These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[118.7] Warp Bubble Dragging Change

First post First post
Author
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#241 - 2016-08-03 03:44:59 UTC
Lexx Devi wrote:
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
Problem with citadels was they're immune. Any other kind of gatecamp can at least be engaged. Just because they can be circumvented doesn't make an immune doomsday alright.


Immune yes, if its camping you 0on gate kill it of it cant even target you your not in danger.

Ok, i hear what your saying. im looking from as many senarios as i can imagine,
Attacking, Deffending, Camper, Victim, Owner, Grefer, Rage, Troll, FC, Miner, Transporter.

This is my responce:

If your sitting on the gate "Your Not Camped" by a citadel, its 1000km of.
You faild at scouting yes you get stuck. Still, "your not camped"
If you sitt on gate no "your not camped" by citadel.

If theres a weapon that reaches from the citadel, if the "doomsday" can, then change the Doomsday.

This forum sounds more like a place for controling the game then contributing.
Everyone Wants their own view to succed without the tougth of anyone else but their known friends.

Sounds like your saying its sitting on 0km off the gate.

You do realize the problem was seen as the drag bubbles that pull you out of warp and land you in range of a Citadel's weapons.

It is just an example of Devs not taking different use scenarios into consideration when implementing new things. Eve players will abuse any mechanic that is not locked down and like with so many other changes, they nerf everything around the "problem" rather than addressing it in a professional way.
Someone was smart enough to work out you could place a drag bubble right next to a Citadel and use it to kill others, Devs are now rectifying something that never should have been possible by nerfing the surrounding mechanics (not the thing that caused the issue, it doesn't get touched and so will still be there for the next exploit finder to use - leading to more nerfs).

It would have made far more sense to just increase the range which Citadels could be placed from a gate - But that would have been too easy, so they decided to screw up a perfectly fine mechanic that has been part of gate camping (nulsec life) forever by changing and limiting its use.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#242 - 2016-08-03 08:18:51 UTC
While we are at it, put an anchoring minimum distance of 100km between each bubble from the edge of the bubble, not the center.
That way, not-so-brave need to be vary in their mining system and not have 30570586265 bubbles with 2m distance to each other.

Git gud! If you cannot pvp, don't pvp. If you cannot defend your space, don't own space. If you cannot organize, you should think about your lives and return to highsec.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#243 - 2016-08-03 12:29:48 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:

It would have made far more sense to just increase the range which Citadels could be placed from a gate - But that would have been too easy, so they decided to screw up a perfectly fine mechanic that has been part of gate camping (nulsec life) forever by changing and limiting its use.

Please explain how drag bubbles were dragging you more than 500km off gate before new grids got introduced without indulging in major potentially exploiting grid fu?
Pretty much they weren't and you weren't using bubbles any differently than you will be able to after the change limiting them to 500km range goes through.
Cade Windstalker
#244 - 2016-08-03 17:38:42 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
You do realize the problem was seen as the drag bubbles that pull you out of warp and land you in range of a Citadel's weapons.

It is just an example of Devs not taking different use scenarios into consideration when implementing new things. Eve players will abuse any mechanic that is not locked down and like with so many other changes, they nerf everything around the "problem" rather than addressing it in a professional way.
Someone was smart enough to work out you could place a drag bubble right next to a Citadel and use it to kill others, Devs are now rectifying something that never should have been possible by nerfing the surrounding mechanics (not the thing that caused the issue, it doesn't get touched and so will still be there for the next exploit finder to use - leading to more nerfs).

It would have made far more sense to just increase the range which Citadels could be placed from a gate - But that would have been too easy, so they decided to screw up a perfectly fine mechanic that has been part of gate camping (nulsec life) forever by changing and limiting its use.


They're fixing this in a way that makes perfect sense, especially since it also standardizes another mechanic.

The issue, and the only issue, is the interaction between bubbles and Citadels. That least either adjusting Citadels or adjusting bubbles, and adjusting bubbles impacts fewer things overall and makes perfect sense.

Also it's ridiculous to claim that these mechanics have been part of Null "forever". They've changed bubbles in small ways like this a couple of times, and these ranges have only been present since the grid size was changed. For the majority of Eve history the range was actually shorter than the new 500km range, and way shorter than the 1000km we have now.

Really this whole post feels like unjustified salt.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#245 - 2016-08-03 17:42:36 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:

It would have made far more sense to just increase the range which Citadels could be placed from a gate - But that would have been too easy, so they decided to screw up a perfectly fine mechanic that has been part of gate camping (nulsec life) forever by changing and limiting its use.

Please explain how drag bubbles were dragging you more than 500km off gate before new grids got introduced without indulging in major potentially exploiting grid fu?
Pretty much they weren't and you weren't using bubbles any differently than you will be able to after the change limiting them to 500km range goes through.

Seriously - That's what you took from that?

Is it any wonder Devs stay on Reddit - Most of those who post here are too narrow minded to understand a simple statement - Devs implemented something that requires changing something unrelated because they didn't take the time to see how the changes may be used in unintended ways. Large grids + Citadels created a bad (unforeseen) game mechanic.

A simple drag bubble 500K off a gate is no problem, unless it is manned (or next to a Citadel - 1,000k off a gate, which seems to be the major consideration) you just exit it and warp to the gate. One that is 100k off a gate is far worse, you have to bounce to get back to the gate or slowboat it. The extended grid only allowed players to abuse a mechanic that had been in the game for years in a way that was unintended - gate camping with Citadels..


Whether you could or couldn't have a bubble pull you 500k prior to the changes is completely irrelevant.
It really isn't that hard to work out. READ THE OP.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Cade Windstalker
#246 - 2016-08-03 17:56:58 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Seriously - That's what you took from that?

Is it any wonder Devs stay on Reddit - Most of those who post here are too narrow minded to understand a simple statement - Devs implemented something that requires changing something unrelated because they didn't take the time to see how the changes may be used in unintended ways. Large grids + Citadels created a bad (unforeseen) game mechanic.

A simple drag bubble 500K off a gate is no problem, unless it is manned (or next to a Citadel - 1,000k off a gate, which seems to be the major consideration) you just exit it and warp to the gate. One that is 100k off a gate is far worse, you have to bounce to get back to the gate or slowboat it. The extended grid only allowed players to abuse a mechanic that had been in the game for years in a way that was unintended - gate camping with Citadels..


Whether you could or couldn't have a bubble pull you 500k prior to the changes is completely irrelevant.
It really isn't that hard to work out. READ THE OP.


Please leave the insults at home, thanks.

Yes, the interaction between bubbles and Citadels is a problem, though only really around gates. They could have changed the anchoring range on Citadels, but that would probably impact other things, create problems if Citadels get moved into each other, and generally make more of a mess than is warranted.

You seem to have an issue with CCP changing bubbles to fix this issue, but that makes no sense. It's not breaking anything else, as you yourself point out there's no real advantage to a bubble 1000km off grid vs one 500km off grid, except that one can sit on a Citadel. This is simply the easiest change to make to solve the issue at hand, and as an added bonus it creates more consistency with bubble mechanics, which is nice. So why the hate?
William Legrand-Marx
Nemesis Ad Astra
#247 - 2016-08-04 18:33:05 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Kahanis Inkunen wrote:
The hard cap on bubble drag range makes the following possible: Anchor a t1 small bubble 499 km from a gate and a t2 large 501 km from the gate. When somebody warps to the gate they end up on the edge of a small bubble, deep inside the large.


This is also possible now :)


are you saying this is fine, or are you saying you'll fix this some other time?

it's not fine btw, it's really awful



Why? Should warping to direct gate to gate unscouted not be punished?


getting dragged off by a bubble is being punished. getting dragged into the centre of 50 bubbles is just ridiculous, and I think an unintended thing with the grid changes


Just limit number of bubbles per system or per user or per corporation. Would it work?

There is nothing worthy in this world even if others think it is worth something...

Falconee Dawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#248 - 2016-08-04 19:02:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Falconee Dawn
--disregard--
Sootsia
HIgh Sec Care Bears
Brothers of Tangra
#249 - 2016-08-04 19:52:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Sootsia
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Hey Space Friends,

To answer some of the questions asked in this thread so far >

Q) Why are you making this change?
A) Two reasons, first, you can use a citadel to camp a stop or pull bubble on a gate. Secondly, the current bubble mechanics are a little unintuitive. For example, a stop bubble (that is a bubble in-line before your warp destination) will only work at 1000km or less, while a pull bubble (that is a bubble in-line after your warp destination) will work at any range on grid.

Q) Whats wrong with Citadels camping gates?
A) Their invulnerability.

Q) After this change you'll be able to place a bubble at 499km and another at 501km and you'll land at the edge of the 499km bubble but be in the middle of the 501km bubble!
A) Yes. And you can do that now, just at 1000km. You can also do this using Interdictor bubbles (drop a 2nd as ships are landing on the edge), or a Heavy Interdictor fit with both a T1 and T2 bubble (keep the T1 up, put the T2 up as ships land).

Q) What about adding killmails for mobile bubbles, and/or adding an expiry timer for mobile bubbles?
A) I think these are pretty good ideas. CSM 10 also suggested the expiry timer. We'll see :)



CCP Larrikin,
I think your logic is a tad bit unsound.
Consider this, your argument in that a "Citadel is used to (Argument 1, 2) compared to me using a super or a carrier, with fighters/fighter bombers, having said fighters/fighter bombers, support fighters, in close proximity to the aforementioned much maligned bubble camp, with my capitals/supers 3k, 4k or even at max targeting range. Am I not just as "invulnerable" to anyone daring to enter said bubblecamp? Are they not just as dead as to someone actively manning a citadel? How about I use a Titan with the new DD's against a hostile force that comes in via the gates into a actively manned bubble camp? Are they not just as dead and me just as invulnerable? Able to GTFO at a moments notice?

Invulnerability is merely a matter of degrees and semantics, in a citadel, it may be days, in a Titan, it is counted in the DD cool down and possibly cap recharge time. In a carrier/super, its the time it takes to press warp when properly aligned out.

Any Ship, POS, Citadel with a pilot behind the guns, fighters, whatever form of offensive dps, is potentially capable of destroying a ship that gets caught in the bubble. it is simply a matter of degree as to to the size of the defender of said bubble versus the speed and size of the offender whom is in a space that is inherently not supposed to be safe.


#savethebubble
Lexx Devi
Freeport . 7
#250 - 2016-08-04 21:08:15 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Lexx Devi wrote:
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
Problem with citadels was they're immune. Any other kind of gatecamp can at least be engaged. Just because they can be circumvented doesn't make an immune doomsday alright.


Immune yes, if its camping you 0on gate kill it of it cant even target you your not in danger.

Ok, i hear what your saying. im looking from as many senarios as i can imagine,
Attacking, Deffending, Camper, Victim, Owner, Grefer, Rage, Troll, FC, Miner, Transporter.

This is my responce:

If your sitting on the gate "Your Not Camped" by a citadel, its 1000km of.
You faild at scouting yes you get stuck. Still, "your not camped"
If you sitt on gate no "your not camped" by citadel.

If theres a weapon that reaches from the citadel, if the "doomsday" can, then change the Doomsday.

This forum sounds more like a place for controling the game then contributing.
Everyone Wants their own view to succed without the tougth of anyone else but their known friends.

Sounds like your saying its sitting on 0km off the gate.

You do realize the problem was seen as the drag bubbles that pull you out of warp and land you in range of a Citadel's weapons.

It is just an example of Devs not taking different use scenarios into consideration when implementing new things. Eve players will abuse any mechanic that is not locked down and like with so many other changes, they nerf everything around the "problem" rather than addressing it in a professional way.
Someone was smart enough to work out you could place a drag bubble right next to a Citadel and use it to kill others, Devs are now rectifying something that never should have been possible by nerfing the surrounding mechanics (not the thing that caused the issue, it doesn't get touched and so will still be there for the next exploit finder to use - leading to more nerfs).

It would have made far more sense to just increase the range which Citadels could be placed from a gate - But that would have been too easy, so they decided to screw up a perfectly fine mechanic that has been part of gate camping (nulsec life) forever by changing and limiting its use.



"You do realize the problem was seen as the drag bubbles that pull you out of warp and land you in range of a Citadel's weapons."

*Yes, You do realize this isn't necessarily a problem, unless You se it as a problem.
According to your response you se it as a issue.
Your not ready to live & fly around a "Citadel Camp"?

Open Your Mind, They may have seen this scenarios they might not expect so much salty tears of a new feature.
CCP might think, "oh well they want empty space & Mindless jumping? Sure they are our blood & lifeforce..."

***My point is: keep content, How lazy are humans srsly, Scout so you don't get stuck!

What do we do when we find problems?
Do we work harder to overcome?
Do we adapt to the situation?
Do we run blindly in to a bubble, then cry that its unfair.
Do we make "example" of how other ppl do things wrong?

Are your way the only right way?
If you say "Yes" your a blight to the world.
If you say "No" we can start discussing how to make this better.
Its like sort all over, not paying attention & running without listening to his FCs.


I vote +1 to "Make space interesting & full of dangers, not empty"
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#251 - 2016-08-04 22:39:25 UTC
Sootsia wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Hey Space Friends,

To answer some of the questions asked in this thread so far >

Q) Why are you making this change?
A) Two reasons, first, you can use a citadel to camp a stop or pull bubble on a gate. Secondly, the current bubble mechanics are a little unintuitive. For example, a stop bubble (that is a bubble in-line before your warp destination) will only work at 1000km or less, while a pull bubble (that is a bubble in-line after your warp destination) will work at any range on grid.

Q) Whats wrong with Citadels camping gates?
A) Their invulnerability.

Q) After this change you'll be able to place a bubble at 499km and another at 501km and you'll land at the edge of the 499km bubble but be in the middle of the 501km bubble!
A) Yes. And you can do that now, just at 1000km. You can also do this using Interdictor bubbles (drop a 2nd as ships are landing on the edge), or a Heavy Interdictor fit with both a T1 and T2 bubble (keep the T1 up, put the T2 up as ships land).

Q) What about adding killmails for mobile bubbles, and/or adding an expiry timer for mobile bubbles?
A) I think these are pretty good ideas. CSM 10 also suggested the expiry timer. We'll see :)



CCP Larrikin,
I think your logic is a tad bit unsound.
Consider this, your argument in that a "Citadel is used to (Argument 1, 2) compared to me using a super or a carrier, with fighters/fighter bombers, having said fighters/fighter bombers, support fighters, in close proximity to the aforementioned much maligned bubble camp, with my capitals/supers 3k, 4k or even at max targeting range. Am I not just as "invulnerable" to anyone daring to enter said bubblecamp? Are they not just as dead as to someone actively manning a citadel? How about I use a Titan with the new DD's against a hostile force that comes in via the gates into a actively manned bubble camp? Are they not just as dead and me just as invulnerable? Able to GTFO at a moments notice?

Invulnerability is merely a matter of degrees and semantics, in a citadel, it may be days, in a Titan, it is counted in the DD cool down and possibly cap recharge time. In a carrier/super, its the time it takes to press warp when properly aligned out.

Any Ship, POS, Citadel with a pilot behind the guns, fighters, whatever form of offensive dps, is potentially capable of destroying a ship that gets caught in the bubble. it is simply a matter of degree as to to the size of the defender of said bubble versus the speed and size of the offender whom is in a space that is inherently not supposed to be safe.


#savethebubble

You are battling semantics where there are none.

A citadel is quite literally invulnerable between invul periods by design. Super carriers themselves, are not invulnerable.

There is literally an attribute or line of code that says "no you cannot damage this object".

It's not semantics, it's mechanics.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#252 - 2016-08-04 23:07:40 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Seriously - That's what you took from that?

Is it any wonder Devs stay on Reddit - Most of those who post here are too narrow minded to understand a simple statement - Devs implemented something that requires changing something unrelated because they didn't take the time to see how the changes may be used in unintended ways. Large grids + Citadels created a bad (unforeseen) game mechanic.

A simple drag bubble 500K off a gate is no problem, unless it is manned (or next to a Citadel - 1,000k off a gate, which seems to be the major consideration) you just exit it and warp to the gate. One that is 100k off a gate is far worse, you have to bounce to get back to the gate or slowboat it. The extended grid only allowed players to abuse a mechanic that had been in the game for years in a way that was unintended - gate camping with Citadels..


Whether you could or couldn't have a bubble pull you 500k prior to the changes is completely irrelevant.
It really isn't that hard to work out. READ THE OP.


Please leave the insults at home, thanks.

Yes, the interaction between bubbles and Citadels is a problem, though only really around gates. They could have changed the anchoring range on Citadels, but that would probably impact other things, create problems if Citadels get moved into each other, and generally make more of a mess than is warranted.

You seem to have an issue with CCP changing bubbles to fix this issue, but that makes no sense. It's not breaking anything else, as you yourself point out there's no real advantage to a bubble 1000km off grid vs one 500km off grid, except that one can sit on a Citadel. This is simply the easiest change to make to solve the issue at hand, and as an added bonus it creates more consistency with bubble mechanics, which is nice. So why the hate?
I didn't insult anyone -If you do see an insult there, your seeing something that is only in your imagination. Or a really bad interpretation of the English language.

As I said - This change is only valid for one thing, it would have been far easier to just remove Citadels from gates.
I can tell you what the next nerf will be - Carriers unable to sit near a Citadel with fighters deployed on a bubble 500K from a gate.

Because our Devs have no insight as to how people play the game, they are always going to be n the back foot - Fixing errors in their judgement of what players will do and how they will react.

NB; Any bubble 1000K "off grid" is going to do nothing - They must be ON GRID to be effective.

I don't have an issue with what devs are doing, I just don't see it as a complete fix. It is simple bandaid.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Sootsia
HIgh Sec Care Bears
Brothers of Tangra
#253 - 2016-08-05 01:19:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Sootsia
Rowells wrote:
Sootsia wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Hey Space Friends,

To answer some of the questions asked in this thread so far >

Q) Why are you making this change?
A) Two reasons, first, you can use a citadel to camp a stop or pull bubble on a gate. Secondly, the current bubble mechanics are a little unintuitive. For example, a stop bubble (that is a bubble in-line before your warp destination) will only work at 1000km or less, while a pull bubble (that is a bubble in-line after your warp destination) will work at any range on grid.

Q) Whats wrong with Citadels camping gates?
A) Their invulnerability.

Q) After this change you'll be able to place a bubble at 499km and another at 501km and you'll land at the edge of the 499km bubble but be in the middle of the 501km bubble!
A) Yes. And you can do that now, just at 1000km. You can also do this using Interdictor bubbles (drop a 2nd as ships are landing on the edge), or a Heavy Interdictor fit with both a T1 and T2 bubble (keep the T1 up, put the T2 up as ships land).

Q) What about adding killmails for mobile bubbles, and/or adding an expiry timer for mobile bubbles?
A) I think these are pretty good ideas. CSM 10 also suggested the expiry timer. We'll see :)



CCP Larrikin,
I think your logic is a tad bit unsound.
Consider this, your argument in that a "Citadel is used to (Argument 1, 2) compared to me using a super or a carrier, with fighters/fighter bombers, having said fighters/fighter bombers, support fighters, in close proximity to the aforementioned much maligned bubble camp, with my capitals/supers 3k, 4k or even at max targeting range. Am I not just as "invulnerable" to anyone daring to enter said bubblecamp? Are they not just as dead as to someone actively manning a citadel? How about I use a Titan with the new DD's against a hostile force that comes in via the gates into a actively manned bubble camp? Are they not just as dead and me just as invulnerable? Able to GTFO at a moments notice?

Invulnerability is merely a matter of degrees and semantics, in a citadel, it may be days, in a Titan, it is counted in the DD cool down and possibly cap recharge time. In a carrier/super, its the time it takes to press warp when properly aligned out.

Any Ship, POS, Citadel with a pilot behind the guns, fighters, whatever form of offensive dps, is potentially capable of destroying a ship that gets caught in the bubble. it is simply a matter of degree as to to the size of the defender of said bubble versus the speed and size of the offender whom is in a space that is inherently not supposed to be safe.


#savethebubble

You are battling semantics where there are none.

A citadel is quite literally invulnerable between invul periods by design. Super carriers themselves, are not invulnerable.

There is literally an attribute or line of code that says "no you cannot damage this object".

It's not semantics, it's mechanics.



While you are correct in that there is a (paraphrasing) notification given that a citadel is invulnerable (visual clue by looking at it) The same occurs when you are stuck in a blob of bubbles x kilometers from a gate and you see a super in a system without a citadel 1000k off that same gate, with fighters not only in range, but poking holes in your ships arse, locking and engaging you many many times faster than the citadel can. The mechanics is the same, the super is invulnerable to your feeble attempts to do squat but die in a fire being that you cannot even lock it. (Mechanics)

#can't scout get outordieinafire
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#254 - 2016-08-05 03:31:30 UTC
Sootsia wrote:
Rowells wrote:
Sootsia wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Hey Space Friends,

To answer some of the questions asked in this thread so far >

Q) Why are you making this change?
A) Two reasons, first, you can use a citadel to camp a stop or pull bubble on a gate. Secondly, the current bubble mechanics are a little unintuitive. For example, a stop bubble (that is a bubble in-line before your warp destination) will only work at 1000km or less, while a pull bubble (that is a bubble in-line after your warp destination) will work at any range on grid.

Q) Whats wrong with Citadels camping gates?
A) Their invulnerability.

Q) After this change you'll be able to place a bubble at 499km and another at 501km and you'll land at the edge of the 499km bubble but be in the middle of the 501km bubble!
A) Yes. And you can do that now, just at 1000km. You can also do this using Interdictor bubbles (drop a 2nd as ships are landing on the edge), or a Heavy Interdictor fit with both a T1 and T2 bubble (keep the T1 up, put the T2 up as ships land).

Q) What about adding killmails for mobile bubbles, and/or adding an expiry timer for mobile bubbles?
A) I think these are pretty good ideas. CSM 10 also suggested the expiry timer. We'll see :)



CCP Larrikin,
I think your logic is a tad bit unsound.
Consider this, your argument in that a "Citadel is used to (Argument 1, 2) compared to me using a super or a carrier, with fighters/fighter bombers, having said fighters/fighter bombers, support fighters, in close proximity to the aforementioned much maligned bubble camp, with my capitals/supers 3k, 4k or even at max targeting range. Am I not just as "invulnerable" to anyone daring to enter said bubblecamp? Are they not just as dead as to someone actively manning a citadel? How about I use a Titan with the new DD's against a hostile force that comes in via the gates into a actively manned bubble camp? Are they not just as dead and me just as invulnerable? Able to GTFO at a moments notice?

Invulnerability is merely a matter of degrees and semantics, in a citadel, it may be days, in a Titan, it is counted in the DD cool down and possibly cap recharge time. In a carrier/super, its the time it takes to press warp when properly aligned out.

Any Ship, POS, Citadel with a pilot behind the guns, fighters, whatever form of offensive dps, is potentially capable of destroying a ship that gets caught in the bubble. it is simply a matter of degree as to to the size of the defender of said bubble versus the speed and size of the offender whom is in a space that is inherently not supposed to be safe.


#savethebubble

You are battling semantics where there are none.

A citadel is quite literally invulnerable between invul periods by design. Super carriers themselves, are not invulnerable.

There is literally an attribute or line of code that says "no you cannot damage this object".

It's not semantics, it's mechanics.



While you are correct in that there is a (paraphrasing) notification given that a citadel is invulnerable (visual clue by looking at it) The same occurs when you are stuck in a blob of bubbles x kilometers from a gate and you see a super in a system without a citadel 1000k off that same gate, with fighters not only in range, but poking holes in your ships arse, locking and engaging you many many times faster than the citadel can. The mechanics is the same, the super is invulnerable to your feeble attempts to do squat but die in a fire being that you cannot even lock it. (Mechanics)

#can't scout get outordieinafire

Improbable to harm != impossible to harm
ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#255 - 2016-08-05 13:02:16 UTC
I have removed a couple replies.
Quote:

23. Post constructively.

Negative feedback can be very useful to further improve EVE Online provided that it is presented in a civil and factual manner. All users are encouraged to honestly express their feelings regarding EVE Online and how it can be improved. Posts that are non-constructive, insulting or in breach of the rules will be deleted regardless of how valid the ideas behind them may be. Users are also reminded that posting with a lack of content also constitutes non-constructive posting.

ISD Decoy

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Cade Windstalker
#256 - 2016-08-05 15:14:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
Sootsia wrote:
CCP Larrikin,
I think your logic is a tad bit unsound.
Consider this, your argument in that a "Citadel is used to (Argument 1, 2) compared to me using a super or a carrier, with fighters/fighter bombers, having said fighters/fighter bombers, support fighters, in close proximity to the aforementioned much maligned bubble camp, with my capitals/supers 3k, 4k or even at max targeting range. Am I not just as "invulnerable" to anyone daring to enter said bubblecamp? Are they not just as dead as to someone actively manning a citadel? How about I use a Titan with the new DD's against a hostile force that comes in via the gates into a actively manned bubble camp? Are they not just as dead and me just as invulnerable? Able to GTFO at a moments notice?

Invulnerability is merely a matter of degrees and semantics, in a citadel, it may be days, in a Titan, it is counted in the DD cool down and possibly cap recharge time. In a carrier/super, its the time it takes to press warp when properly aligned out.

Any Ship, POS, Citadel with a pilot behind the guns, fighters, whatever form of offensive dps, is potentially capable of destroying a ship that gets caught in the bubble. it is simply a matter of degree as to to the size of the defender of said bubble versus the speed and size of the offender whom is in a space that is inherently not supposed to be safe.


#savethebubble


It's not that you're effectively invulnerable to people entering the camp, it's that you're literally invulnerable even if the thing entering the camp is Cyno-bait with the entire combined Super fleets of Eve on the other end of the phone line. If I drop a big fleet on your bubble camp at the very least I can eat your Fighters, even if you kill my bait ship, and come out more or less ahead of the game. I've also removed you from the bubble camp, either because you warped off or because I blew you up.

None of that works with a Citadel.

Invulnerability is not just "Degrees and semantics". If someone has mitigated their risk to the point that they're hard to kill then that's one thing. They're not actually invulnerable, and they're very vulnerable to being out-played. For example I could scan down your carrier, have a bubble up at his probable safe spot, nail him down and kill him with support. He's not invulnerable.

Citadels offer no such counterplay outside of a brief window each week. The Citadel is literally at no risk and in no danger, all other ways of manning a bubble camp are, at best, in theory at very little risk and all are vulnerable to counter play.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
As I said - This change is only valid for one thing, it would have been far easier to just remove Citadels from gates.
I can tell you what the next nerf will be - Carriers unable to sit near a Citadel with fighters deployed on a bubble 500K from a gate.

Because our Devs have no insight as to how people play the game, they are always going to be n the back foot - Fixing errors in their judgement of what players will do and how they will react.

NB; Any bubble 1000K "off grid" is going to do nothing - They must be ON GRID to be effective.

I don't have an issue with what devs are doing, I just don't see it as a complete fix. It is simple bandaid.


You were absolutely being insulting. You called the majority of forum users "narrow minded" and heavily implied that you were referring to me explicitly, and you also implied that you think I'm stupid with your first sentence, which was instantly dismissive of my entire previous response.

Nope, removing Citadels from gates means they have to figure out where to put them or how to reimburse them, gets into a lot of potential ways things could break, and is generally a much messier solution. Even just moving them off grid gets into questions of where to put them, since there are restrictions on how close Citadels can be to other Citadels.

The devs are, by definition and simple math, always going to be running behind the players playing catchup, becuase there are thousands of players trying to break the game and only a few hundred devs maintaining it. This is a fundamental truth in Eve or any other game, MMO or otherwise. You'll probably see the general sentiment passed around more frequently in Computer Security circles though, it doesn't mean the devs are bad or incompetent, it's just simple logic.

As for the issue of Carriers on a Citadel. That Carrier has to be vulnerable in order to threaten anyone, it has to give itself a weapons timer, and at the very least if nothing else its Fighters can be killed to the tune of tens of millions of ISK. That's a *far* better state for the game to be in than literally invulnerable Citadel camps.
Maenth
The Thirteen Provinces
#257 - 2016-08-05 18:26:36 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Kahanis Inkunen wrote:
The hard cap on bubble drag range makes the following possible: Anchor a t1 small bubble 499 km from a gate and a t2 large 501 km from the gate. When somebody warps to the gate they end up on the edge of a small bubble, deep inside the large.


This is also possible now :)


That doesn't mean it's good... it's actually weird to have such a hard edge of where it works and where it doesn't.

Drones. Drones are a means to an end. An end to the ruthless Caldari 'progress' machines. An end to the barbaric 'redemption' proposed by the Amarr. What they see as chaos shall be my perfect order, merely beyond their comprehension.

Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#258 - 2016-08-05 18:45:14 UTC
It also works anywhere within those 500km ;-)

Anchor a small bubble, anchor a larger one inside the first; and behold: targets will land at the edge of the small bubble [wicked grin]

PROFIT!



This is a good thing imho. Light ships often don't even land in the bubble and warp straight off unless you have an svinstapul handy.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#259 - 2016-08-06 01:37:41 UTC
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
It also works anywhere within those 500km ;-)

Anchor a small bubble, anchor a larger one inside the first; and behold: targets will land at the edge of the small bubble [wicked grin]

PROFIT!



This is a good thing imho. Light ships often don't even land in the bubble and warp straight off unless you have an svinstapul handy.

Or we could change bubbles to make them even more intuitive and not require such work arounds. But that would make people even more unhappy if they always landed in the middle of a bubble that was within 500km of their exit, even if it wasn't online. Even if it would be far more consistent and understandable.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#260 - 2016-08-06 01:52:47 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:

You were absolutely being insulting. You called the majority of forum users "narrow minded" and heavily implied that you were referring to me explicitly, and you also implied that you think I'm stupid with your first sentence, which was instantly dismissive of my entire previous response.

1; Nope, removing Citadels from gates means they have to figure out where to put them or how to reimburse them, gets into a lot of potential ways things could break, and is generally a much messier solution. Even just moving them off grid gets into questions of where to put them, since there are restrictions on how close Citadels can be to other Citadels.

2; The devs are, by definition and simple math, always going to be running behind the players playing catchup, becuase there are thousands of players trying to break the game and only a few hundred devs maintaining it. This is a fundamental truth in Eve or any other game, MMO or otherwise. You'll probably see the general sentiment passed around more frequently in Computer Security circles though, it doesn't mean the devs are bad or incompetent, it's just simple logic.

3; As for the issue of Carriers on a Citadel. That Carrier has to be vulnerable in order to threaten anyone, it has to give itself a weapons timer, and at the very least if nothing else its Fighters can be killed to the tune of tens of millions of ISK. That's a *far* better state for the game to be in than literally invulnerable Citadel camps.
Stating an opinion - A majority of those using these forums are narrow minded (me included, as my opinion is focused on my agenda) is not an insult to anyone, unless of course you think for some reason your special and a broad based comment was directed at you personally ( I assure you - It wasn't). I would be far more insulted if someone were to say I flip flop on my stance, therefore can have no valid opinion.

1; Where to put them? Anywhere that is not on a gate grid. Grids have a minimum size, can't anchor within X, really wouldn't be hard to do. As long as citadels remain invulnerable while using offensive weapons, they are risk free and should not be allowed to be used to "protect space".
Alternately, Devs could make Citadels vulnerable like everything else in Eve - You attack something you get a suspect, weapons or criminal timer. You want to put a Citadel on a gate and use it to kill things, that Citadel should be vulnerable to attack.
If Citadels can't be attacked when they are actively attacking - They should not be allowed to activate any offensive weapons.

Reimburse them? For what exactly?
Restrictions on placement? I don't know of any systems on TQ that are so small they would limit where one wants to place a structure - I know of at least one lowsec system that has 3 Medium Citadels, all within 2K of the same gate.

2; What does Computer security have to do with Devs not considering how players may use mechanics?
They wouldn't need to do as much "catchup" (nerfing, balancing, etc) if new additions to the game were tested properly and player ingenuity taken into consideration. Many Devs profess to actually play the game but seem to have little to no understanding of how the game is played (outside PL and NC. of course)

3; The carrier is all but invulnerable if it is engaging 500K from a bubble while sitting on a Citadel undock.. One minute is all it takes to get complete safety.
As for losing fighters being an example of "vulnerability" and "far better than..." - Your joking right?
Hauler lands in bubble, fighters kill hauler - No risk.
Small gang lands in bubble, carrier pilot assesses to much risk - Fighters don't engage but retreat to safe distance - Calculated risk
Something lands in bubble that may be able to kill 100 mil worth of fighters while getting killed - Small risk, still isk positive on killboard.

Something lands in bubble and begins to burn the 500K to the carrier - Pilot de-agresses and 60 seconds later becomes invulnerable.
-- - -- - -- - --
Bottom line of course is, the changes to bubble mechanics only affects a minority of the overall player base. So doesn't really deserve this much attention. Where as the same broken way in which Citadels can be used in lowsec has far wider implications for many more players, that Devs aren't interested in. You don't need bubbles to use Citadels to kill while remaining invulnerable to attack.

Citadel mechanics need an overhaul, not just a bandaid fix for nulsec - If it makes an offensive attack, it should become vulnerable to attack.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.