These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Citadel Question - W-Space rules

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jezza McWaffle
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#81 - 2015-08-10 10:45:46 UTC
If you at all read anything you would also know that the Citadels will have enough defences to stop a trolceptor as calaretu said.

Wormholes worst badass | Checkout my Wormhole blog
Winthorp
#82 - 2015-08-10 10:53:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Winthorp
Jezza McWaffle wrote:
If you at all read anything you would also know that the Citadels will have enough defences to stop a trolceptor as calaretu said.



If you have at all read any of these threads, devblogs or spoken with devs in the slack channel for structures or even reddit you would know how very wrong you are.


  • 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.

    • Now add to this undock games and camp ins. And from what i remember they still have not as yet decided if we will have a single undock/dock point or the multiple and random as requested by many.

    My kingdom for an updated devblog though...
    Chance Ravinne
    WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
    WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
    #83 - 2015-08-10 12:30:55 UTC
    Winthorp wrote:
    Jezza McWaffle wrote:
    If you at all read anything you would also know that the Citadels will have enough defences to stop a trolceptor as calaretu said.



    If you have at all read any of these threads, devblogs or spoken with devs in the slack channel for structures or even reddit you would know how very wrong you are.


  • 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.

    • Now add to this undock games and camp ins. And from what i remember they still have not as yet decided if we will have a single undock/dock point or the multiple and random as requested by many.

    My kingdom for an updated devblog though...


    As far as undock games go, this is something nobody wants and CCP is trying to address this to prevent BS especially in w-space. I can't say if it'll work out exactly but based on what I've seen I'm optimistic the solution is there. Keep in mind citadel docking gives you an outside view, that is just one component of preventing docking games. Manning guns from within the structure is another part. The invulnerability link is a third part. And there are additional ideas being thrown around beyond that.

    You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
    Andrew Jester
    Collapsed Out
    Pandemic Legion
    #84 - 2015-08-10 13:06:22 UTC
    WTB> Aussies/Russians for a WH corp to set a top tier invuln window~

    If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy
    Trinkets friend
    Sudden Buggery
    Sending Thots And Players
    #85 - 2015-08-10 14:47:13 UTC
    Pffft jester, you now this is bullshcnitzel.

    if some rednecks siege some turnip herding yak fondlers and don't complete the timer, it stay viable until povert TZ (AU TZ). Then some idiotic yokel bloketards decide to troll it. They complete the timer in the AU TZ and it resets to 48 hours from the US/EU/RUS timezone setting. This then cuts the bloketards out of the loop, because why dafuqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq do you waste any amount of time trollceptoring rusbear POS only to have rusbear POS come back out of RF in rusbear hours?

    We invaded our crappy C4 BH 2 weeks ago, and we still haven'trolled all the farking POCOs because rsbear TZ is like 3 a.m.. I mean, great, TZ warfare is the best, I know this for one times fact (redeemable anywhere in world, fo sho) but after a while you are sitting there thinking "what the actual, I can't even, 3 a.m. will this never end, goddamn this stupid game and stupider mechanics".

    So yeah, maybe Au TZ defence timers best timers. But only if the vulnerability is 4 hours.

    Glad to see a CSM fite going down. It's like a one armed mutant versus goonbexx with eight arms full of fact swords +5 versus useless vanity CSM potang grab patheticman. Come on carbexx, finshing moe! U-U-D-D-L-L-R-R-L-R-U-D!!!!!!

    ~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
    Andrew Jester
    Collapsed Out
    Pandemic Legion
    #86 - 2015-08-10 14:54:51 UTC
    if it's ~8h? vuln, then you can set for RUS and maybe it'll bleed into AUS? or just set it so that the back half is AUS prime so that you can ride part of it out during DT

    If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy
    calaretu
    Honestly We didnt know
    #87 - 2015-08-10 19:04:15 UTC
    For the record automated defence does not equal automated guns. As the quote I cant be arsed to requote say they are looking at ways for the citadel to counter trollceptors without manned guns.

    ~Bringer of happiness

    http://collapsedbehind.blogspot.no/
    Justin Cody
    War Firm
    #88 - 2015-08-10 23:14:32 UTC
    Chance Ravinne wrote:
    Winthorp wrote:
    Jezza McWaffle wrote:
    If you at all read anything you would also know that the Citadels will have enough defences to stop a trolceptor as calaretu said.



    If you have at all read any of these threads, devblogs or spoken with devs in the slack channel for structures or even reddit you would know how very wrong you are.


  • 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.

    • Now add to this undock games and camp ins. And from what i remember they still have not as yet decided if we will have a single undock/dock point or the multiple and random as requested by many.

    My kingdom for an updated devblog though...


    As far as undock games go, this is something nobody wants and CCP is trying to address this to prevent BS especially in w-space. I can't say if it'll work out exactly but based on what I've seen I'm optimistic the solution is there. Keep in mind citadel docking gives you an outside view, that is just one component of preventing docking games. Manning guns from within the structure is another part. The invulnerability link is a third part. And there are additional ideas being thrown around beyond that.



    This all seems good assuming you can fix the Null WH nerf. Thanks and don't be a traitor!
    Andrew Jester
    Collapsed Out
    Pandemic Legion
    #89 - 2015-08-11 00:23:05 UTC
    lol expecting chance ravinne to advocate for ANYTHING

    If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy
    Chance Ravinne
    WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
    WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
    #90 - 2015-08-11 04:26:52 UTC
    Andrew Jester wrote:
    lol expecting chance ravinne to advocate for ANYTHING


    Yes yes, I come here for my health... and of course the scores of fawning fans (so many of them here in the wormhole subforum).

    My primary concerns for citadels in wormhole space have been advocating for looting and plunder since beautiful drops are a great incentive for structure destruction (for anyone who isn't amply rewarded by the loss of others). With the discussions of various asset safety systems I want to see an end system that rewards successful evictions either directly through loot or indirectly via the thorough toppling of the losing organization.

    Ultimately the new structures are going to be a very big compromise, both for w-space and for other regions of space, being significantly less safe in some ways and significantly more safe in other ways. It is worth re-mentioning that citadels are not the be-all, end-all structures so some of their shortcomings may have to be covered by other new structures.

    You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
    Ripblade Falconpunch
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #91 - 2015-08-11 04:38:05 UTC
    Chance Ravinne wrote:
    Andrew Jester wrote:
    lol expecting chance ravinne to advocate for ANYTHING


    Yes yes, I come here for my health... and of course the scores of fawning fans (so many of them here in the wormhole subforum.


    At least you know where you stand around here.

    Knowing is half the battle right?
    Bleedingthrough
    #92 - 2015-08-11 05:34:25 UTC
    Chance Ravinne wrote:
    It is worth re-mentioning that citadels are not the be-all, end-all structures so some of their shortcomings may have to be covered by other new structures.


    All I want is a place to store ships that can not be trolled effortless and riskless.
    The process of capturing should provide potential content like something worth killing on grid. It would be fatal for w-space if a single (non-capital/marauder) ship could “RF” these new POSes.
    Barrogh Habalu
    Imperial Shipment
    Amarr Empire
    #93 - 2015-08-11 05:47:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Barrogh Habalu
    Chance Ravinne wrote:
    As far as undock games go, this is something nobody wants and CCP is trying to address this to prevent BS especially in w-space. I can't say if it'll work out exactly but based on what I've seen I'm optimistic the solution is there. Keep in mind citadel docking gives you an outside view, that is just one component of preventing docking games. Manning guns from within the structure is another part. The invulnerability link is a third part. And there are additional ideas being thrown around beyond that.

    Wait a minute, sir.
    These ideas sound like something aimed at station camping, however, from my experience docking games by defender (by both parties for Empire) is what is seen as more problematic. For example, undocking en masse and then disengaging and docking back individually once aggro is taken while the rest are trying to burn at least a ship from another team. Rinse and repeat. This may be especially pronounced with player-owned structures since only one side can dock there.

    While entosis means that attackers can go for the station directly, docking tactics will play a big role in those fights that don't involve a lot of people - which will happen quite a bit in low-class space.

    Will this be addressed somehow, or is it considered workable?

    Inb4 I'm just rambling...

    Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
    Chance Ravinne
    WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
    WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
    #94 - 2015-08-11 12:25:32 UTC
    Barrogh Habalu wrote:
    Chance Ravinne wrote:
    As far as undock games go, this is something nobody wants and CCP is trying to address this to prevent BS especially in w-space. I can't say if it'll work out exactly but based on what I've seen I'm optimistic the solution is there. Keep in mind citadel docking gives you an outside view, that is just one component of preventing docking games. Manning guns from within the structure is another part. The invulnerability link is a third part. And there are additional ideas being thrown around beyond that.

    Wait a minute, sir.
    These ideas sound like something aimed at station camping, however, from my experience docking games by defender (by both parties for Empire) is what is seen as more problematic. For example, undocking en masse and then disengaging and docking back individually once aggro is taken while the rest are trying to burn at least a ship from another team. Rinse and repeat. This may be especially pronounced with player-owned structures since only one side can dock there.

    While entosis means that attackers can go for the station directly, docking tactics will play a big role in those fights that don't involve a lot of people - which will happen quite a bit in low-class space.

    Will this be addressed somehow, or is it considered workable?

    Inb4 I'm just rambling...


    There is a very healthy discussion about this right now and obviously I can't promise exactly what will be implemented but some of the ideas that I seen if they work out correctly will prevent a situation like we're talking about. Undocking should be a commitment.

    You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
    Andrew Jester
    Collapsed Out
    Pandemic Legion
    #95 - 2015-08-11 12:53:32 UTC
    Barrogh Habalu wrote:
    Chance Ravinne wrote:
    As far as undock games go, this is something nobody wants and CCP is trying to address this to prevent BS especially in w-space. I can't say if it'll work out exactly but based on what I've seen I'm optimistic the solution is there. Keep in mind citadel docking gives you an outside view, that is just one component of preventing docking games. Manning guns from within the structure is another part. The invulnerability link is a third part. And there are additional ideas being thrown around beyond that.

    Wait a minute, sir.
    These ideas sound like something aimed at station camping, however, from my experience docking games by defender (by both parties for Empire) is what is seen as more problematic. For example, undocking en masse and then disengaging and docking back individually once aggro is taken while the rest are trying to burn at least a ship from another team. Rinse and repeat. This may be especially pronounced with player-owned structures since only one side can dock there.

    While entosis means that attackers can go for the station directly, docking tactics will play a big role in those fights that don't involve a lot of people - which will happen quite a bit in low-class space.

    Will this be addressed somehow, or is it considered workable?

    Inb4 I'm just rambling...


    if they act similar to how stations do with entosis now(which I assume they will because iirc they're meant to eventually replace stations as well as POses?) then not only will defenders be able to play station games, attackers will be able to too~ If it gets freeported after 1 cycle or something? then the attacker fleet can just dock up and wait. It'll be FUN.

    Hopefully I'm wrong here tho

    If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy
    Trinkets friend
    Sudden Buggery
    Sending Thots And Players
    #96 - 2015-08-11 23:50:08 UTC
    Jester, the problem with setting for RUS Hour and hoping it bleeds into AUS TZ (best TZ!) is that if you succeed in AUS TZ then the timer resets to come out...in RUS Hour.

    Whee?

    This is why AUS TZ in nullsec is just bored idiots in Svipuls crashing gate or instawarping in prop mode. No timers exist in the AU TZ and if they have bled over from another TZ due to being incomplete, if you complete in AU it resets to whatever ungodly hour of the night you can't be arsed getting up to attack.

    Fozziesov is Time Zone Cancer coming on the heels of Space AIDS. The next thing is going to be Citadel Ebola with hobbit can loots.

    Chance Ravinne says he wants to see an end to a system that rewards evictors. This coming from someone whose organisation has never evicted anyone and couldn't light a fart in a curry eating contest using a blowtorch.

    So, Chance, what do you see as a valid reason for evictions?

    From my point of view valid reasons, in order of importance;
    1. I identified them as one of your guys' alts (twice now we have evicted your idiots)
    2. I wonder why there's 7 SMA's in this POS in a C1?
    3. Their POS looks like it was set up by a blind octopus with Parkinsons
    4. They keep avoiding fights and/or mouthing off in Local
    5. I was moving holes and theirs looked good
    6. The Krab People Nation needs more lebensraum in C5 magnetar space / Quaserknocks doesn't own this C6 yet
    7. Because.
    8. Just because.

    ~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
    Chance Ravinne
    WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
    WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
    #97 - 2015-08-12 02:31:10 UTC
    Trinkets friend wrote:

    So, Chance, what do you see as a valid reason for evictions?

    From my point of view valid reasons, in order of importance;
    1. I identified them as one of your guys' alts (twice now we have evicted your idiots)
    2. I wonder why there's 7 SMA's in this POS in a C1?
    3. Their POS looks like it was set up by a blind octopus with Parkinsons
    4. They keep avoiding fights and/or mouthing off in Local
    5. I was moving holes and theirs looked good
    6. The Krab People Nation needs more lebensraum in C5 magnetar space / Quaserknocks doesn't own this C6 yet
    7. Because.
    8. Just because.


    In order to not make it look too much like I am paying you to advertise my corporation,* I've only quoted the non-sponsored material. Let's try to at least pretend like we don't have a cross-channel campaign running! It's what I'd expect from a public relations professional.

    Anyway, you don't need my validation or anyone else's validation to smash in someone's structure. The people who put it up are dumb? You don't like them? The POS had a stupid name? It's full of loot? You're bored and attacking plays into a ridiculous roleplay narrative you've constructed to justify your otherwise pointless actions? These are all valid reasons.

    * Just to make sure, I make payments by a flat monthly rate. If you expect some kind of per-namedrop payment scheme I don't think I can make that happen, as the costs would quickly skyrocket if past posting history is any indication.

    You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
    Ripblade Falconpunch
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #98 - 2015-08-12 03:49:28 UTC
    Chance Ravinne wrote:
    * Just to make sure, I make payments by a flat monthly rate. If you expect some kind of per-namedrop payment scheme I don't think I can make that happen, as the costs would quickly skyrocket if past posting history is any indication.


    At least Trinket posts regularly, and is amusing. Despite your recent attempts at pretending to be active, it's way past that point by now.
    Chance Ravinne
    WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
    WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
    #99 - 2015-08-12 04:11:09 UTC
    Ripblade Falconpunch wrote:
    Chance Ravinne wrote:
    * Just to make sure, I make payments by a flat monthly rate. If you expect some kind of per-namedrop payment scheme I don't think I can make that happen, as the costs would quickly skyrocket if past posting history is any indication.


    At least Trinket posts regularly, and is amusing. Despite your recent attempts at pretending to be active, it's way past that point by now.


    I'm not really sure what you're getting at. I also find Trinket highly amusing, which is why I engage with him. Plus it's great for SEO.

    As for my pretendings, I've always been a believer that if pretending hard enough feels the same as actually doing something, there isn't an effective difference. So while I'm pretending to chat with CCP every day about the stuff I pretended to read here, on Reddit, on Twitter, and other places, I'll pretend to feel productive.

    If however you'd prefer I pretended not to care what anyone in this subforum thought, well that would strike me as terribly mean -- all the other forums are so boring by comparison.

    You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
    Nevyn Auscent
    Broke Sauce
    #100 - 2015-08-12 14:12:24 UTC
    calaretu wrote:
    For the record automated defence does not equal automated guns. As the quote I cant be arsed to requote say they are looking at ways for the citadel to counter trollceptors without manned guns.

    Please show me any NPC's (Short of Drifters) that can't be Trollceptored into pointlessness. Heck, even drifters can probably be trollceptored.