These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Rubicon 1.1 Mobile Structures

First post
Author
Inspiration
#41 - 2014-01-23 19:57:12 UTC
The ESS discussion took all the attention before, so i neglected to say something about the Mobile Scan Inhibitor.

I understand trying to throw in something odd, but here is the weird decision with regard to this deployable:

When active, the Mobile Scan Inhibitor will prevent the operation of both combat probes and directional scanners by or against anything within its 30km radius. The structure itself is always visible to both probes and directional scans, and is extremely easy to pinpoint using probes.

Why make it visible at all, if it is capable of hiding everything around it? This doesn't make sense, certainly not from the users perspective. Warping towards it at range will reveal everything that is there, without the users seeing any Intel themselves. This block suggests it works by nullifying all signals in its influence sphere which should make itself also undetectable.

It is probably done to counter complains that it might otherwise be too powerful, but i disagree. From a user point of view it should stay hidden, else it would have very limited application. The most logical place to use for such a structure is as a rally point or as a way to hide your presence in WH space. The first use is severely compromised by its visibility, the second one is downright nullified.

Which essentially leaves one use left. Using it in say missions or behind bubbles as a trap of some sort to catch anyone that comes to inspect it. This makes it a deplorable bait ship and an obvious one at that....in essence rendering it useless.

I am serious!

Sid Crash
#42 - 2014-01-23 20:01:33 UTC
CCP Gargant wrote:
Mobile Structures were first introduced in Rubicon 1.0. Now it's time to add to the collection! In Rubicon 1.1 there will be 5 more Mobile Structures being added to your arsenal, and CCP Fozzie has written a dev blog to tell you all about it.

Head on over here to read it.

Tell us what you think! Leave your constructive feedback in this thread.



"CCP loves teh blob", noted.


Zircon Dasher
#43 - 2014-01-23 20:01:45 UTC
It would have been great to get more info on siphon usage. I think you erred a little too far on the side of caution, but I can understand the concern.

Nice changes on the ESS!

+1 from me

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.

Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#44 - 2014-01-23 20:23:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Querns
Inspiration wrote:
The ESS discussion took all the attention before, so i neglected to say something about the Mobile Scan Inhibitor.

I understand trying to throw in something odd, but here is the weird decision with regard to this deployable:

When active, the Mobile Scan Inhibitor will prevent the operation of both combat probes and directional scanners by or against anything within its 30km radius. The structure itself is always visible to both probes and directional scans, and is extremely easy to pinpoint using probes.

Why make it visible at all, if it is capable of hiding everything around it? This doesn't make sense, certainly not from the users perspective. Warping towards it at range will reveal everything that is there, without the users seeing any Intel themselves. This block suggests it works by nullifying all signals in its influence sphere which should make itself also undetectable.

It is probably done to counter complains that it might otherwise be too powerful, but i disagree. From a user point of view it should stay hidden, else it would have very limited application. The most logical place to use for such a structure is as a rally point or as a way to hide your presence in WH space. The first use is severely compromised by its visibility, the second one is downright nullified.

Which essentially leaves one use left. Using it in say missions or behind bubbles as a trap of some sort to catch anyone that comes to inspect it. This makes it a deplorable bait ship and an obvious one at that....in essence rendering it useless.

The MSI is a lot more useful in nullsec than it is in wormhole space. Because of immediate local in nullsec, it's not a question of who is in system, it's a question of what ships are you in and what you are doing. Dropping a MSI makes finding the answers to those questions more difficult, and makes finding said answers involve risk. (What's on grid with this thing? Is is a hauler? Is it an RSB'd daredevil and 20 brawler BS ready to make me into meat paste? It is a mystery!) Making the answers to those questions impossible to find would have been way too powerful.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Abulurd Boniface
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2014-01-23 20:39:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Abulurd Boniface
Inspiration wrote:

If a player launches an ESS and after some ratting wants to collect. Then the very structure he deployed will scramble him?!


I support this objection.

It makes no sense for the deployer to be scrambled by his own device. That just doesn't compute.

It's like you're walking up to your car. There's a guy lunging out at you with a knife. You have to wait 30 seconds for your car to open the door before you can jump in and race to safety.

I can see why it's done but the feature should not work like that for the pilot dropping the device. It is not reasonable to assume you'd deploy a device that would then prevent you from escaping.

Unless

you explained it as being badly designed by the corporation making the device. I want to see the hero who makes that argument.

Solution, for we are nothing if not the combination of our collective intelligence.

The mobile structure works exactly as designed

BUT

On deploying the mobile structure, the structure drops a key fob into the hold of the pilot deploying it. The key fob has one of those lovely icons the graphics gods in Reykjavik so generously share with us, it has a nice and cool description that makes fun of somebody, it weighs nothing

AND

it acts as a key fob. As long as the pilot has that thing in his hold when he's collecting from the device, he is not going to be scrambled by the mobile unit.

The mobile unit delivers one, and only one, key fob to the pilot deploying the unit. The pilot can put the key fob into the hold of another ship he's using, but it is bound to him [somehow], he can't pass it on. It can't be dumped in a jet can, traded, contracted or sold.

This way the internal logic the fair gods in far Reykjavik have built into this device remains intact. The pilot will be susceptible to the influence of the mobile unit, should they happen not to have the key fob on them, but if they do, they are not hampered by the device they themselves deployed.

Now, tell me that is not a nice and elegant solution to a pesky problem. Everybody gets something and we don't have to make it so as if our feelings are hurt.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#46 - 2014-01-23 20:43:30 UTC
Incidentally, does the MSI have a graphical effect (like a bubble) for the range of the device? If so, I'd like to see a screenshot of it in action.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#47 - 2014-01-23 21:09:08 UTC
Abulurd Boniface wrote:
It makes no sense for the deployer to be scrambled by his own device. That just doesn't compute.

It's like you're walking up to your car. There's a guy lunging out at you with a knife. You have to wait 30 seconds for your car to open the door before you can jump in and race to safety.

I can see why it's done but the feature should not work like that for the pilot dropping the device. It is not reasonable to assume you'd deploy a device that would then prevent you from escaping.

Unless

you explained it as being badly designed by the corporation making the device. I want to see the hero who makes that argument.


The Empires feel their control slipping away. This is one of their efforts at saying, "F– you, Empyreans!"

It's not your device. It's the empire's. You deploy it, they get to determine the rules of how they pay out. So it's more like the poker machine: when you want to pay out you press the button and wait for the attendant to arrive. All the while you are vulnerable because the stabby guy with the knife is watching as you receive your thousand dollar winnings.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#48 - 2014-01-23 21:10:35 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
This is what bad game design looks like.


How is "Share" vs "Take All" bad game design? Are you scared that someone who is not friendly to you could cause you economic harm? Does this structure diminish your feeling of safety in deep blue null sec?
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#49 - 2014-01-23 22:31:41 UTC
Meh, Rubicon 1.1 is about overheat everything not some stupid boxes in space.

Invalid signature format

Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#50 - 2014-01-23 22:46:31 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Since the blog actually doesn't mention it outright, I have to ask: is the 5% nerf to bounties still in?

If so…
Mag's wrote:
Why does the ESS require a 5% nerf to bounties?
…this.


i'd like an answer to this question as well. Why a 5% nerf to the ONE bit of null sec pve content that provides an income to the rank and file players who are buying ships to get blown up in fleet fights (thus powering the EVE economy). That income is already balanced by the fact that ratters get killed by raiders and is not all that competative (when factoring in risk, effort and distance from market) with the Sister's missions that are sucking up all the Mobile tractor uses.....

That 5% nerf might not seem like much in a vacuum, but it's just another thing to push ratters out of null and into safety, and this is terrible bad for the game.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#51 - 2014-01-23 23:14:22 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Since the blog actually doesn't mention it outright, I have to ask: is the 5% nerf to bounties still in?

If so…
Mag's wrote:
Why does the ESS require a 5% nerf to bounties?
…this.

From what I understand it is. So yeah, that.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#52 - 2014-01-23 23:47:33 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Pinky Hops wrote:
This is what bad game design looks like.


How is "Share" vs "Take All" bad game design?


Roll

The concept of sharing vs taking is always good. Reducing it down to pressing buttons literally labeled as such I would say is a complete and epic failure.

It's kind of like saying: "Here's your god damn ******* conflict driver. We know it drives conflict because it has two conflicting buttons attached and an incentive for using it."

It feels very forced and weak. It also makes no sense at all.

Enjoy it, if that's your thing. I don't rat now and I certainly won't be any more likely to rat once this comes out. Not an exciting thing.

"Oh man, I just can't wait to try this new ESS structure! I have not gone ratting in months! It will be amazing to put a hefty percentage of my loot into a styrofoam space box."

Yeah, that really gets my juices flowing. Oh wait.

The only thing this adds to my game is that I could hot drop the people dumb enough to use one. But if they are dumb enough to use one, they were probably going to get hot dropped anyways so it's hard to tell...
Dant Perst
Dark Matter Industrial Corp
#53 - 2014-01-23 23:57:19 UTC
Ok...mobile structures great. However, as they fit into a cargo hold, they should be "scoopable" to cargo hold -- just like abandoned drones...if reinforced...not so...that's fine...but just sitting there abandoned, no reinforcement...no! Cmon...the uni is cluttered enough! It's as bad as seeing all the wrecks on DSCAN and not being able to scan them down and convert them. Just adding to the mess. If you can see it, you should be able to scan it down and do something with it.

And please; attack a mobile and hope for a cargo drop, but wait....48 hours...are you kidding?
Charlie Firpol
Gr0und Zer0
#54 - 2014-01-24 00:07:43 UTC
Inspiration wrote:

When active, the Mobile Scan Inhibitor will prevent the operation of both combat probes and directional scanners by or against anything within its 30km radius. The structure itself is always visible to both probes and directional scans, and is extremely easy to pinpoint using probes.

Why make it visible at all, if it is capable of hiding everything around it? This doesn't make sense, certainly not from the users perspective. Warping towards it at range will reveal everything that is there, without the users seeing any Intel themselves. This block suggests it works by nullifying all signals in its influence sphere which should make itself also undetectable.


A scanner will most likely know that it is fooled by a mobile device. The device doesnt remove the signals from the ether, it just disrupts them so much that your ships scanner cant tell you more than "there must be stuff there, all signals are messed up"

The Butcher of Black Rise - eve-radio.com

Aryth
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#55 - 2014-01-24 01:00:10 UTC
The ESS blueprint should be BPCs that come from the LP store. Charge ISK and LP. Get an ISK and LP sink while still allowing it to be playermade.

Also preserves the lore as they can come from the same Navy LP stores you are grinding for.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

Vald Tegor
Empyrean Guard
Tactical Narcotics Team
#56 - 2014-01-24 01:46:39 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Since the blog actually doesn't mention it outright, I have to ask: is the 5% nerf to bounties still in?

If so…
Mag's wrote:
Why does the ESS require a 5% nerf to bounties?
…this.

The description of the ESS in this dev blog was atrocious. Here's this new module. Go read a different dev blog and sift through a hundred page thread to figure out what it actually does in its current incarnation.

In the future, please list the entirety of the current state of the proposition as it differs from Tranquility. This will give us an accurate baseline for further discussion of the topic.
Tarpedo
Incursionista
#57 - 2014-01-24 06:05:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Tarpedo
500k subscribers, 10k deployments per day = less than 2% of players use deployable structure (one player can use it multiple times per day).

Mobile siphons: 240 billions stolen / 60 days since expansion = 4 billions per day. Single headquarters incursion fleet is ~50 times more effective and make the same money in 30 minutes (usually there are 5 HQ fleets running).

Could be much more interesting to know - how many toons use sleeve tattoos and cybernetic arms?
Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#58 - 2014-01-24 09:59:17 UTC
Ess , so contrived.

Eve world has the technology to scramble any ship
But its only ever used in structures that wait for you to ask to be scrambled.


If scramble all technology is available then why is it not available in aggresive mods and structures ?


Please stop all this contrived nonsence where you design in one foreseen mode of gameplay.

Make simple structures and enable the sandbox you like to bang on about.

Abulurd Boniface
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2014-01-24 10:14:20 UTC
Dav Varan wrote:
Ess , so contrived.


I'm not saying you don't have a point, could you maybe phrase it so that your point of view would meet with acceptance rather than a defensive stance that will have people push the argument away instead?

There are so many ways you can voice that argument. Language is so diverse, you can put the letters in any sequence you want.

"Life is wasted on the living"
[Zaphod Beeblebrox IV]
Sable Moran
Moran Light Industries
#60 - 2014-01-24 10:55:55 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
For example the depot. It is an awesome structure but of limited use in fleets, it doesn't scale very well. Now imagine they would make it standing based and a single depot could supply a whole fleet with ammo and fitting service... i don't think that we will ever see this since it would be OP for such a small and cheap module.


After Rubicon 1.1 there will be three different siphons in the game. what makes you think there won't ever be more than one type of depot in the game in the future?

Sable's Ammo Shop at Alentene V - Moon 4 - Duvolle Labs Factory. Hybrid charges, Projectile ammo, Missiles, Drones, Ships, Need'em? We have'em, at affordable prices. Pop in at our Ammo Shop in sunny Alentene.