These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Albert Spear
Non scholae sed vitae
#441 - 2015-03-23 21:28:21 UTC
I think I like it, subject to details to follow - including slot counts, modules, and supporting blueprints.

I would hope that the smallest modules and structures would be accessible to manufacture to newer players - so that the gameplay spreads across as much of the player base as possible.
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
#442 - 2015-03-23 21:32:58 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
you will not be able to reach the same generalization you currently enjoy with a single Starbase indeed. As mentioned in the blog, we would like to allow you to specialize further in a specific field should you choose to.

At this point its not exactly "if you so chose" but more like....""as you are forced to"....

Maybe a basic structure that can be more generalized and NON-specialized as each and every one of them is atm....if a "choice" isn't actually a "choice".....then how is it we were able to chose anything?
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force
#443 - 2015-03-23 21:37:32 UTC
Oxide Ammar wrote:
CCP, what is the idea behind your insist of manning the POS guns to defend and not make like the current system we have right now ?
This is game guys why you we have to feel it is full time job game to defend ourselves by having corp members 24/7 online to be rdy to man the guns if we got attacked ? reasons ?


It's a common theme lately with them isn't it? Want to defend sov? Full time job. Want to defend your structures? Full time job. Want to defend your space? Full time job. Strangely enough, CCP, most of us already have full time jobs and those pay us real life money which we use to be your customers with. When we log on we want to play. We don't want to spend hours traveling or days sitting on our arses defending stuff, we want to mine or rat or blap stuff in the hour or two we have each evening.

13 years and counting. Eve Defence Force is recruiting.

Anonymous Forumposter
State War Academy
Caldari State
#444 - 2015-03-23 21:40:52 UTC
John McCreedy wrote:
It's a common theme lately with them isn't it? Want to defend sov? Full time job. Want to defend your structures? Full time job. Want to defend your space? Full time job. Strangely enough, CCP, most of us already have full time jobs and those pay us real life money which we use to be your customers with. When we log on we want to play. We don't want to spend hours traveling or days sitting on our arses defending stuff, we want to mine or rat or blap stuff in the hour or two we have each evening.


So do that then. No one is forcing you to hold high level assets.
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force
#445 - 2015-03-23 21:45:38 UTC
Anonymous Forumposter wrote:
John McCreedy wrote:
It's a common theme lately with them isn't it? Want to defend sov? Full time job. Want to defend your structures? Full time job. Want to defend your space? Full time job. Strangely enough, CCP, most of us already have full time jobs and those pay us real life money which we use to be your customers with. When we log on we want to play. We don't want to spend hours traveling or days sitting on our arses defending stuff, we want to mine or rat or blap stuff in the hour or two we have each evening.


So do that then. No one is forcing you to hold high level assets.


Roll

13 years and counting. Eve Defence Force is recruiting.

xttz
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#446 - 2015-03-23 21:53:43 UTC
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
Querns wrote:
Yeah, even an individual like myself, who considers himself to be superior to all other thought leaders in Eve: Online, defers to xttz's expertise in the area of sovereignty and POS.

I have done a fair amount of reading and never heard of him. I just thought he was new to the game due to him wanting structure grinding when there has been scores of people listing why it is bad. His post just had a new bro feel to it. I meant no harm.

I would love to read up on his expertise on the subject of structures and sovereignty. Please mail and or list some links. I'm always eager to learn. Apologies to xttz. Oops


Uh yeah I may have been around here for a little while.

Structure grinding is bad when it's mandatory and/or abused. This was the issue with Dominion sov, as the effort required to remove hostile structures was the same in every situation, regardless how much the space is used or what was invested in it. This in turn creates a barrier for entry into null-sec; you have to be able to inflict obscene amounts of damage which in turn means caps and supercaps.

The flipside of this is that key enemy structures should require an element of risk to take out. Dreadnoughts have always been really well balanced in this regard, with siege mode forcing them commit to an attack for a minimum period of time. This is a fantastic avenue for content, with defenders setting traps or scrambling to catch unexpected sieges. It would be a real shame to lose this aspect of EVE.
Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Pandemic Horde
#447 - 2015-03-23 22:36:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Rainus Max
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Re racial types: the new structures wont be following the standard racial variants ie Caldari, Gallente etc


Would it be possible to use the new SKIN ship painting system on these new structures? Granted the configuration of all these structures will add a bit of variation but everyone having the same structures is going to get a bit boring.

Also are all the larger structures individual deployable you dock at or do you deploy a central 'frame' that you then attach the various bits you want to? If individual deployable it seems like you are saving a lot of logistics effort with new structures only to potentially replace it with a lot intra-structure movements - eg taking your ore to one structure, refine it, take it to the manufacturing structure, fetch your BPs, build it and then ship everything over to a market/admin structure.
Pesadel0
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#448 - 2015-03-23 23:26:49 UTC
xttz wrote:
I may well have missed it, but there's something I have yet to see a clear answer for:

Currently one of the primary roles for starbases is as a strategic base. During invasions and longer-term skimishes they're often dropped as a staging location to support fleets in various ways. While most of the specific functions here do seem to be covered, the proposed structure roles list doesn't include an obvious analogue for a military base.

What are we expected to deploy for supporting members during a war in enemy territory? Offensive drilling platforms? Aggressive research labs? Hostile market hubs?

I can't be the only one who thinks that seems a bit silly.



This is a very important question , because per example my corp is a small gmt corp that lives in WH space , our pos are death-stars to deal with the foes , with this change me and my corp mates will wake up and see all our stuff destroyed because :

1-No one was there at 4 eve time to man the guns.

I mean really=?
Akii
ISK.Industries
ISK.Enterprises
#449 - 2015-03-23 23:38:18 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:

So a few points worth noting:

1) Structures should be destroyed more often than they currently do (easy thing to say for Outposts obviously) which means more opportunities for looting.


CCP Ytterbium wrote:

We want them to be like ships, so if there is good gameplay behind it, there is no reason why they shouldn't use drones, or fighter / fighter-bombers at the largest sizes. We do not like gun automation though, so it's likely those will have to be manually controlled if they ever make it in, again, like ship drones.


Mooring looks like anyone with eyes on the structure can see all ships stored there.

Is this really what is going to be achieved?
From the dev blog
Quote:

5. Housing

Proper housing of player items and ships is a critical must-have if we wish those structures to be used over NPC stations. As such, we have different ideas up our sleeves to make that happen.


I feel like NPC stations are looking like the safer option for small corps...
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#450 - 2015-03-23 23:57:41 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:


  • Forcefield mechanic has issues that we want to remove in the new system, if possible. The (super)capital issues are indeed something that needs to be discussed, a thread was created for that purpose there.


  • Can we finally know what are those "issues with forcefield"?
    Max Kolonko
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #451 - 2015-03-24 00:03:54 UTC
    CCP Nullarbor wrote:


    Yep, use this thread for now.


    So a general question: will we be able to anchor multiple structures on one grid (i.e. POS town)

    So I can have my laboratory and array and hangar at the same spot?

    Schwein Hosen
    DuckPus Fightclub
    #452 - 2015-03-24 00:34:49 UTC
    I think you should consider making some small percentage of the stuff in the station drop as loot available to anyone. That way, no one person loses that much, but everyone can have a fun reward once the station blows up. I mean, at say 5% people can't complain that much and I feel like they do deserve to lose something since the thing did blow up. 5% would still mean billions in most cases, plenty enough for looting chaos to ensue. Big smile
    Dani Maulerant
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #453 - 2015-03-24 01:07:26 UTC
    Has anyone asked yet what will happen then to Faction Tower BPCs some may have stashed away, or posted on contracts? Will they be reimbursed or just simply lost with nothing for the trouble of having pulled them from profession sites?
    Valterra Craven
    #454 - 2015-03-24 01:11:30 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Samsara Toldya wrote:

    No racial towers - no racial fuel?



    • Racial fuel will most likely be spread among the various structures, or merged into one, not sure yet. Up to discussion, like everything else.


    I think a fuel block should require some of each type. That way space that doesn't contain a certain type of ice still needs to import something in the new mechanic.
    Valterra Craven
    #455 - 2015-03-24 01:17:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Valterra Craven
    CCP Nullarbor wrote:
    EX Winet wrote:
    So i have two simple questions


    2 - There is really only one major benefit to Sov holding, reduced fuel bills. Will the new structures have this applied or did CCP just sneak it out without anyone actually being aware.



    2. We want some functionality and bonuses to be limited to sov holding space to incentivise holding yes. In particular we are thinking of having rigs which modify their bonus depending on where the structure is deployed.


    There is also a large benefit to fuel use in faction towers as well.

    I think you need to release a general structure that doesn't fit any set type of work (ie research, or manfucture) and maybe its special bonus is reduced fuel usage to compensate for no other bonuses.

    This would be good for people just getting into large space born assets.

    One thing I want you guys to think about as well is how one would go about "upgrading" in place under the new system.

    Say for example I want to go from a med manufacture to a large, or I want to a med research.Under the old system if you wanted to switch a pos role you just switched out the structures on it. now its a whole new structure. I'd much prefer if you didn't have to do that.

    Which gives me an idea. I'd much rather the pos be more like tech 3 destroyers where you could set which role you wanted the pos to occupy (ie switch between research/other things). I know that limits "variety", but under this idea you could go back to having racial/faction variants instead (which IMO is more eve like given how ships are setup) and then with each one be able to choose a role with a time limit for switching etc.
    Valterra Craven
    #456 - 2015-03-24 01:26:05 UTC
    CCP Nullarbor wrote:
    EX Winet wrote:
    So i have two simple questions

    1 - There has been alot of talk coming out of the round table with regards to replacement or reimbursement for Towers/mods/structures/BPC, however nothing has been said about Stations. Will stations be replaced via isk or the new structures. Or as it seems is being hinted but not outright said, will they just become obsolete and thus destroyable leaving alliances out of pocket?


    1. We need to have a long think about Outpost + Outpost Upgrade reimbursement, particularly because they have such a long history of investment form multiple previous owners. If you have any ideas on how to do this fairly please share your thoughts.



    Sorry, kinda posting stream of thought on this.

    If you went with my idea of racial structures instead of role structures, you could leave outposts as is under the new system completely.

    For example, lets say you have a mini outpost.

    Under the old system those structures got special bonuses.

    Under the new system each race gets a special bonus for a specific role. So for example mini are good are building stuff so they get the normal role bonus if you chose to go manufacture, so lets say that normal role bonus is 10% and then because they are mini they get another 5%. But lets say you don't want to stay manufacture, well it just becomes a bonus you don't use or a special sub role that it gets to retain while doing something else. So lets say a mini structure with a research role gets 10% to research for its role and 5% to manufacture for race.

    Then you take all the upgrades the station has and convert them to the new system, be they rigs, or "fittings". That way NOTHING needs to be reimbursed, and if they are converted to fittings, they can be used on some other XL structure if people so chose. Doing conversions seems much simpler than having everyone start from scratch.
    Valterra Craven
    #457 - 2015-03-24 01:30:00 UTC
    Also, I'm going to be watching you VERYYYY closely. It seems like just a year ago I was having to protect my "precious"

    The Hyasyoda Research Lab. Please don't screw it up....
    Valterra Craven
    #458 - 2015-03-24 01:38:01 UTC
    CCP Nullarbor wrote:

    Re racial types: the new structures wont be following the standard racial variants ie Caldari, Gallente etc


    Please elaborate on why. The new system is decidedly "un-eve" like with no real reason why. Especially after I argued so hard for all industrial ships to be moved to ORE a while ago, and you guys persisted with the racial variants there.
    Juan Mileghere
    Meta Zero
    Meta Reloaded
    #459 - 2015-03-24 02:22:43 UTC
    Only real question would be how this all is affected in different parts of space...
    Juan Mileghere
    Meta Zero
    Meta Reloaded
    #460 - 2015-03-24 02:23:55 UTC
    Max Kolonko wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:


  • Forcefield mechanic has issues that we want to remove in the new system, if possible. The (super)capital issues are indeed something that needs to be discussed, a thread was created for that purpose there.


  • Can we finally know what are those "issues with forcefield"?

    wasn't that because stuff could get bumped out of bubbles if cynoed in a certain way?