These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Back Into the Structure

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Banko Mato
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#501 - 2015-03-24 19:12:23 UTC
Oma Lorche wrote:
I wouldn't like Idea of keeping assembly arrays separate from research laboratories. Especially now when BPs have to be on hangar floor. I understand that it would add risk to owners of multi-billion worth BPOs. But for us small scale industrialists its daily hassle of moving dozens of t2 BPCs.


Hm, a solution would be to allow structures to share storage or at least route production outputs from one structure to another. Might for example require another low or mid slot "module" fittet, that then acts as transfer point. This way you can set up a dedicated invention structure next to a dedicated manufacturing platform (same grid or reasonably close?) and have all the invented T2 BPC2 automatically moved over. Thoughts on that?
Joey DavidDrien
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#502 - 2015-03-24 19:14:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Joey DavidDrien
Lelira Cirim wrote:
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Can someone explain me what is the idea behind datacores magically emerge in those new structures? Cores can be found in exploration sites (datas) as far i can see it will end in even less profit after this proposal. Constant changes to loot value in exploration, after another, half of sites will be just covering in dust. What the point of keeping useless content in game? You can't rid of NPC activity completely. NPC empires are not lead by players and i hope they'll never be.

Speaking purely from a lore standpoint, datacores are a "generated" item through research agents. When they're not working for capsuleers assumedly they (and many more planetside) work for the empires. One assumes that they end up as exploration loot from being leftover by pirate faction researchers. It makes lore sense that capsuleers could now purchase facilities capable of manufacturing datacores, and download the same information into them.

It is a case of giving capsuleers access to the same tools as NPCs, which is very much in line with the storyline goals of power shift, and I think your concerns are unfounded. I have a highsec toon working with 4 research agents at literally zero cost to me aside from the skill(book) requirements. This feature is about self-sufficiency, and will come with a cost that my toon doesn't spend.

Off topic, exploration loot tables can be changed at the snap of a finger, once the decision is made that loot there is no longer valuable enough. I wouldn't worry about one specific item type becoming no more valuable than metal scraps. CCP can do whatever it wants to make loot tables a particular value for explorers, generally it's all very boring stuff except for BPCs, and they could work harder to choose more interesting loot.

-edit yay 500!


Totally agree.
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#503 - 2015-03-24 20:29:34 UTC
While i like the concepts. I do have a major problem with your vision/delivery balance which i can paraphrase as;

'We want a system that is simple, accessible to everyone, effective, almost revolutionary and fun to use! To achieve this we have striven towards previously unseen levels of convolution and complication.'

Perhaps you are not explaining yourselves very well.
RainReaper
RRN Industries
#504 - 2015-03-24 21:22:10 UTC
Falin Whalen wrote:
The Tallman wrote:
Anonymous Forumposter wrote:
John McCreedy wrote:
It's a common theme lately with them isn't it? Want to defend sov? Full time job. Want to defend your structures? Full time job. Want to defend your space? Full time job. Strangely enough, CCP, most of us already have full time jobs and those pay us real life money which we use to be your customers with. When we log on we want to play. We don't want to spend hours traveling or days sitting on our arses defending stuff, we want to mine or rat or blap stuff in the hour or two we have each evening.


So do that then. No one is forcing you to hold high level assets.


A POS isn't a high level asset.

Anyway, CCP will feel it in their wallets if they screw this up and end up making owning/living in a POS a pain in the ass.

A POS already is a PITA to own/live in, yet people are still subbed. Although the ones operating POS are a certain breed of masochist but whatever.


i dread the moments when i have to take a pos down or set one up. my whole day is gone once im finished. sadly i have to deal with it if i move home.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#505 - 2015-03-24 21:28:09 UTC
Please tell me that whoever made the borderline criminal suggestion of NPC haulers was taken out to the back end of wormhole space, podded repeatedly by the rest of the team and then left to walk back to Iceland. The people who have been asking for that ridiculous "feature" are the same Eve-haters who said that "griefers" were driving off newbies.

Ned Thomas wrote:
EDIT: I am most curious how frozen corpses will be tied into advertising.


Corpses should be the power supply, using 1 every x time interval. You want a board you have to kill people. Failing that, you can buy bodies off other people, which would *ahem* breath life into the corpse market.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Maenth
The Thirteen Provinces
#506 - 2015-03-24 21:29:17 UTC
Banko Mato wrote:
Oma Lorche wrote:
I wouldn't like Idea of keeping assembly arrays separate from research laboratories. Especially now when BPs have to be on hangar floor. I understand that it would add risk to owners of multi-billion worth BPOs. But for us small scale industrialists its daily hassle of moving dozens of t2 BPCs.


Hm, a solution would be to allow structures to share storage or at least route production outputs from one structure to another. Might for example require another low or mid slot "module" fittet, that then acts as transfer point. This way you can set up a dedicated invention structure next to a dedicated manufacturing platform (same grid or reasonably close?) and have all the invented T2 BPC2 automatically moved over. Thoughts on that?


Near the beginning they said (roughly) that they should be able to do anything, but give bonuses to the types of activities related to their nature. So, Assembly Arrays should be able to fit a science module, but that 'pos' won't have any bonuses to research beyond what the module does on its own.

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.
Sky Cloud Austrene
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#507 - 2015-03-24 21:30:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Sky Cloud Austrene
Not sure, if the Dev's just skimmed or ignored the first 12 or so pages of this thread because there is very little reply to points raised, by people in them.

I still don't see answers to these 3 questions;

1) I imagine these structures would still be required to have some sort of HP system tied to them, in order to be able to guage damage so they can be destroyed and also, so the defenders can repair them if they rebuff an attack.
How would this work and how will it be different from a structure grind?

And

2) Under the current Corp Mechanics, corp members are limited in their ablity to operate/manage structures via the grantable role system, Will this be changed, in order to allow for individuals to be able operate/manage these new structures with out having to be in a corp?.

And

3) Why can't assets in destroyed stations just be transfered to an NPC station, in order to protect players who only play casually, instead of daily ? How will you avoid people exploiting the proposed jettison can system by utilising the hell camp senario ?
I cant see any way you could reasonably stop that, given if, by chance the first time someone warps to a can to retrieve their stuff, & they get scanned down, bingo hostiles bookmark it & they then know where exactly to camp & wait for the person trying to get their stuff to come back, before not only killing them but also their stuff.
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#508 - 2015-03-24 21:31:43 UTC
Lelira Cirim wrote:

Off topic, exploration loot tables can be changed at the snap of a finger, once the decision is made that loot there is no longer valuable enough. I wouldn't worry about one specific item type becoming no more valuable than metal scraps. CCP can do whatever it wants to make loot tables a particular value for explorers, generally it's all very boring stuff except for BPCs, and they could work harder to choose more interesting loot.

I have zero experience what to do with datacores , i provide them. Since there are still ppl who buys there is demand for them (low but still). Exploration loot changed in a snap of a finger? Prices are falling since odyssey, not just because more players are doing it, data sites becomes more and more flying trash in space. Last try to make them worth something only made them worse. It was done in shadow of making certain industry activity simpler. So no it's not a snap of a finger. Please don't try the lore thing. Relic sites, named after local pirates, full of colonization ships, with BPCs for currently using hulls, lore...contradiction chasing contradiction.
I have no issiue with players build datacores unless they aren't build from air. Passive activities, dependant only on clone skills are bad.

Quote:
'We want a system that is simple, accessible to everyone, effective, almost revolutionary and fun to use! To achieve this we have striven towards previously unseen levels of convolution and complication.'

So they want simple or complicated system?

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
Tinkers
Masterwork Productions Inc
#509 - 2015-03-24 22:58:15 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
EX Winet wrote:
So i have two simple questions

1 - There has been alot of talk coming out of the round table with regards to replacement or reimbursement for Towers/mods/structures/BPC, however nothing has been said about Stations. Will stations be replaced via isk or the new structures. Or as it seems is being hinted but not outright said, will they just become obsolete and thus destroyable leaving alliances out of pocket?

2 - There is really only one major benefit to Sov holding, reduced fuel bills. Will the new structures have this applied or did CCP just sneak it out without anyone actually being aware.


1. We need to have a long think about Outpost + Outpost Upgrade reimbursement, particularly because they have such a long history of investment form multiple previous owners. If you have any ideas on how to do this fairly please share your thoughts.

2. We want some functionality and bonuses to be limited to sov holding space to incentivise holding yes. In particular we are thinking of having rigs which modify their bonus depending on where the structure is deployed.



Not sure what the problem is...replace existing outpost with XL Structure with similar mods installed. Same with existing starbases, et.al.
STush T
House of Tuachair
#510 - 2015-03-24 23:37:12 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Removing dead sticks (abandoned pos's) is very high on my wish list

m


I really thought that the new roaming drifter battleships with their doomsday weapons would take care of dead sticks.
Xindi Kraid
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#511 - 2015-03-25 00:00:07 UTC
xttz wrote:
Hostile market hubs?

Heh, I like it.

You are doing hostile takeovers.

CCP Nullarbor wrote:

1 weapon slot can mean 6 guns place at the end of each 3 dimensional axis. You should have 360 degree defences since you cannot move or spin around or arrange them at all.


Are you envisioning the specific scenario of POS a defensive module being one specific item (eg. turret), and a certain number of those are placed on the hull to provide full coverage as it is on ships, or have you given any though to things like weapons SYSTEMS. for example a 150 MM railgun system would install a dozen 150MM railguns and a half dozen dual 150 MM railguns, to have a better spread of target selection (other ideas are stuff like a cruise missile battery that can also target paint 1-2 targets). Also would the cluster of turrets off one fitted item work like ship turrets where whichever turret on the assigned module is in arc with the target it fires and the rest lay dormant, or will each turret be able to fire independently?


On a different note, how is ownership being handled? I know you mentioned certain services may be limited by sec status and sov, but like how outposts are alliance only while POSes are corp only and mobile depots are purely personal, will different sizes of structure only be able to be owned by specific groups? For instance, I have long had a Hyasyoda Mobile Lab I carry from corp to corp to put up in the POS for R&D, and also now have a tower, but still need roles to manage it; In the new system, I am assuming IF we get smaller structures of that category, I can probably own for myself a small lab I can do a couple BPs in, or, as somone who can afford a POS, can I run an actual large research laboratory launched for myself, and owned by myself (attackable by WTs of course just as my ship is)?

Also, related to this, how much can we allow access to others? If I put up my lab for myself rather than corp, can I still allow corp mates (or even alliance mates) to use the lab? Can I even set it up to allow public use (for a fee of course)


I would like to suggest, along with the specialized structures, we get a few super general structures with absolute middle of the road stats, and a few extra fitting/service slots, so we have a few things we can do literally everything with like the current POSes (like what wormholers use; sure it's mostly storage, but another big part of it is what do we need here now since there's no market for 5 holes and 20 jumps).

Speaking of wormholers: I think the community could use a depot type structures that are mainly storage, but escpecially ship storage, and I hope ship storage can be expanded (maybe have extra storage be a service, and depots have a role bonus for those)
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
#512 - 2015-03-25 00:22:47 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Lurifax wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Eduardo'o wrote:
Any chance for the veterans amongst us to move all stuff locked up and gathered over the years in multiple 0.0 outposts, to be moved to the closest low sec station? I got tons of stuff all over 0.0 and no chance to get to it anymore now. Many amongst us must be in this situation

PS: great stuff


Outpost destruction is a long time away still, and we will need to come up with some special case handling especially for inactive accounts. Ejected contents safed up in journal entries from destroyed Outposts with a 1 year timer before it expires might be one way for example.


Have some loot drop and some send to the nearest NPC station?


Yes returning to NPC stations may be another option for dealing with Outposts specifically.

Just change the owner of the items an impound fee for recovery. Blink

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

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
#513 - 2015-03-25 00:33:11 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Chribba wrote:
Very interesting, I foresee a major logistics effort to replace all structures though, if I understood it correctly we would have to replace them with the new things?

Also looking forward on more details about the mooring system, the radius things and of course if this might mean we will be seeing supercaps for sale on the market.

Imagining an outpost gets destroyed, and all the content and stuff gets ejected into space for the owner to scoop within the time, could a massive amount of canisters affect lag or similar with many thousands of new objects in space?

/c


We will find ways around this not to have the servers die and beg for mercy. Ejected containers could have extremely large capacity so one is enough for each owner, or that you at least don't have 100 container for each possible owner. Also remember, those will not appear until the owner warps to the planet bookmark (like Planetary Launches), so this will spread the spawning as well.


You could also delay the calculation for spawning based on whether the person is online or offline and in the system. The server does a check and notes who has any possessions in the station. If they are in the system and online, then the server further processes the contents of their hangers. If there are corp assets in the station then the server checks to see if there are corp members online in the system before processing assets. Might need to have a table created for each station that simply lists the name of a player with an asset in station and the corp name with a used hanger. If the player it out of the system, asset processing takes a lower priority. If they are offline, assets processing does not take place until they are online or at downtime.

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

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
#514 - 2015-03-25 02:13:09 UTC
Overall, I am really, really looking forward to these changes. Never dealing with the green box again can't come soon enough.

I love the idea that these can be anchored anywhere. Not being tied to the moon or planet will make these very flexible.

1 -aspiring to be the bad boy of High Sec War Decs, I will place these structures around Jita IV-4 with weapons bristling and ready to insta pop any and all war targets daring to undock or dock. I will eclipse the stargates in Niarja and Uedama to the same effect. CCP will need to ensure anchoring around Gates and Stations is limited. There are enough mobile depots and MTUs without adding armed POSes. Lol

2 - The ESS was an excellent alert system for wormholes to let people know when someone has entered. Unfortunately CCP prevents anchoring them in WH space now. Sad But with these structures I could anchor a defensive POS on top of a worm hole, bubble the wormhole, and have a certain sense of security. Sure, I won't know who came in, but if they are not in an interceptor or a cloak capable ship, I am pretty sure the starbase under attack notifications let alone any kill mail provided by the structure killing someone will let me know when I really need to turtle up. This is something I hope CCP does not restrict, if they do, they need to have it as a proximity restriction.

3 - Think DeathStar, but with component pieces. Will there be restrictions on proximity to each other?

4 - Moonmining - can multiple Structures be set up to mine the moon? Or will it function like the TCU: whoever has the first mining module active reaps the reward? Will mining be restricted to the proximity of the warp-in? Can I now mine the other side while someone mines the warp in side?

5 - Will combat timers prevent me from docking/mooring?

6 - Old Abandoned POSes should simply be relieved of CONCORD protection. If I have two months of lead time to the full changeover to the new structures, then I will have had time to decommission my POS. If I have valuables in my POS and am offline, then someone most likely already war dec'ed my corp and killed the modules, leaving only the stick behind. The lead up period should be enough notification via general EVE update emails saying POS mechanics are changing to let me know I should resub to take it down.
After the change the POS should be freely shoot-able without obtaining even a suspect flag.
Maybe any online or offline POSes left after the change should get a 30 day count down of doom... maybe a massive event that removes them. Something happened... did the drifters take offense to my stick? Salvaged by Circadian Sleepers?

Maybe reduce all offline POSes to 1 HP after the change? Twisted

7 - If I have corpses in my POS or new structure, will that attract the attention of Drifters?

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

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.
Maenth
The Thirteen Provinces
#515 - 2015-03-25 03:32:36 UTC
concerning the dead-stick issue, I think new-form POS's should consume fuel hourly like old starbases, if only a little, to distinguish active from abandonted structures (and running service modules can just consume more fuel, as in the proposal)

when a structure is unfuelled/offline then maybe it loses a lot of the weight of its shield/armor defense (maybe online has base 50% resistances but offline all resistances reduce to zero) so they're easy to clear away when abandoned

also, as many have voiced, it's a pretty un-cool idea that - based on what little we see in the proposal (as much as it is) - our new bases might be helpless about defending themselves if we happen to be asleep when a substantial structure is attacked!

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.
Quintessen
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#516 - 2015-03-25 04:40:17 UTC
A question to the game designers:

What's your plan for small corps that can't be online every night for their designated four-hour block? With structures no longer being able to defend themselves, what steps can we take other than commit to playing nights we already know we can't, in order to secure our structures from capture?

Let's take an example of a M or L assembly array. If someone knows that we just aren't playing much on Tuesdays and Wednesdays as a corp, what prevents a lone pilot from wardeccing, attacking our structure on a Tuesday with an entosis link and claiming it before we get much chance to defend it? Then finishing up the job on a Wednesday when we probably won't be able to get enough people together to mount a defense.

Currently when we are wardecced, we simply make sure all the guns are online and a sole attacker or two isn't going to be able to really take out our POS even when we're not around?

Is your intention, CCP, to make it so that small corps that can't field a proper defense at least every other night simply stay out of structure gameplay? I really, really like the idea of all these structures and I'm not looking for invulnerability, but right now the proposed mix of time spent on setup and time spent on stealing doesn't seem in balance. It looks like it's going to be far too easy to steal structures from corps that aren't on regularly even if they want or are willing to invest heavily in offline defense.
Emmy Mnemonic
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#517 - 2015-03-25 06:10:14 UTC
Quintessen wrote:
A question to the game designers:

What's your plan for small corps that can't be online every night for their designated four-hour block? With structures no longer being able to defend themselves, what steps can we take other than commit to playing nights we already know we can't, in order to secure our structures from capture?

Let's take an example of a M or L assembly array. If someone knows that we just aren't playing much on Tuesdays and Wednesdays as a corp, what prevents a lone pilot from wardeccing, attacking our structure on a Tuesday with an entosis link and claiming it before we get much chance to defend it? Then finishing up the job on a Wednesday when we probably won't be able to get enough people together to mount a defense.

Currently when we are wardecced, we simply make sure all the guns are online and a sole attacker or two isn't going to be able to really take out our POS even when we're not around?

Is your intention, CCP, to make it so that small corps that can't field a proper defense at least every other night simply stay out of structure gameplay? I really, really like the idea of all these structures and I'm not looking for invulnerability, but right now the proposed mix of time spent on setup and time spent on stealing doesn't seem in balance. It looks like it's going to be far too easy to steal structures from corps that aren't on regularly even if they want or are willing to invest heavily in offline defense.


I guess this will be self-regulated. PLayers that can not be online every night at their "prime time" will not own sturctures (if the same mechanics are applied as to sov). OR they have to form bigger corps so that a minimal force is always online at their primetime, i.e. structures is nothing for small corps. The new sov- and structure-mechanics will shake up all of EVE quite a bit, old relations will end, new will be forged. This will be fun, because EVE needs a large injection of shake up!

Ex ex-CEO of Svea Rike [.S.R.]
Oxide Ammar
#518 - 2015-03-25 06:19:58 UTC
Emmy Mnemonic wrote:
Quintessen wrote:
A question to the game designers:

What's your plan for small corps that can't be online every night for their designated four-hour block? With structures no longer being able to defend themselves, what steps can we take other than commit to playing nights we already know we can't, in order to secure our structures from capture?

Let's take an example of a M or L assembly array. If someone knows that we just aren't playing much on Tuesdays and Wednesdays as a corp, what prevents a lone pilot from wardeccing, attacking our structure on a Tuesday with an entosis link and claiming it before we get much chance to defend it? Then finishing up the job on a Wednesday when we probably won't be able to get enough people together to mount a defense.

Currently when we are wardecced, we simply make sure all the guns are online and a sole attacker or two isn't going to be able to really take out our POS even when we're not around?

Is your intention, CCP, to make it so that small corps that can't field a proper defense at least every other night simply stay out of structure gameplay? I really, really like the idea of all these structures and I'm not looking for invulnerability, but right now the proposed mix of time spent on setup and time spent on stealing doesn't seem in balance. It looks like it's going to be far too easy to steal structures from corps that aren't on regularly even if they want or are willing to invest heavily in offline defense.


I guess this will be self-regulated. PLayers that can not be online every night at their "prime time" will not own sturctures (if the same mechanics are applied as to sov). OR they have to form bigger corps so that a minimal force is always online at their primetime, i.e. structures is nothing for small corps. The new sov- and structure-mechanics will shake up all of EVE quite a bit, old relations will end, new will be forged. This will be fun, because EVE needs a large injection of shake up!


What does that mean? small corps should suck it up and never own POS in this game because you hide behind a wall of peasants that can defend your structures 24/7. Why the hell people are disconnected from reality and never realize this a game.

Lady Areola Fappington:  Solo PVP isn't dead!  You just need to make sure you have your booster, remote rep, cyno, and emergency Falcon alts logged in and ready before you do any solo PVPing.
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#519 - 2015-03-25 09:03:58 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
+1. Multiple paths to victory seems very in-concept for Eve-O.

I'd be massively excited about a system where an invading alliance had different groups dedicated to attacking the defences in multiple different ways to progressively degrade the defender's sovereignty. The current proposal could form the basis of this but as it stands is very bare-bones.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.
Marox Calendale
Xynodyne
The Initiative.
#520 - 2015-03-25 11:01:52 UTC
Banko Mato wrote:
Oma Lorche wrote:
I wouldn't like Idea of keeping assembly arrays separate from research laboratories. Especially now when BPs have to be on hangar floor. I understand that it would add risk to owners of multi-billion worth BPOs. But for us small scale industrialists its daily hassle of moving dozens of t2 BPCs.


Hm, a solution would be to allow structures to share storage or at least route production outputs from one structure to another. Might for example require another low or mid slot "module" fittet, that then acts as transfer point. This way you can set up a dedicated invention structure next to a dedicated manufacturing platform (same grid or reasonably close?) and have all the invented T2 BPC2 automatically moved over. Thoughts on that?

What about a Data Center Module for Service Slots at Large and X-Large Structures? You could store and use all of your BPO´s and BPC´s from one single Point or maybe spread them over several of Data Centers. Today already most Blue Prints are used in a digital form and not as a real Paper Sheet or have at least a digital backup.
Depending how complex industry and industry structure should be, this could be scaled to Backup Data Centers for those who fear to lose their high scaled BPO´s or to Data Links which are needed to transfer the Data between the Data Centers and the Manufacturing- or Research Structures.