These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

48 hour kill time for Citadels in WH space
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Job Valador
Professional Amateurs
#21 - 2016-04-17 11:40:46 UTC
RemSalak wrote:
Borsek wrote:
Afaik you can still move things in/out of hangars when it's reinforced, unlike a Pos. Also bigger groups are able to **** on little guys anyway, it just takes 1d14h max at the moment, whereas you will have an extra 10h, in your preferred tz in the future.

So yeah, you can't just log alts, as that would mean the residents could evac in the meantime.



Let me put this into perspective.

Show me a group of EVE players that have the determination to stick around a WH for a week to wipe out a small corps assets they've gained over potential months.

- only the ones you've really pissed off.

Now show me a list of EVE players that will stick around for 48 hours to troll/grief a small corp simply because they wouldn't "give gud fights" because they were outnumbered 5:1.

- nearly every large WH corp/alliance in exsistance.

see the difference?

for a 48 hour timer you would still have to maintain a presence to prevent asset evac. it should be more like 96 hours AT A MINIMUM.

they've made WH space only for larger groups. Hence emphasis once again placed on the blob. Now some idiot will likely say " but you've got to deal with WH mass" yeah. WH mass with 30+ T3's.... wanna try again?




Some people like to just burn holes.

"The stone exhibited a profound lack of movement."
unimatrix0030
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2016-04-17 20:16:30 UTC
Have you even considered the consequences if assets would not be destroyed after a citadel pops in wh's?
If it would the 10% of loot denial tax of k-space, then you would never be safe in wh's.
The large rich corps the op talks about would just destroy a citadel full of ships wich would then stay in the wh's untill they anchor a new citadel... . In wich they would recover the "lost" assets... .
So they got an instant beachhead... .For ever because if that citadel gets destroyed, then can again hang a new one up....
So how is that bether?
It is even a worse defense nightmare then losing everything.... .

No local in null sec would fix everything!
Sheeth Athonille
Rabid Dogz Mining
#23 - 2016-04-17 22:14:07 UTC
Lord Okinaba wrote:
I have no issue with complete loss upon destruction, but it should apply to citadels in Low sec and null sec too. WH dwellers are being short changed here.

And don't come at me with the lore crap that WH is unknown space and therefor not feasible. Please explain the lore behind stuff being magically transported from anywhere without haulers moving it.


Originally they were planning on making citadels in WH's safe from asset destruction as well, but there was quite a bit of negative feedback. As for why it's not that way in null, people usually have far more non-movable assets in null. Lots of industry, very full markets, etc. Having the equivalent of outposts being destructible would completely remove an aspect of null game play (for better or worse) and the devs apparently don't want to do that.

That said, it seems kind of ridiculous that the equivalent of current pos's (medium citadels) can't be looted. Though I guess a lot of the pos features are going to be done by other structures that havn't been released yet (like mining platform), and I'm going to go ahead and assume these can be looted at least...
Lord Okinaba
Aliastra
#24 - 2016-04-18 10:35:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Okinaba
Sheeth Athonille wrote:
Lord Okinaba wrote:
I have no issue with complete loss upon destruction, but it should apply to citadels in Low sec and null sec too. WH dwellers are being short changed here.

And don't come at me with the lore crap that WH is unknown space and therefor not feasible. Please explain the lore behind stuff being magically transported from anywhere without haulers moving it.


Originally they were planning on making citadels in WH's safe from asset destruction as well, but there was quite a bit of negative feedback. As for why it's not that way in null, people usually have far more non-movable assets in null. Lots of industry, very full markets, etc. Having the equivalent of outposts being destructible would completely remove an aspect of null game play (for better or worse) and the devs apparently don't want to do that.

That said, it seems kind of ridiculous that the equivalent of current pos's (medium citadels) can't be looted. Though I guess a lot of the pos features are going to be done by other structures that havn't been released yet (like mining platform), and I'm going to go ahead and assume these can be looted at least...


Yes, I was one of those giving negative feedback, despite being a WH dweller myself. I had however assumed total asset destruction would apply to all.

People have lots of assets in WH's too and with the arrival of citadels they are soon to have their own markets as well. Seems like the majority are having their voices heard over the minority. One rule for some and one for the others.
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#25 - 2016-04-18 11:28:40 UTC
The reason for assets dropping per normal loot-rules is because that's the way it's been in W-space. We don't have stations that cannot be destroyed and hence the citadels don't need to compete with them. It's just keeping the situation similar to what it is now. CCP is afraid that if they allow loot to drop in K-space, nobody is going to use citadels as they can just keep their stuff in stations and have their stuff be safe.

Wormholer for life.
Pinkylein
No Vacancies
No Vacancies.
#26 - 2016-04-18 11:51:01 UTC
Wander Prian wrote:
The reason for assets dropping per normal loot-rules is because that's the way it's been in W-space. We don't have stations that cannot be destroyed and hence the citadels don't need to compete with them. It's just keeping the situation similar to what it is now. CCP is afraid that if they allow loot to drop in K-space, nobody is going to use citadels as they can just keep their stuff in stations and have their stuff be safe.



Exactly. And ... besides ... WHO will bring stuff that is currently located in stations, into citadels anyway? Whats the point? You don't pay for just storing stuff. So all the Level 4 - 10B Marauders, nobody will move them into a citadel, not even if it's 100% secure that they will just moved into another station. They will go on living, the life they have been since the day, they started doing so.
Lord Okinaba
Aliastra
#27 - 2016-04-18 11:53:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Okinaba
Wander Prian wrote:
The reason for assets dropping per normal loot-rules is because that's the way it's been in W-space. We don't have stations that cannot be destroyed and hence the citadels don't need to compete with them. It's just keeping the situation similar to what it is now. CCP is afraid that if they allow loot to drop in K-space, nobody is going to use citadels as they can just keep their stuff in stations and have their stuff be safe.


But their plan is to phase out stations. They have said this in the past at least.

Why maintain the status quo? Eve is too safe for some people. People in null for the most part are filthy rich and continue to get richer. This game needs shaking up.

Time for some Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#28 - 2016-04-18 12:53:15 UTC
Lord Okinaba wrote:
Wander Prian wrote:
The reason for assets dropping per normal loot-rules is because that's the way it's been in W-space. We don't have stations that cannot be destroyed and hence the citadels don't need to compete with them. It's just keeping the situation similar to what it is now. CCP is afraid that if they allow loot to drop in K-space, nobody is going to use citadels as they can just keep their stuff in stations and have their stuff be safe.


But their plan is to phase out stations. They have said this in the past at least.

Why maintain the status quo? Eve is too safe for some people. People in null for the most part are filthy rich and continue to get richer. This game needs shaking up.

Time for some Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes


Because otherwise it would mean that K-space would live out of stations for as long as possible and make a huge thing about having to move to a less secure structure. This way CCP can make the move gently without having gazillion citadels going up in a week with a huge shitstorm

Also because apparently we wormhole-dwellers take pride in living in this hostile space that was never meant for it and the whole risk versus reward -thing comes with it.

While I hope CCP will unify the mechanics, I'm also just little proud that we wanted to keep the timetable and looting the same instead of taking the easy way.

Wormholer for life.
Alexhandr Shkarov
The MorningStar. Syndicate
#29 - 2016-04-18 13:58:58 UTC
It smells like an eviction is in the works after this post.

All my posts are on my personal title and should not be confused as me speaking for anyone else.
ExookiZ
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
#30 - 2016-04-18 14:48:47 UTC
Have those of you whining about big corps rolling over you actually tried out a citadel on SiSI? They're a small corp's dream.

Citadels were literally designed to allow for asymmetric warfare, a manned citadel with a small support fleet can easily turn away a fleet twice its size, possibly even three times all depending on the actual composition of each fleet.

Your citadel, if you actually fight to defend it is a very powerful weapon, and in wormholes where the attackers cant bring capitals their fighter squadrons are likewise a significant leg up you have over your aggressors.

For a corp who would let their POS burn, and SD their **** all because a bigger corp attacked them nothing will change. Your citadel will burn, except now you cant SD all your assets so our attackers will get loot for their effort.

For the corp who would at the very least go down in a glorious fire defending their space your chances of winning and defeating a larger aggressor just shot through the roof.

Event Organizer of EVE North East
Lord Okinaba
Aliastra
#31 - 2016-04-18 18:25:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Okinaba
ExookiZ wrote:
Have those of you whining about big corps rolling over you actually tried out a citadel on SiSI? They're a small corp's dream.

Citadels were literally designed to allow for asymmetric warfare, a manned citadel with a small support fleet can easily turn away a fleet twice its size, possibly even three times all depending on the actual composition of each fleet.

Your citadel, if you actually fight to defend it is a very powerful weapon, and in wormholes where the attackers cant bring capitals their fighter squadrons are likewise a significant leg up you have over your aggressors.

For a corp who would let their POS burn, and SD their **** all because a bigger corp attacked them nothing will change. Your citadel will burn, except now you cant SD all your assets so our attackers will get loot for their effort.

For the corp who would at the very least go down in a glorious fire defending their space your chances of winning and defeating a larger aggressor just shot through the roof.


And the attackers, if from known space can take all that loot back to their citadel and sit on it indefinitely. Brilliant...
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#32 - 2016-04-19 11:13:45 UTC
Lord Okinaba wrote:
ExookiZ wrote:
Have those of you whining about big corps rolling over you actually tried out a citadel on SiSI? They're a small corp's dream.

Citadels were literally designed to allow for asymmetric warfare, a manned citadel with a small support fleet can easily turn away a fleet twice its size, possibly even three times all depending on the actual composition of each fleet.

Your citadel, if you actually fight to defend it is a very powerful weapon, and in wormholes where the attackers cant bring capitals their fighter squadrons are likewise a significant leg up you have over your aggressors.

For a corp who would let their POS burn, and SD their **** all because a bigger corp attacked them nothing will change. Your citadel will burn, except now you cant SD all your assets so our attackers will get loot for their effort.

For the corp who would at the very least go down in a glorious fire defending their space your chances of winning and defeating a larger aggressor just shot through the roof.


And the attackers, if from known space can take all that loot back to their citadel and sit on it indefinitely. Brilliant...



To be fair, most likely they will sell it just like they do now. You are really grasping at straws here... Citadels are much better than POS for the smaller corporations. They are much more secure and have much stronger defences. Vulnerability-times are chosen by you, usually for the times you have most people online to help in defending.

Wormholer for life.
Duo Roman
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
#33 - 2016-04-19 14:59:35 UTC
I'm from a small corp and I think citadels will be a much needed improvement. The increased security against bigger corps is a BIG plus, but the real improvement will be management of members' access. This will enable small tribe-like corps to recruit new members in a safer way.
Selene Eltar
Star Freaks
#34 - 2016-04-21 04:35:29 UTC
Alexhandr Shkarov wrote:
It smells like an eviction is in the works after this post.


Na, this dude is just super salty for some reason. He's got like 3 other posts in the wormholes section about how citadels are ****.
Borsek
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#35 - 2016-04-21 13:58:13 UTC
Well, I did expose who he is in one of his other saltposts, but I don't think 10000m^3 of ore is worth the effort of evicting him. I mean, I was one one of those evictions where 90% of the loot was that crap, and while we got some of it out, we gave up after about 1h and just blew up the space garbage.
Eva Ambrosa
State War Academy
Caldari State
#36 - 2016-04-27 19:23:03 UTC
Bro's accepts defense contracts. Should a smaller group need help to prevent an eviction please reach out to either myself or one of my directors.
Shuckstar
Blue Dreams Plus
#37 - 2016-04-27 21:25:30 UTC
It is weird that in WH when your Citadel is destroyed you loose all your assets but in null/low and high sec you get to get your stuff back for a fee ect. Not involved in Wh's myself but it does kind of look like CCP: "**** Wormhole dudes".

CCP Greyscale wrote:"OK, I've read every post up to page 200, and we're getting to a point in this thread where there's not a lot of new concerns or suggestions being brought up. There will be future threads (and future blogs) as we tune details, but for now I want to thank you for all of your constructive input, and wish you a good weekend :)"

Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#38 - 2016-04-28 00:50:24 UTC
Shuckstar wrote:
It is weird that in WH when your Citadel is destroyed you loose all your assets but in null/low and high sec you get to get your stuff back for a fee ect. Not involved in Wh's myself but it does kind of look like CCP: "**** Wormhole dudes"

that's fine, we wspace folk are not nullsec nancies.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#39 - 2016-04-28 02:28:49 UTC
Shuckstar wrote:
It is weird that in WH when your Citadel is destroyed you loose all your assets but in null/low and high sec you get to get your stuff back for a fee ect. Not involved in Wh's myself but it does kind of look like CCP: "**** Wormhole dudes".


You know, we actually asked for this to be added Twisted

Wormholer for life.
GizzyBoy
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#40 - 2016-04-28 02:46:08 UTC
Wander Prian wrote:
Shuckstar wrote:
It is weird that in WH when your Citadel is destroyed you loose all your assets but in null/low and high sec you get to get your stuff back for a fee ect. Not involved in Wh's myself but it does kind of look like CCP: "**** Wormhole dudes".


You know, we actually asked for this to be added Twisted



Some people where more concerned with loot drops and completely forgot about how a invasion would be fought. or if if they could even be won.

except now things could become an absolute grind fest for either side. (most groups get ****** if required to hold hole control for over 48 hours)

Large groups running current full moon coverage policy's will likely still have near un - assailable wh castles.

I have a few theories on how things may happen, But I'll just have to sit back and wait to see how different people approach evictions and what strategies they take.

For all groups however citadels are the thing that makes life super easy for letting in newer players.(in theory)
Previous page123Next page