These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#161 - 2015-03-21 22:45:46 UTC
I would avoid having a small, medium and large version of these modules (ala small pos, medium pos, large pos).

I would make it pretty much a static figure and chuck the S/M/L out the door. It might as well be universal as you really don't need different version sizes (gets confusing).

You can make the faction versions have significant differences.

Also, if the green anchor thingy goes away.. .happy guy.

Extremely happy guy.

Yaay!!!!
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#162 - 2015-03-21 22:46:57 UTC
So, for those of us who have invested heavily as a corp into outpost upgrades, where it was a significant investment, and not just 'oh, we're going to upgrade vfk, here's 40bil', are our upgrades just going poof?
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#163 - 2015-03-21 22:51:13 UTC
Midori Amiiko wrote:
What about Acceleration Gates? I always thought it would be cool if you could place them and have them launch me into a "private" deadspace pocket or something.


Or have acceleration gates as a longer-range version of the mobile jump unit, instead of a 100km range it provides a 10,000km range. Thus you can "launch" valuable ships such as freighters out of a bubble camp.

Another gate type that could be interesting is a warp gate, which could replace jump bridges for alliance-level logistics. The simple idea is that you anchor the warp gate and its end point, then when a ship activates the warp gate it will be flung into a 2AU/s warp to the other end. This will reduce the transit time for freighters and capital ships significantly. The warp gate would need a fairly large activation radius, such that placing one or two near a star gate is sufficient to provide coverage for freighters arriving furthest away.

Enterprising individuals could place warp gates near stargates in high traffic, large distance hisec systems and charge per activation. Then hisec wars would actually have a purpose ;)

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#164 - 2015-03-21 22:53:42 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:
I would avoid having a small, medium and large version of these modules (ala small pos, medium pos, large pos).


while we're at it, why not make all spaceships the same size too? It's just confusing.

What I would like to see is structures using the same modules and rigs as spaceships, so we don't end up with a second parallel economy.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#165 - 2015-03-21 22:54:18 UTC
Beta Vixen wrote:
Finally. It's been a LONG wait.

Still, I see many details that need to be hashed out, possibly in play testing.


in no particular order:

a. weapons and AI using them are vital to larger structures -- as others point out, being present to defend a structure 24/7 kills game play. With Entosis taking only minutes to, at most, a few hours to make something vulnerable, continuous defense would be required. In my experience [I've been in EVE since very near the beginning], that'll kill motivation to build up anything because it's too easy for the aggressors to succeed.

b. consider making the nub of structures upgradable in size. Start at MDepot size and functionality, add upgrades to increase size and change functionality.

c. there is no reason that the smallest size need have any weapons capability, nor AI -- let those functions be added as the structure grows, and quite possibly in increments.

d. deathstars have a purpose and use. 8 weapons is nothing to a deathstar -- some easily have 30 or more online all at once.

e. deathstars are why we have dreads. let's not kill the dreads for lack of something to do.

f. AI should target any ship trying to use entosis first ... basic defense principle.

g. starbase gunners are important and useful -- however, the number of weapons/modules each can control needs to be doubled to make them more in line with ships.

h. outposts do not currently have weapons -- i'm for adding them. Maybe we change the mechanic so that entosis can't be used until all weapons have been disabled -- thus creating another reason to keep dreads and carriers around [since carriers could rep the weapons if they seize military control of the space].


whoops -- all that time allows atm -- I'll be back with more later.




a) I think initially the attacker needs a bit of a boost in order to get the ball rolling. The last thing you want is groups blueballing people (ala weaponizing boredom).

b) That is a bit excessive. Keep the system simple. There is really no need for a upgrade for these things. It should have the capability. If it doesn't, it never will.

c) Depends on how the structure functions, we don't know yet. Some I can see having guns, some I can't.

d and e) They are chucking the old pos system out. We'll have to manage with the new one. I'm sure there will be many ways to fit your pos

f) Actually that might remove the whole thing with using the entosis link if your ship gets poped in 10 seconds by the defense system. Whats the point then.

g) A pos gunner might turn into a single person controlling the POS/Base in total themselves (so instead of 10 gunners, one gunner can do it all. Call it the Den Mother of the pos.

h) That would be a lazy job for a carrier/dead honestly. And I wouldn't balance that based on what carriers/dreads could do. Its a bandaid fix, and wouldn't rectify any issue with them atm.

Having a totally automated defense system blow up everything that gets near it is not necessarily the best idea. You wind up relegating battles to be back on dreads/carriers/supers, etc. Were looking to get away from that, not go closer to it.

Yaay!!!!
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#166 - 2015-03-21 22:55:49 UTC
Wow, EvE meets X3 finally.

I'm my own NPC alt.
Phig Neutron
Starbreaker and Sons
#167 - 2015-03-21 23:13:45 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Beta Vixen wrote:
f. AI should target any ship trying to use entosis first ... basic defense principle.


f) Actually that might remove the whole thing with using the entosis link if your ship gets poped in 10 seconds by the defense system. Whats the point then.

The point would be to bait the guns. You put an entosis link onto something with a great tank, put a bunch of logi ships on it, and then you can bring anything else you want with no fear of being targeted by the structure you're shooting.

However the AI is done, it should not be so predictable that attackers can figure out how to game the system. Either the AI is extremely intelligent, or, you let the defenders program the AI so that they can confound the attackers.
Flamespar
WarRavens
#168 - 2015-03-21 23:20:23 UTC
Idea for a structure

Deep space observation post

Enables an overview of exploration sites in the system/constellation/region (range depends on size)
New gameplay opportunities include the detection of comets, exploration sites in deep space, new regions of space.
Ability to influence types of exploration sites that spawn.
Other players can be dock and purchase exploration data.
Player s
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#169 - 2015-03-21 23:20:48 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Again just to repeat, no differences for hisec, CCP hang tough on that, its important.

The key thing here is that people have something large that they need to defend, but making it so they lose everything and the disparity between the ability of industrial corps and hisec war dec corps means that no one will do anything in hisec if you have differing drops because CONCORD runs around, when they have not been bribed to look away of course.

Do the same thing for the stations in hisec as you do every where else, if people want to loot the stuff then they need to hunt the people who try to recover their stuff and they need to keep that war dec going as long as they need to. People will have to sit camping those in null sec, low sec and WH space, they need to do the same in hisec and they need to continue to pay the bribe to allow them to shoot people during that period.

If people are not able to do that then you need to look at yourselves, are you special just because you war dec people in hisec, I think not...

This is true. A large corp who wants to invest in a large structure should have some protection to encourage corp stability and growth. Conversely, a small corp who wants some improved industry stats should have risk if they let their structure run out of fuel.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Phig Neutron
Starbreaker and Sons
#170 - 2015-03-21 23:27:56 UTC
Beta Vixen wrote:

n. pls also think out how to simplify the moon mining to reactions mechanism. {while you're at it, can you simplify PI setup? maybe use same interface?


I totally disagree. I think CCP should be looking for ways to complexify industry. The T1 manufacturing system, in which 90% of the items in the game are made out of the same 7 minerals with a blueprint and no intermediate steps, is incredibly limiting. Capital construction and T2 mineral production is barely more interesting. The PI system is so far the most interesting industrial mini-game in EVE, but affects only a tiny fraction of items. Transforming the industrial process for all those T1 ships and modules would be a huge improvement, whether it means adding more different types of minerals, requiring that ships be made out of subsystems instead of produced in one step, or something else.
Phig Neutron
Starbreaker and Sons
#171 - 2015-03-21 23:37:26 UTC
New structure idea: Space Elevator
Purpose & function: Ships, modules, and other inventory can be placed in "long term storage" on the surface of a planet (temperate, barren, ice) or moon. Orbital storage (the top of the elevator) is limited to 1,000,000m3 of assembled, moored ships and 10,000m3 of stored items, and can be accessed immediately. Surface storage is unlimited, invulnerable, and free of charge. Moving items to or from the surface takes 10 minutes. Items on the surface cannot be retrieved without a working space elevator. Could also be used to pick up PI products from the surface.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#172 - 2015-03-21 23:40:02 UTC
Damn good blog, one problem, I don't see the new structures on market yet.

Also their is not time travel structure that would allow us to go back in time and put these things into EVE instead of poses and outposts so we would have never had to deal with their crappiness. Please fix :)
Pissfat
Tactically Challenged
The Initiative.
#173 - 2015-03-21 23:44:30 UTC
I love the new POS fitting window although i don't see options for extra redundancy modules. I am also concerned that when it is destroyed the possible wreck options layed out by CCP in the devblog would destroy WH seiges as we know it and people wouldn't lose any of their assets and the agressor would have no possibility of loot.

Seems like there wouldn't even be a need to self destruct ships anymore if you an just access them later, Sometimes in WH space the desire to start a seige is stemmed from being able to see all their **** burn. This feels to safe for us.

I am Winthorp you might remember me from such films as i got CCP to make signature ID's persistent through DT for their love of AU bros.
Hilti Enaka
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#174 - 2015-03-21 23:55:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Hilti Enaka
You have my vote on this, it look incredible and if you pull this off, props.

I do fear you have made a rather already complex system even more complex but hey complexity is what draws me to eve.

Surely those who have POS already anchored can have the new structure implemented by a script?
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#175 - 2015-03-21 23:57:32 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:

What I would like to see is structures using the same modules and rigs as spaceships, so we don't end up with a second parallel economy.


This would be a balancing nightmare. Also, umm, you do realize that the new modules are going to replace the already existing pos modules, guns, hardeners and all that, so there will be no new 'economy' at all?A few new and different modules to make our industry/market even healthier but nothing even remotely close to a second parallel economy.
Eden Runner
Eden Runners
#176 - 2015-03-22 00:04:06 UTC
I can not wait for this to happen. Do not conceptualize on this, just do it. I getting excited thinking of the systems I will build.

Speaking of building please expand space and reduce high sec, it is almost imposable for a new player to get out into null solo and set anything up without running under the shield of a large corp, it just too crowded. Everyone just blows you up in there T2/T3 within seconds for thinking of going into low. I want to spend my billions on building my own empire and not have to join someone else until I skill up for a year . Make all systems claimable and put Sov. into everyone hands or something.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#177 - 2015-03-22 00:14:59 UTC
on POS's .. it seems odd that you can't get into the POS forcefield yet you can still damage the structure itself?
surely if we are shooting the forcefield then shouldn't the range be determined by proximity to the forcefield rather than the tower?

and the forcefield should have the majority of the HP not the tower. would make sense if you have too shoot the forcefield than even a frigate should be able too fire at it and it should have HP itself.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
xttz
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#178 - 2015-03-22 00:21:36 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
on POS's .. it seems odd that you can't get into the POS forcefield yet you can still damage the structure itself?
surely if we are shooting the forcefield then shouldn't the range be determined by proximity to the forcefield rather than the tower?

and the forcefield should have the majority of the HP not the tower. would make sense if you have too shoot the forcefield than even a frigate should be able too fire at it and it should have HP itself.

If only you'd posted this in 2004 when it was still relevant.
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
#179 - 2015-03-22 00:25:26 UTC
STANDINGS



First of all, I am more than a bit happy with what I have read so far. That being said, I still think CCP got it wrong when it eroded standings with empire factons as a requirement to anchor semi-permanent structures in empire space.

I get that you wanted to reduce the barriers for change, but I hope you seize this opportunity to revisit that. Here is what I propose:

Standings (corporate) are not a barrier to anchor in empire. However, standings with the empire where semi permanent strutures (L & XL) are calculated based on current (today) methods.

For Large and XL structures mounted in Empire space, Please consider this.

Standings with the NPC faction holder will increace or reduce the following:

1. Time and or squad size of a response by Concord to any and all attacks on the structure that occur without a war declaration.

Low stndings = long wait and frig-cruiser response
High standings = short wait and pain

2. Fuel cost of operating modules.

obvious

3. NPC taxes over and above the structure holder's taxes.

obvious

4. Escort capacity of Interbus couriers.

Low stndings = frig-cruiser escorts
High standings = full Armada based on value of contract


5. Time for Entosis capture.

obvious

6. Hitpoints of structures.

obvious

Etc and so on, You get my drift? This way, standings do not bar any entity from anchoring and using a system, but they offer a reward to those organizations that are loyal.

You kinda killed standings as a consideration for choice last time you had a chance. Please be more kind this time

Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your character. And character is everything. - author unknown
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#180 - 2015-03-22 00:30:24 UTC
One important question.

Today one of the reason we attack other towers is loot (in WH piniata POS can have anything from few bill to 100 bil)

But we are now told that new system will somehow separate people assets from Struckture Fitting and only drop fitting???

My question is: will we still have loot from structures smaller than station?

Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?