These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

[New structures] Observatory Arrays and Gates

First post First post First post
Author
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1 - 2015-03-23 11:35:17 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Ytterbium
Hello people,

We would like your feedback on the various new structure lines presented during Fanfest and on our latest structure blog.

This particular thread is going to focus on Observatory Arrays and Gates.


  • Observatory Arrays focus on intelligence gathering and disruption tools, like tampering with Star Map filters, D-scan disruption, ship intelligence disruption, player tracking capabilities or being able to pinpoint cloak users

  • Gates focus on movement, like warp speeds, agility and mass in the system they're deployed, affect jump capabilities, alter ship movement inside a solar system, allow vessels to travel to other solar system and modify wormhole behaviors.
elitatwo
Dicker Quick and Hyde Defense Attorneys
O.U.Z.O. Alliance
#2 - 2015-03-23 11:42:04 UTC
Can some of them be placed in wormhole space?

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#3 - 2015-03-23 11:44:47 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Ytterbium
elitatwo wrote:
Can some of them be placed in wormhole space?


We are planning on some of the structure to be placed in W-space yes, the exact type and numbers are up to discussion based on the gameplay consequences they are going to have there. It all depends if we feel they're going to negatively impact this area of space or spice up gameplay.

Edit: and I'm referring to all the structures here, not only Observatory Arrays and Gates.
xttz
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#4 - 2015-03-23 11:45:36 UTC
Observatory arrays become incredibly relevant if CCP bite the bullet and finally change how local works in null-sec. The possibilities for new features based around this are endless.
elitatwo
Dicker Quick and Hyde Defense Attorneys
O.U.Z.O. Alliance
#5 - 2015-03-23 11:47:39 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
Can some of them be placed in wormhole space?


We are planning on some of the structure to be placed in W-space yes, the exact type and numbers are up to discussion based on the gameplay consequences they are going to have there. It all depends if we feel they're going to negatively impact this area of space or spice up gameplay.

Edit: and I'm referring to all the structures here, not only Observatory Arrays and Gates.


Thank you that sounds very intriguing!

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Somatic Neuron
Masterwork Productions Inc
#6 - 2015-03-23 11:51:49 UTC
I am assuming that gate structures are going to replace Jump Bridges?

What kind of range limitations are you planning on them? Intra-Constellation for T1, Intra-Region for T2, Inter-Region for Faction?

Are we going to get fatigue for using them, or are they going to work as stargates do now?

I seem to recall that the original stargates were designed with the capability to be able to select your destination w/in range when you jumped....is that something that could be added/considered?

Are gates going to be able to be player owned, or is it something that only alliances can afford?

If hugely expensive alliance assets, maybe to allow players (and corps) to own them, you could enable mass restrictions based on size of the base structure?

Somatic Neuron
Masterwork Productions Inc
#7 - 2015-03-23 11:55:57 UTC
Observation Arrays

Clearly if they have the capability for modifying intel, they would modify it in a positive way for the owning entity? So, if I was to be able to modify local to delayed mode, it would only be delayed mode for those not having a positive standing to me?

How would one interface with the OA to gather new intel? Would you have to be at the OA to pinpoint a cloaked user, or would they be available on my scanner automatically?
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#8 - 2015-03-23 12:27:34 UTC
I really like the "mesh network" idea that got floated during the Fanfest presentations. Removing local by default and clawing it back with structures is a very satisfying mechanic and I hope some serious work goes into making it happen.

Anti-AFK Cloaking is a pretty hot-button issue. How dedicated is the team to making this happen?

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Lu Ziffer
Jelly Baby Corporation
Guardian Society
#9 - 2015-03-23 12:31:48 UTC
Local as part of the observatory array?
This would increase the need to build it.
elitatwo
Dicker Quick and Hyde Defense Attorneys
O.U.Z.O. Alliance
#10 - 2015-03-23 12:41:17 UTC  |  Edited by: elitatwo
Lu Ziffer wrote:
Local as part of the observatory array?
This would increase the need to build it.


And if you would place them in a good way, you would have an early warning system for cloaky ganks.

With a grid like that you could search for tachyon emissions that would come from a cloaking device.. -wait, hold on that sounds familiar somehow

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Ulrik Elristan
EVE University
Ivy League
#11 - 2015-03-23 12:54:14 UTC
The OAs look to me like a huge home defense advantage. Do you plan on having smaller OAs be very easy to deploy (read fast and non bulky) to counter this ?
I'm especially concerned with the cloaky pinpointing. If local is disrupted AND d-scan is disrupted, how are you supposed to get intel without being able to relay on stealth ?
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#12 - 2015-03-23 13:00:28 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
You cannot allow any combination which becomes a carebears paradise - i.e. it needs to be LESS safe than today. Not more.


Gates cannot be used to undo/udermine fatigue changes either
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#13 - 2015-03-23 13:01:34 UTC
I feel like it is going to be very hard to properly balance observatory arrays.

It could be interesting if these became some sort of conflict driver, i.e. they should be fairly expensive and easy to kill.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#14 - 2015-03-23 13:06:02 UTC
Alright so, my two cents about these structures :

- The idea of having a net of structures throughout your space sounds cool!

- As for obscuring map intel, I'd dislike to see a way to create false stats. It would render map filters useless. Instead, I'd prefer either showing the information or not showing it. It would create a more emergent way of hiding intelligence, for instance by obscuring the information of quiet system to make things not-so-obvious as to where true activity is.

- Just bouncing an idea around: What about a drawback if the map-filter-structure is hacked, that makes the system somehow glow on the map? Like, you wanted to be discreet, and suddenly it turns into a beacon for everyone to see on the galaxy map!

- About cloak pinpointing: One idea would be to uncloak people who stay for too long without player input. So maybe a system-wide pulse that with a spool-up time? The more anti-cloak structures, the less spool-up you have. And it warns people in local when the spool-up is initiated. This way, an active cloaker can just recloak instantly when it happens, while a true afk cloaker will.. well, be killed.

- For gates, I find it quite odd to have gates affect the warp speed of players in the whole system. How does multiple-gate systems work? Will a gate affect its companion on the other side? By having gates able to slow down the ennemi, you encourage the concept of "buffer space", something that is highly detrimental in sov null.

- Still on the idea of gates, I'd suggest modules that change the spawn distance from the gate after a jump, and modules that change the cloak duration after a jump.

- Again bouncing an idea: What about a temporary effect to warp speed that only affects ships who have recently used the stargate?

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#15 - 2015-03-23 13:06:21 UTC
afkalt wrote:
You cannot allow any combination which becomes a carebears paradise - i.e. it needs to be LESS safe than today. Not more.

These structures are fully destructible. Why shouldn't we be able to claw out superior sensor suites when a band of murderous and marauding maniacs can easily destroy them?

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#16 - 2015-03-23 13:08:22 UTC
Querns wrote:
afkalt wrote:
You cannot allow any combination which becomes a carebears paradise - i.e. it needs to be LESS safe than today. Not more.

These structures are fully destructible. Why shouldn't we be able to claw out superior sensor suites when a band of murderous and marauding maniacs can easily destroy them?



Because of course, a roaming gang hunting 'bears TOTALLY bring enough power to the field to start blapping structures Roll
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#17 - 2015-03-23 13:09:44 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Querns wrote:
afkalt wrote:
You cannot allow any combination which becomes a carebears paradise - i.e. it needs to be LESS safe than today. Not more.

These structures are fully destructible. Why shouldn't we be able to claw out superior sensor suites when a band of murderous and marauding maniacs can easily destroy them?



Because of course, a roaming gang hunting 'bears TOTALLY bring enough power to the field to start blapping structures Roll

I guess you missed where the entosis link was the mechanic responsible for large structure destruction.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#18 - 2015-03-23 13:13:10 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
If it gets safer, you might as well add a new structure called "The Batphone™" which will cause concord to come blow up "illegal" aggressors in your space.

I do not think, sir, you've ever hunted ratters.

A ratter will escape in 30 seconds, not the 20 odd MINUTES a link takes. Plus the RF timer measured in DAYS.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#19 - 2015-03-23 13:21:55 UTC
afkalt wrote:
If it gets safer, you might as well add a new structure called "The Batphone™" which will cause concord to come blow up "illegal" aggressors in your space.

I do not think, sir, you've ever hunted ratters.

A ratter will escape in 30 seconds, not the 20 odd MINUTES a link takes. Plus the RF timer measured in DAYS.

You are thinking at too small a scale. Destroying the structures isn't a quick-fix to allow you to get one kill — it's applying pressure to reduce the safety of the space in question so that subsequent kills become easier. Defenders should have the ability to spend isk and time to secure their space.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#20 - 2015-03-23 13:29:56 UTC
No-one gets to "afk defend" by virtue of spending isk. It is the antithesis of how the game should work, you don't get to buy protection - you make it yourself with ACTIVE players.

Imagine if someone posted "I should get to spend isk to make me all but impossible to gank in my freighter, even though it's already stupid hard to gank. To balance it, a bunch of people can RF and maybe destroy the protection over a period of days. This will totally make my ship vulnerable and completely balanced". That's pretty much what you'd be asking for here.

At BEST the level of safety at maximum level should be equivalent to today.
123Next pageLast page