These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[New Structures] Condensed thread

First post First post
Author
Locke Deathroe
Clan 86
Antesignani Alliance
#61 - 2015-10-30 22:47:27 UTC
Poranius Fisc[/quote wrote:

They will probably get removed and you may or may not get reimbursed for them.


You sir should work for CCP, you have the vagueness down pat.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#62 - 2015-10-30 23:14:27 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Poranius Fisc wrote:

What happens if a pilot was logged off in an XL citadel in a Titan and the citadel was blown up with the pilot still in it?

Did your corpse and the Titan get hauled away by interbus? or do you log in where the citadel was...

Maybe docking at this stage isn't as safe as you think.

Personally id like to See Larges and Extra Larges take the place of outposts and tie into Perma sov with the option of tearing them down if you are the owner / sov holder. It's a lot of isk to throw away for someones killmail.



Then the titan pilot will get laughed at.

You can dock, stretch your legs etc

Personally, I will undock, tether and safe log prior to logging out for the night

Actually I believe CCP have gone back on making your current ship & pod getting blown up on Citadel destruction.
Because they realised how stupid it was to be safer logging off in open space than inside a citadel.

And you can remove Citadels, they are not 'permanent' like Outposts. It just takes time and they get a vulnerability window at the end of the removal process where anyone can come shoot them.
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
#63 - 2015-10-31 00:51:00 UTC
ThePiachu Avar wrote:
Questions!

1)

CCP Ytterbium wrote:

  • X-Large Citadels: all ships can dock.
  • [/list]


    Does this mean that supers and titans can dock? The keynote from Vegas was rather confusing on that part, implying that they would be only able to tether.

    2) Is there a limit to what system X-Large Citadels can be anchored in? Say, "only in nullsec / w-space", or "nullsec, w-space, lowsec", or will everyone be able to place them everywhere?

    You do realise that you just made it really really clear that you have read nothing about anything *anywhere*. Seriously. Can we get posts just replaced with RTFM? Please?

    AKA the scientist.

    Death and Glory!

    Well fun is also good.

    Nafensoriel
    Brutor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #64 - 2015-10-31 01:40:57 UTC
    Never assume any BPO will be reimbursed or converted to a new item.
    CCPs stance repeatedly has been "youve gotten use out of it" as a reason for lack of reimbursement.

    There is, however, an extremely good reason for this stance. It levels the playing field for the new mechanic.
    While it may seem unfair to lose all of the hard work and time it would be even more unfair to newer players to release a system and then make them compete directly against perfect BPOs.
    Xindi Kraid
    Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
    Arataka Research Consortium
    #65 - 2015-10-31 06:19:40 UTC
    Nafensoriel wrote:


    Actually this is quite simple to answer.

    Wormholes allow an incredible amount of income for personal users. No the corps directly don't make isk like moongoo in nullsec but individually you pull the highest isk per hour in the game potentially.
    The downside to this advantage is risk. You can lose your stuff.. and you cant use all the same toys as everyone else. You have to work a little to get that potential and you have to fight to keep it.

    A citadel with this level of infinitely scalable isk generation allows a WH corp to seriously exploit the transfer system. One C5 site is enough to buy, deploy, and destroy a small citadel. Safe 100% risk free movement of your stuff to NSpace for a 15% tax?
    Do you see now why item transference in a WH is a terrible and literally game breaking idea?
    I was thinking more that they should have either kept the only able to transfer to another citadel in the same system (which requires putting up another structure that can be destroyed), or randomly dump your crap around the system, and you have 20 days to pick it up before it goes poof, and if it's now a hostile system, that could be hazardous. The killmails from people trying to cut their losses could drive further conflict.
    Like blapping that guy who comes back to salvage and loot his own wreck.
    Poranius Fisc
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #66 - 2015-10-31 17:28:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Poranius Fisc
    Locke Deathroe wrote:
    Poranius Fisc

    They will probably get removed and you may or may not get reimbursed for them.[/quote wrote:


    You sir should work for CCP, you have the vagueness down pat.

    Look at the character creation date. I've been listening to it for a while... nm.. this isnt my main.. HE"s been around for a long while.
    Locke Deathroe
    Clan 86
    Antesignani Alliance
    #67 - 2015-11-01 00:52:33 UTC
    Nafensoriel wrote:
    Never assume any BPO will be reimbursed or converted to a new item.
    CCPs stance repeatedly has been "youve gotten use out of it" as a reason for lack of reimbursement.

    There is, however, an extremely good reason for this stance. It levels the playing field for the new mechanic.
    While it may seem unfair to lose all of the hard work and time it would be even more unfair to newer players to release a system and then make them compete directly against perfect BPOs.


    I wouldn't expect to end up with the new BPO fully researched, that I do understand. It's more a matter of every time they remove something they don't give you what the market cost was for the item based on when they were bought, but what they are worth at the time of replacement. The problem with that is the second they say they are getting rid of something the price falls so fast it's a joke. I've had friends quit over that very fact and see many people in Eve facing the same choice over this given how much ISK we are talking for those that made investments in complete sets.
    Nafensoriel
    Brutor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #68 - 2015-11-01 03:43:55 UTC
    Understandable point of view.. but in CCPs case they take the lesser of two evils.
    If they provided market cost then they would have to establish what market cost was.. are we talking peak value, 6 month value, that one expansion in 2006 value? It rapidly becomes an opinion piece that will never satisfy a significant portion of the player base.
    Additionally if you convert that value to isk and materials you create other major problems. What if I just finished training the BPO to max? Is it fair I get full value compared to a guy who maxed it out 5 years ago? The same applies to minerals as it does to leveling the playing field. A sudden infusion of wealth as reimbursement can never be balanced enough to not be unfair to a majority. This is why the logical and fair thing to do is just say "you've gotten use" and remove them.

    Even consider for a moment.. You mention people leaving the game over a lost item in this manner.. Statistically consider that while that is a sad case and rather extreme it is still a very insignificant majority of the player base affected by the change.

    First rule of Dev Work or GM Work... Do what gives you the least amount of hate mail.
    Cynica Deetric
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #69 - 2015-11-01 06:04:31 UTC
    I would like to know why we can't have both POSs and citadels?

    I would think giving player more options not less is a better idea. (CCPlease keep both)

    Also have any of the DEVs taken the time to site down and make a comparison as to what POSs offer/cost vs Citadels?
    (compaired to the "little" guy/corp) (As it stands I would like to keep my POS over buying a citadel or living in a corp citadel)
    Xindi Kraid
    Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
    Arataka Research Consortium
    #70 - 2015-11-01 06:26:52 UTC
    Cynica Deetric wrote:
    I would like to know why we can't have both POSs and citadels?

    I would think giving player more options not less is a better idea. (CCPlease keep both)

    Also have any of the DEVs taken the time to site down and make a comparison as to what POSs offer/cost vs Citadels?
    (compaired to the "little" guy/corp) (As it stands I would like to keep my POS over buying a citadel or living in a corp citadel)

    Mainly because POSes are terrible pieces of **** that are complicated to manage for players and have a horrendous mess of legacy code and should have been replaced years ago.

    The better question is why the new Structure sizes and costs don't line up very well with the sizes POSes come in.
    Nevyn Auscent
    Broke Sauce
    #71 - 2015-11-01 08:54:43 UTC
    Locke Deathroe wrote:


    I wouldn't expect to end up with the new BPO fully researched, that I do understand. It's more a matter of every time they remove something they don't give you what the market cost was for the item based on when they were bought, but what they are worth at the time of replacement. The problem with that is the second they say they are getting rid of something the price falls so fast it's a joke. I've had friends quit over that very fact and see many people in Eve facing the same choice over this given how much ISK we are talking for those that made investments in complete sets.

    If they are going to reimburse what it cost they should also take away all the isk you made or saved with it since you bought it. Seems only fair that if you want the isk from back years ago you don't get to keep any profit made since.

    More likely they will reimburse based on the current research costs to get it to ME 10 TE 20 if you did that. Or whatever ME & TE you did. Since the research costs now provide a very concrete value for what a researched blueprint is actually worth.
    Which in a lot of cases will be far far more than you ever paid for it, and certainly vastly more than it cost you to research it at the time if you did it yourself.
    Rivr Luzade
    Coreli Corporation
    Pandemic Legion
    #72 - 2015-11-01 13:33:12 UTC
    I have a small concern with the deployment of the citadels: The current version of having the 3D mesh with the interior structure of the citadel showing translucent in the placement process is in my opinion nothing but a useless fancy. Judging by the video footage available of the placement of an M Citadel, it is hard to discern what is what on the structure even on that "small" version of it, especially where the undocks are or where they face.

    Instead of this useless fancy, I would like to see clear and more opaque mesh that really only shows the outer shell of the structure and undocks displayed in a different color or some other means to highlight where they are, and in addition their undock direction indicated with arrows.

    UI Improvement Collective

    My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

    Gabriel Karade
    Coreli Corporation
    Pandemic Legion
    #73 - 2015-11-01 13:46:43 UTC
    My concern is that the functionality provided by an XL-SMA (or even starbase forcefields) hasn't be replicated in this proposal, beyond the gold plated XL-Citadel option.

    This is a major change to anyone who wants to be able to 'stretch their legs' for short periods outside a steel coffin. Is this intended?

    War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

    Gabriel Karade
    Coreli Corporation
    Pandemic Legion
    #74 - 2015-11-01 13:51:09 UTC
    Kenneth Feld wrote:
    Xindi Kraid wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    I'm going to unpin the other structures threads and link them all here as we are running out of space in this forum subsection.

    Well last dev post in any of them WAS some months ago.

    Any idea when we might hear any more thoughts on specialized structures?
    Hopefully you are thinking where to go next before citadels launch, so you can roll new stuff out without too much delay
    ===
    I am wondering why you are treating W-space ENTIRELY differently from other areas of space where asset safety is concerned.
    It really isn't fair to let every single other area recover the entirety of their personal assets while people in W-space lose EVERYTHING. What makes W-space so special that it makes you lose everything?
    Certainly you can add some sort of asset recovery system that still results in some danger whether it exposes you, or requires you to plop a new structure. At the same time, 100% of assets back seems surprisingly generous for deep null


    Kenneth Feld wrote:

    Why do you NEED to dock those capitals?

    Why is tethering not enough? You can tether up to Titans at a medium

    Because it means you can't get out of your ship if you want it to remain safe.



    Hmm, maybe we have different definitions of safe

    Safe logging from tethered will be inherently more safe than docked, if you are docked and it gets blown up, you have to pay 15% to get your stuff back unless you build a new citadel

    He's referring to being able to get out of a ship for short periods of time, which otherwise cannot dock - tethering doesn't apply to unmanned ships in the way it has been described. This is completely different to existing mechanics.

    War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

    Kenneth Feld
    Habitual Euthanasia
    Pandemic Legion
    #75 - 2015-11-01 14:33:54 UTC
    Gabriel Karade wrote:
    My concern is that the functionality provided by an XL-SMA (or even starbase forcefields) hasn't be replicated in this proposal, beyond the gold plated XL-Citadel option.

    This is a major change to anyone who wants to be able to 'stretch their legs' for short periods outside a steel coffin. Is this intended?




    We don't know yet

    They sorta kinda have to dock in XL assembly arrays cause they will be built there, they should be significantly cheaper (But with less defense) than a citadel
    Flyinghotpocket
    Small Focused Memes
    Ragequit Cancel Sub
    #76 - 2015-11-01 21:00:56 UTC
    better yet, why isnt this stuff released yet? ive seen this crap on the forums for MONTHS now.

    Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro

    Nafensoriel
    Brutor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #77 - 2015-11-01 21:22:51 UTC
    Flyinghotpocket wrote:
    better yet, why isnt this stuff released yet? ive seen this crap on the forums for MONTHS now.

    Because it only takes seconds to do a few hundred thousand lines of code, create detailed hundred thousand poly models, and create custom texture maps for things right?

    I bet you get pissed at McDonalds for taking 60 seconds to cook your burger too.
    Poranius Fisc
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #78 - 2015-11-01 21:59:06 UTC
    Gabriel Karade wrote:
    My concern is that the functionality provided by an XL-SMA (or even starbase forcefields) hasn't be replicated in this proposal, beyond the gold plated XL-Citadel option.

    This is a major change to anyone who wants to be able to 'stretch their legs' for short periods outside a steel coffin. Is this intended?



    Also, does this satisfy replacing all outposts as well?

    Perhaps L's and XL's might be better purposed and a break-downable outpost that can be flipped with entosis, but if the enemy flips it, your stuff is required to be shipped out, or you pick it up someplace else for that 15% fee.

    Why the huge push for rediculous killmails? congrats.. you killed the XL.. now theres no more outposts. If you wnat to hold this system, you need to build something fast.

    You want to set up what? How many cap's are limited in a medium structure tether?
    Cynica Deetric
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #79 - 2015-11-01 23:37:10 UTC
    Xindi Kraid wrote:
    Cynica Deetric wrote:
    I would like to know why we can't have both POSs and citadels?

    I would think giving player more options not less is a better idea. (CCPlease keep both)

    Also have any of the DEVs taken the time to site down and make a comparison as to what POSs offer/cost vs Citadels?
    (compaired to the "little" guy/corp) (As it stands I would like to keep my POS over buying a citadel or living in a corp citadel)

    Mainly because POSes are terrible pieces of **** that are complicated to manage for players and have a horrendous mess of legacy code and should have been replaced years ago.

    The better question is why the new Structure sizes and costs don't line up very well with the sizes POSes come in.



    Most of what you said is OPINION, could POSs be improved yes. I do not feel that POSs are a pieces of ****. On the management aspect of POSs I don't think it is compicated but I don't think it is as effective as some players would like it to be.

    I feel that your question is valad and I wouldn't mind the extra cost IF they kept POSs in the game however if they are going to take them out later on down the road they should cost the same as what they are replacing.
    Flyinghotpocket
    Small Focused Memes
    Ragequit Cancel Sub
    #80 - 2015-11-02 00:22:19 UTC
    Nafensoriel wrote:
    Flyinghotpocket wrote:
    better yet, why isnt this stuff released yet? ive seen this crap on the forums for MONTHS now.

    Because it only takes seconds to do a few hundred thousand lines of code, create detailed hundred thousand poly models, and create custom texture maps for things right?

    I bet you get pissed at McDonalds for taking 60 seconds to cook your burger too.

    these objects have been in demand for years. not months years. Yah i went to mcdonalds and pre ordered a bigmac for 3 months from now. so no, since the last few years of mostly no new updates, no it doesnt take THAT long to code some new buildings.

    Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro