These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

EVE: Citadel expansion - General feedback

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Barune Darkor
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#221 - 2016-05-22 14:23:33 UTC
The MWD sig and sig radius of fighters needs to be reduced. Carriers are useless in mid to large engagements. Too easy to kill off all of the carrier's fighters. Why would you take a carrier that will lose all of its dps ability when you can take a dread and still be able to apply damage?
Vol Arm'OOO
Central Co-Prosperity Union
#222 - 2016-05-22 19:26:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Vol Arm'OOO
While docked at a citadel in high sec) even though you have a limited engagement timer with somene (i was trying to test my guns etc and had dueled an alliance mate) you are not able to shot the person but instead get a concord criminal warning. When you have an le flag you should be able to shot the person without any concord warning.

Even where you have set a citadel access to public -people who are at war with your corp/alliance - shouldnt be able to tether/dockr/repair.

There needs to be some calender application that will let you know when your citadel runs out of fuel just like there is with a pos - and if you do run out of fuel - your services should be suspended not disabled - there should be no extra fuel use for services that have accidentally been turned off due to fuel running out.

There is not enough financial incentive to use a citadel - and since all medium citadels offer exactly the same services there is extensive competitive pressure pushing taxes to 0%. All of which means that for somebody who is looking to set one up as an economic venture - they are unlikely to ever get a positive return out of it.

There needs to be some way for the owner of a citadel to designate which toons have the capability of taking over the defense/management of the citadel - maybe I'm wrong about this and just dont see it at the moment - but it appears to me that defense/management is limited to corp members and cannot be presently deligated to anybody outside of the owner corp.

I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
Eve Serie7
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#223 - 2016-05-23 11:07:59 UTC
Barune Darkor wrote:
The MWD sig and sig radius of fighters needs to be reduced. Carriers are useless in mid to large engagements. Too easy to kill off all of the carrier's fighters. Why would you take a carrier that will lose all of its dps ability when you can take a dread and still be able to apply damage?


+1 also easy to kill all heavy fighters from moms

Poll: Want the ability Carrier with Drones back, or improve Fighters.
helana Tsero
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#224 - 2016-05-24 02:12:45 UTC  |  Edited by: helana Tsero
Citadel Defense Feedback

- Its is far to easy to kite a citadel. Cerberus fleet with a handful of logi 300 km off a citadel are practically invincible and can DPS the citadel with ease from that range because as long as their missiles reach the end of the tether ring it counts as a hit at 0 on the citadel. None of the citadel ewar can reach them and the anti subcapital missiles do not do enough damage to subcaps moving at speed. A defense fleet need Cerberus of their own to even touch them and even then the attackers can warp off and come back with ease.

- Citadels capacitor should last until the end of the minimum time to destroy a defence layer (shield/amour etc)

- If someone is firing at a citadel they should stay pointed by the citadel until their weapons timers has finished. Only being pointed for 60 seconds or so on initial warp in means that hit and run tactics on a citadel are completely viable. (which was what ccp said they were going to prevent)


Citadel Storage Management Feedback

- Need the ability to give our alts the rights to use our personal hangers. Its a pain to need one ship for each alt. Delivery is not a solution because Need to log on the alt that has the ship, then deliver it to the other alts hanger and then log on the alt to fly it. When you need a combat ship quickly that's not viable.

- Its far to easy to awox a corps assets that they make available for corp use. Log on transfer all corp use ships/modules/ammo to your own personal hanger, log off. This is an issue for WH corps because we frequently make significant assets like 'hole rolling battleships' available for corp use.

- Problem of corp members quiting eve and leaving expensive ships in their untouchable personal hangers.
If a citadel of large wh corp stands for a couple of years then the isk value of the abandoned ships from people who have left eve will be significant.

Nice loot pinata for sure but hardly fair on the corp that gets it citadel blown up.. cause it has no way to evac those abandoned ships/modules.

See here for a good opt in solution to this from CSM member Noobman. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6500047#post6500047

Citadel UI Feeback

When you attack a citadel why is it nessasary to have a giant UI icon showing the citadel shield/amor level. Its located right in the middle of the citadel, so instead of looking at the pretty citadel and enjoying explosions your eye is drawn to this massive icon.

We already have the target icon which shows the current citadel shield/amor level so why do we also need another icon showing us exactly the same thing. Please remove.


Citadel Graphics Feedback.

- Personally I like the ads in stations. More variety would be good. I dont see why people who dislike cant rotate their ship 90 degrees so they dont see them anymore

- Having all the ships moving through the interior corridors of the citadel is a bit unrealistic when I know I am only person in the citadel. Small npc ships is fine but multiple battleships flying around inside the citadel is a bit unrealistic and destroys immersion

- I don't see the point of the outside citadel view. You can not get any intel due to the zoom level. You cant even enjoy the view of the citadel because the zoom is way to far out. Removing UI for this outside view is fine.. but allow us to zoom all the way into the citadel.

"...ppl need to get out of caves and they will see something new.... thats where eve is placed... not in cave."  | zoonr-Korsairs |

Meanwhile Citadel release issues: "tried to bug report this and the bug report is bugged as well" | Rafeau |
Iowa Banshee
Fenrir Vangard
#225 - 2016-05-24 15:34:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Iowa Banshee
helana Tsero wrote:
Citadel Defense Feedback

- Its is far to easy to kite a citadel. Cerberus fleet with a handful of logi 300 km off a citadel are practically invincible and can DPS the citadel with ease from that range because as long as their missiles reach the end of the tether ring it counts as a hit at 0 on the citadel. None of the citadel ewar can reach them and the anti subcapital missiles do not do enough damage to subcaps moving at speed. A defense fleet need Cerberus of their own to even touch them and even then the attackers can warp off and come back with ease.

- Citadels capacitor should last until the end of the minimum time to destroy a defence layer (shield/amour etc)

- If someone is firing at a citadel they should stay pointed by the citadel until their weapons timers has finished. Only being pointed for 60 seconds or so on initial warp in means that hit and run tactics on a citadel are completely viable. (which was what ccp said they were going to prevent)


Citadel Storage Management Feedback

- Need the ability to give our alts the rights to use our personal hangers. Its a pain to need one ship for each alt. Delivery is not a solution because Need to log on the alt that has the ship, then deliver it to the other alts hanger and then log on the alt to fly it. When you need a combat ship quickly that's not viable.

- Its far to easy to awox a corps assets that they make available for corp use. Log on transfer all corp use ships/modules/ammo to your own personal hanger, log off. This is an issue for WH corps because we frequently make significant assets like 'hole rolling battleships' available for corp use.

- Problem of corp members quiting eve and leaving expensive ships in their untouchable personal hangers.
If a citadel of large wh corp stands for a couple of years then the isk value of the abandoned ships from people who have left eve will be significant.

Nice loot pinata for sure but hardly fair on the corp that gets it citadel blown up.. cause it has no way to evac those abandoned ships/modules.

See here for a good opt in solution to this from CSM member Noobman. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6500047#post6500047

Citadel UI Feeback

When you attack a citadel why is it nessasary to have a giant UI icon showing the citadel shield/amor level. Its located right in the middle of the citadel, so instead of looking at the pretty citadel and enjoying explosions your eye is drawn to this massive icon.

We already have the target icon which shows the current citadel shield/amor level so why do we also need another icon showing us exactly the same thing. Please remove.


Citadel Graphics Feedback.

- Personally I like the ads in stations. More variety would be good. I dont see why people who dislike cant rotate their ship 90 degrees so they dont see them anymore

- Having all the ships moving through the interior corridors of the citadel is a bit unrealistic when I know I am only person in the citadel. Small npc ships is fine but multiple battleships flying around inside the citadel is a bit unrealistic and destroys immersion

- I don't see the point of the outside citadel view. You can not get any intel due to the zoom level. You cant even enjoy the view of the citadel because the zoom is way to far out. Removing UI for this outside view is fine.. but allow us to zoom all the way into the citadel.


You missed mentioning a feature failure with Citadels if the role of the medium is a price equivalent replacement for a tower in a wormhole.

A point that was brought up at the round table at Eve Vegas :-
At present someone can fly an undockable ship (Rorqual/Carrier) - into a low class wh towers forcefield THEN put it in a SMAor get out in the force field to board another ship. This is relatively safe method to allow a player to do something else in eve other than sit in a specialized ship.

There is no way I can do this with a medium Citadel:
The tether follows the POD - leaving a ship that can be boarded & flown away
I could squeeze into a SMA - Now I have to sit visible to everyone.


Why can't we moor an empty ship or 2 at a Medium Citadel?
What happened to Docking ? wasn't that proposed to fill this game play mechanic ?




EDIT: I need keys to get in my car and drive it off - In the future did we forget how to make locks?
Ohhhhhh Really
Doomheim
#226 - 2016-05-26 18:23:26 UTC
The functionality to change the field-of-view zoom with CTRL+mouse wheel has been removed.
WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT? Please for the love of god dont force that low fov again Oops
PAPULA
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#227 - 2016-05-26 22:23:31 UTC
Quote:
The 'old' camera has been disabled


Shocked
Really ? WHY ??
Evil
Vol Arm'OOO
Central Co-Prosperity Union
#228 - 2016-05-28 05:02:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Vol Arm'OOO
Would like to see a way for citadel owners to log who is using their citadels and what services they are using - that way services and taxes can be customized. Would also like some sort of message board to be made available for citadel owners to post messages for their users - such as notices about discounts and offers regarding taxes and the like.

Would like agents to be moved to citadels - citadel owners could select which npc corporation they house in their citadel - depending upon the quality of the rigs and services fit would determine the level of agent available. The owner of the citadel would get a piece of the bounties that the players get for performing the missions. The amount of the bounty being received by the owner of the citadel being customizable. Ofc player station rewards would have to be adjusted to make citadels competitive.

Regarding citadel defenses - they should be able to fit remote (triage) and local reps .

I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
Darkblad
#229 - 2016-05-28 08:07:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Darkblad
PAPULA wrote:
Quote:
The 'old' camera has been disabled


Shocked
Really ? WHY ??
Evil
Because they did'nt make it to do so on the initially planned date (one month after "new camera is no longer beta").
Also: Checking if old features work with every new patch is tedious. First reason stated here (statement on load station environment)

Ah there it was (published on the 9th of February):
Team Pycho Sisters wrote:
we’ve decided to keep the option of reverting to the old camera for about 1 month as of now.


This in no way suggests that I think that's a good idea.

NPE-ISD-Übersetzt!
Fasyakius
State War Academy
Caldari State
#230 - 2016-05-31 07:18:24 UTC
Am I only one who fed up with capital spawns on asteroid anomalies????? That's something insane!!! MY corp mates making dozens of havens in system and have no capital spawns, in the same time I had several of them on asteroid anomalies. That's stupid... Why they spawns so often on belts and asteroid sites rather than on combat sites?
offtherails2010
Astral Sanctuary - 4th Division
Astral Sanctuary
#231 - 2016-06-09 18:47:59 UTC  |  Edited by: offtherails2010
Astecus wrote:
Access lists!!! <3<3<3

I've heard rumors that you might end up using access lists with other things besides just structures, and after playing around with the lists, I fell in love! I tried finding a dedicated thread about them to dump all this in, guess this place will have to do.

I'm the creator of public channels Anti-ganking and Gank-Intel, which both tend to peek around 400 these days. There are other public channels with more people, but I think no other public channel has a blocklist as big as ours - 1974 entities currently, mirrored between both channels. Due to the nature of the channels, we get a lot of disruption attempts from gankers. And as you can imagine, the sheer size of the blocklist gives us headaches in many different ways, most notably when one of our moderators spent 3 hours clicking to restore it when another moderator turned rogue and let the blocklist be wiped back in december 2014 (it only had about 1000 entities back then). Since then, we have been way too weary adding new moderators, just because of the damage they can do in a few clicks, requiring thousands of clicks to fix.

If access lists could somehow take over for our blocklist, that would make our life soooo much easier! I even found ways to take personal backup of the whole list in seconds. Even in this very early iteration, the only drawback I can think of right now, is no way to add a reason for someone being blocked, which might even be useful relating to structures.

I would love to be able to use these access lists with mailing lists as well, and with fleet adverts!

Back in 2013-2014 I ran a 'public' mining fleet in The Forge for about a year, and it might have been one of the biggest in the game, peeking at 139 right before I burned out. A big pain point for me back then, was struggling with a full contact list constantly bumping up against the limit of 1024. I ended up giving all NPC corps access, which led to a nice steady stream of new players showing up in fleet chat and loving what they stumbled over in their fleet finder. However, this also led to it becoming hard to remove thieves, as it wasn't possible to block a single char as long as their NPC corp had access.

After I burned out, many others have been stepping up to keep a similar fleet going in Otela. And they all must deal with the same big contact list, mostly containing the same entities. If access lists could be used instead, I can imagine us having sort of an official list that would be very easy to share with new upcoming fleet bosses. And maybe I'll even start boosting again, as I tend to freak out whenever I think about managing contacts the same way again.

Interestingly, I actually think the very same blocklist we use in the AG channels would work quite well for these fleets also. Although, you might have to add a way to filter out truly public fleets in the fleet finder, as there could become many of them, and I have had people contact me asking to be unblued just so they wouldn't see my fleet.

Some thoughts:

  • How are conflicts resolved when you add two lists to the same profile? I see no way to prioritize one list over the other.
  • Make doubleclicking an entity show info? Makes it easier to go through and remove biomassed chars/closed corps.
  • Maybe even some automated way or button to remove these things?
  • Some simple numbers showing how many chars/corps/alliances in the list would be nice, maybe also visible in the public info when clicking the link.
  • Add filtering options to the search box, to only show corps for instance? Or hide admins/managers.
  • Any reason why ctrl+a and ctrl+c works in the logs tab but not in members tab? Pasting stuff in a text file can often be practical.
  • Rightclick option to add/edit reason? Would probably add database stress, but would be quite useful so new moderators have a clue why someone got blocked 2 years ago.


Heh, with all the possibilities I see with these access lists, I even started to wonder if I could use them with my corp as well, but nothing has jumped out yet :P



howdy & congrats on the citadel release, belated congrats lol :))

>> having helped boost a mining fleet for over a year too (not entirely by myself, its a teamwork thing :P) i can certainly relate to a "One Main List" for access, especially as ive been at 1024 names in my addressbook for a few months now, having to delete a red/negative character to ADD a blue or another red/negative character is extremely tedious, having much more than 1024 names would be extremely helpful and gratefully appreciated, maybe 10,000 as standard !?!

>> if Access lists could have nominated pilots on the operator list as we have for chat channels so that 2nd in command's or Directors, Officers etc can amend access lists that would be awesome too

>> the main problem is pilots not able to have more than 1024 names in their addressbook, granted if their not boosting a fleet or in any position of command they will almost never reach their limits, so how about if we could request addittional name entry space as a clickable option in the addressbook (not requiring support ticket activation) so that 1 click could open up 10,000 name space entries so that everyone everywhere DOES NOT HAVE 10k name space limit, only to those minority who need the space. this should help with lesser server load perhaps

These are the bane of our Universe atm lol if anything could be done about this lot, many would be extremely grateful (looking at New Eden as a whole, we would be the minority, but still a very large number !)

:)
Mudeky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#232 - 2016-06-23 04:37:56 UTC
So why arent the Astrahus Citadels able to install a market hub module???
I mean if I drop 3 billion isk to put one of these up I damn sure want to be able to sell stuff in the damn thing, otherwise I have to spend more then 20 billion just to be able to sell things from my citadel seriously WTF. Wouldnt be so much of an issue if there wasnt such a steep price increase between the medium and large citadels. CCP I think you really need to look into this and make it so market hubs can be installed in the mediums because honestly without the market hub theres really no reason to even put one of these up and seems kinda crappy to put it in game and for it to be not as useful as it should be. Not everyone has bottomless pockets to build Fortizars like all the big corps and alliances. Again seems your only focusing on helping the rich get richer in game instead of helping everyone as you so seem to believe.
DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
#233 - 2016-06-23 15:05:43 UTC
I don't see the CEO Ejection Tube Module for Citadels? Is that coming in a future release?
Alexandr Naimov
State War Academy
Caldari State
#234 - 2016-07-22 00:07:48 UTC
Please remove Dreadnoughts from mining anomalies, or make HULK tanked enough to tank this dreadnought, going to stop mining till you fix this, already lost 3 hulks, one hulk in every two days. That make exhumers useless for nullsec mining.
Darkblad
#235 - 2016-07-22 09:04:19 UTC
Alexandr Naimov wrote:
going to stop mining till you fix this
Looks like: Objective complete!Pirate
Bring a friend. Use the second M in MMO to your advantage, don't MSO.

NPE-ISD-Übersetzt!
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#236 - 2016-07-22 21:58:34 UTC
Alexandr Naimov wrote:
Please remove Dreadnoughts from mining anomalies, or make HULK tanked enough to tank this dreadnought, going to stop mining till you fix this, already lost 3 hulks, one hulk in every two days. That make exhumers useless for nullsec mining.
Switch to Skiffs and stay aligned.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#237 - 2016-07-22 23:01:52 UTC
Waitwhat?

Did someone who wasn't trolling actually seriously ask for a tanky Hulk?!
Nalianna
Perkone
Caldari State
#238 - 2016-09-09 10:10:40 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Tahrl Cabot, very well said and straight to the point. Good job.

Obviously as usual there's an immense lack of Dev response to these and various other issues currently plaguing Eve Online. And as usual the amount of players logging into the game keeps dropping month after month.

It was said in the past that Goons would kill Eve but the truth of the fact is that CCP is killing Eve.


DMC

Goons couldn't kill EvE if CCP didn't change the rules to let them. It's all CCP, whichever way you look at it.

From my perspective, CCP is killing anything that isn't new and blingy. They killed Dust because they wanted to spend more time on stupid wastefully expensive VR games instead of supporting existing ones and just porting them to newer platforms and/or PC.

I'm becoming more and more disappointed with CCP. I came back to EvE from Dust to find that CCP is ruining EvE as well!

The latest is the 900k ISK for clone activation. Thanks a lot. I will NEVER move my jump clones to citadels. I will stop using them before I do that. Idiots. You are killing your own games. EvE, of all your games, should be the one that you keep most healthy. Your quest for new and blingy, and changing things that don't need to be changed is ruining it all.
David Grogan
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#239 - 2016-09-12 20:21:40 UTC
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:


There needs to be some way for the owner of a citadel to designate which toons have the capability of taking over the defense/management of the citadel - maybe I'm wrong about this and just dont see it at the moment - but it appears to me that defense/management is limited to corp members and cannot be presently deligated to anybody outside of the owner corp.



you can allow alliance members use the weapons and fuel the citadel also.

Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless you are from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs.
Henry Plantgenet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#240 - 2016-09-23 09:17:12 UTC
Is it possible to have notifications for when your citadel is supposed to run out of fuel?
(Something something this already exists for POSes)