These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Grorious Reader
Mongorian Horde
#521 - 2015-05-14 16:42:13 UTC
I for one approve of virtually everything about these new structures. No more structure grinding opens up a lot more strategic possibilities for smaller groups like mine. It also means clearing abandoned structures is much less hassle, so there will be a lot fewer abandoned structures. As a wormholer I welcome the change, even if it makes my own POS easier to destroy. It has a lot of potential to create entertaining content.

If the hangars available in these structures behave more like NPC station hangars and less like the crappy POS modules, I will be ecstatic.

It would be nice if there was some kind of limited clone vat service that could be used in W-space. Maybe call it the "Bio-Reconstitution Array" and say it uses stolen drifter technology. It would have a fuel bay of sorts, that would hold a small number of corpses. You put corpses into the bay, and in a couple hours or so it becomes a clone. When you die in the same system as the BRA, you can respawn there. Doing so uses up one of the reconstituted clones. This means that you can't respawn there indefinitely since you will eventually run out of viable clones because it takes hours to create one. You also shouldn't be able to use it for clone jumping between w and k-space. As long as the number of clones you can have in the array at once is relatively low, the module won't make it significantly harder to evict a corp, and will help alleviate the pain of getting podded by a lone ganker and having to dive all the way back into your C5. I think this would make people living WH less averse to PvP, and it would make the system seem more like a home base.
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
#522 - 2015-05-14 16:43:40 UTC
159Pinky wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:
That's a valid sentiment but I'm guessing you're not an industrialist.

Industry involves a practically unmanageable volume of materials, and it's nearly impossible to evacuate everything in a matter of two timers. A month, even. Caches of ships and materials that you really have no place else to put them, other than NPC stations. If you don't make considerations for assets, it would be a profound nerf to player owned structures.



You have to move all the stuff in the structure, so why aren't you able to move it out? It's all about planning.
Then again, you could always defend your structure. Or you could run your operation out of an NPC station.

The Interbus moving could be interesting, but then those convoys should be vulnerable to player attacks. So the gamble woud be: do I stay and fight and not evacuate or do I move them with Interbus and risk losing the stuff?


1 - it was moved there without the immediate threat of losing it
2 - it was moved there over a long period of time
3 - stuff accumulates

Now, as a general rule, I do not maintain a lot in any of the POSes I run. I have and have seen enough take down by seemingly insignificant forces to be foolish enough to trust all I have to them. But for manufacturing certain things: NPC stations do not exist. A Titan, for instance, cannot be manufactured in an NPC station so the Trillions of ISK in material and billions of metric volume simply cannot be moved at a whim and certainly not with a single jump freighter should the structure be attacked.

As for planning: Plans are good and well, but no plan survives the battlefield.

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

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.
Morn Hylund
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#523 - 2015-05-14 16:43:55 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
That's a valid sentiment but I'm guessing you're not an industrialist.

Industry involves a practically unmanageable volume of materials, and it's nearly impossible to evacuate everything in a matter of two timers. A month, even. Caches of ships and materials that you really have no place else to put them, other than NPC stations. If you don't make considerations for assets, it would be a profound nerf to player owned structures.

Materials accumulate quickly, by way of buy orders and several players filling them. Not just ore or minerals.

There are a lot of situations where it requires tens or hundreds of freighter loads to build just one thing. If you have a freighter pilot, you can get a sense of this on Sisi by joining up with Wedge Rancer. He builds supers for players. I had ten freighter pilots ferrying materials from station to POS for hours, and there's no end to that. I did it just for the perspective, and I think you should too.

Structures can, will, and do accumulate more stuff than can be moved by a corporation or alliance... coalition even, in a short period of time. Good luck organizing a coalition-wide materials evacuation op. That's about the least sexy gameplay I can imagine.

If you ask me, players are already going to be up a creek in the new destructible structure system even with the considerations their assets are being given.

I think a better solution would be an emergency Interbus moving service that is invulnerable to player attack, but costs ISK and time. More than the ISK or time cost, though, displacing assets would be the real consequence for losing a structure, and I think that's enough. Otherwise, Industry and market become a casualty of structure / system / Sov ownership, and I don't think you want that. Personal assets, too. They need to be removed from at-risk-in-space-combat gameplay. The fantasy hardcore EVE you are asking for is one that would destroy itself.

The PVP playstyle would destroy all others, and that's a bit OP.

About the Interbus moving service thing... if assets are moved to the next-closest owned structure or nearest NPC station (for free?)... chasing out a group's war and industry materials in this way isn't a wasted effort.

It's not destruction, but it's still a denial of access. Compared to destruction (which is absolute), you can balance that denial if it has variables of distance, time, and ISK cost (in the Interbus method I suggested).

It adds an interesting gambling scenario, too, where you might order your assets moved then save the structure.

Great post. I really don't get all this whining about - Waaaaaaaaa we don't get to have all their stuff when we blow up their Citadel.

1. You blew up their Citadel and that is usually the first step to taking over someone's space.
2. You blew up their Citadel, and Citadel stuff will drop as loot. Just not the personal containers.
3. You blew up their Citadel, so all that ISK and time they spent building it is gone.
4. You blew up their Citadel, and all their personal stuff is going to have to be transported somewhere else.
5. You blew up their Citadel.
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
#524 - 2015-05-14 16:48:07 UTC
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
Romel Erata wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:

2. I think we will show them on the onboard scanner to warp to.


I haven't read the blog in its entirely yet, but how are these structures going to be deployed anywhere, if the only available points are the warpable solar system objects like the sun, moons, planets and all intersecting lines between them, i.e. someone will ALWAYS pass your structure in warp as it lies on the warp path between two objects, unless you deploy something like 2000 km off a planet's warp in point.

In other words, you can't have positioning above the solar system's plane, unless you have old Deep safe spot bookmarks from many moons ago. Sad


You can get to all sorts of interesting positions with careful bookmark-warp-bookmarking.


Not sure if anyone has brought this up yet but does this mean I can set essentially a stationary pipe-bomb with an XL Citadel and a bubble?


Dat is a good point. Smile

"Oh sorry, our new-POS-system-deathstar-station-thingy appears to be in the way of your travel direction."Pirate

The Future is UP!

CCP pls ༼ つ ◕_◕༽つ gib warp 2 own Scanner Probe


Not if these structures cannot be placed on Grid - of course... a grid can be extended... Twisted

It would still not be impossible to surround Jita IV-4 with Citadel structures and extend the grid from an afore mentioned 250 KM to see the station and all who undock.

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

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#525 - 2015-05-14 16:52:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Iroquoiss Pliskin
Petrified wrote:
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
Romel Erata wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:


You can get to all sorts of interesting positions with careful bookmark-warp-bookmarking.


Not sure if anyone has brought this up yet but does this mean I can set essentially a stationary pipe-bomb with an XL Citadel and a bubble?


Dat is a good point. Smile

"Oh sorry, our new-POS-system-deathstar-station-thingy appears to be in the way of your travel direction."Pirate

The Future is UP!

CCP pls ༼ つ ◕_◕༽つ gib warp 2 own Scanner Probe


Not if these structures cannot be placed on Grid - of course... a grid can be extended... Twisted


Eh? The grid is anything that has 1 player.

You create a bookmark between two gates, you then ferry your deathstar there to plant it. Setup a few warp bubbles and enjoy. Cool

Quote:
It would still not be impossible to surround Jita IV-4 with Citadel structures and extend the grid from an afore mentioned 250 KM to see the station and all who undock.


Grid is irrelevant if restriction is placed on the distance from any given celestial, even at 1,000 km fixes all issues.

Grid around Jita 4-4 is already multiple times larger on average due to instaundocks and other shenanigans around the station.

// [PvP Damage Done by Class (Scylla)] //

[Cruisers Online]
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#526 - 2015-05-14 17:10:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Aralyn Cormallen
EnternalSoul wrote:

Basically I do not see a need to limit them at all. Have 300 XL in one system if you can afford to build them.


Yeah, I don't see weight of structures in a system as being a problem - if someone erects 300 structures in one system, sure, thats a hell of a lot to entosis to unseat them, but we for one could drop enough of a fleet to entosis them all in one vulnerability window, and leave the poor sods trying to save 300 structures all at once. Even if they could defend that uncontested, thats still a wrist-slittingly unpleasant prospect. More structures, the more nodes to defend, the problem is kinda self-regulating.
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#527 - 2015-05-14 17:10:43 UTC
drag bubbles not on the same grid as the grid where warp was initiated or the destination grid have no effect, fyi
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
#528 - 2015-05-14 17:14:54 UTC
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
Eh? The grid is anything that has 1 player.

You create a bookmark between two gates, you then ferry your deathstar there to plant it. Setup a few warp bubbles and enjoy. Cool

Actually, while it is nice on paper, it does not work in practice. Not for a lack of trying but because of the nature of warp disrupting bubbles and grid mechanics. There is a reason Rooks and Kings set up their pipe bombing runs on a gate and not in between gates: the bubble has to be placed on grid prior to the warp. So while you can place a bubble 1 AU in between two gates it will catch no one unless they were aiming for the grid co-ordinate - in which case most likely a fleet member since the target is less likely to be warping to your book mark.

There are ways to extend the grid with bubbles... hehe... but such things are a no no due to the server lag it causes.

A place like Jita IV-4 could get very interesting since it would be possible to bait a target from near the station into range of the Citadel's guns.

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
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
#529 - 2015-05-14 17:16:41 UTC
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
EnternalSoul wrote:

Basically I do not see a need to limit them at all. Have 300 XL in one system if you can afford to build them.


Yeah, I don't see weight of structures in a system as being a problem - if someone erects 300 structures in one system, sure, thats a hell of a lot to entosis to unseat them, but we for one could drop enough of a fleet to entosis them all in one vulnerability window, and leave the poor sods trying to save 300 structures all at once. Even if they could defend that uncontested, thats still a wrist-slittingly unpleasant prospect. More structures, the more nodes to defend, the problem is kinda self-regulating.


Pretty much. Also, since the structures are not tied to sov - just the TCU, the only ones you have to concern yourself with are the ones controlling resources - such as moon goo or system intel.

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

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.
Obil Que
Star Explorers
Solis Tenebris
#530 - 2015-05-14 17:22:06 UTC
Petrified wrote:
Lena Lazair wrote:
Petrified wrote:
How can the Citadel be able to take care of itself in a fight and repel trolling attempts from a single player IF it requires someone to man the guns? The Dev blog implies that the guns are automated like a POS when not manned.


The dev blog implies that if you own a citadel and are alive to use it, you can repel a solo troll 100% of the time. You don't need to be a good pilot, or have expensive ships, or be a PvP wizard... you just need to get into your citadel and push the "fire big guns make bad people go away" button.

It in no way implies that we go back to the days of absentee landlordism where you can drop down a dozen structures that defend themselves. If you are there using the structure it will be trivial to repel anything that is not an actual attempt to take the structure. If you are not there using the structure than it will (intentionally) be vulnerable to a solo troll in a newb-ship.

Again, occupancy-based concepts here. Provide powerful tools to people actually using an area through structures while simultaneously making it trivial to clear out crap left behind by people no longer present without requiring a giant structure HP grind.


Which makes the Citadel essentially an immobile space ship. I would want to see more details on how the vulnerability windows will work for the structures, but essentially this detail does become problematic for the more solo oriented player.

The other problem is the association of these structures to Lordism. Since these structures will essentially be freely deployable anywhere, there is no lordism involved in using them apart from a place to do things and keep things. The only time they will be lordism would be if they are tied to a limited resource: such as system control or moon mining.

But the idea behind any form of automated defense is not that it is foolproof but that it is capable of defending against a fool. A single pilot is going to have a hard time taking down an existing POS, but the defenses can be soloed and eliminated and the POS itself destroyed. Likewise, all I and others are asking for from the Devs is that there is a minimal defense mechanism to prevent the random fool from sitting on the place running a link whereas a well prepared fool could.

It is am important distinction. I am not asking that the defenses work at their optimal when no one is present, just that they work with enough effect to harass the random entosis wielding fool. As I mentioned previously: it makes sense the weapons would not perform as effectively when a capsuleer is not manning them but they should work - any programmer/designer (in game not the Devs) would be a fool to not include such basic functionality.


They are going to have a huge balance issue enabling automated defenses. An Entosis ship as basically no defense other than local reps during the cycle. It becomes a min/max game and any automated defense will have a DPS threshold you have to exceed to run Entosis on it. Whatever that level is, that will be the minimum ship required to solo attack an unoccupied structure. EVE is nothing if not predictable and people will simply fly that ship to do the job. That's more like solving a PvE equation that anything and you might as well not have the automated defense then as the result is the same. I'm not sure how you get around that fact and it is all a result of the Entosis module, its side effects and the limitation of "slots" on a structure.
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#531 - 2015-05-14 17:23:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Iroquoiss Pliskin
Petrified wrote:
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
Eh? The grid is anything that has 1 player.

You create a bookmark between two gates, you then ferry your deathstar there to plant it. Setup a few warp bubbles and enjoy. Cool

Actually, while it is nice on paper, it does not work in practice. Not for a lack of trying but because of the nature of warp disrupting bubbles and grid mechanics. There is a reason Rooks and Kings set up their pipe bombing runs on a gate and not in between gates: the bubble has to be placed on grid prior to the warp. So while you can place a bubble 1 AU in between two gates it will catch no one unless they were aiming for the grid co-ordinate - in which case most likely a fleet member since the target is less likely to be warping to your book mark.

There are ways to extend the grid with bubbles... hehe... but such things are a no no due to the server lag it causes.


Even at 1,000 km deployment restriction it can be done, so 10,000 km deployment restriction then. Twisted

Quote:
A place like Jita IV-4 could get very interesting since it would be possible to bait a target from near the station into range of the Citadel's guns.


Assuming XL/L structures will be deployable in Hisec, assuming the new weapon systems will have that kind of range, and assuming the 250 km from celestials limit. Blink

EvilweaselSA wrote:
drag bubbles not on the same grid as the grid where warp was initiated or the destination grid have no effect, fyi


Then it becomes a non-issue with a reasonable deployment distance from stargates and other stations.

// [PvP Damage Done by Class (Scylla)] //

[Cruisers Online]
Atum' Ra
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#532 - 2015-05-14 17:24:06 UTC
The ability to defend gates with stational stuctures is not so bad. Few sentry will be enogh but... citadel i like more.

CCP please give more info. 500 messages in 3 days! People isn't interested in your entosis we want new big guns & AOE torpedos Twisted
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#533 - 2015-05-14 17:28:25 UTC
Atum' Ra wrote:
The ability to defend gates with stational stuctures is not so bad. Few sentry will be enogh but... citadel i like more.


I think that instead of placing a whole station at a gate, the gates themselves could become re-fittable in claimed space.

// [PvP Damage Done by Class (Scylla)] //

[Cruisers Online]
Dominique Vasilkovsky
#534 - 2015-05-14 17:36:02 UTC
Can we have an assault version of the citadel with a jump drive upgrade? You know so people can do invasions in style?
Atum' Ra
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#535 - 2015-05-14 17:52:52 UTC
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Can we have an assault version of the citadel with a jump drive upgrade? You know so people can do invasions in style?


Just make REAL mothership like in Homeworld !
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
#536 - 2015-05-14 18:08:21 UTC
Obil Que wrote:
Petrified wrote:
Lena Lazair wrote:
Petrified wrote:
How can the Citadel be able to take care of itself in a fight and repel trolling attempts from a single player IF it requires someone to man the guns? The Dev blog implies that the guns are automated like a POS when not manned.


The dev blog implies that if you own a citadel and are alive to use it, you can repel a solo troll 100% of the time. You don't need to be a good pilot, or have expensive ships, or be a PvP wizard... you just need to get into your citadel and push the "fire big guns make bad people go away" button.

It in no way implies that we go back to the days of absentee landlordism where you can drop down a dozen structures that defend themselves. If you are there using the structure it will be trivial to repel anything that is not an actual attempt to take the structure. If you are not there using the structure than it will (intentionally) be vulnerable to a solo troll in a newb-ship.

Again, occupancy-based concepts here. Provide powerful tools to people actually using an area through structures while simultaneously making it trivial to clear out crap left behind by people no longer present without requiring a giant structure HP grind.


Which makes the Citadel essentially an immobile space ship. I would want to see more details on how the vulnerability windows will work for the structures, but essentially this detail does become problematic for the more solo oriented player.

The other problem is the association of these structures to Lordism. Since these structures will essentially be freely deployable anywhere, there is no lordism involved in using them apart from a place to do things and keep things. The only time they will be lordism would be if they are tied to a limited resource: such as system control or moon mining.

But the idea behind any form of automated defense is not that it is foolproof but that it is capable of defending against a fool. A single pilot is going to have a hard time taking down an existing POS, but the defenses can be soloed and eliminated and the POS itself destroyed. Likewise, all I and others are asking for from the Devs is that there is a minimal defense mechanism to prevent the random fool from sitting on the place running a link whereas a well prepared fool could.

It is am important distinction. I am not asking that the defenses work at their optimal when no one is present, just that they work with enough effect to harass the random entosis wielding fool. As I mentioned previously: it makes sense the weapons would not perform as effectively when a capsuleer is not manning them but they should work - any programmer/designer (in game not the Devs) would be a fool to not include such basic functionality.


They are going to have a huge balance issue enabling automated defenses. An Entosis ship as basically no defense other than local reps during the cycle. It becomes a min/max game and any automated defense will have a DPS threshold you have to exceed to run Entosis on it. Whatever that level is, that will be the minimum ship required to solo attack an unoccupied structure. EVE is nothing if not predictable and people will simply fly that ship to do the job. That's more like solving a PvE equation that anything and you might as well not have the automated defense then as the result is the same. I'm not sure how you get around that fact and it is all a result of the Entosis module, its side effects and the limitation of "slots" on a structure.


In and of itself, that is not a problem: people always will fly what best fits the situation. As I stated, the auto-mated defenses are not meant for those people, but for the fool who decides to take on the structure willy nilly. That is all that is being asked. The real mix up comes when another player enters the grid and engages.

The only difference, offense wise, between a POS and a Citadel at present is that the POS'es offensive capability can be neutered.

Let any automation require a higher fuel consumption, but let there be some form of automation available. Just because I am on a business trip for a few weeks and cannot sufficiently access EVE I should not have to dismantle my Citadel and move all it's contents to an NPC station because the station designer failed to include a script that says: turn on guns and shoot if someone fitting x category approaches. I should not have to do that if I am on the business trip because any random Tom or Sally comes along in a T1 Frigate and applies an entosis module.

I should not have to always rely on other players to protect my interests if I am offline.

A minimal amount of automation is requested, not a full blown death star. If I lose my Citadel because of someone dedicating an attack to it rather than some random frigate I am fine with that: good game. But to lose it because of a random frigate in conjunction with real life is not a good game but bad design.

"Sorry, you can't use X if you work solo without a disproportionate chance to lose it to anyone random person." is not a realistic answer. Murphy's Law is quite real and anyone who has played EVE, had something they needed to address in real life, and returned to the keyboard knows: thats when it happens. The automation is not there to protect against someone determined, but to mitigate against the random. Its not that difficult of a concept nor impossible to include.

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
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
#537 - 2015-05-14 18:09:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Petrified
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Can we have an assault version of the citadel with a jump drive upgrade? You know so people can do invasions in style?

They exist, I think they are Titans, Dreadnaughts, and Carriers? Blink

Atum' Ra wrote:
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
Can we have an assault version of the citadel with a jump drive upgrade? You know so people can do invasions in style?


Just make REAL mothership like in Homeworld !

Oh wait... yeah... When I first saw Titans introduced, I hoped they would be more like that. Capable of manufacture et al, nt just a bigger ship with a bigger gun.

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

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.
Obil Que
Star Explorers
Solis Tenebris
#538 - 2015-05-14 18:11:53 UTC
Petrified wrote:
In and of itself, that is not a problem: people always will fly what best fits the situation. As I stated, the auto-mated defenses are not meant for those people, but for the fool who decides to take on the structure willy nilly. That is all that is being asked. The real mix up comes when another player enters the grid and engages.

The only difference, offense wise, between a POS and a Citadel at present is that the POS'es offensive capability can be neutered.

Let any automation require a higher fuel consumption, but let there be some form of automation available. Just because I am on a business trip for a few weeks and cannot sufficiently access EVE I should not have to dismantle my Citadel and move all it's contents to an NPC station because the station designer failed to include a script that says: turn on guns and shoot if someone fitting x category approaches. I should not have to do that if I am on the business trip because any random Tom or Sally comes along in a T1 Frigate and applies an entosis module.

I should not have to always rely on other players to protect my interests if I am offline.

A minimal amount of automation is requested, not a full blown death star. If I lose my Citadel because of someone dedicating an attack to it rather than some random frigate I am fine with that: good game. But to lose it because of a random frigate in conjunction with real life is not a good game but bad design.

"Sorry, you can't use X if you work solo without a disproportionate chance to lose it to anyone random person." is not a realistic answer. Murphy's Law is quite real and anyone who has played EVE, had something they needed to address in real life, and returned to the keyboard knows: thats when it happens. The automation is not there to protect against someone determined, but to mitigate against the random. Its not that difficult of a concept nor impossible to include.


The Entosis makes it an entirely different dynamic than attacking a POS today. You can only rely on local tank and the Citadel can only apply X DPS limited by slots.

It's a pretty simple calculation to beat your defenses to do a solo unattended attack. So what good are they then?
Fzhal
#539 - 2015-05-14 18:17:58 UTC
Obil Que wrote:
It's a pretty simple calculation to beat your defenses to do a solo unattended attack. So what good are they then?

That is what I said 300 posts ago...
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
#540 - 2015-05-14 18:19:02 UTC
Obil Que wrote:
Petrified wrote:
In and of itself, that is not a problem: people always will fly what best fits the situation. As I stated, the auto-mated defenses are not meant for those people, but for the fool who decides to take on the structure willy nilly. That is all that is being asked. The real mix up comes when another player enters the grid and engages.

The only difference, offense wise, between a POS and a Citadel at present is that the POS'es offensive capability can be neutered.

Let any automation require a higher fuel consumption, but let there be some form of automation available. Just because I am on a business trip for a few weeks and cannot sufficiently access EVE I should not have to dismantle my Citadel and move all it's contents to an NPC station because the station designer failed to include a script that says: turn on guns and shoot if someone fitting x category approaches. I should not have to do that if I am on the business trip because any random Tom or Sally comes along in a T1 Frigate and applies an entosis module.

I should not have to always rely on other players to protect my interests if I am offline.

A minimal amount of automation is requested, not a full blown death star. If I lose my Citadel because of someone dedicating an attack to it rather than some random frigate I am fine with that: good game. But to lose it because of a random frigate in conjunction with real life is not a good game but bad design.

"Sorry, you can't use X if you work solo without a disproportionate chance to lose it to anyone random person." is not a realistic answer. Murphy's Law is quite real and anyone who has played EVE, had something they needed to address in real life, and returned to the keyboard knows: thats when it happens. The automation is not there to protect against someone determined, but to mitigate against the random. Its not that difficult of a concept nor impossible to include.


The Entosis makes it an entirely different dynamic than attacking a POS today. You can only rely on local tank and the Citadel can only apply X DPS limited by slots.

It's a pretty simple calculation to beat your defenses to do a solo unattended attack. So what good are they then?


The same as with a POS.

I can look at a POS and see what I need to fit and tank for. With a Citadel, I won't have to do any of that if the person happens to be called away for something more pressing in their life.

I can solo a POS in a Rokh if I have observed what defenses there are and thus prepared accordingly. This is no different from what I urge the developers to rethink with regards to Citadels: a minimal automation to the guns at least.

But you yourself admit the point: if one comes prepared: what good was the defense? The Defense is good against the unprepared and to slow even the prepared. But it is never fool proof. The Citadel defenses, manned or not, will not be fool proof. Adding simple automation will not make them fool proof any more than any current POS is fool proof.

Do you understand the difference and thus the point?

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

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.