These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Kynric
Sky Fighters
Rote Kapelle
#141 - 2015-11-16 02:39:59 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Roberta Gastoni wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Kynric wrote:
What happens to member assets if a wormhole citadel is unanchored?



asset safety


No asset safety in wormhole.



ahh, yeah, sorry, didn't notice he said wormhole

Also, if they can make it work, once attack starts no "Trash it" while docked either



Am I the only one that sees a problem with this? It has all of the downside of a personal hangar but its much much larger. A single rouge director could trash all stored ships much more rapidly than is presently possible. This is probably not the best plan if we want wormhole space to be a healthy active area.
H3llHound
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#142 - 2015-11-16 11:03:55 UTC
the unanchoring is not instantaneous as with personal hangar mods. and i'm pretty sure such an action will be cancable aswell
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#143 - 2015-11-16 13:09:53 UTC
Kynric wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Roberta Gastoni wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Kynric wrote:
What happens to member assets if a wormhole citadel is unanchored?



asset safety


No asset safety in wormhole.



ahh, yeah, sorry, didn't notice he said wormhole

Also, if they can make it work, once attack starts no "Trash it" while docked either



Am I the only one that sees a problem with this? It has all of the downside of a personal hangar but its much much larger. A single rouge director could trash all stored ships much more rapidly than is presently possible. This is probably not the best plan if we want wormhole space to be a healthy active area.



Well, in wormholes, there is a tactic used currently to jump in ships and self destruct to deny attackers the spoils

If you are allowed to "Trash it" once an attack starts, someone could trash everything and deny all loot, in that spirit, you can still undock and self destruct, but it takes much more time and gives loot, rather than just going away with "trash it"
Kynric
Sky Fighters
Rote Kapelle
#144 - 2015-11-16 13:35:33 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:


Well, in wormholes, there is a tactic used currently to jump in ships and self destruct to deny attackers the spoils

If you are allowed to "Trash it" once an attack starts, someone could trash everything and deny all loot, in that spirit, you can still undock and self destruct, but it takes much more time and gives loot, rather than just going away with "trash it"


You cant trash an SMAs contents. The timer is not really relevant as reversing or halting an unanchor is not an option. Also we should assume that the process starts after the CEO logs for the night.

The risk for wormhole pilots is mych higher than for any other pilots in the game. This concept makes running a wormhole corp harder not easier as adding directors to share the load would be a mistake.
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#145 - 2015-11-16 16:14:10 UTC
Kynric wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:


Well, in wormholes, there is a tactic used currently to jump in ships and self destruct to deny attackers the spoils

If you are allowed to "Trash it" once an attack starts, someone could trash everything and deny all loot, in that spirit, you can still undock and self destruct, but it takes much more time and gives loot, rather than just going away with "trash it"


You cant trash an SMAs contents. The timer is not really relevant as reversing or halting an unanchor is not an option. Also we should assume that the process starts after the CEO logs for the night.

The risk for wormhole pilots is mych higher than for any other pilots in the game. This concept makes running a wormhole corp harder not easier as adding directors to share the load would be a mistake.



The timer takes 24 hours to unanchor, so if it happens after CEO logs off, odds are he will login before it finishes

You can board and self destruct the contents of a SMA

You are lookign at it from a thief perspective and it will be essentially the same now

WH complained about it from a invasion perspective and that is why it is setup the way it is.

You REALLY need to listen to the wormhole roundtable to gain perspective before you ask too many more questions. It will explain alot for you
Roberta Gastoni
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#146 - 2015-11-16 20:40:09 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:

The timer takes 24 hours to unanchor, so if it happens after CEO logs off, odds are he will login before it finishes

You can board and self destruct the contents of a SMA

You are lookign at it from a thief perspective and it will be essentially the same now

WH complained about it from a invasion perspective and that is why it is setup the way it is.

You REALLY need to listen to the wormhole roundtable to gain perspective before you ask too many more questions. It will explain alot for you


Actually the unanchoring timer has not been stated anywhere, we suppose it's 24 hours like the anchoring, but no dev or dev blog stated how much time to unanchor a citadel.

I really don't like how citadels are shaping up for WH:
- you cannot haul a large one into an orca, forcing you to build a large from a medium one inside the wormhole
- all citadels will show up in the anomalies overview, even in wormholes
- there's no asset safety, of any kind, in wormholes

All these "problems" with no real reward for risking so much
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#147 - 2015-11-16 20:50:37 UTC
Roberta Gastoni wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:

The timer takes 24 hours to unanchor, so if it happens after CEO logs off, odds are he will login before it finishes

You can board and self destruct the contents of a SMA

You are lookign at it from a thief perspective and it will be essentially the same now

WH complained about it from a invasion perspective and that is why it is setup the way it is.

You REALLY need to listen to the wormhole roundtable to gain perspective before you ask too many more questions. It will explain alot for you


Actually the unanchoring timer has not been stated anywhere, we suppose it's 24 hours like the anchoring, but no dev or dev blog stated how much time to unanchor a citadel.

I really don't like how citadels are shaping up for WH:
- you cannot haul a large one into an orca, forcing you to build a large from a medium one inside the wormhole
- all citadels will show up in the anomalies overview, even in wormholes
- there's no asset safety, of any kind, in wormholes

All these "problems" with no real reward for risking so much



Large has been clafirified to be 80K like the dev blog says, so you can in fact carry it in a WH

They have also said numerous time you can build L/XL in a POS, so not sure why you would have to build a medium first.....still not sure where that myth started....Yes, i am aware of the size limitations of a pos and so is CCP. lets see what they do before we say we can't do XXX
Roberta Gastoni
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#148 - 2015-11-17 06:17:34 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Large has been clafirified to be 80K like the dev blog says, so you can in fact carry it in a WH

They have also said numerous time you can build L/XL in a POS, so not sure why you would have to build a medium first.....still not sure where that myth started....Yes, i am aware of the size limitations of a pos and so is CCP. lets see what they do before we say we can't do XXX


The problem is when pos are going to be removed like they said.

Seems we all have some doubts or unclear part about the system, but I don't see a dev posting in this thread since it's creation, so far it's us talking philosophy
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#149 - 2015-11-17 12:11:09 UTC
Roberta Gastoni wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Large has been clafirified to be 80K like the dev blog says, so you can in fact carry it in a WH

They have also said numerous time you can build L/XL in a POS, so not sure why you would have to build a medium first.....still not sure where that myth started....Yes, i am aware of the size limitations of a pos and so is CCP. lets see what they do before we say we can't do XXX


The problem is when pos are going to be removed like they said.

Seems we all have some doubts or unclear part about the system, but I don't see a dev posting in this thread since it's creation, so far it's us talking philosophy



What part is unclear?

Devs are incredibly active on Slack and we have a very good handle on what is happening
Black Pedro
Mine.
#150 - 2015-11-17 12:20:54 UTC
Roberta Gastoni wrote:
I really don't like how citadels are shaping up for WH:
- you cannot haul a large one into an orca, forcing you to build a large from a medium one inside the wormhole
- all citadels will show up in the anomalies overview, even in wormholes
- there's no asset safety, of any kind, in wormholes

All these "problems" with no real reward for risking so much
Risk? As far as I can see there is practically no risk for using the larger versions of these citadels in wormholes.

The reason CCP originally wanted L and XL citadels to be difficult to deploy in wormholes was because of how difficult they are going to be to attack. The XL citadels in particular are literally going to be invincible in low-class wormholes and highsec to almost every group in the game who cannot field 100-200 battleships, which is pretty much everyone outside of the largest nullsec/lowsec groups. Certainly no low-class wormhole groups have those numbers. Depending how they are balanced offensively the L citadels will also be tough to crack, although at least 20 battleships is a plausible number for a typical-sized wormhole group to assemble.

I am hoping Team Game of Drones has something up their sleeves because this v2 of the citadels are shaping up to be way more difficult, or actually impossible for most groups to attack when capitals are unavailable than the original v1 entosis-vulnerable design. Released as such, XLs will almost never be attacked in highsec or low-class wormholes, and certainly never by the local residents of these spaces with a bar that high.
Kynric
Sky Fighters
Rote Kapelle
#151 - 2015-11-17 13:32:01 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Roberta Gastoni wrote:
I really don't like how citadels are shaping up for WH:
- you cannot haul a large one into an orca, forcing you to build a large from a medium one inside the wormhole
- all citadels will show up in the anomalies overview, even in wormholes
- there's no asset safety, of any kind, in wormholes

All these "problems" with no real reward for risking so much
Risk? As far as I can see there is practically no risk for using the larger versions of these citadels in wormholes.

The reason CCP originally wanted L and XL citadels to be difficult to deploy in wormholes was because of how difficult they are going to be to attack. The XL citadels in particular are literally going to be invincible in low-class wormholes and highsec to almost every group in the game who cannot field 100-200 battleships, which is pretty much everyone outside of the largest nullsec/lowsec groups. Certainly no low-class wormhole groups have those numbers. Depending how they are balanced offensively the L citadels will also be tough to crack, although at least 20 battleships is a plausible number for a typical-sized wormhole group to assemble.

I am hoping Team Game of Drones has something up their sleeves because this v2 of the citadels are shaping up to be way more difficult, or actually impossible for most groups to attack when capitals are unavailable than the original v1 entosis-vulnerable design. Released as such, XLs will almost never be attacked in highsec or low-class wormholes, and certainly never by the local residents of these spaces with a bar that high.


I think you underestimate how attractive a killmail eorth several trillion isk will be. Also keep in mind the number of battleships listed is what is required to do the deed in the minimum time by hitting damage cap.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#152 - 2015-11-17 13:43:00 UTC
Kynric wrote:

I think you underestimate how attractive a killmail eorth several trillion isk will be. Also keep in mind the number of battleships listed is what is required to do the deed in the minimum time by hitting damage cap.
Several trillion? The XLs will only cost ~70B plus the modules. No one is going to spend the 120+ boring player hours to kill something for a kill mail worth less than a Titan.

I think you over-estimate the average group size in this game. There are (almost) no groups in highsec or low-class wormholes of that size so no matter how much someone "wants" a kill mail, it will be impossible to get one. And that assumes the structure is undefended. Defended, even larger fleets with significant support ships will be required completely out of the realm of possibility for anyone except the massive nullsec groups.

The only XLs that will die in highsec will be ones fitting market modules which will be reinforced by nullsec groups looking to control the market. Private XLs in highsec and in wormholes inaccessible to capitals will never be attacked.
Roberta Gastoni
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#153 - 2015-11-17 17:07:12 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Several trillion? The XLs will only cost ~70B plus the modules. No one is going to spend the 120+ boring player hours to kill something for a kill mail worth less than a Titan.

I think you over-estimate the average group size in this game. There are (almost) no groups in highsec or low-class wormholes of that size so no matter how much someone "wants" a kill mail, it will be impossible to get one. And that assumes the structure is undefended. Defended, even larger fleets with significant support ships will be required completely out of the realm of possibility for anyone except the massive nullsec groups.

The only XLs that will die in highsec will be ones fitting market modules which will be reinforced by nullsec groups looking to control the market. Private XLs in highsec and in wormholes inaccessible to capitals will never be attacked.


A fully fitted XL citadel is worth as much as a Titan, but I think you are right, nobody is going to bother.

Also another of my concerns is that on the paper (of the dev blog) all citadels can be destroyed, but in reallity, who is going to kill a XL citadel in a low class wormhole or in high sec? In a c1-c2 cruiser-only wh a large is already troublesome to take down.

However is fun how in just 3-4 pages we passed from people stating "a large and eve XL are a juicy kill mail and they are easy to destroy" to "large and xl in high sec / wh are too hard to kill since the dps requirements are too high".

Just a hint, I don't want to convince anyone and it's not directed to black pedro, but people should go have a look at the pos attacks happening in the last year in high sec and low class wormhole: a good number of them are on inactive POS, commited by a single person or a single player on a couple of bashing alts (biggest I've seen lately was 3 bashing alts). Why do you think it's going to be different on medium and large citadels? Because of the loot? The very same loot that will be sent elsewhere due to citadel mechanics or simply lost in wh space? Because of the kill mail? If you want a easy 300 mil kill mail go gank a hulk in a catalyst.

Do people want another idea of how people are going to react to "pointless bashing of structures in high sec and low class wh spaces"? Go look the POCOs (Custom Offices), even in WH space, even if they are quite easy to deploy, nobody is attacking a custom office unless the owner corp have setted up some crazy taxes.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#154 - 2015-11-17 18:48:33 UTC
Roberta Gastoni wrote:
Just a hint, I don't want to convince anyone and it's not directed to black pedro, but people should go have a look at the pos attacks happening in the last year in high sec and low class wormhole: a good number of them are on inactive POS, commited by a single person or a single player on a couple of bashing alts (biggest I've seen lately was 3 bashing alts). Why do you think it's going to be different on medium and large citadels? Because of the loot? The very same loot that will be sent elsewhere due to citadel mechanics or simply lost in wh space? Because of the kill mail? If you want a easy 300 mil kill mail go gank a hulk in a catalyst.

Do people want another idea of how people are going to react to "pointless bashing of structures in high sec and low class wh spaces"? Go look the POCOs (Custom Offices), even in WH space, even if they are quite easy to deploy, nobody is attacking a custom office unless the owner corp have setted up some crazy taxes.
Yes, there is clear precedent for this. As you say, aside from the occasional dead stick, the killboards are showing that practically no-one is shooting large POSes in low-class wormholes and especially in highsec. These XL citadels are about five times more grindy that the current large POSes - no one, I mean no one is going to attack them without a hugely compelling reason. Perhaps these market modules will be enough to get a nullsec entity or two motivated, but otherwise, a drop of a few billion in minerals and a killmail will not result in any one spending the disproportionate amount of player effort to grind them down in highsec or wormholes without dreads.

An XL is impossible/too tedious for a group of 20-30 players to attack in highsec, yet 70-100B ISK is not very much for a similarly sized group to gather to put one up. This will result in unassailable XL structures strewn accross highsec, doing nothing but providing absolute safety for their owners, or collecting dust until the end of the game.

Removing these artifical HP walls was what the entosis link was all about. I understand why that plan was scrapped, but this new plan, at least as it has been announced so far is not going to result in people fighting over these XL structures in highsec and wormholes. It is several times worse than the current HP walls presented by large POSes to aggressors who are unable to use capital ships to attack.
Roberta Gastoni
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#155 - 2015-11-17 22:22:22 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
....


While your ideas could work with some tuning, I want to bring you to the other level of understanding why there are no real kills of active pos in places like high sec, and why rarely you see small and medium pos in any wormhole.

It's not the mass, the cost or the worth of the pos but it all reside in how defender and attacker interact.

Let's say Black Pedro Piracy Ltd. war dec my corp, the Robertas Space Industries, aiming to destroy my small pos I use to compress ore during my mining op in high sec, and my large pos where I build stuff and research.

Is it worth to defend the small pos? no ofc, I'll tear it down and store it in a station for when the storm has passed.
What about my large pos? Inside it I've all my valuable bpo researching me and te, copying my capital parts and building t2 / t3 stuff. Am I going to risk all my stuff just to not interrupt the jobs? No, most are going to cancel all jobs and store everything inside a station, but at this point what's the reason of defending the large pos? There's no reason why should I, so since it's empty, I'm going to tear it down too and guess what, store it into a station. This is not an issue with war decs, because trust me, halting the production of a fully working pos can cost the owner from a few milions to even billions lost, almost like losing it, the difference is you don't see it in the kill mail, but the missed profit it there.

Considering a large tower take 30 minutes to anchor, 30 min to online, no time to shut down and I think 30 min to unanchor, I guess large stations are going to be alike, probably to 2 hours to anchor and 1 to unanchor. Mind, the dev blog stated a freshly anchored station will go invul for a day, it didn't state how much time would it take to anchor and unanchor. Long story short, an active medium or large citadel in high sec will probably be unanchored before the war start, so your idea of having the entosis working on them will go down the drain, since only either corp that plan to defend it, or abandoned citadels will be there when the attack starts.

So that's why I said in my previous post, entosis yes, but only on inactive structures, so in high sec people will go around hunting for inactive ones, clearing the land scape by unanchoring and selling the citadel or recycling it for their own use. This also will work well in wh space, as finding an abandoned station is going to be a thrilling and new experience, very different from grinding it down for some loot and another killmail. Not to mention, bring a large or xlarge one we already all agreed it's going to be not so easy, so the capture of an abandoned one can be a very valuable find, beyond the simple monetary value of the structure.

All of this stuff about wardecs wont apply to wh ofc, because you cannot be able to know when the enemy will hit, but my other point was WH citadels follow the rules of low sec citadels, but WH citadels wont be able to benefit from the real structure defining ability, the assets safety measure. I was just hoping there will be WH specific modules to counterbalance this higher risk of losing everything. Which modules I've no idea, but probably something to not make them show as 100% in the anomaly list and maybe rigs to increase sensor strenght. I wouldn't be scared nobody will able to find them, remember in WHs you don't have mission agents or incursions sending you in random spots outside the DScan, and all anomalies spawn at no more than 4 AU of a celestial object, so a fast hit of the DScan and a couple of probes will find it.
Tyranis Marcus
Bloody Heathens
#156 - 2015-11-18 00:31:21 UTC
Been wondering. When the new small structures eventually come around for development, will the modular idea still be on the table for those? That sounded really cool.

Do not run. We are your friends.

Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#157 - 2015-11-18 10:43:27 UTC
Tyranis Marcus wrote:
Been wondering. When the new small structures eventually come around for development, will the modular idea still be on the table for those? That sounded really cool.



Small structures are in the game

They are:

Mobile depot
Cyno inhibitor
scan inhibitor
cans
bubbles


There isn't going to be a small citadel
Tycho VI
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#158 - 2015-11-25 10:46:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Tycho VI
As it looks currently, an XL Citadel is basically a titan that can not move, which many people will know exactly when and where to attack it. It is very likely that the top 3 forces in the game will take great interest in roaming the galaxy with 40+ supercapitals, with the sole intent on head shotting an XL Citadel over a short deployment belonging to a defender with no hope to face off against that kind of force. Reminiscent of brave in catch against PL. XL Citadels are a huge investment, these sandcastles should require a little more effort then station grid control with an apex force. Yes, eventually with enough effort they should win, but the engagement itself should be more fulfilling then a simple timer battle, and allow the defender with some opportunities.

I have thought of a few suggestions that would make an XL citadel battle more interesting and challenging for both attackers and defenders. Note that medium and large citadels won't play by these rules, they are just reserved for the XL.

*The XL Citadel will be invulnerable indefinitely until the conditions are met:

The owner of the XL citadel would need to not hold a TCU in the entire constellation. This means that the attackers would have to remove all the defending TCU's in the constellation if they wanted to start an attack on the citadel. Once this happens, the citadel could either become vulnerable at a set time every day while this condition persists, or immediately, which ever option CCP likes the most.

Should the defender manage to retake a system in the constellation, replacing a TCU, then their Citadel would have to be repaired before it can become invulnerable if it has been under attack. The attackers could still keep it going through it's reinforced cycles as long as the shields remain below a certain percentage.

*Removing all of the defender's ihubs in the constellation would have a profound effect as well:

If the attacker can manage to win every Ihub timer in the constellation, then the Citadel's vulnerability window could become corrupted. Meaning that while the defenders hold an ihub, then the RF timer will always come out at a set, very narrow time frame. Without any defending ihubs, the window can become much more unpredictable.



This is just a simple outline, but I think it would accomplish the goal of making these massive structures require a severe commitment by the largest forces. They would probably want to take systems nearby the defenders to stage from, over a decent period of time, rather then being nomadic and heading in only a few times for the head shot. Not only that, but defenders that have capital ship stockpiles in the citadel would be greatly encouraged to hold the field in surrounding systems as part of the initial defense, and they could be lured into traps, or into victory! The TCUs would provide a wall, and the Ihubs a utility. It would make for some amazing fights that many members of the attacking/defending forces could partake in over an epic campaign! :)

If an entire constellation is too much then you could consider it and the surrounding systems which would put more emphasis on strategic placement when building too.
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#159 - 2015-11-25 16:47:01 UTC
What about a XL in High sec, they could never be attacked or what?
Tycho VI
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#160 - 2015-11-25 18:21:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Tycho VI
Kenneth Feld wrote:
What about a XL in High sec, they could never be attacked or what?


They would obviously not work with this rule set. :) Not for me to think of, I am largely uninvolved with highsec...but there could be some things requiring entosis to make a highsec XL vulnerable as well, with a wardec required. Like deploying an XL citadel in a highsec system, will place structures in adjacent systems that would need to be entosis simultaneously for a given amount of time for the structure to leave invulnerability, giving notification to defenders. Definitely no nodes there though. idk really, but they could be exciting with some kind of similar rule set, or even just leave them as citadels are currently planned. It would be nice though for them to be defensible to the point where they can not even enter a vulnerable state by keeping the surrounding systems in check against any wardeccers.

I agree that if you can not defend one, then you should lose it. My idea is more for the approach of having the process being more exciting and requiring an attacker to commit to a wider campaign in order to destroy one.