These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Remote System POS, WH space, and Citadels

First post
Author
Drago Shouna
Doomheim
#41 - 2016-04-01 19:03:04 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
The replies in this thread are correct, it is intentional that you cannot unanchor or transfer away your structure to avoid it being destroyed in a wardec. The asset safety will save the hangar contents but the hull and its fittings will always be at risk.


Yes and it sucks.

Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."

Welcome to EVE.

Rapscallion Jones
Omnibus Solutions
#42 - 2016-04-01 19:50:16 UTC
Bethan Le Troix wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
The replies in this thread are correct, it is intentional that you cannot unanchor or transfer away your structure to avoid it being destroyed in a wardec. The asset safety will save the hangar contents but the hull and its fittings will always be at risk.


The average industrial orientated player in EVE Online is not going to like this risk element one bit methinks. I would suggest you consider allowing players to continue to be able to unanchor expensive infrastructure prior to wardecs beginning. The alternative is that EVE Online will likely leech even more player numbers than we already have .

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. Players will go elsewhere if they are forced to do something they don't want to do. My two cents for what they are worth. Smile


There is nothing preventing an industrialist from taking their valuable blueprints out of a Citadel at risk, that's how it is with the current POS system.

Just as you quickly move PI into the POCO as your Viator dies on a lowsec pick up, or you pull implants from a scrammed pod, so too you'll have to kill the research and move your blueprints to safety. The citadel is just disposable hull, nothing more. Once you learn to think of your POS/Citadel this way, you'll learn to enjoy the game far more.

The industrial cat and mouse game is a lot of fun, get in the game and just let it go! After all they're only space pixels.
Neadayan Drakhon
Heuristic Industrial And Development
AddictClan
#43 - 2016-04-01 21:14:39 UTC
Rapscallion Jones wrote:
or you pull implants from a scrammed pod

What, so they don't show up on a KM?
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#44 - 2016-04-01 22:53:07 UTC
Rapscallion Jones wrote:
Bethan Le Troix wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
The replies in this thread are correct, it is intentional that you cannot unanchor or transfer away your structure to avoid it being destroyed in a wardec. The asset safety will save the hangar contents but the hull and its fittings will always be at risk.


The average industrial orientated player in EVE Online is not going to like this risk element one bit methinks. I would suggest you consider allowing players to continue to be able to unanchor expensive infrastructure prior to wardecs beginning. The alternative is that EVE Online will likely leech even more player numbers than we already have .

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. Players will go elsewhere if they are forced to do something they don't want to do. My two cents for what they are worth. Smile


There is nothing preventing an industrialist from taking their valuable blueprints out of a Citadel at risk, that's how it is with the current POS system.

Just as you quickly move PI into the POCO as your Viator dies on a lowsec pick up, or you pull implants from a scrammed pod, so too you'll have to kill the research and move your blueprints to safety. The citadel is just disposable hull, nothing more. Once you learn to think of your POS/Citadel this way, you'll learn to enjoy the game far more.

The industrial cat and mouse game is a lot of fun, get in the game and just let it go! After all they're only space pixels.


Pretty much this, you can easily get back all your stuff but the Citadel itself is both an investment and a liability. The same as undocking in any ship is potentially a liability.

Instead of running away we are trying to encourage you to stay by giving you big guns instead Bear

BTW if you are not comfortable investing in your own citadel you could use someone elses

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

Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#45 - 2016-04-02 01:43:30 UTC
Fit guns, hire mercs.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Geronimo McVain
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2016-04-02 05:36:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Geronimo McVain
The Defender is putting his ships at risk like the attacker. But he ALSO has his citadel at risk.the attacker can pull back but there is no way to retaliate for the Defender. Ifthe attacker needs to have an equal Citadel in the Region he is also at risk. Docking is a viable tactic against Bad odds but why should only the attacker have this possibility? Example: if goonswarm is hunting you you Dock up and change to an alt but what could you do with a Citadel?
To clarity it: the attacker can always choose the best odds while the Defender has to stand tall against Bad odds and that's unfair. With a mandatory Citadel you might think twice if you want to attack every other Citadel in the Region because someone might get back at you orthe other Clans might Kick you out of the Region by popping your Citadel whenever it goes up
Shayla Etherodyne
Delta Laroth Industries
#47 - 2016-04-02 05:59:37 UTC
jepsjeps wrote:
Shayla Etherodyne wrote:

Based on the precedent of POCOs I think the fees would be pretty high in most of those citadels. And I would be vary of using player owned structures when I am not part of the owning corp/alliance and have no information about when they would decide to change rates, move around, block someone, be wardecced and so on.


Yeah, you might want to build relationship with the owner (which is always good thing in eve). If they decide to block you, you will be able to move your stuff to NPC station. I


One of my problems is how much power over me I would give to the Citadel owner.
You remember how the BOB alliance was dispersed? 1 disgruntled/bored player or an infiltrator decide to pull the plug and disperse the owning corp and/or self destroy the citadel and everything I have there will disperse in a puff of pixels and stream of informations.

Realistic: sure. But this is a game too. i don't like the idea of giving that much power over me to someone that can decide tomorrow that it is time to quit the game.
Shayla Etherodyne
Delta Laroth Industries
#48 - 2016-04-02 06:08:49 UTC
Neadayan Drakhon wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
Neadayan Drakhon wrote:

While I can understand (somewhat) the reasoning behind Citadels being unable to be removed once war is declared, I really hope that the industrial structures don't get the same restriction, but they probably will. Personally I don't think Citadels should be locked like that, if someone wants to take the effort to empty and remove it for a wardec, they should have the option. Seems unnecessraily arbitrary that we can't. Kinda takes away from the sandbox feel. With POS's, you can choose to remove them, or arm them, depending on your use and needs. Either one takes an active effort and time.
Nah, evasion isn't fun for anyone. If you are benefiting from a structure, you should have to defend it. That provides content for the whole game when stuff is actually on the line, rather than everyone just holing up in a station whenever they think they can't win.

Players, in general, are too timid and seem to assume the worst about their opponents, that is that they are immensely powerful, competent and skilled, when usually they are just another bunch of scrubs. Mechanics that incentivize defending your stuff over evasion are needed in a open-world game like this. Of course your structures also need to be easily defensible to prevent everything from just burning to the ground all the time, but from the look of Citadels, they are not going to be so easy to knock over and will require the attacker to also put something on the line to try.

But this is off-topic. Perhaps some of the yet-to-come structures will indeed have shorter unanchor timers than the 7-day citadel one, but I would not expect them to be less than the 24h war warm-up period from what CCP Nullarbor has said.



Taking down a POS (or part of a POS) for a wardec is defending it. You're defending your assets by securing them in a station.

It might not be what YOU want me to do. But just because you want to blow up my stuff doesn't mean I have to let you.

The downside to taking down a POS (or citadel) of course is that you can't use it while it's down. Yes this is a PVP centric game. But it's a SANDBOX pvp game. Let me play in my sandbox how I want to. It just seems an arbitrary rule that you can't take down a citadel whenever you want, even mid-wardec. Sure make it so you can't drop it while its being attacked.

I just don't see any good reason to arbitrarily restrict structures from coming down because someone declared war on you.

You say defend your assets, I say removing them from the field is a perfectly valid form of defense.


The other drawback of tearing down a POS is that it can be replaced by another corp POS.
So it isn't a painless decision.

Shayla Etherodyne
Delta Laroth Industries
#49 - 2016-04-02 06:17:45 UTC
Pookoko wrote:
It's difficult to say now what the final mechanic will be.

The following was the original dev concept.

"Unanchoring may only be started if the structure has full shields and is not within a repair timer. This is to prevent some early bail-out should it be attacked

Once the unanchoring process has started, the structure will become invulnerable for a specific amount of time

Once the invulnerability timers runs out, the structure will be vulnerable for damage yet again, with having a repair process identical of what’s been mentioned above. This time however, shields, armor and hulls will be fully available"

https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/citadels-sieges-and-you-v2/


But the above dev blog did not specify how long it takes to unanchor.

and then I read from SISI feedback thread that unachoring timer is 7 days

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=473950&p=10

And I think it must be from the above thread the OP gets the idea Citadel cannot be unanchored when there's a war coming.

As far as I understand, there is no mechanic blocking players from unanchoring a Citadel during or before imminent war. If there is, I have seen no such information so maybe some one can point reference if they think other wise. But when you think about it, it is very unlikely there will be such war time restrictions, because it would mean that an one man corp can perma dec an alliance making it impossible to unanchor any of their citadels forever (as long as war dec lasts).

So I think the currently mentioned 7 days timer is the only restrictive mechanic in place for now. But of course, the length of such timer or anything at this stage may change before hitting TQ though.




What happen to the items stored in a citadel or those sold in its market when ti is unanchored?
Or when a module is removed?

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#50 - 2016-04-02 06:38:45 UTC
Shayla Etherodyne wrote:

What happen to the items stored in a citadel or those sold in its market when ti is unanchored?
Or when a module is removed?


They go into the asset recovery system.
If the market is removed they may simply be all cancelled orders but if it is unanchored they go into recovery.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#51 - 2016-04-02 06:54:15 UTC
Geronimo McVain wrote:
The Defender is putting his ships at risk like the attacker. But he ALSO has his citadel at risk.the attacker can pull back but there is no way to retaliate for the Defender. Ifthe attacker needs to have an equal Citadel in the Region he is also at risk. Docking is a viable tactic against Bad odds but why should only the attacker have this possibility? Example: if goonswarm is hunting you you Dock up and change to an alt but what could you do with a Citadel?
To clarity it: the attacker can always choose the best odds while the Defender has to stand tall against Bad odds and that's unfair. With a mandatory Citadel you might think twice if you want to attack every other Citadel in the Region because someone might get back at you orthe other Clans might Kick you out of the Region by popping your Citadel whenever it goes up

So what? The citdadel is only vulnerable 3 hours a week (for the medium anyway). If you can't play defense for a couple hours a week (and you only have to do the when you receive a wardec) and do your part to provide content in this game, you don't deserve to benefit from one.

How is it not fair when the defender gets warning, is immune from attack 97% of the time while getting to select the time of that small window, and has access to a powerful battlestation (which the attacker does not have) complete with weapons, reps and system which prevents the attacker from fleeing? And even if you do lose, your stuff is 100% safe?

It seems to me that CCP has made every effort to make defending these things advantage the defender, but they have made it so you actually have to defend them and not just roll them up and hide. And they have made it so the aggressor (and the defending ships too for that matter) can't immediately dock up so that running is less viable tactic. By making the structure vulnerable, yet easy to defend (and not too punitive to lose), and preventing evasion tactics like docking up and immediately fleeing, these structures will provide incentive for both sides to fight.

Eve is always going to be unfair and players can always choose not to play by logging off. But at least with this design logging off or docking up isn't the best solution, or even possible, which is going to make more things explode, and explosions are content for both PvPers and industrialists alike.
Shayla Etherodyne
Delta Laroth Industries
#52 - 2016-04-02 06:57:14 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Shayla Etherodyne wrote:

What happen to the items stored in a citadel or those sold in its market when ti is unanchored?
Or when a module is removed?


They go into the asset recovery system.
If the market is removed they may simply be all cancelled orders but if it is unanchored they go into recovery.



Not jet logged in singularity after my return. So, how it work?
Where I recover my stuff?

To put another way: it can become a system to "teleport" items? Or it end in a virtual or real container in that area of space?
How do you access it?
Depending on how it work recovering fitting ships can be very complicated or way too easy.




Geronimo McVain
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#53 - 2016-04-02 08:02:29 UTC
So where is the Problem if the attacker needs to have a Citadel on it's own? And if ,you pull back an attack because of high resistance youare doing the same as someone packing up his Citadel because maybe the Defender wants a Fight. I don't like the idea of packing a citadel but only when the attacker puts a citadel in danger himself.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#54 - 2016-04-02 08:11:53 UTC
Shayla Etherodyne wrote:

Not jet logged in singularity after my return. So, how it work?
Where I recover my stuff?

To put another way: it can become a system to "teleport" items? Or it end in a virtual or real container in that area of space?
How do you access it?
Depending on how it work recovering fitting ships can be very complicated or way too easy.

RTFM
You are asking stuff that has been answered ages ago in Dev blogs.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#55 - 2016-04-02 08:49:16 UTC
Geronimo McVain wrote:
So where is the Problem if the attacker needs to have a Citadel on it's own? And if ,you pull back an attack because of high resistance youare doing the same as someone packing up his Citadel because maybe the Defender wants a Fight. I don't like the idea of packing a citadel but only when the attacker puts a citadel in danger himself.

I see no problem with limiting the ability to declare wars to corporations that have deployed a citadel or maybe another less expensive structure, as long as the war itself is not tied to that structure. Having something for the defender to counter-attack might generate some interesting content.

But that is something for another thread regarding war mechanics and would have to be part of a much larger war revamp. This thread is about Citadels and the fact that your Citadel is vulnerable to attackers who may not have something to counter-attack is not "unfair". It is exactly like every other PvE or industrial mechanic that puts you or your assets at risk in exchange for a material benefit to you. It's simple risk vs. reward.

If you don't want the benefits (and assumed risk) of a Citadel, don't deploy one and use the NPC stations or another group's structure. If you want the substantial benefits of owning a Citadel, then deploy one but you have to take responsibility for defending it. The choice is as simple as that.
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#56 - 2016-04-02 11:57:49 UTC
Shayla Etherodyne wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Shayla Etherodyne wrote:

What happen to the items stored in a citadel or those sold in its market when ti is unanchored?
Or when a module is removed?


They go into the asset recovery system.
If the market is removed they may simply be all cancelled orders but if it is unanchored they go into recovery.



Not jet logged in singularity after my return. So, how it work?
Where I recover my stuff?

To put another way: it can become a system to "teleport" items? Or it end in a virtual or real container in that area of space?
How do you access it?
Depending on how it work recovering fitting ships can be very complicated or way too easy.





10% fee for transport to nearest empire station (although they might change this because it would be very predictable) or zero fee if you build a similar structure in the same system.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#57 - 2016-04-02 13:37:15 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:

Pretty much this, you can easily get back all your stuff but the Citadel itself is both an investment and a liability. The same as undocking in any ship is potentially a liability.

Instead of running away we are trying to encourage you to stay by giving you big guns instead Bear

BTW if you are not comfortable investing in your own citadel you could use someone elses


I cannot use my big guns if I'm at the hospital dealing with a sick kid.
I cannot use my big guns if work decides top deploy me somewhere.
I cannot use my big guns if I'm on a cruise ship, or anywhere else with limited internet.
I cannot use my big guns if my computer fails.

With a small POS, I can take it ALL down in a couple of hours. Not with a citadel. You are not encouraging players to stay and fight, you are punishing players for having a life outside of eve.

With a POS you have three options:

1) Stay and fight.
2) Take it down
3) Don't put it up in the first place.

With Citadels, you lose option #2. Eve is supposed to be a game where players make decisions. You are taking one away.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

Geronimo McVain
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#58 - 2016-04-02 13:42:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Geronimo McVain
Where is the risk for the attacker? if you know what you're doing the risk is very limited and you can pull back anytime. I want the same risk forboth sides: the attacker chooses the fight and the Defender can retaliate or even stop the attacker if he blows the attackers citadel to Kingdom come. This way the attacker also creates some PvP Content.
Sanya Chan
Blazing Phoenix Logistics Corp
Black Rose.
#59 - 2016-04-02 14:10:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Sanya Chan
If you are to scared to put your space pixels at risk in space then this is not the game for you and thats the end of it.
Shayla Etherodyne
Delta Laroth Industries
#60 - 2016-04-02 17:09:50 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Shayla Etherodyne wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Shayla Etherodyne wrote:

What happen to the items stored in a citadel or those sold in its market when ti is unanchored?
Or when a module is removed?


They go into the asset recovery system.
If the market is removed they may simply be all cancelled orders but if it is unanchored they go into recovery.



Not jet logged in singularity after my return. So, how it work?
Where I recover my stuff?

To put another way: it can become a system to "teleport" items? Or it end in a virtual or real container in that area of space?
How do you access it?
Depending on how it work recovering fitting ships can be very complicated or way too easy.





10% fee for transport to nearest empire station (although they might change this because it would be very predictable) or zero fee if you build a similar structure in the same system.


Thanks. Found the blog.
Quote:
In cases where items are delivered to a NPC station, players will need to pay an ISK fee based on a percentage of moved item market value (numbers we are considering are around 10% price fee).

"Market value" is wonderfully variable. What is the market value of stuff that i sold only through contracts? Regional average or server average? There is a blog defining how it is determined?

A minimum recovery time, based on the distance between origin and destination, calculated in light years. There will be a minimum time enforced, even if items are recovered within the same system: current number is 5 days minimum, up to 20 days for the longest distances. A choice doesn’t have to be picked after the recovery time has elapsed, players may wait more before picking a recovery option. If the chosen destination structure is blown up before the recovery time has elapsed, it will not reset – a new structure can be picked after the remaining time is gone All items:

Are automatically delivered as a single package which has to be opened, like courier contract plastic wraps. This is done not to overwhelm, confuse or mix items that are being delivered with ones already in place in the hangar.
Owners can pick one item at a time to extract from the package if they so wish. In that case, pricing will be calculated on selected items. This done to allow users to get separate items out if they cannot pay the fee for the whole batch if items are delivered to a NPC station.
Items with exclusive sizes will have restriction on delivery, which mainly includes capital and supercapitals. For example, a titan that was lost inside a Citadel XL structure cannot be delivered to a NPC station or any other Citadel size than XL. Furthermore, a capital or supercapital ship cannot be delivered to high-sec.
When the structure is destroyed all items stay inside containers, but lose password or lock protection.
Corporation hangar items need proper roles to be delivered. Due to the nature of the recovery it is critical access is properly filtered to avoid thefts.

Not too bad

That leaves us with player docked inside the structure when it was lost:

The player is podded with all normal rules applying for such a case (implants are lost) and moved to his or her medical station. If the medical clone was set to the structure that just blew up, it will be moved to a medical NPC station.
Player ships are safely impounded and saved, along with all their fittings and rigs. We considered destroyed the active ship as well, but that would only lead to further hassle where players would always have to remember to exit their active ship when docking at one of those new structures.
As an optional feature, we are investigating having frozen player corpses docked inside the lost structure to appear near the wreck, or be able to be salvaged through the wreck.
Another option is to have all livestock goods be wrecked and appear as frozen meat when delivered through this feature (example: exotic dancers, fedos, liverstock etc..). Yes, bad things happens to perishable products when delivered in such a fashion.

Great, now i can be podded while not logged in. Shocked




After reading it, I have reached the conclusion that I will not store anything that I am not currently using or selling (if some citadel really became a trade hub) in a citadel.


Aside: "There are too many quotes". So it is not possible to comment several sections separately? []Shake head[/]