Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Lugh Crow-Slave
942
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:27:24 -
[31] - Quote
Ulrik Elristan wrote:As a regular scout in w-space, I can only emphasize again Enta's point : removing this huge intel tool will be incredibly detrimental.
Maybe a half way meet between removing the full power of d-scan while allowing us at least some intel would be to have the possibility to see who and what is in the station once you're on grid with it.
A second concern I would have is timers : how do you intend to deal with the unavoidable station games that will come out of this ? As it is today, once you're out of the forcefield it is possible to bump you and keep you away. The way docking works, it will be much harder to get somebody out of docking range, and thus decrease the risk of undocking in a shiny ship.
considering they also want to add intel gathering deployables i think they can manage to find a balance at the same time you can see how active a structure has been based on its animation perhaps they can add to this by ensuring there is an animation only active when a player is docked
something like the docking bay light is on
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3?
|
1Robert McNamara1
The Graduates Forged of Fire
73
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:28:19 -
[32] - Quote
Literally Space Moses wrote:Supers and titans can dock in CSMAs currently, so might want to rethink that point.
But only if their fitting is in their cargo hold, correct? |
Lugh Crow-Slave
942
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:31:16 -
[33] - Quote
Joran Sothos wrote:I live in wormhole space.
The problem of intelligence is key.
Currently, supers cannot dock with an SMA of any size, so they are either always in space and visible, or logged off. Mooring doesn't affect them.
Capitals, though, CAN currently dock. Forcing them to stay out in space where they can be scanned is a HUGE boost to intel gathering (wormhole space or not).
I don't see why changing poses and how they work should penalize us. We should still be able to do after the patch what we can do before the patch.
Right now, there aren't a lot (any) details, so it's hard to give comments other than at the macro level. Show us some stats, and we can give better feedback.
I have lived in WH space for years you see this as penalizing us to be honest i see it as a new chalange and a change to the landscape WHs have gotten stale this will spice it up.
if this would put one group at more of a disadvantage than another then yes it would be a problem but it doesn't
if anything this can help to promote fights in lower class holes as i will know i'm not going to get 3 triage carriers warping in on me mid fight
at the same time it can make having caps riskier so if you don't need them groups may not build as many
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3?
|
Literally Space Moses
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
151
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:32:41 -
[34] - Quote
1Robert McNamara1 wrote:Literally Space Moses wrote:Supers and titans can dock in CSMAs currently, so might want to rethink that point. But only if their fitting is in their cargo hold, correct?
Same rules as say carriers or dreads stored in other SMAs. You can be fit, but stuff other than ammo in the cargo is a no-go, etc. Just no one does it because it's massively unsafe.
#T2013
|
Hairpins Blueprint
CBC Interstellar Fidelas Constans
165
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:33:34 -
[35] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
- Having (super)capitals visible from space, even if invulnerable to direct assault, is going a huge intelligence boost to opposing forces.
- Having (super)capitals traceable in such a manner could allow third parties to ambush (super)capital pilots as soon as they remove moorings to destroy the ships before they can escape.
- Having a fixed mooring capability on those structures will create problems if the structure mooring capability is full when another (super)capital pilot tries to use it under pressure.
Make supers cloaked when they "Moor" = no free intel.
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
1077
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:38:06 -
[36] - Quote
Another element i want to throw in here is the idea of soft mooring which works a bit like the current POS shield so you can still move around and use dscan etc within range of the structure but you cannot target anything and you are invulnerable.
It is basically an area invulnerability effect around the station like a remote rep or similar. It allows you to warp to 0 or undock into relative safety.
You can of course be bumped unless you do a hard mooring or dock up.
Thoughts?
CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
|
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
1077
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:39:27 -
[37] - Quote
Hairpins Blueprint wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:
- Having (super)capitals visible from space, even if invulnerable to direct assault, is going a huge intelligence boost to opposing forces.
- Having (super)capitals traceable in such a manner could allow third parties to ambush (super)capital pilots as soon as they remove moorings to destroy the ships before they can escape.
- Having a fixed mooring capability on those structures will create problems if the structure mooring capability is full when another (super)capital pilot tries to use it under pressure.
Make supers cloaked when they "Moor" = no free intel.
This is effectively just docking supers, protection with no intel is the same as docking, but maybe it's time to allow that?
CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
|
|
1Robert McNamara1
The Graduates Forged of Fire
73
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:40:36 -
[38] - Quote
Literally Space Moses wrote:1Robert McNamara1 wrote:Literally Space Moses wrote:Supers and titans can dock in CSMAs currently, so might want to rethink that point. But only if their fitting is in their cargo hold, correct? Same rules as say carriers or dreads stored in other SMAs. You can be fit, but stuff other than ammo in the cargo is a no-go, etc. Just no one does it because it's massively unsafe.
Thanks for clearing that up. I read a fierce exchange on reddit that emphatically claimed it was impossible to put a fit super into a CSMA. I hate the idea of flying a space coffin so have no direct experience. |
Awulf
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:42:44 -
[39] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Another element i want to throw in here is the idea of soft mooring which works a bit like the current POS shield so you can still move around and use dscan etc within range of the structure but you cannot target anything and you are invulnerable.
It is basically an area invulnerability effect around the station like a remote rep or similar. It allows you to warp to 0 or undock into relative safety.
You can of course be bumped unless you do a hard mooring or dock up.
Thoughts? I see that as a doable option. Still think hard mooring should not be on d-scan while soft mooring would show on d-scan. |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
909
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:46:25 -
[40] - Quote
I'll repost what I put in the main thread:
I have a bit of a love/worry relationship with the mooring mechanics. It is definitely cool, and I am very for it, but what happens to a "moored" Supercap when you log out? Does it stay there? If so, this adds a lot more danger to Supercap ownership (not intrinsically a bad thing, but it does), but if not, what happens when you log back in, since someone else could be on your mooring spot when you log back in? Plus, Supercap accounts are quite notorious for being left unsubbed for long periods between wars, so does an unsubbed Supercap have to stay moored, or just get stuck chancing it by logging out at a safe spot? If so, again, that is a lot more danger of loss, plus there is going to be vast farms of towers serving as unsubbed mooring.
Personally, I'm all for more risk to Supercaps, and limiting the number in space by the amount of room to moor them is definitely an intresting approach. But there is a hell of a lot in space at the moment, and a move over to this could have quite some growing pains. Especially given how Supercaps are being given the finger by the sov changes, and that the current utterances about Supercap changes are leaving people fairly lukewarm, removing safety from those logged-off or unsubscribed could be a final tipping point for many. |
|
Suev Raylap
Dropbears Anonymous Brave Collective
4
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:46:44 -
[41] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Another element i want to throw in here is the idea of soft mooring which works a bit like the current POS shield so you can still move around and use dscan etc within range of the structure but you cannot target anything and you are invulnerable.
I for one never want to be able to dock in wormhole space. Nor do I want others to be able to dock up. Intel gathered/given up from being logged in a pos is a huge mechanic that would be lost if docking would be possible.
That said I like alot of what these new structures present in regards to scale as well as preventing drifting via 'mooring' (every WH player that has ever drifted outside of pos shields while intoxicated will understand, or double clicked in the wrong client).
I think a middle ground is a structure that is 'soft morring' with SMA/CHA(please with a more complex permission system) features and a pos shield solves this problem.
Basically not every structure that you can live in/out of should allow docking. Docking should be expensive and a commitment to deploy and maintain.
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
909
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:51:27 -
[42] - Quote
And I'll add something else that came to mind.
Currently, the bump mechanics can be fairly unkind to Supercapitals. They are slow-moving, and a bump off a structure can take minutes to correct (with slowing down and then likely having to bounce since you'll be stranded within the "too close to warp" distance). At present, POSes are fairly "safe", in that you have quite a wide radius so you can make sure your log-out point is a good distance from the stick, so when you warp back to your parking spot or come out of log-in warp, you don't bump. With bubble safety gone, warping in to mooring spots could become fairly hazardous - unless the radius from the structure is reasonably sized, or you can activate a "Moor" function on the structure in order to have it "collect" a ship from a good distance out, you'll be constantly chancing bouncing off the structure.
Then you have the other side of the equation, undocking. Supers slow speed means manoevering around structures to warp out can be an exercise in annoyance if you are moored the wrong side of a structure from where you want to warp. If the mooring mechanic tucks ships in quite tight, half the potential mooring space might be a waste, as pilots trying to use them crawl, bounce, and wobble their ship around the structure. A possible solution could be a small "undock-push" to free the ship of the structure, but that potentially brings back the danger of bouncing out of moor range.
Either way, if this is done wrong, there is potential for many hilarious kills of ships stranded on or just off structures. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
942
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:55:44 -
[43] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Another element i want to throw in here is the idea of soft mooring which works a bit like the current POS shield so you can still move around and use dscan etc within range of the structure but you cannot target anything and you are invulnerable.
It is basically an area invulnerability effect around the station like a remote rep or similar. It allows you to warp to 0 or undock into relative safety.
You can of course be bumped unless you do a hard mooring or dock up.
Thoughts?
i like it at the very least at first people who are used to pos' use it as a transition later if needed it can be removed or it can stick around
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3?
|
Moridunum Kanjus
The Graduates Forged of Fire
7
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:56:29 -
[44] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Another element i want to throw in here is the idea of soft mooring which works a bit like the current POS shield so you can still move around and use dscan etc within range of the structure but you cannot target anything and you are invulnerable.
It is basically an area invulnerability effect around the station like a remote rep or similar. It allows you to warp to 0 or undock into relative safety.
You can of course be bumped unless you do a hard mooring or dock up.
Thoughts?
So an invisible forcefield?
I would prefer a forcefield that I can see. |
Yroc Jannseen
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
87
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:57:09 -
[45] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Another element i want to throw in here is the idea of soft mooring which works a bit like the current POS shield so you can still move around and use dscan etc within range of the structure but you cannot target anything and you are invulnerable.
It is basically an area invulnerability effect around the station like a remote rep or similar. It allows you to warp to 0 or undock into relative safety.
You can of course be bumped unless you do a hard mooring or dock up.
Thoughts?
What are the downsides of soft mooring?
The same as in a POS shield now? Unable to lock, agress, control drones, etc? Without this would of course be hilariously broken.
Can you move? Are you locked in place? Would all structures have this ability? Otherwise fuelling or interacting with assembly arrays, mining platforms becomes extremely dangerous. |
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force The Kadeshi
182
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 15:57:31 -
[46] - Quote
What's the point of mooring? Genuine question this, not being funny. Why would I want to moor? Why am I doing this? It's not been explained what the reason behind wanting to do this is? To access cloning? To access fitting? Certainly not accessing the market since you're separating this from the main docking area? Why am I mooring? We can't debate the pros and cons of the idea without this question being
11 years and counting. Eve Defence Force is recruiting.
|
Rayzilla Zaraki
Tandokuno
286
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 16:00:10 -
[47] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:We are aware mooring presents a lot of discussion points, some of which were expressed during the Fanfest structure round table:
- Having (super)capitals visible from space, even if invulnerable to direct assault, is going a huge intelligence boost to opposing forces.
- Having (super)capitals traceable in such a manner could allow third parties to ambush (super)capital pilots as soon as they remove moorings to destroy the ships before they can escape.
- Having a fixed mooring capability on those structures will create problems if the structure mooring capability is full when another (super)capital pilot tries to use it under pressure.
I don't see a real problem with point number one. Its really how it should be. Capitals and Supers are huge ships, they shouldn't be able to be hidden. Initially, it would be a huge pain in the strategic and tactical arse,, but players will adapt. The same goes for the converse in WH space. Now, ALL ships are outside to be seen and will be able to be docked in the future. Players will adapt.
Point number two is sort of a concern basically because of the mechanics and limitations of the game engine. But, again, it makes sense. The ship has to un-moor at which point it is vulnerable to attack. I think to remedy this, just make it able to fly through the structure and other ships for a set time or distance from the moors. I think any other solution would be either unfair or very exploitable.
Point three - also a non-issue since it is somewhat realistic.
I like where the idea of structures is headed!
Gate campers are just Carebears with anger issues.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
942
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 16:00:15 -
[48] - Quote
Suev Raylap wrote:
Basically not every structure that you can live in/out of should allow docking. Docking should be expensive and a commitment to deploy and maintain.
expensive is relative if you want it to be expensive for every one then the only ones that could afford it are just like now large groups
and i feel empowering smaller groups is better than forcing larger ones
that said no this should not just be something one guy could afford easily either
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3?
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1108
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 16:01:08 -
[49] - Quote
maybe a closed mooring area is the solution, when a capital docks or undocks the doors open up as the only indicator a ship is undocking.
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists.
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic, nerf sentries.
Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
|
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
910
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 16:01:22 -
[50] - Quote
Also, will there be a way for owners to "lock" mooring to ship classes? Since otherwise you can imagine the annoyance of people mooring all manner of crap, stopping Capitals and Supercapitals getting in to the mooring radius (especially as Moored objects wont be bumpable, even a couple of frigates or noobships could block an area out preventing Caps and Supers from squeezing in. |
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
942
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 16:01:24 -
[51] - Quote
John McCreedy wrote:What's the point of mooring? Genuine question this, not being funny. Why would I want to moor? Why am I doing this? It's not been explained what the reason behind wanting to do this is? To access cloning? To access fitting? Certainly not accessing the market since you're separating this from the main docking area? Why am I mooring? We can't debate the pros and cons of the idea without this question being
because you can't dock a supper but they are getting rid of the pos bubble so the need a replacement
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3?
|
Alexandre Bellenger
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
62
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 16:01:51 -
[52] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
This is effectively just docking supers, protection with no intel is the same as docking, but maybe it's time to allow that?
I don't know why you don't just do this instead of making things difficult for yourself, code and balance wise, with mooring. Intel is the only thing gained over actually docking the super in the station as opposed to mooring. Everything else is the same; cyno into moor radius, mooring games, etc. Yes you get emergent gameplay like hellcamping the station but again, exactly the same as docking.
Intel wouldn't be different to how it is now, with people logging off in POS's and their ships disappearing with them, and we seem to do just fine with super intel. Locator agents, killboards etc are all just as effective as seeing the actual super moored there on station, if not more so due to their range and ease.
Of course docking supers is a big thing, so perhaps balance it with the introduction of your new station sizes. Stations require upgrades to go to your max size (ie 100km or so), and those upgrades simultaneously allow for supers and maybe titans to be docked. The majority of lowsec would not have these stations, save for a select few (hello emergent gameplay), which would prevent risk free travel of supers across Eve without proper preparation.
/2c and the 2c of hundreds of super pilots
|
Edward Olmops
DUST Expeditionary Team Good Sax
290
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 16:02:50 -
[53] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote: This is effectively just docking supers, protection with no intel is the same as docking, but maybe it's time to allow that?
Well... I for my part will never desire owning a super as long as this means that I am forever stuck in it. Being forced to maintain a zoo of accounts and alts really isn't appealing to me (especially if the launcher cannot handle multiple accounts being logged in). Change it and I might reconsider.
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
942
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 16:04:43 -
[54] - Quote
Alexandre Bellenger wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:
This is effectively just docking supers, protection with no intel is the same as docking, but maybe it's time to allow that?
I don't know why you don't just do this instead of making things difficult for yourself, code and balance wise, with mooring. Intel is the only thing gained over actually docking the super in the station as opposed to mooring. Everything else is the same; cyno into moor radius, mooring games, etc. Yes you get emergent gameplay like hellcamping the station but again, exactly the same as docking. Intel wouldn't be different to how it is now, with people logging off in POS's and their ships disappearing with them, and we seem to do just fine with super intel. Locator agents, killboards etc are all just as effective as seeing the actual super moored there on station, if not more so due to their range and ease. Of course docking supers is a big thing, so perhaps balance it with the introduction of your new station sizes. Stations require upgrades to go to your max size (ie 100km or so), and those upgrades simultaneously allow for supers and maybe titans to be docked. The majority of lowsec would not have these stations, save for a select few (hello emergent gameplay), which would prevent risk free travel of supers across Eve without proper preparation. /2c and the 2c of hundreds of super pilots
because then i can store a bunch of suppers rather than have limited space for them that is the reason the can' dock now
there would be a **** tone more suppers if we could store them as ships rather than components
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3?
|
WarFireV
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
382
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 16:07:33 -
[55] - Quote
I don't get the point of adding in more penalties to owning a super capital.
Why would anyone ever moor something ever? What am I getting from making my super vulnerable when I moor it, over just logging it off in deep space? |
Lugh Crow-Slave
942
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 16:08:52 -
[56] - Quote
WarFireV wrote:I don't get the point of adding in more penalties to owning a super capital.
Why would anyone ever moor something ever? What am I getting from making my super vulnerable when I moor it, over just logging it off in deep space?
its for when you are logged on not off just like in a pos shield
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3?
|
Antonia Iskarius
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 16:15:33 -
[57] - Quote
1Robert McNamara1 wrote:Literally Space Moses wrote:1Robert McNamara1 wrote:Literally Space Moses wrote:Supers and titans can dock in CSMAs currently, so might want to rethink that point. But only if their fitting is in their cargo hold, correct? Same rules as say carriers or dreads stored in other SMAs. You can be fit, but stuff other than ammo in the cargo is a no-go, etc. Just no one does it because it's massively unsafe. Thanks for clearing that up. I read a fierce exchange on reddit that emphatically claimed it was impossible to put a fit super into a CSMA. I hate the idea of flying a space coffin so have no direct experience. Actually, they are both wrong. I am fairly certain you can have whatever you want in a super's cargohold, fleet hangar, and ship maint bay and the the super will still go into the CSMA. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
942
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 16:19:40 -
[58] - Quote
Antonia Iskarius wrote:1Robert McNamara1 wrote:Literally Space Moses wrote:1Robert McNamara1 wrote:Literally Space Moses wrote:Supers and titans can dock in CSMAs currently, so might want to rethink that point. But only if their fitting is in their cargo hold, correct? Same rules as say carriers or dreads stored in other SMAs. You can be fit, but stuff other than ammo in the cargo is a no-go, etc. Just no one does it because it's massively unsafe. Thanks for clearing that up. I read a fierce exchange on reddit that emphatically claimed it was impossible to put a fit super into a CSMA. I hate the idea of flying a space coffin so have no direct experience. Actually, they are both wrong. I am fairly certain you can have whatever you want in a super's cargohold, fleet hangar, and ship maint bay and the the super will still go into the CSMA.
no you can not have certain types of containers like a silo in the hold but yes most things are fine
Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3?
|
Antonia Iskarius
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 16:20:47 -
[59] - Quote
I don't like this idea of 'mooring'. It really seems like no benefits over the current POS forcefield / CSMA options but a lot of penalties. I would instead just fit a cloak and log off in deadspace with a holding alt. Or get rid of the super together... along with the account it is on. |
John McCreedy
Eve Defence Force The Kadeshi
186
|
Posted - 2015.03.23 16:22:32 -
[60] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:John McCreedy wrote:What's the point of mooring? Genuine question this, not being funny. Why would I want to moor? Why am I doing this? It's not been explained what the reason behind wanting to do this is? To access cloning? To access fitting? Certainly not accessing the market since you're separating this from the main docking area? Why am I mooring? We can't debate the pros and cons of the idea without this question being because you can't dock a supper but they are getting rid of the pos bubble so the need a replacement
I can log off at a safe in low sec. Can't be bubbled, can't be tackled. Take proper precautions and it'll be safer than mooring, especially if entire fleets log off in the same spot. What happens to my ship when I log off? Do I pop out of space? If I do pop out of space and I'm moored, can someone else moor at the same spot? How do they know I'm there? What happens if the structure I'm moored at is attacked? Am I suddenly vulnerable to being attacked with no hope of being able to escape or fight back because I'm not online? If I'm 'ejected' somewhere in the system, can I not simply be scanned down and attacked? How many mooring slots do we get? What happens to the rest of the fleet? What if we have more Supers than systems?
What I'm getting at here is that mooring should be a short term solution to allowing you to 'dock' in order to access something you need to be able to access. CCP should not remove POS, POS should simply be restricted to being mobile deployable shields. There's too many unanswered questions and the whole thing as a long term solution opens a can of worms.
11 years and counting. Eve Defence Force is recruiting.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |