These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Dev blog: Building Dreams: Introducing Engineering Complexes

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
#61 - 2016-10-10 17:39:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Torgeir Hekard
#NOPOORS

Basically if you don't have a gold stash and a share in a blue donut you may as well not bother with manufacturing. Or pretty much using any new structures.

The good thing about poses is they can be made expendable and easy to move.

The new structures are pretty much one-time use (the unanchoring timers) and cost like they're made of gold.

Also yay for big block monopoly on everything manufacturable. Might as well give out free T2 BPO sets for designated alliances while you are at it.
Anthar Thebess
#62 - 2016-10-10 17:40:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Anthar Thebess
Will jobs pause during the reinforce timers?
I can reinforce someone citadel just to make him unable to produce for a week?
Slots locked and jobs paused.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#63 - 2016-10-10 17:43:53 UTC
Agfro Er wrote:
Not excited to see the longer timer paired with less HP, no fighter bay, and unable to anchor in range of citadel defenses. I'm worried my future weekends will be entirely consumed warping from structure to structure to keep an eye on them instead of enjoying the game.

It makes sense to have these structures more vulnerable than the citadel, but redistributing asset/defense locations across system, when small corps are built around managing a single central defensive point, will break the parity for small corps and severely limit access to areas of the game that are currently available to them.

Any chance to allow indy structures on same grid as citadel? Maybe extend some penalties to the citadel. Such as extended vulnerability window for the citadel, or increased damage applied.



This definitely presents some new challenges for the common small/single player industrial corporations (and I'm a member of that latter group). I'm not sure that's necessarily a bad thing, though I'm sure there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Single-player industry corps makes a lot of sense under the POS model because I really don't want anyone else, even people I vaguely trust, having access to my arrays, their contents, or my jobs.

The new structure model alleviates most/all of the core problems with larger industrial organizations, and even allows for the practical use of public structures. So, while it is definitely harder for one player to effectively maintain their own infrastructure, they don't necessarily have to do that anymore.

System cost indices are still somewhat discouraging, but I'm not ready to get too worked up over that just yet.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Anna Lightyear
Red Storm Rising
#64 - 2016-10-10 17:44:14 UTC
Overall I like the look of them (citadel skins, so we can get rid of the yellowness? Shocked )

While I hate to bust out a bit of common sense/lore here, why on earth do we have an advanced civilisation that applies defensive systems to structures with no real purpose but to be shot at, and the structure that are critical to life, economics and the welfare of all have bugger all?

I'll be happy to see more big things go boom with a chance for some nice bpc's and materials to drop (bringing freighters to pvp ops ftw!), but key assets for industry need some sort of defensive capability, especially one that an be killed by 5 T1 ships in 20 minutes, this seems unwise.

The new rorqual is probably easier to defend than these citadels.

Can we also get an idea on the costs of the BPO's please?
RainReaper
RRN Industries
#65 - 2016-10-10 17:44:15 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
Will jobs pause during the reinforce timers?
I can reinforce someone citadel just to make him unable to produce for a week?


Well, if you take them down into structure then all services automaticaly go offline. So I would say that yes. But you have to first go through shields and then armor for this.
Guybrush Threepwoot
Doomheim
#66 - 2016-10-10 17:44:15 UTC
1) One XL Structur per Ally or is it possible to build more than one? One per Corp? One per player?
2) How many Indu Slots for SuperCapitals are aviable in a XL Structur?
3) if more than one... possible to use these slots from all ppl from an ally?
Ms Michigan
Aviation Professionals for EVE
#67 - 2016-10-10 17:46:14 UTC
It seems elegant; i.e. Risk vs Reward seems balanced..... but still I am struck by the cost overall compared to POS. Maybe this is needed/planned. I would like to see CCP's thoughts on this. Last I checked though, when Citadels were first announced, the granularity of structures and the idea of thus squatting in someone's backyard, was a REAL, planned, thing. Apparently not? I don't know...not sold.

Also, the complexity of it all. So many citadel structures, rigs...I guess you guys are banking on salvage being abundant and fixing drops for that. Also...you are just replacing the same thing we had before. I get it is a "ground up" redesign and reprogram which has been needed for YEARS...but besides tethering and a few other advantages to citadels...I still don't like them compared to POS and Outposts. Bang for the buck....again...stepping backward and not without huge liability.

Structures being able to be destroyed more granularly I guess is the theme of the day.

Jury still out.
RainReaper
RRN Industries
#68 - 2016-10-10 17:46:45 UTC
Anna Lightyear wrote:
Overall I like the look of them (citadel skins, so we can get rid of the yellowness? Shocked )

While I hate to bust out a bit of common sense/lore here, why on earth do we have an advanced civilisation that applies defensive systems to structures with no real purpose but to be shot at, and the structure that are critical to life, economics and the welfare of all have bugger all?

I'll be happy to see more big things go boom with a chance for some nice bpc's and materials to drop (bringing freighters to pvp ops ftw!), but key assets for industry need some sort of defensive capability, especially one that an be killed by 5 T1 ships in 20 minutes, this seems unwise.

The new rorqual is probably easier to defend than these citadels.

Can we also get an idea on the costs of the BPO's please?


I think you forgot the fact that you have to go trought shields,

then wait a day while its reinforced, then armor, then wait a week before you can finaly go trough its structure,
and it will have asset safety like citadels.
Anthar Thebess
#69 - 2016-10-10 17:48:44 UTC
CCP Lebowski wrote:
Kronossan wrote:
I was hoping to find out more about faction tower reimbursement/replacement.
Towers aren't going anywhere for now, as they still have functionality that new structures don't yet offer.

Rest assured that you'll be informed when we're closer to reaching feature parity!


Can we simply get reprocessing of all pos related stuff buffed now to 100% ?
We can transform materials we invested in post stuff into new structures.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Aristide BriandIII
Lippstadt Creed
Solyaris Chtonium
#70 - 2016-10-10 17:54:37 UTC
I just noticed something. New POSes won't be anchorable after December. Yet, the Mining Arrays do not yet have a scheduled release. This strikes me as a problem for moon miners. If your mining POS is destroyed post December and Mining Arrays are not yet released, we could see wars targeting any moon mining operation because you won't be able to replace it.

This poses a significant risk to Coalition/Alliance level economies. I have looked for some sort of post to reconcile this but haven't seen it yet.
Milla Goodpussy
Garoun Investment Bank
#71 - 2016-10-10 17:55:08 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
CCP Lebowski wrote:
Kronossan wrote:
I was hoping to find out more about faction tower reimbursement/replacement.
Towers aren't going anywhere for now, as they still have functionality that new structures don't yet offer.

Rest assured that you'll be informed when we're closer to reaching feature parity!


Can we simply get reprocessing of all pos related stuff buffed now to 100% ?
We can transform materials we invested in post stuff into new structures.




no cant do that because they forgot to add scrapmetal processing to rigs in the current citadels.. great thinking ccp.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#72 - 2016-10-10 17:55:10 UTC
Agfro Er wrote:
Not excited to see the longer timer paired with less HP, no fighter bay, and unable to anchor in range of citadel defenses. I'm worried my future weekends will be entirely consumed warping from structure to structure to keep an eye on them instead of enjoying the game.

It makes sense to have these structures more vulnerable than the citadel, but redistributing asset/defense locations across system, when small corps are built around managing a single central defensive point, will break the parity for small corps and severely limit access to areas of the game that are currently available to them.

Any chance to allow indy structures on same grid as citadel? Maybe extend some penalties to the citadel. Such as extended vulnerability window for the citadel, or increased damage applied.


I really don't understand why we are not encouraged to put an Engineering Complex a couple of hundred kilometers from a Citadel and make little space cities.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Do Little
Bluenose Trading
#73 - 2016-10-10 17:55:29 UTC
4-5 time the price of a small POS for similar functionality and 4-5 time the fuel cost. These don't seem th have much relevance for smaller industrial operations. Pity.
JTK Fotheringham
Ducks in Outer Space
#74 - 2016-10-10 17:56:43 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
e penalties to the citadel. Such as extended vulnerability window for the citadel, or increased damage applied.


I really don't understand why we are not encouraged to put an Engineering Complex a couple of hundred kilometers from a Citadel and make little space cities.[/quote]

Because the Missile / Bomb mechanics work on there only being one of them able to hit a target.
Scath Bererund
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#75 - 2016-10-10 17:56:56 UTC
so will this structure handle the booster and T3 reactions?
Tash'k Omar
Indefinite Mass
#76 - 2016-10-10 17:57:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Tash'k Omar
Does the invention service module also add the ability to run T3 invention jobs (formerly reverse engineering) that are currently limited to research outposts and experimental labs?

And gas reactions?
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#77 - 2016-10-10 17:57:22 UTC
Aristide BriandIII wrote:
I just noticed something. New POSes won't be anchorable after December. Yet, the Mining Arrays do not yet have a scheduled release. This strikes me as a problem for moon miners. If your mining POS is destroyed post December and Mining Arrays are not yet released, we could see wars targeting any moon mining operation because you won't be able to replace it.

This poses a significant risk to Coalition/Alliance level economies. I have looked for some sort of post to reconcile this but haven't seen it yet.


New OUTPOSTS - not new POS.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Jawen Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
#78 - 2016-10-10 17:57:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Jawen Serce
Still nothing about SMALL sizes of those strctures ?

What will become the whole sandbox part of being able to throw our own little tent (POSs) ?
What will become the will of players, not very wealthy, to still be able to have his own little house made of wood in the wild ?

This is beautifull and shiny and all, but you are cutting a whole part of what some of those "little ones" loved in this game about structures.

I'm still waiting for some clarifications about what will become POSs, and/or what you are planning to do about this.

These new structures are really well thought and all, but they demande WAY MORE ISK and organisation to be thrown out in space.
I know this is an MMO, and social is important, but even for super little corps, or little friends circle, it is a huge amount of ISK to put on the table to be able to have a owned structure.
RainReaper
RRN Industries
#79 - 2016-10-10 18:04:33 UTC
With the current amount of ice we get in the highsec anomalies we will go from having around 4/5 to not even close... and us small guys wont be able to sustain even a medium one of these thigns att all.
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#80 - 2016-10-10 18:06:30 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Jawen Serce wrote:
Still nothing about SMALL sizes of those strctures ?


Why would there be anything about SMALL sizes of those structures? They're not happening.

It's not like they just haven't gotten around to making a dev blog about it just yet - they're not a thing. They're not a planned thing. They've never been a planned thing. They've never said anything to suggest that will ever be a planned thing.

Small structures are mobile depots and MTUs and the like.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/