These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Crius] Starbase feedback

First post First post
Author
#181 - 2014-06-21 17:17:19 UTC
Retar Aveymone wrote:
Alexander Lion wrote:
Moon harvesters are conformed to work in 0.4 by now :) i allready planted one ind a nearby lowsec system.

unfortunatly the big power blocks already send out there scanners to scan all the 0.4 moons for r32 and r64 mats :(

time to build some syphons.


Drug labs can now also be anchored and onlined in 0.4 systems

i like that not even nulli members consider themselves part of the big power blocks



Might be that Nulli is in the N3 block but i also know people in smaller industry allies how haven't the ability to fight N3 or the CFC.

i know some tech moons in 0.4 low sec but it is impossible for most corps to defend the tower from the blocks or the allies within a block.
Caldari State
#182 - 2014-06-21 18:08:24 UTC
Alexander Lion wrote:
i dont know if this was posted befor.

I played a little on Sisi and wanted to anchor a pos mod and there was not enough CPU to put it online. So i put a Design lab offline, where several jobs were running. the Lab got offlined and i could online the other pos mod. no thing. after realizing there were jobs in the lab i checked the jobs tab in the industry window. I recognized there is a large X infront of the Status bars now where the time is counting down. I wondered my the counter still counts down and what will haben, if it reaches 0. will the jobs be delivered or do they fail?

to check if the job status changes again, i online the Lab again and the x became a arrow like the play button on media players. will this jobs be finshed normal?

Update:

So i checked my jobs today. The ones from the first offlined and then onlined again Design lab were delivered successful.

now i will check what will happen to the jobs if the lab is offline wenn the counter is 0.

Update 2:

So if the POS Mod goes offline while jobs are running in it, the counter keeps counting down and when it reaches 0 the status freezes and you cannot deliver the job. After onlining the Lab again the job gets reset to to the moment the mod was offlines.

so my job took 8 min i offlines the mod at 4 min and the job got reset to 4 min after onlining again.


Is this behaviour correct or should the job be canceled without being completable at all?

Having the job pause while the mod is offline was intended behavior it was setup that way with a mind that you could offline the array to online defenses, and not lose the materials everytime someone rf'ed or you attempted to defend your tower.

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.

#183 - 2014-06-21 22:40:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Alexander Lion
ok. i had this in mind but the mechanics is some kind of broken^^ i will upload video on how the timer is jumping around when putting the mods on and offline.

maybe instead of an 'x' infront of the Status there should be a ' I I ' -symbol for pause and the countdown should freeze.

and i got several problems with online and offlicne mods. atm my small caldari control tower has 2000/1875 CPU and very much pos mods online.

videos will be there tomorrrow.
#184 - 2014-06-22 03:40:08 UTC
Does this mean booster manufacturing will be allowed in 0.4 as well?
#185 - 2014-06-22 04:56:12 UTC
Is it intended that you cant put on jobs at the pos remotely ?
Pandemic Legion
#186 - 2014-06-22 12:26:53 UTC
serv Puell wrote:
Is it intended that you cant put on jobs at the pos remotely ?



You can, in fact put jobs on a pos remotely

You just have to make sure everything is there in the pos, in the actual array you want to put the job on first.

They even removed region limits from the supply chain management skill
#187 - 2014-06-22 12:47:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Alexander Lion
Terranid Meester wrote:
Does this mean booster manufacturing will be allowed in 0.4 as well?


yes, i tried it with Standard Crsh Boosters and the job got accepted, and after 6h there where 49 Crash boosters in the Drug Lab. So drug manufactoring in 0.4 Systems is possible.

With the Scientific Networking Skill / Supply Chain Management you can Start jobs remotely. But all mats needed for the job must be in the structure where the job shall be installed.

The Skills are range based now. so at lvl V you can start jobs from not sure if 25 or 20 jumps away. you can park you char in Jita and can Start jobs in Venal and Tribune for example.
Goonswarm Federation
#188 - 2014-06-22 16:12:10 UTC
Is it safe to assume that fitting requirements (CPU and PW) for starbase modules isn't going to change much between now and Crius?

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums

Goonswarm Federation
#189 - 2014-06-22 21:51:59 UTC
TigerXtrm wrote:
Is it safe to assume that fitting requirements (CPU and PW) for starbase modules isn't going to change much between now and Crius?


Considering how little they've changed between now and Exodus, that's probably a safe bet.
C C P Alliance
#190 - 2014-06-23 09:57:34 UTC
Stalence wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Soldarius wrote:
Blue Harrier wrote:
Thanks for the earlier reply to my other post.

Now a question;
We now have the facility to anchor a POS in high sector space but do I take it we will not be able to harvest moons?

I did try and set up a Moon Harvesting Array but got a long winded message about it had to be in 0.4 or less (I think). The message vanishes far too quickly to read it all and because it has multiple lines it’s very difficult to read all of it in one go.


The tl;dr: You cannot do moon mining in .4 or higher.

That is it. I hope that one day that changes. I've never been a fan of artificial and/or arbitrary limitations. Then again, it would probably completely crash the moongoo market.


0.5 or higher as of Crius. We changed a >= to a > so the code does what the authoring was always assuming it did. I just fixed the display text for the attributes this afternoon to reflect this, but the code should already be in place.



Will this affect drug manufacturing too or just moon mining?


Anything that has that attribute that manages which sec status it can be anchored in, will be affected by this change.

TigerXtrm wrote:
Is it safe to assume that fitting requirements (CPU and PW) for starbase modules isn't going to change much between now and Crius?


We're not planning to touch them, but if we find a strong need to we will.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#191 - 2014-06-24 19:49:28 UTC
CCP Greyscale, thank you for this. Common sense changes are good for the game.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

Test Alliance Please Ignore
#192 - 2014-06-24 20:01:39 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
No idea how viable it is, but:

Add a 20 minute online time (but not offline, preferably) to all arrays and labs. Then sure, you can play online/offline shenanigans, but it'd be annoying as hell to do regularly, with large times to do (as you can't online two things at the same time)


Not no. But Hell, no. We just got rid of the unholy crime against humanity that is module online/offline times and you wanna bring it back? Do you have nay idea how badly that effects POSes with silos that have to be regularly switched on and off just so we can take stuff out or put it in?

Nonononononono.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

#193 - 2014-06-24 22:48:50 UTC
mynnna wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Sentient Blade wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
The ones that don't trust their members or are unable to defend their POS will simply research and copy in (now slotless) NPC stations.


I think you're deliberately confusing a small indy corp with a nullsec alliance or RvB.

The notion of defending a POS is nonsense - If it's online, and armed, then the only groups liable to attack it are those with sufficiently overwhelming force that it's reinforced within half an hour.

That RF can take place at ANY time of the day.

Are you seriously suggesting that to take advantage of researching in POS towers that small indy corps now need enough members to put up an around-the-clock defensive fleet?

What about smaller still, one or two man corps that use industry to fund other things, like PvP? Is it a case of:

"Hey, sorry. We here at CCP think that EVE is serious business and you can forget about that spontaneous weekend trip away with your wife because when you get back your BPOs are all gone."


For a highsec POS at least you will get a wardec notice period before being at risk, but like I said, small corps will just use NPC stations. With the removal of slots and system wide cost scaling this isn't as big a deal as it used to be with slot constraints.

Those that want to take the risk, enjoy the POS bonuses. The choice is yours.


One real problem from the risk side of things is that the POS ability to defend itself - or rather, be used by a player or group of players to defend itself - is absolutely laughable. Stats on the modules are dated to an era where a dread had less EHP than can be achieved by a well tanked cruiser or battlecruiser these days, not to mention the ridiculous lock times. The UI to actually manage your weapons is pretty bad too, but that's a harder problem to tackle, I suspect. All of that, though, means that "highsec POS users" are another group that would benefit from POS guns not being awful.

I suggest:

  • Buff damage numbers a bit, and perhaps damage application numbers.
  • Buff Starbase Defense Management to be two arrays per level instead of one.
  • Increase scan resolution on weapon batteries by a factor of five and scan resolution on electronic warfare and neuting batteries by a factor of ten. To balance this and maximize the benefit of these changes to manned towers, increase the random lock delay by the same factor.
  • Have a look at the stats on neuting batteries. Not relevant to highsec but in theory they should be the best weapon against capitals or supers; in practice, 1k cap is nothing. Alternatively, give us different sizes of neuting batteries - small, medium, large, and extra large.


Do all that and then if a "small corp" or indeed any corp is vigilant with their defense, they'll have the capability to defend their POS. Granted, it'll mean some tradeoffs, fewer labs and arrays if they want to supplement gun batteries with shield hardeners and electronic warfare, but that's as it should be - at least doing so would actually be a viable option.



Re: Extra moons and supply/demand, my napkin estimate says new supply from the new 0.4 moons is to a fart in a hurricane. I'm not exactly concerned.


You make a good point on issue of the Risk Side of current POS's. Although I'm in favor of increasing the defenses of POS and such, what it means to the small player corps in nullsec and lowsec is that they'll have a much bigger problem trying to hit enemy POSs. Adjusting the offence and defenses of the POSs needs to be done, but will mostly benefit the larger Corps and alliances. Just saying...
#194 - 2014-06-25 12:33:05 UTC
Esmanpir wrote:
You make a good point on issue of the Risk Side of current POS's. Although I'm in favor of increasing the defenses of POS and such, what it means to the small player corps in nullsec and lowsec is that they'll have a much bigger problem trying to hit enemy POSs. Adjusting the offence and defenses of the POSs needs to be done, but will mostly benefit the larger Corps and alliances. Just saying...

I'm not sure how improvement of POS defenses favors larger corps. It's true, larger corps have an advantage, both in actively defending their own starbases and in attacking those of others, whether they be actively defended or not. This will be true regardless of the state of POS defense options.

I suppose your point is that stronger defenses would make it more difficult for a small gang to take down an unattended POS, which is true. But not all of those POSes being attacked are owned by large corps.

My opinion is that any weapons system in the game ought to be viable for some purpose, else why does it exist? Currently a lot of POS defense mods are useless.


#195 - 2014-06-25 19:27:16 UTC
I'll admit that I haven't gone through the whole thread at this point, but I set up a tower to check the reprocessing module and got about a third less product than I expected (and much less than I had gotten in the station).

Just a heads up in case that's not accurate.
Greater D.U.S.K. Coalition
#196 - 2014-06-26 04:38:59 UTC
Is the reprocessing array suppose to only be usable if you are with in 3km of it? This is different then the new standard of being able to access everything but board a new ship any where in side the pos shields.

If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide

See you around the universe.

Tactical Narcotics Team
#197 - 2014-06-26 19:23:01 UTC
An Idea I had with the new way industry is presented in Crius. Would it be possible to change the way POS modules work with other modules in a POS structure?

Let use labs for example if you removed their cargo room completely and instead of putting your bpos or bpcs in it you would instead put them in the corp hanger array or the personal hanger array and would set the input out put in the same manner you would in station. This is only a thought but if this was the case you could stream line now POSs function and allow some sort of safety per individual member in a corp but still maintain the risk of putting BPO’s in a POS.

I have no idea of the POS code or if this is even possible but if is something that would be possible it would make building from a POS simpler as you could put all your mins into a single container and build from any additional module you anchor into the pos be it ammo array or ship array.

I hope this is clear enough I can try to explain it better if needed.
#198 - 2014-06-26 19:38:10 UTC
CCP is not interested in your ideas for POS changes.
CCP will not be changing POS behavior in Crius other than what they have already done.
Based on prior behavior, CCP will release Crius in its current state, regardless of what bugs are being reported here.

MDD
Goonswarm Federation
#199 - 2014-06-27 00:12:29 UTC
MailDeadDrop wrote:
CCP is not interested in your ideas for POS changes.
CCP will not be changing POS behavior in Crius other than what they have already done.
Based on prior behavior, CCP will release Crius in its current state, regardless of what bugs are being reported here.

MDD


If it's deployed in its current state it will literally (actually literally) break the entire game. Lol

But no, don't expect major POS overhauls in Crius. The existing code is too ****** to alter or modify and the devs are probably hard at work on designing the POS mechanics from the ground up. First we're getting an overhaul in corp and alliance management, though. So I'd expect to see new POS stuff hitting SiSi about this time next year. Hopefully.

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums

#200 - 2014-06-27 04:14:06 UTC
TigerXtrm wrote:
MailDeadDrop wrote:
CCP is not interested in your ideas for POS changes.
CCP will not be changing POS behavior in Crius other than what they have already done.
Based on prior behavior, CCP will release Crius in its current state, regardless of what bugs are being reported here.

MDD


If it's deployed in its current state it will literally (actually literally) break the entire game. Lol

Yep. That is exactly what is going to happen.

TigerXtrm wrote:
But no, don't expect major POS overhauls in Crius. The existing code is too ****** to alter or modify and the devs are probably hard at work on designing the POS mechanics from the ground up. First we're getting an overhaul in corp and alliance management, though. So I'd expect to see new POS stuff hitting SiSi about this time next year. Hopefully.

Nope. They're hard at work planning their August vacations. They take the entire month off. So when the awful crap that is Crius hits in late July, just be prepared to put up with it until sometime after September 1st, because there's literally no one at CCP to fix it.

MDD
Forum Jump