These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Shake my Citadel

First post First post
Author
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#241 - 2015-05-12 22:22:12 UTC
Milla Goodpussy wrote:
Dentia Caecus wrote:
Milla Goodpussy wrote:
Aaril wrote:
Are all current structures (other than the "smalls") going away? This is pertaining to both current POSs and Outposts. I do understand there is supposed to be a phase out period.

I know more details will be released about this, but now that we know a little of the function and form of the Citadels, I want to talk about protecting assets when a station is destroyed. To that end, please do the personal container "ejection" philosophy through something like the journal. At least from a roleplay standpoint that makes sense (station going down in flames, spew all the personal items randomly throughout the system with personal security attached to each container). Everyone who has assets in the Citadel should be able to warp to a container that has all of their personal belongings.



they still have yet to come up with a thought process of how players would get their stuff out of space!

I want you to name something that can haul.. lets say 10 fitted battleships, 20 cruisers, 100 frigates, 1000 modules, 100 billion m3 of minerals .. all in one ship...

the personal container eject into space idea is broken as well, considering if the aggressor blows up the damn station and decides to camp the system with supers and titans and fleets..

how can one get their stuff back? name the ship that can haul all of that.. it surely isn't a jump freighter, and surely isn't a freighter.



Agreed. As currently explained, it is a pie in the sky idea/mechanic. Moreover, once someone warps to the container, both it and the ship can be scanned, bubbled and killed. The invading entity gets a wonderful kill and each individual player's "stuff."


which in turn means players will eventually get tired of this draconian HTFU type of game and leave.. I don't see this as gathering new subs but causing even more folks to leave. I don't buy the bullcrap P.R that eve is spiking in players.. just to have a mechanic like that introduced that rips you off.. too bad you had to go away cause your mother died, too bad you have to go away cause you have cancer, to bad you had to defend your country (ccp will say fawk the military bro's you snooze you loose your ****..haha).. just too damn bad you didn't have time to play 23/7 eve online protecting your own time investment.

I hate this entire thought process, its making other games way more appealing then sitting here and giving these folks money.


You know what? CCP never asked why players didn't wanted to use structures. So they made a poll which only reflected the opinion of industrialists, nullseccers and the tiny percent who uses them without being forced to by industry mechanics.

I'd like to have a "home" in EVE. But not one which is ROFLstomped by NPC stations. Roll

"This is your home in EVE... it's like a NPC station, but gives you a unique chance to lose all your assets at once for a extravagant price"

What oh WHAT could go wrong?

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you

IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
Crouching Woman Hidden Cucumber
#242 - 2015-05-12 22:23:53 UTC
Milla Goodpussy wrote:
just too damn bad you didn't have time to play 23/7 eve online protecting your own time investment.


I am pretty sure CCP don't expect one person to defend assets 23/7, that is why they made Eve a multi-player game.
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#243 - 2015-05-12 22:24:17 UTC
What about capitals in WH. If You only get to store capitals in X-L (and like You mentioned You consider storing them also in Large structure) what about all those people that sits today on few capitals per character in wormholes. You are forcing them into higher structures.

Is the mooring mechanic still considered? As a replacment?
thebringer
Mass Collapse
It Must Be Jelly Cause Jam Don't Shake
#244 - 2015-05-12 22:28:30 UTC  |  Edited by: thebringer
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Lyron-Baktos wrote:
When do we get some news on these new structures and how or if they will interact in wormhole space?


We want most of those structures to be available in W-space, but with some special restrictions if need be.


Bringing full docking into wh space will change the place entirely, one of the reasons to live there is to avoid dumb docking games and how intel gathering is important (finding poses, seeing what in them players/ships/structures).

I would rather we stay with the current pos system (at least for wormholes) than this stupid capture the flag rubbish and no loot drops from structures.

But you will do it anyway because who cares about wormholers...

Just please dont break it too badly.

Why CCP...

Selto Black
Apotheosis.
#245 - 2015-05-12 22:31:47 UTC
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69 wrote:
Milla Goodpussy wrote:
just too damn bad you didn't have time to play 23/7 eve online protecting your own time investment.


I am pretty sure CCP don't expect one person to defend assets 23/7, that is why they made Eve a multi-player game.


Playing an MMO means that player interaction is unavoidable, not required. Forgive the rather faulty analogy, but its like having a kid. Interaction with the opposite sex is Unavoidable, dosent mean you cant tell them to **** off right afterwards.
NovaCat13
Seymourus and Co.
#246 - 2015-05-12 22:35:42 UTC
Mellianah wrote:
Lore Question, mostly for giggles:

I read somewhere recently, that Titans in planetary-orbit were large enough to affect the tides of planets with seas...

Whether that's 'true' or not, these new structures utterly dwarf Titans. So...

If someone anchors one or two of these things at a highsec planet, can we look forward to stories of tsunamis wiping out entire populations? ;)


I believe tide affecting titans were the Iapetan Titans I'm not sure if the current gen Titans have that much mass.

Just say NO to Dailies

Tarek Raimo
Eleutherian Guard
#247 - 2015-05-12 22:35:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Tarek Raimo
Mellianah wrote:
Lore Question, mostly for giggles:

I read somewhere recently, that Titans in planetary-orbit were large enough to affect the tides of planets with seas...

Whether that's 'true' or not, these new structures utterly dwarf Titans. So...

If someone anchors one or two of these things at a highsec planet, can we look forward to stories of tsunamis wiping out entire populations? ;)


Tidal forces are a function of relative mass and movement occurring when the gravity of one object affects another one unequally across its surface area or volume.

As long as those stations do not move around planets/moons but stay in a synchronous orbit, their effect will be very minimal.

I think CCP went a bit over the top with their description of Titans being so large that they cause tidal floods. That would require a relative mass between the Titan and the affected planet similar to the relation between Earth and Moon. Our own moon has a mass billions of times higher than that of an Avatar. Even an Iapetan Titan can not be that much larger. Still, the Moon only amounts to less than 1.5% of the Earth's mass.

If you had a planet so small that a Titan could affect it with the same proportionate mass relation, the planet would be too small to hold an atmosphere, let alone liquid water. In fact, I would consider a Titan to be much more in danger from breaking apart if it passed by a planet too fast rather than it having an effect on the planet.

For an example of that happening check out what happened to comet Shoemaker Levy when it passed through the orbit of Jupiter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_Shoemaker%E2%80%93Levy_9
Memphis Baas
#248 - 2015-05-12 22:42:04 UTC
Are the structures limited to 8 (HML) slots?
Blastil
Aideron Robotics
#249 - 2015-05-12 22:42:05 UTC
Given that these will have market functionality, how will you handle docking, and permissions? Will it be done the same way as our current docking system?

Personally I feel like the current standings-based docking system is kind of silly, since it ties a mechanic often used for determining who you do and do not want to shoot with a mechanic for who you're willing to trade with. For example, i'm fine trading with reds, as long as I can tax them more.

Could we investigate a better system of discriminating who's a welcome guest in my citadel?

If you do separate these two things, can we program certain rules of engagement into our citadels? IE only fire if fired upon, or judiciously settle all combat within X kilometers?

Could we maybe even make a citadel open only to a small list of approved individuals on a citadel by citadel basis?

I guess the reason why I ask these questions Is that I kind of want to run my own little mos-eisly of shady drug dealers and pirates and would love for this to enable that kind of game play.
Milla Goodpussy
Garoun Investment Bank
#250 - 2015-05-12 22:47:21 UTC
Selto Black wrote:
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69 wrote:
Milla Goodpussy wrote:
just too damn bad you didn't have time to play 23/7 eve online protecting your own time investment.


I am pretty sure CCP don't expect one person to defend assets 23/7, that is why they made Eve a multi-player game.


Playing an MMO means that player interaction is unavoidable, not required. Forgive the rather faulty analogy, but its like having a kid. Interaction with the opposite sex is Unavoidable, dosent mean you cant tell them to **** off right afterwards.



mmo means lots of players play online.. its doesn't mean lots of players are required to play with others online. single player content is always tied to an mmo for a reason

besides.. when P.L comes in and blows up your station and decides to biches slap you once again .. im going to laugh. run along young one.. run along..
Mellianah
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#251 - 2015-05-12 22:48:36 UTC
Tarek Raimo wrote:
Mellianah wrote:
Lore Question, mostly for giggles:

I read somewhere recently, that ... [snip]


Tidal forces are a function of relative mass and movement occurring when the gravity of one object affects another one unequally across its surface area or volume.

As long as those stations do not move around planets/moons but stay in a synchronous orbit, their effect will be very minimal.

I think CCP went a bit over the top with their description of Titans being so large that they cause tidal floods. That would require a relative mass between the Titan and the affected planet similar to the relation between Earth and Moon. Our own moon has a mass billions of times higher than that of an Avatar. Even an Iapetan Titan can not be that much larger. Still, the Moon only amounts to less than 1.5% of the Earth's mass.

If you had a planet so small that a Titan could affect it with the same proportionate mass relation, the planet would be too small to hold an atmosphere, let alone liquid water. In fact, I would consider a Titan to be much more in danger from breaking apart if it passed by a planet too fast rather than it having an effect on the planet.

For an example of that happening check out what happened to comet Shoemaker Levy when it passed through the orbit of Jupiter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_Shoemaker%E2%80%93Levy_9

Interesting, thank you :)

Re: The synchronous orbit... It was the 'suddenly appearing' prospect that had me wondering the most. Great points though.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#252 - 2015-05-12 22:55:34 UTC
Marcus Tedric wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Quote:
Structures won't be able to shoot without someone manning the guns. As CCP Nullarbor mentioned, we have options under our sleeves to mitigate the risk from this change. Like having a reduced vulnerability window in specific areas, and / or be able to have NPCs spawn.


This is a bit of a slippery slope eh? I know you want individuals to feel that they can use the medium structures, but relying on NPC pirates to provide defense is... questionable on a number of levels.

No offense intended.


You would not rely in NPC defense at all, it would be a mild deterrent against a lone ship at best, the point is to show up for your timers and defend.

As I mentioned the balance will be how frequently this happens so that it's not a chore, but still provides opportunities for an interesting engagement.


So, you now require anyone who wishes to be involved with structures to so arrange their lives such that they can be playing EVE every single day; 365 days per year?



Good news Smile

No need to.

A: The vulnerability window isn't necessarily going to be every day.
B: you can let it slide one day, let it get reinforced, then save it phase 2. Or even 3.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Fzhal
#253 - 2015-05-12 22:57:50 UTC
thebringer wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Lyron-Baktos wrote:
When do we get some news on these new structures and how or if they will interact in wormhole space?


We want most of those structures to be available in W-space, but with some special restrictions if need be.


Bringing full docking into wh space will change the place entirely, one of the reasons to live there is to avoid dumb docking games and how intel gathering is important (finding poses, seeing what in them players/ships/structures).

I would rather we stay with the current pos system (at least for wormholes) than this stupid capture the flag rubbish and no loot drops from structures.

But you will do it anyway because who cares about wormholers...

Just please dont break it too badly.

Umm. Don't POSs have bubble of invulnerability and guns now, and the new structures will too with in-space safe logout bubble. And POS hangar/array/etc can be looted after tower destroyed. Your point, and claim to being a wormholer, is refuted by THE MOST BASIC wormhole knowledge...
Aaril
Interstellar Consulting Group
#254 - 2015-05-12 23:04:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Aaril
I have zero experience in sov null, other than sneaking in for explo, so this may be a terrible idea:

Why not just make these (at least the dockable ones), indestructible just like Outpost today? What happens to someones ships/modules/etc today if they get ejected from a system and lose an Outpost?

Apparently these are supposed to be massive undertakings, I doubt there will ever be space clutter like we have with POS today if the requirements are that strict (I am only referring to the largest ones where people can dock).
Chrome Veinss
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#255 - 2015-05-12 23:05:19 UTC
what will be the point of stations after these structures are introduced. are we going to have both npc stations and citadels in npc null?
why would an alliance living in npc null want to invest a lot of isk building a citadel where assets will be at risk instead of using the stations?

these changes dont make sense for npc nullsec unless they come tied with destructible npc stations
Memphis Baas
#256 - 2015-05-12 23:06:52 UTC
Can we please have billboards outside the large structures? or ON the structures?
Suede
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#257 - 2015-05-12 23:11:36 UTC
CCP Logibro wrote:
It's time for some more Structure talk with Team Game of Drones. This time, they're talking about the Citadel class structures, how they will work, and the ways in which it will be able to reach out and say "Hi!" to someone before blowing them up. If this catches your interest, then you should read the blog from the keyboard of CCP Ytterbium.



are you going to let structures be able to warp or fly about slowly,

would be nice for a structures to be able to move in space at very slow speed,
or some kind of structures which can move about in space
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
#258 - 2015-05-12 23:21:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Terranid Meester
Will we be able to incapacitate the invulnerability link by entosis/shooting thereby leaving the tasty capitals ripe for shooting when it goes offline?

I think 250km is a good distance, if you build a base its good to see it.
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
#259 - 2015-05-12 23:24:49 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Structures will drop fitted modules through the same loot mechanic than ships, but corporate and personal stored items inside them will not be affected – this will be handled through asset safety mechanic which we quickly explained in the previous Dev Blog and shall be more extensively tackled in a later blog.

I thought you said that was only going to be used for the XL structures....or else there is very little incentive for those of us that like to bash HS towers to do it. We do it for the LOOTS, the extra build materials, blueprints, ect....we don't hit towers ONLY for the arrays that are anchored.

Not a happy camper right now.
DaReaper
Net 7
Cannon.Fodder
#260 - 2015-05-12 23:24:56 UTC
One more question not sure if this was asked:

I have ran a corp for years, from small to 120 man. Anyway, this Citadel, will it work like a corp hanger array or a psersonal hanger array?

Lets say me and billybob deploy in ls. After a few months billybob suddenly vanishes. I decide i am tired of running this thing and want to move it. Does billybob need to have his stuff cleared out before i unanchor? If not, then is his stuff lost if i unanchor (like a PHA) or as ceo can i empty his hanger to unanchor it? Or would i unancor, move, reanchor, and his stuff is still there? I'm thinking it will be like the PHA, but i'm curious

OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Eve For life.