These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Citadels, sieges and you v2

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Black Pedro
Mine.
#361 - 2015-09-22 18:43:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Masao Kurata wrote:
I'm glad you're optimistic, Black Pedro, I'm sure not. Maybe they'll tone this down a little and it'll only be three times as much structure grinding as large towers are now, which is still far too much. Everyone hates structure grinding, let's give them entosis! Oh actually everyone loved structure grinding, let's give them five times as much! An XL citadel has more HP than an iHub used to! You can't seriously argue in favour of a ridiculous HP wall like that.
The reason I am optimistic is two-fold. First, the original entosis design and that first dev blog showed that CCP really wanted players to be able to attack them easily. From a game design perspective that is a good solution - make attacking so easy even one player can do it, but defending even easier so you have a massive advantage if you show up to fight. That would encourage people to both attack and defend. But I think on balance, they are right to reverse the decision - I see the inherent problem of players seemingly having nothing to do while the timer ticks down if the defenders don't show.

Secondly, CCP Ytterbium confirmed on reddit that this dealing with this issue of the HP wall in highsec is "one of the challenges we have to solve for them being there...". I mean, it doesn't get much more direct than that.

I am still flabbergasted there is still a constant parade of people posting in this thread like it is at all possible that some unassailable XL structures will be released into highsec. The problem with requiring 200+ hours to attack a structure that gives no real gain to the attackers is self-evident to anyone, at least I would have thought. Apparently, self-interest is a pretty powerful blinding force.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#362 - 2015-09-22 18:45:50 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Sure, let's balance a mechanic that is suppose to be accessible to the all the player base around a near max skilled character flying an expensive pirate battleship. Roll

CCP's own numbers from the devblog say up to 225 players will be needed in battleships so I am perfectly fine with my characterization of 100-200 players to meet the 30 minute target.

But even asking a small WH corp or highsec group to field 40 max-DPS faction/pirate battleships to even attempt to attack them in the time proposed by the design is way too much. Also, don't forget these are the minimum requirements - the citadel is suppose to fight back.

And now we know you are just trolling in order to get CCP to nerf these into uselessness, then wonder why basically no-one uses them after you win, and complain that CCP made useless features and everyone is living out of stations

There is no 30 minute target mark like you keep blathering on about. That is the MINIMUM time to reinforce it. And how they calculated the EHP from the DPS Cap.
And it only need SIXTY (60 in case you can't read) players to reach that in battleships or ABC, the Battleships are capable of still fitting a significant tank at that point.

Now consider that these are T1 Battleships with T2 fittings. Go to faction battleships with faction fittings, like most PvP groups actually use in highsec, and now we are down to 30 Battleships to do this in 30 minutes since they can reach 2000 DPS with the implants they use. Or 15 battleships to do it in 1 hour. Or 8 battleships to do it in two hours.

So stop with the stupidly blindly quoting the CCP Table when CCP themselves said it was a very very rough table and probably not accurate, just a vague indication.
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#363 - 2015-09-22 18:56:49 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
And now we know you are just trolling in order to get CCP to nerf these into uselessness.


Requiring the defenders to turn up to at least one of the timers isn't rendering them useless. You are not entitled to structures which are such a chore to destroy that nobody will even attempt it no matter how certain they are that you won't undock.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#364 - 2015-09-22 18:59:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Why is everything I write "trolling" to you? You could start a post with something like "No, I disagree with you" or, "I am sorry Mr. Pedro but you are mistaken". In this case I am not however:

Nevyn Auscent wrote:
There is no 30 minute target mark like you keep blathering on about. That is the MINIMUM time to reinforce it. And how they calculated the EHP from the DPS Cap.


Team Game of Drones wrote:
As further iteration from the previous attack mechanic, we would like structure assaults to take around 30 minutes to complete, no matter where the structure is deployed. This ensures a unified experience and prevents confusion as a whole.


Team Game of Drones wrote:
As a side note, there won’t be hull, armor or shield hardeners, or anything that increases structure EHP since we do not want attack time to drag on forever.


Clearly, the intention of the design team is to reduce and standardize structure grinding across all the spaces. Coupled with CCP Ytterbium's comments I quoted above, I think it is safe to say that XL citadels will not be released in highsec without some way, like perhaps capitals, so a small group can take them down.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Merlin Harrington
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#365 - 2015-09-22 19:03:29 UTC
I repeat my self but you still ignore that:


Merlin Harrington wrote:

Secondly, for now we aren't even sure that an XL in HS will be useful. Since is only advantage on L size is the ability to dock MS and Titan, useless in HS.

Third, use an XL as private market hub in HS will need hundreds of client to be viable.
An XL Citadel in HS will not be protect by 10 players but by hundreds and come to defend it for 10 players will just be boring.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#366 - 2015-09-22 19:08:13 UTC
Masao Kurata wrote:

Requiring the defenders to turn up to at least one of the timers isn't rendering them useless. You are not entitled to structures which are such a chore to destroy that nobody will even attempt it no matter how certain they are that you won't undock.

Again, read the numbers I've posted. Black Pedro thinks that these are unreasonable numbers and that no group in HS or a low end WH (Note that in a low end WH you have to build the freighter and XL Citadel in the WH first also) can possibly muster 15 people for 2 hours to reinforce an XL Citadel.
So is demanding that their EHP be massively dropped.

What happens if their EHP is dropped is that it becomes childs play to reinforce one even if defenders are present, and then they become giant loot Pinata's. Since just taking the Citadel, if it costs 10 bil to build and fit an XL Citadel, they will be dropping 5 billion in loot even before we get onto any active jobs since they drop their fittings and build minerals.
At which point they become useless because they cost so much and are so easy to destroy for the loot.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#367 - 2015-09-22 19:13:29 UTC
Merlin Harrington wrote:
I repeat my self but you still ignore that:


Merlin Harrington wrote:

Secondly, for now we aren't even sure that an XL in HS will be useful. Since is only advantage on L size is the ability to dock MS and Titan, useless in HS.

Third, use an XL as private market hub in HS will need hundreds of client to be viable.
An XL Citadel in HS will not be protect by 10 players but by hundreds and come to defend it for 10 players will just be boring.



I am expecting a certain group to build an XL Citadel as a market hub and yes the extra hit points will be needed as it will be seen as a number one target. I just hope that CCP do something about people that get blue then dock up and then troll the market by making only blues be able to trade from it, otherwise an interesting type of gameplay will not develop...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#368 - 2015-09-22 19:14:20 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Masao Kurata wrote:

Requiring the defenders to turn up to at least one of the timers isn't rendering them useless. You are not entitled to structures which are such a chore to destroy that nobody will even attempt it no matter how certain they are that you won't undock.

Again, read the numbers I've posted. Black Pedro thinks that these are unreasonable numbers and that no group in HS or a low end WH (Note that in a low end WH you have to build the freighter and XL Citadel in the WH first also) can possibly muster 15 people for 2 hours to reinforce an XL Citadel.
So is demanding that their EHP be massively dropped.

What happens if their EHP is dropped is that it becomes childs play to reinforce one even if defenders are present, and then they become giant loot Pinata's. Since just taking the Citadel, if it costs 10 bil to build and fit an XL Citadel, they will be dropping 5 billion in loot even before we get onto any active jobs since they drop their fittings and build minerals.
At which point they become useless because they cost so much and are so easy to destroy for the loot.


I think you pretty much sussed out his agenda...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#369 - 2015-09-22 19:59:37 UTC  |  Edited by: gascanu
Black Pedro wrote:
Why is everything I write "trolling" to you? You could start a post with something like "No, I disagree with you" or, "I am sorry Mr. Pedro but you are mistaken". In this case I am not however:

Nevyn Auscent wrote:
There is no 30 minute target mark like you keep blathering on about. That is the MINIMUM time to reinforce it. And how they calculated the EHP from the DPS Cap.


Team Game of Drones wrote:
As further iteration from the previous attack mechanic, we would like structure assaults to take around 30 minutes to complete, no matter where the structure is deployed. This ensures a unified experience and prevents confusion as a whole.


Team Game of Drones wrote:
As a side note, there won’t be hull, armor or shield hardeners, or anything that increases structure EHP since we do not want attack time to drag on forever.


Clearly, the intention of the design team is to reduce and standardize structure grinding across all the spaces. Coupled with CCP Ytterbium's comments I quoted above, I think it is safe to say that XL citadels will not be released in highsec without some way, like perhaps capitals, so a small group can take them down.


i think you got it the wrong way pedro:
it's not that they want to take max 30 min, they want it to take at least 30 mins, so the big coalitions can't just rage reinforce one in under 5 minutes Blink
the old structure grinding is dead with the introduction of magic flashlights, this is a new thing, and since CCP want more small alliances out here, putting a minimum time req it's the logical step to do, otherwise noone(except the big blocks) will use theyr new structure stuff, or not everything bigger than the M one

once again, you keep comparing XL citadels with poses which is a mistake, one xl will cost about 50x+ large faction fitted poses;
you also lack the basic knowledge about poses, but still insist on arguing about the stuff you don't exacttly know : for example, do you have any idea how long it's taking today to reinforce a full ecm/hard faction fitted large pos with "your 20 man bs gang"?
i'll give you a hint, they need to start early or the down time will come before they finish
so, you want a structure that costs at least 50 times as a large pos to die easyer than a large pos? who do you think will put one up?
like i told you before, an XL citadel is a "titan" killmail just sitting there; i don't know what game are you playing, but in my game, 0.0 alliances will do allot of effort to kill a titan: metagaming, spys, bribes , hours and hours of waiting in fleet for a trap to work, weeks and even months of camping in some cases, all of that for a possible titan kill. you telling how they won't come to high sec for a certain "titan" kill because "effort", it's just silly
Black Pedro
Mine.
#370 - 2015-09-22 20:42:18 UTC
gascanu wrote:

i think you got it the wrong way pedro:
it's not that they want to take max 30 min, they want it to take at least 30 mins, so the big coalitions can't just rage reinforce one in under 5 minutes Blink
the old structure grinding is dead with the introduction of magic flashlights, this is a new thing, and since CCP want more small alliances out here, putting a minimum time req it's the logical step to do, otherwise noone(except the big blocks) will use theyr new structure stuff, or not everything bigger than the M one
No, the parts I quoted pretty much say they do not want structure grinding to be too long or different in the different sectors of space. The quote from CCP Ytterbium also directly says they will not release them in highsec unless they can solve this discrepancy.

It would be nice if someone from Team of Drones would drop by and say this explicitly though. Too many of the pages of this thread have been wasted on this tangential point.

I mean the original plan called for a single person to be able to reinforce an XL Citadel by themselves (also, note the standard time across the sectors of space of the first plan). Why weren't you guys all up in arms about how that was "too easy" and unfair somehow to someone? Ok, maybe you were and if so I am sorry I missed it.

But thanks for not calling me a troll though. :)
gascanu wrote:
once again, you keep comparing XL citadels with poses which is a mistake, one xl will cost about 50x+ large faction fitted poses; you also lack the basic knowledge about poses, but still insist on arguing about the stuff you don't exacttly know : for example, do you have any idea how long it's taking today to reinforce a full ecm/hard faction fitted large pos with "your 20 man bs gang"?
i'll give you a hint, they need to start early or the down time will come before they finish
so, you want a structure that costs at least 50 times as a large pos to die easyer than a large pos? who do you think will put one up?
like i told you before, an XL citadel is a "titan" killmail just sitting there; i don't know what game are you playing, but in my game, 0.0 alliances will do allot of effort to kill a titan: metagaming, spys, bribes , hours and hours of waiting in fleet for a trap to work, weeks and even months of camping in some cases, all of that for a possible titan kill. you telling how they won't come to high sec for a certain "titan" kill because "effort", it's just silly
It's not silly at all. As I said that was the original plan.

First, ISK tanking is a terrible game design and is actively avoided by developers wherever they can. The smallest and cheapest ships can kill the largest and most expensive ships in the game. In the new Sov system a single person in a one-man alliance can attempt to contest Sov from Goonswarm if they wish. Goonswarm enjoys no protection because they are wealthier than anyone else, nor does the Titan pilot get to ignore that fleet of frigates because their ship is 10 000X the value. ISK tanking locks out new players and prevents conflict and is generally all around a bad idea in a PvP game.

My guess is that a 20 man BS gang could reinforce a large POS with 50% resists in about an hour. The same gang can do the proposed new XL structure in a little less than 2 hours (factoring in the 20% resists). Thing is - there aren't many (any?) 20 BS gangs in low class wormholes. They can't support it. And in highsec? Only the largest corps can field that many players in battleships. So what you get is what we have now - hardly anyone does it because it is way too tedious. If no corp is willing to spend the 20-30 player hours it takes now to shoot a large POS, why do you think they suddenly will find the will to spend the 100-120 (3x reinforce) players hours to shoot a structure that only gives a killmail? They won't. And what if the citadel start to fight back?

Perhaps you haven't spent much time in highsec recently, maybe never at all, but there are very few organizations of the size that can mobilize the 100 players it would take to meet the design target that CCP has provided in the dev blog. It is just poor game design to release a structure that can be deployed by one player in highsec, but not contested by almost all of the other players that live in that same system. There just will never be an conflict or content generated by them because it is just to much tedium to fight for a structure that was balanced for large nullsec sized fleets.

Why are you still arguing this point? It's like you all have a blind spot to CCP Ytterbium comments that I have linked three times now. He said these XL citadels will not make it to highsec unless they solve this issue. I feel at this point Team Game of Drones should give me a honourable mention somewhere for doing their communications work in this thread.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#371 - 2015-09-22 20:47:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Nevyn Auscent
No, we are arguing it because your numbers are WRONG.
You are blathering on about 100 man BS gangs needed when you can actually reinforce an XL Citadel with 30 BS in 30 minutes.
Or 15 in one hour.
If you use the actual battleships that people ALREADY USE in highsec.

I used T1 Battleships/ABC with T2 fittings and no implants specifically to make the point that the barrier of entry to be able to affect XL Citadels is low low LOW! And my numbers are still less than half this 100-200 BS you keep inventing from thin air.
Really citadels are vastly too easy to reinforce as they already stand, and we were complaining when a single player could entosis them as well as being too easy.

As for why we are ignoring your 'quotes', is because you are massively misquoting by selectively quoting only a tiny portion of the blog in a deliberately out of context situation. If he wants to come here and also say that the maximum time that it should ever take is also 30 minutes, then he can come here and say so, and then we will all laugh our heads off at him for being stupid.
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#372 - 2015-09-22 21:02:21 UTC
Merlin Harrington wrote:
Lady Rift, right i mis that.

In this case i don't even see an utility for Citadel in HS.

Edit : Read the "Shake my Citadel" devblog. the market and office hub become the citadel.

And this stay true :
"Secondly, for now we aren't even sure that an XL in HS will be useful. Since is only advantage on L size is the ability to dock MS and Titan, useless in HS.

Third, use an XL as private market hub in HS will need hundreds of client to be viable.
An XL Citadel in HS will not be protect by 10 players but by hundreds and come to defend it for 10 players will just be boring."



POS's also become Citadel which has M, L abd and if most of the cost is in the rigs for the thing then it might not be super super expensive
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#373 - 2015-09-22 21:24:16 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
No, we are arguing it because your numbers are WRONG.
You are blathering on about 100 man BS gangs needed when you can actually reinforce an XL Citadel with 30 BS in 30 minutes.
Or 15 in one hour.
If you use the actual battleships that people ALREADY USE in highsec.

I used T1 Battleships/ABC with T2 fittings and no implants specifically to make the point that the barrier of entry to be able to affect XL Citadels is low low LOW! And my numbers are still less than half this 100-200 BS you keep inventing from thin air.
Really citadels are vastly too easy to reinforce as they already stand, and we were complaining when a single player could entosis them as well as being too easy.

As for why we are ignoring your 'quotes', is because you are massively misquoting by selectively quoting only a tiny portion of the blog in a deliberately out of context situation. If he wants to come here and also say that the maximum time that it should ever take is also 30 minutes, then he can come here and say so, and then we will all laugh our heads off at him for being stupid.


Yes and I will tell him that I will do what I do currently with a POS, online it run some refining and then take it down again, nice gameplay that...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#374 - 2015-09-22 21:48:05 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:

Yes and I will tell him that I will do what I do currently with a POS, online it run some refining and then take it down again, nice gameplay that...

You did read you won't be able to do that anymore with Citadels right? They take 24 hours to put up, start in hull right when that wardec comes in and 24 hours to take down
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#375 - 2015-09-22 21:52:48 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:

Yes and I will tell him that I will do what I do currently with a POS, online it run some refining and then take it down again, nice gameplay that...

You did read you won't be able to do that anymore with Citadels right? They take 24 hours to put up, start in hull right when that wardec comes in and 24 hours to take down


I thought it was a normal unanchor time but a 24 hr cooldown period before you can unanchor?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#376 - 2015-09-22 21:58:28 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

I thought it was a normal unanchor time but a 24 hr cooldown period before you can unanchor?

Quote:

Once the unanchoring process has started, the structure will become invulnerable for a specific amount of time
Once the invulnerability timers runs out, the structure will be vulnerable for damage yet again, with having a repair process identical of what’s been mentioned above. This time however, shields, armor and hulls will be fully available

So you become vulnerable for a significant period then the structure finally unanchors.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#377 - 2015-09-22 22:00:27 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

I thought it was a normal unanchor time but a 24 hr cooldown period before you can unanchor?

Quote:

Once the unanchoring process has started, the structure will become invulnerable for a specific amount of time
Once the invulnerability timers runs out, the structure will be vulnerable for damage yet again, with having a repair process identical of what’s been mentioned above. This time however, shields, armor and hulls will be fully available

So you become vulnerable for a significant period then the structure finally unanchors.


going to need to re-read that bit again and work it out
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#378 - 2015-09-22 22:20:49 UTC
OK this is confusing me:

Quote from CCP:
Quote:
For anchoring:

The structure goes into a 24 hour invulnerability timer. No damage can be done during that time and the owner cannot cancel this action once it has been confirmed
The structure will come out of the invulnerability timer with only its hull layer active and vulnerable to attack (enters the vulnerability states above).
As usual, any damage done to the structure while it is vulnerable will cause the repair time to start. Please note however that in this case the structure will only have hull layer available – it is not a fully operational battle station yet, and as such is even more susceptible to damage than usual. Which means if attackers can take it to 0 hit points it will be destroyed on the spot, there will be no further invulnerability phase.

For unanchoring:

Unanchoring may only be started if the structure has full shields and is not within a repair timer. This is to prevent some early bail-out should it be attacked
Once the unanchoring process has started, the structure will become invulnerable for a specific amount of time
Once the invulnerability timers runs out, the structure will be vulnerable for damage yet again, with having a repair process identical of what’s been mentioned above. This time however, shields, armor and hulls will be fully available


This doesn't make much sense to me. How long will the invulnerability timer be after anchoring/unanchoring?

How long to put online/offline, if this even happens now?

surely a station would have shields armour and hull available when anchored and not when unanchored (systems are shut down)?

Could do with some clarification and an example here I think.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#379 - 2015-09-22 22:27:30 UTC
Online/Offline no longer happens. You don't consume fuel for being 'online' anymore, and there is no force field, so you are always 'online'.
Fuel is consumed with services such as manufacturing being actually used.

Anchoring they were fairly explicit.
24 Hours invulnerable then immediately vulnerable in just hull, and has to repair to full shields before it becomes invulnerable again (assuming timers say it's invulnerable)

Unanchoring you are right, they were a bit unclear on the times with that. But they have said at least 24h in a few places, so assuming that remains true, a war dec will always catch a citadel. And they can always get the fittings and the mineral value of the citadel itself for loot, even if you cancel all current jobs.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#380 - 2015-09-22 22:30:46 UTC
OK, so for anchoring it takes a full repair timer to become fully operational.

For unanchoring I thought the 24 hrs was before you could unanchor to guarantee the structure would still be there when a wardec kicks in. what happens after the unanchor is still not clear to me, is it the repair cycle before you can scoop?