These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

new POSes and wormholes - what do w-space dwellers need?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Messoroz
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
#401 - 2012-08-18 00:30:36 UTC
Here's the super hilarious part about having to scan down POSes.

A few years ago warp to zero didn't exist for stargates and people created bookmarks for them. They had to implement warp to zero because the terribad bm system was killing the server. The terribad bm system still eixsts. It will not take long for the server to go down in a hell fire with everyone BMing random POSes for scouting.
Kynric
Sky Fighters
Rote Kapelle
#402 - 2012-08-18 07:12:27 UTC
Perhaps the present system of finding a POS and the 'anywhere idea' can co-exist. I suggest that if a tower is anchroed at a celestial object (i.e. moon) that it be found in the same way they currently are, however towers anchored anywhere else would have a 'navigational beacon' that would be found by the ship scanner. I suspect the 'anywhere' idea is inspired by a desire to make player homes widespread and that clearly the moons count in many areas of highsec would limit this. As such having structures at locations other than moons is probalby a feature we will have to live with. Also, clearly there need to have some limits on 'anywhere' as players errecting structures in asteroid belts, at gates, on the docking port of an existing stations, next to a poco or adjacent to other peoples towers would likely make life worse and not better.

I would like to hear more about details such as the transition plan, how much storage will be available for goods and ships, how many people will a tower comfortably support, what becomes of my old structures and so on. Will I log in one day and discover my old tower is suddnely something new, or will I have to rip it down, haul it out and drag something new in?
Qual
Knights of a Once Square Table INC.
#403 - 2012-08-18 07:58:25 UTC
Just reposting a thought I have posted on TwoSteps's blog, but I thought it might be better put here:

Quote:
Ok, about the whole docking thing, imagine this. When you dock at the POS, you go to the normal station interface, exept that instead of the usual interior and ship to spin, to see the pos in space the same way you usually see the ship. (Which you could then spin, very important... :p )
Your ACTIVE ship would be tethering outside the POS. This actaully fix a LOT of issues.

  • Others would be able to see active people docked, due to tethering.
  • You would be able to see who is at the POS before undocking (or un-tethering as it is)
  • Spy's would be able to still gather intel as jumping into other shipsfor fitting would actaully show them at the POS.


I know this is a more complex solution as it mixes current station environment with spce environment, but it could not hurt for CCP to think about it...


Disclaimer: I have not read throught this thread, so this or a similar idea might have be discussed already...
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
#404 - 2012-08-18 08:05:23 UTC
Another thing that FFs bring and seems to be overlooked since page 2 is range.
Every small tower gets bashed just for the chance it might not have stront in it. And why do POCOs get RFed?
Because you can do it with the standard armor-T3 gang. But to get a large tower down you need ships that can hit the tower. BS or dreads in most cases, which put a lot of mass on the entranceholes.
If you take away FFs you allow the same fleetcomposition to do holecontrol and bashing. And they are almost immune to bombingruns or trying to snipe a (almost) stationary target, one of the few thing defenders can do when heavyly outnumbered.
A well-defended POS can even force the attackers to field two entire different fleets and give the defender the chance to fight one of them.
Armor-T3-fleet at your POS and you can´t apear further then 20km (f.e.) away leads only to instadeath of everyone undocking.

Also allowing only a number of ships to dock/moore/safehug a POS makes invasions with big fleets even more painful.
"Let´s invade a home with a possible hostile force of 150? Ok if we want to be able for the same number of our pilots to go afk or log we´d have to bring in and set up 5 towers." The new POSses need an orca to haul it in? That´s going to be fun.

disclaimer: all numbers are made up.
Ashera Yune
Doomheim
#405 - 2012-08-18 09:27:18 UTC
I personally would like the pos modules that can combine capital components into subsystems.

The time to build the subsystems combined will equal the current times to assemble a capital ship based on the subsystem blueprint.

These parts will be 100,000 m3 each and can be combined in an X-L assembly array to build a full complete capital ship in less than a few hours.

This will make pos sieging easier against people who refuse to fight back and hide in their pos.

Oh and too many people are in wormhole space, it'd be nice to evict farmers and lower classes from wormholes to make them more exclusive to only the more skilled and dedicated.

"Yesterday we obeyed kings and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to truth."

 Kahlil Gibran
Kalel Nimrott
Caldari Provisions
#406 - 2012-08-18 11:55:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Kalel Nimrott
CSM & CCP Meeting minutes, May 30th wrote:
CCP Greyscale suggested that perhaps the larger power cores (fuel consumption) might require freighters to move around, which would prevent them from getting into lower class wormholes.


Game desing balancing the game play?

Edit:
Now I know why such a system would be implemented. If you hide in Wspace and have no Walking in station, a Dust Dweller wont be able to shoot you in the face.

Bob Artis, you will be missed.

O7
Dino Boff
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#407 - 2012-08-19 11:36:10 UTC
Shilalasar wrote:
Another thing that FFs bring and seems to be overlooked since page 2 is range.
Every small tower gets bashed just for the chance it might not have stront in it. And why do POCOs get RFed?
Because you can do it with the standard armor-T3 gang. But to get a large tower down you need ships that can hit the tower. BS or dreads in most cases, which put a lot of mass on the entranceholes.
If you take away FFs you allow the same fleetcomposition to do holecontrol and bashing. And they are almost immune to bombingruns or trying to snipe a (almost) stationary target, one of the few thing defenders can do when heavyly outnumbered.
A well-defended POS can even force the attackers to field two entire different fleets and give the defender the chance to fight one of them.
Armor-T3-fleet at your POS and you can´t apear further then 20km (f.e.) away leads only to instadeath of everyone undocking.

Also allowing only a number of ships to dock/moore/safehug a POS makes invasions with big fleets even more painful.
"Let´s invade a home with a possible hostile force of 150? Ok if we want to be able for the same number of our pilots to go afk or log we´d have to bring in and set up 5 towers." The new POSses need an orca to haul it in? That´s going to be fun.

disclaimer: all numbers are made up.


TLTR; force fields are good for w-space because ships flown in w-space can't be used to shoot them Ugh
Kalel Nimrott
Caldari Provisions
#408 - 2012-08-19 14:01:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Kalel Nimrott
Stupid question, but, how many of you actually took the effort of reading the csm minutes?

Bob Artis, you will be missed.

O7
Gudrun Ellecon
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#409 - 2012-08-19 15:11:33 UTC
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
Stupid question, but, how many of you actually took the effort of reading the csm minutes?


Why bother reading them? All that does is take away from the time you could spend complaining.
Soon Shin
Scarlet Weather Rhapsody
#410 - 2012-08-19 17:28:25 UTC
There is one thing that concerns me about the minutes. That is of ccp's idea of making pos takedown take weeks and is balanced around the hot drop fest of 0.0
kapolov
Doomheim
#411 - 2012-08-19 21:07:55 UTC
@ Two Step

Can we have a CSM Town hall style meeting with you and leaders of most of the notable WH space entities, i think this would end threads like this reaching over 20 pages of confusing and trolls like me.
Wolvun
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#412 - 2012-08-19 21:15:33 UTC
kapolov wrote:
@ Two Step

Can we have a CSM Town hall style meeting with you and leaders of most of the notable WH space entities, i think this would end threads like this reaching over 20 pages of confusing and trolls like me.



What the hell would that achieve? The guy has his viewpoints and doesn't want to listen to the overwhelming response to that at all when he disagrees.

Try getting him to discuss the comparison between large towers as an attempt to fortifying a C1-4 to the C5/6 fortifying their holes with large numbers of caps and the inherent problem with evicting a large well fortified group from a C5/6. The guy is very willing to nerf all low end w-space but unwilling to discuss at all nerfing his end of space.
Kalel Nimrott
Caldari Provisions
#413 - 2012-08-19 21:55:07 UTC
Wolvun, I took the effort of reading most of the CSM minutes regarding the new Starbase system and I can assure you that most of this thread lenght is due to missinformation and trolling. You can have some differences with what was said but you have to remember 2 things that was said there that would help you get in tune with it.
First: NOTHING IS FINAL. Basically was a presentation of an idea that was in the mind of CCP.
Second: Its a long way anything happening soon, so it may not happen at all.

I have a third for the ones that did not read it: JUMP DRIVES ON STARBASES! (WTF?)

Bob Artis, you will be missed.

O7
Madner Kami
Durendal Ascending
#414 - 2012-08-19 22:02:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Madner Kami
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
First: NOTHING IS FINAL. Basically was a presentation of an idea that was in the mind of CCP.
Second: Its a long way anything happening soon, so it may not happen at all.


Unfortunately the thing that seems to stir up people the most, is the one thing which both the minutes and Two Steps's posts display as pretty much set in stone: Forcefield removal.
Pink Marshmellow
Caucasian Culture Club
#415 - 2012-08-19 22:14:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Pink Marshmellow
Without capital support, it is much more time consuming and difficult to take on large towers. This applies to C1-C4 space.

Because Forcefield on large towers are 27 km in radius, the only real way to destroy a pos is by using Battleships, which cannot fit in a C1, or a Tier 3 Battlecruiser with are poorly suited to taking down defended pos due to their fragility.



I don't know whether or not Forcefields should be removed, but I believe when pos bashing the Forcefield itself should be the target, rather than the tower. Meaning that you no longer need large or long range weaponry in order actually pos bash.

Once the forcefield 's hitpoints are gone, it should disappear leaving behind the pos which has no shields.
Wolvun
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#416 - 2012-08-19 22:14:55 UTC
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
Wolvun, I took the effort of reading most of the CSM minutes regarding the new Starbase system and I can assure you that most of this thread lenght is due to missinformation and trolling. You can have some differences with what was said but you have to remember 2 things that was said there that would help you get in tune with it.
First: NOTHING IS FINAL. Basically was a presentation of an idea that was in the mind of CCP.
Second: Its a long way anything happening soon, so it may not happen at all.

I have a third for the ones that did not read it: JUMP DRIVES ON STARBASES! (WTF?)



I also read the minutes and i understand that nothing is set in stone but the person putting forward our views or doing so like he is supposed to be doing needs to listen to them before CCP starts coding or we will only have CCP's and Two Steps vision implemented.

What you fail to be reading in this thread is the many voices asking him not to go down the path of low end w-space nerfing and him completely determined to gimp all low end space. When the guy is committed to nerfing one end of w-space and unwilling to discuss the other end of w-space is a major problem to me, and if that's the position we go into when CCP starts coding then we are screwed. Perhaps you should read a bit more of the thread here yourself.
XxRTEKxX
256th Shadow Wing
Phantom-Recon
#417 - 2012-08-20 00:19:10 UTC
1. Access logs for corp hangars and ship maintenance arrays. ie. Pilot 1 boarded Drake(Tango{name of ship}) at 18:45 on such and such date. Pilot 1 stored Drake(Tango) at 19:30 on such and such date.
Viewable by anyone with the role to view such logs.

2. Keys or Passwords to fly a ship. If I own a ship, have it stored in a ship maint array........I set a password for the ship, or have a ship key stored in cargo that allows a pilot with possession of the key or password to fly the ship.
If I want to loan the ship to someone, I can leave them a temporary key in cargo(set to that pilot/character) or give them a temporary password that will allow them to board that ship for chosen set of time.
Sort of like an alarm system, or key/ignition system.
If cars and trucks can have them in real life, why not spaceships in the future?

3. Parameters to allow access to different POS modules to chosen pilots. Whether in corp/alliance or not.
ie. I create a bpc for someone, and set it so that person can come into the pos shields and collect that item. Possibly only that item they can see and take. So I can store multiple items/ships etc, and only those I contract them to can take/see etc.

Basically, more and more options and controls over our POSs so we can customize access and usability to a greater extent than we currently have.
Kalel Nimrott
Caldari Provisions
#418 - 2012-08-20 03:05:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Kalel Nimrott
Wolvun wrote:
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
Wolvun, I took the effort of reading most of the CSM minutes regarding the new Starbase system and I can assure you that most of this thread lenght is due to missinformation and trolling. You can have some differences with what was said but you have to remember 2 things that was said there that would help you get in tune with it.
First: NOTHING IS FINAL. Basically was a presentation of an idea that was in the mind of CCP.
Second: Its a long way anything happening soon, so it may not happen at all.

I have a third for the ones that did not read it: JUMP DRIVES ON STARBASES! (WTF?)



I also read the minutes and i understand that nothing is set in stone but the person putting forward our views or doing so like he is supposed to be doing needs to listen to them before CCP starts coding or we will only have CCP's and Two Steps vision implemented.

What you fail to be reading in this thread is the many voices asking him not to go down the path of low end w-space nerfing and him completely determined to gimp all low end space. When the guy is committed to nerfing one end of w-space and unwilling to discuss the other end of w-space is a major problem to me, and if that's the position we go into when CCP starts coding then we are screwed. Perhaps you should read a bit more of the thread here yourself.


I know you just want to rant and pick a forum fight, so lets have it. Read carefuly what I posted two post back. I actually referred to the problem of low end Wspace nerf and what was CCP answer to it. Also, If I`m telling you that nothing is final, then not even Wspace low end nerf is final.
Tell me next time I`m too subtle for you Blink

Edit: Actually, was 3 post back, but only counting mines.

Bob Artis, you will be missed.

O7
Wolvun
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#419 - 2012-08-20 03:26:27 UTC
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
Wolvun wrote:
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
Wolvun, I took the effort of reading most of the CSM minutes regarding the new Starbase system and I can assure you that most of this thread lenght is due to missinformation and trolling. You can have some differences with what was said but you have to remember 2 things that was said there that would help you get in tune with it.
First: NOTHING IS FINAL. Basically was a presentation of an idea that was in the mind of CCP.
Second: Its a long way anything happening soon, so it may not happen at all.

I have a third for the ones that did not read it: JUMP DRIVES ON STARBASES! (WTF?)



I also read the minutes and i understand that nothing is set in stone but the person putting forward our views or doing so like he is supposed to be doing needs to listen to them before CCP starts coding or we will only have CCP's and Two Steps vision implemented.

What you fail to be reading in this thread is the many voices asking him not to go down the path of low end w-space nerfing and him completely determined to gimp all low end space. When the guy is committed to nerfing one end of w-space and unwilling to discuss the other end of w-space is a major problem to me, and if that's the position we go into when CCP starts coding then we are screwed. Perhaps you should read a bit more of the thread here yourself.


I know you just want to rant and pick a forum fight, so lets have it. Read carefuly what I posted two post back. I actually referred to the problem of low end Wspace nerf and what was CCP answer to it. Also, If I`m telling you that nothing is final, then not even Wspace low end nerf is final.
Tell me next time I`m too subtle for you Blink

Edit: Actually, was 3 post back, but only counting mines.


Was it a rant? Did it bug you?

And i don't care for a forum fight, i only care that Two Step puts the views of a community above his own. That's all.

Actually i don't see any of your posts that even slightly mention low end w-space nerfs so yes too subtle indeed. Roll Or should i put some words in for you?

And we clearly all know nothing is final, but should we just say nothing and wait until Two Step convinces them of the horrible nerf and then go hey no one wants this, why are you doing that CCP? And then when CCP has put to many resources into making it so that it would take another 5 years to reverse?

I only asked that Two Step be willing to discuss it further and in more detail than caps in lows are bad and towers are to hard mmmk
Kalel Nimrott
Caldari Provisions
#420 - 2012-08-20 05:39:05 UTC
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
CSM & CCP Meeting minutes, May 30th wrote:
CCP Greyscale suggested that perhaps the larger power cores (fuel consumption) might require freighters to move around, which would prevent them from getting into lower class wormholes.


Game desing balancing the game play?

Edit:
Now I know why such a system would be implemented. If you hide in Wspace and have no Walking in station, a Dust Dweller wont be able to shoot you in the face.


Still too subtle?

Bob Artis, you will be missed.

O7