These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Summer 2014] Starbase tweaks

First post First post
Author
Gothikia
#201 - 2014-05-07 14:18:36 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.


About god damn time! :P

<3 Gothie

remco1
Vengance Inc.
#202 - 2014-05-07 14:20:26 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
mynnna wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.


Wanna change some more numbers and do a balancing pass on POS guns and buff their stats a bit, since they haven't been touched since an era when a dreadnaught had less EHP than a cruiser can get today?


e: This goes especially for scan res. In context of such a change I'd propose massive increases to scan res, on the order of tenfold, but perhaps a corresponding increase in the automatic lock delay as well. That way an unmanned POS still takes its sweet time doing anything, but a manned POS is able to swiftly react to a changing combat landscape. You've got that huge tower there, why are its targeting arrays so bad?


That's going to take quite some time indeed, but that's why we keep CCP Fozzie chained in the basement. I'll promise him some raw meat if he looks at it at some point, that should cheer him up.

We'll discuss that point for sure, but we are not certain this will make it at the same time than the main bulk of Industry changes though.



guess people who trained anchoring 5 for posguns get skillpoints back then ??
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
Fraternity.
#203 - 2014-05-07 14:21:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Erasmus Phoenix
You still get to use large T2 bubbles

EDIT: More importantly, you have the advantage of having been able to shoot POS guns in the past when others couldn't. CCP aren't going back in time and giving the ability to everyone at release, now are they?
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#204 - 2014-05-07 14:35:55 UTC
remco1 wrote:



guess people who trained anchoring 5 for posguns get skillpoints back then ??


Of course, CCP always reimburses skills when they change things, have you not been getting a ton of SP every patch?
Iosue
Black Sky Hipsters
#205 - 2014-05-07 14:52:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Iosue
Weaselior wrote:
Seraphina Amaranth wrote:
So is there any incentive to run more than one of each type of lab/array any more?

that you're using them as storage :v:


along that line, can we get a new CHA size? i mean its kinda silly to keep using assembly arrays in place of CHA's as a work around. having another Large CHA that matches the size and fitting requirements of the large ship assembly array would be great.
Batelle
Filthy Peasants
#206 - 2014-05-07 14:52:49 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.



\o/

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.

Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
Fraternity.
#207 - 2014-05-07 14:55:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Erasmus Phoenix
Iosue wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
Seraphina Amaranth wrote:
So is there any incentive to run more than one of each type of lab/array any more?

that you're using them as storage :v:


along that line, can we get a new CHA size? i mean its kinda silly to keep using assembly arrays in place of CHA's as a work around. having another Large CHA that matches the size and fitting requirements of the large ship assembly array would be great.


CHAs are getting more than twice the capacity. It's gonna help, at least.
Spectre Wraith
Darwin Inc.
#208 - 2014-05-07 15:02:48 UTC
Can those of us who trained Anchoring V (twice, ugh) expect something for our time investment in that skill?

Dear lord, please help me deal with the insufferable....

Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#209 - 2014-05-07 15:04:00 UTC
Spectre Wraith wrote:
Can those of us who trained Anchoring V (twice, ugh) expect something for our time investment in that skill?


Yes. You can expect to still be able to do everything that you could before. Nothing is changing that will effect you. Now stop complaining.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#210 - 2014-05-07 15:04:13 UTC
Spectre Wraith wrote:
Can those of us who trained Anchoring V (twice, ugh) expect something for our time investment in that skill?

No
Go build an outpost
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
#211 - 2014-05-07 15:06:21 UTC
Spectre Wraith wrote:
Can those of us who trained Anchoring V (twice, ugh) expect something for our time investment in that skill?


Read your own signature . . .

I am not an alt of Chribba.

mynnna
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#212 - 2014-05-07 15:14:04 UTC
Spectre Wraith wrote:
Can those of us who trained Anchoring V (twice, ugh) expect something for our time investment in that skill?

You can expect a big fat HTFU from me, as I've trained anchoring 5 on no less than twelve characters in the past couple months, and am fine with this.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

Arkon Olacar
black.listed
Pandemic Legion
#213 - 2014-05-07 15:38:28 UTC
Now that you're buffing the Phoenix can CCP refund all my gunnery skills so I can retrain into citadel torps

/s
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance
Team Amarrica
#214 - 2014-05-07 15:53:40 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.

O COMON i just trained up anchoring 5 just for this skill.

SP reimbursement!

Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro

CynoNet Two
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#215 - 2014-05-07 16:03:09 UTC
remco1 wrote:
guess people who trained anchoring 5 for posguns get skillpoints back then ??


Spectre Wraith wrote:
Can those of us who trained Anchoring V (twice, ugh) expect something for our time investment in that skill?


Flyinghotpocket wrote:
O COMON i just trained up anchoring 5 just for this skill.

SP reimbursement!


All of you are why we so rarely get nice things :(

If everyone got a free titan in the next patch you'd probably complain it was the wrong colour.
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#216 - 2014-05-07 16:04:05 UTC
I wanted a blood raider titan
When is CCP Scarpia releasing the new skins?
Kateryna I
Bean-shidh
The Nameless Alliance
#217 - 2014-05-07 16:05:15 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.


god damn, just trained so many chars to anchoring 5, had I known that :[

Anyway, makes my life easer going forward...

Polish PVP corp looking for members to have some fun together. Join me! Check our KB

Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#218 - 2014-05-07 16:06:51 UTC
What ever you do, an unmanned POS should NOT lock any faster than they do now.
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#219 - 2014-05-07 16:13:27 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
What ever you do, an unmanned POS should NOT lock any faster than they do now.

why not?
Do they randomly shoot people still?
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#220 - 2014-05-07 16:15:12 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
What ever you do, an unmanned POS should NOT lock any faster than they do now.


Agreed.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY