These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Phoebe] HP/Resists Tweaks for Sov Structures and Station Services

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#61 - 2014-10-10 04:08:45 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
This change would be even better if you removed structure notification mails. Regardless of what others will reply to this suggest, I really would like a CCP reply on the topic and everyone would be highly interested in what you have to say about them.

Please don't disappoint us.

and reinforcement timers. so we can complexly avoid fights. *double facepalm*

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
Anthar Thebess
#62 - 2014-10-10 06:27:11 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
This change would be even better if you removed structure notification mails. Regardless of what others will reply to this suggest, I really would like a CCP reply on the topic and everyone would be highly interested in what you have to say about them.

Please don't disappoint us.

This is good idea, currently there is to much out of game apps managing this.

They also could come distributed.

For example , lets create deployable.
"Communications Scrambler"
- 4h lifetime
- unable to scope
- around 20mil in materials
- you can drop more than 1 ( just to give possibility of keeping communications scrambled)

This structure can be deployed in system, only on Sun ( warp to 0)
If this structure is active in the system.
No emails about :
- new towers
- any attack
- sbu

is sent.
If this structure dies and there is not any new in the system - warning emails will be generated.
This will put very nice "meta" into the game.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Il Feytid
State War Academy
Caldari State
#63 - 2014-10-10 08:00:41 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
This change would be even better if you removed structure notification mails. Regardless of what others will reply to this suggest, I really would like a CCP reply on the topic and everyone would be highly interested in what you have to say about them.

Please don't disappoint us.

and reinforcement timers. so we can complexly avoid fights. *double facepalm*

Why is so many people trying to put words in my mouth? Why do you do this? I happen to think reinforcement timers is needed in the game. So would you please openly apologize to me in this very forum and promise to stop saying twisting the truth and outright lying about things?
Il Feytid
State War Academy
Caldari State
#64 - 2014-10-10 08:04:19 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
This change would be even better if you removed structure notification mails. Regardless of what others will reply to this suggest, I really would like a CCP reply on the topic and everyone would be highly interested in what you have to say about them.

Please don't disappoint us.

This is good idea, currently there is to much out of game apps managing this.

They also could come distributed.

For example , lets create deployable.
"Communications Scrambler"
- 4h lifetime
- unable to scope
- around 20mil in materials
- you can drop more than 1 ( just to give possibility of keeping communications scrambled)

This structure can be deployed in system, only on Sun ( warp to 0)
If this structure is active in the system.
No emails about :
- new towers
- any attack
- sbu

is sent.
If this structure dies and there is not any new in the system - warning emails will be generated.
This will put very nice "meta" into the game.


I think that is really unnecessary. The removal of structure notifications will do just fine. No need to add some arbitrary hoop to jump through. Besides, if you have an object that can be at only one place in the system; all a defender has to do is just check the sun instead actually check on the assets at risk which could easily be more than just one per system.

Again, no structure notifications will work just fine.*

*I have no problem with the low on fuel POS notification.
Anthar Thebess
#65 - 2014-10-10 08:56:02 UTC
I agree, that this module is worst solution than removing all notifications , but on the other hand.
If you have sov, and someone attack your ihub / stations etc then some event should be raised.
This way we can provide some very important meta game to prevent abusing API notifications.
4h to short?
14 hours then.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#66 - 2014-10-10 09:45:58 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. One of the many smaller changes we have planned for Phoebe is a rebalance of the HP and resists of Sov Structures and Station Services.

In the medium-long term we are still committed to the idea that HP based objectives are a suboptimal way to swap control of sov infrastructure, but until we can transition to a new capture mechanism we want to reduce the amount of time that is needed for both shooting and repairing these objectives.

These changes are intended to go alongside the big changes coming to capital ship movement coming in Phoebe, which make large supercarrier fleets less convenient for grinding structure HP.

These changes are live on SISI now.

Station Services: (-66% EHP)
-83% Shield HP
+50% shield resists

IHUBs and Stations: (-50% EHP)
-60% Shield and Armor HP
-50% Hull HP
+20% Shield and Armor Resists

SBUs: (-50% EHP)
-50% Shield, Armor and Hull HP

Let us know what you think!



Hey fozzie. Have you guys, in your discussions given any thought on smaller targets .. or more limited impact that can be disabled by a smaller, more tactical group like a roaming gang? Not enough to cripple the sov holder, but things that can be fired by a smaller gang if they are not coutnered, to give an incentive for the people to undock and go DEFEND their space?

Somethign like that could increase a lot the number of small scale engagements that everybodylieks so much. Nowadays there is no reason for a defense form up to hunt a roaming fleet. Most alliances just dock their ratters and ignore it.



My personal suggestion. Make same type of changes to jump bridges ( way less EHAP but with more resistance to make it easier to repair later). ANd maybe move the moon mining pos modules to outside the shield for same effect.

What we need is not only work on the strategic level of combat. 0.0 Has been very very poor for reasons for peopel to engage in tactical level scenarios.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#67 - 2014-10-10 09:49:23 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
This change would be even better if you removed structure notification mails*. Regardless of what others will reply to this suggest, I really would like a CCP reply on the topic and everyone would be highly interested in what you have to say about them.

Please don't disappoint us.

*this includes notifications or anything to find out such things via the API



That I completely agree. And not only those notifications. Right now there is no need to have presence on a region, because if anythign visits you and tries to make damage you get a nice magical notification..

Notifications just ensure that there is no need for scrambling against ships detected in your territory. Notifications are bad for the health of small scale engagements.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#68 - 2014-10-10 09:51:48 UTC
Gevlon Goblin wrote:
I don't think decreasing srtucture EHP is a good idea (though adding resist and decreasing HP is good idea for repping them). The problem is that currently there are two roles of supers: grinding structures and hotdropping capitals. Jump nerfs take the second. The first is unaffected as you have time to prepare a regional invasion. With the EHP nerf, grinding structures in subcaps will be less of a problem so using supers can become completely redundant.

Have you considered that after these changes, why would anyone have a super? I mean, what is the designated role of them?



For staters they are TOOO powerful and the defining force right now. They will still have the same anti capital deterrent power, no jump nerfign will not take that from them. They will jsut have to commit to a front in a war for example.

They are and still will be so powerfull that they will continue to represent 3/4 of the power of the superblocs.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#69 - 2014-10-10 09:53:04 UTC
XavierVE wrote:
-50% EHP to SBU'S! YES! Resists instead of raw buffer HP to stations and i-hubs!

Holy ****, you guys are on a roll today.



Funny. I suggested that DOZEN times in the last 5 years, and every time the community attacked me as if that was the most idiotic Idea ever. Strange how the community clearly have no capability of analyse ideas for their own.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Sigras
Conglomo
#70 - 2014-10-10 09:53:07 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
Anthar Thebess wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
This change would be even better if you removed structure notification mails. Regardless of what others will reply to this suggest, I really would like a CCP reply on the topic and everyone would be highly interested in what you have to say about them.

Please don't disappoint us.

This is good idea, currently there is to much out of game apps managing this.

They also could come distributed.

For example , lets create deployable.
"Communications Scrambler"
- 4h lifetime
- unable to scope
- around 20mil in materials
- you can drop more than 1 ( just to give possibility of keeping communications scrambled)

This structure can be deployed in system, only on Sun ( warp to 0)
If this structure is active in the system.
No emails about :
- new towers
- any attack
- sbu

is sent.
If this structure dies and there is not any new in the system - warning emails will be generated.
This will put very nice "meta" into the game.

I think that is really unnecessary. The removal of structure notifications will do just fine. No need to add some arbitrary hoop to jump through. Besides, if you have an object that can be at only one place in the system; all a defender has to do is just check the sun instead actually check on the assets at risk which could easily be more than just one per system.

Again, no structure notifications will work just fine.*

*I have no problem with the low on fuel POS notification.

reinforcement timers are shown system wide anyway... you would only need to enter system to see them.

That said, the more I think about this idea the more I like it... I would exempt POSs from this change, they dont have anything to do with sov, and they're used in low sec. There are plenty of towers being managed in low sec but the owners dont necessarily want to live there.

Sov is a different story though. If you cant be asked to check on your systems once a day then you arent really using them and shouldnt have them.
Whisperen
Resilience.
The Initiative.
#71 - 2014-10-10 09:58:39 UTC
What about Jump bridges, cyno beacons and cyno jammers? What about TCU's?
Sigras
Conglomo
#72 - 2014-10-10 10:01:59 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
XavierVE wrote:
-50% EHP to SBU'S! YES! Resists instead of raw buffer HP to stations and i-hubs!

Holy ****, you guys are on a roll today.



Funny. I suggested that DOZEN times in the last 5 years, and every time the community attacked me as if that was the most idiotic Idea ever. Strange how the community clearly have no capability of analyse ideas for their own.

Boy do i know what you mean...
Mattpat139 Sukarala
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#73 - 2014-10-10 10:14:48 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. One of the many smaller changes we have planned for Phoebe is a rebalance of the HP and resists of Sov Structures and Station Services.

In the medium-long term we are still committed to the idea that HP based objectives are a suboptimal way to swap control of sov infrastructure, but until we can transition to a new capture mechanism we want to reduce the amount of time that is needed for both shooting and repairing these objectives.

These changes are intended to go alongside the big changes coming to capital ship movement coming in Phoebe, which make large supercarrier fleets less convenient for grinding structure HP.

These changes are live on SISI now.

Station Services: (-66% EHP)
-83% Shield HP
+50% shield resists

IHUBs and Stations: (-50% EHP)
-60% Shield and Armor HP
-50% Hull HP
+20% Shield and Armor Resists

SBUs: (-50% EHP)
-50% Shield, Armor and Hull HP

Let us know what you think!



Does any of this affect FW I-hubs?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5376912#post5376912
Anthar Thebess
#74 - 2014-10-10 10:20:56 UTC
Sigras wrote:


That said, the more I think about this idea the more I like it... I would exempt POSs from this change, they don't have anything to do with sov, and they're used in low sec. There are plenty of towers being managed in low sec but the owners don't necessarily want to live there.


Towers have big impact on sov, and whole point in removing or blocking this communicators is to force you live where you have assets.

In case of towers this can be very hard to change , as when you think about this you have many ways to detect that something is going on, as api provides information about :
- fuel left
- stront
- silo state.

Still disabling all attack notifications for towers could be good.
Even if you will be able to detect that tower is in RF , you will not know about this asap.

All SOV related notifications must go.
- sbu placement
- ihub/sbu attacked
- etc.

This will scale down nicely ability to manage AFK large amount of assets.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#75 - 2014-10-10 11:44:57 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
Sigras wrote:


That said, the more I think about this idea the more I like it... I would exempt POSs from this change, they don't have anything to do with sov, and they're used in low sec. There are plenty of towers being managed in low sec but the owners don't necessarily want to live there.


Towers have big impact on sov, and whole point in removing or blocking this communicators is to force you live where you have assets.

In case of towers this can be very hard to change , as when you think about this you have many ways to detect that something is going on, as api provides information about :
- fuel left
- stront
- silo state.

Still disabling all attack notifications for towers could be good.
Even if you will be able to detect that tower is in RF , you will not know about this asap.

All SOV related notifications must go.
- sbu placement
- ihub/sbu attacked
- etc.

This will scale down nicely ability to manage AFK large amount of assets.


Also the API must be nerfed so siphoons cannot be magically auto detected.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Anthar Thebess
#76 - 2014-10-10 11:53:29 UTC
Haven't this multi silo issue was not fixed?
Detecting/not detecting issue will not be issue when jump ranges will be nerfed.

Unless you want to pump all your towers in scimitars.
Remember that currently blobs controlled r64/r32 moons so easily as they could drop capital bloob every where extremely fast.
Tower 25LY away from staging ... this is just 1 midpoint.
Now it will be a bit more.

But lets get back to structures them self.
Stuff that i would like to see modified :
- jump bridges / cyno generators
( cyno jammers will be gone , unless CCP will reduce their maintenance cost. )

Next thing that also should need adjustment is Super Capital EHP.
They are not structures , but when we are talking about adjusting EHP of structures should not we do the supers at the same time?

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Solaris Vex
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#77 - 2014-10-10 11:53:58 UTC
Death to structure shooting.

Instead I propose a new module.

Station Hacking device

Requires;
1 Highslot
1 PG
1 CPU
electronic warfare III
max 1 per ship
150km range

Upon activation starts an 8 hour capture timer, if the device is interrupted for any reason (warping off, ecm/damps) the timer resets. At the end of the timer the station and system flips to the hackers corp. Hacking devices do not stack.


Also;
IHUB upgrades can now be equipped on stations
Remove IHUBs, TCUs, and SBUs.

Enjoy the chaos.
Anthar Thebess
#78 - 2014-10-10 12:02:34 UTC
Solaris Vex wrote:
Death to structure shooting.

Instead I propose a new module.

Station Hacking device

Requires;
1 Highslot
1 PG
1 CPU
electronic warfare III
max 1 per ship
150km range

Upon activation starts an 8 hour capture timer, if the device is interrupted for any reason (warping off, ecm/damps) the timer resets. At the end of the timer the station and system flips to the hackers corp. Hacking devices do not stack.


Also;
IHUB upgrades can now be equipped on stations
Remove IHUBs, TCUs, and SBUs.

Enjoy the chaos.


So you want to move all sov conquest to a ships.
Ships that , unless are titans or supers , have very small ehp - and they can be killed very easily?

Or do you want 1 overtanked tech 3 cruiser on undock , being pumped for 8h by 300 man logistic fleet ?

Bad idea.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Solaris Vex
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#79 - 2014-10-10 12:12:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Solaris Vex
Anthar Thebess wrote:
Solaris Vex wrote:
Death to structure shooting.

Instead I propose a new module.

Station Hacking device

Requires;
1 Highslot
1 PG
1 CPU
electronic warfare III
max 1 per ship
150km range

Upon activation starts an 8 hour capture timer, if the device is interrupted for any reason (warping off, ecm/damps) the timer resets. At the end of the timer the station and system flips to the hackers corp. Hacking devices do not stack.


Also;
IHUB upgrades can now be equipped on stations
Remove IHUBs, TCUs, and SBUs.

Enjoy the chaos.


So you want to move all sov conquest to a ships.
Ships that , unless are titans or supers , have very small ehp - and they can be killed very easily?

Or do you want 1 overtanked tech 3 cruiser on undock , being pumped for 8h by 300 man logistic fleet ?

Bad idea.

If people have to stay on grid it will create fights.

Also logistics need to be nerfed, but thats a separate issue.
Anthar Thebess
#80 - 2014-10-10 12:53:03 UTC
Yes but you want 8h
This is to shoort and to long.

To short?
People sleep and work.
So you can do it when they are taking care important stuff ( aka RL)

To long.
You want 1 person for 8h to sit in front of computer ? ( how old are you? Roll )

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!