These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Wormholes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

new POSes and wormholes - what do w-space dwellers need?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Malken
Sleiipniir
#141 - 2012-08-11 19:06:59 UTC
and to those wanting clone access in WH space all i can say is that you are nuts.

podding people is a way to remove people from the WH and a direct meter on winning the fight as they have helluva lot harder to get back into the fight for said WH.


☻/ /▌ / \
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#142 - 2012-08-12 00:16:15 UTC
Sorry if someone has already said this but i don't think it will matter if we can't tell if the new POS's are offline or not, using d-scan.

Haven't people been asking for the ability to salvage/hack/unanchor abandoned POS's for a while now?

If they let us do that there won't be an issue because nobody is going to intentionally leave a place holder pos somewhere if it can be stolen.



The wishlist is pretty much complete...
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#143 - 2012-08-12 00:21:55 UTC
Malken wrote:
and to those wanting clone access in WH space all i can say is that you are nuts.

podding people is a way to remove people from the WH and a direct meter on winning the fight as they have helluva lot harder to get back into the fight for said WH.




I think the majority of people who want clones in wh space aren't thinking about getting podded and waking up back in wh space, but rather about the ability to switch implants.
Zedah Zoid
Good Eats
#144 - 2012-08-12 00:30:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Zedah Zoid
Bane Nucleus wrote:
Gnaw LF wrote:



People might not like to fight against the UI but what they love to do is fight against each other. You have multiple pages of explanations and discussions on how the changes proposed in CSM minutes will reduce the potential for fun fights. Might I recommend that you focus on that? Tell us how new POSes and how your ideas will bring us more pew instead of little gimmicks like Contracts and Markets.


THIS. 99% of the people in wormhole space don't give a rats rectum about docking, markets, etc... We care about changing T3 subs, making pos security better and having a place for us to store our crap. Forcefields don't need to be gone for that to happen. Docking doesn't need to take place for that to happen. It honestly seems like CCP wants to reinvent the wheel, when it isn't really needed.

The whole K.I.S.S attitude should apply here (Keep It Simple Stupid) Wormhole space is one of the few places in Eve that isn't butchered to all hell. Let's keep it that way.


I honestly don't know how to say it much better than this. Mooring the active ship is fine with me. I don't care if I can't see inactive ships. But no docking period. It just makes no sense. If you guys want to have a docking module for a POS that's fine. Just tie it to Sov like TCU's and don't allow that module in WH space. Keep our SMA's and add mooring if you want. I have no problem with some change here but it is clear nobody wants timers and docking games in WH space. And don't make docking available in C5 and C6's but not in C1-C4's.

Please do a blog post about this Twostep because based on what you've said here and what's in the minutes this is not looking good. You folks are basically ignoring your voting base. Nobody(well mostly nobody) is up in arms yet or screaming for heads while carrying pitchforks and torches. We know this is still fluid. But better to get the points across now rather than wait for it to show up on Sisi and be told, "Oh sorry. We can't change that now, it's too far along."
Soon Shin
Scarlet Weather Rhapsody
#145 - 2012-08-12 05:29:58 UTC
I must agree with the sentiment here. As nice it would be to have a station in wormhole space for convenience, I would rather not have to deal with docking games. (unless ofcourse the pos module that he's hiding in doesn't have reinforce timer and a not a lot of hitpoints)


Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#146 - 2012-08-12 10:54:42 UTC
Pink Marshmellow wrote:
Thinking about Forcefields, what do you think about its removal?

Im a bit half and half about the situation. The radius of forcefields around poses makes a lot of weapon systems and ships unable to hit the tower.

But at the same time it provides a niche for certain weapon systems like torpedoes.

This is currently the only reason I can see behind getting rid of forcefields as they are.

But surely it could be better fixed by tweaking the code so you do something crazy.... like shooting the outside of the forcefield!
Surely it can't be *that* hard to modify the force field code like this.

*shrugs*
Dino Boff
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#147 - 2012-08-12 11:00:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Dino Boff
IMHO, docking games will be better than force field games. By games, I mean when the defender get out of the POS to alpha a weak ship or to kill a bubble but don't want to commit to a fight.

Currently, with force field, the defender will get some few hundred meters out of the force field and shoot something. The siege fleet will rep what the defender is shooting and send some ships over to try to bump him off. As soon as a ship come too close, the defender get back in and try again on the opposite side. it's quite boring, but one of the less boring of POS bashing activities, so we still play it even if the chance to bump him off correctly and in time is so low.

With a dock, the defender undock, shoot for some time until he need to deaggress to redock. The sieging fleet has one minute to bump out of the undock him and any logistic or carrier undocking to rep (by then, hopefully, repping will give aggression and prevent the ship from docking right away).

Also, defender might be more willing to get out to commit to a fight since if it's easier to surprise the sieging fleet (or ganking fleet if it is to go help a corp mate being ambushed).

Personally, as long as we can sneakily judge if a POS is active or not, I am ok with the occupant fleet composition being hidden. CCP could design those POS with visual clues of activity or we could have a POS scanner.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#148 - 2012-08-12 20:00:25 UTC
Dino Boff wrote:
IMHO, docking games will be better than force field games. By games, I mean when the defender get out of the POS to alpha a weak ship or to kill a bubble but don't want to commit to a fight.

Currently, with force field, the defender will get some few hundred meters out of the force field and shoot something. The siege fleet will rep what the defender is shooting and send some ships over to try to bump him off. As soon as a ship come too close, the defender get back in and try again on the opposite side. it's quite boring, but one of the less boring of POS bashing activities, so we still play it even if the chance to bump him off correctly and in time is so low.

With a dock, the defender undock, shoot for some time until he need to deaggress to redock. The sieging fleet has one minute to bump out of the undock him and any logistic or carrier undocking to rep (by then, hopefully, repping will give aggression and prevent the ship from docking right away).

Also, defender might be more willing to get out to commit to a fight since if it's easier to surprise the sieging fleet (or ganking fleet if it is to go help a corp mate being ambushed).

Personally, as long as we can sneakily judge if a POS is active or not, I am ok with the occupant fleet composition being hidden. CCP could design those POS with visual clues of activity or we could have a POS scanner.


Docking games are god awful.
Chitsa Jason
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#149 - 2012-08-12 21:37:03 UTC
/me still waiting for TwoStep to post blog post about POSes

Burn the land and boil the sea You can't take the sky from me
Shenra Twrin
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#150 - 2012-08-12 23:50:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Shenra Twrin
Chitsa Jason wrote:
/me still waiting for TwoStep to post blog post about POSes


I think he still licking is wounds after you killed his Archon and Pod, so we gonna need to wait for an answere.
also the comment on the pod his actualy funny
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#151 - 2012-08-13 00:12:07 UTC
As promised, my blog post is up: http://twostep4csm.blogspot.com/2012/08/response-to-response-on-pos-redesign.html

That link isn't to my pod, BTW...Big smile

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
Shenra Twrin
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#152 - 2012-08-13 00:27:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Shenra Twrin
Two step wrote:
As promised, my blog post is up: http://twostep4csm.blogspot.com/2012/08/response-to-response-on-pos-redesign.html

That link isn't to my pod, BTW...Big smile

fixed

also

Quote:
Docking Games

In the threads, the biggest problem people have with the system that was discussed is that a docking module would bring k-space style "docking games" to wormhole space. I understand this concern, but I do not think it will be nearly as big of a problem as some people seem to think. There are a couple of reasons for this:
1) We already have "forcefield games", and people just don't complain about that all that much. The difference would probably be fairly minor between the two mechanisms.
2) The vast majority of fights in w-space are not outside a POS, they are at wormholes or in sites. The new POS system will still have POS defenses, and that means the new system probably wouldn't change where people fight.


soooo you just did say .... the fact we already have"""" forcefield games""""" makes docking games not that bad... this is the same logic as We killed peoples in the old times so its ok if we start killing people now for no reason..... this is a knockout argument.... and totaly wrong


Also i see WH´s gonna failscading in a few months... so i will enjoy my time left in WH and then go to something else maybe another game

no direct offense twosteps but i think ccp make WH like or likely 0.0 and i have no intentions of playing in WH which are like/ly 0.0 so i gonna pull the only protest a company understand
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#153 - 2012-08-13 00:48:32 UTC
Shenra Twrin wrote:

Quote:
Docking Games

In the threads, the biggest problem people have with the system that was discussed is that a docking module would bring k-space style "docking games" to wormhole space. I understand this concern, but I do not think it will be nearly as big of a problem as some people seem to think. There are a couple of reasons for this:
1) We already have "forcefield games", and people just don't complain about that all that much. The difference would probably be fairly minor between the two mechanisms.
2) The vast majority of fights in w-space are not outside a POS, they are at wormholes or in sites. The new POS system will still have POS defenses, and that means the new system probably wouldn't change where people fight.


soooo you just did say .... the fact we already have"""" forcefield games""""" makes docking games not that bad... this is the same logic as We killed peoples in the old times so its ok if we start killing people now for no reason..... this is a knockout argument.... and totaly wrong


Also i see WH´s gonna failscading in a few months... so i will enjoy my time left in WH and then go to something else maybe another game

no direct offense twosteps but i think ccp make WH like or likely 0.0 and i have no intentions of playing in WH which are like/ly 0.0 so i gonna pull the only protest a company understand


Can I have your stuff?

I disagree with your conclusions. Can you please explain to me how docking games are different than forcefield games? I'm still waiting for anyone to show the supposed major change that would result from docking. In 3 years of living (and fighting) in w-space, I can probably count on one hand the number of real fights I have had outside a POS, and I can't see how docking would change a single one of them.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
Shenra Twrin
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#154 - 2012-08-13 00:54:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Shenra Twrin
Two step wrote:
Shenra Twrin wrote:

Quote:
Docking Games

In the threads, the biggest problem people have with the system that was discussed is that a docking module would bring k-space style "docking games" to wormhole space. I understand this concern, but I do not think it will be nearly as big of a problem as some people seem to think. There are a couple of reasons for this:
1) We already have "forcefield games", and people just don't complain about that all that much. The difference would probably be fairly minor between the two mechanisms.
2) The vast majority of fights in w-space are not outside a POS, they are at wormholes or in sites. The new POS system will still have POS defenses, and that means the new system probably wouldn't change where people fight.


soooo you just did say .... the fact we already have"""" forcefield games""""" makes docking games not that bad... this is the same logic as We killed peoples in the old times so its ok if we start killing people now for no reason..... this is a knockout argument.... and totaly wrong


Also i see WH´s gonna failscading in a few months... so i will enjoy my time left in WH and then go to something else maybe another game

no direct offense twosteps but i think ccp make WH like or likely 0.0 and i have no intentions of playing in WH which are like/ly 0.0 so i gonna pull the only protest a company understand


Can I have your stuff?

I disagree with your conclusions. Can you please explain to me how docking games are different than forcefield games? I'm still waiting for anyone to show the supposed major change that would result from docking. In 3 years of living (and fighting) in w-space, I can probably count on one hand the number of real fights I have had outside a POS, and I can't see how docking would change a single one of them.



pew..... give me 1-2 days to deliver, because im now to sleepy to make a quality post about this important thing.... i will sent you a mail with a link with my answere .... much work to do atm in rl :/ so give me some time because work with paint take time :D because info pics are always nice


also nope the stuff will go to a newbie like its said in BoBs little Book of how to live and die in WH
Etheoma
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#155 - 2012-08-13 01:16:03 UTC
Quote:
^this is also an excellent point.
many WH groups have 20+ POSs in their system.
what's going to happen if you put up 20 deathstars on the same grid? will be impossible to take out with anything you can field in a WH.
definitely needs limits


They said they wanted to remove POS defences which is one of my biggest gripes.
Etheoma
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#156 - 2012-08-13 01:27:13 UTC
Quote:
Can I have your stuff?

I disagree with your conclusions. Can you please explain to me how docking games are different than forcefield games? I'm still waiting for anyone to show the supposed major change that would result from docking. In 3 years of living (and fighting) in w-space, I can probably count on one hand the number of real fights I have had outside a POS, and I can't see how docking would change a single one of them.


Have you ever fought in k-space off a station? If not then shhhh...

Yes the reason why people don't usually fight on the POS is because first the attacker is getting hit by gun's "which they want to remove." Second if the defenders are near the forcefield they can travel in and out of the forcefield. while the attacker cannot.

If they were to remove the defences and make it so that you had to undock they could camp you easily which makes for boring game play.

Most fighting in highsec goes on outside stations and believe me station games are no fun. Go do it for a while and you'll find out why. Just because someone can't verbalize the reasons why station games suck. doesn't mean they don't suck.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#157 - 2012-08-13 01:31:24 UTC
It would be nice to have some kind of "minimal viable product" sooner rather than later :)

Just an anchoring gantry, power/CPU upgrade module and a ME or PE lab. No docking required, no storage other than fuel required, and CCP would be able to test the bedrock code with real users in hisec. Storage, reactors, refinery, etc can come later.

I especially like the idea of being able to scale up from a bedsit apartment to full fledged outpost/logistics support/assembly plant/market hub.

Death to Jita!

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#158 - 2012-08-13 01:33:00 UTC
Etheoma wrote:
If they were to remove the defences and make it so that you had to undock they could camp you easily which makes for boring game play.


Removing defenses would be stupid. Switching from force field games to docking games changes nothing.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Dino Boff
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#159 - 2012-08-13 02:06:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Dino Boff
I missed that part where CCP mentions they would remove POS defence and according to Two Step, they won't. I understand there won't be guns and such structures to anchor anymore But I expect we will be able to add defence module to a POS.

In term of balance, they could limit them to one POS with defences per grid. You would have a corp POS with defence and various services like a corp market and around it on the same grid lots of personal POS, only used to store your own ships and modules.
GordonO
BURN EDEN
#160 - 2012-08-13 02:09:00 UTC
Switching to docking changes the way you can engage. In a POS you can see the enemy and warp off then back on them, or poke out the force field. With a station and no local you have no idea who is out there so if a solo or small corp un-docks in their wh they can easily be destroyed without any chance. And no, I do not want local populated in WH's.

... What next ??