These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Sounding board for structures in w space

First post
Author
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#61 - 2015-05-29 03:21:01 UTC
Trinkets friend wrote:
Having listened, it is clear that removing the POS ties to moons is basically unworkable barring some kind of brainwave solution.

Citadels not on overview = use combat probes
Combat probes = surprise gone
No probes = Where is structure?
POS's on overview = EZ mode scouting
POS's on system scanner = cluttered
POS's not on system clutter = go to back to top


I hate spitballing ideas regarding this because this whole new setup effects all space, not just wspace... But for the suprise part...

An "option" would be to add a new green sig to the probe overview.

You launch a citadel, it shows up as a green sig (warpable), but unidentified (you don't know what it is). Its off the overview, in a place probably 20 to 30% of new eden don't even pay attention to.

To make this effective, you would have to change all identified green sigs into unidentified green sigs (warpable to, but unknown). To identify it, you either probe it, or warp to it.

To fix the issue of easy detection, the "box" that shows up when you warp to a site gets moved to when you land in the site.

Its an idea.

Yaay!!!!

Kynric
Sky Fighters
Rote Kapelle
#62 - 2015-05-29 05:32:27 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Trinkets friend wrote:
Having listened, it is clear that removing the POS ties to moons is basically unworkable barring some kind of brainwave solution.

Citadels not on overview = use combat probes
Combat probes = surprise gone
No probes = Where is structure?
POS's on overview = EZ mode scouting
POS's on system scanner = cluttered
POS's not on system clutter = go to back to top


I hate spitballing ideas regarding this because this whole new setup effects all space, not just wspace... But for the suprise part...

An "option" would be to add a new green sig to the probe overview.

You launch a citadel, it shows up as a green sig (warpable), but unidentified (you don't know what it is). Its off the overview, in a place probably 20 to 30% of new eden don't even pay attention to.

To make this effective, you would have to change all identified green sigs into unidentified green sigs (warpable to, but unknown). To identify it, you either probe it, or warp to it.

To fix the issue of easy detection, the "box" that shows up when you warp to a site gets moved to when you land in the site.

Its an idea.


Why not go for a hyrbrid solution:
1. A navigational beacon is added to the onboard scanner results when a pos is not at a celestial.
2. When the pos is at a celestial there is no need for a beacon and thus it is not added.

It would then be a choice if you wanted a custom location or if you would rather use a naturally occuring feature as the beacon for your navigational computers.
Winthorp
#63 - 2015-05-29 05:58:41 UTC
After reading the notes i am truly worried.

But **** it, will just watch it burn to the ground.
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#64 - 2015-05-29 11:54:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
I get why they want these warpable, it makes sense. Not objecting to that because it makes for some semblance of sane gameplay instead of "no probe scanner, oh well". There would be no real need for pirates little helper (copy paste copy paste copy paste, etc). There would be no need to play "Guess the moon", or adjust by 100,000 and dscan again.

There wouldn't be no real need to anchor 100 of these either.

Dunno. I'll relisten to the audio today.

Yaay!!!!

HTC NecoSino
Out of Focus
Odin's Call
#65 - 2015-05-29 13:54:10 UTC
I look forward to watching these changes mutate to best suit the desires of NullSec while Wormholers struggle to adapt to this new "emergent gameplay"
GizzyBoy
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#66 - 2015-05-29 16:25:06 UTC
I'm perfectly ok with the structure having a big timer show up as its onlineing in the overlay. just like poco's have timers.

But the small / mediums dont show up till after they are functional maybe.

Having a reason for some one to come back to a system is not a bad idea and could be great additional gameplay, you get kicked out, but you still have stuff at risk, and are now potentially motivated to come back and kick the people out, to get your stuff back. or you infiltrate the newer group trade your journal entry to an alt and over time suddenly pow get your stuff back,
Steven Hackett
NOMADS.
#67 - 2015-05-29 16:27:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Steven Hackett
Sad I couldn't make it to the Sounding board.

What I seem to hear though is that CCP is set on having this type of structures, they then realised that they didn't have the knowledge, expertise or groundwork to do it, so now it is all about pushing out a feature that they aren't ready to push out.

Why did you choose the storage solution? Cause it was the easy way with our current systems.
Why did you choose the way of locating them? Cause it was the easy way with our current systems.
Why did you choose the way to interact wit them? ...
The way of gathering intel from them? ...
How did you choose the type of fuel? We went for the easy solution..

It is all about hacking a feature together with whatever broken systems they have at their disposal. So instead of making a good feature, they hack together something that works, but isn't good.

I guess some things never change, despite new release cycles, designers, roadmaps..

Not many Vikings around the CCP offices anymore? :P


How about we stop up for a second, realize that we aren't ready to make these new structures, say sorry to the community for once again promising something we didn't have the skills/time/resources to do.
Then we can get around to making some tempoary issues with NS structures until we are ready to do it proper. And then we can focus on parts of the game that is actually broken, like corp roles, activity, add stuff to do etc.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#68 - 2015-05-29 17:57:48 UTC
Steven Hackett wrote:
Why did you choose the storage solution? Cause it was the easy way with our current systems.
Why did you choose the way of locating them? Cause it was the easy way with our current systems.
Why did you choose the way to interact wit them? ...
The way of gathering intel from them? ...
How did you choose the type of fuel? We went for the easy solution..


There's no shame in elegance. The more stuff they add, the more they have to design, maintain, update (for grapgical assets) and so on.

The only pressing reason to roll up a new thing is that nothing you have in your existing assets will do the trick.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Niskin
League of the Lost
#69 - 2015-05-29 18:43:39 UTC
corbexx wrote:
zar dada wrote:


I'm not up to date if these changes have already been flushed out...

1. Please ask CCP NOT to bring station games to wspace and still allow some indication of how many ships/pilots are floating at the new POS replacement structure



you are indeed right you are not up to date if you had read the replys to the feedback thread or my blog you would understand linking and how there wont be station games


I just finished reading all 26 pages of the thread about structures in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum and didn't get that impression. It's been like 20 pages since a dev responded though, so that could be why. If you could poke them and get them to post an update there it might help with the visibility on that.

I'll go check your blog though, I haven't been keeping up to date on much in EVE while I've been inactive.

It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog

Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship.

-MooMooDachshundCow

GizzyBoy
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#70 - 2015-05-30 02:52:13 UTC
Steven Hackett wrote:
Sad I couldn't make it to the Sounding board.

What I seem to hear though is that CCP is set on having this type of structures, they then realised that they didn't have the knowledge, expertise or groundwork to do it, so now it is all about pushing out a feature that they aren't ready to push out.

Why did you choose the storage solution? Cause it was the easy way with our current systems.
Why did you choose the way of locating them? Cause it was the easy way with our current systems.
Why did you choose the way to interact wit them? ...
The way of gathering intel from them? ...
How did you choose the type of fuel? We went for the easy solution..

It is all about hacking a feature together with whatever broken systems they have at their disposal. So instead of making a good feature, they hack together something that works, but isn't good.

I guess some things never change, despite new release cycles, designers, roadmaps..

Not many Vikings around the CCP offices anymore? :P


How about we stop up for a second, realize that we aren't ready to make these new structures, say sorry to the community for once again promising something we didn't have the skills/time/resources to do.
Then we can get around to making some tempoary issues with NS structures until we are ready to do it proper. And then we can focus on parts of the game that is actually broken, like corp roles, activity, add stuff to do etc.


They current systems are less than optimal in so many ways, The new structures are what we have been asking for to some extent for the last 7+ years, they also have to be made in a way that works for all of space. and in a way that is consistent.

I'm ok with there being less intel on what they have or dont have, either some ones going to fight you (potentially based on previous fights / encounters / killmail stats) or they are not.

I do have issues possibly with the undock mechanism because choke points kinda suck when compared to the current pos shield, and it would be to easy to park 10+ smart bombing bs's to cover the undock area.

They appear to be in the information gathering stage where they are documenting what they want and how it works BEFORE they actually write things and making it work. Which is how designing things works and its a near total change from other game changing features designed prior.

Is it going to be perfect? you wont get 100% what you want, but will it be better than what we have? yes most likely. will it possibly change the face of all areas of space,

The implications for all areas of space are so vast as it will be almost a complete game changer in how people use space and where they live.
Axloth Okiah
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#71 - 2015-05-30 08:14:46 UTC
NEWS FLASH: "CCP and CSM still making sure wspace stays dead"

We've been explaining what we need for several years now and it seems to have had absolutely no impact whatsoever. So now that they are finally cobbling something together, we will get stuck with tools tuned specifically and exclusively for the needs of nullbears (big surprise there, given the lack of real non-bloc CSMs).

On the bright side, at least its a change and it might shake some things up. It will still suck, but it will suck in a somewhat different way. So we will keep complaining as usual (to no effect), some people will leave, others might come, etc.
Steven Hackett
NOMADS.
#72 - 2015-05-30 10:22:11 UTC
GizzyBoy wrote:


They current systems are less than optimal in so many ways, The new structures are what we have been asking for to some extent for the last 7+ years, they also have to be made in a way that works for all of space. and in a way that is consistent.

I'm ok with there being less intel on what they have or dont have, either some ones going to fight you (potentially based on previous fights / encounters / killmail stats) or they are not.

I do have issues possibly with the undock mechanism because choke points kinda suck when compared to the current pos shield, and it would be to easy to park 10+ smart bombing bs's to cover the undock area.

They appear to be in the information gathering stage where they are documenting what they want and how it works BEFORE they actually write things and making it work. Which is how designing things works and its a near total change from other game changing features designed prior.

Is it going to be perfect? you wont get 100% what you want, but will it be better than what we have? yes most likely. will it possibly change the face of all areas of space,

The implications for all areas of space are so vast as it will be almost a complete game changer in how people use space and where they live.

I actually like the POSes.
I don't see much wrong with them that couldn't be fixed by changing a few structures and a bit of tweaking.
I also hasn't noticed a lot of people asking for new POSes. I've seen a lot of people asking for CCP to fix the issues, mainly the issues with roles, tabs and divisions, but not the actual towers and forcefields.

So what exactly does these new structures bring us that we want/need?
So far it gives us:
Worse storage solutions
Worse intel collection
Worse way of finding the towers
Worse interaction (docking & mooring)
Worse verison of the forcefiels.

As I see it, all the most important features of the POS seems to become worse, all so CCP in their infinite lazyness, doesn't have to make and manage 2 systems (stations and POSes), and so they can best accommodate the nullsec part of the game. A dev even wrote that the way we wanted storage seemed so complicated, so he was just gonna be lazy and do it the easy way(personal storage).

So please, what exactly is it that these new structures bring W-space that we have been needing so desperately, that it is worth sacrificing our way of life and living?
GizzyBoy
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#73 - 2015-05-30 13:04:19 UTC
Steven Hackett wrote:
GizzyBoy wrote:


So please, what exactly is it that these new structures bring W-space that we have been needing so desperately, that it is worth sacrificing our way of life and living?



Not my job to defend there choices, and no matter what they do people are going to be but hurt.

1) pos security and roles, its currently **** and dont tell me it isnt manageable if you do xz & z, and you should click the box on the 3rd page because that stops some one taking something out of this pos, but not at corprate station (f) but yes at station (x)

2)Total amount of storage available, there are limits, Since nova I travel pretty light. some people are bad and where using things like capital assembly arrays to store ships which they would online and offline so they could drag ships to the empty SMA
Granted this is and edge case scenario and no one should ever let there setup get that messy.

3)wont need pos passwords

4) more freedom for lower ranked members to do things with out any special roles,
They can build something, no one can steal said thing or accidentally use some one else's materials.

5)People dropping things in the wrong hangers wont need help retrieving said things.

6)Ability to hide intel if you so choose. the reality is you will either engage some one or you wont. it wont matter if theres 50 people on-line in there system or only 2, your either going for it or your not. if your worried your going to be counter jumped thats your problem and a risk you take.

7) ability to trade in station with out doing the whole hangers that can etc business, so long as there is some kind of office facility to drop loot to corp, or access shared ships, then things will be fine.


8) Much easier to find.. I disagree your your statement that they will be hard to find, with the ease of use(I hope!) the density of people living in the same structure will increase. meaning far less structures to have to find and stalk in the first place.

Of course people might go for full coverage if there's some kind of limit, but really, there's only 4-5 systems I can think off that would bother to do that.

With things like Curses not showing up on dscan I really hope theres an increase in the chance of hitting people care baring in your own allegedly empty system!


9) its possible you currently like pos's because you have Starbase config or your own tower is configured in such a way you can do as you please. I can assure you this is not the case for the majority of wspace citizens.

10) CCP programmers have a right to be lazy, super complicated things for the sake of being complicated have bugs and the weirdest usage case sceneries, at its purest form. Its a place you login/loggoff at, a place to park your ship, build something, fit a ship, undock to go kill something. how much more complicated do you really want it to be?


Change is coming, they are telling you its coming, you can shout and scream all you want. but its going to happen. you can be a part of the process and put your views forward, or you can rant and scream the sky is falling contribute nothing constructive and be totally ignored by all and sundry.


that said things i'm not certain about.
How gas reactions will change, will they become factory type jobs? because in some ways thats sweet, onlineing offlineing crap to move and do things is a pita because roles (pos online/offline needed) antiquated reaction type setups are a ball ache.

Moon reactions/boosters, will they be jobs or how will that work. some kind of factory addon /service that burns fuel?

The undock.. I dislike all the ships coming out of a small easy area where you could get camped blapped due to lag / game crashes. or the ease of dropping one large t2 bubble .

Standings status, currently only people in the same alliance or whom know the pos password can enter a pos ff. If the structure is tied to corp/alliance standings then will we see multiple alliances /corps working out of the same system?

Will we see baiting with care bare corps, as "Owners of structures" in an attempt to lure prospective things to kill to feel much safer to travel or do things in your system or will people change the owner ship to confuse and dazzle would be aggressors?

Ive never found a loot pinjata tower yet, with an off-line ff, but I live and dream of the day! If there's some way that can still happen..

We have also found and swiped ships floating out of pos shields before, I guess we wont see that happen any more.

in the long term I see no negatives. These structures make wspace more accessible to more people and less crazy roles and security permissions needed for the basic usage of the structures, they will also work the same as every other part of space meaning people only need to learn a bit about scanning and wh sizes to adjust to wspace.
Steven Hackett
NOMADS.
#74 - 2015-05-31 14:30:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Steven Hackett
1. Is a roles issue and is being worked on by a different team. This has nothing directly to do with the citadels. With our without citadels, this is being worked on by a different dev team.

2. You construct your POS to do what you want it to do (storage, defense, manifacturing). If you want an easy way of living, then why did you go to W-space in the first place? I support the users choice to mix and match what they need. You should sacrifice something to benefit something else.

3. The removal of POS passwords also removes part of gameplay. Having spies in other corporations, getting their passwords is an old part of gameplay. I don't want CCP to remove risk and turn W-space into NS or HS in regards to security.

4. This is again a roles issue and has nothing to do with the Citadels. It is being worked on by a different team.

5. This is again a roles issue or an issue with how you've set up your towers. Either way, with Citadels you'll most likely still have corp hangars and this will still be an issue. Doesn't have much to do with the structure it self.

6. I think that is very black/white and not true at all. I very much use intel to decide wether I want to engage or not. If you don't then that is your loss, cause I honestly think that most people do. In any case, it is removing a choice from the player, thus removing part of the game and the choices one can take in the sandbox.

7. I do actually like the idea of a trading system. I would hate for you to have to dock to use it though. I would rather trade in the old way(dropping cans), than have to swallow bad mechanics just so it is easier to trade.

8. I don't think I ever said they would be hard to find. Fact is we don't know how they will be located yet. We do however know what CCP said about out ability to look inside the structures.

9. I've been in corps with and without roles. I've set up POSes, taken down POSes, lived out of POSes.. In any case.. This is still an issue with roles, and I agree that the roles system sucks, but this has nothing to do with the structure it self. The stick and the forcefield has nothing to do with the roles system, other than their manage interface, which obv. will need changing when the roles are fixed. And believe me.. Roles are even more a pain in the ass when you got them ;)

10. I want it to be simple actually.. I just don't want them to make something and then be lazy about how they do it. For my sake they can keep the POSes as they are and just fix the roles. CCP is making a brand new Tesla out of old parts from a used Golf.. Lazyness is fine, as long as it doesn't hurt the quality.. Lets please remember that it was lazyness that put CCP in the position where this **** broke to begin with.

So what I read from your post, to sum it up is that you want High Sec station services in W-space, and you want new roles. One of those things you can get by living in HS, that way you won't ruin the W-space way of life, the other thing has nothing to do with the citadels or the topic.. ?

Please understand that I agree with you 100% that the roles is an issue and that the roles makes it hard to create good security without making it a PITA to do anything. And I would love for CCP to fix roles.
It is my understanding, that when most people have been yelling "fix pos'es" in the past, they actualy ment fix roles. Some tweaks to the POS structures would be sweet as well, but that is small stuff compared to the roles.
Niskin
League of the Lost
#75 - 2015-06-01 19:53:41 UTC
I went and read Corbexx's blog post about Structures, for reference, this is what it says:

Quote:
Station games and linking.

I've had a lot of people moan about wormholes getting docking games and this simply isn't the case. It basically comes down to a couple things, people not reading the feedback thread and CCP not explaining it really well.

Here is what it will mostly be like.

you will be docked, you will be able to see the grid outside. So can see if anyone is about. You undock and enter a linking phase, while in this linking phase you are invulnerable, can't lock people or be locked yourself. You will how ever be able to fly around the citadel to a certain distance. This will act as a pseudo force field.


To be fair, this isn't exactly like docking in a station, but it doesn't seem different enough to avoid docking games either.

The only real differences are that in this situation you will be able to see what is on grid while docked, and when you undock you will have limited invulnerability. Now we don't know from that post whether being "linked" is time limited, distance limited, or action limited. For example, if I initiate warp, does invulnerability drop immediately? The answers to those three possibilities may determine whether docking games will be possible or not.

Basically if I undock and initiate warp, if that drops my invulnerability, then it will be docking games galore. If invulnerability is only distance and/or time related then that might solve the problem. Though if it's related to distance then bumping puts docking games back in play.

I posted my feelings about these structure changes in the Features and Ideas thread here. I think staging is one of the most important benefits of having a POS. I don't think CCP fully understands or agrees with this based on how they are trying to proceed. Maybe there is more info out there, that I don't have yet, that addresses these concerns. At least that's what I'm hoping, because it feels like they are missing the point with these new structures, even if I agree with where they are trying to go with most of it.

It's Dark In Here - The Lonely Wormhole Blog

Remember kiddies: the best ship in Eve is Friendship.

-MooMooDachshundCow

Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#76 - 2015-06-05 00:13:36 UTC
kreschun.

OK, so these Citadels have no fuel use. So they never go offline, never get weakened by inactivity. So they are still as theretically deadly when not inhabited as when inhabited. Then the junk inside them get squirelled away to sekrit space cans by space hobbits.

Well, OK, not a question. So here's the real one:

When i unanchor the Citadel, what happens to the junk inside it?

Right now, I have 82 toons in corp. Divide by 2 for alts, I have about 40 meatbods. Some of these meatbods go AFK for long periods. At the moment what I do is hump all their stuff out of their hangars, then take their ships out of the SMA, and either liquidate or contract it back to them.

This is predicated on the ability of a CEO like me, not only dashing and handsome, but able to peek into every nook and cranny of the POS and extract nuggets of caca from it before jacking it down and unanchoring it.

So...in the space hobbit milieux how does it work if my members have their own private space? Do you get the same problems you get with PHA's in that you can't unanchor them because of reasons? Do you get to force the issue and make Space Hobbits come along and steal your member's stuff and hide it in invisible leprecans around system, which will then expire and destroy all their stuff because your members are AFK?

Or soes the act of unanchoring the Citadel just trash everything?

I haven't heard anything either way on this issue. It would be interesting to hear, because I suspect that the way t deal with items being destroyed or space hobbitted is to just move out of the Citadel, leave it sitting there abandoned (just like now! except with no SMA killmail risk!) and take a bet that ecause it's 40 AU's off dscan no one will ever find it, and my members can come back from AFK and eventually get their stuff out.

I dunno. I mean, i hate moving out quitter's gear, but by the same token, this is a bit odd.