These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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] Mooring and docking features

First post First post
Author
Webster Carr
Carr Consolidated Corporation
#321 - 2015-04-03 21:53:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Webster Carr
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
Webster Carr wrote:
Being able to dock in Wormhole space is a quality of life thing for me, I want to be able to build something lasting with all the conveniences in my lil wormhole home. Living in space without being able to dock is a PITA...

*I also want it to be able to blast anyone who tries to take my hermit hole away from me so please allow passive defenses for the new structures....enough at least to deter the casual pirate gang...

-Web

And why should the casual pirate not be able to engage the casual worm hole player?


Oh, the casual pirate should most certainly be able to engage the casual wormhole player. The casual pirate should not be able to casually take out the structure that it took the casual wormhole player a month to build without at least a bit more than casual effort...

It is always easier to destroy than it is to build, but let's posit this:

CWR (Casual Wormhole Resident) moves into a wormhole and puts up a Large Research Station. He slots this station with guns, ewar, and defensive mods in addition to having a Data Core Research Modules, Dock Space, and some minor production in the service slots. Let's say he parks this station above his main PI planet to receive deliveries. He also builds regular POCO stations above the other planets and generally constructs a nice little industrial center to be his EVE home. Some people like building things.

Along comes MCP (Mr. Casual Pirate). He does some scanning and finds CWR hopping around to his various POCOs retrieving his PI production or maybe CWR is in a MAC mining out a signature. A nice juicy target, MCP drops by to see if he can blow something up... (Because some people just like to watch the world burn.) Maybe MCP was watching D-scan, perhaps not, maybe he got his pod out, maybe not... I call THAT the ability to engage CWR by MCP...

So let's say CWR sees MCP's probes on d-scan and warps back to his Large, Heavily Armed, Fully Operational Research Station, docks up, and takes manual control of the defenses. What now? In my view of how structures should work, unless MCP heads out and rounds up a gang of 8-10 like minded, heavily equipped battlecruisers/battleships there SHOULD NOT be much danger to the station. Most importantly if MCP comes back to destroy CWR's home the next day while CWR is at his RL job, he should not log back on to find his wormhole home in ruins all because his station's defenses were not active while he was off line...


Bottom line: It should take a concerted effort equal to at least a percentage of what it took to build the structure to destroy it... Otherwise it is not worth building in the first place.

So:
1) Yes to Structure Passive Defenses
2) Yes to Dock-able Structures in Wormholes
3) NO to silly Entosis games in Wormholes

Because without these CWR will not be there in the wormhole in the first place for MCP to engage...

-Web
d0cTeR9
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#322 - 2015-04-03 22:47:12 UTC
Webster Carr wrote:
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
Webster Carr wrote:
Being able to dock in Wormhole space is a quality of life thing for me, I want to be able to build something lasting with all the conveniences in my lil wormhole home. Living in space without being able to dock is a PITA...

*I also want it to be able to blast anyone who tries to take my hermit hole away from me so please allow passive defenses for the new structures....enough at least to deter the casual pirate gang...

-Web

And why should the casual pirate not be able to engage the casual worm hole player?


Oh, the casual pirate should most certainly be able to engage the casual wormhole player. The casual pirate should not be able to casually take out the structure that it took the casual wormhole player a month to build without at least a bit more than casual effort...

It is always easier to destroy than it is to build, but let's posit this:

CWR (Casual Wormhole Resident) moves into a wormhole and puts up a Large Research Station. He slots this station with guns, ewar, and defensive mods in addition to having a Data Core Research Modules, Dock Space, and some minor production in the service slots. Let's say he parks this station above his main PI planet to receive deliveries. He also builds regular POCO stations above the other planets and generally constructs a nice little industrial center to be his EVE home. Some people like building things.

Along comes MCP (Mr. Casual Pirate). He does some scanning and finds CWR hopping around to his various POCOs retrieving his PI production or maybe CWR is in a MAC mining out a signature. A nice juicy target, MCP drops by to see if he can blow something up... (Because some people just like to watch the world burn.) Maybe MCP was watching D-scan, perhaps not, maybe he got his pod out, maybe not... I call THAT the ability to engage CWR by MCP...

So let's say CWR sees MCP's probes on d-scan and warps back to his Large, Heavily Armed, Fully Operational Research Station, docks up, and takes manual control of the defenses. What now? In my view of how structures should work, unless MCP heads out and rounds up a gang of 8-10 like minded, heavily equipped battlecruisers/battleships there SHOULD NOT be much danger to the station. Most importantly if MCP comes back to destroy CWR's home the next day while CWR is at his RL job, he should not log back on to find his wormhole home in ruins all because his station's defenses were not active while he was off line...


Bottom line: It should take a concerted effort equal to at least a percentage of what it took to build the structure to destroy it... Otherwise it is not worth building in the first place.

So:
1) Yes to Structure Passive Defenses
2) Yes to Dock-able Structures in Wormholes
3) NO to silly Entosis games in Wormholes

Because without these CWR will not be there in the wormhole in the first place for MCP to engage...

-Web


That's how it should be anywhere in null-sec and WH space...

People screaming to get more easy kills (now from supers, and soon from player structures) should NOT get what they are whining about. I see ZERO point in spending isk/time in this game, if my stuff gets blown up/destroyed because i'm at my RL job, or i took 1-2 weeks off to relax on a beach...

Been around since the beginning.

Dean Auduin
Sturmfeuer.
SLYCE Pirates
#323 - 2015-04-03 23:22:25 UTC
looking forward to that!
Cade Windstalker
#324 - 2015-04-04 02:05:30 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Wh groups being limited in numbers (the isk income a wh can support number) makes it difficult to cover all tz. Sure there are a few 200+ corps out there, but not many. The lower the class of wh, the fewer folks it can support. Over all it is not practical for lower class in specific and higher class in general to be able to field 23/7 coverage.

That being said, what ever mechanics are applied there should be resistant to TZ shinanigans. If US players can dunk russian/EU players while they sleep/work Russian players can dunk EU/US players while they sleep/work and EU players can dunk US/russian players while they sleep/work, well asside from a glorious first month, wh will become pretty empty.

It will be left w/ a few bears logging off in caps, logging in to farm and logging back off in short order. WH space will change it's road warrior style pvp mystique to the ultimate farmville for alt accounts. Please keep the unique circumstances of wh living in mind and don't make it so 'off time zone dunking' is a thing.


With the new structure mechanics you have a 4 hour window of vulnerability, so you don't need anything like 24/7 coverage to protect your structures any more than you do now. This was part of the original dev blog and is mentioned in the Entosis thread.
Felter Echerie
Profit Prophets
#325 - 2015-04-04 02:13:40 UTC
Webster Carr wrote:
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
Webster Carr wrote:
Being able to dock in Wormhole space is a quality of life thing for me, I want to be able to build something lasting with all the conveniences in my lil wormhole home. Living in space without being able to dock is a PITA...

*I also want it to be able to blast anyone who tries to take my hermit hole away from me so please allow passive defenses for the new structures....enough at least to deter the casual pirate gang...

-Web

And why should the casual pirate not be able to engage the casual worm hole player?


Oh, the casual pirate should most certainly be able to engage the casual wormhole player. The casual pirate should not be able to casually take out the structure that it took the casual wormhole player a month to build without at least a bit more than casual effort...

It is always easier to destroy than it is to build, but let's posit this:

CWR (Casual Wormhole Resident) moves into a wormhole and puts up a Large Research Station. He slots this station with guns, ewar, and defensive mods in addition to having a Data Core Research Modules, Dock Space, and some minor production in the service slots. Let's say he parks this station above his main PI planet to receive deliveries. He also builds regular POCO stations above the other planets and generally constructs a nice little industrial center to be his EVE home. Some people like building things.

Along comes MCP (Mr. Casual Pirate). He does some scanning and finds CWR hopping around to his various POCOs retrieving his PI production or maybe CWR is in a MAC mining out a signature. A nice juicy target, MCP drops by to see if he can blow something up... (Because some people just like to watch the world burn.) Maybe MCP was watching D-scan, perhaps not, maybe he got his pod out, maybe not... I call THAT the ability to engage CWR by MCP...

So let's say CWR sees MCP's probes on d-scan and warps back to his Large, Heavily Armed, Fully Operational Research Station, docks up, and takes manual control of the defenses. What now? In my view of how structures should work, unless MCP heads out and rounds up a gang of 8-10 like minded, heavily equipped battlecruisers/battleships there SHOULD NOT be much danger to the station. Most importantly if MCP comes back to destroy CWR's home the next day while CWR is at his RL job, he should not log back on to find his wormhole home in ruins all because his station's defenses were not active while he was off line...


Bottom line: It should take a concerted effort equal to at least a percentage of what it took to build the structure to destroy it... Otherwise it is not worth building in the first place.

So:
1) Yes to Structure Passive Defenses
2) Yes to Dock-able Structures in Wormholes
3) NO to silly Entosis games in Wormholes

Because without these CWR will not be there in the wormhole in the first place for MCP to engage...

-Web

+♥ to that
ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#326 - 2015-04-04 02:40:34 UTC
Quote:
5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive, and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

I have removed a troll post.

ISD Decoy

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#327 - 2015-04-04 03:01:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Mazzara wrote:
Quote:
Well, then just leave a POS shield up around the structure, like we have now



I agree with you why not, leave the shields


Because there are a few mechanical problems (as in game mechanical) with the current POS shields. Like the number of ways you can get a CYNO inside one, for example, all of the various bump mechanics, and basically anything else that involves the physics engine interacting with a POS bubble. It's far easier to remove these issues by introducing a new mechanic that preserves the desirable functionality and removes the problems.

CCP have stated that currently their intention is to entirely remove POS bubbles from the game.

Noxisia Arkana wrote:
Still think docking games in wormholes is going to be ******. I'm also concerned about the amount of effort to flip structures to new ownership. It should be more difficult than than bringing everything in and setting it up, especially since wormholes operate with less people - and it's likely someone won't be on during a vulnerability time for the 5,10 or 30 minutes it'll take.

Forcing ships to moore (capital) could be a problem, since it's going to give a huge advantage to sieging corps. They can see how many caps you have, and they can log off enough to deal with you.

Edit: to elaborate on docking - I don't want to play highsec docking games in wormhole space, that's going to **** me off. A lot.


If they add docking then Capitals should be able to dock, Supers will have to moor but it's a Wormhole... what Supers? (I mean, besides FCFTW's secret super-fleet, ignore that)

We already have POS games, docking games can be mitigated by simply making all of these structures what is generally referred to as a "kick-out" undock. In other words you don't undock within the docking ring.

Lastly do you really think you can't at least have one guy online during what is ostensibly prime-time for your organization during the week?

That said the capture and destruction mechanics for Wormholes do need to be outlined/ironed out, since Wormholes don't exactly have a Region to fight through (or at least not an easily accessible one).


Wh groups being limited in numbers (the isk income a wh can support number) makes it difficult to cover all tz. Sure there are a few 200+ corps out there, but not many. The lower the class of wh, the fewer folks it can support. Over all it is not practical for lower class in specific and higher class in general to be able to field 23/7 coverage.

That being said, what ever mechanics are applied there should be resistant to TZ shinanigans. If US players can dunk russian/EU players while they sleep/work Russian players can dunk EU/US players while they sleep/work and EU players can dunk US/russian players while they sleep/work, well asside from a glorious first month, wh will become pretty empty.

It will be left w/ a few bears logging off in caps, logging in to farm and logging back off in short order. WH space will change it's road warrior style pvp mystique to the ultimate farmville for alt accounts. Please keep the unique circumstances of wh living in mind and don't make it so 'off time zone dunking' is a thing.

burned farms and barren fields just like a shaken up sov?

sounds great


after so long about how they will end blobber nullsec structure dreams, now themselves feel their structures threatened? hah

because your cap blobs or whatever won't work. wait, is this goons crying about moa ending them or what now

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

Gabriel Karade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#328 - 2015-04-04 20:47:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Gabriel Karade
@Ytterbium:

How do you envisage 'perimeter security' around the new structures?

Lots and lots of guns? e.g. 'mini-Deathstars' all round the mooring structure?
Local (fixed) cyno-jammers? (like a mobile inhibitor, but structure based?)
Local (fixed) warp jammers? (like a mini deadspace pocket - drops people out of warp at its outer radius, prevents on-grid warping, but doesn't stop warping off?).

I've always felt POS shields were a slightly 'hacky' and immersion breaking approach, but if you're going to get rid of them, the functionality (perimeter security) needs to be re-envisaged in some form. Otherwise, as others have pointed out, the 'mooring' aspiration won't fly.


If (and it's a major 'if'...) it was all done properly it could add a whole new level of 'awesome' to the game; I would love (as I'm sure every Sci-Fi geek in this game would) to see the scale getting to a near grid-sized 'naval base', built up over time with interlocking structures, multiple moored supers/dreads, multiple fights occurring at different ends of the grid - i.e turning the concept up to '11'.

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

unimatrix0030
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#329 - 2015-04-04 21:13:47 UTC  |  Edited by: unimatrix0030
Just a small list w-space structure users would need:
If we are looking at a structure we should be able to see who is online and in what ships they are in.
I prefer we see all that intell by looking at ships not by doing show info or some kind of dscan window.Eve has to much spreadsheets to do it again in that way.
D-scanning while moored should also be possible and seeing space with overview also .
We should also be able to see people switching ships

Staging use, we need a safe place to assemble a fleet and align it to a destination.
People need to be able to align and get to warpspeed in safety before getting vulnerable. And this for fleet align use as for getting out when the structure is about to be destroyed.
And full warp disruptor bubble cover of the structure should be possible like the pos system now.

I prefer to only see ships moored/soft-moored wich have people in it.the rest could just e-warp out or be inside the structure like a sma.
You should be able to switch ships while moored/softmoored wiithout being vulnerable.
Ships should also be ejectable like you can now, and float out of "safe" range.
Seeing ships and people that are active , things that are unactive should be able to be stored(up to a certain volume).

When moored/softmoored you still should be able to refit, repair, move in and out of ships.
Loggin off or loggin in should make you appear softmoored at the place you were.
Unless the structure got moved/destroyed.

Softmoored ships should appear on d-scan moored not.

Structures need to be warpable , since we can't locate them on d-scan if they are not moonlocked (maybe like an anomaly).
If they are only scanable by probes then defenders would have to much free intell.
The structures in w-space should not let people dock .
Pods at the most .
And only if you can get info on them without active tools the people can detect .
So maybe only XL post can have docking but can't be able to be used into w-space.
Also don't let people be able to moor/softmoor at the small structures, people need to be gathered to gether.
I would want to have to search for a 50 man fleet in a system with 100+small structures all doin the same as a L or XL structure.

I for one never want to be able to dock in wormhole space. Nor do I want others to be able to dock up. Intel gathered/given up from being logged in a pos is a huge mechanic that would be lost if docking would be possible.
I would prefer a forcefield that I can see. By a visible shield or some other indicator(like bomb radius).
Soft-mooring bumping preferably not by enemies.

Number of moor point, just scale it like the way the ship maintanace arrays can fit now, except maybe the XL who can fit the same size als stations.

Allow moored ships to become part of the structure's defenses at a cost .

Most importantly, don't bring docking games to w-space. Ever.
It's one of the things ALL wormholers intentionally fled because docking games SUCK.

Looks like all the null sec and low sec dudes only care about supercaps, don't you guys have subcap fleet to assemble, align, safe up and bridge?

Worries :
intell of people inside structure.
fleet assembly, align to warp out, safe place, fir/refit/repair
docking games changed to mooring games.
Timers to dock/moor and undock/unmoor is not a good way to play.



Most importantly, don't bring docking games to w-space. Ever.
It's one of the things ALL wormholers intentionally fled because docking games SUCK.

No local in null sec would fix everything!

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#330 - 2015-04-04 23:33:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Nevyn Auscent
Soft mooring just sounds like 'POS shield V2' so I'd rather not see any soft mooring.
WH space already has station games/docking games, it's called POS games instead.

Also remember
Current POS's are the same size as proposed Medium
Current Stations are the same size as proposed Large.
Extra Large has no current equivalent.
Cade Windstalker
#331 - 2015-04-05 04:28:16 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Soft mooring just sounds like 'POS shield V2' so I'd rather not see any soft mooring.
WH space already has station games/docking games, it's called POS games instead.

Also remember
Current POS's are the same size as proposed Medium
Current Stations are the same size as proposed Large.
Extra Large has no current equivalent.


Soft mooring may be necessary for people to feel that using the Mooring feature is worth anything.

The closest equivalent to XL structures is NPC Stations.
d0cTeR9
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#332 - 2015-04-05 05:29:27 UTC  |  Edited by: d0cTeR9
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Soft mooring just sounds like 'POS shield V2' so I'd rather not see any soft mooring.
WH space already has station games/docking games, it's called POS games instead.

Also remember
Current POS's are the same size as proposed Medium
Current Stations are the same size as proposed Large.
Extra Large has no current equivalent.


People need a reason to use mooring. Making it another death trap (ie use gates) just means condemning a new feature to uselessness.

Think of it this way... most people, probably including yourself, are not to keen into suiciding a t3 cruiser, they are kinda expensive. You are even more cautious using a carrier (it's also pretty expensive).

So what about a 30 bil supercarrier, or a 110 bil titan?

You guessed right, even MORE cautious.

CCP needs to find a nice medium to let super pilot use their ships, and at MINIMUM store it safely while on standby (when logged in). Currently we sit inside a POS (it has advantages and disadvantages). New SOV structures should offer something very similar if not better.

If CCP implements mooring, but the moment you try to moore/unmoore and you get hot dropped and die... well no one will use it and CCP just wasted everyone's time. Or heck... we will use it... with 300 blues next to us in local with lots and lots of triage carriers... yeah not fun everytime we log in... also promotes bigger blobs/alliances...

Been around since the beginning.

Cade Windstalker
#333 - 2015-04-05 05:36:44 UTC
d0cTeR9 wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Soft mooring just sounds like 'POS shield V2' so I'd rather not see any soft mooring.
WH space already has station games/docking games, it's called POS games instead.

Also remember
Current POS's are the same size as proposed Medium
Current Stations are the same size as proposed Large.
Extra Large has no current equivalent.


People need a reason to use mooring. Making it another death trap (ie use gates) just means condemning a new feature to uselessness.

Think of it this way... most people, probably including yourself, are not to keen into suiciding a t3 cruiser, they are kinda expensive. You are even more cautious using a carrier (it's also pretty expensive).

So what about a 30 bil supercarrier, or a 110 bil titan?

You guessed right, even MORE cautious.

CCP needs to find a nice medium to let super pilot use their ships, and at MINIMUM store it safely while on standby (when logged in). Currently we sit inside a POS (it has advantages and disadvantages).

If CCP implements mooring, but the moment you try to moore/unmoore and you get hot dropped and die... well no one will use it and CCP just wasted everyone's time. Or heck... we will use it... with 300 blues next to us in local with lots and lots of triage carriers... yeah not fun everytime we log in... also promotes bigger blobs/alliances...


It's also worth noting that Soft Mooring could be more like a sort of undocking timer++, rather than the current POS shield which is entirely and completely dependent on distance and nothing else. There's nothing stopping you from popping out, shooting, and ducking back in to the shield. With Mooring and Docking replacing these mechanics it's possible to limit the availability of docking games, POS games, reindeer games, or any other undesirable shenanigans that might go on.

It's certainly likely to be better than the current POS setup. Among other things the current POS shield mechanics encourage an excessive number of bubbles for containing the occupants or blocking off access to the POS, while something like Mooring and undocking could allow a small number of bubbles (possibly combined with your own offensively anchored structure even?) since you can drop them closer to the target or right on the undock point.

Personally I'd like to see some kind of variation on the current Weapons Timer with Mooring, so at the very least you can't re-Moor right after firing, but with the option to un-moor and jump, warp, safe-log-off, or otherwise do something before getting attacked as long as no other mechanic actively prevents that (like a bubble stopping you from warping off).
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#334 - 2015-04-05 16:41:00 UTC
I'd say, go ahead and allow caps and scaps to actually dock.

The structure will be massive enough for it not to look funny when these undock.

And with the new structure destruction mechanic, docked supers will probably be more vulnerable than they are in a POS now. Imagine any nullsec entity knowing there are X number of supers docked in a station for sure. That station is going down.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#335 - 2015-04-05 17:20:27 UTC
d0cTeR9 wrote:
If CCP implements mooring, but the moment you try to moore/unmoore and you get hot dropped and die... well no one will use it and CCP just wasted everyone's time. Or heck... we will use it... with 300 blues next to us in local with lots and lots of triage carriers... yeah not fun everytime we log in... also promotes bigger blobs/alliances...

I'm looking forward to this

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

Sean Crees
Sean's Safe Haven
#336 - 2015-04-05 21:45:28 UTC
Is mooring supers to NPC stations in null and lowsec being considered?
d0cTeR9
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#337 - 2015-04-06 00:07:31 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
d0cTeR9 wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Soft mooring just sounds like 'POS shield V2' so I'd rather not see any soft mooring.
WH space already has station games/docking games, it's called POS games instead.

Also remember
Current POS's are the same size as proposed Medium
Current Stations are the same size as proposed Large.
Extra Large has no current equivalent.


People need a reason to use mooring. Making it another death trap (ie use gates) just means condemning a new feature to uselessness.

Think of it this way... most people, probably including yourself, are not to keen into suiciding a t3 cruiser, they are kinda expensive. You are even more cautious using a carrier (it's also pretty expensive).

So what about a 30 bil supercarrier, or a 110 bil titan?

You guessed right, even MORE cautious.

CCP needs to find a nice medium to let super pilot use their ships, and at MINIMUM store it safely while on standby (when logged in). Currently we sit inside a POS (it has advantages and disadvantages).

If CCP implements mooring, but the moment you try to moore/unmoore and you get hot dropped and die... well no one will use it and CCP just wasted everyone's time. Or heck... we will use it... with 300 blues next to us in local with lots and lots of triage carriers... yeah not fun everytime we log in... also promotes bigger blobs/alliances...


It's also worth noting that Soft Mooring could be more like a sort of undocking timer++, rather than the current POS shield which is entirely and completely dependent on distance and nothing else. There's nothing stopping you from popping out, shooting, and ducking back in to the shield. With Mooring and Docking replacing these mechanics it's possible to limit the availability of docking games, POS games, reindeer games, or any other undesirable shenanigans that might go on.

It's certainly likely to be better than the current POS setup. Among other things the current POS shield mechanics encourage an excessive number of bubbles for containing the occupants or blocking off access to the POS, while something like Mooring and undocking could allow a small number of bubbles (possibly combined with your own offensively anchored structure even?) since you can drop them closer to the target or right on the undock point.

Personally I'd like to see some kind of variation on the current Weapons Timer with Mooring, so at the very least you can't re-Moor right after firing, but with the option to un-moor and jump, warp, safe-log-off, or otherwise do something before getting attacked as long as no other mechanic actively prevents that (like a bubble stopping you from warping off).


I'm thinking mooring spots are going to be perma-bubble by trolldictors that fly with trollceptors... Hopefully CCP doesn't allow bubbles on mooring spots, or else... yupp more bubble games.

Been around since the beginning.

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#338 - 2015-04-06 00:37:45 UTC
d0cTeR9 wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
d0cTeR9 wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Soft mooring just sounds like 'POS shield V2' so I'd rather not see any soft mooring.
WH space already has station games/docking games, it's called POS games instead.

Also remember
Current POS's are the same size as proposed Medium
Current Stations are the same size as proposed Large.
Extra Large has no current equivalent.


People need a reason to use mooring. Making it another death trap (ie use gates) just means condemning a new feature to uselessness.

Think of it this way... most people, probably including yourself, are not to keen into suiciding a t3 cruiser, they are kinda expensive. You are even more cautious using a carrier (it's also pretty expensive).

So what about a 30 bil supercarrier, or a 110 bil titan?

You guessed right, even MORE cautious.

CCP needs to find a nice medium to let super pilot use their ships, and at MINIMUM store it safely while on standby (when logged in). Currently we sit inside a POS (it has advantages and disadvantages).

If CCP implements mooring, but the moment you try to moore/unmoore and you get hot dropped and die... well no one will use it and CCP just wasted everyone's time. Or heck... we will use it... with 300 blues next to us in local with lots and lots of triage carriers... yeah not fun everytime we log in... also promotes bigger blobs/alliances...


It's also worth noting that Soft Mooring could be more like a sort of undocking timer++, rather than the current POS shield which is entirely and completely dependent on distance and nothing else. There's nothing stopping you from popping out, shooting, and ducking back in to the shield. With Mooring and Docking replacing these mechanics it's possible to limit the availability of docking games, POS games, reindeer games, or any other undesirable shenanigans that might go on.

It's certainly likely to be better than the current POS setup. Among other things the current POS shield mechanics encourage an excessive number of bubbles for containing the occupants or blocking off access to the POS, while something like Mooring and undocking could allow a small number of bubbles (possibly combined with your own offensively anchored structure even?) since you can drop them closer to the target or right on the undock point.

Personally I'd like to see some kind of variation on the current Weapons Timer with Mooring, so at the very least you can't re-Moor right after firing, but with the option to un-moor and jump, warp, safe-log-off, or otherwise do something before getting attacked as long as no other mechanic actively prevents that (like a bubble stopping you from warping off).


I'm thinking mooring spots are going to be perma-bubble by trolldictors that fly with trollceptors... Hopefully CCP doesn't allow bubbles on mooring spots, or else... yupp more bubble games.
unless the mechanics changed without my knowledge, isn't this the same thing as rapecaging a POS?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#339 - 2015-04-06 01:14:46 UTC
d0cTeR9 wrote:

I'm thinking mooring spots are going to be perma-bubble by trolldictors that fly with trollceptors... Hopefully CCP doesn't allow bubbles on mooring spots, or else... yupp more bubble games.

Number of places people could moor...... I don't see that being a global issue. Sure someone might try and trap you, so take control of the structure weapons and blow them up, blow their bubbles up, etc.

Remember these structures have teeth, so camping the structure isn't going to be possible in the same way, they actually have to commit some serious forces to be able to camp your undock assuming CCP get weapons which can engage a fleet appropriately (As in making it so it doesn't insta blap a solo ship but can still engage a decent number reasonably).
So I don't see mooring/undock games happening with the current proposal.

Also with the changes coming CCP may finally give us 'windows' into space properly from all structures & stations.
I'm fine with an undock invuln timer like current also to allow people to load grid as well, but beyond that, it's POS shield V2.
Cade Windstalker
#340 - 2015-04-06 01:23:09 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Number of places people could moor...... I don't see that being a global issue. Sure someone might try and trap you, so take control of the structure weapons and blow them up, blow their bubbles up, etc.

Remember these structures have teeth, so camping the structure isn't going to be possible in the same way, they actually have to commit some serious forces to be able to camp your undock assuming CCP get weapons which can engage a fleet appropriately (As in making it so it doesn't insta blap a solo ship but can still engage a decent number reasonably).
So I don't see mooring/undock games happening with the current proposal.

Also with the changes coming CCP may finally give us 'windows' into space properly from all structures & stations.
I'm fine with an undock invuln timer like current also to allow people to load grid as well, but beyond that, it's POS shield V2.


We actually haven't seen or heard anything about the weapon loadouts on these sorts of structures beyond (paraphrasing here) 'some of them will definitely have guns like current POSes, and we're going to make these unique modules so we're not tied to Ship weapon balancing'.

Also it will only bear a superficial resemblance to the current POS shield mechanics if it's location based and creates an exclusion zone against enemy ships. If neither of these things happens then's closer to an un-dock timer that lets you move around a bit.