Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
ANTONE1357
Enigmous Prime Manifesto.
3
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 03:37:38 -
[1] - Quote
Wouldn't it be cool if one day you see your structure being hid by the local faction NPC. Them dropping caps, and shooting at your structure. Putting it into reinforcement, and creating timers to respond to making you have to protect even to the local NPC. I see a problem in this game with Citadels being dropped in random. Some corps not even using them, almost a waste and honestly who needs 5 citadels in systems their no longer using. I think this would be a start to something interesting, and why has CCP dropped the ball on this. Think about it, a actually agent NPC being paid to go attack structures, wouldn't that be cool. What do you guys think about something like this, your honest opinion on Citadels littering the game? |
Marcus Binchiette
Federal Vanguard
147
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 03:53:13 -
[2] - Quote
ANTONE1357 wrote:Wouldn't it be cool if one day you see your structure being hid by the local faction NPC. Them dropping caps, and shooting at your structure. Putting it into reinforcement, and creating timers to respond to making you have to protect even to the local NPC. I see a problem in this game with Citadels being dropped in random. Some corps not even using them, almost a waste and honestly who needs 5 citadels in systems their no longer using. I think this would be a start to something interesting, and why has CCP dropped the ball on this. Think about it, a actually agent NPC being paid to go attack structures, wouldn't that be cool. What do you guys think about something like this, your honest opinion on Citadels littering the game?
There are corporations which do this. If you talk to your local mercenary corp I'm sure they'd be able to offer you a reasonable price for doing the job. The whole point of player owned structures is to create player driven content. The idea of offloading this to NPC's because you're too lazy to get off your fat arse and do it doesn't fit with that paradigm. |
ANTONE1357
Enigmous Prime Manifesto.
3
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 04:52:36 -
[3] - Quote
Marcus Binchiette wrote:ANTONE1357 wrote:Wouldn't it be cool if one day you see your structure being hid by the local faction NPC. Them dropping caps, and shooting at your structure. Putting it into reinforcement, and creating timers to respond to making you have to protect even to the local NPC. I see a problem in this game with Citadels being dropped in random. Some corps not even using them, almost a waste and honestly who needs 5 citadels in systems their no longer using. I think this would be a start to something interesting, and why has CCP dropped the ball on this. Think about it, a actually agent NPC being paid to go attack structures, wouldn't that be cool. What do you guys think about something like this, your honest opinion on Citadels littering the game? There are corporations which do this. If you talk to your local mercenary corp I'm sure they'd be able to offer you a reasonable price for doing the job. The whole point of player owned structures is to create player driven content. The idea of offloading this to NPC's because you're too lazy to get off your fat arse and do it doesn't fit with that paradigm.
So tell me how its player driven when one player has 30 citadels not being used in high sec and there are plenty of stations in those systems. NPC's would force a player to respond, there for it to be player driven content. Making you have to defend it. or fuel it and actually manage it. If you don't see a problem with the Citadels being deployed so random and so much and for no real purpose. Then technically its not something you look for in general and well progressing the game in that area might change things. Having actual artificial A.I. NPCS that go after SOV or structures. There's not enough players or time in life, in eve to take out every Citadel that sits in high sec or low sec or null sec. With no fuel and no one to managing it, their just trash sitting there. Not forcing those people to log back in daily to check their system and or surroundings and actually doing something in space. Think about it other then paying "your local merc group", who could or couldn't give you the results. So if my ratting index falls or I'm not actually doing anything to combat the local NPC, now I have a bigger problem. We have NPC mining fleets that escalate, why not having NPC factions that go on the offensive. Its almost like the game cleaning its computer from useless unused memory by clearing out its cookies. Though to think I'm speaking from my ares tells me one thing. You really don't think to far into the future on things. I'm not lazy and my ares may be a little big, but my mind is thinking far better then yours. Thanks for your response and honestly of no help but a point to be heard. |
Johan Civire
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1187
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 06:26:23 -
[4] - Quote
ic what the OP is meaning of this. Indeed i think let me say this if the citadels are more then 30 days inactive the need to self explode so this clean up the afk bases. Not a bad idea tbh. And or remove all citadels in high sec there is no need for that in high sec.
However like someones already mention the local merc can give it a check and clean it up for you for a price offcourse. |
Marcus Binchiette
Federal Vanguard
148
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 07:05:39 -
[5] - Quote
ANTONE1357 wrote:
So tell me how its player driven when one player has 30 citadels not being used in high sec and there are plenty of stations in those systems. NPC's would force a player to respond, there for it to be player driven content. Making you have to defend it. or fuel it and actually manage it. If you don't see a problem with the Citadels being deployed so random and so much and for no real purpose. Then technically its not something you look for in general and well progressing the game in that area might change things. Having actual artificial A.I. NPCS that go after SOV or structures. There's not enough players or time in life, in eve to take out every Citadel that sits in high sec or low sec or null sec. With no fuel and no one to managing it, their just trash sitting there. Not forcing those people to log back in daily to check their system and or surroundings and actually doing something in space. Think about it other then paying "your local merc group", who could or couldn't give you the results. So if my ratting index falls or I'm not actually doing anything to combat the local NPC, now I have a bigger problem. We have NPC mining fleets that escalate, why not having NPC factions that go on the offensive. Its almost like the game cleaning its computer from useless unused memory by clearing out its cookies. Though to think I'm speaking from my ares tells me one thing. You really don't think to far into the future on things. I'm not lazy and my ares may be a little big, but my mind is thinking far better then yours. Thanks for your response and honestly of no help but a point to be heard.
1. It's player owned. 2. If you don't like them then blow them up 3. There is a natural requirement to manage structures in lowsec and nulsec. Try living there. 4. I didn't say that I have no problem with it.... Because when I do, I blow them up. 5. You don't have to take out every single citadel. You only need to take out the ones in the systems you live in. 6. Even when unfuelled citadels can store your goods, they can be used to refit, teather and repair. Even citadels which are undefended and have no service modules can be used to garrison entire fleets of warships for launching attacks. They are always useful. 7. Your local mercs CAN give you the results... and if they can't that obviously means that the citadel was not quite so abandoned as you originally thought. 8. The game needs to be taylored to a variety of players, who can have varying degrees of real life time commitments. Personally, if I go on holidays, I'd like to have my station and assets contained therein to be still there when I get back. 9. Please don't presume to know what I am or am not thinking. 10. Please see point 9.
I appreicate your point of view, but, to be perfectly honest if you don't like how things work out in this game it's upto you to change it. Please don't write these stupid CCPlease arguments asking for people to fix things which you are too lazy to fix - and especially not when you have the means to fix them... If you can't be bothered, or don't have the time to blow up all those citadels, then, it's obviously not that important for you. |
Ioci
Bad Girl Posse Somethin Awfull Forums
619
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 07:06:22 -
[6] - Quote
I'm sure whoever put them up had grand plans but in the end they were just more dead end roads to nowhere. Rather than remove them, give them purpose because ultimately that's what so many mechanics in EVE lack. Purpose. The emergent content card has been rode hard and put away wet too many times. No matter your motive for asking to have these removed be it to 'clean up the space' or just so you can add your own, I think you will find they just don't matter in the end. Just like the off line POS clutter was the product of a speculation that never came to pass, Citadel placement will come and go and won't matter.
If CCP hasn't given up on the dark lady of EVE then they need to focus on motive in New Eden, not mechanic. If they have no motivation themselves and are just buying time, I'm talking out of my ass, it doesn't matter.
R.I.P. Vile Rat
|
Cypherous
Liberty Rogues Aprilon Dynasty
310
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 07:15:57 -
[7] - Quote
So, important question, why and how do these unused citadels affect you exactly?
If they are unused they can't really impact your gameplay other than adding an overview entry if you're near them or by adding a small addition to the right click menu in space, also, high sec ones do have a use, people are using them to sell things with less tax on the market, they can also be used to avoid jump clone timers and for providing better refining services for miners, just because YOU don't have a use for them doesn't mean someone else doesn't have a use for them :P |
erg cz
ErgoDron
604
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 08:22:05 -
[8] - Quote
Make citadels in high sec pay with race charts to be CONCORD protected. You do not pay with chart - anyone can shoot your citadel in vulnerability window without concord interferense. Content created, citadel still operating as designed, abandoned citadels are removed from the system by players. Everyone is happy.
Absolutely free head start for newcomers!. Just click the link and get extra 250 000 SP!
|
Yarosara Ruil
Haighare Pirates
1052
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 09:16:09 -
[9] - Quote
Just remove them from the Overview unless in range like POSes and we can go back to not giving a rat's tail about them.
I mean, I refuse to believe there are more Citadels than there are POSes! |
Magnet Trade
Magnet Construction Ltd
0
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 10:02:18 -
[10] - Quote
Cypherous wrote:So, important question, why and how do these unused citadels affect you exactly?
If they are unused they can't really impact your gameplay other than adding an overview entry if you're near them or by adding a small addition to the right click menu in space, also, high sec ones do have a use, people are using them to sell things with less tax on the market, they can also be used to avoid jump clone timers and for providing better refining services for miners, just because YOU don't have a use for them doesn't mean someone else doesn't have a use for them :P
There are an aweful lot of them atm, doing nothing at all and not even fueled, so on that part I agree with the op. NPC's might be a good idea if they are left unfueled for a month, I kinda like this idea tbh but it needs more thought.
Avoid Jump Clone timers? I never knew that, thats pretty cool. Not sure it would work if the structure was not fueled? and also refining and compression does not work if unfueled, and there are an awful lot just collecting dust. |
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
6756
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 11:43:17 -
[11] - Quote
Can you please define unused with regards to citadels?
Woo! CSM XI!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
erg cz
ErgoDron
605
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 11:47:01 -
[12] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Can you please define unused with regards to citadels?
Good point. I think the only way how to defentely tell, that citadel is abandoned is the special "unprotected" state, when citadel is not protected by CONCORD any more, cause owner did not add faction charts into correspondent faction charts bay. I am speaking about high sec only, of cause.
Absolutely free head start for newcomers!. Just click the link and get extra 250 000 SP!
|
Magnet Trade
Magnet Construction Ltd
0
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 12:16:49 -
[13] - Quote
Yarosara Ruil wrote:Just remove them from the Overview unless in range like POSes and we can go back to not giving a rat's tail about them.
I mean, I refuse to believe there are more Citadels than there are POSes!
Soon, very soon. I foresee a bright future for the unused Citadels, there are at least 15 where I live, and thats without looking. |
Kixx
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
8
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 15:40:06 -
[14] - Quote
With the killing of all the structures in EvE no longer giving any loot at all, I don't blame people for not killing them anymore.
In fact the people who now go play in null or go around bashing these things, just look dumber than ever. Not only is there no reward for the risk anymore, you literally are wasting money on ammo to destroy them.
I don't have to see statistics to know null and wormholes both will take a major hit in activity when there is no reward for an activity.
EvE has become that game that says it loves pvp and conflict, until you look at the mechanics and realize no they don't, they are more interested in asset security which is game breaking as its totally unbelievable mechanics and just spreading Hi sec to everywhere.
Risk? WHAT RISK? LOL
see you in Albion |
Photrius Pyrelius
University of Caille Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 16:24:15 -
[15] - Quote
Kixx wrote:EvE has become that game that says it loves pvp and conflict, until you look at the mechanics and realize no they don't, they are more interested in asset security which is game breaking as its totally unbelievable mechanics and just spreading Hi sec to everywhere.
I would expect this to be catering to their player-base, though you and I, individually, may disagree with it. People like amassing wealth. People like that wealth to be secure. People don't like losing millions/billions/trillions of ISK, and people who do lose vast fortunes (proportional to their own total assets, not necessarily in an absolute sense) are quite prone to "rage-quit", which means $15/mo less for CCP.
Now, don't mistake me, I'm not saying CCP are dumb/stupid/money-grubbing because they cater to their players - not at all. They are, after all, a business, and for this game that we all love to remain extant, they need to maintain a sufficient income. If there is any fault, it lies with players who have fooled themselves into thinking they like this game when they can't handle the harsh realities of it, so they petition CCP to change the fundamental nature of it. I dunno about you, but that doesn't sound like "love" to me.
All because they couldn't take the simplest of advice: when you undock, consider that ship and cargo destroyed. If you make it back to dock, congratulations, you just got a shiny new ship! Or, in simpler phrasing: don't fly what you can't afford to lose. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
3493
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 16:38:05 -
[16] - Quote
Johan Civire wrote:ic what the OP is meaning of this. Indeed i think let me say this if the citadels are more then 30 days inactive the need to self explode so this clean up the afk bases. Not a bad idea tbh. And or remove all citadels in high sec there is no need for that in high sec.
However like someones already mention the local merc can give it a check and clean it up for you for a price offcourse.
Of course abandoned citadels should be destroyed automatically. Once again, CCP underestimates the player base's penchant for messing with game mechanics.
From common sense view, the strain on CCP's hardware and software would be greatly lessened if citadels that had run out of fuel say, somewhere between 45 and 60 days, were incinerated.
CCP could say the unattended reactors inside the citadels went critical. |
Spookyjay
Air The Initiative.
7
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 17:56:34 -
[17] - Quote
I could fix this game in 6 months. Or at least lay the ground work. Actually I can do it now.
1. Limit the number of player citadels per system to 5. 2. move sov over to a hub/spoke system with the hubs being in fortizars and spokes being in astrahaus. 3. limit the number of systems you can have sov in without a hub. So small groups can claim sov but big groups need big assets on field to claim large areas. 4. Keepstars require a hub in every surrounding system. if a keepstar loses all its hubs. then it loses a large amount of ehp. 5. Move war declarations to a structure. So that people declaring war must put something on the field top defend. If they can not defend it the war ends. (Gives the declared party a actual way to end the war) (Stops troll wars). 6. Structures will have a fuel cost. If a citadel is unfueled. it goes offline and can be killed without a timer and has no weapons and no tether. Also makes them vulnerable to spied and general mischief.
Fire Fozzy for almost destroying eve through incompetent game design.
sure. my ideas not perfect. but its 1000% times better than fozzy sov. It makes people fight for space. And it stops spam of structure.. And fixes the age old war issues. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3283
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 18:06:52 -
[18] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
From common sense view, the strain on CCP's hardware and software would be greatly lessened if citadels that had run out of fuel say, somewhere between 45 and 60 days, were incinerated.
lolwut.
You should probably stick to your tinfoil hat conspiracy theories, you're laughably out of your depth at this point.
Idle citadels consume computing resources at a rate somewhere between, "nil" and "****-all".
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
2700
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 19:15:17 -
[19] - Quote
The answer is simple and I have suggested this with POSs as well. You should be able to hack any structure left un-fueled for 30 days or more. Hack it, make it yours, then refuel it or unanchor it and steal it. Folks would start paying attention if they new someone could walk off with it if it is ignored!
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3285
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 20:18:46 -
[20] - Quote
Issler Dainze wrote:The answer is simple and I have suggested this with POSs as well. You should be able to hack any structure left un-fueled for 30 days or more. Hack it, make it yours, then refuel it or unanchor it and steal it. Folks would start paying attention if they new someone could walk off with it if it is ignored!
Nah, that's a ****** idea that starts with the presumption that you deserve to gain something. You don't.
It would be adequate to have a baseline fuel requirement that overlaps with service modules (e.g., If a medium requires a baseline fuel burn of 10/hr, and has no services installed, it burns 10/hr. With a single module installed that requires 5 per hour, the cit still burns 10 per hour. If it has service installed burning 12/hr, it burns 12/hr.). Unfueled structures are stuck on vulnerable, and get a single 24 hour reinforcement cycle.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
|
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
1707
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 20:42:18 -
[21] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Can you please define unused with regards to citadels? Run out of fuel for more than a month and no player of the owning corp has docked within the last 30 days.
Remove standings and insurance.
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
6756
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 21:37:05 -
[22] - Quote
Mara Pahrdi wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:Can you please define unused with regards to citadels? Run out of fuel for more than a month and no player of the owning corp has docked within the last 30 days.
So really 'no player of the owning corp has docked'.
Because citadels have no fuel burn, if they have no online service modules.
(I've had discussions about this with various people)
Woo! CSM XI!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Spookyjay
Air The Initiative.
8
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 22:29:03 -
[23] - Quote
GIVE THEM FREAKING FUEL BURN. honest to god. I do wonder if the devs and half of CSM even play this game any more. Im pretty sure they just think they do. But they spend so much time in bureaucratic talking about this game they don't really. |
Malphas Vynneve
Apple of Discord Straight Jacket Bears
30
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 23:03:09 -
[24] - Quote
ANTONE1357 wrote:
So tell me how its player driven when one player has 30 citadels not being used in high sec and there are plenty of stations in those systems. NPC's would force a player to respond, there for it to be player driven content. Making you have to defend it. or fuel it and actually manage it. If you don't see a problem with the Citadels being deployed so random and so much and for no real purpose. Then technically its not something you look for in general and well progressing the game in that area might change things. Having actual artificial A.I. NPCS that go after SOV or structures. There's not enough players or time in life, in eve to take out every Citadel that sits in high sec or low sec or null sec. With no fuel and no one to managing it, their just trash sitting there. Not forcing those people to log back in daily to check their system and or surroundings and actually doing something in space. Think about it other then paying "your local merc group", who could or couldn't give you the results. So if my ratting index falls or I'm not actually doing anything to combat the local NPC, now I have a bigger problem. We have NPC mining fleets that escalate, why not having NPC factions that go on the offensive. Its almost like the game cleaning its computer from useless unused memory by clearing out its cookies. Though to think I'm speaking from my ares tells me one thing. You really don't think to far into the future on things. I'm not lazy and my ares may be a little big, but my mind is thinking far better then yours. Thanks for your response and honestly of no help but a point to be heard.
This has been pretty well addressed, but i'm not above beating the dead horse.
If you don't see a problem with citadels being deployed so random and so much, then you're probably not A.) Trying to put a citadel there, yourself. B.) OCD about your overview, in which case, remove them from your overview. C.) just generally unhappy with highsec life, in which case, it's about time you moved to null.
Also, did you not consider the tactical advantage of the fact that if one person puts up a citadel somewhere, it hinders another person's ability to put up a citadel there; in that exact spot. For whatever strategic advantage a citadel's location may bring, occupying that space takes it away from someone else. So, what you see as useless, random, abandoned citadels, might actually just be strategically placed "citadel blockers". I mean, that's just a moment's though. Probably wrong, but you get the idea. |
Malphas Vynneve
Apple of Discord Straight Jacket Bears
30
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 23:13:54 -
[25] - Quote
I'm just sayin, if this were all real and you were really in space and all that, lets say there actually was a bunch of abandoned citadels all over highsec. What would you do? Since unfit citadels are easy to kill and burn no fuel, what would you do? If you don't blow it up, it'll just float there. You gonna pray to the CCP Gods to just "remove " them or magically burn fuel for nothing? Ask concord to allow you to aggress a corporation without having been aggressed first or legally declaring war? Non-protecting, all punishing concord is probably not gonna sit too well with that idea. |
Kixx
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 23:23:25 -
[26] - Quote
Normally in EvE when we don't like something somewhere we just shoot it.
But that was before when it actually dropped loot.
Exactly what do I get for killing citadels?
Now you have to use a whole different game breaking solution of asking for someway to remove them to fix the last game breaking solution of making items magically float to a new station.
Nice direction this game is headed. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
3493
|
Posted - 2017.07.18 23:34:00 -
[27] - Quote
Spookyjay wrote:GIVE THEM FREAKING FUEL BURN. honest to god. I do wonder if the devs and half of CSM even play this game any more. Im pretty sure they just think they do. But they spend so much time in bureaucratic talking about this game they don't really.
You have to realize that a good chunk of the CSM DID think this through. They realized that by littering their space with structures that had zero maintenance cost, but could be fired up at a moment's notice, they could create an impregnable defence.
And that is what is happening in null sec. Now, whether the dev's were complicit it in this plan, or just out-thought by the null sec cartels, that is up for debate. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
6756
|
Posted - 2017.07.19 00:32:59 -
[28] - Quote
Spookyjay wrote:GIVE THEM FREAKING FUEL BURN. honest to god. I do wonder if the devs and half of CSM even play this game any more. Im pretty sure they just think they do. But they spend so much time in bureaucratic talking about this game they don't really.
tbh, this is something I've suggested.
Please don't assume that we're not talking to CCP about things just because we're not yelling about something in public.
Though the fuel burn I'd prefer isn't a flat cost. it's a minimum. So if you're running services, it doesn't increase your costs. Just sets a minimum.
Woo! CSM XI!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
3493
|
Posted - 2017.07.19 02:00:20 -
[29] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Spookyjay wrote:GIVE THEM FREAKING FUEL BURN. honest to god. I do wonder if the devs and half of CSM even play this game any more. Im pretty sure they just think they do. But they spend so much time in bureaucratic talking about this game they don't really. tbh, this is something I've suggested. Please don't assume that we're not talking to CCP about things just because we're not yelling about something in public. Though the fuel burn I'd prefer isn't a flat cost. it's a minimum. So if you're running services, it doesn't increase your costs. Just sets a minimum.
These things have been in space for months. They have been creating a problem weeks after they were introduced, and it is only going to get worse. The null sec cartels love them.
And CCP has made it clear that they have other priorities, like the idiotic alliance tourney.
You say that you suggested that they should have a fuel cost. I believe you. But you are not part of the null sec cartel bloc, but the very tiny minority of the CSM that is not run by the cartels.
So to expect your voice to be listened to, sorry, can't see it. |
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
3556
|
Posted - 2017.07.19 06:41:36 -
[30] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Please don't assume that we're not talking to CCP about things just because we're not yelling about something in public. Well to be fair to that poster, the CSM-CCP interactions are very opaque, intentionally that is, and it is not easy for an outsider to see what input their representatives have given. Judging from the things that slip through the cracks, the CSM does miss things and/or CCP ignores you guys on semi-regular basis for whatever reason and we have no way of knowing which it is.
I am trying to cut back on my back-seat game designing, and pontificating in general, but I am with Spookyjay there: just give them some freakin' fuel. This problem of accumulation of abandoned structures, and the ability to spam them everywhere, was pointed out to the design team on many occasions and was clearly heard, but Ytterbium and friends wanted to make them as easy to use and maintain as possible and ignored these concerns. I don't blame the CSM for this, and like most choices that have negative impacts, it was made with good intentions (that is to reduce the complaints from the few players whose role it is to refuel POS networks for large organizations). But honestly, the current imbalance is so predictable, and we have perfectly good paradigm for structure abandonment with POSes and their fuels, that I pains me to see such choices made by a game developer with as much experience as CCP should have.
Make fuelling as cheap and easy as you would like, but there needs to be some way for abandoned structures, either owned by players who have quit or by organizations that have been evicted from a space, to be much, much easier to remove. These things are suppose to be conflict and content generators, not time sinks that waste 1.5 hours times 5 people or more to get rid of, often in the middle of the night or work day. That is way too much tedium for an undefended structure.
The 8 Golden Rules of Eve
Why Do They Gank?
|
|
Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries VOID Intergalactic Forces
443
|
Posted - 2017.07.19 13:04:54 -
[31] - Quote
they problem with cleaning it up is it takes a week to due it thanks to the non-fuel consuming 2 timers we get to have. also if theres no point in having a citadel in empire, there was never a reason to have a pos.
"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
|
Spookyjay
Air The Initiative.
8
|
Posted - 2017.07.19 13:49:55 -
[32] - Quote
Yea maybe its about time people started yelling in public. Especially the CSM. The CSM was created to stop ridiculous development choices and get the wish of the players across. Instead its become a bureaucratic crap heap full of players with their own agendas that actually probably holds up some development. Fopr example. The NC guy who wants to nerf mjd's. Literally the 1 thing that has made a change to the landscape of the battlefield in years. And he wants it removed because it hurts the blob. He should be kicked off CSM for that. it's entirely negative as breaking the blob should be one of CCP top priorities as its literally the stagnation that will slowly kill this game.
The Sov system is the other part of that stagnation. NOTHING is worth fighting for. Citadels are destroying tactical gameplay and fozzy sov is true cancer. a growing festering lump at the core of this games mechanics. IT IS TIME PEOPLE SHOUT AND SCREAM IN PUBLIC. Because it seems to be the only way CCP realise something needs fixing immediately. Players shouting and screaming in public are like EVE signs of illness. CCP heavy handed forum moderation and CSM have effectively killed EVE being able to show it's developers something is wrong and it is ill. |
Peta Chieve
White Partyhat Headquarters
4
|
Posted - 2017.07.21 08:49:37 -
[33] - Quote
I think an interesting way to fix this issue aswell as balance cits would be to introduce a mechanic that links cit capacitor, fuel and rf timers.
Here's how, Citadels have a set amount of cap that they need to have in reserves, in order to go into reinforced mode, say 35%. If the structure is below that value when the attacking force breaches the shields, armor or hull, the citadel does not go into rf. This means citadels cannot spam bombs and webs relentlessly without some sort of trade off. Then make it so that if a structure runs out of fuel, it cannot regen it's cap at all and sits at 0 until refueled. Through this, structures that are unfueled can be ground down in the same way that offline towers can be. Then make it so that structures destroyed without fuel in them, drop all the loot within it.
Proud CEO of White Partyhat Trading Company
To contact us, feel free to join our discord: White Partyhat Trading Company
|
Henry Plantgenet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
228
|
Posted - 2017.07.21 09:34:35 -
[34] - Quote
If you give them a fuel burn it's also a good idea to have similar to current POS mechanics.
Where if the fuel runs out you can blow it up in one go and don't need 3 reinforcement timers. |
Ebony Texas
The Knights Armada Sev3rance
82
|
Posted - 2017.07.21 15:25:57 -
[35] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Spookyjay wrote:GIVE THEM FREAKING FUEL BURN. honest to god. I do wonder if the devs and half of CSM even play this game any more. Im pretty sure they just think they do. But they spend so much time in bureaucratic talking about this game they don't really. tbh, this is something I've suggested. Please don't assume that we're not talking to CCP about things just because we're not yelling about something in public. Though the fuel burn I'd prefer isn't a flat cost. it's a minimum. So if you're running services, it doesn't increase your costs. Just sets a minimum.
Steve,
Seriously dude I know you work hard on the csm, but seriously the citadel deployment and its issues have been incredibly denied.. there should have been standings requirements to deploy in high sec.. I don't know what in living hell ccp fozz-bird was thinking to allow this mess but seriously...something has to be done.
its also totally bullchit to be able to deploy a fawking citadel in sov owned null sec without being part of an alliance as well.
you and your peers have failed us all.. |
Spookyjay
Air The Initiative.
10
|
Posted - 2017.07.21 15:58:10 -
[36] - Quote
There is just no excuse for the current state of Sov and structure. The problems with them have been pointed out since day 1 of their announcement. It's exactly the same as with incarna when me and others were telling CCP it was a crap idea. CCP don't listen. But now they are even worse. Because now they have the CSM between them and the players, so the player they should be listening too are even more ignored. Instead what they have is a bunch of figure heads of EVE telling them what they want.
Lets put it in simple contexts. If the core is broken, every other aspect of the game will wither. And right now the core is more broken than it's ever been. |
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
2702
|
Posted - 2017.07.21 19:25:09 -
[37] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Issler Dainze wrote:The answer is simple and I have suggested this with POSs as well. You should be able to hack any structure left un-fueled for 30 days or more. Hack it, make it yours, then refuel it or unanchor it and steal it. Folks would start paying attention if they new someone could walk off with it if it is ignored!
Nah, that's a ****** idea that starts with the presumption that you deserve to gain something. You don't. It would be adequate to have a baseline fuel requirement that overlaps with service modules (e.g., If a medium requires a baseline fuel burn of 10/hr, and has no services installed, it burns 10/hr. With a single module installed that requires 5 per hour, the cit still burns 10 per hour. If it has service installed burning 12/hr, it burns 12/hr.). Unfueled structures are stuck on vulnerable, and get a single 24 hour reinforcement cycle.
And that is a ****** reply. Why am I saying I "gain" something. I didn't talk about the details to hack an abandoned structure. Something left un-serviced for a month should be subject to risk. What you shouldn't be able to assume is something left in space indefinitely remains safe. |
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
1709
|
Posted - 2017.07.21 21:55:35 -
[38] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Mara Pahrdi wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:Can you please define unused with regards to citadels? Run out of fuel for more than a month and no player of the owning corp has docked within the last 30 days. So really 'no player of the owning corp has docked'. Because citadels have no fuel burn, if they have no online service modules. (I've had discussions about this with various people) I'm well aware of the fact. I never calculated how much fuel it takes to run a service module though, so I cannot tell, whether the fuel hold would keep a single module running for a month or two.
I'd be fine with a single module running on fuel for two months and no player docking though. As long as there's a minimum of attention devoted to the structure, it should be fine.
Structures, that are not serviced or used at all though, should decay and go poof within something of 4 to six months.
Remove standings and insurance.
|
ANTONE1357
Enigmous Prime Manifesto.
4
|
Posted - 2017.07.22 04:56:01 -
[39] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Can you please define unused with regards to citadels?
So how is a Citadel that is not being used in regards to activity and fuel being inputted confusing to you and mostly everyone that doesn't understand and see why this is a problem. Still allowing a citadel with the capability's of tethering, corp offices and fitting modules on ships is a problem. If a POS. ran out of fuel then basically your not able to use it there's no reinforcement timer if your trying to hit it. You have three timers to reinforcement a unused Citadel that is not fueled. Come on your the CSM to CCP and the actually players voice. Both you and I know there is an issue with the mechanics of this, and really me addressing this to CCP in my header is a great way to get the needed discussion going. I hoped this would bring attention and honestly it Is a topic that is well needed to be addressed. I see the big problem that is needing in the restructure of structures and the mechanics behind them. But a Citadel that has no fuel should not give you any benefits as to storage, repairing, fitting mods, offices, tethering, docking, ext. Put some Ideas as to what you want to change about structures with no fuel and maybe CSM and CCP will fix it. . I like to see this game take on a new light, and forces players who have valuables anchored structures in space have to log in everyday and maintained their structures and fuel them. Also ratting and keep those local factions at bay or maybe they hit your structures that you don't pay attention too would be a fun part of the game. Tower's and Citadels that's are offline or have no fuel should go poof if their not fueled for over months definitely go poof. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
6757
|
Posted - 2017.07.22 15:33:43 -
[40] - Quote
ANTONE1357 wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:Can you please define unused with regards to citadels? So how is a Citadel that is not being used in regards to activity and fuel being inputted confusing to you and mostly everyone that doesn't understand and see why this is a problem. Still allowing a citadel with the capability's of tethering, corp offices and fitting modules on ships is a problem. If a POS. ran out of fuel then basically your not able to use it there's no reinforcement timer if your trying to hit it. You have three timers to reinforcement a unused Citadel that is not fueled. Come on your the CSM to CCP and the actually players voice. Both you and I know there is an issue with the mechanics of this, and really me addressing this to CCP in my header is a great way to get the needed discussion going. I hoped this would bring attention and honestly it Is a topic that is well needed to be addressed. I see the big problem that is needing in the restructure of structures and the mechanics behind them. But a Citadel that has no fuel should not give you any benefits as to storage, repairing, fitting mods, offices, tethering, docking, ext. Put some Ideas as to what you want to change about structures with no fuel and maybe CSM and CCP will fix it. . I like to see this game take on a new light, and forces players who have valuables anchored structures in space have to log in everyday and maintained their structures and fuel them. Also ratting and keep those local factions at bay or maybe they hit your structures that you don't pay attention too would be a fun part of the game. Tower's and Citadels that's are offline or have no fuel should go poof if their not fueled for over months definitely go poof.
Citadels don't _require_ fuel.
If they have no service modules, they don't use any. So put a single fuel block into them, and they're fueled forever.
Or you can manually offline all the fitted modules, and fuel will stick around.
Put in a quantity of fuel which isn't evenly divided by the quantity it burns, and you'll have the service modules offlining, and fuel being left.
You begin to see why more definition is required?
Woo! CSM XI!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
|
Worgen Fratmon
Netflix and Kill Digital Vendetta
4
|
Posted - 2017.07.23 02:45:28 -
[41] - Quote
Require them to use fuel for any operation, like fitting, hangars, weapons, shield, reinforcement. Require this fuel before the services can be fueled or activated. Require strontium for reinforcement. |
Fluffy Moe
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
26
|
Posted - 2017.07.23 05:08:52 -
[42] - Quote
Marcus Binchiette wrote:ANTONE1357 wrote:Wouldn't it be cool if one day you see your structure being hid by the local faction NPC. Them dropping caps, and shooting at your structure. Putting it into reinforcement, and creating timers to respond to making you have to protect even to the local NPC. I see a problem in this game with Citadels being dropped in random. Some corps not even using them, almost a waste and honestly who needs 5 citadels in systems their no longer using. I think this would be a start to something interesting, and why has CCP dropped the ball on this. Think about it, a actually agent NPC being paid to go attack structures, wouldn't that be cool. What do you guys think about something like this, your honest opinion on Citadels littering the game? There are corporations which do this. If you talk to your local mercenary corp I'm sure they'd be able to offer you a reasonable price for doing the job. The whole point of player owned structures is to create player driven content. The idea of offloading this to NPC's because you're too lazy to get off your fat arse and do it doesn't fit with that paradigm.
Moot point. I actually tried to rally some people up for it but the merc corps you mention kinda suck or want prices that are so exurberant they are completely and utterly unusable. And yes, there are wayyyyyyy too many citadels. All they do now is basically spam your overview and they're being used as placeholders to hold real estate space more or less for sale or investment.
O and inb4 "you can remove them from overview", yea, if you never venture out to low / null and never need to actually see them to know which one is which, otherwise no you can't. I would like to see them blown up just for this reason alone, not to mention the other reasons.
Just way too many of them, too much citadel spam, they're as bad as caps in null, if not even worse at this point.
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6757
|
Posted - 2017.07.23 19:51:53 -
[43] - Quote
ANTONE1357 wrote:Wouldn't it be cool if one day you see your structure being hit by the local faction NPC. Them dropping caps, and shooting at your structure. Putting it into reinforcement and creating timers for you to respond too. Making you have to protect your assets even to the local NPC factions. I see a problem in this game with Citadels being dropped in random. Some corps not even using them, almost a waste and honestly who needs 5 citadels in systems their no longer using. I think this would be a start to something interesting, and why has CCP dropped the ball on this. Think about it, a actually agent NPC being paid to go attack structures, wouldn't that be cool. What do you guys think about something like this, your honest opinion on Citadels littering the game?
This is a player driven game, not a game driven my NPCs or CCP. You want to see caps killing stuff...get to work. Build up your network of in game contacts, start a corporation, alliance, etc. Or join such an organization and motivate them to do this.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers EVEolution.
659
|
Posted - 2017.07.24 09:40:53 -
[44] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Spookyjay wrote:GIVE THEM FREAKING FUEL BURN. honest to god. I do wonder if the devs and half of CSM even play this game any more. Im pretty sure they just think they do. But they spend so much time in bureaucratic talking about this game they don't really. tbh, this is something I've suggested. Please don't assume that we're not talking to CCP about things just because we're not yelling about something in public. Though the fuel burn I'd prefer isn't a flat cost. it's a minimum. So if you're running services, it doesn't increase your costs. Just sets a minimum.
was never happy with the reverse order of things with them, should have been x amount of fuel per hour end of, once fueled your fittings are limited only by cpu and power grid. just like a pos.
leaves them open to be used as unfueled no servive needed deployment points. cheap as peanuts too. which leads to them being deployed in the way they are. numbers will only rise i'm sure. |
Doddy
Excidium.
965
|
Posted - 2017.07.25 03:29:55 -
[45] - Quote
I don't get what this thread is about? If a Citadel is unused why does it bother you? If it does bother you why don't you kill it and make some isk? |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |