These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Structure fitting in the EVE: Citadel Expansion

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
RainReaper
RRN Industries
#161 - 2016-02-12 16:54:14 UTC  |  Edited by: RainReaper
Fredric Wolf wrote:
RainReaper wrote:

Why do you feel that Hi-Sec should be self sustainable?


because its always been a bit self sustainable. when ccp changed the static ice belts into ice anomalies they said that fuel sustainability in highsec would be around 4/5 out of that wich was needed. After these changes its not gonna be even 1/5 cause you get so damn little strontium in highsec. look im not trying to say we should be 100% self sustainable. But if we cant mine any decent amount of fuel here att all then highsec cant be home to all the structures that are gonna come. listen im not trying to **** you off here. im just saying that we need to be able to providefor ourselves a little. what if all the strontium in highsec gets brought up? if it runs out and null sec dosent sell any to high anymore? we will be in trouble then!


I am not getting upset. I was just interested in your opinion on the matter. Do I think Hi-Sec should be 100% self sustaining. I do not. With what you have put though, is a very valid concern with good numbers to back it up. I think a better solution would be to increase the amount of stront in both standard and improved ore by 3 for base and 5 for improved. It will allow miners in empire to be some what self sufficient but also not change the standard of null only ice asteroids.[/quote]
hm...3 clatrates per ice is still really low...(sigh) well well see waht ccp themselves ahve to say on this matter. its up to them to decide in the end anyways.
I need to lie down now anyways. my autistic brain cant handle worrying like this.
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
#162 - 2016-02-12 17:44:56 UTC
RainReaper wrote:
Fredric Wolf wrote:
RainReaper wrote:

Why do you feel that Hi-Sec should be self sustainable?


because its always been a bit self sustainable. when ccp changed the static ice belts into ice anomalies they said that fuel sustainability in highsec would be around 4/5 out of that wich was needed. After these changes its not gonna be even 1/5 cause you get so damn little strontium in highsec. look im not trying to say we should be 100% self sustainable. But if we cant mine any decent amount of fuel here att all then highsec cant be home to all the structures that are gonna come. listen im not trying to **** you off here. im just saying that we need to be able to providefor ourselves a little. what if all the strontium in highsec gets brought up? if it runs out and null sec dosent sell any to high anymore? we will be in trouble then!


I am not getting upset. I was just interested in your opinion on the matter. Do I think Hi-Sec should be 100% self sustaining. I do not. With what you have put though, is a very valid concern with good numbers to back it up. I think a better solution would be to increase the amount of stront in both standard and improved ore by 3 for base and 5 for improved. It will allow miners in empire to be some what self sufficient but also not change the standard of null only ice asteroids.

hm...3 clatrates per ice is still really low...(sigh) well well see waht ccp themselves ahve to say on this matter. its up to them to decide in the end anyways.
I need to lie down now anyways. my autistic brain cant handle worrying like this.[/quote]

Tech 2 materials are not harvested in hi-sec, yet builders still build Tech 2 in hi-sec.
Tech 3 materials are not harvest in Hi-Sec, yet builds still build Tech 3 in Hi-Sec.

Many products that are required for use in production chains except basic ore are not harvested in Hi-sec. Yet many players Survive without ever touching Low or Null. Just remember starbases were never designed to be dropped everywhere easily like they became. In the past it was a corp goal of a group to drop a POS, now any lone pilot who makes a 1 day old corp can. I am not saying this is an issue or to get in a debate about that. But citadels are not supposed to be dropped by every person around. That is why they are high cost and offer more benefits than a starbase. Im not sure about you, but when I lived in hi-sec for several years, Stront rarely moved, was worth nothing because everyone had piles of it, it was to large to move in the quantities you needed to empty the hangar and get it out of your sight. If you are an ice miner you should have hangars full of this stuff unless you were just pitching it at whatever it would to clean the hangars out. Hop in a barge and go ice mine, You will have two things that you can't offload quick enough, Ozone and Stront. Heavy water and racial variant have always been the blocks on fuel production.
Firvain
Wildly Inappropriate
Wildly Inappropriate.
#163 - 2016-02-12 17:59:49 UTC
Fredric Wolf wrote:
Firvain wrote:
50% reduction in stront is a good start, but that still leaves a massive deficit of strontium. I hav ebeen buying ICE locally and from jita for 2 months to supply me with all the required LO/HW and isotopes(well mostly, still need to import some raw every now and then) but with all the stront acquired I still only have enough for 1 week worth of construction. But I still have enough LO/HW to last me a month. So something is wrong here.

And praying that the old ice miners from yeh will drop their existant strontium supply on market seems to be a bit odd


Do you think this is more a supply demand issue as up until now mining for stront was not all that profitable up until now?


you cant mine for just stront, you always get the other stuff too. So with just pure mining you always either have never enough stront or you are drowning in LO and HW.

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#164 - 2016-02-12 18:48:32 UTC
Fredric Wolf wrote:
RainReaper wrote:
I do have to say that being self sustaining in fuel in highsec is gonna be HARD when you need so much stront and get so little.
Having to mine more than 200 blocks of ice for a single run of fuel blocks wont be fun att all.
Maybe you can add in a tiny amount of glare crust roids into the highsec ice anomalies?
Or make a new type of ice with a bit less strontium and half the heavy water and liquid ozone of that of glare crust?
Cause lets face it its gonna be hell to get that much strontium in the highsec ice anomalies.

If you can do neither of those then you NEED to increase the amount of strontium you get from the racial ice.
Cause i refuse to sit and mine for... 3.5 hours to get a SINGLE hour worth of fuel in a citadel. And i have been looking forward to the structures for so long. please dont take this away from me guys Q~Q


You could buy the stront off the market also as it would be a boost to null sec to have an advantage over high.


another boost to nullsec? wow they really must dislike hisec then. So now the hisec manufacturers who are already reliant on goods from other areas to produce at lower yields will need to have citadels, defend them fully in wars, and pay yet more into nullsec alliances to be productive.

Hisec manufacturing will slowly die if we keep going down this root. Small scale hisec manufacturers simply won't be able to use even a medium citadel depending on the cost of fuel and defence against wars.
Obil Que
Star Explorers
Solis Tenebris
#165 - 2016-02-12 19:00:57 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Fredric Wolf wrote:
RainReaper wrote:
I do have to say that being self sustaining in fuel in highsec is gonna be HARD when you need so much stront and get so little.
Having to mine more than 200 blocks of ice for a single run of fuel blocks wont be fun att all.
Maybe you can add in a tiny amount of glare crust roids into the highsec ice anomalies?
Or make a new type of ice with a bit less strontium and half the heavy water and liquid ozone of that of glare crust?
Cause lets face it its gonna be hell to get that much strontium in the highsec ice anomalies.

If you can do neither of those then you NEED to increase the amount of strontium you get from the racial ice.
Cause i refuse to sit and mine for... 3.5 hours to get a SINGLE hour worth of fuel in a citadel. And i have been looking forward to the structures for so long. please dont take this away from me guys Q~Q


You could buy the stront off the market also as it would be a boost to null sec to have an advantage over high.


another boost to nullsec? wow they really must dislike hisec then. So now the hisec manufacturers who are already reliant on goods from other areas to produce at lower yields will need to have citadels, defend them fully in wars, and pay yet more into nullsec alliances to be productive.

Hisec manufacturing will slowly die if we keep going down this root. Small scale hisec manufacturers simply won't be able to use even a medium citadel depending on the cost of fuel and defence against wars.


Yeah, because HS today is just bereft of POSes burning fuel 24x7
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#166 - 2016-02-12 19:25:13 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:


another boost to nullsec? wow they really must dislike hisec then.


On the other hand, it looks like they also nerfed the **** out of the relative difference between null and high refining bonuses to the point that null only has a token advantage.

I'm assuming this is what's driving the current drop in mineral prices. Hello, mineral price dip.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#167 - 2016-02-12 19:36:05 UTC
Obil Que wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Fredric Wolf wrote:
RainReaper wrote:
I do have to say that being self sustaining in fuel in highsec is gonna be HARD when you need so much stront and get so little.
Having to mine more than 200 blocks of ice for a single run of fuel blocks wont be fun att all.
Maybe you can add in a tiny amount of glare crust roids into the highsec ice anomalies?
Or make a new type of ice with a bit less strontium and half the heavy water and liquid ozone of that of glare crust?
Cause lets face it its gonna be hell to get that much strontium in the highsec ice anomalies.

If you can do neither of those then you NEED to increase the amount of strontium you get from the racial ice.
Cause i refuse to sit and mine for... 3.5 hours to get a SINGLE hour worth of fuel in a citadel. And i have been looking forward to the structures for so long. please dont take this away from me guys Q~Q


You could buy the stront off the market also as it would be a boost to null sec to have an advantage over high.


another boost to nullsec? wow they really must dislike hisec then. So now the hisec manufacturers who are already reliant on goods from other areas to produce at lower yields will need to have citadels, defend them fully in wars, and pay yet more into nullsec alliances to be productive.

Hisec manufacturing will slowly die if we keep going down this root. Small scale hisec manufacturers simply won't be able to use even a medium citadel depending on the cost of fuel and defence against wars.


Yeah, because HS today is just bereft of POSes burning fuel 24x7


POS fuel can be built entirely from goods found in hisec in reasonable amounts. The inclusion of stront into the fuel blocks at the values discussed will mean stront now has to be imported from null. Another transfer of money from hisec players to nullsec alliances. Whilst I'm not a hisec player as such now I can see how this will negatively impact those who are that are manufacturers.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#168 - 2016-02-12 19:36:55 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:


another boost to nullsec? wow they really must dislike hisec then.


On the other hand, it looks like they also nerfed the **** out of the relative difference between null and high refining bonuses to the point that null only has a token advantage.

I'm assuming this is what's driving the current drop in mineral prices. Hello, mineral price dip.


I think CCP Someone said they were looking to address this at some point
Alexis Nightwish
#169 - 2016-02-12 20:27:11 UTC
Dev Blog wrote:

  • Prevent some poor soul from having to stay forever locked inside a Citadel to provide skill-level related bonuses

(then literally in the next paragraph)

We are still going to require a few skills to operate the structures and give few bonuses...

  • Structure Missile Systems: increases damage by 2% of all Structure Missile Launchers per level
  • Structure Defensive Systems: reduces capacitor need of all structure defensive modules by 2% per level (not listing specific modules here since most of them won’t make it in the first Citadel release)
  • Structure Electronic Systems: reduces capacitor need of Electronic Warfare, ship tractor beam, and bumping modules by 2% per level
  • Structure Engineering Systems: reduces capacitor need of the Doomsday Device and Capacitor Warfare modules by 2% per level

I feel like a white girl. I literally can't even.

Just axe the whole concept of skills for Citadels, and make their functionality 100% based on the modules and rigs installed.

CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge

EVE Online's "I win!" Button

Fixing bombs, not the bombers
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#170 - 2016-02-12 20:45:17 UTC
RainReaper wrote:
Fredric Wolf wrote:

Why do you feel that Hi-Sec should be self sustainable?


because its always been a bit self sustainable. when ccp changed the static ice belts into ice anomalies they said that fuel sustainability in highsec would be around 4/5 out of that wich was needed. After these changes its not gonna be even 1/5 cause you get so damn little strontium in highsec. look im not trying to say we should be 100% self sustainable. But if we cant mine any decent amount of fuel here att all then highsec cant be home to all the structures that are gonna come. listen im not trying to **** you off here. im just saying that we need to be able to providefor ourselves a little. what if all the strontium in highsec gets brought up? if it runs out and null sec dosent sell any to high anymore? we will be in trouble then!

Highsec has never been self-sustainable. You can't get zydrine or megacyte from highsec at all -- it has to come from without. Same for moongoo.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
RainReaper
RRN Industries
#171 - 2016-02-12 21:02:03 UTC
Querns wrote:
RainReaper wrote:
Fredric Wolf wrote:

Why do you feel that Hi-Sec should be self sustainable?


because its always been a bit self sustainable. when ccp changed the static ice belts into ice anomalies they said that fuel sustainability in highsec would be around 4/5 out of that wich was needed. After these changes its not gonna be even 1/5 cause you get so damn little strontium in highsec. look im not trying to say we should be 100% self sustainable. But if we cant mine any decent amount of fuel here att all then highsec cant be home to all the structures that are gonna come. listen im not trying to **** you off here. im just saying that we need to be able to providefor ourselves a little. what if all the strontium in highsec gets brought up? if it runs out and null sec dosent sell any to high anymore? we will be in trouble then!

Highsec has never been self-sustainable. You can't get zydrine or megacyte from highsec at all -- it has to come from without. Same for moongoo.


you can get zydrine from highsec mining anomalies. and megacyte from mission running. again not enough for 100% self sustaining. but i said i dont want highsec to be 100% self sustainable. but dont lie and say you cant get any att all. cause thats not true.
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#172 - 2016-02-12 22:07:43 UTC
Alexis Nightwish wrote:
Dev Blog wrote:

  • Prevent some poor soul from having to stay forever locked inside a Citadel to provide skill-level related bonuses

(then literally in the next paragraph)

We are still going to require a few skills to operate the structures and give few bonuses...

  • Structure Missile Systems: increases damage by 2% of all Structure Missile Launchers per level
  • Structure Defensive Systems: reduces capacitor need of all structure defensive modules by 2% per level (not listing specific modules here since most of them won’t make it in the first Citadel release)
  • Structure Electronic Systems: reduces capacitor need of Electronic Warfare, ship tractor beam, and bumping modules by 2% per level
  • Structure Engineering Systems: reduces capacitor need of the Doomsday Device and Capacitor Warfare modules by 2% per level

I feel like a white girl. I literally can't even.

Just axe the whole concept of skills for Citadels, and make their functionality 100% based on the modules and rigs installed.


Maybe I'm misremembering but I thought they said at some point that citadels won't auto-defend - someone will have to actually "pilot" them for combat purposes. So, there's really nothing wrong with this, if that's the case, and the two statements are certainly not inconsistent.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Lugh Crow-Slave
#173 - 2016-02-12 22:17:33 UTC
John McCreedy wrote:
Fuelling stations now, great. The game is getting further and further away from the things that make it fun and clogging you down with more and more micromanagement. You should be freeing up our time to focus on the fun things in Eve, not tying us down further with logistics.


but some people find the logistical aspects fun this game isn't just about you

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Alexis Nightwish
#174 - 2016-02-12 22:21:20 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Alright, update regarding the stront numbers:


  • We're going to decrease required stront numbers from 400 to 200 for a batch of 40 fuel blocks.
  • Stront volume is being decreased from 3 to 2m3.
  • Stront consumption of triage and siege modules will increase by 50% to compensate. This puts consumption at 375m3 for Siege Modules and 375 / 300 for Triage I / II
  • Entosis Links are not affected.


Edit: also renaming fuel blocks from racial fuel block to isotope fuel block, should reduce confusion since the new structures don't have different racial themes.


  • Helium Fuel Block, Nitrogen Fuel Block, Oxygen Fuel Block, Hydrogen Fuel Block
Stealth buff to POS reinforcement times, or is this change only being implemented when POSs are finally phased out of EVE?

CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge

EVE Online's "I win!" Button

Fixing bombs, not the bombers
Alexis Nightwish
#175 - 2016-02-12 22:35:01 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Alexis Nightwish wrote:
Dev Blog wrote:

  • Prevent some poor soul from having to stay forever locked inside a Citadel to provide skill-level related bonuses

(then literally in the next paragraph)

We are still going to require a few skills to operate the structures and give few bonuses...

  • Structure Missile Systems: increases damage by 2% of all Structure Missile Launchers per level
  • Structure Defensive Systems: reduces capacitor need of all structure defensive modules by 2% per level (not listing specific modules here since most of them won’t make it in the first Citadel release)
  • Structure Electronic Systems: reduces capacitor need of Electronic Warfare, ship tractor beam, and bumping modules by 2% per level
  • Structure Engineering Systems: reduces capacitor need of the Doomsday Device and Capacitor Warfare modules by 2% per level

I feel like a white girl. I literally can't even.

Just axe the whole concept of skills for Citadels, and make their functionality 100% based on the modules and rigs installed.


Maybe I'm misremembering but I thought they said at some point that citadels won't auto-defend - someone will have to actually "pilot" them for combat purposes. So, there's really nothing wrong with this, if that's the case, and the two statements are certainly not inconsistent.
You're correct that Citadels won't auto-defend. However my point still stands that Citadels will be the new space coffins, and that the idea of skills affecting Citadels is a terrible one.

Our Citadel in XY-123 is under attack?
*checks spreadsheet for XY's Citadel gunner*
*logs into the appropriate alt with V in all Citadel skills*

Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% for Citadels needing someone there to "pilot" them. However, having character skills affect the performance of the Citadel will only hurt small groups, as large ones will have no trouble providing alts for the role.

CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge

EVE Online's "I win!" Button

Fixing bombs, not the bombers
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#176 - 2016-02-12 22:53:16 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Alright, update regarding the stront numbers:


  • We're going to decrease required stront numbers from 400 to 200 for a batch of 40 fuel blocks.
  • Stront volume is being decreased from 3 to 2m3.
  • Stront consumption of triage and siege modules will increase by 50% to compensate. This puts consumption at 375m3 for Siege Modules and 375 / 300 for Triage I / II
  • Entosis Links are not affected.


Edit: also renaming fuel blocks from racial fuel block to isotope fuel block, should reduce confusion since the new structures don't have different racial themes.


  • Helium Fuel Block, Nitrogen Fuel Block, Oxygen Fuel Block, Hydrogen Fuel Block


Can you clarify if this change is coming at release of the first citadels, or once POS are removed?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#177 - 2016-02-12 23:49:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Nevyn Auscent
Alexis Nightwish wrote:

Maybe I'm misremembering but I thought they said at some point that citadels won't auto-defend - someone will have to actually "pilot" them for combat purposes. So, there's really nothing wrong with this, if that's the case, and the two statements are certainly not inconsistent.
Our Citadel in XY-123 is under attack?
*checks spreadsheet for XY's Citadel gunner*
*logs into the appropriate alt with V in all Citadel skills*

Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% for Citadels needing someone there to "pilot" them. However, having character skills affect the performance of the Citadel will only hurt small groups, as large ones will have no trouble providing alts for the role.

They are proposing 4 2* skills for Citadels. If your pilots refuse to train them to IV, then your problem is in your alliance.
It's not like they are demanding 6 months of training just for Citadels.
(Quote got messed up, I apologise if it's misquoting)
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#178 - 2016-02-13 00:37:50 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Alexis Nightwish wrote:

Maybe I'm misremembering but I thought they said at some point that citadels won't auto-defend - someone will have to actually "pilot" them for combat purposes. So, there's really nothing wrong with this, if that's the case, and the two statements are certainly not inconsistent.
Our Citadel in XY-123 is under attack?
*checks spreadsheet for XY's Citadel gunner*
*logs into the appropriate alt with V in all Citadel skills*

Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% for Citadels needing someone there to "pilot" them. However, having character skills affect the performance of the Citadel will only hurt small groups, as large ones will have no trouble providing alts for the role.

They are proposing 4 2* skills for Citadels. If your pilots refuse to train them to IV, then your problem is in your alliance.
It's not like they are demanding 6 months of training just for Citadels.
(Quote got messed up, I apologise if it's misquoting)


Pretty much this.

The need for an alt (which is questionable to begin with, given the weekly vulnerability windows) is not impacted in this scenario - only the skills on the alt.

The skills are only rank 2s with a 2%/lvl effect. If you feel it's required to ensconce a maxed-out character there for all time, it's a function of neurosis, not a gameplay necessity. It's, what, a day and a half to get each skill to 4? Roll

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Gyges Skyeye
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#179 - 2016-02-13 09:21:25 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
A suggestion on the stront issue: Make strontium clathrates refine into strontium isotopes with a much lower volume for use in fuel. No issues rebalancing anything else that uses existing stront then.


I nominate this guy for best solution to the stront issue. I will expand on this by suggesting that stront be held out of the fuel block recipe and be consumed directly from the structure fuel bay. This way you don't have to touch POS chains at all until you axe them entirely.

Stretch goal; Give each structure module a preferred fuel block. Consume additional strontium isotopes above base cost if preferred fuel block is not available.


Querns wrote:
Glad to see more details! Thanks for the info.

The reprocessing rigs have me a little worried. Right now, the maximum base reprocessing rate available in highsec is 52%, but with drilling platforms, you can get 59%, and nullsec gets its 60%. I feel like this is a pretty drastic increase in highsec reprocessing efficiency; is there a reason why it's such a large increase?


I identify with this.

I know that it has been mentioned that these values will be adjusted. I'm going to lay out another reason to nerf bat the highsec rates.

Right now in industry there is a division of labor amongst structures. The structure where you get your best refine is not where the greatest bonuses to creating and marketing finished goods is. You are incentivized to refine in a minmatar station then haul it to an amarr station to build a product then haul it to a market hub for sale. This creates a gradient where people can choose the convenience of doing the entire process in one location or opt to derive savings from adding in extra steps.

The proposed system seems to suggest that the new citadels are going to be the Mary Sue of structures. They will do it all, and they will do it perfectly. I know you are offering the refining rigs before the drilling structures come out thinking it will be nice... but that rush to onboard people into the new system is going to squash a lot of economic niches in the process.

Following on this, the convenience that you are proposing of refine+build+market with no hauling, in the safety of high sec is not being accounted for in the described rates. One can validly make the argument that high sec refine rates of citadels should be lower than a POS in highsec today because you can sell the finished product directly from the citadel but can not do so from the POS.
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#180 - 2016-02-13 12:54:22 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Ytterbium
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Alright, update regarding the stront numbers:


  • We're going to decrease required stront numbers from 400 to 200 for a batch of 40 fuel blocks.
  • Stront volume is being decreased from 3 to 2m3.
  • Stront consumption of triage and siege modules will increase by 50% to compensate. This puts consumption at 375m3 for Siege Modules and 375 / 300 for Triage I / II
  • Entosis Links are not affected.


Edit: also renaming fuel blocks from racial fuel block to isotope fuel block, should reduce confusion since the new structures don't have different racial themes.


  • Helium Fuel Block, Nitrogen Fuel Block, Oxygen Fuel Block, Hydrogen Fuel Block


Can you clarify if this change is coming at release of the first citadels, or once POS are removed?


Edited: fuel block changes will go out in March