These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Making Modules/Rigs dictate Citadel/Engineering structures Timers?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Fifty Three
Doomheim
#1 - 2017-06-14 06:27:23 UTC
If someone wants more production, by not installing the invulnerability modules/Rigs on Citadels/Engineering Complexes,,then they will not have the Armour/Structure timers at all.

Module versions, of both Armour/Structure will give the highest timers, while Rig versions will be about half that.

-Only 1 of each type can be installed, whether Rig or Module on a Citadel/Engineering Complex
- The new rigs will be Structure+Armour invulnerability shield
- New Modules will be Structure+Armour invulnerability shield

The best, Module versions, will be modeled off the current system of timers already in the game.
The Rig versions, will be half the current timer period that is in the Eve universe.

Note: To encourage more people to take risk, then perhaps increase the efficiency of any Citadel/Engineering complex with equal proportions base off the Armour+Structure Invulnerability shield Rig and/or Module installed. i.e. If it is a mixture of 1 module for invulnerability(either Armour or structure)+1 Rig for(either Armour or Structure), then they will get a bit of bonus with fuel efficiency etc. and other role bonuses, since the Rig version is not the absolutely best.

... IF someone install both Modules versions, then the citadel/Engineering complex will be normal, like how it is now in the game.

So win for Production, so on for the owner, and for those who want to attack the place, because they could just take it down in 1 go,IF the owner did not install module(s) and/or Rig(s) for timer invulnerability shield to protect the Armour+Structure of the Citadel/Engineering Complex.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#2 - 2017-06-14 06:49:46 UTC
Oh look, lets repeat the idea mentioned in about five threads in the last week, and show how much we don't understand why timers exist and why they are part of the structure.
Do Little
Bluenose Trading
#3 - 2017-06-14 08:26:01 UTC
Upwell structures were designed, in part to replace completely indestructible stations. How do you encourage players to move their characters and their assets to a structure that can be destroyed? People need to feel safe even though they aren't safe and I think CCP has accomplished that rather well.

Citadels are easily destroyed - in highsec many, if not most, are completely undefended but it is a lot of work for little reward. People aren't going to do it for LOLs - there needs to be a strategic objective and that's a good thing!
Fifty Three
Doomheim
#4 - 2017-06-14 08:34:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Fifty Three
On a somewhat similar note, I proposed having players make their own Citadels/Engineering complexes which have no invulnerability timers and they will cost less than their counterparts. Same bonuses, everything(all classes from small to extra large etc.), perhaps can be unanchored/undeployed under 30 minutes to move.

- They will have less structural strength/Armour/Shield than their counterparts
-Still can fit all modules of their counterparts
-Perhaps automatic fire, if weapons installed.
-Cost a bit less
Rhaegon Aesir
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2017-06-14 08:50:10 UTC
You forgot to write "To: The Developers:" in your post title. Now they'll never see your idea!

In all seriousness though timers exist for a reason. I can maybe get on board with the first timer being whenever and the following timers set by the defenders, like POCOS are. But all this idea means is that structure spammers have to spend a little more isk, and the structures that people actually live in will be less protected than the ones that nobody lives in.
Do Little
Bluenose Trading
#6 - 2017-06-14 12:00:31 UTC
As I've said before, I miss the portability, flexibility and economy of my small POS. But, the world changed and, to be honest, that's what I like best about Eve, it forces us to adapt.

During the structure presentation at Fanfest, CCP Fozzie mentioned small Upwell structures that didn't allow docking. No specifics, definitely not on the public roadmap, but not completely off the table either. During the same presentation CCP Nagual mentioned that structures might be a bit too defensive a couple of times. So - things may change again, don't get too comfortable in whatever rut you're currently occupying!
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#7 - 2017-06-14 16:32:12 UTC
Rhaegon Aesir wrote:
You forgot to write "To: The Developers:" in your post title


Totally threw me off too.


On topic:
1) Why?
2) This change would only benefit the massive groups with a significant presence in all timezones (who could defend their assets without timers). They need less benefit, not more.
Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries
VOID Intergalactic Forces
#8 - 2017-06-15 10:33:09 UTC
Do Little wrote:
Upwell structures were designed, in part to replace completely indestructible stations. How do you encourage players to move their characters and their assets to a structure that can be destroyed? People need to feel safe even though they aren't safe and I think CCP has accomplished that rather well.

Citadels are easily destroyed - in highsec many, if not most, are completely undefended but it is a lot of work for little reward. People aren't going to do it for LOLs - there needs to be a strategic objective and that's a good thing!


what is the reward for killing a cit? tears? after the first timer or so its hard for people to have interest a week later and stop the auto repair timer that should the only thing be repairing is the shields, players should still have to come out and rep the armor/hull unless the citadels get special rep modules.

Also how are people not safe, you don't die in the citadel if it pops, and all of your stuff gets locked up for free, not like you have to pay a fee.

"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith