These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#121 - 2015-03-21 20:38:35 UTC
Zappity wrote:
I'm worried about highsec game play because of the comment that structure wrecks would only be looted by the owner. You absolutely need to ensure that highsec structures can be destroyed and looted. Otherwise you remove the only risk of the current system which is wardecs.

There is a lot of game play around people searching out unfuelled or at least undefended towers, deccing and destroying for the loot. It would be a shame for this to go away because it is one of the only significant risk elements of high sec industry.

Please make it so that:

1. Defences power down without fuel to make AFK and lack of planning have consequence. This could be done by having a shield/defence module which consumes fuel blocks.
2. Highsec structure wrecks can be looted by the legitimate aggressor (or anyone for a suspect flag).

To bad all war are based around griefing.

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude

Sky Cloud Austrene
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#122 - 2015-03-21 20:40:22 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Initial reply to the Dev blog/snippets from Fanfest.

Awesome concept work, would like to see a lot more fill in of the structure list in the medium size as well for small high sec corps to use, as currently most of them seem directed towards Null.


There is a reason for that. It being, that the current proposed structure changes will have a significant impact on nul & how nul works as well as implications towards sov.

But agree, there should be and probably will be, more stuff for high sec down the track.

Madd Adda
#123 - 2015-03-21 20:42:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Madd Adda
Tzar Sinak wrote:
Please consider:

If the owner of containers that are injected into space (as a result of structure destruction) does not retrieve them WITHIN A PERIOD OF TIME, these containers should become scannable and hackable. This will provide additional and logical game play. The destroyed structure will become a beacon of possible loots to be had for explores as we travel from system to system.


then won't the containers be camped to hell because the owner would have to come back?


if anything, eject containers that warp to a random location in system with coordinates EVE mailed to you. I guess they can be probed, but make it so the owner has an actual chance to retrieve the assets, rather than just walk right into an ambush. Otherwise it's another "EVE favors the aggressors" moment.

Carebear extraordinaire

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#124 - 2015-03-21 20:49:02 UTC
So, are outposts on the way out? It seems like the new system is merging the functionality of the two current structure systems: POS and outposts. And in the blog it mentions no longer being able to plant new outposts.

Do you plan on removing them or letting them die out or what?
Tzar Sinak
Mythic Heights
#125 - 2015-03-21 20:49:58 UTC
The owner is given a period of time to retrieve their assets as the dev blog states. During that time the containers are not scannable allowing the owner the opportunity to recover the goods in relative safety.

Now the converse is true. The owner knows what is in the containers and may choose not to recover them. The owner knows when the time elapses and the containers become scannable. The owner can choose to be the one laying the ambush!

To add another twist, allow the owner of a container that is hacked to obtain kill rights on the one taking the contents.

Hydrostatic Podcast First class listening of all things EVE

Check out the Eve-Prosper show for your market updates!

Poena Loveless
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#126 - 2015-03-21 20:52:08 UTC
Peonza Chan wrote:
Quote:

E. Observatory arrays
... act as solar system wide D-scan blockers ...

I hope you are not considering to bring this into WHs

I hope they aren't planning on bringing this to EVE period.

D-scan is vital for players finding each other.

While the overall direction you are going in is good, I think pretty much every suggestion for "Observatory arrays" so far is horrible.

Blocking star map filters (namely the data of contextual player activity they provide) and blocking D-scan is a really bad idea.
In a game built around the vastness of (mostly empty) space, we need tools that encourage people to find each other and give us the tools and mechanics to do so.
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
#127 - 2015-03-21 20:52:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Lil' Brudder Too
How are the skills going to work, are we going to have to train up a whole lot of new expensive and time consuming skills now to do these new structures? Please say no.

Also, tower loots? Currently there is incentive to war-dec and kill towers to get their loots....seems like this will be gone if either of the main ideas means we can't get it..
Tzar Sinak
Mythic Heights
#128 - 2015-03-21 20:55:29 UTC
Idea: There will be structures that can affect the ability to cloak and using D scan. Could these structures also improve the ability to scan with both combat and core probes? Say, improve strength, speed, resolution.

Conversely, the structure could be set to inhibit the ability for it and nearby structures to be discovered.

Since these structures can now be deployed anywhere within a system this could allow for forward staging bases for invasion, or stealth homes for explorers or sovereignty griefers etc.

Hydrostatic Podcast First class listening of all things EVE

Check out the Eve-Prosper show for your market updates!

Michal Jita
Lords Of The Universe
#129 - 2015-03-21 20:56:23 UTC
I love the changes, just one thing which is a concern, current POS mechanic being terrible and all that still offers good protection for small corporations in wormholes, they require a significant fleet and time commitment to attack especially in low class WHs.
I just hope small corps in low class WHs will still be able to gain some relative safety against bigger opponents as last thing we want is for big fleets just search out all smaller opponents and use entosis mechanic to loot and get rid of everyone that can't field big conventional fleet.

Love the work, just don't forget of the little guys....
Tzar Sinak
Mythic Heights
#130 - 2015-03-21 21:01:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Tzar Sinak
Idea: Observatories observe... gates create the ability to travel between systems... couple them together.

When coupled together a system could be targeted for observation: Discover what is being manufactured, harvested, traded etc. This coupled system could be used as a form of recon to assess adversary capabilities, intentions and provide a means to determine what systems need to be actually visited to refine the intel.

Hydrostatic Podcast First class listening of all things EVE

Check out the Eve-Prosper show for your market updates!

Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#131 - 2015-03-21 21:01:26 UTC
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
Zappity wrote:
I'm worried about highsec game play because of the comment that structure wrecks would only be looted by the owner. You absolutely need to ensure that highsec structures can be destroyed and looted. Otherwise you remove the only risk of the current system which is wardecs.

There is a lot of game play around people searching out unfuelled or at least undefended towers, deccing and destroying for the loot. It would be a shame for this to go away because it is one of the only significant risk elements of high sec industry.

Please make it so that:

1. Defences power down without fuel to make AFK and lack of planning have consequence. This could be done by having a shield/defence module which consumes fuel blocks.
2. Highsec structure wrecks can be looted by the legitimate aggressor (or anyone for a suspect flag).

To bad all war are based around griefing.

This is not true. I do it a lot, purely for profit. Searching out offline or undefended highsec towers, trying to figure out how capable the corp is of mounting a defence, waiting for the 24 hour period before being able to attack and anticipating the shields going back up before the countdown is complete, killing the structures and waiting for the drops, often in the context of war targets in local or surrounding systems (often from other corps). This is all great content.

It is not difficult to defend against this sort of thing. For target selection, towers fall into two categories: offline and online. If offline with anchored research, industrial, CHA, PHA, SMA etc then it is immediately war decced. If online, a large tower will rule it out for me because the grind is too much of a deterrent. A small or medium tower with ANY defences at all is also ruled out because there are easier targets out there.

This is not griefing. It introduces consequence for lack of planning, lack of foresight or laziness. It introduces excellent and profitable gameplay for whoever can be bothered to go out and find good prospects and is willing to risk their own assets in war decs.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#132 - 2015-03-21 21:08:32 UTC
Zappity wrote:

This is not griefing. It introduces consequence for lack of planning, lack of foresight or laziness. It introduces excellent and profitable gameplay for whoever can be bothered to go out and find good prospects and is willing to risk their own assets in war decs.

It also does not remove risk if you can't loot it. As the 'stations' themselves are assets at significant risk and cost their victims. Your desired mechanics will just lead to the classic dec dodging continuing and people pulling down assets and staying docked for a week. The proposed mechanics are actually more likely to leave things in space for you to shoot at.
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus
#133 - 2015-03-21 21:10:00 UTC
All I can say at this point: Finally! I've been waiting for POSes to be wrapped up into a single structure since I first read about them ;)
Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#134 - 2015-03-21 21:10:39 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
Zappity wrote:
I'm worried about highsec game play because of the comment that structure wrecks would only be looted by the owner. You absolutely need to ensure that highsec structures can be destroyed and looted. Otherwise you remove the only risk of the current system which is wardecs.

There is a lot of game play around people searching out unfuelled or at least undefended towers, deccing and destroying for the loot. It would be a shame for this to go away because it is one of the only significant risk elements of high sec industry.

Please make it so that:

1. Defences power down without fuel to make AFK and lack of planning have consequence. This could be done by having a shield/defence module which consumes fuel blocks.
2. Highsec structure wrecks can be looted by the legitimate aggressor (or anyone for a suspect flag).

To bad all war are based around griefing.

This is not true. I do it a lot, purely for profit. Searching out offline or undefended highsec towers, trying to figure out how capable the corp is of mounting a defence, waiting for the 24 hour period before being able to attack and anticipating the shields going back up before the countdown is complete, killing the structures and waiting for the drops, often in the context of war targets in local or surrounding systems (often from other corps). This is all great content.

It is not difficult to defend against this sort of thing. For target selection, towers fall into two categories: offline and online. If offline with anchored research, industrial, CHA, PHA, SMA etc then it is immediately war decced. If online, a large tower will rule it out for me because the grind is too much of a deterrent. A small or medium tower with ANY defences at all is also ruled out because there are easier targets out there.

This is not griefing. It introduces consequence for lack of planning, lack of foresight or laziness. It introduces excellent and profitable gameplay for whoever can be bothered to go out and find good prospects and is willing to risk their own assets in war decs.


"structure wrecks would only be looted by the owner"
Thats for the biggest structures from what i understand the XL ones, maby also few X sized... how will that be related to high sec... nothing 100% sure

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude

w1ndstrike
White Talon Holdings
#135 - 2015-03-21 21:13:22 UTC
I think the biggest issue that will need to be addressed with these changes is how you handle the assets in outposts of players who are not currently subscribed. those of us who are subscribed will have some kind of heads up that its time to start moving anything non-essential, but unsubbed accounts have no such warning.

with the number of people who regularly take breaks from the game for longer periods of time, only to return and be very active (have done so myself) it is imperative that CCP find some way to "clean slate" the outposts for that pool of potentially returning players.

the best option I've seen floated so far is simply to have all assets owned by unsubscribed accounts and corporations where a member has not logged in for at least 2 months moved in a one-time deal to the nearest interbus station in a 0.6 highsec or higher (0.6 avoids most highsec islands in lowsec).

the only reason a single specific station is not suggessted despite it being easier to code is that this move would produce content for haulers and other services if/when those players return.

is it slightly heavy-handed? yes, but it is also the easiest way to avoid damaging player perceptions for those returning to the game after this system goes live.


all that being said, I look forward to new structures with interest, as it looks like making single star system a true home is within reach, instead of needing 3 or 4 for a complete service set.

if what is shown on the slides is correct, it also means that the wormhole crew will be getting a MASSIVE quality of life buff with what looks like offices and docking on smaller structures, and personal-use structures. which I cannot support enough (even though I don't live in J-space, those dudes deserve better support services for the risks they choose to take daily)
Noriko Mai
#136 - 2015-03-21 21:18:03 UTC
I would like to see mooring being some kind of structure extension that can be build up to X times to extend slots. If a parking lot of a super market is full, we build a bigger/second parking lot, not a second super market.

"Meh.." - Albert Einstein

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#137 - 2015-03-21 21:25:07 UTC
Fantastic blog, inspiring ideas.

Let's do this.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Phig Neutron
Starbreaker and Sons
#138 - 2015-03-21 21:30:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Phig Neutron
These ideas are all excellent. I would especially like to be able to have more than one "outpost" per system, potentially even from rival groups. It would also be good to make outposts destructable -- I remember there was a lot of outpost-building several years ago, but I don't think it happens much any more because the universe is pretty well saturated. I wonder if the devs intend to replace ALL outposts with this new system, even NPC outposts in highsec.

My only worry is that this removes the possibility of having things in "permanent storage". I have stuff all over the galaxy and it's always a treat to find something that I left behind years ago. I also quit the game for a few years and then came back. It wouldn't have been nice to find all my ships were exploded in my absence.

Here's my proposed solution: allow us to land our ships, and store our items, on moons or planets. That would be "permanent storage" but have no services or utilities. If you want to buy and sell, reprocess or manufacture, you'd have to put your assets at risk by flying them to a structure in space.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#139 - 2015-03-21 21:32:05 UTC
Poena Loveless wrote:
Peonza Chan wrote:
Quote:

E. Observatory arrays
... act as solar system wide D-scan blockers ...

I hope you are not considering to bring this into WHs

I hope they aren't planning on bringing this to EVE period.

D-scan is vital for players finding each other.

While the overall direction you are going in is good, I think pretty much every suggestion for "Observatory arrays" so far is horrible.

Blocking star map filters (namely the data of contextual player activity they provide) and blocking D-scan is a really bad idea.
In a game built around the vastness of (mostly empty) space, we need tools that encourage people to find each other and give us the tools and mechanics to do so.


The tools and mechanics to find other players are already in game. They are called spaceships. Checking Dotlan or the in game map to look for ratting activity, cynosural fields, etc. needs to die in a fire. Make people get out in space and be active to get intelligence. Same goes for local chat.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Phig Neutron
Starbreaker and Sons
#140 - 2015-03-21 21:32:38 UTC
sorry, duplicate