These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#101 - 2017-01-10 12:33:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Naxirian wrote:
As a citadel owner myself, a citadel is supposed to be fitted to support a fleet. It will not solo defend itself. It was not intended to and it never will be intended to, nor would I want it to. They pack incredibly powerful neuts, webs, scrams, and painters. Their biggest strength imo is capacitor warfare. They can seriously mess with a fleets capacitor. The dps must be dealt by the defense fleet. The citadel is just intended to provide support, and it does this very well. If you can't defend a citadel then you shouldn't put one up unless you're prepared for it to die. End of story.


Thank you Citadel owner, hmmmm, a Raitaru which is an indy structure put up by indy players who cannot defend themselves let alone the structure costs about ISK 550m in raw materials, so not a huge cost, about the cost of two rigged and T2 fitted BS. One man and a dog can take that down even if fully fitted and manned, it is a kill mail for low expectation players, nothing more.

People need to treat it as a joke, which it is, they even extended the vulnerability period because it was too difficult otherwise, sigh... The only way you dirty casuals can have one is if you flood the systems of Eve with them like a shoal of fish so that the predators get confused at the mass of targets that do not shoot back and await their fate.

People should create multiple Alpha accounts and create a corp, then transfer them to each individual corp and do some war dec fee tanking along with is this the one they actually use to do stuff tanking and not forgetting the waste of time tanking. As I said Eve at its finest.

You do know don't you that most indy corps are made up of indy characters that can't shoot back and have a total of one player in the corp, don't you...? Obviously not...

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
#102 - 2017-01-10 12:37:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Black Pedro wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
I am everything at this point that the HTFU purists hate, I am playing in their self-proclaimed PvP sandbox as a resource and ISk generator and I am ignoring them, showing them as not being able to affect me and treating them with contempt.

I build lots of things, I risk things and I have lost things, but I don't give entitled players easy kills especially in areas with no counter.

And your statement about buffing hisec is twaddle, totally wrong, I see lots of ships being ganked and I have no issue with that, I do have an issue with no consequence bumping and low consequence loot scooping and I do have an issue with setting up large kill mails that die if you sneeze on them. Which is why I play as I do.

You wanted Citadels and Indy structures so a one man war dec corp can kill them, that was your bar, you got what you wanted, but did you really, talk about naff content.


A one man corporation can attack, but there is no guarantee they will succeed. Pretty much any defense will send the attacker off with the support of the citadel. All it means is the defenders have to show up. Such a design puts the battle for the structure back on the grid between the two sides of real players, rather than just allowing players to hide behind the tedium of a pile of boring hoops the attacker is forced to jump through.

If you don't show up to defend your structure, you don't deserve to keep it. This design produces more content than just making it too tedious to even bother attacking like much of the current game play around POSes.

But twaddle? You yourself have shown that it is trivial to not lose anything in highsec if you take a few precautions, just as I do every day. I have built in my own facilities and moved tens of billions of ISK of ships around highsec, including ganking ships, over the years and have never come close to losing anything to anyone. The sum total of the non-consensual player interaction during my industrial activities over those years: my Orca got bumped a couple times on the Amarr undock once. Now, this is of course because I take precautions and know the mechanics of this game inside and out from playing also as a highsec pirate, but there is nothing magical in what I do. Generally, I treat highsec as lowsec and have a few additional protocols for moving my freighters, but there is nothing that other players can't do to make themselves near invincible. Plus, even if the odds catch up with me some day and I am in the wrong place at the wrong time (or face a very dedicated adversary) I never fly anything I am not ready to lose so there is nothing I have to fear.

People get ganked sure, but in almost every case it is because of something they did either to make themselves a profitable target or a target of opportunity. And if they are just unlucky, undocking in something you are can afford to lose mitigates even that risk. That's the game: perfect defensive play should make you near impervious while cutting corners by not fitting tank, not paying attention, not scouting and whatever should make you vulnerable. Most times you will get away with it and make more yield or save time, but occasionally another player will call you on your recklessness and explode you. This play, counterplay and player interaction is what Eve is all about.

No one begrudges you for playing defensively. You are sacrificing yield and effort to make yourself safe. You can play Eve as a resource gathering game, safe in the kiddie pool from the most of the sharks, as you should be able to. All of us need to have a place to start out in, and to fall back to if we hit a rough patch and get kicked out of our home elsewhere. Just don't expect to be able to enjoy the same benefits as players who take actual risks and deploy a structure, or set up in a wormhole, or take sov. People who take such risks and offer themselves up as content should be receive increased rewards as befits the risk vs. reward design of the game. If you want to forgo those rewards for reduced risks, that is your choice. For you, that means you will pass on the benefits of structure ownership for additional safety.

Personally I think that a silly choice given the vanishingly small probability of being attacked and the limited downside of losing something you can clearly afford to lose, but that is your choice. Play the game how you want.


When I was in 0.0 I had the impression that most were basking sharks..., just filtering plankton Shocked

We saved a freighter pilot twice from a bumper, the third time he died when the bumper spammed duels at him and he made an error, that player was bumped on every trip he did, he logged out when he realised he was in a duel and I have not seen him since, he was a eager solo player with one account. Well played sirs...

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

Cpt BusterRoids
i420 Inc
#103 - 2017-01-10 12:46:22 UTC
Meh I am gonna side with author of the thread ...... Those structures are not defended well enough atm compared to what a large POS can do, having said that maybe CCP should keep POS's for the solo players :) lol Idea

PS Pls dont reply to me I am just here wasting time after patch today an wont be following thread but I am not telling ya what to do either
u3pog
Ministerstvo na otbranata
#104 - 2017-01-10 12:50:06 UTC  |  Edited by: u3pog
In my humble experience with POSes it was so hard to take a Large one with the right setup, Citadels just seem too easy. Sure, more hit point, timers, you get to choose when to fight, but you have to actually show up and bring some friends. POSes on the other hand...fully automated pest control. Also the price on large and X-Large citadels is not even comparable, but you have more perks don't you - Market, Doomsday, etc.

Either way, this is the future, we have to deal with it. Deploy structures at your own risk folks, but do expect them to blow up when you do so. Big smile

If CCP ever removes the NPC stations, this is when things start to get really interesting. No total safety anymore.
Keno Skir
#105 - 2017-01-10 12:58:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Keno Skir
Lothar Mandrake wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Lothar Mandrake wrote:
Now you're bringing defenders into it which defeats the whole point.

no that is the point.

these things are conflict drivers first, force multipliers second, but even as force multipliers they will burn if undefended.

Horde have 11774 as of writing ,
damn straight its an easy kill.


You're stating the way things are, not the way they should be. I want your perspective on how it should be. Your opinion is much more important to me and everyone else.


Mate seriously, some really good points have been made so far and the various reasons citadels are bad at fighting have already been outlined, essentially with a big colorful crayon. Citadels are designed to be force multipliers, and are specifically designed to be vulnerable if undefended (or they would have auto defense like a POS).

Stop harping on about realism in a spaceship game where you fly through liquid, fire lasers that have less range than missiles and where asteroids magically regenerate every day at 10am. Your argument for realism, just like the hundreds before you is moot. Making the game work properly is a million times more important than realism, stop ignoring that because it doesn't fit with your cry baby OP about how citadels have caused you to do boring things for fun. Structure bashing has never been fun, it is now less boring than ever but quite obviously still boring because you're slowly grinding through million of HP.

It's not supposed to be a spectator sport, in fact by spectating very large fights you contributed un-necessarily to the time dilation factor, making them even more boring by your very presence. Good going champ Pirate
StonerPhReaK
Herb Men
#106 - 2017-01-10 13:09:15 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
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.


I dont have an attitude. I play within my means. Something thats lost on this new generation of entitled eve players.

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

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#107 - 2017-01-10 13:16:05 UTC
StonerPhReaK wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
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.


I dont have an attitude. I play within my means. Something thats lost on this new generation of entitled eve players.


So you think that an indy player who had a safe setup with a POS that he could pull down as needed is entitled when what he is being presented with is so much worse on every level. The indy player has been delivered a sack of shite which is just spend 552m ISK on something that is so easy to kill, can't be taken down and costs so much more than his previous entitled POS, and most of the players who were upset with this were old players doing indy in hisec.

Don't worry, expect to see loads of Raitaru in hisec space, most will be dorment and diversionary...

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.
#108 - 2017-01-10 14:29:10 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
We saved a freighter pilot twice from a bumper, the third time he died when the bumper spammed duels at him and he made an error, that player was bumped on every trip he did, he logged out when he realised he was in a duel and I have not seen him since, he was a eager solo player with one account. Well played sirs...
You baffle me. You respond to a serious discussion of the game with a throw-away line and a non-sequitur partial anecdote about some player who lost a spaceship in a game about building and losing spaceships.

I have no doubt this putative person you are referring to was not bumped "every trip" nor do I think the fact you haven't seen him means anything. Perhaps he just learned form his loss and isn't flying freighters solo anymore through Uedama. Or maybe he realized he didn't really want to be playing a full-time, competitive PvP sandbox game and moved on. Whatever man, his choice.

Eve is a game about conflict and competition. If you are going to throw your hands up every-time someone loses a virtual asset in a game build upon destruction of virtual spaceships, you are a) going to be throwing your hands up a lot, and b) you are not going to be having much fun. Things in Eve are made to be broken. Try embracing that for a while.

But really, what does this have to do with structures being vulnerable? If your archetypal bright-eyed freighter pilot deployed a citadel solo, he might also find it explode from under him. So what? That is what this game is about. If you opt to flying an unsupported freighter to benefit from its amazing ability to move cargo (instead of the smaller, but near-invulnerable DST more appropriate for the solo hauler which I generally prefer in highsec) then you risk that you might lose it to an attack, just like if you deploy a citadel without arranging for a defensive fleet, you might lose it. Risk vs. reward. In fact, even if you take all precautions you might still be outplayed and lose it. That's the game.

Both freighters and structures are completely optional. You can pay other people to take that (tiny) risk and move your stuff or rent out a structure and let the other guy worry about defending it. I was just looking yesterday and there are already low-fee (<1%, some even at 0%), public Engineering Complexes in practically every other system nearish the trade hubs. I was thinking of deploying one as an exercise to see how they work and to cook up a batch of Catalysts and Taloses and fittings, but there really is no need - I'll just use one of the public ones. If you want to deploy one for their benefits, accept the risk you might lose them and the responsibility to defend them. If you do not want to risk losing them, then just don't use them and retain your near invulnerability if that makes you more comfortable.

The choice is yours and that is what this game is about: choices and trade-offs.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#109 - 2017-01-10 14:38:56 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
We saved a freighter pilot twice from a bumper, the third time he died when the bumper spammed duels at him and he made an error, that player was bumped on every trip he did, he logged out when he realised he was in a duel and I have not seen him since, he was a eager solo player with one account. Well played sirs...
You baffle me. You respond to a serious discussion of the game with a throw-away line and a non-sequitur partial anecdote about some player who lost a spaceship in a game about building and losing spaceships.

I have no doubt this putative person you are referring to was not bumped "every trip" nor do I think the fact you haven't seen him means anything. Perhaps he just learned form his loss and isn't flying freighters solo anymore through Uedama. Or maybe he realized he didn't really want to be playing a full-time, competitive PvP sandbox game and moved on. Whatever man, his choice.

Eve is a game about conflict and competition. If you are going to throw your hands up every-time someone loses a virtual asset in a game build upon destruction of virtual spaceships, you are a) going to be throwing your hands up a lot, and b) you are not going to be having much fun. Things in Eve are made to be broken. Try embracing that for a while.

But really, what does this have to do with structures being vulnerable? If your archetypal bright-eyed freighter pilot deployed a citadel solo, he might also find it explode from under him. So what? That is what this game is about. If you opt to flying an unsupported freighter to benefit from its amazing ability to move cargo (instead of the smaller, but near-invulnerable DST more appropriate for the solo hauler which I generally prefer in highsec) then you risk that you might lose it to an attack, just like if you deploy a citadel without arranging for a defensive fleet, you might lose it. Risk vs. reward. In fact, even if you take all precautions you might still be outplayed and lose it. That's the game.

Both freighters and structures are completely optional. You can pay other people to take that (tiny) risk and move your stuff or rent out a structure and let the other guy worry about defending it. I was just looking yesterday and there are already low-fee (<1%, some even at 0%), public Engineering Complexes in practically every other system nearish the trade hubs. I was thinking of deploying one as an exercise to see how they work and to cook up a batch of Catalysts and Taloses and fittings, but there really is no need - I'll just use one of the public ones. If you want to deploy one for their benefits, accept the risk you might lose them and the responsibility to defend them. If you do not want to risk losing them, then just don't use them and retain your near invulnerability if that makes you more comfortable.

The choice is yours and that is what this game is about: choices and trade-offs.


You said that you are safe in hisec, I gave you an example of someone who was not, if you don't want me to respond stop with the bullshite, hisec is not safe and the example I gave was to point out that what you said was incorrect.

Using a public Indy structure is actually a significant risk, one of the recent griefing abilities offered by these structures is to offer those services cheap then stop fuelling the structure or bring it down, people have lost billions in raw materials to this, yet another badly thought out mechanic that people use to be a pain to others.

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.
#110 - 2017-01-10 15:01:54 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
You said that you are safe in hisec, I gave you an example of someone who was not, if you don't want me to respond stop with the bullshite, hisec is not safe and the example I gave was to point out that what you said was incorrect.

Using a public Indy structure is actually a significant risk, one of the recent griefing abilities offered by these structures is to offer those services cheap then stop fuelling the structure or bring it down, people have lost billions in raw materials to this, yet another badly thought out mechanic that people use to be a pain to others.
It is near impossible to die in highsec if you are defending yourself. You acknowledge this fact in this very thread when you were bragging about how immune to attack you are. Yes, unsupported freighters are vulnerable as are now the new player structures (both completely intentional), but as a whole, highsec is incredibly safe.

You do raise a good point. That probably is an oversight and should be looked to be fixed or using other people's ECs may never catch on. I certainly wouldn't do any high volume industry in a EC I did not trust.
Neuntausend
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#111 - 2017-01-10 15:28:03 UTC
I was already beginning to wonder why this wasn't discussed more. I'm not opposed to the mechanic, as I think if you put billions of materials on a player owned spacestation you should make sure first it doesn't go out of business a day later - do some research, check who owns it, talk to the guy, anything at least. But it may be a good idea to give a proper warning when you are about to start a job on one of those structures, so that people will at least be aware of the risk they are taking.

The reason for shutting the thing down may not even be malicious, but stuff may happen that causes the production job to fail, in which case it's probably beneficial to at least know the owner, maybe get a forewarning, or work out a deal.
ROFLCOPTER LMFAO
Doomheim
#112 - 2017-01-10 15:48:28 UTC
To the OP:

I understand your frustration with the defense capabilities of the citadel structures completely.

I run a corporation with just myself and have no capacity to defend any of my structures other than the defensive capabilities provided by the citadel itself. HOWEVER, I think that you are looking at the situation from the wrong perspective. Personally, I consider a citadel to be a disposable structure with a useful life of 7 days at the minimum. I do not fit any defensive modules on my structures because that is just a waste of ISK.

When I anchor a citadel, I start a 7 day timer and begin to harvest as much ore and ice as I possibly can in order to pay for the structure, asset safety release, and finally a profit.

Think of a citadel as a consumable tool that enables you to generate income rather than a permanent safe haven. I love the fact that I can avoid purchasing and risking a jump freighter or paying a delivery service to move ore out of null sec. Never before has a solo/small corporation been able to stake a 7 day claim in null sec risk free essentially (minus the citadel cost).

Sometimes I get to the point where I start praying that someone will come and blow up one of my citadels so that I can get stuff moved out of null sec.

My advice: Start thinking about how you can utilize a citadel to your advantage rather than wishing it did something that it does not. Citadels are a very useful tool to small corps. It just depends on how you leverage their abilities.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#113 - 2017-01-10 15:52:14 UTC
ROFLCOPTER LMFAO wrote:
To the OP:

I understand your frustration with the defense capabilities of the citadel structures completely.

I run a corporation with just myself and have no capacity to defend any of my structures other than the defensive capabilities provided by the citadel itself. HOWEVER, I think that you are looking at the situation from the wrong perspective. Personally, I consider a citadel to be a disposable structure with a useful life of 7 days at the minimum. I do not fit any defensive modules on my structures because that is just a waste of ISK.

When I anchor a citadel, I start a 7 day timer and begin to harvest as much ore and ice as I possibly can in order to pay for the structure, asset safety release, and finally a profit.

Think of a citadel as a consumable tool that enables you to generate income rather than a permanent safe haven. I love the fact that I can avoid purchasing and risking a jump freighter or paying a delivery service to move ore out of null sec. Never before has a solo/small corporation been able to stake a 7 day claim in null sec risk free essentially (minus the citadel cost).

Sometimes I get to the point where I start praying that someone will come and blow up one of my citadels so that I can get stuff moved out of null sec.

My advice: Start thinking about how you can utilize a citadel to your advantage rather than wishing it did something that it does not. Citadels are a very useful tool to small corps. It just depends on how you leverage their abilities.


I was thinking of doing just that to get a load of stuff out of Stain...

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

Bertok Francis
Spartan Vanguard
Pandemic Horde
#114 - 2017-01-10 15:56:54 UTC
I have a suggestion; leave the citadel's offensive capabilities alone and instead have a remote repair module on it that pretty much turns an astrahaus into a multipurpose caforce auxiliary. You will still need to defend it but when it reps 10k dps in both armor and shield your defense fleet is a able to do a lot better job of defending while outnumbered. (Or you can bring a couple of normal logi cruisers and if they can rep the citadel you can just plain ignore a small fleet.)
TheGunzo
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#115 - 2017-01-10 21:48:46 UTC
ROFLCOPTER LMFAO wrote:
To the OP:

I understand your frustration with the defense capabilities of the citadel structures completely.

I run a corporation with just myself and have no capacity to defend any of my structures other than the defensive capabilities provided by the citadel itself. HOWEVER, I think that you are looking at the situation from the wrong perspective. Personally, I consider a citadel to be a disposable structure with a useful life of 7 days at the minimum. I do not fit any defensive modules on my structures because that is just a waste of ISK.

When I anchor a citadel, I start a 7 day timer and begin to harvest as much ore and ice as I possibly can in order to pay for the structure, asset safety release, and finally a profit.

Think of a citadel as a consumable tool that enables you to generate income rather than a permanent safe haven. I love the fact that I can avoid purchasing and risking a jump freighter or paying a delivery service to move ore out of null sec. Never before has a solo/small corporation been able to stake a 7 day claim in null sec risk free essentially (minus the citadel cost).

Sometimes I get to the point where I start praying that someone will come and blow up one of my citadels so that I can get stuff moved out of null sec.

My advice: Start thinking about how you can utilize a citadel to your advantage rather than wishing it did something that it does not. Citadels are a very useful tool to small corps. It just depends on how you leverage their abilities.


Best post of the thread... What a great way to get your 'stuff' back home....

Back to Hi-SEC citadels. Want to confirm after much testing, these are paper in space. I would hope the attacking team would want to have some 'fear' as they approach a manned Fortizar. If they don't have all their ducks in a row, they will die. So a well equipped fleet should be able to take out a manned Fortizar, but if they slip up and the Fortizar is on their toes, this attacking fleet would easily lose ships.

Rinse and Repeat for the smaller citadels with smaller attack fleets. Hitting a 'boss structure' should instill fear in the attacker.

Gunzo
ROFLCOPTER LMFAO
Doomheim
#116 - 2017-01-10 22:12:15 UTC  |  Edited by: ROFLCOPTER LMFAO
TheGunzo wrote:
ROFLCOPTER LMFAO wrote:
To the OP:

I understand your frustration with the defense capabilities of the citadel structures completely.

I run a corporation with just myself and have no capacity to defend any of my structures other than the defensive capabilities provided by the citadel itself. HOWEVER, I think that you are looking at the situation from the wrong perspective. Personally, I consider a citadel to be a disposable structure with a useful life of 7 days at the minimum. I do not fit any defensive modules on my structures because that is just a waste of ISK.

When I anchor a citadel, I start a 7 day timer and begin to harvest as much ore and ice as I possibly can in order to pay for the structure, asset safety release, and finally a profit.

Think of a citadel as a consumable tool that enables you to generate income rather than a permanent safe haven. I love the fact that I can avoid purchasing and risking a jump freighter or paying a delivery service to move ore out of null sec. Never before has a solo/small corporation been able to stake a 7 day claim in null sec risk free essentially (minus the citadel cost).

Sometimes I get to the point where I start praying that someone will come and blow up one of my citadels so that I can get stuff moved out of null sec.

My advice: Start thinking about how you can utilize a citadel to your advantage rather than wishing it did something that it does not. Citadels are a very useful tool to small corps. It just depends on how you leverage their abilities.


Best post of the thread... What a great way to get your 'stuff' back home....

Back to Hi-SEC citadels. Want to confirm after much testing, these are paper in space. I would hope the attacking team would want to have some 'fear' as they approach a manned Fortizar. If they don't have all their ducks in a row, they will die. So a well equipped fleet should be able to take out a manned Fortizar, but if they slip up and the Fortizar is on their toes, this attacking fleet would easily lose ships.

Rinse and Repeat for the smaller citadels with smaller attack fleets. Hitting a 'boss structure' should instill fear in the attacker.

Gunzo


Who in their right mind would want to attack a citadel under 100%+ time dilation? Personally, just going through the agony of dealing with tidi is enough of a defense provided by the structure.
Bingham McSnuggles
SPACE JIHAD.
#117 - 2017-01-11 02:17:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Bingham McSnuggles
a lot of talking here :D

personaly i think ccp should have limited the ammount of citadels deployable per system ( or even better , complete game) or per ally/corp to make them something " special"
now a citadel is more like a non-movable capital with **** defense systems ( +clonebay and docking) and evry tard entity ingame has a lot of them.
but its okay those things dont have hardcore dps defense systems, cause there are still 2 timers to workaround until such structure finaly blaps.
its also funny to see all those structures in perimeter pop , but i dont give a crap, its highsec, griefing some suspects, or whoring on a structure KM of a 1 person corp,hooray.


btw this guy nails it pretty accurate

ROFLCOPTER LMFAO wrote:
To the OP:

I understand your frustration with the defense capabilities of the citadel structures completely.

I run a corporation with just myself and have no capacity to defend any of my structures other than the defensive capabilities provided by the citadel itself. HOWEVER, I think that you are looking at the situation from the wrong perspective. Personally, I consider a citadel to be a disposable structure with a useful life of 7 days at the minimum. I do not fit any defensive modules on my structures because that is just a waste of ISK.

When I anchor a citadel, I start a 7 day timer and begin to harvest as much ore and ice as I possibly can in order to pay for the structure, asset safety release, and finally a profit.

Think of a citadel as a consumable tool that enables you to generate income rather than a permanent safe haven. I love the fact that I can avoid purchasing and risking a jump freighter or paying a delivery service to move ore out of null sec. Never before has a solo/small corporation been able to stake a 7 day claim in null sec risk free essentially (minus the citadel cost).

Sometimes I get to the point where I start praying that someone will come and blow up one of my citadels so that I can get stuff moved out of null sec.

My advice: Start thinking about how you can utilize a citadel to your advantage rather than wishing it did something that it does not. Citadels are a very useful tool to small corps. It just depends on how you leverage their abilities.
Bingham McSnuggles
SPACE JIHAD.
#118 - 2017-01-11 02:34:38 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
You said that you are safe in hisec, I gave you an example of someone who was not, if you don't want me to respond stop with the bullshite, hisec is not safe and the example I gave was to point out that what you said was incorrect.

Using a public Indy structure is actually a significant risk, one of the recent griefing abilities offered by these structures is to offer those services cheap then stop fuelling the structure or bring it down, people have lost billions in raw materials to this, yet another badly thought out mechanic that people use to be a pain to others.
It is near impossible to die in highsec if you are defending yourself. You acknowledge this fact in this very thread when you were bragging about how immune to attack you are. Yes, unsupported freighters are vulnerable as are now the new player structures (both completely intentional), but as a whole, highsec is incredibly safe.

You do raise a good point. That probably is an oversight and should be looked to be fixed or using other people's ECs may never catch on. I certainly wouldn't do any high volume industry in a EC I did not trust.



hisec is pretty much the unsafest area of new eden, its plain chaos, especially around tradehubs ( god how i hate jita) . suicide gatecamps. killright scams, undock games, duel invite spamming, fleet invite scams,burn jita events and so on and on and on +always check ur suspect status after leavin lowsec...
0 is the safest ( when ur in an ally/corp) u see if neuts come to local, there is an intel channel and u always can differ friend from foe because of...u guess it...local.
Beast of Revelations
Multiverse Trading
#119 - 2017-01-11 06:07:30 UTC
From what I've read here, I think many people here 'miss the point' (if indeed I 'get' the point myself). Or, they miss 'a' point.

I think the point is pretense. It's a structure that (apparently) has the pretense of being able to defend itself. But (apparently) it can't.

'Pretense' therefore must be rectified. Either buff the thing to put it in line with pretense, or remove the paltry capability to defend itself so there is no pretense at all, so 'what you see is what you get.'

As in real life, disappointment comes when expectations fail to match reality. Just align the damn thing's reality with the expectations that are out there. Or, employ a tactic I use sometimes in real life - completely obliterate the expectations.

As to that last quip, I had a friend who had a (hot) girlfriend. She had an expectation that he would someday, somehow, some way, get a 6-pack, and kept ragging him about it. He finally made a purposeful decision to obliterate her expectations - her fantasy if you will - and went out and promptly gained 50 pounds, and kept it. Now she's much happier. Any hope, dream, expectation, or fantasy that she ever had that her boyfriend would have a 6-pack was just totally obliterated. Eviscerated. Terminated. And her expectation now matches reality.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#120 - 2017-01-11 06:22:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Herzog Wolfhammer
Dracvlad wrote:
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.




The more I look back on it the more the height of casual play was the height of the game.

I'm thinking about the ancestors of the Sperm Whales versus the Megaladon Sharks right now. The Sperm Whales had basically no defense against these sharks. But one is extinct and the other is not. Why is that? Well both had challenges aside from whales being eaten by sharks and sharks being eaten by other sharks. But the whales were able to breed better than the sharks. The Megalodon is gone. It was badass though. They based a movie on it that scared people off the beaches in the 1970s (I saw it when it was in the theater - damn I'm getting old).

Now if the oceans of say 3 million years ago were run by CCP, they would have let a few sperging sharks convince them "This is a PVP ocean hurr durr" and plankton would have gotten nerfed.

But the sharks don't eat plankton. They ate whales. See where I'm going? What happens when you nerf plankton?

I'm starting to get a little Greedy Goblinish now considering how everything has been a move towards monetizing not the casuals, but the sharks. Think about it: free to play and micro transactions (NES stuff) was unheard of back in the golden age. The only nerfs we have truly seen to ganking only so much as involve requiring more gankers. Think about this.

When Herr Wilkus published his "tornado trifecta" it was nerfed in a week. Why? One player with a tornado taking out three ships, that's why.

Then how long did it take to get rid of hyperdunking? Love to be a fly on the wall for that one.

Freighter EHP? Sure it seems like miners cried and CCP stepped and fetched, but the gankers are just as hornswaggled as it appears the citadel owners are right now. Every "gank nerf" had the appearance of being coddling of carebears, but all it really did was require more gankers to do the same thing.

And someone probably figured it out. Who is the most egotistical player in the game? Who absolutely will not quite, even if it means multiple accounts?

No Herr Wilkus with tornado trifecta, but look at those "Kusion fleets". How much do they cost? Took a while to get rid of hyperdunking. Note that bumping remains, but the problem is already "solved" on the gank side - multiple accounts are involved. But look at the counters to bumps: yes multiple accounts.

Wreck EHP might not have been raised to coddle the gankers, it was to see if AG was to fall to the same avarice and ego as gankers. Would the wreck shooters now go and get multiple accounts so they can "hurr durr adapt or go back to wow!"? Of course not. They are a little more intelligent than that.

But... but... without the casuals the ore prices go up! Yes, and then what does it take to feed a PVP habit? PLEX? Or maybe some intrepid players run entire fleets of mining ships. Multiple accounts.

To a lot of people who have played this "hurr durr get a second/third/fourth account" routine looks like a scam. I remember in the golden age casuals and PVPers with just about an alt for everything including scratching their own ass. New players would come in, see that, and be like "are these people nuts?"

But it's an old game, an MMO dinosaur. Maybe someone figured out a way to keep the subs up while the attrition of players followed a normal path - or maybe this is at the cost of casuals, who don't have too big of and ego and more likely not to care about leaving? Maybe the bad reputation and weaponized boredom has taken its toll too long?

This citadel thing is just another facet of what's starting to look like one big scam. When the game was all about "be the villain" we got lots of villains. Now it's all about "build that sandcastle" and looks what's happening now. How do we stop it? "Hurr durr hire mercs" (provide content for sharks) or don't (and provide content for sharks).

What if citadels were the last hurrah for getting casual players fed to the sharks?

Welp.... CCP means "crowd control productions" after all. Well played. I'm impressed.

Now it's time for a shower.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!