These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Citadel defenses are pathetic.....why bother?

Author
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#61 - 2017-01-09 15:58:23 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
In all of the bashes I've ever participated in, only twice did anyone ever bother to show up to try and defend it.
In both cases it was one lone soul.

These things, both POS'es and Citadels tend to die alone and afraid in high sec.
Nobody should realistically expect the structure to be able to defend itself alone from a fleet that came for the specific reason of removing it.

That's just silly.


If that fleet is less than what was needed to kill a large properly set up POS then perhaps it is not so silly? After all two dps and a logi makes me snigger, come on that is pathetic...

Could be two or twenty two, shouldn't matter .
if you leave your shite to burn, it should burn.

The fact is that if you show up in a small gang of "kiety ,**** you , bull****" ewar and keept the logi from negating the DPS it's a very Different scenario.

Othran
Route One
#62 - 2017-01-09 16:05:30 UTC
This doesn't really help the thread but some of the best fun I've ever had in Eve is as a "POS Gunner".

I'm sure "Citadel Gunner" (oh look no real skills required) is just as much fun. All you have to do is login during your vuln timer :)

Its the only time you're ever going to be in charge of your own "deathstar" in Eve Twisted
Revis Owen
Krigmakt Elite
Safety.
#63 - 2017-01-09 16:08:40 UTC
Lothar Mandrake wrote:
Last May, I brought in 11 "paying" members and 9 are gone

Aha! "Eve is dying" thread #749,368.

Agent of the New Order http://www.minerbumping.com/p/the-code.html If you do not have a current Mining Permit, please contact me for issuance.

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#64 - 2017-01-09 17:19:12 UTC
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
Dracvlad, kind of yes, kind of no.
In that past I've heard of a single pilot offlining POSes, but I really don't recommend anyone trying this. It can go badly, especailly if you've been drinking copious amounts of bourbon. Technically, though, it's feasible.

POS'es took longer in one sitting to down, then the reinforcement timer.
Now you've got citadels with multiple timers, requiring in the case of war for it to drag out for more than a week. That means that by default they're going to be costing the aggressors a MINIMUM of 50mil extra to make it go away, oftentimes more.
Either way there's a certain amount of commitment involved in making it go away.
Either way the thing is doomed if a determined enough crew is willing to invest the time in making it go away...
IF nobody bothers to try to protect it.
The citadels are pricey for a reason, and they do some cool stuff also for a reason.
CCP wants us to defend them. If we don't, they go away.
The citadel fight I was in a bit ago that the ONE guy showed up to try to save got a great deal more intersting when he manned the EWAR on the thing and was directing fire and whatnot.
If his corp had bothered to log in and muster a fleet to save it then things might have gone differently.
At the very least they would have stood a very real chance of getting some lumps in before going down.


I was not looking at the war dec cost and time involved in terms of the indy structure or citadel yep that is more of a pain for teh attacker I agree, however they could pull a POS down if strategically outmatched, so what happens now it has to sit there and be shot at, no evasion, so that is worse, next issue is that they are so weak in terms of offence and of course what is needed to reinforce them. Next issue as you are quite aware most hisec corps are not really more than one man indy corps, they have no chance of defending them, befor ethey could use a POS which they could adjust to be quite well defended and a pain but now no.

From my point of view I wanted to see them at the same level as a Large POS and to be honest ISK tanking being the reason if you want, because proportionally I felt that was a reasonable expectation. I wanted them to be a challenge to take down based on the average corp size in hisec, sadly that is not the case when two DPS and a logi can take them down. Take me, I could put one ship in space and have a Citadel gunner, I don't think I would be able to do much at all as they are, and if my only option is to fly a Falcon and hope I jam an ECCM'd to hell and back merc Logi, well what is the point. Nah they are not going to be fun and I never had the chance to use my top skilled POS gunner skills...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#65 - 2017-01-09 17:34:37 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
In all of the bashes I've ever participated in, only twice did anyone ever bother to show up to try and defend it.
In both cases it was one lone soul.

These things, both POS'es and Citadels tend to die alone and afraid in high sec.
Nobody should realistically expect the structure to be able to defend itself alone from a fleet that came for the specific reason of removing it.

That's just silly.


If that fleet is less than what was needed to kill a large properly set up POS then perhaps it is not so silly? After all two dps and a logi makes me snigger, come on that is pathetic...

Could be two or twenty two, shouldn't matter .
if you leave your shite to burn, it should burn.

The fact is that if you show up in a small gang of "kiety ,**** you , bull****" ewar and keept the logi from negating the DPS it's a very Different scenario.



It does matter the difference between two or twenty, because is it the right level that a single player with three accounts can take one down, from my prespective it should require a small fleet. The fact that two DPS and a logi could do it against a manned Astrahus and perhaps less against a manned Raitaru does not sit easy with me, it is just too low, seems it got set to a level so that a solo war decker could take them down which quite frankly sucks.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#66 - 2017-01-09 17:50:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Black Pedro wrote:
[quote=Dracvlad]Unlikely. Look at a properly balanced profession like exploration. No professional explorer confines themselves to only highsec sites. They roam all around New Eden, serving as content and creating activity in all the spaces and are rewarded for taking those risks. Similarly PI and gas mining work well at drawing players out of highsec and the massive increase in rewards easily offsets the odd lost ship.

CCP has taken steps in recent years to make nullsec mining a thing with some success although the effort vs reward of highsec AFK mining is still too high. They will have a great opportunity with the Drilling Platform to build on this and get this sorted, perhaps with a nerf to AFK mining and/or a buff to active mining. Industry is also not properly incentivized to be done in more dangerous spaces so is done overwhelmingly in highsec, but perhaps the added risk of the EC over the POS will fix this once POSes are deprecated.

I will agree with you that nullsec AFK ratting is a terrible mechanic and honestly out of control now. It is overdue for both a nerf in value as well as a complete rethink of how it is done, but the problem is that it is the only real reason to take sov now (especially if moon mining goes away). There really needs to be another, more active replacement for income generation for sov holders (as well as more diversity), one that isn't eclipsed by just running the totally beaten and min-maxed highsec incursions.

Players should always be able to play in the relative safety of highsec, but this should not be the most lucrative way to play as it is often the case. There needs to be reasons to take risks and spend the effort to secure/defend space or the game just degenerates into a boring consensual space battle game, the virtual universe CCP is trying to create drowned in all this safety.

Eve isn't ever going to die because there are too many explosions. It's more likely to suffer a long descent into boredom hastened by well-meaning devs who listen to the constant bleating for more safety from much of the player base.


Exploration is better in riskier space, same goes for volume and types of ore in terms of mining. PI is better in riskier space, part of my PI empire is in low sec.

Personally I am happy with the Rorqual as it is, I don't want to see it nerfed to the degree they are talking about nerrfing it, but no one gives that a chance do they, its nerf before the impact is allowed to happen. And this thing about AFK mining, I cannot see where the hell you get that from, I cannot AFK mine, it is just not possible, the roids are small and certain days I get two cycles worth of ore and that is it. You really think I can AFK mine?

I have no idea what these drilling platforms will be, I think they are moon goo related, but who knows. I hope that people can have multiple ones around moons which will shake things up a lot and make it more interesting.

I am not a fan of incursions, you know that but people seem to ignore the fact that sometimes you get one in hisec and it is messy as hell.

Boredom, weaponised boredom is the biggest turn off in this game, or putting content out of the reach of most of the player base, people don't mind being blown up, I have seen that attitude by most of the people I have met in the AG group, however they do want a correct balance. This bleating you talk about does not really exist, it is a view of gankers that people who want balance want total safety, or want to end all PvP in hisec, nope, you are just blowing a loud trumpet there and it is a bit annoying.

Anyway Astrahus and Raitaru's in hisec are too easy to kill, this is an issue that needs to be rectified, I remember you insisting that one man war deckers could take one down, I am sorry to see that they listened to you in that, what is wrong with people having to form up to kill these things, that is what I said in the F&I or feedback thread and CCP just went and screwed it up IMO.

Though they do look nice sitting in my hanger....

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#67 - 2017-01-09 17:57:03 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Omar Alharazaad wrote:
In all of the bashes I've ever participated in, only twice did anyone ever bother to show up to try and defend it.
In both cases it was one lone soul.

These things, both POS'es and Citadels tend to die alone and afraid in high sec.
Nobody should realistically expect the structure to be able to defend itself alone from a fleet that came for the specific reason of removing it.

That's just silly.


If that fleet is less than what was needed to kill a large properly set up POS then perhaps it is not so silly? After all two dps and a logi makes me snigger, come on that is pathetic...

Could be two or twenty two, shouldn't matter .
if you leave your shite to burn, it should burn.

The fact is that if you show up in a small gang of "kiety ,**** you , bull****" ewar and keept the logi from negating the DPS it's a very Different scenario.



It does matter the difference between two or twenty, because is it the right level that a single player with three accounts can take one down, from my prespective it should require a small fleet. The fact that two DPS and a logi could do it against a manned Astrahus and perhaps less against a manned Raitaru does not sit easy with me, it is just too low, seems it got set to a level so that a solo war decker could take them down which quite frankly sucks.

Possible ≠ advisable.
I've no interest in taking the Don Quixote award for 2017.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#68 - 2017-01-09 18:35:40 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Anyway Astrahus and Raitaru's in hisec are too easy to kill, this is an issue that needs to be rectified, I remember you insisting that one man war deckers could take one down, I am sorry to see that they listened to you in that, what is wrong with people having to form up to kill these things, that is what I said in the F&I or feedback thread and CCP just went and screwed it up IMO.

Though they do look nice sitting in my hanger....
Be thankful they take that much to shoot. The original plan called for them to be killable by a single player in a entosis-fit frigate.

The problem of having people form up massive fleets to shoot them is it locks out small groups from attacking them. CCP designed them to support groups of all sizes fighting over them which is why they started with the entosis mechanic before switching to the DPS cap system to allow both small groups and large groups to fight over the same structure. Grid control, not meeting some arbitrary damage bar, is suppose to decide whether these things explode or not. If a five-man corp wants to fight another five-man corp over a structure, they should be able to.

These things are tedious to shoot and drop nothing so the vast majority go unmolested in highsec. If anything, CCP has made them too safe in my opinion, or perhaps just failed to provide sufficient conflict drivers given how they are piling up in most highsec systems.

What's wrong with a single player trying to shoot a structure anyway? That just means (all things being equal) you have to bring two people to see them off.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#69 - 2017-01-09 18:53:36 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Anyway Astrahus and Raitaru's in hisec are too easy to kill, this is an issue that needs to be rectified, I remember you insisting that one man war deckers could take one down, I am sorry to see that they listened to you in that, what is wrong with people having to form up to kill these things, that is what I said in the F&I or feedback thread and CCP just went and screwed it up IMO.

Though they do look nice sitting in my hanger....
Be thankful they take that much to shoot. The original plan called for them to be killable by a single player in a entosis-fit frigate.

The problem of having people form up massive fleets to shoot them is it locks out small groups from attacking them. CCP designed them to support groups of all sizes fighting over them which is why they started with the entosis mechanic before switching to the DPS cap system to allow both small groups and large groups to fight over the same structure. Grid control, not meeting some arbitrary damage bar, is suppose to decide whether these things explode or not. If a five-man corp wants to fight another five-man corp over a structure, they should be able to.

These things are tedious to shoot and drop nothing so the vast majority go unmolested in highsec. If anything, CCP has made them too safe in my opinion, or perhaps just failed to provide sufficient conflict drivers given how they are piling up in most highsec systems.

What's wrong with a single player trying to shoot a structure anyway? That just means (all things being equal) you have to bring two people to see them off.


Yeah I remember that and all my contacts said nope, we ain't doing that entosis mess, hopefully that will disappear and space will be held with Citadels and fleets.

I don't think one man and a dog being able to kill them is good content, I had in mind 6 DPS and four logi as a good number for the Astrahus in hisec. Why not one man you ask, simple these things should not be easy and require effort, that is what I said to you before, they should require a proper military campaign of bringing in allies etc., not a jolly jape to pop one which is what they are now... And using the school of fish defence really bugs me. I guess If I do put them up I will will put up twenty Raitaru to bore the death out of an attacker...

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

SurrenderMonkey
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#70 - 2017-01-09 19:21:57 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Why not one man you ask, simple these things should not be easy and require effort, that is what I said to you before, they should require a proper military campaign of bringing in allies etc., not a jolly jape to pop one which is what they are now...



They do, when they're defended.

It's a "jolly jape" to pop most of them because that's the exact same level of consideration that was given to their deployment.

People throw up structures with no plan, capability, or desire to defend them, relying solely on people opting not to attack them (because it's annoying, time consuming, and not really worth it) to keep their asset safe.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

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

Black Pedro
Mine.
#71 - 2017-01-09 19:28:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Dracvlad wrote:
Why not one man you ask, simple these things should not be easy and require effort, that is what I said to you before, they should require a proper military campaign of bringing in allies etc., not a jolly jape to pop one which is what they are now...
Why? Arbitrary bars of entry just prevent content from happening.

The Upwell structures give the defenders control of the time of the fight and insulate them from any loss of their contents, as well as serving as a force multiplier of a sort not to mention force an attacker to show up three times. Why should they not be vulnerable to attack by one person who thinks they can beat the defenders three times in a row on the defender's terms? How does locking out that one man antagonist from trying an attack against the structure make the game better in any way?

Why should they be hard and require effort to attack? For maximal stuff to happen in the game, they should be easy to attack but even easier to defend.
Salvos Rhoska
#72 - 2017-01-09 20:59:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
As has been shown, Citadels have anemic weapon systems, but they can support with other means their defending fleet.
The windows of aggression are also narrow, and defined by the defender.
CCP has stated this as intended.

What concerns me more, with POS being phased out, is what happens to small corps.

With the information I have at hand, Im seeing some concerning gaps in CCPs grand plan.

The outcome of this, I expect as further consolidation of small corps into larger entities, on the larger entities terms.
Furthermore the proliferation of Citadels, exponentially, as a severely slowing effect on the exchange of territory between NS entities.
J-space is even more complicated, owing to logistics problems, especially for smaller entities.

Im not seeing a lot of positive results here in terms of player dynamics.

Instead Im seeing congealment and concretion of larger entities control of their apace, both in terms of expending resources in creating Citadels within it, and also the reduction of smaller entities capacity to defend their own assets now that the POS system is being phased out, in favor of fleet defense and more expensive installations.

Frankly, Ive never understood the decision to phase out POS.
Mala Zvitorepka
Karthen-Woight
#73 - 2017-01-09 22:10:12 UTC
If anything, there is a problem in hisec of lack of incentive to remove them. 
As for defense, targeting range is very poor, especially considering it has fighters. Maybe CCP forgot a zero? Other than this hole (damage on 300km, logi additional 60km away), I don't see how you could possibly destroy a citadel using 2x dps + 1x logi.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#74 - 2017-01-09 22:21:30 UTC
Mala Zvitorepka wrote:
If anything, there is a problem in hisec of lack of incentive to remove them. 
As for defense, targeting range is very poor, especially considering it has fighters. Maybe CCP forgot a zero? Other than this hole (damage on 300km, logi additional 60km away), I don't see how you could possibly destroy a citadel using 2x dps + 1x logi.

Calculate the DPS the launchers actually put out once you take target sig & some speed into account.
Then consider what happens when you neut the structure to it's cap of which there are not things like structure cap batteries to help,and even if they were there are so few slots.
Logi just outside 250km with sniper DPS is obviously one solution. But you can just fit your logi/dps for ECM and face tank all the DPS also with how miserable it is.

Sure they should require 'defending'. But someone turning up to gun is someone defending. If no-one turns up they don't shoot at all. And they are meant to be a force multiplier, so that 1 guy turning up to defend should count as 5 to start with. If 4 people turn up they should count as 20.
Otherwise why bother to turn up at all when the attacker outnumbers you, which is the current situation they are in for highsec, where it's so irrelevant once the attacker has more than 3 people it's just down to fleet size. And this is the issue.
StonerPhReaK
Herb Men
#75 - 2017-01-09 22:38:07 UTC
Its ok for a small/one man corps to anchor a citadel. But it isn't ok for one guy and 2 buddies to bring it down. What?

Signatures wer cooler when we couldn't remove them completely.

Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#76 - 2017-01-10 06:34:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Herzog Wolfhammer
I have been watching this thread, and wondering why it has not devolved into trolling and name-calling. Is everybody OK today? Is there a flu going around?


One thing I would like to add to the topic's vector regarding solo/casual play and the "going big" in reference to a keepstar is this: while I would have to submit that no casual player could expect to go big and get something they might not be able to defend, and seeing that this is in line with the vision that CCP has (the usual hurr durr this is a multiplayer game make friend and all that HTFU-ery), it's noticeable that casual play has taken a hit but not in ways we could expect to see people complain about.


That is, if a solo or casual player cannot expect to go big, what can they do in a game where such direction seems to be the norm?

What's interesting is that real casual play content is in fact too easy.

Those who know me can stop reading because they seen this. I refer to exploration. Exploration was the best casual play because you could do it for a short time, or a long time, or end up intending on a short time that takes a long time (didn't need that sleep anyway) or expect to play all day, be 100 million or more ahead in the game 10 minutes later, and decide to quite while ahead.

That's one of them.

While it was construed to be the gank crowd complaining about nerfs, mostly to ganking, the biggest nerfs have happened to casual play. It's too easy.

So given that, what is such a player to do? If he's not going big, he does not have much to do. Solo or small gang PVP perhaps. But that has it's own set of issues and most people don't like wandering for hours just to get BLOPS dropped.

It seems like the casual, and mostly non-PVP (ship to ship intended combat PVP) activities became too easy and stale. Yet new content, like new sites, citadels burner missions, etc. require teamwork that casual players lack. Look, if all you got is an hour and you wait half of that for the fleet to form up and then the Logi is like "OMG wife agro" and is gone for 29 minutes, you just spent that hour doing nothing.

Yes maybe you an do the EZ Bake exploration and there some PI clickfest. Or if you have a roid vacuum put that to use. But what is the end goal of that? You might get ganked but that is still less likely to happen depending on numerous circumstances. So the outcome is predictable.

The end goal is.... a citadel? Then they can't defend it? It's like buying a huge house and not being able to afford the utilities I guess.

Like it or not, vast hordes of rank and file casual and solo players, given stuff to do that keeps them engaged and interested, were the lifeblood of the game. Todays carebear may be tomorrows NPSI fleet member, or partake in bombers bar, or go to nullsec. In the meantime what little they could do meant something to them. So that kept them coming back. They didn't read the forums, they didn't want to become space famous (or infamous) and I even met miners who never heard of Hulkageddon even around the 5th occurrence of it. Eve was that big, and that crowded, for that to happen. Unlike now, with these "Kusion fleets" and blanket deccers camping gates in highsec. Sure we get some big fleet fight over some citadel in nullsec somewhere but that was treated like some big historic event. Had something like that happened say 7 years ago it would have been a much bigger deal.

Art wise, and shelf-borne content wise (ship choices, modules, customization) the game is better than it has ever been, but it seems boring, predictable, and rehearsed.

So in summary, while a casual can probably not expect to build a citadel for lack of defending it, if that's the end goal for many a player, and they are told "no way man, it'll get blown up by people who like to blow them up for sh!ts and giggles", and the only draw for the game is that milestone, what are they expected to do? And I say this not as a plea that they should be given a chance, but that more difficult, interesting, and detailed content between point A (nothing) and B (citadel) won't make it the end all be all.

Once upon a time players used to join all starry eyed thinking they would be a fleet commander in some super acting like Captain Picard but then they ended up on some tangent far more rewarding and after a couple of years would not care, or even remember, why they started playing Eve.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#77 - 2017-01-10 06:55:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
StonerPhReaK wrote:
Its ok for a small/one man corps to anchor a citadel. But it isn't ok for one guy and 2 buddies to bring it down. What?


And this attitude is where we are now, no it is not OK, the Citadel should be a challenge, pure and simple, not a jolly jape giggle as the poor sap in it gets capped out after ten minutes using its defences, it should require planning, good fits, logistics, make the event special, not wham bang and there goes my home in space with barely a whimper.

As I said casual players are locked out of fun stuff and if the shoal of fish concept is the only way then expect to see a huge amount of dud ones floating around, I am going to build 80 Raitaru's and put them all up and I will be using three only, have fun guessing which ones are important, does that sound like fun, well for me it is..., riverting game play but what ho work out your strategy and go for it.


Herzog, once again you hit the nail on the head, the casual players possibilities got nerfed again and again, that is why Eve got itself into a mess with subs, ganking and griefing had a part in it true and the most notable was when they gave destroyers heavy DPS and left all the mining ships with a tank of a wet paper bag.

You noticed that Black Pedo failed to reply to my question on can flipping, they can still do it for content, except they do not control the content, because anyone can join in, so being the risk averse snowflakes such as baltec1 who was only blapping noobs in ships that could not fight back their easy kill laugh was now a bit more risky so they stopped, cry more please baltec1 and all people like you, call that hunting, yeah baby seal clubbing.

And this is the issue with Citadels, killing even a properly fitted one in hisec is a jolly jape, which I find pathetic.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#78 - 2017-01-10 07:01:29 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Mala Zvitorepka wrote:
If anything, there is a problem in hisec of lack of incentive to remove them. 
As for defense, targeting range is very poor, especially considering it has fighters. Maybe CCP forgot a zero? Other than this hole (damage on 300km, logi additional 60km away), I don't see how you could possibly destroy a citadel using 2x dps + 1x logi.

Calculate the DPS the launchers actually put out once you take target sig & some speed into account.
Then consider what happens when you neut the structure to it's cap of which there are not things like structure cap batteries to help,and even if they were there are so few slots.
Logi just outside 250km with sniper DPS is obviously one solution. But you can just fit your logi/dps for ECM and face tank all the DPS also with how miserable it is.

Sure they should require 'defending'. But someone turning up to gun is someone defending. If no-one turns up they don't shoot at all. And they are meant to be a force multiplier, so that 1 guy turning up to defend should count as 5 to start with. If 4 people turn up they should count as 20.
Otherwise why bother to turn up at all when the attacker outnumbers you, which is the current situation they are in for highsec, where it's so irrelevant once the attacker has more than 3 people it's just down to fleet size. And this is the issue.


Thank you for pointing it out so well, they really are pathetic, setup Eve style to be easy kills for content for easy jolly jape style play, that is why so many people don't even bother to man the guns, no one likes to play futile defence do they, I wouldn't, in fact I don't think I would waste my ISK on putting weapons on any I put up, in fact I think I will put about 80 up all around the same time and only use three.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Black Pedro
Mine.
#79 - 2017-01-10 07:31:24 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
You noticed that Black Pedo failed to reply to my question on can flipping, they can still do it for content, except they do not control the content, because anyone can join in, so being the risk averse snowflakes such as baltec1 who was only blapping noobs in ships taht could not fight back their easy kill laugh was now a bit more risky so they stopped, cry more please baltec1 and all people like you, call taht hunting, yeah baby seal clubbing.

And this is the issue with Citadels, killing even a properly fitted one in hisec is a jolly jape, which I find pathetic.
You still haven't provided a clear reason why attacking a structure should be some sort of complicated operation that requires dozens of players to even get started on other than your own personal whim. How does setting a high bar of entry and locking out swathes of smaller entities from attacking structures make the game better?

I am willing to entertain the idea that Citadels and Engineering Complexes are too weak offensively and do not function as a sufficient force multiplier (although the killboard data doesn't seem to support this given how rarely these things die in highsec), but I have no clue why you think they should be something put up on a pedestal such that only large groups should be entitled to attack even though a single player can deploy them. Why is it so terrible a fleet a dude and his two buddies can take a crack at a structure? That is better than the alternative of sitting around doing nothing because their corpmates didn't log in.

As for can-flipping I could care less about the specifics. I joined the game when it was in the process of being removed and in my eyes in the grand scheme of things it is a slight variation of the suspect baiting we still have today. But the point was there were plenty of avenues for creative antagonists to create content in highsec. Read blogs of the era and you'll find hilarious tales of can-flipping, awoxing industry corps, ninja salvaging and so forth that gave highsec life (and eventually got me to try the game), all of which are gone now along with the artists of the era. Now things change and people leave the game, but it is not surprising if you remove content-creation tools, people are going to leave the game and interesting things will stop happening in highsec leading to decreasing player numbers as both antagonists and prey are bored out of the game.

Now that sounds overly pessimistic. We still have ganking and war declarations creating content in highsec, and actually these new structures promise to generate even more content given CCP finally patched the wardec/structure loophole, but wardecs and modern ganking are not really a casual, solo-friendly activity for an aspiring highsec antagonist. Highsec is now lacking casual, accessible tools for new player who wants to play as an antagonist leading to less and less happening there as both new aggressive-minded, and new industrial players have nothing to do.

The sad irony is that Eve is more likely to die a slow, lingering death from the inertia of all these buffs to safety the carebears say they want, but actually remove not only the excitement of the risk of players, but the very reason for players to do stuff. For most people, accumulating resources in the near perfect safety of highsec grows stale after a few months and unless they find a larger goal, these players will leave the game. This is why nurturing conflict everywhere in this game, including highsec, is so important.

Anyways, to tie this back to the OP, this is the primary reason Citadels are in the game: they are conflict drivers. It makes no sense to make them invulnerable to everyone but the largest groups in the game (who ironically were the ones attacking the structure the OP was lamenting over - if you make it such that PL cannot explode a manned citadel then who could?). They are there to be built, fought over and destroyed (and by groups of all sizes), creating content at each step. That cycle of construction and destruction is how Eve is suppose to work.
Tuttomenui II
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#80 - 2017-01-10 07:36:38 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:


Thank you for pointing it out so well, they really are pathetic, setup Eve style to be easy kills for content for easy jolly jape style play, that is why so many people don't even bother to man the guns, no one likes to play futile defence do they, I wouldn't, in fact I don't think I would waste my ISK on putting weapons on any I put up, in fact I think I will put about 80 up all around the same time and only use three.


Place them all in one system and place them strategically to create space ascii. Have you noticed that a citadel bracket icon in space already looks like the stars are giving you the bird?