These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Wolvun
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#421 - 2012-08-20 05:46:52 UTC
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
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?


LOL that's not subtlety that's completely generalised and on the topic of nothing at all. Perhaps learn to elaborate your sentence structure to the point it has some meaning and content.
Kalel Nimrott
Caldari Provisions
#422 - 2012-08-20 05:48:20 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?

Edit:
Madner Kami wrote:
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.


You can always do a workaround to get a similar effect. Brainstoming is always good. Like the docking ring could be a par of the station that while you are in a ship you get to pla with he dscan and all that, and you can even undock inside the docking ring...., somany desing options....

Bob Artis, you will be missed.

O7

Kalel Nimrott
Caldari Provisions
#423 - 2012-08-20 05:50:16 UTC
Wolvun wrote:
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
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?


LOL that's not subtlety that's completely generalised and on the topic of nothing at all. Perhaps learn to elaborate your sentence structure to the point it has some meaning and content.

If you didnt understood why I brought the fuel comsupton idea,then you didnt read that part of the csm.

Bob Artis, you will be missed.

O7

Wolvun
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#424 - 2012-08-20 05:53:06 UTC
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
Wolvun wrote:
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
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?


LOL that's not subtlety that's completely generalised and on the topic of nothing at all. Perhaps learn to elaborate your sentence structure to the point it has some meaning and content.

If you didnt understood why I brought the fuel comsupton idea,then you didnt read that part of the csm.



I didn't really want to have a tit for tat argument with you when your so happy to edit your posts to suit yourself, but if that's how you win at the interwebs i really must try harder at edits.
Kalel Nimrott
Caldari Provisions
#425 - 2012-08-20 05:55:40 UTC
Nice one. Accusing of editing my post to suit myself...

Bob Artis, you will be missed.

O7

TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#426 - 2012-08-21 10:09:15 UTC
Pink Marshmellow wrote:
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 personally think that's kind of balanced already. If someone lives in a c1 then yes, attackers have a hard time because they can't swarm in battleships, but thats balanced by the fact that the residents live in a c1 - with less isk and more random traffic which wont hesitate to take the time out from their search for kspace to shoot the mining barge or lone drake doing pve


Pink Marshmellow wrote:
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.


Even though this would kind of go against what I just said about the little bit of "balance" I think it brings (at least with regards to lower class wormholes - 0.0, hisec, etc is a different story) I still support it just because it's always bugged me that the bullets and missiles glide right through this giant shield and happily pound the actual structure.
Doodle Dingle
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#427 - 2012-08-22 21:05:04 UTC
If you want stations.. Go live in K-space...
revamp, don't replace..

also.. The CSM does not represent the playerbase, so CCP will have to gather intel from the crowd and not just rely on the CSM. Unless ofc. they like apologizing and letting staff off? (who knows? it's Iceland :S)


Pink Marshmellow
Caucasian Culture Club
#428 - 2012-08-23 02:26:06 UTC
POS are only as good as their owners, if the owners can't fit or utilize the pos well, then the pos will not do much to save you.

If someone wants to destroy your pos, they will destroy it, unless you can man up a fight to stop them.
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#429 - 2012-08-24 01:57:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Tau Cabalander
Random rambling:

* Docking games may not be wide-spread, as docking modules may not be that common.

This still doesn't solve the issue of docking games when the modules are present!

Also, if docking creates any vulnerability, there will be little point in having the benefits associated with docking, unless the benefits substantially outweigh the risks. As theorized so far, the potential benefits to docking seem unlikely to do so in wormholes.

If docking is risky in wormholes then, but it is the only way T3 can be refit, or items repackaged or reprocessed, etc., then I suspect most wormhole dwellers will continue on without such luxuries.

However if docking is worth the risks, then we've come full-circle, and we're back at concerns over docking games, because everybody will use a docking module.

* Defenses may protect the undocking / mooring area.

Current defenses, both automated and manned, are not adequate for the task (they lack DPS, durability, locking speed, tracking, etc. = general ineffectiveness), hence I expect there is wide-spread concern.

As long as a hostile fleet is able to stay in locking range, or bombs & smartbombs are within range, then the loss of the force field represents a major loss of functionality (= nerf)

* There are activities that can be done in relative safety in a force field, which cannot be performed while docked, moored, or with attackers at close range (there are reasons why there are so few skirmishes around a POS currently).

Example: I carry a control tower in my Rorqual, as a force field is a haven. Without a force field, this ship is completely vulnerable to attack, and wholly inadequate to carry out the roles of boosting and compression for which it was designed.
Tanaka Aiko
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#430 - 2012-08-24 02:02:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Tanaka Aiko
1) don't tease me with being docked and seing the grid at the same time...

it make think about the eve forever 1 or the sansha trailer, where there was windows on the stations... and that would be so great... this itself would give an use to CQ : it's like forcefield, but it's nicer, safer and easier to manage.

what I would really like about docking on the POS, would be the ability to see our ship interior, like we were not inside the POS, but inside our ship, but outside our pod.
art devs will hate me, but hell that I would like this...

2) concerning the issues on docking games... W-space have a specificity that don't happen elsewhere ; you can easily jump back (you're on range of WH when jumping), but you can't do it too much due to timer.
something like that could be done for docking ; you can dock and undock once, but if you do it again you can't, you have to wait a bit.

if someone can't undock/redock during a few minutes when he already did it, then the game end ; cause if the guy is docked, he's here for a while, and if he's undocked, either he'll die, or fight and win, but he can't avoid the combat anymore nor make the others camp rage... except if they have bad tacklers of course, but that is a fair game.

3) also concerning pos location outside moons and so on...
currently you don't need to probe a pos to find where it is.
i never used probes to find a pos.
and always use d-scan to find his moon location, we only need to be able to do the same on the new system.
so either the pos need to be on a celestial, either it create a beacon on space.
being forced to use probes to find an enemy pos is too much.

just think about very big system where you can have 100au without any celestial... hey just put 10 pos on a grid here and you're safe for eternity... 99% of people passing by will never know there's a pos on the system... this is too much and must be forbidden.
Isaiah Harms
State War Academy
Caldari State
#431 - 2012-08-24 05:46:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Isaiah Harms
jonnykefka wrote:


1. transparency. Both being able to see what's outside your POS (important if you are under siege), but more often being able to see who's in a POS and what they are flying, without them even knowing you're there.

2. No timers. Bob hates docking games. Even if we end up with "mooring" or what have you, keeping w-space timer-free is an important part of its character.



I vote for the Deep Space Nine station environment. We dock inside a ring station that does have a dock protected by a force field.

The main issue we have with starbases is their management: POS modules clutter. Motor boating to the correct SMA is a pain (especially in a capital). The ease in which a corp thief can obtain starbase wide access to ships/modules turns many pilots away from getting into wormhole space.

Guys... we got a lot of fancy stuff in here. Nobody else has to share a ship hanger with other corp mates. Really.. THAT needs fixed.

Now.... Taking me OUT of my beautiful wormhole environment so I can stand INSIDE a station like icky KNOWN space. Ugh...

Much less concerned about intel and and docking games. Really.. WH PVP isn't THAT intense, and most of you can't watch all 35 starbases in NOVA anyway.

+1 to allow supercapitals to be built in wormholes. Big smile
Zador42
Asylum of the Daleks
#432 - 2012-08-24 07:20:25 UTC
Idea for compromise.

You want us to dock we might be able to deal with but leave a force field around the pos just a smaller one. Say around 7500m. This allows for a safe undock within the shields so can then scan system before go out in the open. Diminish the force fields hp but add a warning of some kind for people docked that the Force field is down so they can decide if want to undock. This would solve all the docking games while still allowing new added features to pos's. As for seeing inside a pos what about a new probe type for that so that you could scan down number and type of ships inside a pos but remember you would also need a module for pos that does same as probe so balances for both sides.

The idea of multiple undocking areas is another that if incorporated to the first idea would then allow people inside a chance at undocking after shields go down.

I personally love the modular pos idea. Here are couple things ay want to consider.
Instead of tower being center change it to the generator and use a new expanded corp hanger as center of modular pos. This will allow 2 bonuses. One is corp hanger would have to be a lot larger adding room for 20 separate member hangers of around 200K each. Two you could then remove storage from assembly arrays and labs and just have them take directly from the 5 remaining corp hangers inside the newly reconfigured corporate storage array.

You asked for sugestions for changes to pos's so one more thing.
If i can create modules that alter cpu and power grid output on a ship by lessening the opposite why can i not build a pos module that does simaler. This would allow corps to talor pos's to thir needs instead of current where you are stuck with only what on hand.

With these ideas added in a more station like pos would be nice but please don't forget a repair shop!!!!!!!!!!!!
Zador42
Asylum of the Daleks
#433 - 2012-08-24 07:22:59 UTC
And on other subjects. Anything as important as changes to pos's, outposts, or stations should never be kept secret. The only reason an organization keeps things that important secret is if they are adding in ways to use it against the rest of people it concerns.
Zador42
Asylum of the Daleks
#434 - 2012-08-24 07:29:04 UTC
As to pos's anchored anywhere, you are just asking for full scale war over every asteroid belt in galaxy. Every corp will want to anchor pos's close as possible to the belts and will cause so many wars that will make all industry almost impossible.
aadom
black.listed
#435 - 2012-08-24 09:49:35 UTC
Docking/hiding in w-space will create a crippling level of safety that simply undermines the great ideals of living in wormhole space by removing the full two way transparency. Don't break this CCP.


Less risk + Less fights = More Bears
Kalel Nimrott
Caldari Provisions
#436 - 2012-08-24 10:30:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Kalel Nimrott
What if the ship docked can be seen at all times but will always tell if an active player is using it? What about that you can remain docked while inside the ship instead being walking in the station and you can use dscan and ship scanner as you inside ff? The chages could be like the ones in station between captain quarters and ship hangar. While in quarters, the former. While in ship hangar the latter.
Random thoughts

Bob Artis, you will be missed.

O7

Indo Nira
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#437 - 2012-08-24 18:13:06 UTC
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
What if the ship docked can be seen at all times but will always tell if an active player is using it? What about that you can remain docked while inside the ship instead being walking in the station and you can use dscan and ship scanner as you inside ff? The chages could be like the ones in station between captain quarters and ship hangar. While in quarters, the former. While in ship hangar the latter.
Random thoughts


the thing is... if they couldn't CODE the forcefield thing properly (ccp did admit somewhere that forcefields suck because of the coding behind them, right?) I wouldn't trust them making this new system work flawlessly... i dunno, whatever....
Celestra Doxaila
MinTek Tactical Division
#438 - 2012-08-24 19:24:27 UTC
My thought on this:

GIVE STATIONS WINDOWS
Afuran
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#439 - 2012-08-25 16:55:29 UTC
I thought the whole wormhole space idea was supposed to be like a new frontier? I don't want docking or stations in frontier space. I don't want people to be able to hide from pvp any more than they can currently.

I also don't want markets or contracts or in-station environments to walk around in either. That should be the realm of K-space.

I want a frontier-like feel. I want challenges and difficulties so that I can work together with my corp to achieve goals we set ourselves.

Wormhole living should be hard, but fun. Defiantly not easy- living like k-space.

I understand that POS' as they are aren't exactly user-friendly and could use an update, but personally I don't want to see stations and large settlements in wormhole space. Smaller, more basic outposts would be a much better idea I think.

I think CCP need to be careful with what they do to POS design as they could make the mistake of making W-Space very similar to 0.0 and what would be the point in that?
Aren Valle
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#440 - 2012-08-25 21:16:42 UTC
I must be missing something in all the whining and complaining about docking games and high sec station camping...

Who the **** cares?

W-Space is the wild west of EvE. There are no rules. There is no Concord. There are no faction stations.
If I'm docked in a station in W-Space, then chances are my corp or myself owns that station. Therefore, I have complete control of all the weapon systems installed on that station. If there is some pathetic window licker trying to camp my docking bay then I'm just gonna vaporize the idiot and move on...