These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Discussion] - New POS system ( SAND CASTLES - Blackbuilt)

First post
Author
Vanessa Vansen
Vandeo
#61 - 2012-10-07 07:14:33 UTC
Some ideas are also collected in the following thread

How to improve a nomadic lifestyle
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2012-10-07 22:26:20 UTC
Vanessa Vansen wrote:
Some ideas are also collected in the following thread

How to improve a nomadic lifestyle


Good Ideas, they fit really well in this new Starbase system, especially with the Starbase jumpdrive building and the Cloaking array. These new Starbases would make the nomadic Lyfestyle a realy interesting way of life. assuming that all nomadic corps could jump their Starbase to a nice system and go on PVP and resources gathering in the region until they feel threatened or get tired. Then they would move to the new area.

An arriving corp could have a big delay time on the Station jump drive, so they would get more vulnerable on the arrival, making people think thice before jumping.

Also cyno jamming systems would prevent these POSES to get inside your SOV.

And if someone get in your system with a cloaked starbase, and you really want to start a conflict you would get a System Cloak jamer, that would show all cloaked Starbases and the things would get interesting.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#63 - 2012-10-31 14:33:31 UTC
The creativity here shows what players want to see.

This is not a simplistic arena game, where we have a highly limited cookie cutter set of choices to play with.
This is EVE. This is the legendary sandbox other MMOs are afraid to touch.

We know they are planning on changing POS design.

Modular approaches like this are logical, and user friendly on many levels.

We are losing shields, but gaining mobility.
We are not going to be locked into just orbiting a moon.

I think there is room for more than one approach to this, depending on how you choose to defend your POS.
(It moves, it cloaks, it has so many guns noone dares approach, etc...)

Even my own version which could be compared to a deadspace pocket, would work quite well with a practical building approach like this.


+10
Kollyn
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2012-11-12 05:51:59 UTC
I hope for Pos improvment also. But i can't read hat whole threat at this time..

Is there any officil info about in whih direction the cahnge will go and when it will be changed?

Something like a devblock or so?
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#65 - 2012-11-12 15:07:32 UTC
Kollyn wrote:
I hope for Pos improvment also. But i can't read hat whole threat at this time..

Is there any officil info about in whih direction the cahnge will go and when it will be changed?

Something like a devblock or so?


At the moment there is only some clues at the CSM Minutes, no official work on it yet. But we are all waiting for more information from CCP....

Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#66 - 2012-11-20 00:16:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Alx Warlord
Today, CSM published a message to CCP that had some content related to the pos issue, as they called:

Quote:
aging POS mechanic acting as a barrier to full enjoyment of EVE’s best content such as wormholes and hindering the full potential of the player driven economy.


The full text is here: http://evenews24.com/2012/11/19/and-now-a-message-from-the-council-of-stellar-management/

It also contains a whole section related to pos:

Quote:
Critical Issue: POSes
Issues Addressed: Need for incentives to live/work in dangerous space; Need for players to express themselves and create emotional attachment; Need for smaller-scale objectives to provoke and facilitate conflict; Need for proper security that allows new players to live in and explore the most dangerous areas of space; Need for modern management, permissions, and construction UI for player structures; Need for more tools for economic competition; Need to rebalance moon mineral use to decentralize strategic income and promote conflict.
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#67 - 2012-12-05 12:55:31 UTC
As the Retribution is finally deployed, lets hope for CCP to announce something related to the POS revamp Soon! or at last the Path that they want to follow... if they go with the CSM or they will pick an other path...
Shalua Rui
Rui Freelance Mining
#68 - 2012-12-05 13:29:47 UTC
Cool stuff... but it gives me that "oh gods, this game will never be finished" wibe... Blink

"ginger forum goddess, space gypsy and stone nibbler extraordinaire!" Shalua Rui - CEO and founder of Rui Freelance Mining (RFLM)

Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#69 - 2012-12-09 07:55:53 UTC
Would the jump drive capable pos be warp disruptable? Would make sense.

Would be cool if it could warp within system, too. A multi-player-controlled ship would certainly introduce new and interesting dynamics, and more reasons for supercapitals to be relevant.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 

Droidyk
Maniacal Miners INC
#70 - 2012-12-09 09:05:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Droidyk
Shalua Rui wrote:
Cool stuff... but it gives me that "oh gods, this game will never be finished" wibe... Blink

Yeah Big smile, well they said it themselfs too, by adding new features they are just opening things that already exist in the EVE Universe. So there's so many things they could open that its just impossible to finish it. Its like you would like to copy a real world.
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#71 - 2012-12-09 12:22:30 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Would the jump drive capable pos be warp disruptable? Would make sense.

Would be cool if it could warp within system, too. A multi-player-controlled ship would certainly introduce new and interesting dynamics, and more reasons for supercapitals to be relevant.


This is very interesting! This putts another layer of fun to the game, and mostly allow for the jump drive to have a short dellay between jumps, and the possibility to use it to "escape" with the POS, unless tackled. So the defenders would try to kill the tackler, while the attacker would try to kill the defenses and keep the POS pinned down...

CCP Fozzie talked in other tread about the possibility to create ships that can't warp, these would be great addition to the deffensive system of the POS... whille there would be 1 player for Battle station, there would also be inexpensive defensive ships for the POS defense...

This would be allot of fun... Way better then the current bash the way it is now...
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#72 - 2012-12-14 15:33:12 UTC
I found that the POS revamp could also be the solution for other big issue, the corp management issues :

Quote:
The Corporation item management issue

As did with orca

It is impossible to do things globally, as everyone admins stuff in its own way. So Split It !
The management is NOT a tree anyway, it is a WEB!
Remember that a NASA janitor have acess to places that not even the president have....

And the biggest problems in the Corp management is ITEM management.
so:

REVAMP POS: it is the biggest problem for the inventory, now we have many structures with (many x allot) tabs spread among them... we should make it simple. 1 dockable structure with 1 x N tabs...

Then every Station and POS should have an local and single Corporation Hangar with no tabs. and IN THERE the corp manager could place Secured Station Container.

REVAMP CONTAINERS: Every Secured container should have a list of players that can open it. You should also be able to select grup of chars. (Lets says that you corp are split into "vets" and "noobs" so there would be a simple UI where you could sellect who goes to what group) and then in the can you could do: permission> corp> vets > yes and then permission>corp> noobs> no. And all problems are solved.

Then allow the corp CEO and who he really trust to have remote acess to the containers security UI.

And almost All problems solved.


But there is also the POS management roles!!

Easy, give the POS a Owner, a player that will keep the POS. and he can manage the pos Building UI and Fuel. He can give individual permission to others to acess the tabs. If the owner is the corp. then the CEO have the ownership of the POS.
lisa 8
hirr
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#73 - 2012-12-24 17:34:47 UTC  |  Edited by: lisa 8
1. i'd like to see a option for individuals to be able to control a POS rather than a corp, after all they are called Player Owned Structures, not Corp Owned Structures.
2. I'd like to see as mentioned at fanfest the ability introduced to be able to hack offline POS's or at the very least a Offline POS have its resistances and HP halved.
Now thats outa the way;
I think the re-working of Sov mechanics & the issue of moon goo/ ring mining has to be done first. Before we go too far down the track of reworking & defining what we want from a POS. Only then will you have a clear idea of what role POS's are to serve & hence what functionality is really needed from them.
I also have concerns with POS's being given jump abiltiy, for the following reasons:
You dont want POS's to be come the new fleet warfare , where by Hostile upgraded POS "A" lands next to not upgraded friendly Pos "B" and subsequently is used to attack and reinforce/destroy it, without any requirement for a fleet/ fleet fight of some type to be used to achieve the result.
If ring mining is introduced, you dont want a POS to be able to land next to a ring and have harvetors used to extrac the goo/moon minerals either.
Im not against POS's being given the jump ability, just that you dont want to put the cart before the horse and have to live with the consequenses down the track. Which in other words is like CCP saying; we will bring in this u beaut thing in and years later we are still waiting on fixes for problems, which should have been thought of first.
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#74 - 2013-01-16 13:18:33 UTC
lisa 8 wrote:

2. I'd like to see as mentioned at fanfest the ability introduced to be able to hack offline POS's or at the very least a Offline POS have its resistances and HP halved.

Maybe could be some interaction with dust in this... sending a mercenary group to invade and capture/destroy/stell assets from a POS from inside


lisa 8 wrote:

I also have concerns with POS's being given jump abiltiy, for the following reasons:
You dont want POS's to be come the new fleet warfare , where by Hostile upgraded POS "A" lands next to not upgraded friendly Pos "B" and subsequently is used to attack and reinforce/destroy it, without any requirement for a fleet/ fleet fight of some type to be used to achieve the result.
If ring mining is introduced, you dont want a POS to be able to land next to a ring and have harvetors used to extrac the goo/moon minerals either.
Im not against POS's being given the jump ability, just that you dont want to put the cart before the horse and have to live with the consequenses down the track. Which in other words is like CCP saying; we will bring in this u beaut thing in and years later we are still waiting on fixes for problems, which should have been thought of first.


That is why CCP should first revamp the system and then slowly introduce the new structures. Also to jump the POS there should be a new kind of cyno, that have restrictions on where to activate.... It can easily be balanced this way.
Roime
Shiva Furnace
#75 - 2013-01-16 13:50:30 UTC
Fully supported!

Being able to build sandcastles in the stars would be one of the best additions to the game.

Humans have always built monuments, cathedrals, palaces and castles. While many serve functional purposes, they are built to impress. Things to be proud over. The very opposite of mass-produced sticks and bubbles, who are just disposable tools.

Emotional value. It's huge, and unfortunately neglected aspect of EVE as a whole, and I'd love to see it come to starbases and other structures as well as ships. "We built this, and it looks better than yours".

Corp logos on the poses and ships <3

.

Octoven
Noir Holdings
#76 - 2013-01-16 14:07:11 UTC
Im not too much of a fan of the T3 approach. Even with dozens of subsystems and modules, you still have a limited approach to visual customization. I want the ability to shape my structure into a doughnut, sphere, cube, triangle, or countless others. T3 mods are attached directly and would limit that design to a single superstructure directly connected to each other.

However, I do like the jump drive capability. Although I don't use jump drives that often, the idea of a nomadic pirate base seems appealing lol. The ability to launch a station core should be on a personal, corp, or alliance level irregardless of the size of the core. As it stands, most large control towers fuel cost can be paid by a single player. If a player wishes to foot the bill for a large structure...let him. If an Alliance wants to share the fuel cost of a smaller structure...let them. This is EVE where the possibilities is only limited by how much you play and how far your willing to go.

The cloaking array seems like a nice way of hiding your structure. I wander though would the trade off for such an array mean significantly higher fuel cost or would it just take up more CPU/Powergrid?
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#77 - 2013-01-16 15:06:59 UTC
Octoven wrote:
Im not too much of a fan of the T3 approach. Even with dozens of subsystems and modules, you still have a limited approach to visual customization. I want the ability to shape my structure into a doughnut, sphere, cube, triangle, or countless others. T3 mods are attached directly and would limit that design to a single superstructure directly connected to each other.


That is the main point of this topic... It would be really a shame If CCP goes for the T3 like POS... despite the fact that the T3 POS is better then the actual system... it lacks the freedom that everyone wants... People wants to Build, not to assembly....

Probably the T3 Like POS would end up having some standards builds that everyone uses... and things will get as boring as today...

also, thx everyone for the suport! I hope some Dev end up looking at this tread and get inspired to do it.
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#78 - 2013-01-16 21:21:10 UTC
The last CSM minnutes just got released:

Quote:

Unifex stated that what CCP did was spend effort and prototype what would make a good POS system. It would, however, only affect the group of people who manage POSes. Focusing that amount of time and effort on some small singular aspect of the game and delivering only that “is what will kill the business”.

The atmosphere was notably tense at the point.
Octoven
Noir Holdings
#79 - 2013-01-16 21:41:48 UTC
The T3 approach is better than the current system but yes, adjusting to that type of system would dramatically hinder the freedom of personalized starbases. CCP said they want players to make this structure their own; however, they should stick to the ideas put forth in the CSM meeting last summer. I like the idea of having centralized cores with attachable module blocks to place anywhere you want. The whole idea of the high, med, low slot equivalents are a bit redundant in my opinion. The structure will only support what the CPU/grid allows it to.

One other thought is that it was suggested that perhaps multiple starbases could be anchored on the same grid and could share power and cpu with each other. At first glance one may see this as a means of getting around the limitation of cpu and grid for modules. However, if you are compounding starbases on the same grid to essentially create cities and it becomes harder to take them down, then it makes the take down more gratifying in the end. :)

Part of what makes ships so predictable is knowing their fittings, if CCP took a T3 approach then it will be easy to determine a starbases' strengths and weaknesses without even attacking and testing those defenses. I like the mystery of an unlimited number of variable rather than just 20-30.
Celly Smunt
Neutin Local LLC
#80 - 2013-01-17 00:19:46 UTC
OK, too many great Ideas and suggestions and changes/tweaks here and there in this thread..
so let me just say this.

"I like this idea and agree that some restrictions should be placed on certain items, (IE. no capital modules in High Sec except to build freighters and orcas, ect ect) I see needing skills for a new POS an ok trade off for being able to build your own palace, and I think the over all idea of changing them from a stick in space to something more appealing to the eye would be awesome especially if there were added features as well"

Can we have our own bar there on the edge and make it publicly accessible?, have a parking lot where our patrons could dock to watch the show, or grab a drink?

so much potential there if it all doesn't end up being a coding nightmare for the devs...

o/
Celly



Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.