These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Building your Citadel, one block at a time

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
#281 - 2015-10-28 09:04:21 UTC
It should be noted that if you have caps in a c4, with the fact that all caps are getting all the magic hangers and the change that you can deploy from fleet hangers (Others?), you probably can deploy these from a capitol that is not a freighter.

Yep, 100% speculation there. But it is more fun that reading all the blogs. AmIRight.

AKA the scientist.

Death and Glory!

Well fun is also good.
Siliya
State War Academy
Caldari State
#282 - 2015-10-28 09:26:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Siliya
Abaddon Nergal wrote:
Siliya wrote:


aside from the fact that somewhere they said this was an oversight (was a few pages back).. I expect it to be bumped up past Max Orca range of 105k

the one thing we aren't getting info on is what type of installation is required to construct it ...
will we be able to construct it inside a wormhole (put the BPC into the cooker and pop a citidel out) in an array - and if so what array will we be able to use
or will we have to haul it in via freighter or Jump freighter after constructing it in a NPC station(or outpost) in K-space


So I have this straight you are worried about something that hasn't happened,
I think it is more constructive to say "CCP we agree with the volumes of the citadels, thank you"
I for one agree with the currently selected volumes if in the case of this being an oversight well you still have tethering right?
It should be stated I have no issue with Capitals in C1-4 being.... punished. You want them? you'll find a way to build them.

In respect of creating the citadel, agreed no information yet however I would suggest that only stations (the one you dock at) will be the only thing capable of building them.



you've pretty much nailed my concern
however I expect CCP to do the most unpopular thing possible here (forced to build in K-space, Raise Volume on Larges beyond Orca Range)

I also dont have an issue with caps in c1-4, I feel this will end up being an unintentional consequence of this change, I also feel that if they intend to stay with this model then caps that exist in Lower class wormholes NEED to be Reimbursed to the owning players as a change like this will end up forcing owners to eat a multi-billion cost asset because of a game change that was not even a Blip on their Radar when they were constructed

CCP has all but said that you cannot put a large in a c1-4 by stating that freighters are required to deploy (I am ignoring the Orca deploying because I truly believe this will not be possible) "we understand that this may prevent certain ships - blah blah - this is intended ... they have just not Confirmed it yet

as a side note on construction - and I am just raising a point, not complaining is that if we are indeed forced to haul these in it needs to be mentioned that some c5/6 wormholes dont see 1/2way viable capital K-space connections for Weeks (and no Deep Null doesnt count) I feel if this is NOT Taken into account then this may indeed just become another "screw Wormholers" change
and before you start talking about the static ... just remember - freighters cant fit through an M267 or an E175
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
#283 - 2015-10-28 09:33:13 UTC
Siliya wrote:


as a side note on construction - and I am just raising a point, not complaining is that if we are indeed forced to haul these in it needs to be mentioned that some c5/6 wormholes dont see 1/2way viable capital K-space connections for Weeks (and no Deep Null doesnt count) I feel if this is NOT Taken into account then this may indeed just become another "screw Wormholers" change

That is life in a WH. Where the isk loss of a Capitol is not really the problem. But getting more in and the fits.

However we knew that when we moved in. Running C5/C6 chains to find something or get something in is standard op for even the smallest of these corps (I have only me as an active person right now). Leroy a unfitted dread through 3 c5/c6 connections with a hyena for support. Well when stuff lands on grid, you get that PVP rush.....

AKA the scientist.

Death and Glory!

Well fun is also good.
Siliya
State War Academy
Caldari State
#284 - 2015-10-28 09:39:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Siliya
Delt0r Garsk wrote:
Siliya wrote:


as a side note on construction - and I am just raising a point, not complaining is that if we are indeed forced to haul these in it needs to be mentioned that some c5/6 wormholes dont see 1/2way viable capital K-space connections for Weeks (and no Deep Null doesnt count) I feel if this is NOT Taken into account then this may indeed just become another "screw Wormholers" change

That is life in a WH. Where the isk loss of a Capitol is not really the problem. But getting more in and the fits.

However we knew that when we moved in. Running C5/C6 chains to find something or get something in is standard op for even the smallest of these corps (I have only me as an active person right now). Leroy a unfitted dread through 3 c5/c6 connections with a hyena for support. Well when stuff lands on grid, you get that PVP rush.....



agreed tho like I said ... this is a forced mechanic change with an unknown amount of time to adapt (we dont know how long PoS's will stay once citadels land)

I know we still have Months for all the rest of this information to come out but the sooner some Details are released... the sooner we can start preparing ....

tho in hindsight if I follow my own train of thought it becomes pretty obvious we wont be able to construct them inside holes
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#285 - 2015-10-28 10:20:12 UTC
Siliya wrote:


agreed tho like I said ... this is a forced mechanic change with an unknown amount of time to adapt (we dont know how long PoS's will stay once citadels land)

I know we still have Months for all the rest of this information to come out but the sooner some Details are released... the sooner we can start preparing ....

tho in hindsight if I follow my own train of thought it becomes pretty obvious we wont be able to construct them inside holes

You've probably got something like two years before PoS's go, since PoS's will remain until after all the other structures are also implemented. And there are what, six classes of structures to be added?
Nillus K'varr
Trident Nebula Corporation
#286 - 2015-10-28 10:30:44 UTC
Quote:
As a consideration for players living in null-security space, we are investing coming up with more ways to build such fuel block to reduce the logistic hassle to haul four types of isotopes around. For example, we are considering adding 4 more blueprints to build the new fuel block with one racial isotope instead of 4, but increasing the amount to compensate.


I beg you to not do this, please. This new fuel block gives you the perfect opportunity to encourage people to leave the overpopulated Caldari space and drive conflict between nullsec entities.
The more self-sufficiency you pump into nullsec space the less conflict there will be among stablished nullsec entities.
Also, having a standard fuel block that requires all 4 racial isotopes will drive miners to fill the other 3 empires and after the miners there will follow gankers and industrialists, then mission runners, explorers and PvPers.

When I was thinking about ways to make the 'Simon's Patterned' high sec, 4 isolated empires divided by low sec strips, viable, this new fuel block was literally extacly what I was thinking.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#287 - 2015-10-28 10:43:40 UTC
Siliya wrote:

I also dont have an issue with caps in c1-4, I feel this will end up being an unintentional consequence of this change, I also feel that if they intend to stay with this model then caps that exist in Lower class wormholes NEED to be Reimbursed to the owning players as a change like this will end up forcing owners to eat a multi-billion cost asset because of a game change that was not even a Blip on their Radar when they were constructed

This is ridiculous. The fact that you spent X amount of money in the past, and that money is becoming moderately more inconvenient after a transition period of several months does not entitle you to reimbursement.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#288 - 2015-10-28 10:50:26 UTC
Nillus K'varr wrote:
Quote:
As a consideration for players living in null-security space, we are investing coming up with more ways to build such fuel block to reduce the logistic hassle to haul four types of isotopes around. For example, we are considering adding 4 more blueprints to build the new fuel block with one racial isotope instead of 4, but increasing the amount to compensate.


I beg you to not do this, please. This new fuel block gives you the perfect opportunity to encourage people to leave the overpopulated Caldari space and drive conflict between nullsec entities.
The more self-sufficiency you pump into nullsec space the less conflict there will be among stablished nullsec entities.
Also, having a standard fuel block that requires all 4 racial isotopes will drive miners to fill the other 3 empires and after the miners there will follow gankers and industrialists, then mission runners, explorers and PvPers.

When I was thinking about ways to make the 'Simon's Patterned' high sec, 4 isolated empires divided by low sec strips, viable, this new fuel block was literally extacly what I was thinking.

Unfortunately, CCP is at odds with your beliefs. They want nullsec to have less dependency on Jita, not more. Your vignette about regional resources causing conflict doesn't hold up in a world where that very resource is available in highsec. Additionally, there's absolutely no way that any nullsec entity is going to do something as daft as take space for access to new kinds of ice, especially after Phoebe's reduction in power projection and Aegis sov's harsh response times to sovereignty contests. Players will shrug, purchase the things from Jita, and jump them directly off of the undock. CCP wants this to happen less.

On the plus side, with blocks being forged from any type of racial ice, manufacturers of these blocks will drive demand for the "cheapest" tope flavors, increasing costs for all types of ice.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#289 - 2015-10-28 11:14:58 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Cat Harkness wrote:
Destiny Dain2 wrote:
Can a Citadel change their fit on the fly with weapons and ammo?


I picture a sub-capital fleet come in on the final round and the persons Citadel is fitted for them and then when the timer starts, in come the Capitals with no way to defend.


No. Slots can not be changed while the Citadel is under attack (any time the shields, armor, hull is not 100%).

So not even during the repair cycle.




Hmmm I tend to remember we stated after shields were gone. You make me doubt because I can see some crazy module swapping game in combat. Let me double-check and come back at you on that one.


Double-checked, you won't be able to refit in combat. Also won't be able to change modules after shields are gone.
Siliya
State War Academy
Caldari State
#290 - 2015-10-28 11:15:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Siliya
Querns wrote:
Siliya wrote:

I also dont have an issue with caps in c1-4, I feel this will end up being an unintentional consequence of this change, I also feel that if they intend to stay with this model then caps that exist in Lower class wormholes NEED to be Reimbursed to the owning players as a change like this will end up forcing owners to eat a multi-billion cost asset because of a game change that was not even a Blip on their Radar when they were constructed

This is ridiculous. The fact that you spent X amount of money in the past, and that money is becoming moderately more inconvenient after a transition period of several months does not entitle you to reimbursement.



Moderatly is severly understating this
and Transition periods Mean SQUAT for people in these situations
- for years you have been able to have them in a PoS for protection ...
now .. you don't have that option unless you can deploy a large citadel into a c1-4 ..
this is a big reason why construction details are so important

if we have to haul these into wormholes .....
then deploying a Large in a c1-4 is impossible due to the max Jump Mass of anything leading into one of these Holes (300m Max Jump Mass and freighters crack 1m)
by not reimbursing these pilots you are punishing them via Forced game mechanics - they no longer have any security for their capitals and they cant get them out due to max jump mass - cant get them out via repackaging (Archon is 1Million packaged)
they cant reprocess them because the arrays dont support it

if we CAN construct them in wormholes ...
then this is a Moot Point ... and then I would agree that reimbursement would not be needed

but I am hesitant to believe in CCP's judgment on this

how would the big power blocs feel if the XL Citadels could not tether Moms or Titans ... PoS's went away, and you were prevented from moving them puting all of the supers in the game at Risk - that is very similar to what your suggesting players with caps in lower wormholes live with ...
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#291 - 2015-10-28 11:16:22 UTC
Querns wrote:

On the plus side, with blocks being forged from any type of racial ice, manufacturers of these blocks will drive demand for the "cheapest" tope flavors, increasing costs for all types of ice.

We can also hope they might get crazy and work out how to create variable input BPO's, at which point a whole bunch of other fun becomes possible as a result of that change.
And yes you are right, having them made from each variety of ice actually drives demand better for ice than even quantities of all four.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#292 - 2015-10-28 11:17:54 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

Double-checked, you won't be able to refit in combat. Also won't be able to change modules after shields are gone.

Can you confirm. Is the inability to refit in combat due to a weapons timer? In which case wait 60 seconds and you can refit.
Or can citadels not refit any time the repair timer is running so as soon as someone takes the first shot at you?
Which of these scenario's explains why Citadels can not refit in combat.
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#293 - 2015-10-28 11:24:11 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Ytterbium
Max Kolonko wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Saede Riordan wrote:
Chavez Domingo wrote:
wasnt a large citadel at 80.000m³ that can fit into a orca... no need for a freighter than...


Is this actually going to be the case CCP, or is it an oversight? I want to know whether I need to start building an in-system freighter or not. Dev blog says freighters needed to deploy a large, but by the volume an orca will be able to do it with currently listed value. I don't want to have to build a freighter in my wormhole but I will if I need to.

Just yes or no on that. Do I need a freighter to deploy a large, or can I do it with an orca?


Probably an oversight Twisted


So which one is oversight? Do we need orca or freighter for large citadel?

Also have any thought been put on replacement mechanics for current moon coverage in WH as defense mechanics? I remember during Structure Town Hall there was discussions about it and some proposal from CCP side but nothing mentioned about it in blog or during presentation.

During presentation there was (very brief) slide that showed that RF in WH will be shorter, but it was very quick so I could not look at it and it was not mentioned by presenter at all (something something only 24h for second rf???) Could You elaborate on how current plans for RF are loking, especially in WH?

Also have any thought been put on probplem of trust, access to player hangars by directors? With poses (unless You use those stupid personal hangars) thief can only take what he can cary by himself, everything else is in corporate structures accessible by directors. With new citadels he have unlimited personal hangar to take everything from Your corp You gave access too. We in WH use shared ships in many situations (no reason for EVERY member to get for example a WH-collapsing BS when you only need few for entire corp, better to have corp accessible ones). A thief or a spy would need to take those ships one at a time, now he just scoops them all to his hangar.



Moon coverage may be replaced with a module that prevents corporation / alliances other than your own to deploy structures but that most likely won't be coming in the first Citadel batch.

Since Citadels will have infinite cargo holds it'll be much easier to give your members more ships to play with in their personal hangars. Sharing corporation hangar access is done at your own risk, like everywhere else in New Eden.

EDIT: removed the mention to L citadel volume, this needs to be discussed more, please refer to this post.
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#294 - 2015-10-28 11:30:04 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Max Kolonko wrote:
Vivi Masivi wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

Outposts will not be replaced with Citadels. They'll be reimbursed, along with their upgrades.



Am I right in thinking that you will remove Outposts from game?

As previously I saw picture that in the end of transition process we will be banned of building new Outposts and upgrades will be reimbursed in some way.

Now you're thinking to remove Outposts as well?


they stated from the beginning that this will be the end goal, all pos and player stations removed as more and more functionality is being migrated into new structures



PLEASE stop saying player "Stations" they are called OUTPOSTS

Normally, I wouldn't care but the difference between an outpost and a station kinda matters here and is causing a cubic fuckton of confusion


You can't really blame him though when we (CCP) have been quite lax with the naming. There is has been quite some confusion internally as well when discussing those.


My personal little naming scheme:

  • Stations: NPC stations that cannot be conquered (can't change owner or directly manage it)
  • Conquerable stations: NPC stations that can be conquered (can change the owner and can manage it)
  • Outposts: player-build stations that can be conquered, upgraded (can change the owner, can upgrade it and can manage it)
  • Starbases: the control tower + secondary structures (sometimes called POS for Player Owned Structures, but I don't like that term because it could encompass Outposts as well)
  • Deployables: stuff we added later on with a short life expectancy or gameplay use, like Mobile Depot, Mobile Tractor Unit etc...
Munseventy
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#295 - 2015-10-28 11:33:56 UTC
What about building Where can i build them do i start moving PI and ore in or out of WH
Azahar Ortenegro
Seashells and Fireflies
#296 - 2015-10-28 11:37:47 UTC
And what about replacing Small and Medium POSes in-space storage and fitting abilities?
Xindi Kraid
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#297 - 2015-10-28 12:19:44 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
We will change the volume of the L Citadel to prevent Orcas to carry it around.

Disappointing
Obil Que
Star Explorers
Solis Tenebris
#298 - 2015-10-28 12:54:15 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

We will change the volume of the L Citadel to prevent Orcas to carry it around.


I suppose I can just wait for the number but if you know what it is going to be, will it fit in a Rorqual?
Obil Que
Star Explorers
Solis Tenebris
#299 - 2015-10-28 13:01:14 UTC
Delt0r Garsk wrote:
It should be noted that if you have caps in a c4, with the fact that all caps are getting all the magic hangers and the change that you can deploy from fleet hangers (Others?), you probably can deploy these from a capitol that is not a freighter.

Yep, 100% speculation there. But it is more fun that reading all the blogs. AmIRight.


Given the challenges in the past with deployables, cargo, and fleet hangers, I'd feel better if we had a definitive answer if these can be deployed from fleet hangers. You are right, if they can, then there are additional choices other than a Freighter for deploying them. My guess, since they did specifically say Freighter, is that it is from Cargo only.
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#300 - 2015-10-28 13:19:43 UTC
Azahar Ortenegro wrote:
And what about replacing Small and Medium POSes in-space storage and fitting abilities?

mobile depot