These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Citidels For Individual Benefit

First post First post
Author
Kieron VonDeux
#121 - 2015-12-13 17:10:58 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Vincent Athena wrote:
No, it would not necessarily result in the loss of the POS because the POS can shoot back all on its own. Now, a dedicated attack will take the POS, but not a small scale attack force. But, with the Citadels, if you cannot get on-line, even a small force can take it out.

For the solo player, or a small corp, Citadels are far, far more vulnerable due to the need to absolutely, without any question, not have the kids get sick, or the pets get sick, or the internet go out, or have bad weather force emergency actions, or... etc.

A medium citadel will be vulnerable for 3 hours per week, split into 3 x 1 hour sessions in order to be reinforced.

Even if something prevents you from logging in during those 3 hours each week, where the vulnerability window is set by the owner; then there is still time to organise a defence.

Mediums will be ideal for individuals and really not very vulnerable at all. Certainly not as vulnerable as a POS.

In addition, if your POS is destroyed, so are all your things (or lost in loot). Similarly if your POS goes offline because you couldn't login to refuel it (for the same reasons you suggest not being able to defend a Citadel), then it's very easy to attack the anchored structures and take all your stuff.

None of that will occur with a Citadel - no destruction/loss of your things (except in J-Space) and no force field to maintain.

Having killed quite a few POSs solo lately (being stupid and dropping a dread with no support.....*now on every watchlist*), a POS is easy to kill if you approach it appropriately and guns aren't much to be worried about. The protection on Citadels seems far superior to the protection for POSs (eg. AOE defences as well as the current targeted defences), even though it requires manning to use during the vulnerable periods.

A Medium Citadel is vulnerable <2% of the time. A POS is vulnerable 100% of the time.

You know, this is actually really crappy.

More and more do I see highsec being full of citadels everywhere built by scrubs who contribute nothing ...


At least they won't be on your overview. You will have to scan them down to find them.

And since the can be deployed on any empty grid, out of sight, out of mind.
Ayx Shewma
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#122 - 2015-12-13 17:52:53 UTC
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:
Does nobody understand why I am pointing this out or think I have a point?


me
Legion Masser
KROOKBORNE
Seventh Sanctum.
#123 - 2015-12-13 20:37:47 UTC
Ayx Shewma wrote:
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:
Does nobody understand why I am pointing this out or think I have a point?


me

This guy :)

☢☢☢☢☢☢☢- Your Anger is a Gift -☢☢☢☢☢☢☢ Do you even Titan? ☢☢☢ Potato ☢☢☢Lemon☢☢☢

Brigadine Ferathine
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#124 - 2015-12-14 01:03:30 UTC
Ayx Shewma wrote:
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:
Does nobody understand why I am pointing this out or think I have a point?


me

Me what haha?
Max Muni
Muni Corp
#125 - 2015-12-14 21:03:19 UTC
Not really practical for solo players, like many things in game.
Just keep getting more ships, like every other solo player.

Yippie!!

Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#126 - 2015-12-14 21:42:46 UTC
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:
I saw that too.
It wont matter because corporations/ mega coalitions hold all the cards.


Since when?

I lived out of a POS with no one but me, myself and my alts for a while. Was it tougher/earned me less isk? Absolutely, as it should be. If you choose to live solo, accept the consequences (what does the second 'M' in MMORPG stand for again?)

You live in sov null, it looks like. An area of space specifically designed to be controlled by massive groups of players. Set up shop in LS/WH space and you will do just fine solo.
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
#127 - 2015-12-14 22:11:42 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
You know, this is actually really crappy.

More and more do I see highsec being full of citadels everywhere built by scrubs who contribute nothing ...



But they will be contributing something Idea

Perfection is a dish best served like wasabi .

Bumble's Space Log

Marsha Mallow
#128 - 2015-12-14 22:51:47 UTC
This is a really strange topic that keeps jumping about, but the question doesn't seem all that invalid to me (even if the OP hasn't presented it well). If a player choses to join a player corp, why can't they deploy personal structures?

All of the explanations and work-arounds presented are based upon existing systems, some of which have significant flaws and aren't particularly intuitive (i.e. corp roles/structure mechanics). Why should you have to either opt out of player groups or acquire roles within a larger group to own a player structure in space? What purpose does it serve? It's evident players want personal ownership of structures - and why shouldn't they?

Fair enough in highsec, because individuals can't be wardecced, structures have different constraints. But what about everywhere else where a structure can be aggressed without a wardec? What's the reasoning imposing a mechanic to fit highsec across the whole of the game?

Forcing people to launch structures within a corp is seen as a 'content generator' because there's potential for theft and it supposedly promotes player interraction. But in reality this is systematically bypassed by individuals launching alt corps, and by large groups who restrict and monitor access. So it's already flawed and players have established workarounds, which means the system fails players. Why keep strenuously justifying it?

It's a system that's been in place for a long time due to structure mechanics and corp roles, but it's one that has been repeatedly challenged. Rather than defend it from an entrenched position because this is how it's always been, isn't it worth asking whether there's scope to review that under a new design? Citadels are new, and their mechanics should not be based upon the crap we've had to deal with relating to POS and corp role legacy code. It's not unreasonable to propose new approaches to make these things unique and interesting, particularly if it promotes new gameplay mechanics.

As an example: citadels that supers can be tethered to. If players were allowed to deploy these personally, and by opting out their corp would be blocked from any notifications, the risks would be significant. Same for players attempting to launch market hubs. A tweak wouldn't necessarily make things 'safer' and might promote different types of risk/content. What it might mean is that players within groups can create their own content without reference to corp/alliance policy. Which might actually add risk and variety. Or granularity for sub-groups within player organisations without fiddling with corp roles too much.

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day

Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#129 - 2015-12-14 23:05:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Marsha Mallow wrote:
This is a really strange topic that keeps jumping about, but the question doesn't seem all that invalid to me (even if the OP hasn't presented it well). If a player choses to join a player corp, why can't they deploy personal structures?

Traditionally, I think the workarounds have been required because when POSs first entered the game in Exodus (2004) they were tied into capturing sovereignty, so were a Corporation (and Alliance) asset.

Since the role interface for Corporations is very limited currently, there's no way to give individual roles for a specific structure.

That has kind of sucked, because on the whole, I agree with the sentiment in the OP (just not the way the OP has whinged).

Quote:
All of the explanations and work-arounds presented are based upon existing systems, some of which have significant flaws and aren't particularly intuitive (i.e. corp roles/structure mechanics). Why should you have to either opt out of player groups or acquire roles within a larger group to own a player structure in space? What purpose does it serve? It's evident players want personal ownership of structures - and why shouldn't they?

I agree.

I guess my hope will be that once the Corporation related code receives a major overhaul (more than recent changes we have seen to the interface), then it might be possible to allow people to launch structures for themselves, without having the ability to take everyone else's or Corp assets.

Since the start of the Citadel discussion, CCP have mentioned Medium Citadels as being suitable for individuals and small groups, so hopefully they create the tools to allow players the freedom to use Citadels as they seem to be one of the really big changes to the game in recent times that have people somewhat excited.

Of the current plans, the one really major limitation I am disappointed about is the fact that even if a Citadel is allowed for an individual in a Corp and they anchor it and setup home, once they leave the Corp, the Citadel stays with the Corporation, even if the individual paid for it, built it and is the only one using it. I'm not sure how the current kick mechanics work, but I can see a bit of an issue with Corporations being able to kick characters and lock them out of their assets. Their assets will be more secure than in a POS (because of individual hangars in Citadels), but it's a pretty negative consequence of having to be in a player Corp to own a structure.

Requiring players to be in a player Corp to have structures is a convenient way to make those structures destructible, but an inconvenient way to allow individual choice.
Daniel Jackson
Universal Exos
#130 - 2015-12-14 23:34:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Daniel Jackson
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:
Solo and small gang PvP is totally dead in this game.
You cant reasonibly access null sec PvE or Mining
solo and small gang pvp still exsist i happen to do it all the time :P most of it is solo, low sec faction warfare gets alot of solo fights
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#131 - 2015-12-15 03:32:58 UTC
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:
I saw that too.
It wont matter because corporations/ mega coalitions hold all the cards.


Since when?

I lived out of a POS with no one but me, myself and my alts for a while. Was it tougher/earned me less isk? Absolutely, as it should be. If you choose to live solo, accept the consequences (what does the second 'M' in MMORPG stand for again?)

You live in sov null, it looks like. An area of space specifically designed to be controlled by massive groups of players. Set up shop in LS/WH space and you will do just fine solo.

Heh. Where in lowsec would you recommend.

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 ?

Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#132 - 2015-12-15 03:42:50 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Heh. Where in lowsec would you recommend.


I lived solo in a C1 with a LS static for a while. That was some of the better solo play I have had in the game. Between gas mining and PI, more than enough ISK to keep you in ships. LS and low level WHs to find fights.
Brigadine Ferathine
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#133 - 2015-12-15 07:05:30 UTC
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Heh. Where in lowsec would you recommend.


I lived solo in a C1 with a LS static for a while. That was some of the better solo play I have had in the game. Between gas mining and PI, more than enough ISK to keep you in ships. LS and low level WHs to find fights.

I tried a c2 for a while The isk was lower than high sec.
Brigadine Ferathine
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#134 - 2015-12-15 07:08:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Brigadine Ferathine
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Marsha Mallow wrote:
This is a really strange topic that keeps jumping about, but the question doesn't seem all that invalid to me (even if the OP hasn't presented it well). If a player choses to join a player corp, why can't they deploy personal structures?

Traditionally, I think the workarounds have been required because when POSs first entered the game in Exodus (2004) they were tied into capturing sovereignty, so were a Corporation (and Alliance) asset.

Since the role interface for Corporations is very limited currently, there's no way to give individual roles for a specific structure.

That has kind of sucked, because on the whole, I agree with the sentiment in the OP (just not the way the OP has whinged).


I could have laid my argument out better I admit. I wonder what CCP's reasoning is for not giving a reworked role system with this. Is it because they don't want the majority their paying players to have any power or because the technology doesn't let them?
Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#135 - 2015-12-15 16:03:02 UTC
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:
I tried a c2 for a while The isk was lower than high sec.


Why do you people only care about ISK? If you only want ISK stay with incursions.

Doesn't anyone else actaully have *fun* playing a video game and not worry about isk?
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#136 - 2015-12-15 17:27:35 UTC
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Marsha Mallow wrote:
This is a really strange topic that keeps jumping about, but the question doesn't seem all that invalid to me (even if the OP hasn't presented it well). If a player choses to join a player corp, why can't they deploy personal structures?

Traditionally, I think the workarounds have been required because when POSs first entered the game in Exodus (2004) they were tied into capturing sovereignty, so were a Corporation (and Alliance) asset.

Since the role interface for Corporations is very limited currently, there's no way to give individual roles for a specific structure.

That has kind of sucked, because on the whole, I agree with the sentiment in the OP (just not the way the OP has whinged).


I could have laid my argument out better I admit. I wonder what CCP's reasoning is for not giving a reworked role system with this. Is it because they don't want the majority their paying players to have any power or because the technology doesn't let them?


It took them YEARS from the time they first announced an overhaul of the POS system to get to citadels. Why? Because nasty old code. I can't even imagine what the code for roles look like.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#137 - 2015-12-15 19:20:20 UTC
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:
I wonder what CCP's reasoning is for not giving a reworked role system with this. Is it because they don't want the majority their paying players to have any power or because the technology doesn't let them?

Neither.

Reworking Corporations is on the plan. So it will be done when they get to it.

This is not difficult information to find.
Brigadine Ferathine
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#138 - 2015-12-15 22:09:55 UTC
Cidanel Afuran wrote:
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:
I tried a c2 for a while The isk was lower than high sec.


Why do you people only care about ISK? If you only want ISK stay with incursions.

Doesn't anyone else actaully have *fun* playing a video game and not worry about isk?

This game doesn't let you have fun. Its a job.
Brigadine Ferathine
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#139 - 2015-12-15 22:11:33 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:
I wonder what CCP's reasoning is for not giving a reworked role system with this. Is it because they don't want the majority their paying players to have any power or because the technology doesn't let them?

Neither.

Reworking Corporations is on the plan. So it will be done when they get to it.

This is not difficult information to find.

I know, I just feel like role reworking would be most logical to do before adding more systems that use it. Then they will just have to go back and redo what they just redid.
Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#140 - 2015-12-15 22:22:52 UTC
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:
This game doesn't let you have fun. Its a job.


News to me. I made just around a bil in the last few days selling some stuff that has been waiting for decent prices. I have the ships I need to do what I need, ISK for fuel saved up for a few months. Guess what? I'm not looking at my wallet or doing any serious PvE-ing until I go through that billion I just earned.

I have a job IRL. I 'grind' for money for over 40 hours a week at that. If I treated my gaming in my free time as "OMG I need to max the ISK I made today" I would shoot myself.

You can easily cover POS fuel, ship replacement and ammo living solo in a C1/C2 with gas production and PI alone. You won't be as space rich as the guy farming incursions 23/7, but if you keep the lights on in your home and have a good time doing it, who on earth cares?