These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[New structures] Item safety mechanics on structure destruction

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Phig Neutron
Starbreaker and Sons
#161 - 2015-03-27 20:43:48 UTC
Metal Icarus wrote:
If you go on vacation without dealing with your assets in space, that's like leaving your car at an airport parking lot unlocked for your whole vacation. I hear that is not a very smart thing to do.


We're not talking about "assets in space". We're talking about assets in stations.
How do you "deal with your assets" in the station? Only thing I can think you mean is that we have to sell everything we own before logging out for more than a couple days. So the only "safe asset" is ISK.

But why should ISK be safe? It's stored in a bank or something, right? If we're going to take this stupid idea to its logical conclusion, shouldn't we also make player wallets destructable? Or maybe your account is stored in one of those NPC bank stations (Garoun Investment Bank etc), and when it's blown up you should lose everything. That's the true spirit of EVE or something isn't it? Only a carebear would oppose this idea, right?
oohthey ioh
Doomheim
#162 - 2015-03-28 04:37:56 UTC
Phig Neutron wrote:
oohthey ioh wrote:
Phig Neutron wrote:

YOU see a difference between "outposts" and "stations" but I don't see any indication that the developers see "stations" as sacred and untouchable while they're re-designing "outposts". I'm pretty sure that whatever changes they're proposing are intended to affect both of them alike.


During the steam they made it clear you keep your items so people use the player made structures over stations and has CCP has been referring to outpost and stations separately. plus there are lores be hide some stations.


Quoting in order to boggle future grammarian-archaeologists.
Dev blog states:
Quote:
There are currently five different types of structures available in the game, each with a unique purpose, which we shall quickly review now.

And then enumerates them: deployables, POCO, POS, sov structures, and Outposts. No distinction is made between player-built or NPC-owned outposts.

Then under the heading "Keep Calm, Your Stuff is Safe" it says "Not removing existing structures without transition time." In other words, existing structures will be removed.

I don't know what some dev might have said at Fanfest while drunk, but this is what they've written down. There is every indication that they are thinking about removing all stations and going over to the new system, albeit gradually.


https://youtu.be/sOGnPAbHKDk?t=1h9m27s

form 1:09 in he talks about about the player made structures, and he clearly says "player made outposts", ccp has made no indication that they are touching stations just player made structures.
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort
#163 - 2015-03-28 07:28:49 UTC
1 a) Only anchorable in systems you hold sov in.
1 b) Only anchorable if "permits" by NPC/player faction items are within structure's hold and are consumed on hourly basis.

2) While the alliance holds sov and/or "permits" are available the structure is invulnerable to being flipped/destroyed
-Entosis may offline the structure stopping all current functions.

3) If alliance loses sov over the space or structure runs out of "permits" the structure become vulnerable to being flipped/destroyed.
-Player with entosis is given a message to either Flip control or destroy. Pretty self explanatory.

4) Any items still within the structure are put into limbo until the owning player comes online. They will be prompted that their assets are in possession of the structure's previous inhabitants who fled before it's destruction/re-acquisition and to please give them a location to deliver their assets.

5) Player must select a station with a corp office or high standing NPC station.


Reason for this is pretty simple. Imagine your job/country/family forcing a break from the game then coming back several months later. It was abrupt so your corp has kicked you for inactivity and moved on. Your stuff was in a station that was destroyed. It's all gone, you're back to square one. You quit because frankly, it's not worth it anymore.

This idea also answers the question of "when is a player's personal structure vulnerable?" which is acceptable and still very vulnerable to harassment at all hours.

---

Null is already a risky place to live because you do risk losing access to your assets with a single click of a button by your CEO/alliance leader. But worst case scenario you have the option to sell your assets and get something back.
This idea of destroying the items outright makes unexpected breaks or being unable to play every day to monitor personal structures to be potentially disastrous. This is not "good" nor is it "fair" as this is a game and expecting such a high level of devotion is a horrid game mechanic.
Item's appearing in the system in which the structure was destroyed is just as devastating for all the same reasons. Their assets may as well have been destroyed in the volumes most players have in their possession as they must now likely risk moving in a FJ/carrier to scoop their assets and try to escape assuming the known location(s) have not been bubbled/scouted prior to their arrival.




TL ; DR - Invulnerable to destruction/flip while sov is held, but can be offlined at all hours for harassment. Destruction/flip can occur upon sov loss. Assets are relocated to location of owner's choosing upon log in.
John Podiene
Fist Of The Red Dragon
#164 - 2015-03-29 13:38:47 UTC
No matter where you fall on whether the stuff you had in an outpost should be lootable or not, option #3 is the only feasible option when dealing with things like station containers, and packaged freighters, dreadnaughts on up. The reason being it simply will not be possible for either attacker or defender to retrieve said items because of current cargo-hold limits on freighters.
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#165 - 2015-03-29 14:11:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Masao Kurata
John Podiene wrote:
No matter where you fall on whether the stuff you had in an outpost should be lootable or not, option #3 is the only feasible option when dealing with things like station containers, and packaged freighters, dreadnaughts on up. The reason being it simply will not be possible for either attacker or defender to retrieve said items because of current cargo-hold limits on freighters.


Not necessarily, what if the vault was given the ability to assemble items, disassemble, move items in and out of containers and launch ships? Maybe even allow reprocessing at a fairly poor rate.

You might need friends or multiple trips but everything should be retrievable.
Airane
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#166 - 2015-03-29 15:27:06 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
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 what happens to items stored inside structures when they blow up (or end up captured) in a blaze of glorious space explosions.


  • First option is to have the structure turn into a wreck - fitted structure modules could drop as loot, while items inside the structure would only be accessible to their rightful owner(s), possibly through salvaging. Users docked at the time of the structure destruction would still be docked inside the wreck, but unable to dock back should they exit.

  • Another option is to use the same mechanic we have for planetary launches. When a structure is destroyed, all assets are moved into special containers. A container exists for each individual that stored items in the structure, as well as corporation entities and are spread around planets. When this happens, an entry would appear on the owner journal giving a warp-in point to go to. Please note such containers would not be destructible at all, and could not be scanned until the rightful owner comes to retrieve his or her loot. The duration at which those entries would stay remains entirely dependent to the structure type and player condition when it was destroyed (logged off, account lapsed etc…). Player docked inside the structure would be spread around the solar system.

  • Third option could be to have the items inside the structure moved to another structure belonging to the same owners.



Such gameplay is necessary if we wish players to use those new structures and not stash all of their items in NPC stations. Also, please note, it is possible for such mechanics to only be available in the largest structures (most likely XL) since existing Starbases do not have any kind of item safety mechanic (and would likely end up as L size equivalent in the new model).



other good idea is to make isk an item where you have to carry it about or keep it in a NPC bank,
just like the idea to make eve feel real in way you buying stuff,
John Podiene
Fist Of The Red Dragon
#167 - 2015-03-29 16:19:05 UTC  |  Edited by: John Podiene
Masao Kurata wrote:
John Podiene wrote:
No matter where you fall on whether the stuff you had in an outpost should be lootable or not, option #3 is the only feasible option when dealing with things like station containers, and packaged freighters, dreadnaughts on up. The reason being it simply will not be possible for either attacker or defender to retrieve said items because of current cargo-hold limits on freighters.


Not necessarily, what if the vault was given the ability to assemble items, disassemble, move items in and out of containers and launch ships? Maybe even allow reprocessing at a fairly poor rate.

You might need friends or multiple trips but everything should be retrievable.


I get what your saying, but that doesn't make logical sense. If the station has been blown up, logically It stands to reason that services like assembling ships, containers, ect. would not be available as a matter of course. It's a wreak. If the content of said outpost has been scattered then they should receive no special assembly in space service just to make the mechanic work. I believe option 3 is the best solution because increasing the freighter's cargo hold space isn't an option.
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#168 - 2015-03-29 16:36:10 UTC
John Podiene wrote:
Masao Kurata wrote:
Not necessarily, what if the vault was given the ability to assemble items, disassemble, move items in and out of containers and launch ships? Maybe even allow reprocessing at a fairly poor rate.


I get what your saying, but that doesn't make logical sense. If the station has been blown up, logically It stands to reason that services like assembling ships, containers, ect. would not be available as a matter of course. It's a wreak. If the content of said outpost has been scattered then they should receive no special assembly in space service just to make the mechanic work. I believe option 3 is the best solution because increasing the freighter's cargo hold space isn't an option.


It's not a wreck, it's some kind of magical vault, I really don't care about the lore explanation.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#169 - 2015-03-29 17:27:20 UTC
I was thinking that the destroyed structure could drop an indestructible box containing all items which could be accessed by item owners, or this box could have a new structure built around it for a reduced cost. The new structure would take on the ownership and access settings of the old structure, regardless of who (re)built it.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
John Podiene
Fist Of The Red Dragon
#170 - 2015-03-29 20:43:07 UTC  |  Edited by: John Podiene
[quote=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 what happens to items stored inside structures when they blow up (or end up captured) in a blaze of glorious space explosions.

[list]
  • First option is to have the structure turn into a wreck - fitted structure modules could drop as loot, while items inside the structure would only be accessible to their rightful owner(s), possibly through salvaging. Users docked at the time of the structure destruction would still be docked inside the wreck, but unable to dock back should they exit.

    • John Podiene wrote:
    Masao Kurata wrote:
    Not necessarily, what if the vault was given the ability to assemble items, disassemble, move items in and out of containers and launch ships? Maybe even allow reprocessing at a fairly poor rate.


    I get what your saying, but that doesn't make logical sense. If the station has been blown up, logically It stands to reason that services like assembling ships, containers, ect. would not be available as a matter of course. It's a wreak. If the content of said outpost has been scattered then they should receive no special assembly in space service just to make the mechanic work. I believe option 3 is the best solution because increasing the freighter's cargo hold space isn't an option.


    It's not a wreck, it's some kind of magical vault, I really don't care about the lore explanation.

    apparently your wrong. you want "magical vaults" go play wow. You can cal it whatever you want, but if i destroy an outpost and expect to get loot from it, the outpost will leave a wreck even if the loot appears elsewhere. I highly doubt that if loot is allowed to drop from outposts that ccp is going to have a "special vault" to allow item assembly. no other object that leaves behind loot has such a mechanic.
    Destiny Dain2
    Your Destiny Corporation
    #171 - 2015-03-29 22:13:54 UTC
    I think you should have it where if your structure is blown up the contents are shipped to an NPC Station, where it is impounded until you pay a fee for safe transport of the goods.
    Masao Kurata
    Perkone
    Caldari State
    #172 - 2015-03-30 05:12:54 UTC
    John Podiene wrote:
    apparently your wrong. you want "magical vaults" go play wow. You can cal it whatever you want, but if i destroy an outpost and expect to get loot from it, the outpost will leave a wreck even if the loot appears elsewhere. I highly doubt that if loot is allowed to drop from outposts that ccp is going to have a "special vault" to allow item assembly. no other object that leaves behind loot has such a mechanic.


    You can make lore explanations for anything. The game design comes first.

    Having loot "scatted" over vast distances is nonsense in the first place, so let's say it gets there by warping. The "vault" is form of automated spaceship fitted with a single use warp drive that functions like the emergency warp on our ships. Inside the vault, and remember that this thing is spacious and TARDIS like containers are a thing in EVE lore, is a small reactor and some equipment and workers.

    Happier? I didn't change the game design aspect one bit.
    Insurance Agent
    Hull Zero Two
    #173 - 2015-03-30 07:00:29 UTC
    If the jet can option is going to be the chosen one, could we have the possibility to booby trap our can and have it explode for enough damage to blap BC sized hulls?
    SecretService
    Secret Services
    #174 - 2015-03-30 09:42:47 UTC  |  Edited by: SecretService
    Overall destructible stations replacements, I don't see it feasible. Sounds cool but the hassle it brings kills the joy.
    As for the other stuff, POS replacements... probably not too much changes in behaviour if things will not be safe. People will just keep the stuff they afford to lose (not talking about exceptions).

    The most desired thing and a huge improvement will be the player experience in setting the base and likely the security within corp.

    First we say that we want stuff to be blown up. Nothing bad with that...
    Then we say we want players not to stash their stuff in NPC stations.

    Obviously there is a conflict. If you lose your stuff, you'll not stash stuff. Similarly with POS now, living in wormhole, I have the minimum and don't care much if I lose that. Everything else is stored in the safety of NPC stations.

    Basically, and mostly griefers, posts follow the idea "we want your stuff to be lost so that we can grab them". Ok, but then you have to trick the players to put their valuable stuff there. Is it worth it? No, so far.

    It is often mentioned teleportation of stuff. Doesn't suit EVE and as many mentioned, exploitable to some extent. To a structure in same system may not be too bad but that ends up in chain destruction.

    Safespots (the journal entry idea) or planets (#37) sound decent but varies on the context. If you have several subcaps and a couple caps, mods, and not too much other stuff it's not that difficult to get it.

    But if it's, let's say, a null staging system that was lost... you can imagine the panic and assets lost there. It will be a bloody masacre and very expensive for all. If you let it drop, kiss goodbye to the party that lost. Winners get even more powerful/richer and losers will have to retreat and probably not many enthusiastics on establishing such a base. But null is not my domain.. I'm sure others will figure it out.

    -my 2 eurocents.
    BugraT WarheaD
    #175 - 2015-03-30 11:20:56 UTC
    I really like the proposal made somewhere on this thread : the mix of proposal 2 and 3. Your assets are in a safe can near a planet, but you can pay a NPC corporation to retrieve your loot back to an NPC station, costing you a percentage of your stuff value.
    Milla Goodpussy
    Garoun Investment Bank
    #176 - 2015-03-30 11:45:31 UTC


    form 1:09 in he talks about about the player made structures, and he clearly says "player made outposts", ccp has made no indication that they are touching stations just player made structures.[/quote]


    umm sorry boo boo.. once their was sov everyone built their station or umm platform eggs to become stations.. which is all player-made.. these structures are indeed going bye-bye.

    they're closing services in the old to force the new as well, but im sure they'll wait to give a heads up (and also soften the raging on forums) once more dev-blogs hit.

    oh there's some twisting in their words cause they're petrified of folks leaving and no longer playing the game (which is going to happen regardless how they try to smooth it over)

    be prepared... low sec isn't safe, no where is safe.. all except high-sec for a long time.. but everyone in caps is impacted, everyone building from stations is impacted.. everything is going to get touched in null sec.


    you wont lose your stuff but good luck on retrieving it once the mess hits the fan.. THAT they will not discuss openly,

    good luck to fending off all those trolls and griefers as well cause oh man its coming as well.
    Jezza McWaffle
    Lazerhawks
    L A Z E R H A W K S
    #177 - 2015-03-30 13:38:07 UTC
    I think CCP has completely forgotten about wormholes in this change. From what I can see pos's will be replaced by these new large structures and non one in wormhole space wants outposts.
    Currently loot from the sma and cha etc drops in wrecks and is lootable by anyone, getting rid of this drop mechanic is a terrible idea in my opinion, I do not see why you cannot keep it ins current state since your basically saying we don't want any hostile aggression against structures in wormholes.

    Wormholes worst badass | Checkout my Wormhole blog
    Scuzzy Logic
    Space Spuds
    #178 - 2015-03-30 14:09:24 UTC
    Personally, I think Option 1 would be the most sensible to implement. There is no need to overcomplicate such a feature.
    Quintessen
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #179 - 2015-03-30 14:58:48 UTC
    Perhaps the destroyed wreck becomes a market location with storage where you sell the salvage rights to other people. You can contract out of there, use the market to buy and sell, but not deposit things. This allows you to offload your stuff the same way you do with an outpost that's been conquered that you're never getting back.

    You get back some ISK if you can't get back your stuff logistically. And if you reclaim the space you can get your actual stuff back. You could still add NPC or PC shipping options since you could contract out.

    Some amount of stuff should drop, but some items should be excluded. No PLEX, no pure collectibles (e.g. Piece of Steve), no aurum-purchased items. BPOs should have a much lower drop rate than other items along with anything else that can have a multi-year investment put into it. And some percentage of things should also be outright destroyed using the same logic.

    EVE is harsh and the idea of any player property loss already puts it ahead of most other games. EVE doesn't need to be rage-quit inducingly harsh though.
    Baljos Arnjak
    Dark Praetorian Order
    #180 - 2015-03-30 22:47:09 UTC
    Just an idea:

    I heard either on the Fanfest stream or on one of Fozzie's recent podcast interviews that there is a new feature being planned that allowed NPC's to deliver small volumes of goods. The risk of using the service was that those NPC's were actually in space traveling and targetable by players. Why not use the same mechanic here?

    So, lets say the installation management can designate an Evacuation Point for an NPC evacuation effort. These NPC's would undock over a period of time in groups/convoys and head to that point with the goods that the installation contained and be vulnerable to attack and destruction, dropping the loot. The more stuff at a station, the more convoys launch. Once they arrive at their destination, be it a station, planet, another installation, or even just an invulnerable container in space, they make their delivery and despawn.

    The way I see it, this gives both the previous owners and the attackers two chances to loot/save that stuff (freeport evac + NPC evac). It would incentivize both defense and offense, spread the battle around, and add another dynamic to a battle. It would also be an incentive to attack large entrenched alliances because they would have the most stuff to loot.

    The only problem that I see with it is that unsubbed players would be vulnerable to having their stuff destroyed/looted. But, to be honest, that's a risk you take when you live in Null. You can lose access to your stuff at any time and it's just a cost of living there. If you don't want to lose your stuff while unsubbed, move it to empire space.