These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Citadels are now on Singularity

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lugh Crow-Slave
#541 - 2016-04-21 06:48:47 UTC
Masao Kurata wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
These things are more expensive and in many ways more limited to a pos their only real advantage is they are going to be hard to kill and that's the point


Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

I have some comments about "more limited" but I need to finish testing, I still think I've barely scratched the surface of how many ways you can break eve with citadels.


well in there currant state they are...

no industry no mining no reactions no research just storage and docking


i din't say they were more limited than citadels said in many ways they are more limited

but my point stands they are supposed to be hard to kill

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Sekeris
Order of Celestial Knights
#542 - 2016-04-21 15:37:51 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
what?

you only need 3 hrs a weak

that lighter colored box that comes up shows you when it will come out of RF if it enters it during that vuln timer.


Aye, i figured that out. Its not very clear though at the moment. Will try to shoot one and see what happens so i can better figure out how to plan my refo. Thinking on it more i guess its much better then the current system, automatic guns dont realy do much atm, and at least this will be invulnerable most the time.
Vigilanta
S0utherN Comfort
#543 - 2016-04-21 21:08:37 UTC
Eli Stan wrote:
Vigilanta wrote:
was playing around today and noticed this. There is no repair option in citadels? If it exists i cant find it, seems like this is a relatively significant oversight as you have no way to repair modules or ships while docked. You could make it a service module id be okay with that, but this should absolutely be something included at launch if you want them to be used as repairing is a big piece of core functionality.

Edit: Also +1 to trespassers idea of having a citadel anchoring in hostile sov space come out of anchoring during the ihubs vulnerability window rather that a multiple of 24 from when it was anchored. If you did this I think it would create a nice balance.


Just undock and the tether will repair any heat or shield/armor/hull damage you have, for free. It doesn't repair damage to drones though, and I dint know what CCP plans for that.



Yea I know that, but being required to fit and undock to repair modules seems pretty meh
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
#544 - 2016-04-21 21:08:40 UTC
Oh, something perhaps more QoL: Is there a reason Festival Launchers cannot be fitted to Citadels? Could Festival Launchers be tagged to allow fitting to Citadels?

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#545 - 2016-04-21 21:34:11 UTC
Not sure if this has been said already and I quite frankly do not feel like searching:

When you want to add someone/something to one of the many access lists for citadels and you search for them with the "+ Add Member" function, you get a completely chaotic list with chars, corps and alliances mixed together like crazy. Unlike in other search result boxes (like the one in Peoples & Places), the search results are not sorted in collapsible/expandable categories. Instead, they are presented in a ridiculously long list for some search terms without any sorting at all. This must change before you deploy these structures.

And no, using exact terms or exclusive terms as limiter for search results is by no means and not at all a solution to this ludicrous handling of search results when you have the polar opposite of this with the mentioned Peoples & Places search result handling.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#546 - 2016-04-21 21:54:29 UTC
Petrified wrote:
Oh, something perhaps more QoL: Is there a reason Festival Launchers cannot be fitted to Citadels? Could Festival Launchers be tagged to allow fitting to Citadels?


Upwell has created vendor lock-in by only allowing Upwell modules to be fitted to their citadels, and Upwell doesn't currently produce any festival launchers. My sources tell me Salvador Sarpati has protested to the SCC which got him nowhere, and now really wants to bring an anti-trust lawsuit to bear but has been unable to convince any court they have jurisdiction over the SCC. Sarpati's Serpentis Corporation no longer has the military capability to acquire a Citadel by force in order to reverse-engineer its encrypted validation of modules. With their monopoly on Citadel items, we can only hope that Upwell increases their line of offerings in the future as they have time, but that they don't abuse their market exclusivity and charge us capsuleers up the nose for them.
Erin Aldent
Eagle Wing Industries
Triumvirate.
#547 - 2016-04-21 22:37:46 UTC
There is a problem w/ how taxes apply when you are in more than one group. Take the med bay, I had 3 groups, Public at 1M, alliance at 200K and a group w/ my alts at 0. What is happening is that my alts in corp are being charged 1M, while my out of corp alts are free. Refining is working the same way, and I assume the market too but i did not test that.

There is also a bug w/ the refining rigs, unless you take control of the citadel the rig bonus is not applying. It defaults to 50% until you take control of the citadel, and then after that the rig bonus applies until the next down time.
Trespasser
S0utherN Comfort
#548 - 2016-04-22 02:55:49 UTC
after playing with the citadels for the last few days here are my thoughts:

Player to player in station trading needs to be implemented
Internal Repair Facilities need to be implemented.

I feel like the point defense is in a good place right now and i feel that anti-drone/anti frig weapons are in a very good place.

other then that we have some problems.

a legion set up with a fleet standard tank only takes 350 damage while webbed and duel target painted from 3 launchers with anti-cruiser missiles... it does even less to a tanked guardian.

This damage needs to be up a good bit.. at least 300% (this would put damage around 1k from a volley of 3 launchers) i understand why you don't want these things to be able to scramble while invulnerable but if thats the case you need to give these things enough damage where you can force t2/t3 cruisers off of it or be required to bring a good size fleet.

I would also think about upping bomb speed and damage a bit as well... i would say at least 50% on the speed because right now they are painfully slow. i would also like to see the ability to fit more then 1 bomb launcher per citadel.


I have watched a Golem tank 3 anti-battleship launchers and a bomb launcher and neuts from a large... he tanked it until he ran out of cap chargers for his boosters. More damage is required here, i would also consider doubling the neut power of the standup large neuts from 1500 to 3k.

Most capital weapons seem to be strong, the biggest gripe here is how slow these missiles are.. and because the citadels are so large even frigate class missiles tank a long time to hit the target


I will updated more as i go along.

Regan Rotineque
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#549 - 2016-04-22 09:14:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Regan Rotineque
Trying to figure out the new broker fee calculation

So I put an item for sale in a citadel where I set the tax rate to o.o% - it charged me 100 isk for a 100,000 isk sale of one item

I then put the tax rate to 10.0% - it charged me 800 isk for the same 100,000 isk item. a rate of o.8%

When i flipped it from three months to one day sale it changed the broker fee to 8000 isk for the 100,000 isk sale a rate of 8.0%

im a bit confuzled.....should it not have just charged 10%?


When i put an item for sale in an NPC station i got charged o.77% (766.41 isk) for the same 100,000 isk sale.
What really confuses me now is when i look on my market screen for the NPC station it says
"BASE BROKER FEE : 20.80% of order value"
not sure if that is correct or a typo....but its very confusing. And should it not be displaying the adjusted rate based on skills?
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#550 - 2016-04-23 07:41:19 UTC
Lauched my test Citadel yesterday ... so wait and see. But I was shocked after /moveme to the test system, the performance was horrible with all the Citadels in system, below 15 FPS, where I usually have solid 60 with medium settings. Switching of the structure marks in space helped improving to 25-30 FPS. You seriously need to work on performance.

Couldn't figure out this market tax (shouldn't it be broker fee?) setting either, we need an update here. Especially as your previously announced plans will certainly crush New Eden's market segment.

I'm my own NPC alt.
Erin Aldent
Eagle Wing Industries
Triumvirate.
#551 - 2016-04-23 08:42:56 UTC
You can't start invention on the citadel rig BPCs in a Design Laboratory, I tested this w/ the Standup M-Set HS Materials Reclamation I Blueprint copy.
Fire Bringer Brisinger
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#552 - 2016-04-24 01:58:38 UTC
please wipe the system i cant even dock or undock and move around the system keeps crashing
Zerling Rush
#553 - 2016-04-24 03:25:35 UTC
hi!

DD may not cause damage to the Citadel? Why balance done crutches?

Why not come up with a module that generates a field locking DD in the grid of the Citadel?
with the module turns on and off instantly

the defenders decide whether they cut subcap using DD, but there is a risk of impact DD on the Citadel
either collect more allies on sгbсap to protect under the field blocking any dd in grid

I think that would be interesting

ps It is also possible to envisage the possibility of forced off the field (entosis?) to create a small window of vulnerability

ps ps Sorry for my terrible English
Lugh Crow-Slave
#554 - 2016-04-24 07:21:47 UTC
Zerling Rush wrote:
hi!

DD may not cause damage to the Citadel? Why balance done crutches?

Why not come up with a module that generates a field locking DD in the grid of the Citadel?
with the module turns on and off instantly

the defenders decide whether they cut subcap using DD, but there is a risk of impact DD on the Citadel
either collect more allies on sгbсap to protect under the field blocking any dd in grid

I think that would be interesting

ps It is also possible to envisage the possibility of forced off the field (entosis?) to create a small window of vulnerability

ps ps Sorry for my terrible English


O.o wut


the only one i could sort of understand is you want entosis to make the citadels vulnerable. this is a bad idea and makes the timers pointless

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Coelomate Mines
Gilliomate Corp
#555 - 2016-04-24 19:40:36 UTC
It appears I can't activate a warp scrambler fit to an Astrahus outside of the vulnerability window - it says "You cannot activate Standup Warp Scrambler I whilst invulnerable." All other modules work.

Is that intentional?
Lugh Crow-Slave
#556 - 2016-04-24 20:53:09 UTC
Coelomate Mines wrote:
It appears I can't activate a warp scrambler fit to an Astrahus outside of the vulnerability window - it says "You cannot activate Standup Warp Scrambler I whilst invulnerable." All other modules work.

Is that intentional?


Yes

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
The fed
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#557 - 2016-04-25 15:04:13 UTC
When i'm trying to activate jump clone on other station being in citadel and in ship get weird message. "Message: ''
Args: {'structureName': u'Orantas House of curtisans and preferans'}"


Screenshot http://imgur.com/tD0Wr4Z
CCP Claymore
C C P
C C P Alliance
#558 - 2016-04-25 16:12:44 UTC
Erin Aldent wrote:
You can't start invention on the citadel rig BPCs in a Design Laboratory, I tested this w/ the Standup M-Set HS Materials Reclamation I Blueprint copy.


Taking a look.

Quality Assurance Analyst Team Psycho Sisters
Regan Rotineque
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#559 - 2016-04-25 19:40:45 UTC
noted a new patch on sisi

so....before i said it was showing broker fee on the My Orders tab at 20.80% ....

Now it shows
"BASE BROKER FEE: 48.00%"

when i put things for sale in the Citadel - and I set the tax rate at 10%

I put something up 1 item for 100.000 isk and it charges 1.0% 1,000 isk
However when i flip the time frame around the tax rate jumps to 10.0% (which is the correct rate as set)

So this is still not working - and still rather confusing since the base fees and taxes show up as such incorrect figures.

And yes I have reported these as bugs though i checked the bug reports show closed.
Regan Rotineque
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#560 - 2016-04-25 19:52:00 UTC
I also noted that when trying to set a Citadel as a destination the citadel does not form part of the route that is plotted. Unlike what I can do with an existing station.

Right now you can right click - 'set destination' and the route plotted includes the end point (the station).