like this will end up forcing owners to eat a multi-billion cost asset because of a game change that was not even a Blip on their Radar when they were constructed This is ridiculous. The fact that you spent X amount of money in the past, and that money is becoming moderately more inconvenient after a transition period of several months does not entitle you to reimbursement. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2217	Posted - 2015.10.28 10:50:26 - [288] - Quote Nillus K'varr wrote: Quote: As a consideration for players living in null-security space, we are investing coming up with more ways to build such fuel block to reduce the logistic hassle to haul four types of isotopes around. For example, we are considering adding 4 more blueprints to build the new fuel block with one racial isotope instead of 4, but increasing the amount to compensate. I beg you to not do this, please. This new fuel block gives you the perfect opportunity to encourage people to leave the overpopulated Caldari space and drive conflict between nullsec entities. The more self-sufficiency you pump into nullsec space the less conflict there will be among stablished nullsec entities. Also, having a standard fuel block that requires all 4 racial isotopes will drive miners to fill the other 3 empires and after the miners there will follow gankers and industrialists, then mission runners, explorers and PvPers. When I was thinking about ways to make the 'Simon's Patterned' high sec, 4 isolated empires divided by low sec strips, viable, this new fuel block was literally extacly what I was thinking. Unfortunately, CCP is at odds with your beliefs. They want nullsec to have less dependency on Jita, not more. Your vignette about regional resources causing conflict doesn't hold up in a world where that very resource is available in highsec. Additionally, there's absolutely no way that any nullsec entity is going to do something as daft as take space for access to new kinds of ice, especially after Phoebe's reduction in power projection and Aegis sov's harsh response times to sovereignty contests. Players will shrug, purchase the things from Jita, and jump them directly off of the undock. CCP wants this to happen less. On the plus side, with blocks being forged from any type of racial ice, manufacturers of these blocks will drive demand for the "cheapest" tope flavors, increasing costs for all types of ice. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4378	Posted - 2015.10.28 11:14:58 - [289] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Cat Harkness wrote: Destiny Dain2 wrote: Can a Citadel change their fit on the fly with weapons and ammo? I picture a sub-capital fleet come in on the final round and the persons Citadel is fitted for them and then when the timer starts, in come the Capitals with no way to defend. No. Slots can not be changed while the Citadel is under attack (any time the shields, armor, hull is not 100%). So not even during the repair cycle. Hmmm I tend to remember we stated after shields were gone. You make me doubt because I can see some crazy module swapping game in combat. Let me double-check and come back at you on that one. Double-checked, you won't be able to refit in combat. Also won't be able to change modules after shields are gone.

Siliya Critical Mass Project The Void Collective 7	Posted - 2015.10.28 11:15:17 - [290] - Quote Querns wrote: Siliya wrote: I also dont have an issue with caps in c1-4, I feel this will end up being an unintentional consequence of this change, I also feel that if they intend to stay with this model then caps that exist in Lower class wormholes NEED to be Reimbursed to the owning players as a change like this will end up forcing owners to eat a multi-billion cost asset because of a game change that was not even a Blip on their Radar when they were constructed This is ridiculous. The fact that you spent X amount of money in the past, and that money is becoming moderately more inconvenient after a transition period of several months does not entitle you to reimbursement. Moderatly is severly understating this and Transition periods Mean SQUAT for people in these situations - for years you have been able to have them in a PoS for protection ... now .. you don't have that option unless you can deploy a large citadel into a c1-4 .. this is a big reason why construction details are so important if we have to haul these into wormholes ..... then deploying a Large in a c1-4 is impossible due to the max Jump Mass of anything leading into one of these Holes (300m Max Jump Mass and freighters crack 1m) by not reimbursing these pilots you are punishing them via Forced game mechanics - they no longer have any security for their capitals and they cant get them out due to max jump mass - cant get them out via repackaging (Archon is 1Million packaged) they cant reprocess them because the arrays dont support it if we CAN construct them in wormholes ... then this is a Moot Point ... and then I would agree that reimbursement would not be needed but I am hesitant to believe in CCP's judgment on this how would the big power blocs feel if the XL Citadels could not tether Moms or Titans ... PoS's went away, and you prevented from moving them puting all of the supers in the game at Risk - that is very similar to what your suggesting players with caps in lower wormholes live with ...

Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2648	Posted - 2015.10.28 11:16:22 - [291] - Quote Querns wrote: On the plus side, with blocks being forged from any type of racial ice, manufacturers of these blocks will drive demand for the "cheapest" tope flavors, increasing costs for all types of ice. We can also hope they might get crazy and work out how to create variable input BPO's, at which point a whole bunch of other fun becomes possible as a result of that change. And yes you are right, having them made from each variety of ice actually drives demand better for ice than even quantities of all four.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2648	Posted - 2015.10.28 11:17:54 - [292] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Double-checked, you won't be able to refit in combat. Also won't be able to change modules after shields are gone. Can you confirm. Is the inability to refit in combat due to a weapons timer? In which case wait 60 seconds and you can refit. Or can citadels not refit any time the repair timer is running so as soon as someone takes the first shot at you? Which of these scenario's explains why Citadels can not refit in combat.

CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4378	Posted - 2015.10.28 11:24:11 - [293] - Quote Max Kolonko wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Saede Riordan wrote: Chavez Domingo wrote: wasnt a large citadel at 80.000m-¦ that can fit into a orca... no need for a freighter than... Is this actually going to be the case CCP, or is it an oversight? I want to know whether I need to start building an in-system freighter or not. Dev blog says freighters needed to deploy a large, but by the volume an orca will be able to do it with currently listed value. I don't want to have to build a freighter in my wormhole but I will if I need to. Just yes or no on that. Do I need a freighter to deploy a large, or can I do it with an orca? Probably an oversight So which one is oversight? Do we need orca or freighter for large citadel? Also have any thought been put on replacement mechanics for current moon coverage in WH as defense mechanics? I remember during Structure Town Hall there was discussions about it and some proposal from CCP side but nothing mentioned about it in blog or during presentation. During presentation there was (very brief) slide that showed that RF in WH will be shorter, but it was very quick so I could not look at it and it was not mentioned by presenter at all (something something only 24h for second rf???) Could You elaborate on how current plans for RF are loking, especially in WH? Also have any thought been put on probplem of trust, access to player hangars by directors? With poses (unless You use those stupid personal hangars) thief can only take what he can cary by himself, everything else is in corporate structures accessible by directors. With new citadels he have unlimited personal hangar to take everything from Your corp You gave access too. We in WH use shared ships in many situations (no reason for EVERY member to get for example a WH-collapsing BS when you only need few for entire corp, better to have corp accessible ones). A thief or a spy would need to take those ships one at a time, now he just scoops them all to his hangar. We will change the volume of the L Citadel to prevent Orcas to carry it around. Moon coverage may be replaced with a module that prevents corporation / alliances other than your own to deploy structures but that most likely won't be coming in the first Citadel batch. Since Citadels will have infinite cargo holds it'll be much easier to give your members more ships to play with in their personal hangars. Sharing corporation hangar access is done at your own risk, like everywhere else in New Eden.


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4378	Posted - 2015.10.28 11:30:04 - [294] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: Max Kolonko wrote: Vivi Masivi wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Outposts will not be replaced with Citadels. They'll be reimbursed, along with their upgrades. Am I right in thinking that you will remove Outposts from game? As previously I saw picture that in the end of transition process we will be banned of building new Outposts and upgrades will be reimbursed in some way. Now you're thinking to remove Outposts as well? they stated from the beginning that this will be the end goal, all pos and player stations removed as more and more functionality is being migrated into new structures PLEASE stop saying player "Stations" they are called OUTPOSTS Normally, I wouldn't care but the difference between an outpost and a station kinda matters here and is causing a cubic fuckton of confusion You can't really blame him though when we (CCP) have been quite lax with the naming. There is has been quite some confusion internally as well when discussing those. My personal little naming scheme: Stations: NPC stations that cannot be conquered (can't change owner or directly manage it) Conquerable stations: NPC stations that can be conquered (can change the owner and can manage it) Outposts: player-build stations that can be conquered, upgraded (can change the owner, can upgrade it and can manage it) Starbases: the control tower + secondary structures (sometimes called POS for Player Owned Structures, but I don't like that term because it could encompass Outposts as well) Deployables: stuff we added later on with a short life expectancy or gameplay use, like Mobile Depot, Mobile Tractor Unit etc...

Munseventy Kikutech Kleinrock Group 1	Posted - 2015.10.28 11:33:56 - [295] - Quote What about building Where can i build them do i start moving PI and ore in or out of WH
Azahar Ortenegro Astromechanica Maxima Astromechanica Federatis 58	Posted - 2015.10.28 11:37:47 - [296] - Quote And what about replacing Small and Medium POSes in-space storage and fitting abilities?
Xindi Kraid Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd. 1078	Posted - 2015.10.28 12:19:44 - [297] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: We will change the volume of the L Citadel to prevent Orcas to carry it around. Disappointing
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 352	Posted - 2015.10.28 12:54:15 - [298] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: We will change the volume of the L Citadel to prevent Orcas to carry it around. I suppose I can just wait for the number but if you know what it is going to be, will it fit in a Rorqual?
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 352	Posted - 2015.10.28 13:01:14 - [299] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: It should be noted that if you have caps in a c4, with the fact that all caps are getting all the magic hangers and the change that you can deploy from fleet hangers (Others?), you probably can deploy these from a capitol that is not a freighter. Yep, 100% speculation there. But it is more fun that reading all the blogs. AmIRight. Given the challenges in the past with deployables, cargo, and fleet hangers, I'd feel better if we had a definitive answer if these can be deployed from fleet hangers. You are right, if they can, then there are additional choices other than a Freighter for deploying them. My guess, since they did specifically say Freighter, is that it is from Cargo only.
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1186	Posted - 2015.10.28 13:19:43 - [300] - Quote Azahar Ortenegro wrote: And what about replacing Small and Medium POSes in-space storage and fitting abilities? mobile depot

Siliya Critical Mass Project The Void Collective 7	Posted - 2015.10.28 13:25:17 - [301] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: We will change the volume of the L Citadel to prevent Orcas to carry it around. will we be able to construct these in Wormholes ... or will we have to haul them in
X Mayce Manson Family Advent of Fate 4	Posted - 2015.10.28 13:26:22 - [302] - Quote X Mayce wrote: o7 Do I get this correct: nowadays, if I want to get dreadnoughts into position within jumprange to a system to siege that system/in that system (and I dont have any stations for docking available): I place a pos within 5lys (max dread jump range) or less, get my dreads there to have some sort of "safe"-starting point. future use of dreadnoughts for sieging something, and you dont have a station for docking yet means: place at least a large building (citadel) with minimal costs of around 3b (optimistic value)? is this, how it's gonna work, or did I get something wrong? does anyone know? Manson Family Advent of Fate
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 352	Posted - 2015.10.28 13:30:16 - [303] - Quote Siliya wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: We will change the volume of the L Citadel to prevent Orcas to carry it around. will we be able to construct these in Wormholes ... or will we have to haul them in 1) You can only haul them into C5-C6 space 2) You can't build them at a POS with the current numbers. You need 127 10km3 parts. The Equipment array at a POS is currently 1M m3. 3) There is no manufacturing module for a M at this time so you also cannot build a M to bulid a L. While it is an easy fix, with the current information, you cannot have a L citadel in C1-C4 space due to the size issue of the construction parts and the hauling size requirements. Can we get an update on how the construction size issue will be resolved or is it intended?
Lady Rift What Shall We Call It 235	Posted - 2015.10.28 13:36:27 - [304] - Quote Vincent Athena wrote: Obil Que wrote: Sir SmashAlot wrote: Does the citadel need to be manned by a player for the weapons / defenses to work? Will groups in High Sec (During War), Low, WH, and, Null be forced to have station alts sitting in these things 23/7 in order to blap anyone on grid? Yes. This has been the case since the first devblog You don't have to man them 23/7, only during your vulnerable windows (3 hours / wk for a M) I assume this time is extended if the citadel is under attack? That means the enemy just needs to shoot now and then, extending the time, until some real life issue forces me log off. This means that, for small or one man corps, a citadel is not a viable option. Note that the present POS is a viable option, because I can take it down during the 24 hour warm-up period of the war. the citadel only need 15 mins of not shooting at it to rep, this is a timer that counts every time your not shooting it and doesn't reset if you start shooting it. Mine is going to be set to come just before down time just so that people can't prolong it. if they want to reenforce it they will need to bring the max dps to get it done in time.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2219	Posted - 2015.10.28 13:43:37 - [305] - Quote Siliya wrote: Querns wrote: Siliya wrote: I also dont have an issue with caps in c1-4, I feel this will end up being an unintentional consequence of this change, I also feel that if they intend to stay with this model then caps that exist in Lower class wormholes NEED to be Reimbursed to the owning players as a change like this will end up forcing owners to eat a multi-billion cost asset because of a game change that was not even a Blip on their Radar when they were constructed This is ridiculous. The fact that you spent X amount of money in the past, and that money is becoming moderately more inconvenient after a transition period of several months does not entitle you to reimbursement. Moderatly is severly understating this and Transition periods Mean SQUAT for people in these situations - for years you have been able to have them in a PoS for protection ... now .. you don't have that option unless you can deploy a large citadel into a c1-4 .. this is a big reason why construction details are so important if we have to haul these into wormholes ..... then deploying a Large in a c1-4 is impossible due to the max Jump Mass of anything leading into one of these Holes (300m Max Jump Mass and freighters crack 1m) by not reimbursing these pilots you are punishing them via Forced game mechanics - they no longer have any security for their capitals and they cant get them out due to max jump mass - cant get them out via repackaging (Archon is 1Million packaged) they cant reprocess them because the arrays dont support it if we CAN construct them in wormholes ... then this is a Moot Point ... and then I would agree that reimbursement would not be needed but I am hesitant to believe in CCP's judgment on this how would the big power blocs feel if the XL Citadels could not tether Moms or Titans ... PoS's went away, and you were prevented from moving them puting all of the supers in the game at Risk - that is very similar to what your suggesting players with caps in lower wormholes live with ... You can still erect Large and even XL citadels in low-class wormholes, it just takes a little bit of legerdemain. Also, trying to say that they're too expensive in the context of living in wormhole space is probably one of the least effective arguments to garner sympathy from in this game. It's almost as unsympathetic as posting while a member of Goonswarm Federation. Also, your scare vignette is actually what is happening to supercapitals -- the POS we currently hide them in is going away. However, we have several months, potentially even years before the POS actually goes away. We'll display some adaptability; so should you. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2219	Posted - 2015.10.28 13:44:45 - [306] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Querns wrote: On the plus side, with blocks being forged from any type of racial ice, manufacturers of these blocks will drive demand for the "cheapest" tope flavors, increasing costs for all types of ice. We can also hope they might get crazy and work out how to create variable input BPO's, at which point a whole bunch of other fun becomes possible as a result of that change. And yes you are right, having them made from each variety of ice actually drives demand better for ice than even quantities of all four. I don't see any reason why this wouldn't be possible. RAM activities don't need to have unique outputs. The names of the blueprints might have to be slightly different, but I am not sure this is even a thing. (It'd be nice if they did have different names, at any rate.) This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4379	Posted - 2015.10.28 13:50:23 - [307] - Quote Actually, we need to discuss L citadel volumes a bit more - CCP Nullarbor made good points about extra annoyance in C2-C4s. So for now, we don't exactly know if they'll fit in Orcas or not. I'll edit my previous answer, sorry for the confusion.


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4379	Posted - 2015.10.28 13:52:49 - [308] - Quote Xindi Kraid wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: We will change the volume of the L Citadel to prevent Orcas to carry it around. Disappointing Still discussing that option actually. See this post.


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4379	Posted - 2015.10.28 13:53:14 - [309] - Quote Obil Que wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: We will change the volume of the L Citadel to prevent Orcas to carry it around. I suppose I can just wait for the number but if you know what it is going to be, will it fit in a Rorqual? Best to wait guys. See this post.


CCP Ytterbium C C P C C P Alliance 4379	Posted - 2015.10.28 13:54:08 - [310] - Quote Siliya wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: We will change the volume of the L Citadel to prevent Orcas to carry it around. will we be able to construct these in Wormholes ... or will we have to haul them in Addendum. See this post.


Soldarius Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore 1408	Posted - 2015.10.28 13:59:26 - [311] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Soldarius wrote: Torgeir Hekard wrote: [paranoia] I've noticed that medium citadel does not require factory and lab construction components to build. [/paranoia] Does it mean that research/invention/manufacturing would not be available in medium citadels, or it's just an arbitrary component set that in no way reflects the structure capabilities? This. Does this mean if I want to run reactions I will need to invest in a 7B isk Large citadel? Because currently every reaction in the eve universe is done at a POS. If the minimum investment becomes 7B isk, you can pretty much kiss the entire T2 and 3 markets goodbye. Only the people with direct access to moons and gases will ever run them, because buying gasses and moon goo off the market will be a complete loss for years. Arbitrary components, do not reflect actual capability. Remember you can fit service modules into the proper slots as long as you have fittings. Some modules may be specialized in the future, but none of the basic service modules should be. Remember though that you'll get more bonuses if you fit rigs and modules into the hull that fits the proper theme (ex: citadel rigs into a citadel hull). Ok, thx. Glad to get some clarification on that one. I can see paying 600M for a medium citadel that I can use for reactions and is generally permanent (assuming no one destroys it) and only needs fuel when I'm actually using the relevant function. No more setting up and taking down POS structures is a huge time saver. Don't even have to put it at a moon, unless I'm moon mining. Now I am very curious to see what CCP does for reactions in general. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Siliya Critical Mass Project The Void Collective 7	Posted - 2015.10.28 14:04:26 - [312] - Quote 1stly I dont live in a low class Wormhole - I live in a c5 ... I am simply pointing out issues with the current dynamics Querns wrote: You can still erect Large and even XL citadels in low-class wormholes, it just takes a little bit of legerdemain. Also, trying to say that they're too expensive in the context of living in wormhole space is probably one of the least effective arguments to garner sympathy from in this game. It's almost as unsympathetic as posting while a member of Goonswarm Federation. this is what Im trying to get to the bottom of because regardless of ledgerdemain if you have to haul them in you have to use a freighter - Just confirmed by CCP - Not an Orca Freighters Will Not Fit into any holes Connecting to c1-4 c1 from High, Low, Null Max Mass per Jump 20Gg c2 from High, Low, Null Max Mass per Jump 300Gg c3 from High, Low, Null Max Mass per Jump 300Gg c4 from High, Low, Null Max Mass per Jump 300Gg High, Low, Null from c1 Max Mass per Jump 20Gg High, Low, Null from c2 Max Mass per Jump 300Gg High, Low, Null from c3 Max Mass per Jump 300Gg so pray tell how do you fit a freighter through any of these holes - answer ... you cannot - no matter how much adaption you use ...Game mechanics will not allow it this is the biggest reason why I am trying to push for an answer because as has been stated by myself and Obil Que --- Unless you can construct them in a wormhole ---you cannot ... no matter how much you want to ... deploy a Large or an Extra Large in a c1-4 so as for my example ... you will be able to eventually move all your supers to the XL when goons build it pilots in c1-4 with capitals will not have that luxury I digress apparently there was a flurry of activity while writing my last post
Valterra Craven 589	Posted - 2015.10.28 14:11:50 - [313] - Quote Ytterbium, much like the industry changes a while back I have big concerns with how you guys are handling the new rigs. I really think you guys need to go back to the drawing board on that one. You have a golden opportunity here to create a new market instead of trashing an old one. What you should be doing is creating new rig materials that can only be found in null sec. This gives null sec an extra income base without actually giving them an isk printing machine. They've been hollering for more opportunities to level the playing field between hi-sec and this is the one chance you have to make them happy without creating an isk faucet. Please for the love of common sense do not tie t2 salvage to structure rigs in any way.
Soldarius Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore 1408	Posted - 2015.10.28 14:21:06 - [314] - Quote probag Bear wrote: Soldarius wrote: The quantities of T2 salvage required for an XL rig are absolutely batshit insane. There is not enough available market supply across the entire eve universe to build more than a couple of any of these. The price of T2 salvage will go so high no one will ever be able to afford T2 rigs for anything ever again. For everything except Enhanced Ward Consoles (and arguably Intact Shield Emitters), there is more than enough available market supply across the entire eve universe to build thousands of these. http://www.eve-markets.net/detail?typeid=25616#supply nope. 450k required for XL-sized rig. 772k available on market. Can build exactly 1. In the entire universe. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Soldarius Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore 1408	Posted - 2015.10.28 15:18:13 - [315] - Quote EvilweaselSA wrote: Azahar Ortenegro wrote: And what about replacing Small and Medium POSes in-space storage and fitting abilities? mobile depot I believe CCP already stated that all citadels will have these capabilities. Otherwise, yes, Mobile Depot. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Azmodai Draconis Cerberus Federation SpaceMonkey's Alliance 1	Posted - 2015.10.28 15:26:44 - [316] - Quote hmm so with the new structure fuel will current fuel blocls be obsolete
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2219	Posted - 2015.10.28 15:30:49 - [317] - Quote Azmodai Draconis wrote: hmm so with the new structure fuel will current fuel blocls be obsolete Eventually. In the short term, this won't happen until new structures can completely replace the capabilities of POS and outposts. --- Incidentally, is there a good name for describing all of the post-POS/outpost structures? The community has been using the phrase "citadel" to refer to all of these structures, but it's my understanding that citadels are specifically the structures being described in the OP's devblog post. A different bit of terminology to describe all of them, separate from POS, outposts, and stations would be nice. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Nillus K'varr Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2015.10.28 15:33:30 - [318] - Quote Querns wrote: Unfortunately, CCP is at odds with your beliefs. They want nullsec to have less dependency on Jita, not more. Your vignette about regional resources causing conflict doesn't hold up in a world where that very resource is available in highsec. Additionally, there's absolutely no way that any nullsec entity is going to do something as daft as take space for access to new kinds of ice, especially after Phoebe's reduction in power projection and Aegis sov's harsh response times to sovereignty contests. Players will shrug, purchase the things from Jita, and jump them directly off of the undock. CCP wants this to happen less. On the plus side, with blocks being forged from any type of racial ice, manufacturers of these blocks will drive demand for the "cheapest" tope flavors, increasing costs for all types of ice. Nullsec alliances are going to depend on high sec trade hubs whether they have autonomy on fuel blocks or not . The logistics issues will be there both to import and export goods from and to high sec. And personally I see this as something beneficial for EVE since no single region in New Eden should be self-sufficient. Giving self-sufficiency to every nullsec region does nothing to combat the current stagnation, in fact it makes it worse. On the other hand, let's not forget that over 75% of the playerbase lives in highsec. Having a unique blueprint for the fuel block would cause white glaze price to plummet due to oversaturation, since all 4 isotopes have exactly the same demand, forcing miners to look for greener pastures in other empires. Jita would retain some market power initially but ice miners would tend to scatter among all 4 empires until supply and demand of all racial isotopes is equalized accros the board. EVE at some extent works like a food chain. With a good miner population, as the first link, you will start dragging more players to that region starting with haulers moving stuff to the closest tradehub and between them, then suicide gankers that prey both on miners and haulers, then industrialists that service all 3 of them. Now the nearest tradehub is much lively than before the change and slowly starts competing with an overcrowded Jita, offering competitive prices, and nullsec alliances start to think twice about either selling and stocking in their closest thub or going all the way to Jita. With a healthy trade hub, other players like mission runners and explorers will see more reasons to move away from Caldari space and dump their loot in other trade hubs. Granted, I don't see CCP taking an extreme measure like isolating all 4 empires between themselves but that would revitalize lowsec piracy, another added bonus. If we get to build fuel blocks with a single racial istope you will have white glaze as the superpopular ice with better supply and demand but less logistic problems and 3 sub-par ices that require longer (and more expensive) hauling trips to Jita and will never have a competitive price. The overpopulation in Caldari space would make white glaze so dirt cheap and accesible that almost no on would bother mining other ices until the maximum output of Caldari belts is reached (7 spawns per belt per day).
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2220	Posted - 2015.10.28 15:43:58 - [319] - Quote Nillus K'varr wrote: Querns wrote: Unfortunately, CCP is at odds with your beliefs. They want nullsec to have less dependency on Jita, not more. Your vignette about regional resources causing conflict doesn't hold up in a world where that very resource is available in highsec. Additionally, there's absolutely no way that any nullsec entity is going to do something as daft as take space for access to new kinds of ice, especially after Phoebe's reduction in power projection and Aegis sov's harsh response times to sovereignty contests. Players will shrug, purchase the things from Jita, and jump them directly off of the undock. CCP wants this to happen less. On the plus side, with blocks being forged from any type of racial ice, manufacturers of these blocks will drive demand for the "cheapest" tope flavors, increasing costs for all types of ice. Nullsec alliances are going to depend on high sec trade hubs whether they have autonomy on fuel blocks or not . The logistics issues will be there both to import and export goods from and to high sec. And personally I see this as something beneficial for EVE since no single region in New Eden should be self-sufficient. Giving self-sufficiency to every nullsec region does nothing to combat the current stagnation, in fact it makes it worse. On the other hand, let's not forget that over 75% of the playerbase lives in highsec. Having a unique blueprint for the fuel block would cause white glaze price to plummet due to oversaturation, since all 4 isotopes have exactly the same demand, forcing miners to look for greener pastures in other empires. Jita would retain some market power initially but ice miners would tend to scatter among all 4 empires until supply and demand of all racial isotopes is equalized accros the board. EVE at some extent works like a food chain. With a good miner population, as the first link, you will start dragging more players to that region starting with haulers moving stuff to the closest tradehub and between them, then suicide gankers that prey both on miners and haulers, then industrialists that service all 3 of them. Now the nearest tradehub is much lively than before the change and slowly starts competing with an overcrowded Jita, offering competitive prices, and nullsec alliances start to think twice about either selling and stocking in their closest thub or going all the way to Jita. With a healthy trade hub, other players like mission runners and explorers will see more reasons to move away from Caldari space and dump their loot in other trade hubs. Granted, I don't see CCP taking an extreme measure like isolating all 4 empires between themselves but that would revitalize lowsec piracy, another added bonus. If we get to build fuel blocks with a single racial istope you will have white glaze as the superpopular ice with better supply and demand but less logistic problems and 3 sub-par ices that require longer (and more expensive) hauling trips to Jita and will never have a competitive price. The overpopulation in Caldari space would make white glaze so dirt cheap and accesible that almost no on would bother mining other ices until the maximum output of Caldari belts is reached (7 spawns per belt per day). The game doesn't shop in Jita because of nitrogen isotopes. There's way more in play than that. If that were actually the case, we'd all be shopping in Dodixie, because gallente towers far outnumber caldari towers, especially after Crius eliminated the need for having huge farms of caldari towers in highsec to gain production/research slots. (Moon mineral reactions, in general, need gallente towers, not caldari.) Also, how does making nullsec more self-sufficient make stagnancy worse? If things are actually feasible and profitable to make solely in nullsec, it increases the traffic in nullsec in the form of harvesters and haulers. This increases prey for PVPers. This increases the need for home defense types, which makes the total amount of things to do in nullsec even higher. Making nullsec a vibrant alternative to producing in highsec also drives demand for actually existing in nullsec, which is a problem right now. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Gunrunner1775 Interstellar Engineering and Electronics INC 52	Posted - 2015.10.28 15:45:01 - [320] - Quote With reguard to the weapons for the citadels.... AOE weapons were mentioned... This will cause issues in high sec, can i assume they will be unuseable in high sec?? (ie 3rd party neutrals getting caught up in the area of effect, and concord follow on reaction)

Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 309	Posted - 2015.10.28 15:48:18 - [321] - Quote Gunrunner1775 wrote: With reguard to the weapons for the citadels.... AOE weapons were mentioned... This will cause issues in high sec, can i assume they will be unuseable in high sec?? (ie 3rd party neutrals getting caught up in the area of effect, and concord follow on reaction) Nope, not allowed in high sec Citadel weapon safety set to permanent green
Saede Riordan Alexylva Paradox Low-Class 7832	Posted - 2015.10.28 16:01:19 - [322] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Actually, we need to discuss L citadel volumes a bit more - CCP Nullarbor made good points about extra annoyance in C2-C4s. So for now, we don't exactly know if they'll fit in Orcas or not. I'll edit my previous answer, sorry for the confusion. Its pretty simple, and we have some options for how to go about it. By the currently discussed mechanics you won't be able to build a L in a wormhole because its too big to fit into any of the component arrays. If you increase the volume so you can't buy them in HS and haul them in with an orca, then it'll be practically impossible to build one. The only way would be: Build medium>build large and freighter in medium> deploy large. That's quite a lot of hassle. If you're trying to say without saying that you don't want Ls in low-class wormholes then I urge you to seriously rethink that position. Some of us have quite a lot of capitals in our home holes and have been building up capital fleets in them for a long time. With mediums unable to have them dock (thus unable to build them inside mediums), you're essentially saying that you can't build capitals in low class space anymore and the only way to have them will be if they're grandfathered in. That's a pretty terrible turd to dump onto us low class wormholers. No, assuming that's unintended and you want us to be able to have larges in our wormholes with some effort, then there's a few solutions. 1) Introduce a temporary construction array at a tower that is large enough to build one at a tower. Still have to build a freighter in-system, which is a pain, but it gives us the option. 2) Keep them their current size, let us haul them in with orcas. 3) Scrap the 'drop them into space fully finished' idea and use gantries like POCOs have. This also allows you to address another point, which is that there's no fast counterplay to someone dropping a citadel in your system (and this applies everywhere). If you have a gantry and have to shovel resources into it, and it doesn't become invulnerable until the gantry is fully loaded, then it gives the vigilant and watchful a chance to take out a fetal citadel before it becomes invulnerable and force us to take a week ripping it down. I see this as a good thing as it rewards players proactively defending their space and means that you can't just drop a citadel and run, you actually have to defend it at least for a little bit while its being loaded with parts. I think #3 is my favourite of the options since it opens up other gameplay opportunities and deals with the whole 'drop it and its there' thing which would make it much harder to defend space against a hostile force. Fear and Loathing in Internet Spaceships
blue dehazon Vega Farscape 31	Posted - 2015.10.28 16:24:56 - [323] - Quote Death to smal industrial corps,and new investment to hige, and new industrial players will have only 1 option join a corp alliance with citadels,if not it will take them years befor they kan kompite with citadels owners anywher in space on marked price,basicly this new system will favor old players to sutch a degree that you migth anonse that in the future industry is no longer an activety you shud prusue as a solo player or in a smal corp,this game just continue to mowe further and further away from the sandbox ide thet so many like to think this game is.
Munseventy Kikutech Kleinrock Group 1	Posted - 2015.10.28 16:33:39 - [324] - Quote Saede Riordan wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Actually, we need to discuss L citadel volumes a bit more - CCP Nullarbor made good points about extra annoyance in C2-C4s. So for now, we don't exactly know if they'll fit in Orcas or not. I'll edit my previous answer, sorry for the confusion. Its pretty simple, and we have some options for how to go about it. By the currently discussed mechanics you won't be able to build a L in a wormhole because its too big to fit into any of the component arrays. If you increase the volume so you can't buy them in HS and haul them in with an orca, then it'll be practically impossible to build one. The only way would be: Build medium>build large and freighter in medium> deploy large. That's quite a lot of hassle. If you're trying to say without saying that you don't want Ls in low-class wormholes then I urge you to seriously rethink that position. Some of us have quite a lot of capitals in our home holes and have been building up capital fleets in them for a long time. With mediums unable to have them dock (thus unable to build them inside mediums), you're essentially saying that you can't build capitals in low class space anymore and the only way to have them will be if they're grandfathered in. That's a pretty terrible turd to dump onto us low class wormholers. No, assuming that's unintended and you want us to be able to have larges in our wormholes with some effort, then there's a few solutions. 1) Introduce a temporary construction array at a tower that is large enough to build one at a tower. Still have to build a freighter in-system, which is a pain, but it gives us the option. 2) Keep them their current size, let us haul them in with orcas. 3) Scrap the 'drop them into space fully finished' idea and use gantries like POCOs have. This also allows you to address another point, which is that there's no fast counterplay to someone dropping a citadel in your system (and this applies everywhere). If you have a gantry and have to shovel resources into it, and it doesn't become invulnerable until the gantry is fully loaded, then it gives the vigilant and watchful a chance to take out a fetal citadel before it becomes invulnerable and force us to take a week ripping it down. I see this as a good thing as it rewards players proactively defending their space and means that you can't just drop a citadel and run, you actually have to defend it at least for a little bit while its being loaded with parts. I think #3 is my favourite of the options since it opens up other gameplay opportunities and deals with the whole 'drop it and its there' thing which would make it much harder to defend space against a hostile force. #2 not going to work for c1 and yes there are c1 with alot of cap fleet in them.
Michal Jita Lords Of The Universe 24	Posted - 2015.10.28 16:35:34 - [325] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Moon coverage may be replaced with a module that prevents corporation / alliances other than your own to deploy structures but that most likely won't be coming in the first Citadel batch. Since Citadels will have infinite cargo holds it'll be much easier to give your members more ships to play with in their personal hangars. Sharing corporation hangar access is done at your own risk, like everywhere else in New Eden. EDIT: removed the mention to L citadel volume, this needs to be discussed more, please refer to this post. Ok, I have kept quiet for a while but I can see this going now very, very bad for my corporations and the likes. Just to shed some light on current POS/Starbase: Each corporation has got pottential for 21 defined corp hangers (3 levels of access - corporation, fuel technician, starbase config and 7 configurable hangers) each of these 21 configured separetly, this is going to be limited to 7 as I understand? Each POS has got 3 levels of SMA with corp access, fuel technician access and starbase access these are going to be merged into corp hangers and/or personal level SMA as I understand. You encourage each individual to have their own ships and personal assets and only the individual being able to access these but at the same time you expect a citadel in WH to be down within 48 hours. So each and every plyer needs to login every day in case we are under attack, this is just not always possible! In effect if we get attaced and any of the players won't get online we won't be able to save any of their asstes to either K-space or second citadel. Can we please get you to rethink the asset safety in WH as with current proposal any small corporations will be literally farmed by larger entities as they will have a gurantee of a decent loot/kill mail. This proposal is so far in favour of larger entities I just don't understand how it come through any design stage. I understand WH should be more dangerous, but accroding to you, unless we are able do field a decent size defensive fleet there is no room for us in WH, is this realy the direction we are heading? As a minimum remedy can we get CEO of the corporation being able to move stuff between hangers? this is not an outpost or a station so can't see that being a problem for you to allow, even better if directors could do it, even better if you could rework the asset safety mechanic as this is just bad, gurantee piniata on any even active Citadel is bad design. Thank you
probag Bear Xiong Offices 88	Posted - 2015.10.28 16:54:20 - [326] - Quote Soldarius wrote: probag Bear wrote: Soldarius wrote: The quantities of T2 salvage required for an XL rig are absolutely batshit insane. There is not enough available market supply across the entire eve universe to build more than a couple of any of these. The price of T2 salvage will go so high no one will ever be able to afford T2 rigs for anything ever again. For everything except Enhanced Ward Consoles (and arguably Intact Shield Emitters), there is more than enough available market supply across the entire eve universe to build thousands of these. http://www.eve-markets.net/detail?typeid=25616#supply nope. 450k required for XL-sized rig. 772k available on market. Can build exactly 1. In the entire universe. 450k required for XL-sized rig, 772k available on the market, at least ~90k despawning, unlooted from their containers, each day. Much like how the number of Data Sheets available in Jita is practically zero compared to the number that was available back when they were actually heavily used for invention, even though their supply hasn't changed a bit.
Sarah Saoirse Caldari Provisions Caldari State 2	Posted - 2015.10.28 18:26:08 - [327] - Quote blue dehazon wrote: Death to smal industrial corps,and new investment to hige, and new industrial players will have only 1 option join a corp alliance with citadels,if not it will take them years befor they kan kompite with citadels owners anywher in space on marked price,basicly this new system will favor old players to sutch a degree that you migth anonse that in the future industry is no longer an activety you shud prusue as a solo player or in a smal corp,this game just continue to mowe further and further away from the sandbox ide that so many like to think this game is. The cost of citadels are expected to be well within the reach of any reasonably active corporation, and for that matter within the reach of, any player wealthy enough to be competitive industrially so I'm perfectly fine with this, as it strongly encourages corporations and their members to have assets that are at some degree of risk which restores meaning to the highsec war declaration system, and for the first tome, makes NPC corps especially unattractive to industrialists. Every single activity in EVE is directly or indirectly a player vs player activity. You shouldn't get to enjoy rewards without risk.
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 352	Posted - 2015.10.28 18:33:53 - [328] - Quote Michal Jita wrote: Ok, I have kept quiet for a while but I can see this going now very, very bad for my corporations and the likes. Just to shed some light on current POS/Starbase: Each corporation has got pottential for 21 defined corp hangers (3 levels of access - corporation, fuel technician, starbase config and 7 configurable hangers) each of these 21 configured separetly, this is going to be limited to 7 as I understand? Each POS has got 3 levels of SMA with corp access, fuel technician access and starbase access these are going to be merged into corp hangers and/or personal level SMA as I understand. You encourage each individual to have their own ships and personal assets and only the individual being able to access these but at the same time you expect a citadel in WH to be down within 48 hours. So each and every plyer needs to login every day in case we are under attack, this is just not always possible! Your structure is only vulnerable 3 or 6 hours (Medium or Large) a week. You do not have to log on every day, only during your vulnerable windows and even then, not during the first attack as you really only need to be there to defend the second timer. This is marked improvement over a POS. While the POS does attack, anyone with an ounce of planning can outsmart your POS defenses and attack your tower at any time putting it into reinforcement and then wait/return 42 hours later to finish the job. There is not added pressure on small corps, only absentee corps that cannot commit to three or six hours a week of activity to defend their space.
FOl2TY8 GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 99	Posted - 2015.10.28 19:01:16 - [329] - Quote blue dehazon wrote: Death to smal industrial corps,and new investment to hige, and new industrial players will have only 1 option join a corp alliance with citadels,if not it will take them years befor they kan kompite with citadels owners anywher in space on marked price,basicly this new system will favor old players to sutch a degree that you migth anonse that in the future industry is no longer an activety you shud prusue as a solo player or in a smal corp,this game just continue to mowe further and further away from the sandbox ide that so many like to think this game is. this guy gets it
Zechariah Bragg Jaded. 191	Posted - 2015.10.28 19:15:37 - [330] - Quote blue dehazon wrote: Death to smal industrial corps,and new investment to hige, and new industrial players will have only 1 option join a corp alliance with citadels,if not it will take them years befor they kan kompite with citadels owners anywher in space on marked price,basicly this new system will favor old players to sutch a degree that you migth anonse that in the future industry is no longer an activety you shud prusue as a solo player or in a smal corp,this game just continue to mowe further and further away from the sandbox ide that so many like to think this game is. Agreed. Many of us in low class whspace are just stunned by the lack of thought in to this matter. Many of us think this has become a more linear approach for eve online and not so much for the sandbox genre we all love. If you don't live in Wh-Space.....your opinions are invalid.

Tau Cabalander Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs 5483	Posted - 2015.10.28 19:56:31 - [331] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Sabastian Cerabiam wrote: I wana know whats gona happen with those of us that have POS bpos. Will they get converted to equivalent citadel ones or will we somehow get reimbursed the isk we spent to buy them? When we get rid of Starbases they will be reimbursed, not converted. Please do a fair reimbursement. All my structure BPOs have been researched to ME:10 TE:20. The last level taking a better part of a year, and a cost of several hundred million. They shouldn't be valued at NPC cost!
drunklies Nocturnal Romance Cynosural Field Theory. 28	Posted - 2015.10.28 20:30:46 - [332] - Quote Tau Cabalander wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Sabastian Cerabiam wrote: I wana know whats gona happen with those of us that have POS bpos. Will they get converted to equivalent citadel ones or will we somehow get reimbursed the isk we spent to buy them? When we get rid of Starbases they will be reimbursed, not converted. Please do a fair reimbursement. All my structure BPOs have been researched to ME:10 TE:20. The last level taking a better part of a year, and a cost of several hundred million. They shouldn't be valued at NPC cost! CCP's line before has been that you have gained the advantage you desired from that research, and as such is not their responsibility to reimburse you. I.e. your stuck at market price.
Darkstar01 Republic University Minmatar Republic 12	Posted - 2015.10.28 20:58:46 - [333] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: Ytterbium, much like the industry changes a while back I have big concerns with how you guys are handling the new rigs. I really think you guys need to go back to the drawing board on that one. You have a golden opportunity here to create a new market instead of trashing an old one. What you should be doing is creating new rig materials that can only be found in null sec. This gives null sec an extra income base without actually giving them an isk printing machine. They've been hollering for more opportunities to level the playing field between hi-sec and this is the one chance you have to make them happy without creating an isk faucet. Please for the love of common sense do not tie t2 salvage to structure rigs in any way. Nope, I think it's perfect that the new Citadels use the existing salvage system. Because in the current game, some salvages are worthless and never used, while other salvages are expensive and used very often. The new Citadels will mainly be using the salvages that are currently worthless and never used - this has the effect of balancing the salvage system, so that all salvages will have a purpose. It would also make the game more accessible to new players, because it boosts the overall salvage income.
blue dehazon Vega Farscape 31	Posted - 2015.10.28 21:21:00 - [334] - Quote Sarah Saoirse wrote: blue dehazon wrote: Death to smal industrial corps,and new investment to hige, and new industrial players will have only 1 option join a corp alliance with citadels,if not it will take them years befor they kan kompite with citadels owners anywher in space on marked price,basicly this new system will favor old players to sutch a degree that you migth anonse that in the future industry is no longer an activety you shud prusue as a solo player or in a smal corp,this game just continue to mowe further and further away from the sandbox ide that so many like to think this game is. The cost of citadels are expected to be well within the reach of any reasonably active corporation, and for that matter within the reach of, any player wealthy enough to be competitive industrially so I'm perfectly fine with this, as it strongly encourages corporations and their members to have assets that are at some degree of risk which restores meaning to the highsec war declaration system, and for the first tome, makes NPC corps especially unattractive to industrialists. Every single activity in EVE is directly or indirectly a player vs player activity. You shouldn't get to enjoy rewards without risk. I kant see that i made a point of the risk factore but your rigth in 1 thing ther shud be som risk with higer bonus,but that only somwat make what i stated iven somwhat more walid,you shud not fly what you kant aford to lose the same aplay for citadels.(singel player-smal corperations)New players.Im not against player corperations this is just an alt,im living hapely in a corp alliance,and will encorage all players to join a player corp,Iven so i think i have a valid point.
Zakarumit CZ Zakarum Industries Exiliar Syndicate 187	Posted - 2015.10.28 21:26:37 - [335] - Quote I have got a question I would like to get answer for: Lets say for example I focus on building HACs in my POS. I really like the idea of Citadels and everything, but so far what I get is: 1] Old structures like POSs are being replaced by new structures 2] First of those new structures are citadels, which will be released in spring and which will be able to do pretty much everything - limited by basically just the modules and rigs you put on them 3] On a later date, more structures will be released, like assembly arrays, which will be probably more suited for manufacturing, but I have never seen anything more specific ...the final question: Should I start preparing for release of Citadels and start using one, or just wait for the new Assembly arrays? What are the differences? What can help me to make the decision? I dont want to invest into Citadel just to find it useless within few months after release of other structures.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2223	Posted - 2015.10.28 21:29:05 - [336] - Quote Zakarumit CZ wrote: I have got a question I would like to get answer for: Lets say for example I focus on building HACs in my POS. I really like the idea of Citadels and everything, but so far what I get is: 1] Old structures like POSs are being replaced by new structures 2] First of those new structures are citadels, which will be released in spring and which will be able to do pretty much everything - limited by basically just the modules and rigs you put on them 3] On a later date, more structures will be released, like assembly arrays, which will be probably more suited for manufacturing, but I have never seen anything more specific ...the final question: Should I start preparing for release of Citadels and start using one, or just wait for the new Assembly arrays? What are the differences? What can help me to make the decision? I dont want to invest into Citadel just to find it useless within few months after release of other structures. Citadels won't be bonused for manufacturing, so I'd wait. Citadels are more geared towards safety of assets and players and storage of items. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Azahar Ortenegro Astromechanica Maxima Astromechanica Federatis 58	Posted - 2015.10.28 21:33:16 - [337] - Quote Soldarius wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: Azahar Ortenegro wrote: And what about replacing Small and Medium POSes in-space storage and fitting abilities? mobile depot I believe CCP already stated that all citadels will have these capabilities. Otherwise, yes, Mobile Depot. Mobile Depot can only be used by the owner, has a maximum life time of 1 month, does not have any defensive capabilities, and has a mighty 3000 m3 of storage space. It does not compare with a Small or a Medium POS. And Medium Citadels replace Large POSes, not Small or Medium POSes.
Valterra Craven 591	Posted - 2015.10.28 21:43:01 - [338] - Quote Darkstar01 wrote: Valterra Craven wrote: Ytterbium, much like the industry changes a while back I have big concerns with how you guys are handling the new rigs. I really think you guys need to go back to the drawing board on that one. You have a golden opportunity here to create a new market instead of trashing an old one. What you should be doing is creating new rig materials that can only be found in null sec. This gives null sec an extra income base without actually giving them an isk printing machine. They've been hollering for more opportunities to level the playing field between hi-sec and this is the one chance you have to make them happy without creating an isk faucet. Please for the love of common sense do not tie t2 salvage to structure rigs in any way. Nope, I think it's perfect that the new Citadels use the existing salvage system. Because in the current game, some salvages are worthless and never used, while other salvages are expensive and used very often. The new Citadels will mainly be using the salvages that are currently worthless and never used - this has the effect of balancing the salvage system, so that all salvages will have a purpose - whether it's obtained in hisec or nullsec. I'm sure they can also tweak the drop rates, so that nullsec drops expensive salvage more often than highsec. Or almost all of the expensive salvage is dropped in nullsec. It would also make the game more accessible to new players, because it boosts the overall salvage income. What are you forgetting is that markets do not function in a vacuum. When T2 rig prices exploded after this launches I will tell you I told you so.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2649	Posted - 2015.10.28 22:47:36 - [339] - Quote Azahar Ortenegro wrote: Mobile Depot can only be used by the owner, has a maximum life time of 1 month, does not have any defensive capabilities, and has a mighty 3000 m3 of storage space. It does not compare with a Small or a Medium POS. And Medium Citadels replace Large POSes, not Small or Medium POSes. So use a M Citadel? Jeez, it's only a couple of hundred mil more, and you save massively on fuel costs if all you want it for is fitting and storage. Incidentally, the above query about Fleet Hangers is actually really really important. Because it also affects if Deep Space Transports can deploy a M Citadel without cargo fitting.
Justa Hunni State War Academy Caldari State 12	Posted - 2015.10.28 22:54:09 - [340] - Quote Querns wrote: Justa Hunni wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: blow up the old one and use asset safety to automove Except of course if you are in a wormhole since only nullbears and other empire scum get asset protection. I can't actually tell if you're boasting or complaining, but in the latter case, you can blame the wormhole community for that being the case. Asset safety was originally going to apply to wormholes. Complaining actually I see some people saying that it was the "WH community" that demanded the removal of asset protection but actually what I've seen is when the plans were first made available, it was the whole "to recover you'll have to build another citadel in the same system to recover" that they were not in favour of. And of course, most of the WH people I've seen posting on this and otehr threads are not in favour of WH space being the only one where you will lose everything if your space castle goes boom. So not sure which part of the "WH community" to which you are referring. Now if they had offered a similar asset protection system as they did to everyone else, (i.e. your assets can be recovered at an NPC station for a price) instead of the ludicrious "you'll have to put up yet another citadel in the system where you lost the last one" maybe the WH community would have been more receptive. But then again, not like CCP is really supportive of small WH corps.

Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2649	Posted - 2015.10.28 22:57:33 - [341] - Quote Justa Hunni wrote: Complaining actually I see some people saying that it was the "WH community" that demanded the removal of asset protection but actually what I've seen is when the plans were first made available, it was the whole "to recover you'll have to build another citadel in the same system to recover" that they were not in favour of. And of course, most of the WH people I've seen posting on this and otehr threads are not in favour of WH space being the only one where you will lose everything if your space castle goes boom. So not sure which part of the "WH community" to which you are referring. Now if they had offered a similar asset protection system as they did to everyone else, (i.e. your assets can be recovered at an NPC station for a price) instead of the ludicrious "you'll have to put up yet another citadel in the system where you lost the last one" maybe the WH community would have been more receptive. But then again, not like CCP is really supportive of small WH corps. The entire part that posted in the thread discussion on this in the Wormhole forum and asked for asset destruction in WH space. That will be the part of the WH community that wanted it. If you missed the thread, perhaps pay more attention to the community?
Michal Jita Lords Of The Universe 25	Posted - 2015.10.28 22:58:57 - [342] - Quote Obil Que wrote: Your structure is only vulnerable 3 or 6 hours (Medium or Large) a week. You do not have to log on every day, only during your vulnerable windows and even then, not during the first attack as you really only need to be there to defend the second timer. This is marked improvement over a POS. While the POS does attack, anyone with an ounce of planning can outsmart your POS defenses and attack your tower at any time putting it into reinforcement and then wait/return 42 hours later to finish the job. There is not added pressure on small corps, only absentee corps that cannot commit to three or six hours a week of activity to defend their space. As a corp member unless i log in everyday I will not be able to evac my stuff once we get attacked. And belive me with new mechanics small corps WILL get attacked for exactly that reason.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2223	Posted - 2015.10.28 23:13:05 - [343] - Quote Justa Hunni wrote: Querns wrote: Justa Hunni wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: blow up the old one and use asset safety to automove Except of course if you are in a wormhole since only nullbears and other empire scum get asset protection. I can't actually tell if you're boasting or complaining, but in the latter case, you can blame the wormhole community for that being the case. Asset safety was originally going to apply to wormholes. Complaining actually I see some people saying that it was the "WH community" that demanded the removal of asset protection but actually what I've seen is when the plans were first made available, it was the whole "to recover you'll have to build another citadel in the same system to recover" that they were not in favour of. And of course, most of the WH people I've seen posting on this and otehr threads are not in favour of WH space being the only one where you will lose everything if your space castle goes boom. So not sure which part of the "WH community" to which you are referring. Now if they had offered a similar asset protection system as they did to everyone else, (i.e. your assets can be recovered at an NPC station for a price) instead of the ludicrious "you'll have to put up yet another citadel in the system where you lost the last one" maybe the WH community would have been more receptive. But then again, not like CCP is really supportive of small WH corps. This thread was where a vociferous portion of the wormholer community asked for full-loot citadels in J-space. As always, the forums sample only a tiny portion of the community. Though, no-teleport-to-k-space asset safety was always on the table. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2223	Posted - 2015.10.28 23:14:18 - [344] - Quote Michal Jita wrote: Obil Que wrote: Your structure is only vulnerable 3 or 6 hours (Medium or Large) a week. You do not have to log on every day, only during your vulnerable windows and even then, not during the first attack as you really only need to be there to defend the second timer. This is marked improvement over a POS. While the POS does attack, anyone with an ounce of planning can outsmart your POS defenses and attack your tower at any time putting it into reinforcement and then wait/return 42 hours later to finish the job. There is not added pressure on small corps, only absentee corps that cannot commit to three or six hours a week of activity to defend their space. As a corp member unless i log in everyday I will not be able to evac my stuff once we get attacked. And belive me with new mechanics small corps WILL get attacked for exactly that reason. Citadels have user-definable vulnerability windows. Mediums only require 3 hours per week, and the hours do not have to be contiguous. If you want to make your thing vulnerable only on the weekend where you will have the most hands available for defense, you can do so. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2649	Posted - 2015.10.28 23:16:49 - [345] - Quote Michal Jita wrote: As a corp member unless i log in everyday I will not be able to evac my stuff once we get attacked. And belive me with new mechanics small corps WILL get attacked for exactly that reason. Hi, lets pretend I am in your corp and we have an M Citadel Lets say the vulnerability is set to Midnight - 3am Friday. All I have to do is log in at some point on friday or saturday and check if it is under attack and I can evac all my belongings. Sunday-Thursday don't matter because the structure will be dead or safe by then. So all you need is one log in for a given 48h period. Additionally you have a corp office in your citadel, so it's up to you how much you care about risk of theft vs how much you care about risk of destruction. But if your corp only has 7 people, you can have a division per person, always use the office and the director can evac for everyone. So no risk of theft except by the director. So..... Where exactly is your complaint?
Cat Harkness Twilight Labs 40	Posted - 2015.10.28 23:26:30 - [346] - Quote Michal Jita wrote: Obil Que wrote: Your structure is only vulnerable 3 or 6 hours (Medium or Large) a week. You do not have to log on every day, only during your vulnerable windows and even then, not during the first attack as you really only need to be there to defend the second timer. This is marked improvement over a POS. While the POS does attack, anyone with an ounce of planning can outsmart your POS defenses and attack your tower at any time putting it into reinforcement and then wait/return 42 hours later to finish the job. There is not added pressure on small corps, only absentee corps that cannot commit to three or six hours a week of activity to defend their space. As a corp member unless i log in everyday I will not be able to evac my stuff once we get attacked. And belive me with new mechanics small corps WILL get attacked for exactly that reason. You do not need to evac your stuff. Quote: Items located in personal or corporation hangars will be impounded and saved from destruction. Unless you are talking about WH space. Cat Harkness CEO Twilight Labs
Justa Hunni State War Academy Caldari State 12	Posted - 2015.10.28 23:34:32 - [347] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Cat Harkness wrote: Destiny Dain2 wrote: Can a Citadel change their fit on the fly with weapons and ammo? I picture a sub-capital fleet come in on the final round and the persons Citadel is fitted for them and then when the timer starts, in come the Capitals with no way to defend. No. Slots can not be changed while the Citadel is under attack (any time the shields, armor, hull is not 100%). So not even during the repair cycle. Hmmm I tend to remember we stated after shields were gone. You make me doubt because I can see some crazy module swapping game in combat. Let me double-check and come back at you on that one. Double-checked, you won't be able to refit in combat. Also won't be able to change modules after shields are gone. So the possible situation referenced by the original post is accurate. You fit for subcaps as that is what is attacking you then once you are under attack, and your fitting is locked, they bring in the Caps and you are SOL. Yeah that's allowing for accurate prepping.
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 309	Posted - 2015.10.29 00:28:47 - [348] - Quote Justa Hunni wrote: Querns wrote: Justa Hunni wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: blow up the old one and use asset safety to automove Except of course if you are in a wormhole since only nullbears and other empire scum get asset protection. I can't actually tell if you're boasting or complaining, but in the latter case, you can blame the wormhole community for that being the case. Asset safety was originally going to apply to wormholes. Complaining actually I see some people saying that it was the "WH community" that demanded the removal of asset protection but actually what I've seen is when the plans were first made available, it was the whole "to recover you'll have to build another citadel in the same system to recover" that they were not in favour of. And of course, most of the WH people I've seen posting on this and otehr threads are not in favour of WH space being the only one where you will lose everything if your space castle goes boom. So not sure which part of the "WH community" to which you are referring. Now if they had offered a similar asset protection system as they did to everyone else, (i.e. your assets can be recovered at an NPC station for a price) instead of the ludicrious "you'll have to put up yet another citadel in the system where you lost the last one" maybe the WH community would have been more receptive. But then again, not like CCP is really supportive of small WH corps. You need to listen to the WH Q&A that was posted, WH corps were brutal, they wanted zero asset safety under no circumstances None ZERO Nada
Justa Hunni State War Academy Caldari State 13	Posted - 2015.10.29 01:23:44 - [349] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Justa Hunni wrote: Complaining actually I see some people saying that it was the "WH community" that demanded the removal of asset protection but actually what I've seen is when the plans were first made available, it was the whole "to recover you'll have to build another citadel in the same system to recover" that they were not in favour of. And of course, most of the WH people I've seen posting on this and otehr threads are not in favour of WH space being the only one where you will lose everything if your space castle goes boom. So not sure which part of the "WH community" to which you are referring. Now if they had offered a similar asset protection system as they did to everyone else, (i.e. your assets can be recovered at an NPC station for a price) instead of the ludicrious "you'll have to put up yet another citadel in the system where you lost the last one" maybe the WH community would have been more receptive. But then again, not like CCP is really supportive of small WH corps. The entire part that posted in the thread discussion on this in the Wormhole forum and asked for asset destruction in WH space. That will be the part of the WH community that wanted it. If you missed the thread, perhaps pay more attention to the community? Ahh that must have been my problem. See I just assumed that the comments by the people identifying as WH people in the thread about the issue linked from the Dev Blog would be the one which was relevant. I guess I just didn't understand that I had to go to other unlinked sub-threads to see the exact opposite opinion being expressed by "the community" rather than those people, you know, in the actual related thread who are also part of the WH community. But you know, whatever you have to tell yourself . . .
Cat Harkness Twilight Labs 40	Posted - 2015.10.29 01:26:37 - [350] - Quote Justa Hunni wrote: So the possible situation referenced by the original post is accurate. You fit for subcaps as that is what is attacking you then once you are under attack, and your fitting is locked, they bring in the Caps and you are SOL. Yeah that's allowing for accurate prepping. Then you better have people on grid to help defend. But I fail to see why you would fit for smaller ships, I would think you would want the best fit you could afford., Cat Harkness CEO Twilight Labs

Justa Hunni State War Academy Caldari State 13	Posted - 2015.10.29 01:28:07 - [351] - Quote Querns wrote: Justa Hunni wrote: Querns wrote: Justa Hunni wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: blow up the old one and use asset safety to automove Except of course if you are in a wormhole since only nullbears and other empire scum get asset protection. I can't actually tell if you're boasting or complaining, but in the latter case, you can blame the wormhole community for that being the case. Asset safety was originally going to apply to wormholes. Complaining actually I see some people saying that it was the "WH community" that demanded the removal of asset protection but actually what I've seen is when the plans were first made available, it was the whole "to recover you'll have to build another citadel in the same system to recover" that they were not in favour of. And of course, most of the WH people I've seen posting on this and otehr threads are not in favour of WH space being the only one where you will lose everything if your space castle goes boom. So not sure which part of the "WH community" to which you are referring. Now if they had offered a similar asset protection system as they did to everyone else, (i.e. your assets can be recovered at an NPC station for a price) instead of the ludicrious "you'll have to put up yet another citadel in the system where you lost the last one" maybe the WH community would have been more receptive. But then again, not like CCP is really supportive of small WH corps. This thread was where a vociferous portion of the wormholer community asked for full-loot citadels in J-space. As always, the forums sample only a tiny portion of the community. Though, no-teleport-to-k-space asset safety was always on the table. Querns, thanks for the link :) I remember reading that perticular thread and seeing people coming down on both pro asset safety and anti sides. I might have even posted myself (I honestly don't remember). The majority of the anti-safety seemed to be people from largely predatory groups who wanted some continuation of the loot piniate like they have with current SMAs. Not really who I think of when I think of the WH community but then my own alliance is much more focused on industry (which I guess will start to be a thing of the past). Oh well, just have to evac the rest of my stuff before any of this foolishness goes live.
Siobhan MacLeary Hole Violence Whole Squid 219	Posted - 2015.10.29 01:51:44 - [352] - Quote Querns wrote: Justa Hunni wrote: Querns wrote: Justa Hunni wrote: EvilweaselSA wrote: blow up the old one and use asset safety to automove Except of course if you are in a wormhole since only nullbears and other empire scum get asset protection. I can't actually tell if you're boasting or complaining, but in the latter case, you can blame the wormhole community for that being the case. Asset safety was originally going to apply to wormholes. Complaining actually I see some people saying that it was the "WH community" that demanded the removal of asset protection but actually what I've seen is when the plans were first made available, it was the whole "to recover you'll have to build another citadel in the same system to recover" that they were not in favour of. And of course, most of the WH people I've seen posting on this and otehr threads are not in favour of WH space being the only one where you will lose everything if your space castle goes boom. So not sure which part of the "WH community" to which you are referring. Now if they had offered a similar asset protection system as they did to everyone else, (i.e. your assets can be recovered at an NPC station for a price) instead of the ludicrious "you'll have to put up yet another citadel in the system where you lost the last one" maybe the WH community would have been more receptive. But then again, not like CCP is really supportive of small WH corps. This thread was where a vociferous portion of the wormholer community asked for full-loot citadels in J-space. As always, the forums sample only a tiny portion of the community. Though, no-teleport-to-k-space asset safety was always on the table. The loudest members of a group do not always make the best representatives of a group. GÇ£Point out to me a person who has been harmed by an AFK cloaker and I will point out a person who has no business playing this game.GÇ¥ - CCP Soundwave
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2223	Posted - 2015.10.29 02:24:12 - [353] - Quote Siobhan MacLeary wrote: The loudest members of a group do not always make the best representatives of a group. I am still pretty strongly against there being no form of asset safety in w-space, as it's a bit of a kick in the teeth. Yes, yes, I know, I know, POSes currently drop loot as w-space Citadels are planned to. That's not the point. Citadels are replacing POSes and in k-space they get total, complete asset safety. W-space gets none whatsoever. I have repeatedly suggested that what does not drop from a Citadel in w-space should not be destroyed, it should be impounded and recoverable in that system by deploying another Citadel. Alas, you actually have to air your feedback for it to be taken into account. Why do you think we post so much? Actually, that's a bit of a misdirection; Goons love to post. It's our nature. The thing with k-space is that no one actually uses a POS for long-term storage. You'd be a fool to do so when outposts, or at the very least, NPC stations are so close by. Any attempts by CCP to rebuke asset safety in nullsec would be met by players shrugging their shoulders and evacuating to the nearest NPC station. CCP reneged on citadel destruction podding everyone logged off inside for the same reason; players would simply use the tedious, but guaranteed safe tactic of logging off in space to circumvent the risk. Wormhole residents, OTOH, have to put their assets at some risk due to the design space of the, er, space. Those who spoke against asset safety in wormholes wanted to preserve that. Whatever side of that argument you're on, you have to admit that allowing asset safety in j-space would be a paradigm shift for the status quo. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Exia Lennelluc Unholy Knights of Cthulhu Test Alliance Please Ignore 1	Posted - 2015.10.29 02:59:00 - [354] - Quote Can the blueprints for citadels be released early so they can be researched and to keep people from making them just leave out fuel structure blocks til the normal release
Nelly Uanos Spirit Unlimited La Division Bleue 32	Posted - 2015.10.29 07:08:54 - [355] - Quote Can I get some clarification on hangar access? Can you give access permission to other character for your personnal hangar? Say my alts, directors, trusted friend? In wormhole, we never used much the "new" personnal hangar array because it was too tedious with multiple character. Or will that be only on corporate hangar? If so will Citadel have infine numbers of corporate hangars? @ Justa Hunni: Actually you're right, I would prefer if Citadel had no asset protection in LS or NS. But who in their right mind would use these when you got a NPC station next door. Wormhole space never had this kind of asset protection. You came in knowing that... We want it to stay that way because Wormhole space IS different from the rest of EVE. If you're afraid of losing your stuff so much, stay in High-Sec...
Aiyshimin Fistful of Finns Paisti Syndicate 562	Posted - 2015.10.29 07:21:26 - [356] - Quote Querns wrote: Siobhan MacLeary wrote: The loudest members of a group do not always make the best representatives of a group. I am still pretty strongly against there being no form of asset safety in w-space, as it's a bit of a kick in the teeth. Yes, yes, I know, I know, POSes currently drop loot as w-space Citadels are planned to. That's not the point. Citadels are replacing POSes and in k-space they get total, complete asset safety. W-space gets none whatsoever. I have repeatedly suggested that what does not drop from a Citadel in w-space should not be destroyed, it should be impounded and recoverable in that system by deploying another Citadel. Alas, you actually have to air your feedback for it to be taken into account. Why do you think we post so much? Actually, that's a bit of a misdirection; Goons love to post. It's our nature. The thing with k-space is that no one actually uses a POS for long-term storage. You'd be a fool to do so when outposts, or at the very least, NPC stations are so close by. Any attempts by CCP to rebuke asset safety in nullsec would be met by players shrugging their shoulders and evacuating to the nearest NPC station. CCP reneged on citadel destruction podding everyone logged off inside for the same reason; players would simply use the tedious, but guaranteed safe tactic of logging off in space to circumvent the risk. Wormhole residents, OTOH, have to put their assets at some risk due to the design space of the, er, space. Those who spoke against asset safety in wormholes wanted to preserve that. Whatever side of that argument you're on, you have to admit that allowing asset safety in j-space would be a paradigm shift for the status quo. Normal loot drops from structures is an important conflict driver. Why go through the trouble of destroying structures, if nothing drops? Of course, nullsec is not about conflict, but avoiding it.
Siobhan MacLeary Hole Violence Whole Squid 220	Posted - 2015.10.29 08:07:43 - [357] - Quote Querns wrote: Siobhan MacLeary wrote: The loudest members of a group do not always make the best representatives of a group. I am still pretty strongly against there being no form of asset safety in w-space, as it's a bit of a kick in the teeth. Yes, yes, I know, I know, POSes currently drop loot as w-space Citadels are planned to. That's not the point. Citadels are replacing POSes and in k-space they get total, complete asset safety. W-space gets none whatsoever. I have repeatedly suggested that what does not drop from a Citadel in w-space should not be destroyed, it should be impounded and recoverable in that system by deploying another Citadel. Alas, you actually have to air your feedback for it to be taken into account. Why do you think we post so much? Actually, that's a bit of a misdirection; Goons love to post. It's our nature. The thing with k-space is that no one actually uses a POS for long-term storage. You'd be a fool to do so when outposts, or at the very least, NPC stations are so close by. Any attempts by CCP to rebuke asset safety in nullsec would be met by players shrugging their shoulders and evacuating to the nearest NPC station. CCP reneged on citadel destruction podding everyone logged off inside for the same reason; players would simply use the tedious, but guaranteed safe tactic of logging off in space to circumvent the risk. Wormhole residents, OTOH, have to put their assets at some risk due to the design space of the, er, space. Those who spoke against asset safety in wormholes wanted to preserve that. Whatever side of that argument you're on, you have to admit that allowing asset safety in j-space would be a paradigm shift for the status quo. I have aired my feedback, it being ignored or overlooked isn't something I can really do much about. As to the latter point - well, sure, it's a paradigm shift but all of Citadels is in a way. If my suggestion were to be implemented, it wouldn't detract from what the more predatory sandcastle-kickers in w-space want while allowing those who might have their sandcastle kicked over a decent chance at their stuff not all being gone or stolen. Stuff that doesn't drop is stuff that attackers wouldn't be able to get their hands on anyway, so where's the harm in setting up so what would normally be destroyed is impounded and recoverable if people friendly to you deploy a new Citadel in that wormhole system. Hell, I'd even settle for two rounds of loot fairy magic; the first governs what drops and what doesn't, then what doesn't drop is either destroyed or impounded for possible recovery later. E: Terrible text flowchart. Citadel destroyed Gû+ Loot fairy magic 1 Gû¦ Some stuff drops Gû+ Some stuff doesn't drop Gû+ Loot fairy magic 2 Gû¦ Some of the stuff that didn't drop is impounded Gû+ Stuff that isn't impounded and didn't drop is destroyed. GÇ£Point out to me a person who has been harmed by an AFK cloaker and I will point out a person who has no business playing this game.GÇ¥ - CCP Soundwave
Munseventy Kikutech Kleinrock Group 2	Posted - 2015.10.29 08:29:41 - [358] - Quote Siobhan MacLeary wrote: Querns wrote: Siobhan MacLeary wrote: The loudest members of a group do not always make the best representatives of a group. I am still pretty strongly against there being no form of asset safety in w-space, as it's a bit of a kick in the teeth. Yes, yes, I know, I know, POSes currently drop loot as w-space Citadels are planned to. That's not the point. Citadels are replacing POSes and in k-space they get total, complete asset safety. W-space gets none whatsoever. I have repeatedly suggested that what does not drop from a Citadel in w-space should not be destroyed, it should be impounded and recoverable in that system by deploying another Citadel. Alas, you actually have to air your feedback for it to be taken into account. Why do you think we post so much? Actually, that's a bit of a misdirection; Goons love to post. It's our nature. The thing with k-space is that no one actually uses a POS for long-term storage. You'd be a fool to do so when outposts, or at the very least, NPC stations are so close by. Any attempts by CCP to rebuke asset safety in nullsec would be met by players shrugging their shoulders and evacuating to the nearest NPC station. CCP reneged on citadel destruction podding everyone logged off inside for the same reason; players would simply use the tedious, but guaranteed safe tactic of logging off in space to circumvent the risk. Wormhole residents, OTOH, have to put their assets at some risk due to the design space of the, er, space. Those who spoke against asset safety in wormholes wanted to preserve that. Whatever side of that argument you're on, you have to admit that allowing asset safety in j-space would be a paradigm shift for the status quo. I have aired my feedback, it being ignored or overlooked isn't something I can really do much about. As to the latter point - well, sure, it's a paradigm shift but all of Citadels is in a way. If my suggestion were to be implemented, it wouldn't detract from what the more predatory sandcastle-kickers in w-space want while allowing those who might have their sandcastle kicked over a decent chance at their stuff not all being gone or stolen. Stuff that doesn't drop is stuff that attackers wouldn't be able to get their hands on anyway, so where's the harm in setting up so what would normally be destroyed is impounded and recoverable if people friendly to you deploy a new Citadel in that wormhole system. Hell, I'd even settle for two rounds of loot fairy magic; the first governs what drops and what doesn't, then what doesn't drop is either destroyed or impounded for possible recovery later. E: Terrible text flowchart. Citadel destroyed Gû+ Loot fairy magic 1 Gû¦ Some stuff drops Gû+ Some stuff doesn't drop Gû+ Loot fairy magic 2 Gû¦ Some of the stuff that didn't drop is impounded Gû+ Stuff that isn't impounded and didn't drop is destroyed. i love this idea because can tell you about 95% of the time of ppl that are kick out they never come back. That becaz they lose most if not all their asset they have
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 474	Posted - 2015.10.29 08:35:34 - [359] - Quote Getting evicted in a WH means you lose everything anyway. I personaly just accept the fact that WH dwellers are far more hard core than those soft Null Bears AKA the scientist. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2224	Posted - 2015.10.29 09:51:43 - [360] - Quote Aiyshimin wrote: Querns wrote: Siobhan MacLeary wrote: The loudest members of a group do not always make the best representatives of a group. I am still pretty strongly against there being no form of asset safety in w-space, as it's a bit of a kick in the teeth. Yes, yes, I know, I know, POSes currently drop loot as w-space Citadels are planned to. That's not the point. Citadels are replacing POSes and in k-space they get total, complete asset safety. W-space gets none whatsoever. I have repeatedly suggested that what does not drop from a Citadel in w-space should not be destroyed, it should be impounded and recoverable in that system by deploying another Citadel. Alas, you actually have to air your feedback for it to be taken into account. Why do you think we post so much? Actually, that's a bit of a misdirection; Goons love to post. It's our nature. The thing with k-space is that no one actually uses a POS for long-term storage. You'd be a fool to do so when outposts, or at the very least, NPC stations are so close by. Any attempts by CCP to rebuke asset safety in nullsec would be met by players shrugging their shoulders and evacuating to the nearest NPC station. CCP reneged on citadel destruction podding everyone logged off inside for the same reason; players would simply use the tedious, but guaranteed safe tactic of logging off in space to circumvent the risk. Wormhole residents, OTOH, have to put their assets at some risk due to the design space of the, er, space. Those who spoke against asset safety in wormholes wanted to preserve that. Whatever side of that argument you're on, you have to admit that allowing asset safety in j-space would be a paradigm shift for the status quo. Normal loot drops from structures is an important conflict driver. Why go through the trouble of destroying structures, if nothing drops? Of course, nullsec is not about conflict, but avoiding it. Sure, but my point is that there's a trivial workaround in k-space. For what it's worth, I also think that citadels should be full loot in nullsec. However, I also know that if it were actually the case, the first thing I'd do is evacuate my assets to ROIR or X-7. I wouldn't ever risk anything in a citadel if I didn't need to do so. I can only assume that everyone else would do the same. Since everyone with a brain will simply avoid stocking citadels with things worth looting in the case of full-loot k-space citadels, why go through the trouble of destroying structures, if nothing drops? This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2650	Posted - 2015.10.29 10:22:06 - [361] - Quote Do remember 50% of build costs drop, and 50% of the fitted modules drop also based on what we have been told. So on an XL Citadel that could be 40 Billion in loot just from build costs and modules. Is that not enough loot?
Azahar Ortenegro Astromechanica Maxima Astromechanica Federatis 58	Posted - 2015.10.29 11:59:28 - [362] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: So use a M Citadel? Jeez, it's only a couple of hundred mil more, and you save massively on fuel costs if all you want it for is fitting and storage. A Small Tower BPO costs 125 millions. Building it costs less than 80 millions. Buying one on the market costs less than 70 millions. A Corporate Hangar Array costs less than 5 millions. A Ship Maintenance Array costs around 20 millions. So to replace a 95 millions POS, you suggest a theoretical 600 millions (since the BPO costs 6B, more like 0.9/1B on the market) Medium Citadel. It's not "a couple hunderd mil more."
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 488	Posted - 2015.10.29 12:19:12 - [363] - Quote Azahar Ortenegro wrote: Nevyn Auscent wrote: So use a M Citadel? Jeez, it's only a couple of hundred mil more, and you save massively on fuel costs if all you want it for is fitting and storage. A Small Tower BPO costs 125 millions. Building it costs less than 80 millions. Buying one on the market costs less than 70 millions. A Corporate Hangar Array costs less than 5 millions. A Ship Maintenance Array costs around 20 millions. So to replace a 95 millions POS, you suggest a theoretical 600 millions (since the BPO costs 6B, more like 0.9/1B on the market) Medium Citadel. It's not "a couple hunderd mil more." The citadel comes with extra functionality and asset safety. Asset safety alone is worth the extra cost. You argument is not relevant. I also understand there will be additional structures released at a later date with different functionality that may be both cheaper and offer the functionality you're looking for. A guide to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1knVqZEH8qFY0eT44nMEFwcKd3t4PbgcZeuv58SVUxsI/edit?usp=sharing
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 352	Posted - 2015.10.29 12:20:40 - [364] - Quote Azahar Ortenegro wrote: Nevyn Auscent wrote: So use a M Citadel? Jeez, it's only a couple of hundred mil more, and you save massively on fuel costs if all you want it for is fitting and storage. A Small Tower BPO costs 125 millions. Building it costs less than 80 millions. Buying one on the market costs less than 70 millions. A Corporate Hangar Array costs less than 5 millions. A Ship Maintenance Array costs around 20 millions. So to replace a 95 millions POS, you suggest a theoretical 600 millions (since the BPO costs 6B, more like 0.9/1B on the market) Medium Citadel. It's not "a couple hunderd mil more." And that structure costs you roughly 1.2B to operate for a year. I don't see the issue with a shift to a 600M ISK structure that has zero operating cost.
Azahar Ortenegro Astromechanica Maxima Astromechanica Federatis 58	Posted - 2015.10.29 12:33:33 - [365] - Quote Fuel cost is only shifted to fitted modules, not removed, and since it's ongoing, it can easily be paid. Oh, and a Small POS is as easily moved around or put offline to cut fuel costs, something you can't do with a Medium Citadel.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 488	Posted - 2015.10.29 12:41:13 - [366] - Quote Azahar Ortenegro wrote: Fuel cost is only shifted to fitted modules, not removed, and since it's ongoing, it can easily be paid. Oh, and a Small POS is as easily moved around or put offline to cut fuel costs, something you can't do with a Medium Citadel. Now you're just making stuff up, Unequipping (or presumably turning them off line like you would a ship module) would mean that the citadel is no longer using fuel. Apart from rigs(that are optional) you can unanchor and move around a citadel a LOT easier than a pos with all it's modules. Then you have all the advantages of small invulnerability window, asset safety, ability to dock ships, tethering, the offensive features, etc. It really feels like they're a bit too cheap but I'm not complaining ps. I lived in a wh for a long time. dealing with POS and POS modules was the single biggest PITA in the game. A guide to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1knVqZEH8qFY0eT44nMEFwcKd3t4PbgcZeuv58SVUxsI/edit?usp=sharing
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 353	Posted - 2015.10.29 12:55:57 - [367] - Quote Azahar Ortenegro wrote: Fuel cost is only shifted to fitted modules, not removed, and since it's ongoing, it can easily be paid. Oh, and a Small POS is as easily moved around or put offline to cut fuel costs, something you can't do with a Medium Citadel. It is actually only been said that service modules cost fuel currently. The only service modules available on a M are clone services, reprocessing, and compression. All of those can be turned on only as needed. If the offensive/defensive modules require fuel, those would only be used during attack so it can be assumed that the cost of operating a Citadel is significantly less than the cost of fueling a tower 24x7 Nothing about a POS is "easy to move around" compared to a Citadel.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 474	Posted - 2015.10.29 13:57:38 - [368] - Quote Azahar Ortenegro wrote: Nevyn Auscent wrote: So use a M Citadel? Jeez, it's only a couple of hundred mil more, and you save massively on fuel costs if all you want it for is fitting and storage. A Small Tower BPO costs 125 millions. Building it costs less than 80 millions. Buying one on the market costs less than 70 millions. A Corporate Hangar Array costs less than 5 millions. A Ship Maintenance Array costs around 20 millions. So to replace a 95 millions POS, you suggest a theoretical 600 millions (since the BPO costs 6B, more like 0.9/1B on the market) Medium Citadel. It's not "a couple hunderd mil more." First off all a medium is more closely related to a large. By the time you have guns/jams and spares to online hardners etc. It is not that cheap. And we chew through fuel like no tomorrow. I always Leroy in a full freighter of fuel every time we have a high sec. Even at 7B for the large + probably 3-5B for a fit. Cost will not be a factor for us. The XL is out of our range. But then it suppose to be. As are outposts now. Also towers are going to be around for the better part of a year. At least. You can keep your towers for a while. AKA the scientist. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Azahar Ortenegro Astromechanica Maxima Astromechanica Federatis 58	Posted - 2015.10.29 14:59:32 - [369] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: First off all a medium is more closely related to a large. By the time you have guns/jams and spares to online hardners etc. It is not that cheap. And we chew through fuel like no tomorrow. I always Leroy in a full freighter of fuel every time we have a high sec. Even at 7B for the large + probably 3-5B for a fit. Cost will not be a factor for us. The XL is out of our range. But then it suppose to be. As are outposts now. Also towers are going to be around for the better part of a year. At least. You can keep your towers for a while. That's my point. Outposts and Large POSes are replaced, not Small and Medium POSes. And for the two above you: deploying a Citadel takes 1 hour and you need a TI Industrial to move it around. Anchoring then onlining a small POS takes 15 minutes, and you can move it in a Blockade Runner. As a side note: I'm not talking for myself here. My alliance uses Large POSes, and we can afford several Citadels. But I often see temporary Small and Medium POSes in high and lowsec systems, and those guys will be kicked out of the Structure part of the game as CCP planned it.
Lady Rift What Shall We Call It 235	Posted - 2015.10.29 15:20:06 - [370] - Quote Obil Que wrote: Azahar Ortenegro wrote: Fuel cost is only shifted to fitted modules, not removed, and since it's ongoing, it can easily be paid. Oh, and a Small POS is as easily moved around or put offline to cut fuel costs, something you can't do with a Medium Citadel. It is actually only been said that service modules cost fuel currently. The only service modules available on a M are clone services, reprocessing, and compression. All of those can be turned on only as needed. If the offensive/defensive modules require fuel, those would only be used during attack so it can be assumed that the cost of operating a Citadel is significantly less than the cost of fueling a tower 24x7 Nothing about a POS is "easy to move around" compared to a Citadel. from the dev blog "Modules: these are structure modules that fit into a structureGÇÖs high, medium and low slots. Similar to their ship module counterparts, they require powergrid and CPU to be properly fitted. Active modules also require capacitor, fuel, or both depending on the circumstances." its very possible that unless you have an unfitted citadel it will require fuel.

Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 353	Posted - 2015.10.29 15:31:19 - [371] - Quote Lady Rift wrote: Obil Que wrote: Azahar Ortenegro wrote: Fuel cost is only shifted to fitted modules, not removed, and since it's ongoing, it can easily be paid. Oh, and a Small POS is as easily moved around or put offline to cut fuel costs, something you can't do with a Medium Citadel. It is actually only been said that service modules cost fuel currently. The only service modules available on a M are clone services, reprocessing, and compression. All of those can be turned on only as needed. If the offensive/defensive modules require fuel, those would only be used during attack so it can be assumed that the cost of operating a Citadel is significantly less than the cost of fueling a tower 24x7 Nothing about a POS is "easy to move around" compared to a Citadel. from the dev blog "Modules: these are structure modules that fit into a structureGÇÖs high, medium and low slots. Similar to their ship module counterparts, they require powergrid and CPU to be properly fitted. Active modules also require capacitor, fuel, or both depending on the circumstances." its very possible that unless you have an unfitted citadel it will require fuel. Yes. As I noted Active modules. Much like your ship, modules are not active when they are not being used like firing guns or repairing ships. It's pretty clear that the fuel requirements for Citadels will be a magnitude less than POSes
Obil Que Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance 353	Posted - 2015.10.29 15:35:38 - [372] - Quote Azahar Ortenegro wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: First off all a medium is more closely related to a large. By the time you have guns/jams and spares to online hardners etc. It is not that cheap. And we chew through fuel like no tomorrow. I always Leroy in a full freighter of fuel every time we have a high sec. Even at 7B for the large + probably 3-5B for a fit. Cost will not be a factor for us. The XL is out of our range. But then it suppose to be. As are outposts now. Also towers are going to be around for the better part of a year. At least. You can keep your towers for a while. That's my point. Outposts and Large POSes are replaced, not Small and Medium POSes. And for the two above you: deploying a Citadel takes 1 hour and you need a TI Industrial to move it around. Anchoring then onlining a small POS takes 15 minutes, and you can move it in a Blockade Runner. As a side note: I'm not talking for myself here. My alliance uses Large POSes, and we can afford several Citadels. But I often see temporary Small and Medium POSes in high and lowsec systems, and those guys will be kicked out of the Structure part of the game as CCP planned it. Kicked out? No. Playstyle affected? Possibly Really depends on how temporary your temporary claim is, but I would trade HOURS of POS anchoring, onlining and offlining guns and scooping structures for a 24 hour anchor time on a Citadel and the ability to simply fit things to it like a ship and then offline and scoop it when I'm done.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 474	Posted - 2015.10.29 16:44:06 - [373] - Quote Obil Que wrote: Yes. As I noted Active modules. Much like your ship, modules are not active when they are not being used like firing guns or repairing ships. It's pretty clear that the fuel requirements for Citadels will be a magnitude less than POSes We don't know what the fuel cost of services are going to be. We just don't know how much fuel it will need. However if it does run of fuel a lot of things still work. Unlike a POS AKA the scientist. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Xindi Kraid Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd. 1078	Posted - 2015.10.29 17:54:07 - [374] - Quote So random ass question/comment. Does it seem at all (thematically) odd to anyone else that Citadels require service components like Station Factory or Station Reprocessing Center, but don't have those services without the appropriate service module? On the other hand, service modules don't require those components, just materials. So what, a station has 90% of what it needs to do something, but you have to build the other 10%? Excuse me while I find the world's largest "Batteries not included" Sign
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2224	Posted - 2015.10.29 18:01:06 - [375] - Quote Xindi Kraid wrote: So random ass question/comment. Does it seem at all (thematically) odd to anyone else that Citadels require service components like Station Factory or Station Reprocessing Center, but don't have those services without the appropriate service module? On the other hand, service modules don't require those components, just materials. So what, a station has 90% of what it needs to do something, but you have to build the other 10%? Excuse me while I find the world's largest "Batteries not included" Sign They're going to rename the components to remove all of those suggestive, completely-unrelated-to-the-structure's-function names. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Anize Oramara The Arch Dashing Dashers 489	Posted - 2015.10.29 18:23:26 - [376] - Quote Azahar Ortenegro wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: First off all a medium is more closely related to a large. By the time you have guns/jams and spares to online hardners etc. It is not that cheap. And we chew through fuel like no tomorrow. I always Leroy in a full freighter of fuel every time we have a high sec. Even at 7B for the large + probably 3-5B for a fit. Cost will not be a factor for us. The XL is out of our range. But then it suppose to be. As are outposts now. Also towers are going to be around for the better part of a year. At least. You can keep your towers for a while. That's my point. Outposts and Large POSes are replaced, not Small and Medium POSes. And for the two above you: deploying a Citadel takes 1 hour and you need a TI Industrial to move it around. Anchoring then onlining a small POS takes 15 minutes, and you can move it in a Blockade Runner. As a side note: I'm not talking for myself here. My alliance uses Large POSes, and we can afford several Citadels. But I often see temporary Small and Medium POSes in high and lowsec systems, and those guys will be kicked out of the Structure part of the game as CCP planned it. This will be at least the 3rd time someone tells you this, probably more I haven't been keeping track, but there will be ADDITIONAL STRUCTURES that are not citadels that will be released before poses go away that will be smaller and do things we use small/medium posses for now. A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier
Sizeof Void Ninja Suicide Squadron 613	Posted - 2015.10.29 19:43:21 - [377] - Quote I've been trying to figure out a reason to use a M Citadel, rather than a L or XL - and, save the minor savings in cost, I don't see much of any reason to ever do so, particularly in low or null space. Perhaps a M Citadel should have some advantage over the L and XL, at least, in low or null - such as the ability to fit a cloaking device (that would be fun), or simply be immune to directional scan (ie. needs to be found using combat probes)?
EvilweaselSA GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1187	Posted - 2015.10.29 19:45:58 - [378] - Quote Sizeof Void wrote: I've been trying to figure out a reason to use a M Citadel, rather than a L or XL - and, save the minor savings in cost, I don't see much of any reason to ever do so, particularly in low or null space. Perhaps a M Citadel should have some advantage over the L and XL, at least, in low or null - such as the ability to fit a cloaking device (that would be fun), or simply be immune to directional scan (ie. needs to be found using combat probes)? how on earth is "is 8.4b cheaper before rigs/mods" not a huge advantage when you're putting up a personal citadel for ratting or mining or the like
Azahar Ortenegro Astromechanica Maxima Astromechanica Federatis 58	Posted - 2015.10.29 19:52:47 - [379] - Quote Anize Oramara wrote: This will be at least the 3rd time someone tells you this, probably more I haven't been keeping track, but there will be ADDITIONAL STRUCTURES that are not citadels that will be released before poses go away that will be smaller and do things we use small/medium posses for now. Perhaps you should read the dev blogs and the FAQ: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mEbMx9xUXje3KH4AppvcjSSoALUVtVEaK6ZZ-zy2Lrs/edit?pli=1#heading=h.57i9vw9hyaaz I have read all the devblogs, thanks you. And as I have said several times already (reading the whole thread would be useful, I suggest you do it) nothing is said about those future structures having ship storage or fitting capabilities. According to the devblogs, those capabilities are what Citadels are for (with several improvements and some losses.), except that there's no Citadel fitting the sizes of Small and Medium POSes.
Xindi Kraid Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd. 1078	Posted - 2015.10.29 19:59:01 - [380] - Quote Querns wrote: Xindi Kraid wrote: So random ass question/comment. Does it seem at all (thematically) odd to anyone else that Citadels require service components like Station Factory or Station Reprocessing Center, but don't have those services without the appropriate service module? On the other hand, service modules don't require those components, just materials. So what, a station has 90% of what it needs to do something, but you have to build the other 10%? Excuse me while I find the world's largest "Batteries not included" Sign They're going to rename the components to remove all of those suggestive, completely-unrelated-to-the-structure's-function names. Only mention of renaming I saw was that they would be called Structure X instead of Station X, but they SHOULD remove the suggestive names.

Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2224	Posted - 2015.10.29 20:06:59 - [381] - Quote Xindi Kraid wrote: Querns wrote: Xindi Kraid wrote: So random ass question/comment. Does it seem at all (thematically) odd to anyone else that Citadels require service components like Station Factory or Station Reprocessing Center, but don't have those services without the appropriate service module? On the other hand, service modules don't require those components, just materials. So what, a station has 90% of what it needs to do something, but you have to build the other 10%? Excuse me while I find the world's largest "Batteries not included" Sign They're going to rename the components to remove all of those suggestive, completely-unrelated-to-the-structure's-function names. Only mention of renaming I saw was that they would be called Structure X instead of Station X, but they SHOULD remove the suggestive names. I can't remember if it was a post on reddit or in this thread, but they said they'd be renaming the comps not only from Station -> Structure, but to remove things like "doomsday mount" and "baguette drying rack" from the names. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Capsups Requiem Knowledge Mortum Ravagers 37	Posted - 2015.10.29 20:09:44 - [382] - Quote CCP RedDawn mentioned in his post here that he wanted to make Data sites more profitable to run. With these new citadels, why don't we use the High-Tech trade goods that can drop from the data sites for production of the citadels and the other new structures? High-Tech Data Chip sounds like something you could use in a citadel, High-Tech Scanner is an obvious candidate for including in the new observatories, High-Tech Manufacturing Tools could easily fit in with the new industry structures while the High-Tech Small Arms could perhaps be used for the new modules that can be fit onto citadels. This could potentially increase the value of data sites immensely and suddenly there's a major demand for people doing exploration sites because there's always a demand for the new structures, just like there are for POS right now.
Balthizarr Unknown Skies Eve Engineering 7	Posted - 2015.10.29 23:05:04 - [383] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Circumstantial Evidence wrote: Balthizarr wrote: These are going to be MASSIVE floating stations, so not letting you walk around them one day... WIS has to be left for a future year and/or decade, when CCP has the funds they'd need to create detailed interior environments, with things to do inside, all without sacrificing ongoing development of the spaceship game. It probably needs to be a separate game, an expansion to Dust / Legion. EVE is spaceships. More it has a complete lack of compelling game play reasons to be done. Not a single thing people have suggested for it actually adds to gameplay, just pure fluff or in one or two cases pure griefing. Why does making "eve real" have to add gameplay???? These are meant to be our homes away from stations. So like stations where we can dock and walk around the captain quarters prison cell they gave us that doesn't add game play but instead adds alittle realism!!! As I said these are meant to be a new breed of structure's so why not one day make them the cornerstone of there wish to make eve real and one day allow players that want to leave there ship n walk round there homes, possibly furnish there new homes etc! I've played many online games that let you buy homes that you can furnish your own way, even games like GTA 5 online allows you to spend your hard earned cash on a place you call home n invite friends n corp mates into with next to no added game play but instead adding realism to the world you play in! CCP have done an outstanding job of improving eve with new ships and a visually stunning universes after alot of players spat their dummies out over the walking in station expansion so why not stop crying everytime anyone who loved the idea of the walking in station expansion mentions leaving our ships and if its possible to give us alittle of what was proposed in the walking in station expansion allow CCP to do it!!! Oh n my question was put out to ask a dev (assuming they have time to reply) about possible future add-ons to citadels so if your not a dev and nothing more than a player like me who knows only what CCP tell us, keep your empty unimportant opinion to your self seeing as your not anyone that can affectively answer my question!!!
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2650	Posted - 2015.10.29 23:18:50 - [384] - Quote Balthizarr wrote: Oh n my question was put out to ask a dev (assuming they have time to reply) about possible future add-ons to citadels so if your not a dev and nothing more than a player like me who knows only what CCP tell us, keep your empty unimportant opinion to your self seeing as your not anyone that can affectively answer my question!!! Because anything on EVE takes Dev time away from other features. So if you want WiS, work out some real compelling gameplay reasons for WiS in Citadels to actually be important. And if you don't want other peoples input, write it on a piece of paper next to your computer, don't post it in a public discussion thread.
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1648	Posted - 2015.10.30 11:36:06 - [385] - Quote Have few questions and "doubts" about the citadels ... ... tethering effectively means, you are safe on undock and can safely escape to and arrive from warp (bubbles aside); nobody can force you to fight or interact with an invading force, no room for exploiting piloting mistakes, right? ... as Citadels are about to replace not only POSs but also (player) stations, this will drastically reduce options to fight for smaller gangs not able to reinforce the Citadel itself and capable to operate multiple siege events ... also the powerful Citadel weaponry will make it impossible for smaller groups to even stay in range of hostile stations, right? ... Wormholes, today you can shoot down SMAs (everywhere, not only in WH) for loot on an inactive tower pretty easily solo, with the Citadels you always need a multi-stage siege fleet ... this again drastically reduced conflict potential. So is the desired goal of the new mechanics to make Null, Low and WH much much safer for the defender than today? Because this is, what I read from the blogs and don't like ... I'm my own NPC alt.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2224	Posted - 2015.10.30 11:42:41 - [386] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: Have few questions and "doubts" about the citadels ... ... tethering effectively means, you are safe on undock and can safely escape to and arrive from warp (bubbles aside); nobody can force you to fight or interact with an invading force, no room for exploiting piloting mistakes, right? ... as Citadels are about to replace not only POSs but also (player) stations, this will drastically reduce options to fight for smaller gangs not able to reinforce the Citadel itself and capable to operate multiple siege events ... also the powerful Citadel weaponry will make it impossible for smaller groups to even stay in range of hostile stations, right? ... Wormholes, today you can shoot down SMAs (everywhere, not only in WH) for loot on an inactive tower pretty easily solo, with the Citadels you always need a multi-stage siege fleet ... this again drastically reduced conflict potential. So is the desired goal of the new mechanics to make Null, Low and WH much much safer for the defender than today? Because this is, what I read from the blogs and don't like ... Dear god, man, you're burning through the ellipsis quota at an alarming rate. Save some for the rest of us! How is tethering any different than the undock invulnerability timer, or using an instadock, or a POS shield? This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1648	Posted - 2015.10.30 12:26:03 - [387] - Quote Querns wrote: How is tethering any different than the undock invulnerability timer, or using an instadock, or a POS shield? Invuln timer is 30s and can be broken by piloting error, tethering is infinite and fool proof. Instadock spots are open to piloting errors too, tethering means warp to 0 and you are safe (except bubble, but those don't exist in low). Yes, it's more like POS shields, but those are not the default home for most of the people today. I'm my own NPC alt.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2224	Posted - 2015.10.30 12:39:18 - [388] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: How is tethering any different than the undock invulnerability timer, or using an instadock, or a POS shield? Invuln timer is 30s and can be broken by piloting error, tethering is infinite and fool proof. Instadock spots are open to piloting errors too, tethering means warp to 0 and you are safe (except bubble, but those don't exist in low). Yes, it's more like POS shields, but those are not the default home for most of the people today. Tethering can be broken by pilot error, too. It deactivates if you accrue a weapons timer, and if you fly out of range. I fail to see how an instadock is open to piloting error. You warp to the bookmark at zero, you dock. You can even engage autopilot in the middle of the warp to make the server forcibly dock you without any interaction on your part. The only difference between being in dock range of a station and being in tethering range is that in the case of a station, you have to hold down the D key and click on the station in order to activate the safety part. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Pine Marten Eight Legged Freaky Starfighters 96	Posted - 2015.10.30 14:26:35 - [389] - Quote Why has the design decision been made to make every station look the same?
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2224	Posted - 2015.10.30 14:29:14 - [390] - Quote Pine Marten wrote: Why has the design decision been made to make every station look the same? Citadels aren't the only new station-replacement structures being added. They're just the first. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 312	Posted - 2015.10.30 14:34:50 - [391] - Quote Pine Marten wrote: Why has the design decision been made to make every station look the same? even the M/L/XL citadels all look different I don't even know what you are asking honestly So far no new structure we have see even looks remotely the same as each other or anything in game If you mean a goon XL vs a PL XL vs a PFR XL Yes, they will look the same, but the new structures uses the same technology as skins, so when the art department comes off 24 hr watchlists, they might have time for skins
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1863	Posted - 2015.10.30 14:56:10 - [392] - Quote Pine Marten wrote: Why has the design decision been made to make every station look the same? I am fairly sure they mentioned SKINs for citadels. This would be a logical thing for CCP to produce and sell. It would also be a great way to introduce the first "custom" alliance skins. I would imagine that being able to prominently display the alliance logo on a structure would be a popular choice in the NEX. 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 1863	Posted - 2015.10.30 15:01:23 - [393] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: Have few questions and "doubts" about the citadels ... ... tethering effectively means, you are safe on undock and can safely escape to and arrive from warp (bubbles aside); nobody can force you to fight or interact with an invading force, no room for exploiting piloting mistakes, right? ... as Citadels are about to replace not only POSs but also (player) stations, this will drastically reduce options to fight for smaller gangs not able to reinforce the Citadel itself and capable to operate multiple siege events ... also the powerful Citadel weaponry will make it impossible for smaller groups to even stay in range of hostile stations, right? ... Wormholes, today you can shoot down SMAs (everywhere, not only in WH) for loot on an inactive tower pretty easily solo, with the Citadels you always need a multi-stage siege fleet ... this again drastically reduced conflict potential. So is the desired goal of the new mechanics to make Null, Low and WH much much safer for the defender than today? Because this is, what I read from the blogs and don't like ... Tipa, 1. When CCP invents a way to prevent piloting mistakes, the universe will produce a better pilot. 2. How are the new structure reinforcement mechanics so different from the POS-reinforcement mechanics, such that a smaller gang will be unable to do something in the future that it can do today? 3. The "powerful Citadel weaponry" has to be manned in order to present any kind of threat. 4. If someone goes "inactive" and leaves their new structure unattended for 48 hours, you will be able to kill it and loot the same as you can today. You just won't get the totally free loot pinata because someone forgot to fuel a POS. In short, I do not see how Null, Low, and WH are getting much safer. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1648	Posted - 2015.10.30 15:23:16 - [394] - Quote Querns wrote: Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: How is tethering any different than the undock invulnerability timer, or using an instadock, or a POS shield? Invuln timer is 30s and can be broken by piloting error, tethering is infinite and fool proof. Instadock spots are open to piloting errors too, tethering means warp to 0 and you are safe (except bubble, but those don't exist in low). Yes, it's more like POS shields, but those are not the default home for most of the people today. Tethering can be broken by pilot error, too. It deactivates if you accrue a weapons timer, and if you fly out of range. I fail to see how an instadock is open to piloting error. You warp to the bookmark at zero, you dock. You can even engage autopilot in the middle of the warp to make the server forcibly dock you without any interaction on your part. The only difference between being in dock range of a station and being in tethering range is that in the case of a station, you have to hold down the D key and click on the station in order to activate the safety part. I have a lot of people on my killboard who messed up with docking/undocking ... most poeple don't know/use the autopilot trick, they warp and dock manually, with tethering it's just warp, dock whenever you want, look around, no rush, no stress. With undock the same, today you have max. 30s outside before you are forced to do something to keep yourself safe ... ... basically POS shield security for everyone. BTW, what will be the radius of tethering? Small as for station docking range or large like POS shields? I'm my own NPC alt.
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 313	Posted - 2015.10.30 15:27:35 - [395] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: How is tethering any different than the undock invulnerability timer, or using an instadock, or a POS shield? Invuln timer is 30s and can be broken by piloting error, tethering is infinite and fool proof. Instadock spots are open to piloting errors too, tethering means warp to 0 and you are safe (except bubble, but those don't exist in low). Yes, it's more like POS shields, but those are not the default home for most of the people today. Tethering can be broken by pilot error, too. It deactivates if you accrue a weapons timer, and if you fly out of range. I fail to see how an instadock is open to piloting error. You warp to the bookmark at zero, you dock. You can even engage autopilot in the middle of the warp to make the server forcibly dock you without any interaction on your part. The only difference between being in dock range of a station and being in tethering range is that in the case of a station, you have to hold down the D key and click on the station in order to activate the safety part. I have a lot of people on my killboard who messed up with docking/undocking ... most poeple don't know/use the autopilot trick, they warp and dock manually, with tethering it's just warp, dock whenever you want, look around, no rush, no stress. With undock the same, today you have max. 30s outside before you are forced to do something to keep yourself safe ... ... basically POS shield security for everyone. BTW, what will be the radius of tethering? Small as for station docking range or large like POS shields? LARGE Think 40-50km
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2225	Posted - 2015.10.30 15:32:10 - [396] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: How is tethering any different than the undock invulnerability timer, or using an instadock, or a POS shield? Invuln timer is 30s and can be broken by piloting error, tethering is infinite and fool proof. Instadock spots are open to piloting errors too, tethering means warp to 0 and you are safe (except bubble, but those don't exist in low). Yes, it's more like POS shields, but those are not the default home for most of the people today. Tethering can be broken by pilot error, too. It deactivates if you accrue a weapons timer, and if you fly out of range. I fail to see how an instadock is open to piloting error. You warp to the bookmark at zero, you dock. You can even engage autopilot in the middle of the warp to make the server forcibly dock you without any interaction on your part. The only difference between being in dock range of a station and being in tethering range is that in the case of a station, you have to hold down the D key and click on the station in order to activate the safety part. I have a lot of people on my killboard who messed up with docking/undocking ... most poeple don't know/use the autopilot trick, they warp and dock manually, with tethering it's just warp, dock whenever you want, look around, no rush, no stress. With undock the same, today you have max. 30s outside before you are forced to do something to keep yourself safe ... ... basically POS shield security for everyone. BTW, what will be the radius of tethering? Small as for station docking range or large like POS shields? So, you're saying that people who are unaware of the basic mechanics of safety around a station can get shot? This doesn't change with tethering. Individual pilots will still be foolhardy, or stupid. Display some adaptability. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1648	Posted - 2015.10.30 15:33:57 - [397] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: 1. When CCP invents a way to prevent piloting mistakes, the universe will produce a better pilot. Seriously? FT Diomedes wrote: 2. How are the new structure reinforcement mechanics so different from the POS-reinforcement mechanics, such that a smaller gang will be unable to do something in the future that it can do today? No difference, that's the point. A small group can do nothing. FT Diomedes wrote: 3. The "powerful Citadel weaponry" has to be manned in order to present any kind of threat. Have an alt on standby, docked for that purpose (citadels are the new space coffins)? Compare that to the NPC station guns in low ... FT Diomedes wrote: 4. If someone goes "inactive" and leaves their new structure unattended for 48 hours, you will be able to kill it and loot the same as you can today. You just won't get the totally free loot pinata because someone forgot to fuel a POS. And you have to have the fire power, and only in WH. So it is safer?! I'm my own NPC alt.
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1648	Posted - 2015.10.30 16:57:05 - [398] - Quote Querns wrote: So, you're saying that people who are unaware of the basic mechanics of safety around a station can get shot? This doesn't change with tethering. Individual pilots will still be foolhardy, or stupid. Display some adaptability. You missed the point here, I'm not saying people will stop doing risky/stupid things with citadels it just doesn't matter that much anymore because you have a 40-50km wide safety net around your home station plus player manned station guns to defend against any entity not strong enough to reinforce the station. Camping a station in low/high would not be possible anymore as you can't stop people from warping in/out at will (and even in null, I'm not sure how difficult it will be to bubble a 100km wide sphere under station guns). The only left (forced) interaction will be to attack the station itself during their limited engagement window. I'm my own NPC alt.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2225	Posted - 2015.10.30 17:00:36 - [399] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: So, you're saying that people who are unaware of the basic mechanics of safety around a station can get shot? This doesn't change with tethering. Individual pilots will still be foolhardy, or stupid. Display some adaptability. You missed the point here, I'm not saying people will stop doing risky/stupid things with citadels it just doesn't matter that much anymore because you have a 40-50km wide safety net around your home station plus player manned station guns to defend against any entity not strong enough to reinforce the station. Camping a station in low/high would not be possible anymore as you can't stop people from warping in/out at will (and even in null, I'm not sure how difficult it will be to bubble a 100km wide sphere under station guns). The only left (forced) interaction will be to attack the station itself during their limited engagement window. I'm failing to see how this is a significant departure from starbases. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1648	Posted - 2015.10.30 17:21:35 - [400] - Quote Querns wrote: Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: So, you're saying that people who are unaware of the basic mechanics of safety around a station can get shot? This doesn't change with tethering. Individual pilots will still be foolhardy, or stupid. Display some adaptability. You missed the point here, I'm not saying people will stop doing risky/stupid things with citadels it just doesn't matter that much anymore because you have a 40-50km wide safety net around your home station plus player manned station guns to defend against any entity not strong enough to reinforce the station. Camping a station in low/high would not be possible anymore as you can't stop people from warping in/out at will (and even in null, I'm not sure how difficult it will be to bubble a 100km wide sphere under station guns). The only left (forced) interaction will be to attack the station itself during their limited engagement window. I'm failing to see how this is a significant departure from starbases. Again you missed the point, because it is not much different from starbases ... but with the twist that outposts (stations) are replaced by them too ... I'm my own NPC alt.

Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2227	Posted - 2015.10.30 17:28:42 - [401] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: I'm failing to see how this is a significant departure from starbases. Again you missed the point, because it is not much different from starbases defense wise ... but with the twist that outposts (stations) are replaced by them too, and citadels are much more versatile than current starbases (like stations). Your point is that a sharply scoped vignette relying on pilot idiocy to generate kills will be supplanted when citadels arrive because... pilots will somehow instantly mutate into perfect rational actors upon being tethered. I wasn't aware tethering boosted cognitive ability. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1648	Posted - 2015.10.30 19:10:51 - [402] - Quote Querns wrote: Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: I'm failing to see how this is a significant departure from starbases. Again you missed the point, because it is not much different from starbases defense wise ... but with the twist that outposts (stations) are replaced by them too, and citadels are much more versatile than current starbases (like stations). Your point is that a sharply scoped vignette relying on pilot idiocy to generate kills will be supplanted when citadels arrive because... pilots will somehow instantly mutate into perfect rational actors upon being tethered. I wasn't aware tethering boosted cognitive ability. I recognize you have more expierience with stupidity ... as a Goon I'm my own NPC alt.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1864	Posted - 2015.10.30 19:13:22 - [403] - Quote Querns wrote: Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: I'm failing to see how this is a significant departure from starbases. Again you missed the point, because it is not much different from starbases defense wise ... but with the twist that outposts (stations) are replaced by them too, and citadels are much more versatile than current starbases (like stations). Your point is that a sharply scoped vignette relying on pilot idiocy to generate kills will be supplanted when citadels arrive because... pilots will somehow instantly mutate into perfect rational actors upon being tethered. I wasn't aware tethering boosted cognitive ability. Tipa is clearly not familiar with the saying, "build an idiot-proof system and the world will produce a better idiot." I have to say that if you currently get most of your kills by exploiting other players' lack of knowledge of basic game mechanics, you will probably continue to get plenty of kills when mechanics change. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2227	Posted - 2015.10.30 19:14:47 - [404] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: I'm failing to see how this is a significant departure from starbases. Again you missed the point, because it is not much different from starbases defense wise ... but with the twist that outposts (stations) are replaced by them too, and citadels are much more versatile than current starbases (like stations). Your point is that a sharply scoped vignette relying on pilot idiocy to generate kills will be supplanted when citadels arrive because... pilots will somehow instantly mutate into perfect rational actors upon being tethered. I wasn't aware tethering boosted cognitive ability. I recognize you have more expierience with stupidity ... as a Goon I'll gladly accept your ecological fallacy as concession of your point. :) This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Laendra Universalis Imperium The Bastion 80	Posted - 2015.10.30 20:03:02 - [405] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Sabastian Cerabiam wrote: I wana know whats gona happen with those of us that have POS bpos. Will they get converted to equivalent citadel ones or will we somehow get reimbursed the isk we spent to buy them? When we get rid of Starbases they will be reimbursed, not converted. Is that reimbursement going to include the cost of researching? if not, wtf? Convert them to the same ME/PE BPO of the appropriate type. Are you converting Starbases that are currently in place????
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1648	Posted - 2015.10.30 20:30:27 - [406] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Querns wrote: Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: I'm failing to see how this is a significant departure from starbases. Again you missed the point, because it is not much different from starbases defense wise ... but with the twist that outposts (stations) are replaced by them too, and citadels are much more versatile than current starbases (like stations). Your point is that a sharply scoped vignette relying on pilot idiocy to generate kills will be supplanted when citadels arrive because... pilots will somehow instantly mutate into perfect rational actors upon being tethered. I wasn't aware tethering boosted cognitive ability. Tipa is clearly not familiar with the saying, "build an idiot-proof system and the world will produce a better idiot." I have to say that if you currently get most of your kills by exploiting other players' lack of knowledge of basic game mechanics, you will probably continue to get plenty of kills when mechanics change. Yeah, the saying has limited meaning in a game with much but not endless freedom ... actually (but unrelated) I put some hope on the new MJD destroyers. I'm my own NPC alt.
Max Fubarticus The Scope Gallente Federation 36	Posted - 2015.10.30 20:59:49 - [407] - Quote This may have been asked previously in this post or elsewhere... if so, please forgive Cyno placement and the infamous "cyno bounce". 1. How will the new Citadel hulls interact with cyno placement? Inside or outside the tether field? If so; How far? 2. Will "cyno bounce" still be a feature ( intended or otherwise ) that will need consideration by the cyno pilot ? Structure Hull composition I noted that in "Build Layout" .png that we see station components in various multiples depending upon size. Mediums are pretty straight forward with either 1 or 4 specific named components required for a build. However, when you get to the L or XL Citadel we see 4, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 4, 40, 100, 400 respectively. Are these numbers arbitrary or based upon the constituent material quantities ( PI, Minerals, Structure Fuel Blocks )? Considering that the industry side of the Eve house will undoubtedly be producing "Citadel kits" for market consumption, would it not make more sense to use multiples of just 1, 5, and 10 and adjust the base material quantity per component to maintain the same level of overall cost basis per hull unit and simplify the copy process? ( note that this is probably a mute issue for XL for obvious reasons ). Example: Large Citadel requires 4 "Station Factory" Why not make that 5 "Station Factory" and adjust the material requirements to give it the same cost as 4 SF ( a reduction in materials per unit in this case ). That way we are making a BPC with 5 runs that can used for a M, L, or XL. OR... Was this intentionally done as a means to control market supply to prevent a glut of BPC's thereby driving down the cost ( and profitability )? I can see this to be a double edged sword. Having hundreds of stagnant contracts floating around due to supply exceeding demand or supply not being met because the opportunity cost of excessive copy times. ( no one wastes a copy run right? ) Copy slots are a valuable commodity whether they be at a station or a POS. Are we sure this is the right metric to approach this with? Thanks, Max
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 479	Posted - 2015.10.31 00:55:09 - [408] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: How is tethering any different than the undock invulnerability timer, or using an instadock, or a POS shield? Invuln timer is 30s and can be broken by piloting error, tethering is infinite and fool proof. Instadock spots are open to piloting errors too, tethering means warp to 0 and you are safe (except bubble, but those don't exist in low). Yes, it's more like POS shields, but those are not the default home for most of the people today. Tethering can be broken by pilot error, too. It deactivates if you accrue a weapons timer, and if you fly out of range. I fail to see how an instadock is open to piloting error. You warp to the bookmark at zero, you dock. You can even engage autopilot in the middle of the warp to make the server forcibly dock you without any interaction on your part. The only difference between being in dock range of a station and being in tethering range is that in the case of a station, you have to hold down the D key and click on the station in order to activate the safety part. I have a lot of people on my killboard who messed up with docking/undocking ... most poeple don't know/use the autopilot trick, they warp and dock manually, with tethering it's just warp, dock whenever you want, look around, no rush, no stress. With undock the same, today you have max. 30s outside before you are forced to do something to keep yourself safe ... ... basically POS shield security for everyone. BTW, what will be the radius of tethering? Small as for station docking range or large like POS shields? Don't you really mean that you have a lot of people that don't have a good as a ping to the server as you. that is not the same as your good. AKA the scientist. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1648	Posted - 2015.10.31 05:00:59 - [409] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: Tipa Riot wrote: Querns wrote: How is tethering any different than the undock invulnerability timer, or using an instadock, or a POS shield? Invuln timer is 30s and can be broken by piloting error, tethering is infinite and fool proof. Instadock spots are open to piloting errors too, tethering means warp to 0 and you are safe (except bubble, but those don't exist in low). Yes, it's more like POS shields, but those are not the default home for most of the people today. Tethering can be broken by pilot error, too. It deactivates if you accrue a weapons timer, and if you fly out of range. I fail to see how an instadock is open to piloting error. You warp to the bookmark at zero, you dock. You can even engage autopilot in the middle of the warp to make the server forcibly dock you without any interaction on your part. The only difference between being in dock range of a station and being in tethering range is that in the case of a station, you have to hold down the D key and click on the station in order to activate the safety part. I have a lot of people on my killboard who messed up with docking/undocking ... most poeple don't know/use the autopilot trick, they warp and dock manually, with tethering it's just warp, dock whenever you want, look around, no rush, no stress. With undock the same, today you have max. 30s outside before you are forced to do something to keep yourself safe ... ... basically POS shield security for everyone. BTW, what will be the radius of tethering? Small as for station docking range or large like POS shields? Don't you really mean that you have a lot of people that don't have a good as a ping to the server as you. that is not the same as your good. I mean, in a roaming gang or with camping you can get kills on stations today (for whatever reason). This is no more with citadels, hence this is a not so small safety improvement... and I'm questioning if EvE needs more safety. I'm my own NPC alt.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2654	Posted - 2015.10.31 05:11:11 - [410] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: I mean, in a roaming gang or with camping you can get kills on stations today (for whatever reason). This is no more with citadels, hence this is a not so small safety improvement... and I'm questioning if EvE needs more safety. EDIT: pings maybe one reason, but also the pilot too optimistic about his tank, or the insta-warpout not good enough, or warping at wrong range to station, etc. 1. Currently you can bump someone who is tethered. 2. Citadels will blap station campers who currently camp in total safety. So firstly I disagree with you that it adds safety on the whole to EVE. And secondly I disagree that additional safety in the cases you have mentioned is a bad thing. Since the cases you have mentioned are not actually making use of good piloting skills but taking advantage of obtuse mechanics and lag.

Gevlin Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 267	Posted - 2015.10.31 08:17:47 - [411] - Quote I am so looking forward to this!! Some day I will have the internet and be able to play again.
DrysonBennington Aliastra Gallente Federation 241	Posted - 2015.10.31 14:48:35 - [412] - Quote Looks like an elegant rendezvous with ....
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1875	Posted - 2015.10.31 18:55:26 - [413] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: I mean, in a roaming gang or with camping you can get kills on stations today (for whatever reason). This is no more with citadels, hence this is a not so small safety improvement... and I'm questioning if EvE needs more safety. EDIT: pings maybe one reason, but also the pilot too optimistic about his tank, or the insta-warpout not good enough, or warping at wrong range to station, etc. If the enemy has one pilot manning the guns on the station, that means one less pilot outside fighting on the undock. I really do not see this as a major change. Most of the time it is a terrible idea to fight on the undock anyway (yet silly people keeping doing it and dying hilariously when the defenders undock overwhelming force because people finally come back from being AFK). Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.
Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 287	Posted - 2015.11.01 10:32:36 - [414] - Quote So, I couldn't find an answer to my earlier question, but I dug this out from the other thread which looked like it had died a death and fallen off it's sticky... CCP Ytterbium wrote: Alright, to recap where we're at with this. Tethering: Going to be renamed tethering instead of mooring (mooring is confusing for various reasons). As long as within some specific range of the structure and do not have weapons timer, you ship is tethered, meaning it cannot receive damage or be locked. You can align and move within the specified tethering range and still be protected, as long as you do not go outside the maximum range. You will not be able to tether to the structure if you are warp scrambled from a targeted module (HIC point, regular warp scrambling modules). You will be able to tether to the structure if you are within an AoE warp scramble bubble (HIC AoE bubble, interdictor bubble). Of course you will not be able to warp away however. This is to prevent people from being caught their pants down when logging back on near a structure. Tethering will be shown in the UI and visually in space. We are investigating options to minimize bumping when you are tethered. If your ship has access to dock into the structure it can use tethering. This doesn't mean you ship can dock however. For instance, you may have access to dock into a Medium Citadel as a Titan pilot, but you still are unable to dock. Your Titan will still be tethered when in range of the structure. If you log off you do not stay in space near the structure, you log off as you normally would (which is why calling this feature "mooring" is confusing). If you leave your active ship the tether will not protect the ship left behind and will tether to your capsule. Docking Medium Citadels: all subcapitals can dock. The Orca and Freighters can also dock. Large Citadels: all capitals can dock. This includes the Rorqual. X-Large Citadels: all ships can dock. There are different docking bays depending if you are in a subcapital, capital or supercapital. Depending on the structure, there may be more than one of each. You cannot choose which one to undock from (for now at least). There is no station interior. When you dock the scene is centered around the structure. Some information may be hidden (like the overview or ship modules) since technically you are not in a ship anymore. Since you're tethered it's easy to undock and then dock back up to get this information back. This is of great concern, as, given you are removing Starbases (eventually) you are also removing one of the options for smaller groups (namely XL-SMA), who don't have a cat in hells chance of building an XL Citadel. I see this as a massive oversight Ytterbium... War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2655	Posted - 2015.11.01 10:36:13 - [415] - Quote Gabriel Karade wrote: So, I couldn't find an answer to my earlier question, but I dug this out from the other thread which looked like it had died a death and fallen off it's sticky... This is of great concern, as, given you are removing Starbases (eventually) you are also removing one of the options for smaller groups (namely XL-SMA), who don't have a cat in hells chance of building an XL Citadel. I see this as a massive oversight Ytterbium... Could you name who these 'smaller groups' are that have Titans and Super Carriers but can't afford an XL Citadel please?
Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 287	Posted - 2015.11.01 10:48:57 - [416] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: So, I couldn't find an answer to my earlier question, but I dug this out from the other thread which looked like it had died a death and fallen off it's sticky... This is of great concern, as, given you are removing Starbases (eventually) you are also removing one of the options for smaller groups (namely XL-SMA), who don't have a cat in hells chance of building an XL Citadel. I see this as a massive oversight Ytterbium... Could you name who these 'smaller groups' are that have Titans and Super Carriers but can't afford an XL Citadel please? In smaller groups it tends to be the individual pilots who have acquired them, not 'the group'. For an XL citadel currently looking at what?... 70bn (base hull materials) + XX bn (BPC cost? noting its 700 bn for the BPO) + XX bn (Rigs) You are kidding yourself if you think these will be anything other than toys for the largest groups. War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2655	Posted - 2015.11.01 11:06:53 - [417] - Quote Gabriel Karade wrote: Could you name who these 'smaller groups' are that have Titans and Super Carriers but can't afford an XL Citadel please? In smaller groups it tends to be the individual pilots who have acquired them, not 'the group'. For an XL citadel currently looking at what?... 70bn (base hull materials) + XX bn (BPC cost? noting its 700 bn for the BPO) + XX bn (Rigs) You are kidding yourself if you think these will be anything other than toys for the largest groups. [/quote] So remind me how much Titans and Super Carriers cost. And why a single pilot who can barely afford a titan needs a Citadel to dock them in also? A single pilot is also not going to be leaving them in an XL-SMA, be consistent. They will continue to use them like current, Cloaks and logging off.
Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 287	Posted - 2015.11.01 11:17:44 - [418] - Quote The original Sovereignty requirements were removed from XL_SMAs for good reason...to give smaller groups options, particularly those operating in low-sec (hence why anchoring in 0.3 space is allowed). I cannot believe there would be a driver to now remove that functionality. I could dig through loads more of these but as an example of them being used: https://zkillboard.com/kill/48423733/ War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2655	Posted - 2015.11.01 11:23:18 - [419] - Quote Gabriel Karade wrote: The original Sovereignty requirements were removed from XL_SMAs for good reason...to give smaller groups options, particularly those operating in low-sec (hence why anchoring in 0.3 space is allowed). I cannot believe there would be a driver to now remove that functionality. I could dig through loads more of these but as an example of them being used: https://zkillboard.com/kill/48423733/ Sure, Corps use them. Now prove that that was a single pilot, not a corp. Also please prove to me that the pilot who could afford a 100 Billion ship can not afford a 70 billion Citadel, especially since they could also afford to lose said 100 billion ship. So losing a 70 Billion citadel and paying shipping on the titan would also be similar cost to them. I really think you are crying over nothing.
Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 287	Posted - 2015.11.01 11:33:39 - [420] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: The original Sovereignty requirements were removed from XL_SMAs for good reason...to give smaller groups options, particularly those operating in low-sec (hence why anchoring in 0.3 space is allowed). I cannot believe there would be a driver to now remove that functionality. I could dig through loads more of these but as an example of them being used: https://zkillboard.com/kill/48423733/ Sure, Corps use them. Now prove that that was a single pilot, not a corp. Also please prove to me that the pilot who could afford a 100 Billion ship can not afford a 70 billion Citadel, especially since they could also afford to lose said 100 billion ship. So losing a 70 Billion citadel and paying shipping on the titan would also be similar cost to them. I really think you are crying over nothing. Stop being obtuse (I'm sorry but falling back on the 'crying' line proves you are just trolling...) they won't cost 70 Bn, they will cost multiples of 70 Bn when factoring in base hull, BPC and rig costs. That's not a problem for larger groups, but considering currently that functionality is provided by a 250m isk POS with an 800m isk structure, that is a massive 'deal' for smaller groups. They (XL-SMAs) were amended to provide functionality that is now being removed, apparently by omission rather than intent. I would like CCPs perspective on this, not that of some twit hiding behind an alt. War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2655	Posted - 2015.11.01 11:44:22 - [421] - Quote Gabriel Karade wrote: Stop being obtuse (I'm sorry but falling back on the 'crying' line proves you are just trolling...) they won't cost 70 Bn, they will cost multiples of 70 Bn when factoring in base hull, BPC and rig costs. That's not a problem for larger groups, but considering currently that functionality is provided by a 250m isk POS with an 800m isk structure, that is a massive 'deal' for smaller groups. They (XL-SMAs) were amended to provide functionality that is now being removed, apparently by omission rather than intent. I would like CCPs perspective on this, not that of some twit hiding behind an alt. You mean those rigs and modules we already have prices for? That don't cost multiples of 70 Billion? Those rigs and modules right? I'm not being obtuse, we have actual numbers for them, if you T2 every single rig and fit the most expensive stuff you can, it will still cost less than 140 Billion, and you don't need a single rig or service module to dock a Titan. And the functionality of a Citadel is vast amounts more than a XL SMA. And can be anchored anywhere also. That 250M Pos with 800m structure docked...1 Titan, at huge risk of corp theft. & Remind me what the long term fuel costs are, like oh, for a year, since you can't just take it down 2 seconds after docking the titan. That Citadel docks as many as you want, with no risk of corp theft unless you want to put them in the corp office. Hell, you can dock in SOMEONE ELSES XL Citadel if they give you docking rights based on what we currently know. And the worst they can do to you is cause your assets to be relocated to the nearest NPC station. So this supposed 'small corp' (That can afford more expensive titans but not a Citadel) doesn't even need to buy a Citadel. They just need to share one with another group. Hey, reasons for groups to band together over a Citadel and share the costs, look at that emergent gameplay possibility which doesn't involve corp theft risk as a result. Also I'm sorry a several year old character not in an NPC corp isn't enough for you :P But I really think you need to get over your ego and your whine here.
Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 287	Posted - 2015.11.01 11:54:26 - [422] - Quote Long term fuel costs are 6bn per year, so still nothing compared to the cost of having to setup a 70bn based hull + BPC + Rigs XL Citadel. Oh and the corp theft issue is trivial to resolve by the way... Sorry, but if you are not an alt, you are not a stakeholder in this, so you really don't understand the issues... Edit: Let me spell it out for you - this 'locks-in' pilots who otherwise would be able to temporarily take a 'step outside' to do other things. It's a terrible change to game mechanics (more boredom), which I really can't believe is intentional given XL-SMA's were made available to all to provide that functionality at a reasonable cost. War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2655	Posted - 2015.11.01 11:59:35 - [423] - Quote Gabriel Karade wrote: Long term fuel cost are 6bn per year, so still nothing compared to the cost of having to setup a 70bn based hull + BPC + Rigs XL Citadel. Oh and the corp theft issue is trivial to resolve by the way... Sorry, but if you are not an alt, you are not a stakeholder in this, so you really don't understand the issues... So a single Titan requires 7 billion a year to maintain in a POS. So... a Citadel is only the equivalent to 10 Titan's. For one year. Assuming none of the POS get destroyed and the titan killed while it's in storage. Your own maths here says it's not an unreasonable cost. As soon as one titan gets killed in storage, the Citadel is the cheaper option. As soon as you have several titans, the Citadel is the long term cheaper option. So yes, I think I have a pretty good handle on the issues involved, and you sure aren't making any case otherwise. And Titan owner or not, storage of Titans affects everyone in EVE. Trying to pretend like only Titan owners are affected is silly.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2233	Posted - 2015.11.01 12:12:33 - [424] - Quote Please tell me where you're parking a supercap in an XLSMA. It's... for statistical purposes. Yep. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 287	Posted - 2015.11.01 12:45:45 - [425] - Quote Querns wrote: Please tell me where you're parking a supercap in an XLSMA. It's... for statistical purposes. Yep. In Amamake, in an un-fuelled tower... Next stupid comment please. War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2235	Posted - 2015.11.01 12:47:10 - [426] - Quote Gabriel Karade wrote: Querns wrote: Please tell me where you're parking a supercap in an XLSMA. It's... for statistical purposes. Yep. In Amamake, in an un-fuelled tower... Next stupid comment please. Despite the jape, it's a valid point -- who the hell would be stupid enough to park a 20 billion isk (plus) autism chariot in an XLSMA? This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 287	Posted - 2015.11.01 12:53:47 - [427] - Quote Querns wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: Querns wrote: Please tell me where you're parking a supercap in an XLSMA. It's... for statistical purposes. Yep. In Amamake, in an un-fuelled tower... Next stupid comment please. Despite the jape, it's a valid point -- who the hell would be stupid enough to park a 20 billion isk (plus) autism chariot in an XLSMA? Plenty of people, it's not rocket science to manage the risks - some people get caught out (e.g. the example I linked earlier). War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2235	Posted - 2015.11.01 12:59:06 - [428] - Quote Gabriel Karade wrote: Querns wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: Querns wrote: Please tell me where you're parking a supercap in an XLSMA. It's... for statistical purposes. Yep. In Amamake, in an un-fuelled tower... Next stupid comment please. Despite the jape, it's a valid point -- who the hell would be stupid enough to park a 20 billion isk (plus) autism chariot in an XLSMA? Plenty of people, it's not rocket science to manage the risks - some people get caught out (e.g. the example I linked earlier). The risk can be managed, but it's a stupid risk -- why not just log off inside an otherwise nondescript POS? Planting an XLSMA down puts a target on your stuff. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 287	Posted - 2015.11.01 13:02:55 - [429] - Quote Querns wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: Querns wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: Querns wrote: Please tell me where you're parking a supercap in an XLSMA. It's... for statistical purposes. Yep. In Amamake, in an un-fuelled tower... Next stupid comment please. Despite the jape, it's a valid point -- who the hell would be stupid enough to park a 20 billion isk (plus) autism chariot in an XLSMA? Plenty of people, it's not rocket science to manage the risks - some people get caught out (e.g. the example I linked earlier). The risk can be managed, but it's a stupid risk -- why not just log off inside an otherwise nondescript POS? Planting an XLSMA down puts a target on your stuff. You have to consider it against the reward of being able to step outside the coffin for a short period of time to do fun stuff - this is a game afterall. War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 287	Posted - 2015.11.01 13:14:04 - [430] - Quote Next question: Can you use a Jump Portal Generator while tethered? (both covert and big brother flavours). Also what are the tethering limitations (numbers of ships) ? War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 2235	Posted - 2015.11.01 13:33:42 - [431] - Quote Gabriel Karade wrote: You have to consider it against the reward of being able to step outside the coffin for a short period of time to do fun stuff - this is a game afterall. I guess they don't have alts where you live. This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 287	Posted - 2015.11.01 13:58:49 - [432] - Quote Querns wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: You have to consider it against the reward of being able to step outside the coffin for a short period of time to do fun stuff - this is a game afterall. I guess they don't have alts where you live. Which is yet another crappy game mechanic, and also undermined by the tethering concept; you eject to switch out to 'holding alt', ship is no longer is tethered and therefore vulnerable.... as opposed to being able to safely transfer pilots inside the comfort of a password protected starbase forcefield.... Tethering should at the bare minimum remain applied to unmanned ships to keep in line with existing mechanics. War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Firvain Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 29	Posted - 2015.11.01 15:14:02 - [433] - Quote Gabriel Karade wrote: Querns wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: You have to consider it against the reward of being able to step outside the coffin for a short period of time to do fun stuff - this is a game afterall. I guess they don't have alts where you live. Which is yet another crappy game mechanic, and also undermined by the tethering concept; you eject to switch out to 'holding alt', ship is no longer is tethered and therefore vulnerable.... as opposed to being able to safely transfer pilots inside the comfort of a password protected starbase forcefield.... Tethering should at the bare minimum remain applied to unmanned ships to keep in line with existing mechanics. Thats why you dock in your shiny new citadel and trade it directly... Cant wait for citadels to trade titans, I cant count the number of titans that have left the "safety" of my pos when i handed them over to my buyer on their own
Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 287	Posted - 2015.11.01 15:26:32 - [434] - Quote Firvain wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: Querns wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: You have to consider it against the reward of being able to step outside the coffin for a short period of time to do fun stuff - this is a game afterall. I guess they don't have alts where you live. Which is yet another crappy game mechanic, and also undermined by the tethering concept; you eject to switch out to 'holding alt', ship is no longer is tethered and therefore vulnerable.... as opposed to being able to safely transfer pilots inside the comfort of a password protected starbase forcefield.... Tethering should at the bare minimum remain applied to unmanned ships to keep in line with existing mechanics. Thats why you dock in your shiny new citadel and trade it directly... Cant wait for citadels to trade titans, I cant count the number of titans that have left the "safety" of my pos when i handed them over to my buyer on their own Yes, at approximately 400 times the cost of what it requires now. That's not going to be in issue for the likes of yourself (you guys will no doubt have more XL citadels than you know what to do with...), but that's a hell of a change for everyone else not in a large group. War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Iski Zuki DaSen Icarus Academy 11	Posted - 2015.11.01 17:52:44 - [435] - Quote the amount of salvage in need for t2 rig for citadels and especialy for xl size one is ridiculous also no trade goods are in need for citadel production either fix the loot tabble of the salvage (the drop rate and the percentage should be higher and with better analogy ) or simply add few trade goods in rig making and cut the slavage needs by alote
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1881	Posted - 2015.11.01 18:30:14 - [436] - Quote Iski Zuki DaSen wrote: the amount of salvage in need for t2 rig for citadels and especialy for xl size one is ridiculous also no trade goods are in need for citadel production either fix the loot tabble of the salvage (the drop rate and the percentage should be higher and with better analogy ) or simply add few trade goods in rig making and cut the slavage needs by alote The salvage needs are awesome. Will be a serious shot in the arm for explorers and should get more people out running the sites. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.
Eodp Ellecon Northstar Cabal Tactical Narcotics Team 25	Posted - 2015.11.01 20:26:42 - [437] - Quote As consideration given to "I Feel Safe" / 'relocate my stuff' as we go about building Citadels and destroying player dropped stations (with no word on NPC conquerables yet) There is the matter of max item limitation of Item Hangers at 1000. If someone loses a Constellations worth of assets the move could easily exceed 1000 items since... 1. Simply adding things to hanger doesn't stack 2. BPCs don't stack at all 3. Station containers won't repackage until it has been vacant for 30 days. 4. It's possible with station container collapse to far exceed 1000 items Typical null loot variety can exceed 300 BP collections can number hundreds Materiel for an Industrial character going from Moon goo thru Alliance Fleet supplier can far exceed 1000 items. 5. Contract system currently limited to 200.
Cannibal0n New Horizons Exploration Inc. 0	Posted - 2015.11.01 21:37:08 - [438] - Quote I'm sooooo happy that all of this planning and work is going into a feature approximately 10 percent (maybe) of the Eve user base will be able to use. Although the trickle down effect is admirable, it just seems those who can throw around the billions needed to construct a citadel aren't the ones that need a reason to come back to or stay in the game. Bravo!!!!
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 315	Posted - 2015.11.01 21:52:31 - [439] - Quote Gabriel Karade wrote: Stupid forums were giving me quote errors, so i deleted the whole damn mess...but you guys should understand this answer.... Well, POS's aren't being removed until all 8 types of structure are in the game and we have 100% overlap of functionality. That beign said, do we know how much a XL assembly arrays costs? They can certainly dock there as they are built there What about a XL drilling machine, we have been told we can reprocess them, so they should be able to dock. Do we know how much any of these structures cost? Citadels are the biggest, badest and most expensive, with good reason, they are your home, but to think they are the only one of the 8 that can dock a SC/Titan MIGHT be strecthing it as we have no idea. So until we have a better picture, i think you are crying over the possibility in 2 years someone might spill milk
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 315	Posted - 2015.11.01 21:54:18 - [440] - Quote Iski Zuki DaSen wrote: the amount of salvage in need for t2 rig for citadels and especialy for xl size one is ridiculous also no trade goods are in need for citadel production either fix the loot tabble of the salvage (the drop rate and the percentage should be higher and with better analogy ) or simply add few trade goods in rig making and cut the slavage needs by alote Quite a few people have been hording salvage for years There is plenty of supply there

Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 288	Posted - 2015.11.01 22:49:05 - [441] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: Stupid forums were giving me quote errors, so i deleted the whole damn mess...but you guys should understand this answer.... Well, POS's aren't being removed until all 8 types of structure are in the game and we have 100% overlap of functionality. That beign said, do we know how much a XL assembly arrays costs? They can certainly dock there as they are built there What about a XL drilling machine, we have been told we can reprocess them, so they should be able to dock. Do we know how much any of these structures cost? Citadels are the biggest, badest and most expensive, with good reason, they are your home, but to think they are the only one of the 8 that can dock a SC/Titan MIGHT be strecthing it as we have no idea. So until we have a better picture, i think you are crying over the possibility in 2 years someone might spill milk See, that was a perfectly reasonable post.... until you had to troll.... .....no, I'm am not 'crying' (seriously, grow up FFS...!), I am pointing out there is a gap in what is being proposed (which may or may not be filled by other structures). War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Mercur Fighter Black Aces I N F A M O U S 4	Posted - 2015.11.02 01:27:54 - [442] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Iski Zuki DaSen wrote: the amount of salvage in need for t2 rig for citadels and especialy for xl size one is ridiculous also no trade goods are in need for citadel production either fix the loot tabble of the salvage (the drop rate and the percentage should be higher and with better analogy ) or simply add few trade goods in rig making and cut the slavage needs by alote The salvage needs are awesome. Will be a serious shot in the arm for explorers and should get more people out running the sites. I concur
Iski Zuki DaSen Icarus Academy 11	Posted - 2015.11.02 11:03:19 - [443] - Quote Mercur Fighter wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: Iski Zuki DaSen wrote: the amount of salvage in need for t2 rig for citadels and especialy for xl size one is ridiculous also no trade goods are in need for citadel production either fix the loot tabble of the salvage (the drop rate and the percentage should be higher and with better analogy ) or simply add few trade goods in rig making and cut the slavage needs by alote The salvage needs are awesome. Will be a serious shot in the arm for explorers and should get more people out running the sites. I concur dont get me wrong i dont say the amount is ridiculous for t1 rigs nor the proportion in need of each t1 salvage the t2 is messed up but look at the spreadsheet CCP gave us run 100 -200 relic sites( yes in null-sec space) gother 4-5 bill in loot from those sites and then come back in with your results and tell me if the proportion looted is somewhere near the proportion those t2 rigs will need the problem will not be in gothering the Enchanted ward console/ single crystall superalloy / intact shield emiter the problem will be in the other matterials such as the one that you need 450.000 of them (they cost nothing and so they are cheap) but simply the sites doesnt drop them in the correct ratio even if we calculate the other rigs needs in them which is lower ...still the amount of those cheap t2 slavage is RIDICULOUS which is why i said they either need to fix the proportion in the loot tables or simply cut the needs of those by alote and to keep things interesting add trade goods , which they are a nice isk sink cause you only buy those from npc stations( the serius quantities you might need )
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 315	Posted - 2015.11.02 12:16:55 - [444] - Quote Gabriel Karade wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: Stupid forums were giving me quote errors, so i deleted the whole damn mess...but you guys should understand this answer.... Well, POS's aren't being removed until all 8 types of structure are in the game and we have 100% overlap of functionality. That beign said, do we know how much a XL assembly arrays costs? They can certainly dock there as they are built there What about a XL drilling machine, we have been told we can reprocess them, so they should be able to dock. Do we know how much any of these structures cost? Citadels are the biggest, badest and most expensive, with good reason, they are your home, but to think they are the only one of the 8 that can dock a SC/Titan MIGHT be strecthing it as we have no idea. So until we have a better picture, i think you are crying over the possibility in 2 years someone might spill milk See, that was a perfectly reasonable post.... until you had to troll.... .....no, I'm am not 'crying' (seriously, grow up FFS...!), I am pointing out there is a gap in what is being proposed (which may or may not be filled by other structures). Hmm, maybe lost in translation "crying over spilled milk" is a phrase used to describe complaining about something that isn't even real or may not become real It doesn't have to do with the physical act of crying or whining My point still stands, we have only seen the first of 8 structures, which admittedly is the biggest, baddest and most expensive Lets wait and see what the other 7 are, how much they cost and what can dock there before we jump to more conclusions about how much it will cost to dock a super
Lady Rift What Shall We Call It 235	Posted - 2015.11.02 13:21:07 - [445] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: Stupid forums were giving me quote errors, so i deleted the whole damn mess...but you guys should understand this answer.... Well, POS's aren't being removed until all 8 types of structure are in the game and we have 100% overlap of functionality. That beign said, do we know how much a XL assembly arrays costs? They can certainly dock there as they are built there What about a XL drilling machine, we have been told we can reprocess them, so they should be able to dock. Do we know how much any of these structures cost? Citadels are the biggest, badest and most expensive, with good reason, they are your home, but to think they are the only one of the 8 that can dock a SC/Titan MIGHT be strecthing it as we have no idea. So until we have a better picture, i think you are crying over the possibility in 2 years someone might spill milk See, that was a perfectly reasonable post.... until you had to troll.... .....no, I'm am not 'crying' (seriously, grow up FFS...!), I am pointing out there is a gap in what is being proposed (which may or may not be filled by other structures). Hmm, maybe lost in translation "crying over spilled milk" is a phrase used to describe complaining about something that isn't even real or may not become real It doesn't have to do with the physical act of crying or whining My point still stands, we have only seen the first of 8 structures, which admittedly is the biggest, baddest and most expensive Lets wait and see what the other 7 are, how much they cost and what can dock there before we jump to more conclusions about how much it will cost to dock a super the idiom crying over split milk actually means to be unhappy about what can't be undone.
Owen Levanth Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration 417	Posted - 2015.11.02 13:47:24 - [446] - Quote Lady Rift wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: Stupid forums were giving me quote errors, so i deleted the whole damn mess...but you guys should understand this answer.... Well, POS's aren't being removed until all 8 types of structure are in the game and we have 100% overlap of functionality. That beign said, do we know how much a XL assembly arrays costs? They can certainly dock there as they are built there What about a XL drilling machine, we have been told we can reprocess them, so they should be able to dock. Do we know how much any of these structures cost? Citadels are the biggest, badest and most expensive, with good reason, they are your home, but to think they are the only one of the 8 that can dock a SC/Titan MIGHT be strecthing it as we have no idea. So until we have a better picture, i think you are crying over the possibility in 2 years someone might spill milk See, that was a perfectly reasonable post.... until you had to troll.... .....no, I'm am not 'crying' (seriously, grow up FFS...!), I am pointing out there is a gap in what is being proposed (which may or may not be filled by other structures). Hmm, maybe lost in translation "crying over spilled milk" is a phrase used to describe complaining about something that isn't even real or may not become real It doesn't have to do with the physical act of crying or whining My point still stands, we have only seen the first of 8 structures, which admittedly is the biggest, baddest and most expensive Lets wait and see what the other 7 are, how much they cost and what can dock there before we jump to more conclusions about how much it will cost to dock a super the idiom crying over spilt milk actually means to be unhappy about what can't be undone. Funnily enough, it still works even under the correct meaning.
Hexatron Ormand Aperture Deep Space Worlds United Fedo Force 90	Posted - 2015.11.02 14:16:23 - [447] - Quote Appears like they got a lot "bigger". Thats cool, when even a "medium" one is as large as current stations and outposts are ;) What about the "what is allowed to dock there"? Is is still that anything capital sized has to dock at a large? What about Freighters and Rorquals? Are there exceptions for them for the mediums? Or also need a large for those? May make future mining outposts a lot more expensive and harder to set up.
Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 288	Posted - 2015.11.02 18:11:06 - [448] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: Stupid forums were giving me quote errors, so i deleted the whole damn mess...but you guys should understand this answer.... Well, POS's aren't being removed until all 8 types of structure are in the game and we have 100% overlap of functionality. That beign said, do we know how much a XL assembly arrays costs? They can certainly dock there as they are built there What about a XL drilling machine, we have been told we can reprocess them, so they should be able to dock. Do we know how much any of these structures cost? Citadels are the biggest, badest and most expensive, with good reason, they are your home, but to think they are the only one of the 8 that can dock a SC/Titan MIGHT be strecthing it as we have no idea. So until we have a better picture, i think you are crying over the possibility in 2 years someone might spill milk See, that was a perfectly reasonable post.... until you had to troll.... .....no, I'm am not 'crying' (seriously, grow up FFS...!), I am pointing out there is a gap in what is being proposed (which may or may not be filled by other structures). Hmm, maybe lost in translation "crying over spilled milk" is a phrase used to describe complaining about something that isn't even real or may not become real It doesn't have to do with the physical act of crying or whining My point still stands, we have only seen the first of 8 structures, which admittedly is the biggest, baddest and most expensive Lets wait and see what the other 7 are, how much they cost and what can dock there before we jump to more conclusions about how much it will cost to dock a super point taken, no worries War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 55	Posted - 2015.11.02 21:31:52 - [449] - Quote Hexatron Ormand wrote: ...................... What about the "what is allowed to dock there"? Is is still that anything capital sized has to dock at a large? What about Freighters and Rorquals? Are there exceptions for them for the mediums? Or also need a large for those?.............. I believe this has been answered... - Rorquals, like other normal capitals can dock at a Large. - Freighters and Orcas can dock at Mediums (exception rule like now in HS) - as can, I assume, JFs
Circumstantial Evidence 234	Posted - 2015.11.03 00:42:23 - [450] - Quote If Outpost + upgrades reimbursement isk is at stake, major alliances may have impetus to engage in the largest conquest campaign of recent history. CCP could require a minimum length of ownership, to help determine the rightful ("most powerful") owner, to pay off. The executor holding it for the most number of days... over a month? Three months? CCP could reimburse outposts and upgrades as nearest-equivalent *items*, instead of isk.

Iowa Banshee Fenrir Vangard 13	Posted - 2015.11.03 20:55:46 - [451] - Quote ""If you leave your active ship the tether will not protect the ship left behind and will tether to your capsule."" So - its nothing like a POS shield ......and in a WH with a M. we are still forced into sitting in specialty role ships like Rorqual/Carrier that we really only want to sit in when we are actually using them because apparently even though we have moored (sorry - tethered) them we still can't hop out of them and go down the pub for a pint. Also... Do you have any idea how long it takes to warp a Rorqual to six POCOs to pick up Pi... (sic)
Owen Levanth Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration 417	Posted - 2015.11.03 21:07:54 - [452] - Quote Iowa Banshee wrote: ""If you leave your active ship the tether will not protect the ship left behind and will tether to your capsule."" So - its nothing like a POS shield ......and in a WH with a M. we are still forced into sitting in specialty role ships like Rorqual/Carrier that we really only want to sit in when we are actually using them because apparently even though we have moored (sorry - tethered) them we still can't hop out of them and go down the pub for a pint. Also... Do you have any idea how long it takes to warp a Rorqual to six POCOs to pick up Pi... (sic) Well then just dock and take a sensible ship. If you have money for a Rorqual, you should have money for a large one.
Iowa Banshee Fenrir Vangard 13	Posted - 2015.11.03 21:31:10 - [453] - Quote Owen Levanth wrote: Iowa Banshee wrote: ""If you leave your active ship the tether will not protect the ship left behind and will tether to your capsule."" So - its nothing like a POS shield ......and in a WH with a M. we are still forced into sitting in specialty role ships like Rorqual/Carrier that we really only want to sit in when we are actually using them because apparently even though we have moored (sorry - tethered) them we still can't hop out of them and go down the pub for a pint. Also... Do you have any idea how long it takes to warp a Rorqual to six POCOs to pick up Pi... (sic) Well then just dock and take a sensible ship. If you have money for a Rorqual, you should have money for a large one. So... Your suggestion is that I train one of my toons up to build & fly a freighter (because I'm guessing the previous occupants I bought the Roqual off for next to nothing won't want to come back to build me a Freighter)..... and I can't train the Rorqual pilot because if I do there will be no-one to sit in it when the Freighter is built. Now that I have 2 pilots sitting in ships they cannot get out of while I train up constructing L Citadels. Then I can build and launch a Large Citadel I cannot afford to pay for and don't have enough corp members to defend JUST to make up for not being able to hop out of a ship in relative safety of a shield once a week to run pi Sure feels like I'm getting shafted....
Owen Levanth Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration 417	Posted - 2015.11.03 21:58:44 - [454] - Quote Iowa Banshee wrote: Owen Levanth wrote: Iowa Banshee wrote: ""If you leave your active ship the tether will not protect the ship left behind and will tether to your capsule."" So - its nothing like a POS shield ......and in a WH with a M. we are still forced into sitting in specialty role ships like Rorqual/Carrier that we really only want to sit in when we are actually using them because apparently even though we have moored (sorry - tethered) them we still can't hop out of them and go down the pub for a pint. Also... Do you have any idea how long it takes to warp a Rorqual to six POCOs to pick up Pi... (sic) Well then just dock and take a sensible ship. If you have money for a Rorqual, you should have money for a large one. So... Your suggestion is that I train one of my toons up to build & fly a freighter (because I'm guessing the previous occupants I bought the Roqual off for next to nothing won't want to come back to build me a Freighter)..... and I can't train the Rorqual pilot because if I do there will be no-one to sit in it when the Freighter is built. Now that I have 2 pilots sitting in ships they cannot get out of while I train up constructing L Citadels. Then I can build and launch a Large Citadel I cannot afford to pay for and don't have enough corp members to defend JUST to make up for not being able to hop out of a ship in relative safety of a shield once a week to run pi Sure feels like I'm getting shafted.... Well if you can't afford all this, then use an Orca instead of Rorquals. Overextending yourself like this isn't necessary.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2659	Posted - 2015.11.03 22:07:00 - [455] - Quote Iowa Banshee wrote: So... Your suggestion is that I train one of my toons up to build & fly a freighter (because I'm guessing the previous occupants I bought the Roqual off for next to nothing won't want to come back to build me a Freighter)..... and I can't train the Rorqual pilot because if I do there will be no-one to sit in it when the Freighter is built. Now that I have 2 pilots sitting in ships they cannot get out of while I train up constructing L Citadels. Then I can build and launch a Large Citadel I cannot afford to pay for and don't have enough corp members to defend JUST to make up for not being able to hop out of a ship in relative safety of a shield once a week to run pi Sure feels like I'm getting shafted.... If you can fly a Rorqual, you can get into a Freighter in like a week or two. Since ACS V is the main hard part to train for Freighters. You can use the Rorqual pilot for the Freighter since you only need to be in the freighter for 5 minutes to launch the L Citadel. Just get corp mates to sit there with the Rorqual locked in that window of opportunity, since you want protection for your freighter online anyway. The Freighter can dock in the M Citadel. If you can't afford a L Citadel, then you shouldn't be in a Rorqual to begin with. If you don't have enough corp members to defend for 7 hours a week, you shouldn't be using Capitals.
Iowa Banshee Fenrir Vangard 13	Posted - 2015.11.03 22:15:12 - [456] - Quote Owen Levanth wrote: Iowa Banshee wrote: Owen Levanth wrote: Iowa Banshee wrote: ""If you leave your active ship the tether will not protect the ship left behind and will tether to your capsule."" So - its nothing like a POS shield ......and in a WH with a M. we are still forced into sitting in specialty role ships like Rorqual/Carrier that we really only want to sit in when we are actually using them because apparently even though we have moored (sorry - tethered) them we still can't hop out of them and go down the pub for a pint. Also... Do you have any idea how long it takes to warp a Rorqual to six POCOs to pick up Pi... (sic) Well then just dock and take a sensible ship. If you have money for a Rorqual, you should have money for a large one. So... Your suggestion is that I train one of my toons up to build & fly a freighter (because I'm guessing the previous occupants I bought the Roqual off for next to nothing won't want to come back to build me a Freighter)..... and I can't train the Rorqual pilot because if I do there will be no-one to sit in it when the Freighter is built. Now that I have 2 pilots sitting in ships they cannot get out of while I train up constructing L Citadels. Then I can build and launch a Large Citadel I cannot afford to pay for and don't have enough corp members to defend JUST to make up for not being able to hop out of a ship in relative safety of a shield once a week to run pi Sure feels like I'm getting shafted.... Well if you can't afford all this, then use an Orca instead of Rorquals. Overextending yourself like this isn't necessary. I'm now at the sarcastic stage .....I see ... the problem is the Rorqual I own ... Not the tether ... Silly me.. I shall explode the Ship as soon as the POS becomes redundant.... I will suggest the same to others in WH space and maybe follow up with a suggestion about moving to Null
Owen Levanth Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration 417	Posted - 2015.11.03 22:26:07 - [457] - Quote Iowa Banshee wrote: Owen Levanth wrote: Iowa Banshee wrote: Owen Levanth wrote: Iowa Banshee wrote: ""If you leave your active ship the tether will not protect the ship left behind and will tether to your capsule."" So - its nothing like a POS shield ......and in a WH with a M. we are still forced into sitting in specialty role ships like Rorqual/Carrier that we really only want to sit in when we are actually using them because apparently even though we have moored (sorry - tethered) them we still can't hop out of them and go down the pub for a pint. Also... Do you have any idea how long it takes to warp a Rorqual to six POCOs to pick up Pi... (sic) Well then just dock and take a sensible ship. If you have money for a Rorqual, you should have money for a large one. So... Your suggestion is that I train one of my toons up to build & fly a freighter (because I'm guessing the previous occupants I bought the Roqual off for next to nothing won't want to come back to build me a Freighter)..... and I can't train the Rorqual pilot because if I do there will be no-one to sit in it when the Freighter is built. Now that I have 2 pilots sitting in ships they cannot get out of while I train up constructing L Citadels. Then I can build and launch a Large Citadel I cannot afford to pay for and don't have enough corp members to defend JUST to make up for not being able to hop out of a ship in relative safety of a shield once a week to run pi Sure feels like I'm getting shafted.... Well if you can't afford all this, then use an Orca instead of Rorquals. Overextending yourself like this isn't necessary. I'm now at the sarcastic stage .....I see ... the problem is the Rorqual I own ... Not the tether ... Silly me.. I shall explode the Ship as soon as the POS becomes redundant.... I will suggest the same to others in WH space and maybe follow up with a suggestion about moving to Null You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2659	Posted - 2015.11.03 23:38:54 - [458] - Quote Iowa Banshee wrote: I'm now at the sarcastic stage .....I see ... the problem is the Rorqual I own ... Not the tether ... Silly me.. I shall explode the Ship as soon as the POS becomes redundant.... I will suggest the same to others in WH space and maybe follow up with a suggestion about moving to Null You do know your POS will stay existing till AFTER all the new structures come in right? This process is likely to take at least a year, more like two years. Even I could make the isk solo in that time, and I'm terrible at making isk.
JTK Fotheringham Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers. 99	Posted - 2015.11.04 12:23:47 - [459] - Quote Any further forward with the situation for low class wormhole corps? Large citadels = freighter deployment - fair enough. (accepting the volume change to rule out orcas) Can we get some detail about where large citadels can be constructed - can they be constructed in current POS facilities? Will a new medium Assembly structure be able to build a large structure?
Iowa Banshee Fenrir Vangard 13	Posted - 2015.11.04 16:20:06 - [460] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Iowa Banshee wrote: I'm now at the sarcastic stage .....I see ... the problem is the Rorqual I own ... Not the tether ... Silly me.. I shall explode the Ship as soon as the POS becomes redundant.... I will suggest the same to others in WH space and maybe follow up with a suggestion about moving to Null You do know your POS will stay existing till AFTER all the new structures come in right? This process is likely to take at least a year, more like two years. Even I could make the isk solo in that time, and I'm terrible at making isk. Rorqual/Carrier - It does not matter I am trying to highlight an aspect of gameplay these Citadels are supposed to replace but fail at - namely the protection afforded by an active force-field bubble. As it stands if you leave a pilotless Ship at an unmanned POS with an active force-field it has a high degree of safety. Leaving an unpiloted ship at an unmanned Citadel is the same as parking it in space - In fact it's worse because at least you have to scan it down if it is floating in space.

Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2668	Posted - 2015.11.04 23:14:53 - [461] - Quote Iowa Banshee wrote: Rorqual/Carrier - It does not matter I am trying to highlight an aspect of gameplay these Citadels are supposed to replace but fail at - namely the protection afforded by an active force-field bubble. As it stands if you leave a pilotless Ship at an unmanned POS with an active force-field it has a high degree of safety. Leaving an unpiloted ship at an unmanned Citadel is the same as parking it in space - In fact it's worse because at least you have to scan it down if it is floating in space. Not if you dock it it isn't Your complaint is that in a tiny edge case you will have to go to a little more bother to get a Citadel that you can dock at, over the span of 1-2 years to get that little more bother solved. They are not removing POS the second Citadels come into the game. And if you can't get a freighter into the WH, you built the Capitals inside the hole to begin with, so deal with it to keep the advantage over anyone entering your hole without capitals.
aldhura Bartledannians 9	Posted - 2015.11.05 23:48:02 - [462] - Quote Valterra Craven wrote: Ytterbium, much like the industry changes a while back I have big concerns with how you guys are handling the new rigs. I really think you guys need to go back to the drawing board on that one. You have a golden opportunity here to create a new market instead of trashing an old one. What you should be doing is creating new rig materials that can only be found in null sec. This gives null sec an extra income base without actually giving them an isk printing machine. They've been hollering for more opportunities to level the playing field between hi-sec and this is the one chance you have to make them happy without creating an isk faucet. Please for the love of common sense do not tie t2 salvage to structure rigs in any way. So having permanent anoms to run back to back, decent astriod belts, higher paying incursions, moon reactions, etc isn't already an isk printing machine in null ?? easiest isk I ever made was in null sec. Bartledannians are recruiting.. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6104254#post6104254
159Pinky Under Heavy Fire Mordus Angels 38	Posted - 2015.11.08 11:50:08 - [463] - Quote aldhura wrote: Valterra Craven wrote: Ytterbium, much like the industry changes a while back I have big concerns with how you guys are handling the new rigs. I really think you guys need to go back to the drawing board on that one. You have a golden opportunity here to create a new market instead of trashing an old one. What you should be doing is creating new rig materials that can only be found in null sec. This gives null sec an extra income base without actually giving them an isk printing machine. They've been hollering for more opportunities to level the playing field between hi-sec and this is the one chance you have to make them happy without creating an isk faucet. Please for the love of common sense do not tie t2 salvage to structure rigs in any way. So having permanent anoms to run back to back, decent astriod belts, higher paying incursions, moon reactions, etc isn't already an isk printing machine in null ?? easiest isk I ever made was in null sec. Agreed, no need to make more stuff that can be farmed in a portion of space. Want new materials? Add them to all security spaces and make them hard to get ( and not farmable by carriers, ishtars.... )
Dr Cedric Independent Miners Corporation Care Factor 124	Posted - 2015.11.10 01:38:12 - [464] - Quote So, it must be my abysmal skills at making spreadsheets, but my numbers for the required PI materials is not anywhere close to the numbers listed on the Dev Blog. Am I reading right that, for example, an XL citadel will need 400 Structure Market Networks. And each of those Market Networks will tak 15 Broadcast nodes to produce...meaning that an XL citadel will need 6000 = 15 x 400 broadcast nodes plus the rest from the other parts. Why does the Dev blog list 4520 as the total needed (specifically for broadcast nodes...the rest of my numbers are off too...) Any help on this is good, or maybe an explanation of what the real numbers are. Cedric
Verok Na Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2015.11.12 03:10:31 - [465] - Quote Been playing this sim since 2005 off and on. Don't let the newbie toon fool you. I'm now a retired Canadian and finally have the time to play again. Mostly, I solo with the occasional get together with a couple friends. Lest you doubt my commitment you should know I spent $300 last month on account renewals, multi training, and plex for corporation upgrading. That represents my entire entertainment budget for the month! Now that I'm up and running the real life cost will be less. I applaud the efforts of this team to substantially upgrade the whole POS experience. Lots of eyecandy , new functionality, and safety upgrades. Looking good all round but..... I'm concerned about the cost and the effect on very low population corporations. I have a solution. In real life, everyone wants a brand new car but most of us drive the clunker we can afford. If we were forced to replace our old cars with new ones, a lot of us would be walking. It should be no different with Starbases vs Citadels. I see no reason why you can't keep the existing Starbases for us poor folk even though you're introducing the latest greatest models. In real life, the new models replace the old ones only when the market dictates. You've done a great job here. There are plenty of very desired features in Citadels. Don't forcibly remove structures from the game over any designated time frame. Allow the market to do its work. Let the market decide when or if the old style Starbase structures get reprocessed to build the shiny new Citadel. Verok Na
aldhura Bartledannians NEMESIS INC UNITED 16	Posted - 2015.11.12 19:43:09 - [466] - Quote Just create a BP that lets you use x number of POS's to build one citadel.. everyone wins :) Bartledannians are recruiting.. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6150832#post6150832
Lavayar Russian SOBR Dream Fleet 235	Posted - 2015.11.16 09:38:30 - [467] - Quote Iowa Banshee wrote: ""If you leave your active ship the tether will not protect the ship left behind and will tether to your capsule."" So - its nothing like a POS shield ......and in a WH with a M. we are still forced into sitting in specialty role ships like Rorqual/Carrier that we really only want to sit in when we are actually using them because apparently even though we have moored (sorry - tethered) them we still can't hop out of them and go down the pub for a pint. You absolutely right! I think mooring (not tethering!) is still the thing which developers should think of. There are many situations when you just can`t place L or XL citadel. And when POSes and Outposts will be gone, we will have bunch of carriers/dreadnouts/rorquals "locked in space". And this is a problem! Anyone who says that it will be plenty of time are wrong beacause no matter how long you offline you must not be in worse position. And ofcourse don't forget that carriers are the best way for small entities to travel with all you ships inside ship maintance hangar. I think M citadels shoud have 3-5 mooring points for carriers/dreadnouts/rorquals. When ship moored you can access to your personal and corporation hangars in citadel thru assets tree (and vice versa when you docked) and of course eject and do anything else while your ship is moored. Visualy it will look like standart ship model attached to citadel (what we saw at presentation of citadels).
Ragnar Snowed fiftyninepee 16	Posted - 2015.11.20 14:51:09 - [468] - Quote hello, Does station warehouse container fitt in citadels ? thanks
ficr Republic University Minmatar Republic 12	Posted - 2015.11.24 03:42:21 - [469] - Quote POS and Citadel Requirments I'm a new player and heard you can mine moons with a POS. Then I read online that you have to set up a player corp to set up a POS. When Citadel's are released will I be able to mine moons without setting up a player corp? If I start a new alt now to set up a player corp will I be able to give my main permissions to fuel etc the POS? Thank You for your time.
Lara Sunji State War Academy Caldari State 18	Posted - 2015.11.24 11:46:08 - [470] - Quote Is this the end of ice mining? Sure looks like it which is beyond odd when introducing a new ice mining ship. CCP logic 101.

Steve Ronuken Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM 5737	Posted - 2015.11.24 12:38:53 - [471] - Quote ficr wrote: POS and Citadel Requirments I'm a new player and heard you can mine moons with a POS. Then I read online that you have to set up a player corp to set up a POS. When Citadel's are released will I be able to mine moons without setting up a player corp? If I start a new alt now to set up a player corp will I be able to give my main permissions to fuel etc the POS? Thank You for your time. Citadels will still be corporation property, not player. And for now, moon mining isn't changing. Woo! CSM X! Fuzzwork Enterprises Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
X Mayce Manson Family Advent of Fate 4	Posted - 2015.11.24 12:58:18 - [472] - Quote X Mayce wrote: o7 Do I get this correct: nowadays, if I want to get dreadnoughts into position within jumprange to a system to siege that system/in that system (and I dont have any stations for docking available): I place a pos within 5lys (max dread jump range) or less, get my dreads there to have some sort of "safe"-starting point. future use of dreadnoughts for sieging something, and you dont have a station for docking yet means: place at least a large building (citadel) with minimal costs of around 3b (optimistic value)? is this, how it's gonna work, or did I get something wrong? I try again Manson Family Advent of Fate
Terranid Meester Tactical Assault and Recon Unit 316	Posted - 2015.11.27 02:29:40 - [473] - Quote Hopefully the change to moon mining will not be too far off.
Garett Rootarian 30plus Fidelas Constans 6	Posted - 2015.11.27 09:10:11 - [474] - Quote Will we be able to walk around these stations? We've had cloning in the South for years. It's called cousins. Imperfection is beauty, madness is genius and it's better to be absolutely ridiculous than absolutely boring
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2736	Posted - 2015.11.30 22:28:20 - [475] - Quote X Mayce wrote: I try again If there is no station within 5ly you can use and you insist on only jumping via jump drive, and having the pilots able to dock rather than just tether, and only doing a single jump. Then yes that is how it will work. Of course you could travel via gates. You could tether at a medium then log off in space. You could simply log off in space. You could wait out the fatigue timer at a safe or logged off then jump again. There are many ways around it.
Rek Seven Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering 2118	Posted - 2015.12.02 11:15:26 - [476] - Quote Can you put a citadel in a shattered wormhole system? The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Cat Harkness Twilight Labs 40	Posted - 2015.12.02 23:30:03 - [477] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: Can you put a citadel in a shattered wormhole system? No Cat Harkness CEO Twilight Labs
Laendra Universalis Imperium The Bastion 81	Posted - 2015.12.05 04:43:24 - [478] - Quote Quote: We are adding 3 new components to fill our needs. They are: Structure Advertisement Nexus, Structure Telescope Lens and Structure Acceleration Coils. We are considering adding those around December to give players time to acquire and research them before the introduction of Citadels. I don't see these in the patch notes for the 8th?
Bombay Saphirre Aoede Labs 0	Posted - 2015.12.18 19:43:53 - [479] - Quote Can Structure components built now, be used to construct the Structure hull after the release of the citadel hull bpo? (spring?) As they appear now there is a difference in materials from what was proposed in the "Building your Citadel, one block at a time" materials. With the addition of fuel blocks and the added materials, it pushes the cost upwards to produce the comps? or am i missing something?
Jerppu3 DeathGames Inc. DeathGamers 0	Posted - 2015.12.18 20:43:39 - [480] - Quote Just reactivated my account once I read about this spring update, any idea when can we start testing this in SiSi?

Ginger Barbarella 2068	Posted - 2015.12.21 23:03:17 - [481] - Quote Sorry if this has been answered already... Any idea when the skillbooks for building or planting required skills will be made available for viewing or purchase? Thx! ~ginger "Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac
Xindi Kraid Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd. 1081	Posted - 2015.12.23 15:45:07 - [482] - Quote Ginger Barbarella wrote: Sorry if this has been answered already... Any idea when the skillbooks for building or planting required skills will be made available for viewing or purchase? Thx! ~ginger Per the blog, we already have the skills we will need: Outpost Construction and Industry Another poke of the devs though, on when the component changes (and new components) is coming though.
Edwin Rothbard Interstellar Arbitrage 22	Posted - 2015.12.28 06:04:59 - [483] - Quote The potential for citadels to upend many stale things in Eve is a welcome change. I've poured over the blogs and the related threads, but I still have some questions: Can large/XL be deployed in high security space like regular POSes or will they be limited to null? Since they can be deployed anywhere, what determines who gets to mine which moon in a system? If a citadel is in immune mode where it cannot be shot, can the owner still man the guns at shoot at ships in low/null/wh space? where will structure modules be manufactured? Station only? can that be done with one of the existing POS modules? where will the hulls be built? Station only? somewhere else? what happens to old pos/outpost modules? do they become collector's items, refunded, or converted to new structures? what about old bpos like POS and outposts? do they get refunded at npc price, converted, or something else? what happens to faction POS/module bcs? what advantages is there to allow public access to a high sec citadel? can you allow/tax others to use your research/manufacturing/market? can you avoid NPC station taxes/brokers fees if you setup a market in a high sec large/XL citadel? 12 of the 15 structure bpos already exist. you can build them right now. they do not have the new build requirements yet. if you build units today will they get converted to the new units or refunded? IE will a "station market network" module built today work as an input into the new citadels? Rothbard's Casino
Orb Hammerhand Cosmic Industrial Complex 0	Posted - 2015.12.28 07:59:34 - [484] - Quote In the presentation it stated that Freighters will be able to dock at medium Citadels, what about the Orca?
stonefly Unicorn Solutions 0	Posted - 2015.12.31 19:03:02 - [485] - Quote Honestly im worried about us small time industrial players.. What about small/medium pos towers? Should there not be small citadel too to fill needs of us smaller players? We dont all want to put up several billion citadel just to research out BP's or run some invention jobs... Sadly this citadel stuff looks by devblogs like handing keys to large nullsec alliances again and forcing us smaller players to join their sandbox instead of letting us play our own corner of global eve sandbox.
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 56	Posted - 2016.01.02 11:37:40 - [486] - Quote stonefly wrote: Honestly im worried about us small time industrial players.. What about small/medium pos towers? Should there not be small citadel too to fill needs of us smaller players? We dont all want to put up several billion citadel just to research out BP's or run some invention jobs... Sadly this citadel stuff looks by devblogs like handing keys to large nullsec alliances again and forcing us smaller players to join their sandbox instead of letting us play our own corner of global eve sandbox. 'Small' structures are now the 'little' deployables - MTUs; Depots; etc. So the one(s) you are looking for are the 'Medium' Citadels - and around 700m for the hull. At present, whilst I've seen the Citadel(s) mentioned as covering: SMAs; Markets; Offices; Refining; & Compressing - I haven't seen (iirc) mention of a 'Laboratory' module - but this could be part of a wholly separate 'Research Array' structure later. Factory Arrays are also 'later'. The one thing that does look to be being seriously nerfed at present is the Small POS + Compression Array which many miners use - for they are a hell of a lot cheaper than 700m! But POSs will be around, I suspect, for at least another 15 months
Nakota Joe Nakota Archron Dusyfe Industries 1	Posted - 2016.01.09 01:10:02 - [487] - Quote I'm thinkin' that all these folks who are begging to make items more expensive and complex to make are batchit crazy. here's my thoughts on it. keep the rigs as are, no need to wreck somebodys gameplan all because you have a ton of whatever and need a use for them. next, enough about these citadels, I see the only ones showing interest are the ones that already have inside information so why bother us with details? we aren't going to be able to afford them anyway. final point, since goonswarm is the only corp that is serious about these....and they have advance knowledge, it is clear that they will be running eve soon. and you thought the mutliboxing nerf forced a lot of people out? I don't think you fully understand these implications, until its too late I guess. later taters.
Alavaria Fera GoonWaffe 6904	Posted - 2016.01.09 02:31:53 - [488] - Quote Marcus Tedric wrote: 'Small' structures are now the 'little' deployables - MTUs; Depots; etc. The one thing that does look to be being seriously nerfed at present is the Small POS + Compression Array which many miners use - for they are a hell of a lot cheaper than 700m! A compression deployable would be nice. Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall. We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
Alavaria Fera GoonWaffe 6904	Posted - 2016.01.09 02:33:32 - [489] - Quote stonefly wrote: Honestly im worried about us small time industrial players.. What about small/medium pos towers? Should there not be small citadel too to fill needs of us smaller players? We dont all want to put up several billion citadel just to research out BP's or run some invention jobs... Check out what the NPCs have to offer you. Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall. We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
Beanhead2 The Bean Consortium 6	Posted - 2016.01.09 03:51:05 - [490] - Quote What is the plan for POS towers, will we get isk for them to help buy a citadel?

Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 56	Posted - 2016.01.09 12:07:37 - [491] - Quote Beanhead2 wrote: What is the plan for POS towers, will we get isk for them to help buy a citadel? There isn't a plan - there have been only hints... I suspect the most likely (given one->one swops are unlikely as everything is different) are NPC Buy Orders (then we can all cry about how undervalued they are and losing billions on faction mods!)
Nakota Joe Nakota Archron Dusyfe Industries 1	Posted - 2016.01.09 15:44:36 - [492] - Quote maybe I missed it in all the ruckus, but can you actually make isk off of a citadel? I mean with people docking in your station and using your services that you paid to provide and fuel......where is the pay off for the station owner or corp?
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 56	Posted - 2016.01.10 19:51:03 - [493] - Quote Nakota Joe Nakota wrote: maybe I missed it in all the ruckus, but can you actually make isk off of a citadel? I mean with people docking in your station and using your services that you paid to provide and fuel......where is the pay off for the station owner or corp? The only thing I know has been said is that you will be able to decide 'who' can dock. But I am fairly sure that, just as with Outposts, you will be able to charge fees for services - including just docking. So, that would probably apply to: market taxes; repair fees; refining costs; etc
Roberta Gastoni Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 37	Posted - 2016.01.12 12:01:54 - [494] - Quote Any ETA on Structure Advertisement Nexus, Structure Telescope Lens and Structure Acceleration Coils? The Dev Blog said they should have been added around december to "give players time to acquire and research them before the introduction of Citadels" and with the research event we are getting closer to the release. Assuming consistency with the other BPOs, researching the ME/TE in a Hyasyoda Research Lab, it will take 18 days for ME or TE 7, another 25 days to pass from ME 7 to 8 and... probably people will stop there, since it's 59 days for ME 9 and 142 additional days for ME 10
DarkChocolate Thunda Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 0	Posted - 2016.01.16 03:19:38 - [495] - Quote Maybe its been asked and answered before I haven't found an answer that clearly states a through response to my question. Since stations are going away and I'm sitting on a large stack of faction tower mods Bpc's and tower Bpc's I've read that compensation for people with control towers deployed will be paid but nothing about compensation for people with faction Bpc's.
Ninlarra Tounge punching fart boxes 35	Posted - 2016.01.16 07:10:50 - [496] - Quote Sizeof Void wrote: Hmm... I find it interesting that, with one exception, CCP Ytterbium has only been responding to posts by Goons. (The one exception is a TEST post.) Is everyone else's post simply being ignored? Where are the conspiracy trolls when you need them? lol.... Didnt you know? CCP is simply the LLC of the Goons. I mean the CCP guy literally asked the goons wtf they should regarding balence. Its laughable.
Ninlarra Tounge punching fart boxes 35	Posted - 2016.01.16 07:13:40 - [497] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Querns wrote: It's because we actually have relevant questions about small details that are easy and possible to answer. Most of the rest of the posting is complaining. If it makes you feel any better, they didn't answer a few of mine. Other people also have had relevant questions and do get nowhere near the Dev response time that goons have in this thread. So.... it's a fair complaint, even if your questions have all been pertinent. Also get off the elistist high horse bullshit will ya? Youre still some random dude, living in a random place, with random kids and a wife wife doing random everyday things. So ease back.
Asptar Monastair Frontier Adventurers 24	Posted - 2016.01.20 03:24:53 - [498] - Quote It would be nice if the service modules or some related manifestation were visible in space on the citadel when the modules are equipped on the citadel, similar to the turret display mechanic.
Iowa Banshee Fenrir Vangard 59	Posted - 2016.01.20 18:47:02 - [499] - Quote As a small corp wormholer I would like to know if I can still do business in the same way I'm doing it now 1) log on, land at tower in Orca 2) Get out of Orca, leaving it sitting in the bubble. 3) Get into an Epithal / Gas Harvester / Stealth Bomber / Scout ship ... what ever 4) Do my thing then and swap back to Orca DEV's In a Citadel is it true that anyone would be able to get in my Orca and fly it away EDIT: Its a C3
Cat Harkness Twilight Labs Elemental Tide 40	Posted - 2016.01.20 23:37:01 - [500] - Quote Asptar Monastair wrote: It would be nice if the service modules or some related manifestation were visible in space on the citadel when the modules are equipped on the citadel, similar to the turret display mechanic. I believe the Modules will be visible on the structure, at least that is what I remember seeing. But of course that was early WIP, so I guess we will have to wait and see. Cat Harkness CEO Twilight Labs

Zappity Black Aces I N F A M O U S 2624	Posted - 2016.01.21 04:52:06 - [501] - Quote CCP Ytterbium wrote: Ransu Asanari wrote: I'm glad we're finally talking about build components for Citadels. I have to say, it's pretty much what I expected, and that disappoints me somewhat. I'm glad the PI requirements are staying equivalent so there is still demand for products in the PI chain. The plan to use T1 and T2 Salvage will greatly increase the value of salvage from Relic Sites, as well as salvaging wrecks from sites. So the planned change will be a net boost to the value of Relic Sites - but I don't see anything in the devblog on helping fix value for Data Sites. The current Faction POS Tower and Module BPCs are only found in Data Sites via Exploration. Since these will be made obsolete when Citadels come along, I was hoping there would be some mention of how they would be replaced. Since the Citadels are not Faction specific anymore, that precludes the base structure having faction versions. In the devblog it was stated "If and when we release Tech II or faction modules the material build-up will be properly modified to match." So that means there aren't plans to release Faction Citadel Modules to replace Faction POS Modules at this launch? The "High-Tech" items, as well as the Faction Materials (Positron Cords, Electric Conduits) that used to be for building Interfaces for invention before they were removed from the game still have no real use in manufacturing. I was hoping maybe they would find some use in the Sovereignty or Citadel Structure build chain to give them some value. CCP RedDawn stated in the current Exploration Site feedback that there is a plan to replace the POS based drops once Citadels come out, but I don't see anything in this Devblog on how. Could you elaborate, or is this still in the works? Still being worked on Has there been any update to this? Specifically about data site loot being used for the production of citadels and other structures. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Marcus Longfellow Pan Galactic Gargle Blasters Ocularis Inferno 1	Posted - 2016.01.23 00:34:19 - [502] - Quote Is there intention to release information soon about storage capability of the Citadels both ships and items?
Zappity Black Aces I N F A M O U S 2624	Posted - 2016.01.23 01:00:22 - [503] - Quote Marcus Longfellow wrote: Is there intention to release information soon about storage capability of the Citadels both ships and items? There was talk on reddit of another dev blog in a couple of weeks. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Spar Multendor Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 7	Posted - 2016.01.25 00:49:41 - [504] - Quote When can we expect to see Citadels on SiSi?
Jinn Daedric Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2016.01.26 04:00:43 - [505] - Quote From what i have read ,this is just another waste of time,your taking resources away and not providing enough back.Hey its great you want all these things but you are really doing it wrong.It is great you providing something bigger for people to blow up,yeah go content...you still havent fixed various other things in game but your wanting us to go and blow other stuff up to take away from the simple life we live in eve.really if you needed something bigger,scale said item and increase it size then tack on the hitpoints.Why centralize everything?you killed interceptors and entrosis link,which is a great idea,people just hate getting pings when they stuff is attacked....and yes they should form a fleet or whatnot to go after this person...make sure their stuff is good to go then they can go back to whatever their doing.even with people playing the game,its losing life.what will it be this year lets start new player in nullsec,cause that will be where the agents are.oh yeah wait they get shot trying to mission ,but missioning isnt part of eve,no way ,lets talk about pvp or in certain circumstances ganking,whats the point in moving anything through high sec now....You have capped off systems,tweaked things to allow criminals into systems they have no business in since they conduct themselves as "pirates" or in CODE's circumstances "extremists" since they bully people to buy permits,then shoot them,then push this belief that a character that barely plays anymore is a savior,we have only one tool to ward off their proprganda and that is a block button that is ...wait for it.....capped as well. but not all you do is bad.you have brought things to the game that is good.the tag system so that those negative status people can redeem and fly in "normal" space.Great thing,and they can always turn bad again...see they didnt lose anything there.the poco thing was great,however, now we have wasted our iskies and resources on those now didnt we.Ummm,Some of the UI interfaces have improved alot,i think the sun shines too bright it actually hurts my eyes,so i have to keep rotating the view away from the sun but the UI and interfaces has improved.there is alot you have done to improve the game,but lets fix some things instead of bringing us half baked goods,Fozisov was a clear example of this.You bring updates more often which isnt the best idea but it was good,people now have something to look forward to,even if it is half baked.the graphics have been amazing,it really has came along over 11-12 years,but i dont use them cause they do what...slow me down,but graphics is great.this number for estismated value when you loot stuff is complety off,if you take that option out does it make room for you to fix something else DOnt get me wrong,i love playing eve as much as the next person,but your killing it.I have started collecting my stuff to go sell or "firesell" it all (another great idea) cause now its not worth playing ,high sec never has enough resources so you force players to go to low sec and null for these things,(yeah about those wormholes what good are they now...not worth it) low sec is all about pvp and Faction warefare(great place for them but alot of stuff needs work there),which sends people to null sec where it is fill out stupid applications for corps and alliances just to go ratting or mining in "their" space.Most of the time this is pointless cause their is always a large number fleet looking for you just to pod kill you and send you back to highsec ,this is the cycle for a normal player,simply because they traded an item to an opposing corp,or they dont have the pvp experience,or skills they cant join these big alliances so there is no hope of taking sov (Yeah sov,still working on that one guys??) and now you want to put bigger things in space...you making it pointless to use the small stuff like siphons or pocos ,small towers,just for a central collection point.and you want us to help you build one so you can give away the bpos ....come on guys ,your starting to be as bad as the scammers in jita.you even made it sound good like its a lottery.You got ships that dont perform like they should,or even have master levels in skills that have nothing to do with the ship,(GO BIfrost),you have systems that are glitchy,wanting to tell me i have modules that are online,but they are using too much of something,along with numerous other things,with all the updates alot of things are being missed,it cant be the players cause we only pay to play this game,you proclaim player driven but you set rather crappy standards,not low,or poor,fair ,good but crappy.alot of these things your bringing to the game dont do anything for a regular player.worst even you give out infomation (via CCP API) ,you killed off battleclinic,more things are disappearing than your fixing or bringing,you want to ban programs for this and that so why pay for this,it use to be cool,log on hang out roam around for some negative status guys,go back home check on some miners see if they need a hand but now you pit everyone against everyone,you run more of a spy game if anything (yeah cause the fleet posting is just the best way to go ,or wait ..lets go check out twitch for a while and see if we find someone ratting in carrier so we can jump him. Really eve can be a great game.This is my final year playing,all you blokes can check api's and whatnot and see i have paid to play so before i run out of characters to type. Some major breaks, Why is there the possibly of having so many people in one alliance(Goons,duh) you all can never log in the same place so why have this.(not limited to just them)maybe a sov problem Harrassment,CODE clearly uses ingame mechanics to harrass (not limited to just them) does this not violate my right to play a game free from bullies like these guys,or am i just suppose to Pay to stay docked up?? Why do guys not in FW able to join up with other faction to bash fw people? you got a year
Kaivar Lancer Placid Peace Corps 714	Posted - 2016.01.27 14:52:41 - [506] - Quote ^ your stuff, can i have?
Moloney Mass Effect Enterprises 187	Posted - 2016.01.27 15:21:36 - [507] - Quote Hi Conserning docking capabilities: Is it? : Medium = Sub cap & Freighters Large = Sub cap, Freighters, and caps (Dread / Carrier only) XL = Titans & everything else I would like to know as I don't see many WH corporations capable of putting down 700bil + fittings for an XL just to store a few Carriers and Dreadnaughts....
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 2008	Posted - 2016.01.27 23:27:19 - [508] - Quote Zappity wrote: Marcus Longfellow wrote: Is there intention to release information soon about storage capability of the Citadels both ships and items? There was talk on reddit of another dev blog in a couple of weeks. I do wish they'd talk here about it instead of reddit. I don't want to have to crawl through muliple sites for information on game changes that should be on the official forums! I look forward to these coming in but definitely feel there's still a lot of detail missing ...
jerppu2 DeathGames Inc. Nova Co. 1	Posted - 2016.01.28 05:59:23 - [509] - Quote Marcus Longfellow wrote: Is there intention to release information soon about storage capability of the Citadels both ships and items? I have not totally mistaken, Citadels are like stations/outposts when you talk about storage... unlimited item and ship storage. If I recall correctly, here's the source.
Incestuous Criticism 10	Posted - 2016.01.29 19:57:25 - [510] - Quote Edwin Rothbard wrote: The potential for citadels to upend many stale things in Eve is a welcome change. I've poured over the blogs and the related threads, but I still have some questions: Can large/XL be deployed in high security space like regular POSes or will they be limited to null? **Since they can be deployed anywhere, what determines who gets to mine which moon in a system?** If a citadel is in immune mode where it cannot be shot, can the owner still man the guns at shoot at ships in low/null/wh space? where will structure modules be manufactured? Station only? can that be done with one of the existing POS modules? where will the hulls be built? Station only? somewhere else? what happens to old pos/outpost modules? do they become collector's items, refunded, or converted to new structures? what about old bpos like POS and outposts? do they get refunded at npc price, converted, or something else? what happens to faction POS/module bcs? what advantages is there to allow public access to a high sec citadel? can you allow/tax others to use your research/manufacturing/market? can you avoid NPC station taxes/brokers fees if you setup a market in a high sec large/XL citadel? 12 of the 15 structure bpos already exist. you can build them right now. they do not have the new build requirements yet. if you build units today will they get converted to the new units or refunded? IE will a "station market network" module built today work as an input into the new citadels? OK I have tried to read the information pertaining to the implementation of the structures replacing the POS. It maybe just me but not very logical in the structure of providing information. As highlighted above I would like one answer. If a citadel can be deployed anywhere in a system, what will be used to harvest moons. Perhaps moon goo will be removed from the game which will alleviate this past time. We currently use POS's to protect harvestors and silos. I cant imagine a citadel needing to be placed at each moon. Will there be other structures that can be deployed to do these tasks. Speculations, thoughts... has anyone read somewhere some information since multiple platforms are being used to communicate what is happening. Thanks

Freedom7 Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering 5	Posted - 2016.02.10 14:31:28 - [511] - Quote Really Really disappointed that this forum is not CCP's primary communication ..... if I was a conspiracy nut I would say that was a deliberate act to keep us all a bit confused..... CCP PLEASE START TO UPDATE US WITH MORE DETAIL .....
Buzz Orti State War Academy Caldari State 175	Posted - 2016.03.02 19:40:12 - [512] - Quote Extracted from o7: The EVE Online Show - Episode 14 at 14:14 to 14:52 about Citadel billboard. with CCP Edelweiss Software Engineer Builds ship in empty Quafe bottle.
Klatus Doshu Die Kreuzritter Invidia Gloriae Comes 7	Posted - 2016.03.24 05:55:11 - [513] - Quote I have a building related question. At the moment you cannot build the structure components (which will be also used for the citadel) in any POS assembly Array right now. Will that be changed? And can you build the citadel in a POS assembly array? What are the plans? Since no assembly arrays nor production modules are planned for the citadels, it could be quite difficult to set-up a large/XL citadel in a high class wh, or do I miss something? If you can't build L or XL ina POS assembly array you have to find a WH connection big enough for a freighter or? That would be quite complicated or? Is that the intention?
Sabastian Cerabiam Seventh Element Advent of Fate 7	Posted - 2016.03.24 10:07:56 - [514] - Quote I dont remember the exact post but CCP did say you would be able to build one in a POS.
Theo Sotken Mother Knows Best Corporation 43	Posted - 2016.04.06 10:12:35 - [515] - Quote Tau Cabalander wrote: CCP Ytterbium wrote: Sabastian Cerabiam wrote: I wana know whats gona happen with those of us that have POS bpos. Will they get converted to equivalent citadel ones or will we somehow get reimbursed the isk we spent to buy them? When we get rid of Starbases they will be reimbursed, not converted. Please do a fair reimbursement. All my structure BPOs have been researched to ME:10 TE:20. The last level taking a better part of a year, and a cost of several hundred million. They shouldn't be valued at NPC cost! CCP should be consistent in its approach. In the industry 'revamp' a lot of highly researched BPO's were unified and alot of research time and expense was lost. If you had been smart you could and should have researched your BPO's before the change to the 10/20 system like many did, which if you had done under your 'fair reimbursement' you will get paid a huge amount of isk for no work and no investment. Did CCP mess up the industry revamp? I think so but giving huge amounts isk to people who researched them under the old system for peanuts particularly when they failed to reimburse genuinely expensively blueprints is silly. PS. I like you :) and would not insult you. You already know the above, why ask the question?
Sizeof Void Ninja Suicide Squadron 634	Posted - 2016.04.16 06:43:50 - [516] - Quote Regarding the Palatine, has there been any thought/discussion as to creating some logical in-game reason as to why there can only be one of them at any given time? If not, I'd suggest something like this: The Palatine is powered by an ancient Jovian reactor, which was discovered in Thera. The reactor is a one-of-a-kind item, which cannot be analyzed, and therefore cannot be replicated. It is invulnerable to all known forms of damage, and always drops when a Palatine is destroyed. So, in order to build a new Palatine, you would have to not only destroy the current Palatine, but scoop up the Jovian reactor, as well, and put it in your new Palatine. The reactor should be so large that it requires a freighter to scoop it up, thus ensuring more fun in trying to safely get away with it. It should also be impossible to dock at a station with the reactor in your ship, due to the massive amounts of energy it produces, and a ship which has it in its cargohold should remain in space, even when logged out. This guarantees that someone will not be able to just collect it, and store it forever in an NPC station or in a logged off ship. Addendum: The Jovian reactor could be the grand prize for the next AT.
Buzz Orti State War Academy Caldari State 296	Posted - 2016.04.16 06:46:22 - [517] - Quote Sizeof Void wrote: Regarding the Palatine, has there been any thought/discussion as to creating some logical in-game reason as to why there can only be one of them at any given time? If not, I'd suggest something like this: The Palatine is powered by an ancient Jovian reactor, which was discovered in Thera. The reactor is a one-of-a-kind item, which cannot be analyzed, and therefore cannot be replicated. It is invulnerable to all known forms of damage, and always drops when a Palatine is destroyed. So, in order to build a new Palatine, you would have to not only destroy the current Palatine, but scoop up the Jovian reactor, as well, and put it in your new Palatine. The reactor should be so large that it requires a freighter to scoop it up, thus ensuring more fun in trying to safely get away with it. It should also be impossible to dock at a station with the reactor in your ship, due to the massive amounts of energy it produces, and a ship which has it in its cargohold should remain in space, even when logged out. This guarantees that someone will not be able to just collect it, and store it forever in an NPC station or in a logged off ship. Isn't the Palatine you were referring about, the Palladium? Builds ship in empty Quafe bottle.
Dolorous Tremmens Lightspeed Enterprises Goonswarm Federation 152	Posted - 2016.04.25 18:42:29 - [518] - Quote When player built outposts are reimbursed, who will receive the reimbursement? The current sov owners, the corporation that built it or the alliance the corporation was a part of at the time? Get some Eve. Make it yours.
Marcus Tedric Zebra Corp Goonswarm Federation 69	Posted - 2016.04.25 20:10:50 - [519] - Quote Dolorous Tremmens wrote: When player built outposts are reimbursed, who will receive the reimbursement? The current sov owners, the corporation that built it or the alliance the corporation was a part of at the time? The only really sensible logic would be for the currently owning Corp to receive the reimbursement. That said - it might just be simpler to just blow them up - with warning Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
Milla Goodpussy Federal Navy Academy 374	Posted - 2016.05.10 19:18:39 - [520] - Quote Marcus Tedric wrote: Dolorous Tremmens wrote: When player built outposts are reimbursed, who will receive the reimbursement? The current sov owners, the corporation that built it or the alliance the corporation was a part of at the time? The only really sensible logic would be for the currently owning Corp to receive the reimbursement. That said - it might just be simpler to just blow them up - with warning that's a terrible idea.. cause that would allow anyone (mostly the big boys) to come into systems attacking it just to take over stations and receive payment for the stations from ccp.. so that "current owner" crap is all bullchit. i honestly think ccp would do that though cause they lack the brains and have way more fanboyism in fozzie right now to do so.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: [one page]

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