These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Back Into the Structure

First post First post
Author
Elana Apgar
Allspark Industries
#301 - 2015-03-23 01:31:05 UTC
I am super excited about these changes. It all sounds really cool. I think all the industrial structures sound awesome, and I can't wait to get some of that going in my wormhole.

There are a few concerns I have.

I'm not sure what the fate will be for POSs, but as of right now, we have safety in our forcefields. We can see the enemy (if there is one sitting at our tower) and we can also hit d-scan obsessively. It's where we hang out between fights and carebearing, while we wait for our scouts to find more content. If you transition us us to mooring, we won't be able to use d-scan, and that's a problem, especially since we don't have local (I am not advocating for local in W-Space, I like W-Space the way it is). We rely heavily on D-scan and losing that ability while we are waiting around is bad.

Another concern with the proposed system is that it looks like with the fitting window, there would be a limited amount of guns, EWAR, webs, and points that you'd be able to put on a tower. As I'm sure you guys are aware, a lot of times there's very valuable stuff stored in control towers. At present we can have as many defensive modules as we want anchored to our tower (although we cannot online all of them at once) so long as we don't cause lag (Deep Space 9 station in Polaris anyone?). We need to be able to defend whatever the next housing structure is as well as we can defend our current towers.

Will the skill "Starbase Defense Management" become obsolete? Will starbases/pos's definitely be phased out?

Elana

BoBoZoBo
MGroup9
#302 - 2015-03-23 02:02:25 UTC
This looks AMAZING! Very excited to see this and love the direction so far.

Primary Test Subject • SmackTalker Elite

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#303 - 2015-03-23 02:20:57 UTC
I would like to see the Faction standing requirements reinstated for corporation deployment of these new structures in high-sec. Large and extra-large structures should have the previous standing requirements, and these could be dropped down a bit for personal deployments.

Medium (personal)
0.5 - 1.0 standing
0.6 - 2.0 standing
0.7 - 3.0 standing
0.8-1.0 (unavailable to reduce clutter)

Large or Extra-Large (corporation only)
0.5 - 5.0 standing
0.6 - 6.0 standing
0.7 - 7.0 standing
0.8 - 8.0 standing
0.9 - 9.0 standing
1.0 - 10.0 standing

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#304 - 2015-03-23 02:37:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Arronicus
xttz wrote:
Something I hope the devs keep in mind when developing these new structures is not to rely entirely on this new Entosis mechanic. While I'm sure the majority of us have a healthy distaste for structure shooting, it does still have a place in the game and shouldn't be dismissed entirely. We have entire classes of ships based around delivering and repairing high quantities of damage and this is an aspect of the game that should remain, albeit in a less essential role to today.

By all means allow sovereignty mechanics to favour grid control over ability to inflict damage, but most other structures should still require a real investment in firepower to destroy. I guess the simplest approach would be for Entosis Links to have a disabling or even conquering effect on structures, but actual damage should be inflicted in order to destroy them for good.


This. Fozzie and rise seem hellbent on completely killing the role of battleships, dreads, and supers in EvE, and it is not only invalidating very large amounts of skilling many players like myself have done across multiple characters, but seeks to take away a big part of the game that, for all we might complain about, we also enjoy. Having entosis control sov, and ihub capture and all that, sure, but non-sov structures should see be hitpoint targets, not entosis. A single interceptor that comes in when everyone in corp is asleep shouldn't be able to shut off our production for 12 hours a day.

A lot of us REALLY strongly identify with a point that was raised during the structures round table, we feel like each thing that we enjoy is being stripped away. The new structures look awesome, I love the new functionality, I love that there is more customization, and destructability, and new roles, but that Fozzie is turning the game into frigates and cruisers online just leaves a REALLY sour taste in my mouth. We should have big goals to build toward, to strive for, not just in empire control, but what we can fly. a system wide wormhole effect or fleet buff is little more than a 'we need 3 players to do X' role as opposed to "Man, I'd love to have one of those eventually". There was talk that capitals are seen as something that would be progressed to in fight escalations, and I'm completely clueless as to why? Entosis sov captures are going to be done by interceptors and small roams, when the defending party gives a gap in their defenses, and then the defender is going to be employing hac fleets for the defence mechanic. Why in the world would anyone escalate to caps to deal with groups of hacs or cruisers or frigates bouncing around doing captures? Or even gatecamps. To take out a carrier who gets caught occasionlly?

Also, I really don't get why it is heralded as 'individuals will have the ability to set up personal structures, as long as they have permission (roles) from their ceo'. This really doesn't seem much different than the current system?
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#305 - 2015-03-23 02:46:37 UTC
Arronicus wrote:
This. Fozzie and rise seem hellbent on completely killing the role of battleships, dreads, and supers in EvE, and it is not only invalidating very large amounts of skilling many players like myself have done across multiple characters, but seeks to take away a big part of the game that, for all we might complain about, we also enjoy. Having entosis control sov, and ihub capture and all that, sure, but non-sov structures should see be hitpoint targets, not entosis. A single interceptor that comes in when everyone in corp is asleep shouldn't be able to shut off our production for 12 hours a day.

And don't forget awesome structure explosions. Twisted

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Elana Apgar
Allspark Industries
#306 - 2015-03-23 02:52:07 UTC
Also, while we're discussing structures, does anyone else think that 1 day 18 hours is retardedly long for a reinforce timer on a mobile depot?
Zheng'Yi Sao
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#307 - 2015-03-23 03:01:50 UTC
What then is the use of a Rorqual?

We hide them in bubbles precisely because they are impossible to use without one. Sit in a belt with a Rorqual and see what happens. For that matter, where are the exhumers/barges supposed to go when the system goes red? Sure, we can warp to a safe point while we wait for the enemy to scan us down. Either we die at a bookmark in space, or we die in the warp bubbles deployed at stations to keep us from docking.

I suppose now I have to rely on Observation Platforms which may or may not block D-Scan system wide? These, of course will be primary targets. If they can be found? Not that you even need to blow it up, because a Rifter/Entosis link can render it inoperable in about ten minutes, maybe twenty if you meet the max defense bonus. Good luck operating anything next to low or hi sec. Any cut rate tourist with said Rifter/Entosis link can troll the nearby null systems at will. I won't go on about Entosis here though.

For that matter, do you even need Sov to deploy any of this stuff? Seems like the Sov owner deploys the big stuff, and the individual players get to anchor what exactly? I couldn't figure this part out from the blog. I feel like you have tossed out all these wild ideas, without explaining hardly at all how current game play will be effected in the new system.

Lots of folks complain that mining is horribly dull. I think the same about ratting. Mining in null is anything but boring. You constantly have to be on your toes. It also requires a major investment of ISK, training time, and upkeep. I don't see how I am supposed to practice my profession in the future. Bubbles make mining possible in null sec. Maybe you think it is reasonable to just hang a 3.5b capital ship out in space for anyone to point and destroy? Not worth it for me. Just a matter of time until you lose everything. Sure, a POS can be destroyed, but it takes time and energy to do so. Mining ships, and their support vessels are garbage when it comes to defense, hence why so many players go after them. Now we will be easy targets, with no place to run. Awesome.

To me, the entire point of Eve is that you can do something other than run around the universe shooting stuff. Now, anyone with the imagination to try a different style will be completely at the mercy of every drooling F1 monkey in New Eden. Excellent.

I would really like to be excited. Seeing such major changes with such little information just leaves me frustrated, angry, and thinking I will be looking for another game to play in the future.

"It's funny the things you people think are mandatory for us, as if we don't do what we do because it's a hilarious good time in a space video game." - Johnny Marzetti

bp920091
Black Aces
Goonswarm Federation
#308 - 2015-03-23 03:05:55 UTC  |  Edited by: bp920091
Overall, I like the changes that are presented, but there's an issue that I have. Referenced earlier in this thread, regarding the diversity of the structures.

A large structure (POS replacement) where moon mining takes place, should have at least 2 size levels.

As someone who manages not only R64 towers (where having a deathstar is pretty common, and would work fine in the new system), but the cheaper R16/32 towers, there needs to be a smaller tower that will have a much lower fuel cost/logistics requirement.

Just to give an example, a platinum moon will give you approx 295m in revenue a month, and costs 125m/month. That's only 170m/month, but since there's quite a few of these (easily 20x the number of R64s), that 170m adds up quite fast. However, this has to have a SMALL tower on it. Much lower defensive ability, no doubt, but it's got a lower fuel requirement. It can fend off a couple of people, but anything that tanks more than 1,000 dps gets to laugh at it, as it reinforces the tower.

A large tower will run you 500m/month, and there needs to be the capacity to mine and provide a reasonable defense.

There should be a range of structures, so that i'm not fitting one with the same capacities on a Platinum moon and a Dysprosium moon.

Dyspro brings in 4b/month, worth the logistical requirements of a massive deathstar. Platinum brings in 170m/month, only worthwhile en-masse. Please dont give a "one size fits all" method to the POS replacement.

Oh, if you do decide to only focus on the big deathstars, and make it impossible financially to run smaller towers, say goodbye to the T2 market (there's a lot of low-priced stuff that goes into the t2 mods, not just the high-value R64 moongoo).

***

Additionally, POS guns need to have the capacity of larger numbers of smaller guns (ie, have 1 large gun, 2 medium guns, or 4 small guns on the same slot), if we're only going to get the capacity to have 8 highslots. There are often REALLY good reasons to have a large number of small guns.
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#309 - 2015-03-23 03:09:32 UTC
Zheng'Yi Sao wrote:
What then is the use of a Rorqual?

We hide them in bubbles precisely because they are impossible to use without one. Sit in a belt with a Rorqual and see what happens. For that matter, where are the exhumers/barges supposed to go when the system goes red? Sure, we can warp to a safe point while we wait for the enemy to scan us down. Either we die at a bookmark in space, or we die in the warp bubbles deployed at stations to keep us from docking.

I suppose now I have to rely on Observation Platforms which may or may not block D-Scan system wide? These, of course will be primary targets. If they can be found? Not that you even need to blow it up, because a Rifter/Entosis link can render it inoperable in about ten minutes, maybe twenty if you meet the max defense bonus. Good luck operating anything next to low or hi sec. Any cut rate tourist with said Rifter/Entosis link can troll the nearby null systems at will. I won't go on about Entosis here though.

For that matter, do you even need Sov to deploy any of this stuff? Seems like the Sov owner deploys the big stuff, and the individual players get to anchor what exactly? I couldn't figure this part out from the blog. I feel like you have tossed out all these wild ideas, without explaining hardly at all how current game play will be effected in the new system.

Lots of folks complain that mining is horribly dull. I think the same about ratting. Mining in null is anything but boring. You constantly have to be on your toes. It also requires a major investment of ISK, training time, and upkeep. I don't see how I am supposed to practice my profession in the future. Bubbles make mining possible in null sec. Maybe you think it is reasonable to just hang a 3.5b capital ship out in space for anyone to point and destroy? Not worth it for me. Just a matter of time until you lose everything. Sure, a POS can be destroyed, but it takes time and energy to do so. Mining ships, and their support vessels are garbage when it comes to defense, hence why so many players go after them. Now we will be easy targets, with no place to run. Awesome.

To me, the entire point of Eve is that you can do something other than run around the universe shooting stuff. Now, anyone with the imagination to try a different style will be completely at the mercy of every drooling F1 monkey in New Eden. Excellent.

I would really like to be excited. Seeing such major changes with such little information just leaves me frustrated, angry, and thinking I will be looking for another game to play in the future.


Completely agree about mining not being dull. There's a ton of us out there who do it, who enjoy it. I think 90%+ of the complaints about mining come from those who dn't mine, which isn't worth listening to considering there are so many of us who enjoy it the way it is, that it works fine.

As for the rorqual, I highly suspect that they will put mining ganglink bonuses on the drilling platform and further relegate our mining director endgame ship into complete uselessness.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#310 - 2015-03-23 03:11:54 UTC
Zheng'Yi Sao wrote:
What then is the use of a Rorqual?

Even though I don't own one, I sympathize and think it's long overdue for an overhaul.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#311 - 2015-03-23 03:14:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Iroquoiss Pliskin
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
I would like to see the Faction standing requirements reinstated for corporation deployment of these new structures in high-sec. Large and extra-large structures should have the previous standing requirements, and these could be dropped down a bit for personal deployments.

Medium (personal)
0.5 - 1.0 standing
0.6 - 2.0 standing
0.7 - 3.0 standing
0.8-1.0 (unavailable to reduce clutter)

Large or Extra-Large (corporation only)
0.5 - 5.0 standing
0.6 - 6.0 standing
0.7 - 7.0 standing
0.8 - 8.0 standing
0.9 - 9.0 standing
1.0 - 10.0 standing


Yes, that would limit the spam somewhat. Smile

Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Zheng'Yi Sao wrote:
What then is the use of a Rorqual?

Even though I don't own one, I sympathize and think it's long overdue for an overhaul.


Why not give it immense EHP to counter the inevitable if it does show up in a high sec belt? Blink

Could lead to interesting "escalations" in null: HALP, RORQ TACKLED IN BELT 3 - III. SEND HALP.

Enemy fleet: "ROR!"
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#312 - 2015-03-23 03:17:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
Yes, that would limit the spam somewhat. Smile

Can you imagine how many Billboard structures would be placed at each Star Gate alone...? And let's not even think about Jita!

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#313 - 2015-03-23 03:20:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Iroquoiss Pliskin
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
Yes, that would limit the spam somewhat. Smile

Can you imagine how many Billboard structures would be placed outside of Jita - let alone stargates...


That would make the Universe... Alive! Big smile

Current Mobile Deployment mechanics are sufficient I think to present billboards in best light - not too far, not too close to a gate/station to make the advertisement actually work and be coherent. Blink

P.S. I remember the times when I used to make can Art in Minmatar lowsec, just a few jumps from Amamake. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Zheng'Yi Sao
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#314 - 2015-03-23 03:31:39 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:

Can you imagine how many Billboard structures would be placed at each Star Gate alone...? And let's not even think about Jita!


I wonder if systems will go into time dilation just from the pure volume of Billboards?

CCP worried about loading all the custom paint skins players might create, now they want to give us mobile video platforms?

"It's funny the things you people think are mandatory for us, as if we don't do what we do because it's a hilarious good time in a space video game." - Johnny Marzetti

Starbuck1988
Extreme Deep Invader Inc.
#315 - 2015-03-23 03:37:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Starbuck1988
ok I love what you are doing with all this, I agree with most of what people are saying except the high sec and low sec going into a Null sec environment, that will defeat what all of this has been about, the first decade+.

The entosis thing whatever it is should be limited to Sov space, and for the new station structures, make it Small, Medium, and Large, and the Service/High/Med/Low are more just like with ships, the bigger the station, the more of each of those you get allowing you to do more.

The service slots just like T3 ships are changeable out where you can make it generic and can do anything, or you have more for more specialized things. just like if small or medium you can put where ships can moor, and if large and XL you can setup moor and dock types.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#316 - 2015-03-23 03:39:06 UTC
Starbuck1988 wrote:
ok I love what you are doing with all this, I agree with most of what people are saying except the high sec and low sec going into a Null sec environment, that will defeat what all of this has been about, the first decade+. the entosis thing whatever it is should be limited to Sov space, and for the new station structures, make it Small, Medium, and Large, and the Service/High/Med/Low are more just like with ships, the bigger the station, the more of each of those you get allowing you to do more, and the service slots just like T3 ships are changeable out where you can make it generic and can do anything, or you have more for more specialized things. just like if small or medium you can put where ships can moor, and if large and XL you can setup moor and dock types.

Honestly, I'm not sure if X-large structures should be constructible in high-sec.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#317 - 2015-03-23 03:44:19 UTC
Noriko Mai wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
[..]I do worry about loss of stuff. Mainly for folks who are deployed or away for good reason (not just because they are bored of the game).[..]

Being bored is a good and valid reason to leave for a while and it should not be treated differently!


and it wouldn't be, but we do need tonacknowledge that some folks have career/duty/rl commitments that drag them from the gameas opposed to just walking away until the next good war happens. The end result would be the same, however. IS the stuff protected or dropped, is it transferred to some neutral pickup point. Is there any hope for a loot pinata?

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)

Yroc Jannseen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#318 - 2015-03-23 03:52:50 UTC
bp920091 wrote:
Overall, I like the changes that are presented, but there's an issue that I have. Referenced earlier in this thread, regarding the diversity of the structures.

A large structure (POS replacement) where moon mining takes place, should have at least 2 size levels.

As someone who manages not only R64 towers (where having a deathstar is pretty common, and would work fine in the new system), but the cheaper R16/32 towers, there needs to be a smaller tower that will have a much lower fuel cost/logistics requirement.

Just to give an example, a platinum moon will give you approx 295m in revenue a month, and costs 125m/month. That's only 170m/month, but since there's quite a few of these (easily 20x the number of R64s), that 170m adds up quite fast. However, this has to have a SMALL tower on it. Much lower defensive ability, no doubt, but it's got a lower fuel requirement. It can fend off a couple of people, but anything that tanks more than 1,000 dps gets to laugh at it, as it reinforces the tower.

A large tower will run you 500m/month, and there needs to be the capacity to mine and provide a reasonable defense.

There should be a range of structures, so that i'm not fitting one with the same capacities on a Platinum moon and a Dysprosium moon.

Dyspro brings in 4b/month, worth the logistical requirements of a massive deathstar. Platinum brings in 170m/month, only worthwhile en-masse. Please dont give a "one size fits all" method to the POS replacement.

Oh, if you do decide to only focus on the big deathstars, and make it impossible financially to run smaller towers, say goodbye to the T2 market (there's a lot of low-priced stuff that goes into the t2 mods, not just the high-value R64 moongoo).

***

Additionally, POS guns need to have the capacity of larger numbers of smaller guns (ie, have 1 large gun, 2 medium guns, or 4 small guns on the same slot), if we're only going to get the capacity to have 8 highslots. There are often REALLY good reasons to have a large number of small guns.


I think it's naïve to assume moon mining as it exists in its current form will continue exactly as is in the new system.
bp920091
Black Aces
Goonswarm Federation
#319 - 2015-03-23 03:56:23 UTC  |  Edited by: bp920091
Yroc Jannseen wrote:
bp920091 wrote:
Overall, I like the changes that are presented, but there's an issue that I have. Referenced earlier in this thread, regarding the diversity of the structures.

A large structure (POS replacement) where moon mining takes place, should have at least 2 size levels.

As someone who manages not only R64 towers (where having a deathstar is pretty common, and would work fine in the new system), but the cheaper R16/32 towers, there needs to be a smaller tower that will have a much lower fuel cost/logistics requirement.

Just to give an example, a platinum moon will give you approx 295m in revenue a month, and costs 125m/month. That's only 170m/month, but since there's quite a few of these (easily 20x the number of R64s), that 170m adds up quite fast. However, this has to have a SMALL tower on it. Much lower defensive ability, no doubt, but it's got a lower fuel requirement. It can fend off a couple of people, but anything that tanks more than 1,000 dps gets to laugh at it, as it reinforces the tower.

A large tower will run you 500m/month, and there needs to be the capacity to mine and provide a reasonable defense.

There should be a range of structures, so that i'm not fitting one with the same capacities on a Platinum moon and a Dysprosium moon.

Dyspro brings in 4b/month, worth the logistical requirements of a massive deathstar. Platinum brings in 170m/month, only worthwhile en-masse. Please dont give a "one size fits all" method to the POS replacement.

Oh, if you do decide to only focus on the big deathstars, and make it impossible financially to run smaller towers, say goodbye to the T2 market (there's a lot of low-priced stuff that goes into the t2 mods, not just the high-value R64 moongoo).

***

Additionally, POS guns need to have the capacity of larger numbers of smaller guns (ie, have 1 large gun, 2 medium guns, or 4 small guns on the same slot), if we're only going to get the capacity to have 8 highslots. There are often REALLY good reasons to have a large number of small guns.


I think it's naïve to assume moon mining as it exists in its current form will continue exactly as is in the new system.


Agreed, but given the lack of logistics people being included in CCP's thought processes proved that there was none, other than the R64 maintenance group (the initial capital range nerf included JFs, which would have obliterated the t2 market, and it was only when there was a massive player backlash to them regarding logistics when they relented (their initial thought process was "People found ways before JFs, so they'll find ways now" without realizing what gameplay changes (carrier + industrials in SMA) people used before JFs)), it needs to be brought up.
Thalos Maedros
69th Canadian Mining Force
#320 - 2015-03-23 04:20:47 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
I would like to see the Faction standing requirements reinstated for corporation deployment of these new structures in high-sec. Large and extra-large structures should have the previous standing requirements, and these could be dropped down a bit for personal deployments.

Medium (personal)
0.5 - 1.0 standing
0.6 - 2.0 standing
0.7 - 3.0 standing
0.8-1.0 (unavailable to reduce clutter)

Large or Extra-Large (corporation only)
0.5 - 5.0 standing
0.6 - 6.0 standing
0.7 - 7.0 standing
0.8 - 8.0 standing
0.9 - 9.0 standing
1.0 - 10.0 standing



Only problem with that system then would be players would then set up personal structures instead if they wanted to bypass the requirements you stated above. As CCP said they want it to have more possibilities for players, your idea is bringing it back to limitations