These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Shake my Citadel

First post First post
Author
Scott Ormands
The Northerners
Northern Coalition.
#141 - 2015-05-12 17:55:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Scott Ormands
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
The invulnerability link (we need a new name for this, taking suggestions)


Charged Citadel Protective Link System (CCPLs)



FTFY
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#142 - 2015-05-12 17:55:52 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Quote:
Structures won't be able to shoot without someone manning the guns. As CCP Nullarbor mentioned, we have options under our sleeves to mitigate the risk from this change. Like having a reduced vulnerability window in specific areas, and / or be able to have NPCs spawn.


This is a bit of a slippery slope eh? I know you want individuals to feel that they can use the medium structures, but relying on NPC pirates to provide defense is... questionable on a number of levels.

No offense intended.


You would not rely in NPC defense at all, it would be a mild deterrent against a lone ship at best, the point is to show up for your timers and defend.

As I mentioned the balance will be how frequently this happens so that it's not a chore, but still provides opportunities for an interesting engagement.

I realize that is the ultimate goal, encouraging engagement.... and that at best a Citadel is supposed to only act as a force multiplier.

When you are a solo player though, there isn't much force there to multiply. Smile It gets a lot easier to defend a structure when you have a number of people in a corp or alliance able to do so... but for the primary user of the medium structure (that being the solo player) there is actually less reason for them to use this than in the current terrible POS system.

I'm not trying to be overly critical, just trying to point out something that may have not been a focus during design.

Why would a solo player that has a small POS now wish to give up the current system in favor of this system? If he cannot be available during the vulnerability timer one night this new structure is virtually defenseless compared to what he has now.

I"m personally not affected by it, but once this truth settles in there will be a lot of "you hate solo players or even small groups" fallout that will be directed towards you... and accusation you are catering to large groups that will have the manpower to defend these STRUCTURES THAT CANNOT DEFEND THEMSELVES.

I'm trying to offer extremely constructive criticism here, and warn you of potential (no, actually inevitable) fallout... so if I sounded like a jerk, please forgive. Was not the intention in the slightest.


Like I said, it depends a lot on the timers and I'm assuming if you're solo you are in high sec, so in part wardec mechanics too. Fortunately the asset safety means although you lose your structure, you won't lose everything inside it.

If you cannot defend your structure though, you won't be able to keep it, but we want to give you every reasonable chance to defend it including the more casual players.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones

CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#143 - 2015-05-12 17:56:31 UTC
Chirality Tisteloin wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:


No docking puts you inside and safe, but you still see the grid outside the station.

The invulnerability link (we need a new name for this, taking suggestions) provides security while you are undocked and mobile around the structure.


If these are two different forms of protection, does that mean that the INductive Victimization Upshot Liquidator (aka invulnerability link) will work on captial ships even for citadels where they are not allowed to dock up?


Yes.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones

Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#144 - 2015-05-12 17:58:06 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:

2. I think we will show them on the onboard scanner to warp to.


I haven't read the blog in its entirely yet, but how are these structures going to be deployed anywhere, if the only available points are the warpable solar system objects like the sun, moons, planets and all intersecting lines between them, i.e. someone will ALWAYS pass your structure in warp as it lies on the warp path between two objects, unless you deploy something like 2000 km off a planet's warp in point.

In other words, you can't have positioning above the solar system's plane, unless you have old Deep safe spot bookmarks from many moons ago. Sad
Papa Django
Materials Harvesting Kombinat
#145 - 2015-05-12 17:58:19 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:

I think 205km is perfectly reasonable, just disappointed at not being able to form complexes and cities out of structures as was mentioned as a possibility a while back.


I think 250km is not enough.

People will make grids of structures to protect (ok it depends on weapons optimal and falloff) them.

I don't want to see anarchic structures deployment like in Starwars Galaxies for thoses who have known this great MMO.

@CCP Devs

Is there a number of structures per solar system limitation like a slot fiting system planned ?
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#146 - 2015-05-12 18:00:39 UTC
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:

2. I think we will show them on the onboard scanner to warp to.


I haven't read the blog in its entirely yet, but how are these structures going to be deployed anywhere, if the only available points are the warpable solar system objects like the sun, moons, planets and all intersecting lines between them, i.e. someone will ALWAYS pass your structure in warp as it lies on the warp path between two objects, unless you deploy something like 2000 km off a planet's warp in point.

In other words, you can't have positioning above the solar system's plane, unless you have old Deep safe spot bookmarks from many moons ago. Sad


You can get to all sorts of interesting positions with careful bookmark-warp-bookmarking.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones

Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
#147 - 2015-05-12 18:03:14 UTC
First I would like to say , Hurray!

I like the name ch√Ęteau better than citadel also.

On the subject of drones as a weapon, I don't see why a medium structure should not be able to use fighters.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#148 - 2015-05-12 18:03:19 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:

2. I think we will show them on the onboard scanner to warp to.


I haven't read the blog in its entirely yet, but how are these structures going to be deployed anywhere, if the only available points are the warpable solar system objects like the sun, moons, planets and all intersecting lines between them, i.e. someone will ALWAYS pass your structure in warp as it lies on the warp path between two objects, unless you deploy something like 2000 km off a planet's warp in point.

In other words, you can't have positioning above the solar system's plane, unless you have old Deep safe spot bookmarks from many moons ago. Sad


You can get to all sorts of interesting positions with careful bookmark-warp-bookmarking.


I agree that old bookmarks, temporary exploration site locations, Sansha incursion points - can all serve as viable locations.

But I'd prefer something like being able to warp to your Core Scanner Probes, though you'd probably have to limit how far beyond the solar system's plane you can reposition these. Smile
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#149 - 2015-05-12 18:05:21 UTC  |  Edited by: War Kitten
CCP Nullarbor wrote:

Like I said, it depends a lot on the timers and I'm assuming if you're solo you are in high sec, so in part wardec mechanics too. Fortunately the asset safety means although you lose your structure, you won't lose everything inside it.

If you cannot defend your structure though, you won't be able to keep it, but we want to give you every reasonable chance to defend it including the more casual players.


Whoa there!!

Assuming solo players are in highsec is a SERIOUS faux-pas.

Solo players and/or small corps abound in lowsec and nullsec, and we have POSs quite often. What Ranger 1 brings up is a valid point - there isn't always someone online every day to watch the entosis window. Currently it works for small groups because attacking a POS with intent to harm is a serious investment in either time or manpower. Devoting 20 minutes to circling a structure with an entosis link is a lot lower barrier than trying to defang even a small POS.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.

per
Terpene Conglomerate
#150 - 2015-05-12 18:10:01 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

Unlike existing Starbases, you won't need multiple guys to operate the weapons. Those structures will be like ships, so you will only need one guy to control them all. The Starbase Defense Management skill will be reworked into something else or refunded when Starbases are removed.


any chances we will use current bpos/pos modules (or some of them) on those new structures or will there be completely new ones and those old ones will be removed once poses are done?


just an idea: would be nice to be able upgrade from medium citadel to large one and from large one to xl - if the requirements and restrictions are met ofc, so some modularity between different sizes maybe?
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#151 - 2015-05-12 18:11:05 UTC
War Kitten wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:

Like I said, it depends a lot on the timers and I'm assuming if you're solo you are in high sec, so in part wardec mechanics too. Fortunately the asset safety means although you lose your structure, you won't lose everything inside it.

If you cannot defend your structure though, you won't be able to keep it, but we want to give you every reasonable chance to defend it including the more casual players.


Whoa there!!

Assuming solo players are in highsec is a SERIOUS faux-pas.

Solo players and/or small corps abound in lowsec and nullsec, and we have POSs quite often. What ranger brings up is a vlaid point - there isn't always someone online every day to watch the entosis window. Currently it works for small groups because attacking a POS with intent to harm is a serious investment in either time or manpower. Devoting 20 minutes to circling a structure with an entosis link is a lot lower barrier than trying to defang even a small POS.



Vulnerability windows for structures will not necessarily be everyday, and the time to capture will vary depending on the structure and where it is anchored. We are very aware of the concerns of small groups having fewer people online to defend.

We will have more details about the capture timings and vulnerability windows etc in a later dev blog.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones

Dradis Aulmais
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#152 - 2015-05-12 18:11:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Dradis Aulmais
Can we free port these structures and if we have a XL can we free-port but prevent non alliance supers from mooring

invulnerability link = Militarization Interference Logistic Feild

Dradis Aulmais, Federal Attorney Number 54896

Free The Scope Three

Narcotic Gryffin
Chemical Dependency.
#153 - 2015-05-12 18:16:18 UTC
Wanted some clarification are the citadel structures only going to be limited to nullsec like current outposts? Or will a say medium citadel structure be able to be deployed in lowsec or wh space?

http://www.sortius-is-a-geek.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/history-channel-hd-aliens-thumb.jpg

Aeril Malkyre
Knights of the Ouroboros
#154 - 2015-05-12 18:18:18 UTC
War Kitten wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:

Like I said, it depends a lot on the timers and I'm assuming if you're solo you are in high sec, so in part wardec mechanics too. Fortunately the asset safety means although you lose your structure, you won't lose everything inside it.

If you cannot defend your structure though, you won't be able to keep it, but we want to give you every reasonable chance to defend it including the more casual players.

Whoa there!!

Assuming solo players are in highsec is a SERIOUS faux-pas.

Solo players and/or small corps abound in lowsec and nullsec, and we have POSs quite often. What Ranger 1 brings up is a valid point - there isn't always someone online every day to watch the entosis window. Currently it works for small groups because attacking a POS with intent to harm is a serious investment in either time or manpower. Devoting 20 minutes to circling a structure with an entosis link is a lot lower barrier than trying to defang even a small POS.
Quite accurate. Right now, as a solo player, I can afford to field a pretty stout tower in wormhole space that wouldn't be at all vulnerable to the equivalent of one guy in an Entosis linked ship. Without automated defenses, a fully fueled and stronted tower is just waiting to be reinforced every single day. I can't always be on every single day.

A moderately defended POS right now can deter a small gang of attackers just by being fully armed and armored. If you're saying that functionality can't be replicated with one of the new Citadels... That's a huge loss.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#155 - 2015-05-12 18:19:11 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
War Kitten wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:

Like I said, it depends a lot on the timers and I'm assuming if you're solo you are in high sec, so in part wardec mechanics too. Fortunately the asset safety means although you lose your structure, you won't lose everything inside it.

If you cannot defend your structure though, you won't be able to keep it, but we want to give you every reasonable chance to defend it including the more casual players.


Whoa there!!

Assuming solo players are in highsec is a SERIOUS faux-pas.

Solo players and/or small corps abound in lowsec and nullsec, and we have POSs quite often. What ranger brings up is a vlaid point - there isn't always someone online every day to watch the entosis window. Currently it works for small groups because attacking a POS with intent to harm is a serious investment in either time or manpower. Devoting 20 minutes to circling a structure with an entosis link is a lot lower barrier than trying to defang even a small POS.



Vulnerability windows for structures will not necessarily be everyday, and the time to capture will vary depending on the structure and where it is anchored. We are very aware of the concerns of small groups having fewer people online to defend.

We will have more details about the capture timings and vulnerability windows etc in a later dev blog.


Ok, that sounds a little more promising.... The devblog just mentioned vaguely that these would work like the sov entosis captures - and those are vulnerable daily.

Assumptions... always making an ass out of u and mptions. ;)

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.

Takeo Yanumano
State War Academy
Caldari State
#156 - 2015-05-12 18:19:27 UTC
So, the way I'm understanding this is that you do not wish wormhole dwellers to be able to continue dwelling in wormholes the same way they do now, correct?

In other words, a solo wh-dweller (why he is solo is besides the point; imagine for example he is solo because most of his corp is taking a brief hiatus) who manages to keep two POS fueled by himself would be made effectively an impossible playstyle, yes? Or at very least, he'd have to put even more time into the game than he currently is, as I understand it.
Milla Goodpussy
The Knights Armada
#157 - 2015-05-12 18:20:10 UTC
would be nice to give us a timeframe these roll out you know,

I mean folks gotta prepare for the transition into fozzisov.. and now these new structures.. you're putting a stress-test on the little guy that may have dreams of building these things..

so when is this rolling? are you just intentionally putting it out there when in fact it may be actually 6 months from now before it hits live??

or is this coming "this summer" during one of the weird expansion names..


eve online : structure-kana or something??

when?

when??

when????????
Manssell
OmiHyperMultiNationalDrunksConglomerate
Together We Solo
#158 - 2015-05-12 18:22:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Manssell
CCP Nullarbor wrote:


Like I said, it depends a lot on the timers and I'm assuming if you're solo you are in high sec, so in part wardec mechanics too. Fortunately the asset safety means although you lose your structure, you won't lose everything inside it.

If you cannot defend your structure though, you won't be able to keep it, but we want to give you every reasonable chance to defend it including the more casual players.



What! I know dozens and dozens of solo players personally, all in low, WH or null sec.

One of the great promises of these new structures was that they be a great new tool for those brave enough to eke out a living in WH, low and null sec solo, not condemn them to live in high sec to use them.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#159 - 2015-05-12 18:23:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Quote:
Structures won't be able to shoot without someone manning the guns. As CCP Nullarbor mentioned, we have options under our sleeves to mitigate the risk from this change. Like having a reduced vulnerability window in specific areas, and / or be able to have NPCs spawn.


This is a bit of a slippery slope eh? I know you want individuals to feel that they can use the medium structures, but relying on NPC pirates to provide defense is... questionable on a number of levels.

No offense intended.


You would not rely in NPC defense at all, it would be a mild deterrent against a lone ship at best, the point is to show up for your timers and defend.

As I mentioned the balance will be how frequently this happens so that it's not a chore, but still provides opportunities for an interesting engagement.

I realize that is the ultimate goal, encouraging engagement.... and that at best a Citadel is supposed to only act as a force multiplier.

When you are a solo player though, there isn't much force there to multiply. Smile It gets a lot easier to defend a structure when you have a number of people in a corp or alliance able to do so... but for the primary user of the medium structure (that being the solo player) there is actually less reason for them to use this than in the current terrible POS system.

I'm not trying to be overly critical, just trying to point out something that may have not been a focus during design.

Why would a solo player that has a small POS now wish to give up the current system in favor of this system? If he cannot be available during the vulnerability timer one night this new structure is virtually defenseless compared to what he has now.

I"m personally not affected by it, but once this truth settles in there will be a lot of "you hate solo players or even small groups" fallout that will be directed towards you... and accusation you are catering to large groups that will have the manpower to defend these STRUCTURES THAT CANNOT DEFEND THEMSELVES.

I'm trying to offer extremely constructive criticism here, and warn you of potential (no, actually inevitable) fallout... so if I sounded like a jerk, please forgive. Was not the intention in the slightest.


Like I said, it depends a lot on the timers and I'm assuming if you're solo you are in high sec, so in part wardec mechanics too. Fortunately the asset safety means although you lose your structure, you won't lose everything inside it.

If you cannot defend your structure though, you won't be able to keep it, but we want to give you every reasonable chance to defend it including the more casual players.

Appreciate the reply... although I must point out I am not a solo player in high sec.
Yes, asset safety mitigates the risk to a degree.... but that really wasn't my point.

There will be a LOT of solo and small corp players who will look at the small POS that they have now, which CAN defend itself against modest threat at all times... and they will compare it to the medium citadels proposed that cannot defend themselves at all unless someone is physically there.... and there will be a great deal of discontent.

The reality is that the assets inside are perhaps better protected than they currently are in some ways. Vulnerability windows and asset safety (depending on how it is implemented) are powerful passive protection for your belongings.

However, EVE players don't care much for passive safety nets like that. The want to build death stars with automated defenses that only get better when players are actually present, but aren't solely dependent on someone being there.

It's a perception thing more than anything else... and I'm concerned about the backlash undermining what is actually a very good concept.

Heck, even it it could only activate an EW defense on it's own that would go a long way... as that would ensure that a couple of guys in interceptors won't be able to keep trolling you into reinforced mode.

Edit: Just spotted the post about vulnerability not necessarily being every day. That might help alleviate concerns, although that is still isn't what most people will likely prefer. When people think "Strong defense fortification" they don't tend to think of an appointment calendar... they think about automated defensive batteries. Smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Dradis Aulmais
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#160 - 2015-05-12 18:23:36 UTC
Milla Goodpussy wrote:
would be nice to give us a timeframe these roll out you know,

I mean folks gotta prepare for the transition into fozzisov.. and now these new structures.. you're putting a stress-test on the little guy that may have dreams of building these things..

so when is this rolling? are you just intentionally putting it out there when in fact it may be actually 6 months from now before it hits live??

or is this coming "this summer" during one of the weird expansion names..


eve online : structure-kana or something??

when?

when??

when????????



Soon(TM)

Dradis Aulmais, Federal Attorney Number 54896

Free The Scope Three