These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Wormholes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

New POS's
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Pissfat
Tactically Challenged
The Initiative.
#1 - 2015-03-21 23:21:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Pissfat
Source: http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/back-into-the-structure/

Feedback thread: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=413728&find=unread

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 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.

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.
Nox52
Pterygopalatine
#2 - 2015-03-22 00:17:13 UTC
The proposed pos destruction mechanism do indeed seem to safe and kinda bland. Needs iteration
Adriana Nolen
Sama Guild
#3 - 2015-03-22 02:09:59 UTC
something concerns greatly me about that example fitting. the severe lack of being able to fit damn near everything useful. pos arrays will now be capped by slots instead of what i want on there.
O'nira
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#4 - 2015-03-22 02:14:38 UTC
Gates

Service module possibilities: Being able to affect warp speed in a solar system (positively or negatively), affect jump capabilities for capitals, alter ship movement inside a solar system, allow vessels to travel to other solar systems and modify wormhole spawning behavior.

Does this mean we are finally getting the wormhole stabilizer?
Adriana Nolen
Sama Guild
#5 - 2015-03-22 02:31:41 UTC
Player built Gates between w-space systems is likely given all that's been going down lately.
Skyleth Bergen
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2015-03-22 02:53:12 UTC
I think it's more likely that player built gates will be part of opening up Jove space some time in the next two years. The lack of static connection is one of the things that makes w-space an interesting environment and there is no reason for CCP to remove that from the game. On the more far-fetched side of possibilities, perhaps null sec gates will be destructible and that is where the player built gates will be implemented into the game. It would be interesting to see power blocks fight over stargate routes.
Adriana Nolen
Sama Guild
#7 - 2015-03-22 02:55:31 UTC
Skyleth Bergen wrote:
I think it's more likely that player built gates will be part of opening up Jove space some time in the next two years. The lack of static connection is one of the things that makes w-space an interesting environment and there is no reason for CCP to remove that from the game. On the more far-fetched side of possibilities, perhaps null sec gates will be destructible and that is where the player built gates will be implemented into the game. It would be interesting to see power blocks fight over stargate routes.


Same was said for ice & stations. The only w-space limitation/feature that hasn't changed is moon mining.
Zeratul Stark
Mouth Trumpet Cavalry.
Mouth Trumpet Cavalry
#8 - 2015-03-22 06:40:18 UTC
Adriana Nolen wrote:
Skyleth Bergen wrote:
I think it's more likely that player built gates will be part of opening up Jove space some time in the next two years. The lack of static connection is one of the things that makes w-space an interesting environment and there is no reason for CCP to remove that from the game. On the more far-fetched side of possibilities, perhaps null sec gates will be destructible and that is where the player built gates will be implemented into the game. It would be interesting to see power blocks fight over stargate routes.


Same was said for ice & stations. The only w-space limitation/feature that hasn't changed is moon mining.


There are stations in literally one out of (what I believe is) 2600, and ice in 100 out of those 2600 wormholes or something like that.... I'd hardly call that a change, more like an exception to a rule. Come back and say that when they make a change to the limitations of more than 3.8% or .038% of wormholes.
Aivo Dresden
State War Academy
Caldari State
#9 - 2015-03-22 08:43:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Aivo Dresden
I think the destruction part there is more aimed at outposts.

The gates feature sounds interesting in a way that it affects Wormhole spawning behaviour. To me that reads as if you could possibly try and 'aim' for certain holes. For example, increase the chance you'll get a shattered, exit to low, ... I don't read this as being able to build wormhole to wormhole gates. Could also be part of opening up Jove space.

I don't think I'm alone in saying that no one really wants the ability to spawn your own direct link between 2 different wormholes of choice. Invasions, PvP ... pretty much everything would change and I'm not sure if it would be for the better.

Also interesting is the Observatory array, which blocks system wide D-Scan ...
Iowa Banshee
Fenrir Vangard
#10 - 2015-03-23 16:27:42 UTC
Aivo Dresden wrote:
Snip

The gates feature sounds interesting in a way that it affects Wormhole spawning behaviour. To me that reads as if you could possibly try and 'aim' for certain holes. For example, increase the chance you'll get a shattered, exit to low, ... .



Or as a large Null sec alliance you could set all you system to spawn maximum number of C6 wormholes and systematically invade them - you know to save all that WH rolling nonsense
Keskora Yaari
POS Party
Ember Sands
#11 - 2015-03-23 17:31:42 UTC
Aivo Dresden wrote:
I think the destruction part there is more aimed at outposts.

Also interesting is the Observatory array, which blocks system wide D-Scan ...


I can't imagine they would keep that functionality for wormhole space. With no local and no d-scan it would kill any sort of ganking and the main way wormhole pvp is initiated would be gone. Part of what makes wormholes so fun and exciting is how dangerous they are... no dscan would completely blind everyone and force combat scanning which ruins all elements of surprise.
Kynric
Sky Fighters
Rote Kapelle
#12 - 2015-03-23 18:05:46 UTC
Keskora Yaari wrote:
Aivo Dresden wrote:
I think the destruction part there is more aimed at outposts.

Also interesting is the Observatory array, which blocks system wide D-Scan ...


I can't imagine they would keep that functionality for wormhole space. With no local and no d-scan it would kill any sort of ganking and the main way wormhole pvp is initiated would be gone. Part of what makes wormholes so fun and exciting is how dangerous they are... no dscan would completely blind everyone and force combat scanning which ruins all elements of surprise.


Sure, but presumably if dscan is blocked the defender would be unable to see the combat probes. It seems like it would hurt the defender and so would not see much use
HTC NecoSino
Suddenly Carebears
#13 - 2015-03-23 20:01:22 UTC
It's really easy guys. If these changes come into effect and do affect WH space, move to NS, take over a station.
Live there, upgrade your system for maximum WH connections.

Roam/Farm out of your NS "hive" system.

Be sad that CCP won, but happy that we still have our gameplay intact.
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#14 - 2015-03-23 22:06:18 UTC
HTC NecoSino wrote:
It's really easy guys. If these changes come into effect and do affect WH space, move to NS, take over a station.
Live there, upgrade your system for maximum WH connections.

Roam/Farm out of your NS "hive" system.

Be sad that CCP won, but happy that we still have our gameplay intact.

yes, cos living in NS is why we're wormholers...
kids these days, i swear to god!

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#15 - 2015-03-26 00:53:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Trinkets friend
I know that CCP doesn't tend to actually respond in any fashion to feedback, and very rarely takes it into account (like, twice, ever) so I am kind of a bit saddened right now to see POS guns only work when manned, and entosis links work on POSs.

I am puzzled by what kind of gameplay they think all of this will create. Sure, the EHP vs DPS game we play now isn't the best, but replacing it with something where a lone entosis alt can sidle up to a structure and reinforce it in ten minutes, that's stupid.

Structure game play may be boring, but reducing it to solo griefing of AFk entities and hoping they stay away for 48 hours so you can get at their gear? That's great. Real great. No wonder the space hobbit shipping service mechanic is there - you can expect to lose your POS weekly or whenever you go away from the game for a couple of days, and then you have to run around picking cans up from planets.

Fantastic.

~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
#16 - 2015-03-28 14:43:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Noxisia Arkana
Edit: wrong thread.


I'd also agree that there should be some automated defense, and I'd be ******* annoyed to leave for 24 hours to come back to timers and junk.

Given the huge pain in the ass that moving stuff in and out of wormholes already has (and likewise for null), there should be some kind of god damn advantage to people that are willing to go forth and try to stake a claim.

It should be HARDER not easier to get rid of those folk. Right now the advantage is in the defenders hands, I'm not a huge fan of giving the attacker all the tools.
Proclus Diadochu
Mar Sarrim
Red Coat Conspiracy
#17 - 2015-03-29 01:33:34 UTC
Adriana Nolen wrote:
Skyleth Bergen wrote:
I think it's more likely that player built gates will be part of opening up Jove space some time in the next two years. The lack of static connection is one of the things that makes w-space an interesting environment and there is no reason for CCP to remove that from the game. On the more far-fetched side of possibilities, perhaps null sec gates will be destructible and that is where the player built gates will be implemented into the game. It would be interesting to see power blocks fight over stargate routes.


Same was said for ice & stations. The only w-space limitation/feature that hasn't changed is moon mining.

CCP straight said they had ZERO intention of implementing moon mining in wormholes. Also, wormhole stabilizing won't happen in wormholes, at least not the current C1-C6 space. There may be an area later that is akin to wormholes, like Shattereds, that CCP may end up using for their "player-built space and connectivity" plan and proving/testing grounds, but they wouldn't burn the wormhole community by turning it into stabilized connections and local.

Fozzie clearly stated that some structures won't work in wormholes, probably the OA and Gates, unless there are system-only functions that wormholers and CCP agree would be fine for upgrading your single system kingdom.

Minister of High Society | Twitter: @autoritare

E-mail: diogenes.proc@gmail.com

My Blog: http://diogenes-club.blogspot.com/

The Diogenes Club | Join W-Space | Down The Pipe
Glyndi
Doom Generation
Best Intentions.
#18 - 2015-03-29 04:25:23 UTC
Proclus Diadochu wrote:
Adriana Nolen wrote:
Skyleth Bergen wrote:
I think it's more likely that player built gates will be part of opening up Jove space some time in the next two years. The lack of static connection is one of the things that makes w-space an interesting environment and there is no reason for CCP to remove that from the game. On the more far-fetched side of possibilities, perhaps null sec gates will be destructible and that is where the player built gates will be implemented into the game. It would be interesting to see power blocks fight over stargate routes.


Same was said for ice & stations. The only w-space limitation/feature that hasn't changed is moon mining.

CCP straight said they had ZERO intention of implementing moon mining in wormholes. Also, wormhole stabilizing won't happen in wormholes, at least not the current C1-C6 space. There may be an area later that is akin to wormholes, like Shattereds, that CCP may end up using for their "player-built space and connectivity" plan and proving/testing grounds, but they wouldn't burn the wormhole community by turning it into stabilized connections and local.

Fozzie clearly stated that some structures won't work in wormholes, probably the OA and Gates, unless there are system-only functions that wormholers and CCP agree would be fine for upgrading your single system kingdom.



Hi Proc o/
Proclus Diadochu
Mar Sarrim
Red Coat Conspiracy
#19 - 2015-03-29 08:22:11 UTC
Glyndi wrote:
Proclus Diadochu wrote:
Adriana Nolen wrote:
Skyleth Bergen wrote:
I think it's more likely that player built gates will be part of opening up Jove space some time in the next two years. The lack of static connection is one of the things that makes w-space an interesting environment and there is no reason for CCP to remove that from the game. On the more far-fetched side of possibilities, perhaps null sec gates will be destructible and that is where the player built gates will be implemented into the game. It would be interesting to see power blocks fight over stargate routes.


Same was said for ice & stations. The only w-space limitation/feature that hasn't changed is moon mining.

CCP straight said they had ZERO intention of implementing moon mining in wormholes. Also, wormhole stabilizing won't happen in wormholes, at least not the current C1-C6 space. There may be an area later that is akin to wormholes, like Shattereds, that CCP may end up using for their "player-built space and connectivity" plan and proving/testing grounds, but they wouldn't burn the wormhole community by turning it into stabilized connections and local.

Fozzie clearly stated that some structures won't work in wormholes, probably the OA and Gates, unless there are system-only functions that wormholers and CCP agree would be fine for upgrading your single system kingdom.



Hi Proc o/

Hi Glyndi o/

We should grab lunch one of these days :)

Minister of High Society | Twitter: @autoritare

E-mail: diogenes.proc@gmail.com

My Blog: http://diogenes-club.blogspot.com/

The Diogenes Club | Join W-Space | Down The Pipe
Cindy Cloudwalker
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2015-03-29 14:56:19 UTC
Trinkets friend wrote:
I know that CCP doesn't tend to actually respond in any fashion to feedback, and very rarely takes it into account (like, twice, ever) so I am kind of a bit saddened right now to see POS guns only work when manned, and entosis links work on POSs.

I am puzzled by what kind of gameplay they think all of this will create. Sure, the EHP vs DPS game we play now isn't the best, but replacing it with something where a lone entosis alt can sidle up to a structure and reinforce it in ten minutes, that's stupid.

Structure game play may be boring, but reducing it to solo griefing of AFk entities and hoping they stay away for 48 hours so you can get at their gear? That's great. Real great. No wonder the sace hobbit shipping service mechanic is there - you can expect to lose your POS weekly or whenever you go away from the game for a couple of days, and then you have to run around picking cans up from planets.

Fantastic.



That's just it isn't it. We don't know what will happen once the POS (new Structure) is entosinised. In sov it will trigger begin the capture events but what about lowsec and WH space? Will it just be vulnerable to attack? We don't know at this point.

It is sad to think that if we don't log on for a couple of days our work will be reduced to ruble to a lone cloaky t3 that just happened upon your pos while you were out or on Holiday.

sheesh.
12Next page