These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Building your Citadel, one block at a time

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ransu Asanari
Perkone
Caldari State
#121 - 2015-10-26 21:21:08 UTC
I'm glad we're finally talking about build components for Citadels. I have to say, it's pretty much what I expected, and that disappoints me somewhat.

I'm glad the PI requirements are staying equivalent so there is still demand for products in the PI chain.

The plan to use T1 and T2 Salvage will greatly increase the value of salvage from Relic Sites, as well as salvaging wrecks from sites. So the planned change will be a net boost to the value of Relic Sites - but I don't see anything in the devblog on helping fix value for Data Sites.

The current Faction POS Tower and Module BPCs are only found in Data Sites via Exploration. Since these will be made obsolete when Citadels come along, I was hoping there would be some mention of how they would be replaced. Since the Citadels are not Faction specific anymore, that precludes the base structure having faction versions.

In the devblog it was stated "If and when we release Tech II or faction modules the material build-up will be properly modified to match." So that means there aren't plans to release Faction Citadel Modules to replace Faction POS Modules at this launch?

The "High-Tech" items, as well as the Faction Materials (Positron Cords, Electric Conduits) that used to be for building Interfaces for invention before they were removed from the game still have no real use in manufacturing. I was hoping maybe they would find some use in the Sovereignty or Citadel Structure build chain to give them some value.

CCP RedDawn stated in the current Exploration Site feedback that there is a plan to replace the POS based drops once Citadels come out, but I don't see anything in this Devblog on how. Could you elaborate, or is this still in the works?
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#122 - 2015-10-26 21:29:34 UTC
Can you imagine someone joining EVE just to owe one of this new structures...?

Neither I... Straight
Sir SmashAlot
The League of Extraordinary Opportunists
Intergalactic Conservation Movement
#123 - 2015-10-26 21:41:14 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Can you imagine someone joining EVE just to owe one of this new structures...?

Neither I... Straight


When the story breaks out about the fight that resulted in the destruction of the first XL citadel with x number of supers docked. I would say Hells Yah! Or the number of supers/capitals/sub caps expended in its destruction.

Or a coalitions attempt to dead zone an asset holding system to force users to pay for relocation fees effectively shotguning the losing groups assets all over new eden. I would say Hells Yah!
Destiny Dain2
Your Destiny Corporation
#124 - 2015-10-26 21:44:41 UTC
Andre Vauban wrote:
Can you please consider adding a defensive module (or rig) for something like "Overview Inhibitor"? The idea being that the citadel (or structure) will NOT show up on the overview but instead will need to be found by dscan and then probing it down (non-trivial to probe down, maybe even requiring sister's+virtues)? The idea being to give the little guy a chance to hide a medium citadel in unused space. The system "owner" will require real work (probing down each system) to find any unwelcome guests rather than just flying a fast interceptor through space and looking at the overview.

My main concern (in lowsec) is that the more powerful groups will just go after citadels for giggles because they can. If they want to actively hunt me and look for targets, then so be it. However, they should at least put in some effort to find me. Yes, they can still dscan/probe them down, but that takes time and they probably cannot keep looking in EVERY system but rather systems they want to control or systems they suspect people they don't like live.



I agree with this to a point.

I think the Citadels should only appear on the overview if you set it to public. That way you can be found if you start selling items or they have to hunt you.

Plus with everyone that is going to build a Citadel will completely flood the overview with 100 Citadels in the list. It will be crazy.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#125 - 2015-10-26 21:56:57 UTC
Destiny Dain2 wrote:
Andre Vauban wrote:
Can you please consider adding a defensive module (or rig) for something like "Overview Inhibitor"? The idea being that the citadel (or structure) will NOT show up on the overview but instead will need to be found by dscan and then probing it down (non-trivial to probe down, maybe even requiring sister's+virtues)? The idea being to give the little guy a chance to hide a medium citadel in unused space. The system "owner" will require real work (probing down each system) to find any unwelcome guests rather than just flying a fast interceptor through space and looking at the overview.

My main concern (in lowsec) is that the more powerful groups will just go after citadels for giggles because they can. If they want to actively hunt me and look for targets, then so be it. However, they should at least put in some effort to find me. Yes, they can still dscan/probe them down, but that takes time and they probably cannot keep looking in EVERY system but rather systems they want to control or systems they suspect people they don't like live.



I agree with this to a point.

I think the Citadels should only appear on the overview if you set it to public. That way you can be found if you start selling items or they have to hunt you.

Plus with everyone that is going to build a Citadel will completely flood the overview with 100 Citadels in the list. It will be crazy.


I agree to.

For wormhole space, being able to just warp to the citadel beacon takes away from the scout role. We should be able to have them not show up on overview and even D-scan if we are willing to sacrifice slots/rigs.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
destinationunreachable
Hello Kitty Fanclub
#126 - 2015-10-26 22:02:52 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:


For wormhole space, being able to just warp to the citadel beacon takes away from the scout role. We should be able to have them not show up on overview and even D-scan if we are willing to sacrifice slots/rigs.


make them invisible even for a d-scan ? - no, but as a compromise: make only XL (and maybe L?) show up in the overview and leave the M like the control towers behave now.

edit: speling
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#127 - 2015-10-26 22:08:57 UTC
I'm assuming you can build a citadel, in a citadel? as opposed to not building POSes in a POS? (unless I missed something)
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#128 - 2015-10-26 22:13:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
destinationunreachable wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:


For wormhole space, being able to just warp to the citadel beacon takes away from the scout role. We should be able to have them not show up on overview and even D-scan if we are willing to sacrifice slots/rigs.


make them invisible even for a d-scan ? - no, but as a compromise: make only XL (and maybe L?) show up in the overview and leave the M like the control towers behave now.

edit: speling


I think it would be a really cool feature if you could make it invisible from D-scan... Any ships around the citadel would still be visible on D-scan, and both ships and the citadel would still be scalable using combat probes.

What's wrong with that?

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
destinationunreachable
Hello Kitty Fanclub
#129 - 2015-10-26 22:28:43 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:

What's wrong with that?


Balance.

An invisible station is nearly un-scannable if in this system there are already 10+ other ones. You can only find it if you know what you are looking for, with invisibility going on when logged out etc - no, it's not balanced.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#130 - 2015-10-26 22:43:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
destinationunreachable wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:

What's wrong with that?


Balance.

An invisible station is nearly un-scannable if in this system there are already 10+ other ones. You can only find it if you know what you are looking for, with invisibility going on when logged out etc - no, it's not balanced.


It is 100% scalable! Why wouldn't you know what you're looking for? What? If a scout wants to know if there is a hidden citadel, he/she simply has to launch probes. This deepens the gamplay for scanners and the potential of structures.

This feature alone has nothing to do with balance. Balance comes in by ccp increasing fitting requirements/penalties for fitting strong modules.

For me this comes under the "free intel" issue. If you want to gather basic intel then you can send a interceptor ahead of your fleet to check for systems with citadels but if you want more detailed intel, that would indicate the presence of a hidden citadel, you need to send a combat probe capable ships. That is balance and that is fun gameplay!

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#131 - 2015-10-26 23:01:53 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:


It is 100% scalable! Why wouldn't you know what you're looking for? What? If a scout wants to know if there is a hidden citadel, he/she simply has to launch probes. This deepens the gamplay for scanners and the potential of structures.

This feature alone has nothing to do with balance. Balance comes in by ccp increasing fitting requirements/penalties for fitting strong modules.

For me this comes under the "free intel" issue. If you want to gather basic intel then you can send a interceptor ahead of your fleet to check for systems with citadels but if you want more detailed intel, that would indicate the presence of a hidden citadel, you need to send a combat probe capable ships. That is balance and that is fun gameplay!

Currently, POS'es are all at moons. Having a structure that can be located anywhere require probes to warp to it massively changes access to the Citadel, hence why you can warp to them direct.
And honestly, they won't be spammed like you keep claiming, because they are worth attacking for profit from the loot drops, and don't take that much to hit.
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#132 - 2015-10-26 23:25:56 UTC
Hmm... I find it interesting that, with one exception, CCP Ytterbium has only been responding to posts by Goons. (The one exception is a TEST post.)

Is everyone else's post simply being ignored? Where are the conspiracy trolls when you need them? lol....
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#133 - 2015-10-26 23:28:26 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
Hmm... I find it interesting that, with one exception, CCP Ytterbium has only been responding to posts by Goons. (The one exception is a TEST post.)

Is everyone else's post simply being ignored? Where are the conspiracy trolls when you need them? lol....

It's because we actually have relevant questions about small details that are easy and possible to answer. Most of the rest of the posting is complaining.

If it makes you feel any better, they didn't answer a few of mine.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#134 - 2015-10-26 23:29:49 UTC
Querns wrote:

It's because we actually have relevant questions about small details that are easy and possible to answer. Most of the rest of the posting is complaining.

If it makes you feel any better, they didn't answer a few of mine.

Other people also have had relevant questions and do get nowhere near the Dev response time that goons have in this thread.
So.... it's a fair complaint, even if your questions have all been pertinent.
Maraner
The Executioners
#135 - 2015-10-26 23:36:50 UTC
SUPER excited for all of this. Just saying but I want my own death star..

Some details on where they can be anchored would be nice (bit off topic sorry).

Citadel looks like the best expansion since they added wormholes and T3's

Can I anchor one of these on a gate and blap stuff as it jumps in?? Can they be anchored in range of each other stations and shoot each other? etc etc
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
#136 - 2015-10-26 23:41:12 UTC
Chavez Domingo wrote:
wasnt a large citadel at 80.000m³ that can fit into a orca... no need for a freighter than...


Is this actually going to be the case CCP, or is it an oversight? I want to know whether I need to start building an in-system freighter or not. Dev blog says freighters needed to deploy a large, but by the volume an orca will be able to do it with currently listed value. I don't want to have to build a freighter in my wormhole but I will if I need to.

Just yes or no on that. Do I need a freighter to deploy a large, or can I do it with an orca?

Fear and Loathing in Internet Spaceships
Unholythrash Davaham
The Forsakened Few
We Forsakened Few
#137 - 2015-10-26 23:42:50 UTC
Maraner wrote:
SUPER excited for all of this. Just saying but I want my own death star..

Some details on where they can be anchored would be nice (bit off topic sorry).

Citadel looks like the best expansion since they added wormholes and T3's

Can I anchor one of these on a gate and blap stuff as it jumps in?? Can they be anchored in range of each other stations and shoot each other? etc etc


I'm fairly certain they said somewhere that they can not share a grid with other structures and that seems to be the only requirement so far
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#138 - 2015-10-26 23:44:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Querns
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Querns wrote:

It's because we actually have relevant questions about small details that are easy and possible to answer. Most of the rest of the posting is complaining.

If it makes you feel any better, they didn't answer a few of mine.

Other people also have had relevant questions and do get nowhere near the Dev response time that goons have in this thread.
So.... it's a fair complaint, even if your questions have all been pertinent.

Timing is also important. Note that we were the first responders in the thread.

You also might look slightly past the "lol goonie" label and take a closer look at the individuals being responded to. Notice any patterns?

It's almost like the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal has some experience in the realms of "interacting sanely with other human beings," "analyzing game features and finding the weak areas," and "having the reputation necessary to lend weight to our words."

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#139 - 2015-10-26 23:51:55 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:


It is 100% scalable! Why wouldn't you know what you're looking for? What? If a scout wants to know if there is a hidden citadel, he/she simply has to launch probes. This deepens the gamplay for scanners and the potential of structures.

This feature alone has nothing to do with balance. Balance comes in by ccp increasing fitting requirements/penalties for fitting strong modules.

For me this comes under the "free intel" issue. If you want to gather basic intel then you can send a interceptor ahead of your fleet to check for systems with citadels but if you want more detailed intel, that would indicate the presence of a hidden citadel, you need to send a combat probe capable ships. That is balance and that is fun gameplay!

Currently, POS'es are all at moons. Having a structure that can be located anywhere require probes to warp to it massively changes access to the Citadel, hence why you can warp to them direct.
And honestly, they won't be spammed like you keep claiming, because they are worth attacking for profit from the loot drops, and don't take that much to hit.


Who keeps claiming what now?

I simply said that I think the ability to remove them from the overlay and d-scan would be fun an interesting gameplay.

If you had to sacrifice something for the ability to do the above, what's wrong with the proposal?

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#140 - 2015-10-26 23:54:53 UTC
Querns wrote:

Timing is also important. Note that we were the first responders in the thread.

You also might look slightly past the "lol goonie" label and take a closer look at the individuals being responded to. Notice any patterns?

It's almost like the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal has some experience in the realms of "interacting sanely with other human beings," "analyzing game features and finding the weak areas," and "having the reputation necessary to lend weight to our words."

Indeed, as individuals nearly every goon is actually a nice person. A few are outright trolls but that is true of every group. My problem with the goons is what happens as a collective once you are all together with regards to manipulating things.

Anyway, to get back on topic. Other pertinent questions that have been asked and apparently ignored.
Tethering, we need more details, especially for the WH folk.
L Citadel and Orca's, does it work and the Dev blog misspoke, or is there a missing detail.
New question. Repulsor & Tractor. Available in high sec since they are just bumping thus legal? Or not for some reason.