Features & Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Summer 2014] Starbase tweaks

First post First post
Author
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#181 - 2014-05-07 01:43:42 UTC
waypoint marker wrote:

I also note that

all industry slots are removed, Mobile Laboratory and Advanced Mobile Laboratory are overlapping in ME research ,copying and invention
you only need 1 mobile lab to do all the things
Ytterbium state that "we like the individual capabilities of each" , it seem quite reasonable that one lab only can do one thing( research ME,TE / copying and invention)

can Ytterbium confirm is it right or not?



https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4557185#post4557185

Yup. They're limiting what each type can do, because they're no longer differentiated by slot counts.

Woo! CSM X!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Minmatar Republic
#182 - 2014-05-07 03:49:00 UTC
Dear CCP Ytterbium,

Welcome to Barter Town

Can we have some form of trade take place at POS/Planets please?

In Example:
(item for item)
Fuel for Charters
Gas for Boosters
Liquids for Water

At least simple item transactions. But what about POS tower shooting and locking and stuff.. Maybe anchoring a Trade module just means you can't shoot some ppl first. Can't be that bad.

Would be a plus for people that like running planets and not gatecamps. Allows for more specialization, more reasons to go out into low, null and WH space.

So please say hello to my little friend: Master Blaster.

Thanks!




C C P Alliance
#183 - 2014-05-07 12:09:22 UTC
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.
#184 - 2014-05-07 12:22:33 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.

Alright, who are you and what have you done with OUR CCP devs!

A most extraordinary thread. Thanks :)

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.

Minmatar Republic
#185 - 2014-05-07 12:30:39 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.


Currently you're on my favourite people list for this change, here have a cookie. Do you have twitter? Sure this change will get many a favourite over at #tweetfleet

EVE Manufacturing Guide - Simple guides to manufacturing in EVE for both beginners and more experienced players.

Goonswarm Federation
#186 - 2014-05-07 12:53:41 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.


Yaaay.

Can we get some goodies for those of us who already have SDM trained... such as pos guns that can kill ships? :)
Goonswarm Federation
#187 - 2014-05-07 12:57:31 UTC  |  Edited by: mynnna
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.


Wanna change some more numbers and do a balancing pass on POS guns and buff their stats a bit, since they haven't been touched since an era when a dreadnaught had less EHP than a cruiser can get today?


e: This goes especially for scan res. In context of such a change I'd propose massive increases to scan res, on the order of tenfold, but perhaps a corresponding increase in the automatic lock delay as well. That way an unmanned POS still takes its sweet time doing anything, but a manned POS is able to swiftly react to a changing combat landscape. You've got that huge tower there, why are its targeting arrays so bad?

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

Minmatar Republic
#188 - 2014-05-07 12:57:58 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.


Noooooooooo, about 2 weeks ago i finally finished all my manufacturing accounts to have one POS gunner each, couldn't you have gotten that flash of genius a bit earlier? Twisted

Besides that, what are the official reactions to the array capacity and lab feedback on the last few pages??
Ev0ke
#189 - 2014-05-07 13:02:37 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.

Can we get the skills point back for Anchoring 5?
A Band Apart.
#190 - 2014-05-07 13:02:51 UTC
mynnna wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.


Wanna change some more numbers and do a balancing pass on POS guns and buff their stats a bit, since they haven't been touched since an era when a dreadnaught had less EHP than a cruiser can get today?


I think that is more than one number. Big smile
Goonswarm Federation
#191 - 2014-05-07 13:10:20 UTC
Kethry Avenger wrote:
mynnna wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.


Wanna change some more numbers and do a balancing pass on POS guns and buff their stats a bit, since they haven't been touched since an era when a dreadnaught had less EHP than a cruiser can get today?


I think that is more than one number. Big smile


But it's still only numbers. And he can make Fozzie do it. Fozzie loves numbers.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

#192 - 2014-05-07 13:16:46 UTC
Banko Mato wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.


Noooooooooo, about 2 weeks ago i finally finished all my manufacturing accounts to have one POS gunner each, couldn't you have gotten that flash of genius a bit earlier? Twisted

Besides that, what are the official reactions to the array capacity and lab feedback on the last few pages??

Go put bubbles on random null gates
Laugh as you then cloak up and they freak
#193 - 2014-05-07 13:18:44 UTC
Lowering the skill requirements for pos gunnery, is itself an increase in POS damage, when averaged across the player base. More corps will be able to field gunners with this change.
Snuffed Out
#194 - 2014-05-07 13:44:40 UTC
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:
Lowering the skill requirements for pos gunnery, is itself an increase in POS damage, when averaged across the player base. More corps will be able to field gunners with this change.


that's the idea
Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
#195 - 2014-05-07 13:48:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Capqu
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.


fire ze missiles

but this is a pretty huge change (very easy to train an alt to pos gun now) and not something i think you should make overnight
Nulli Secunda
#196 - 2014-05-07 13:53:15 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.

vive la france
Feign Disorder
#197 - 2014-05-07 13:54:12 UTC
I like the changes except now let us drop dreads in highsec to RF these towers pls.
Mordus Angels
#198 - 2014-05-07 14:00:27 UTC
I was actually just watching the Industry Devblog post where the suggestion to lower the Anchoring requirement for Starbase Defense Management to 4 was discussed, to large applause. I'll go along with that :)

Powder and Ball Alchemists Union - "Turning Lead into Gold since 2008"

No Response
#199 - 2014-05-07 14:07:09 UTC
Capqu wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.


fire ze missiles



Please don't tell me you've put missiles on your POS :D
C C P Alliance
#200 - 2014-05-07 14:15:12 UTC
mynnna wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Looks good.

Like I said at the panel, change the requirements of pos gunnery to only be anchoring 4. Quick little change.

Poses are going to proliferate quite a bit, and hopefully more people will be fighting at them. And people with less means to defend them will have need to use them where before they didn't. They are going to be less of a specialized thing and more of a necessity fo industrialists. The barrier for pos gunnery could take a look at. Its a really miserable train.


But it's so much work to change one number and I am so le tired! Cry

Fine, done. Starbase Defense Management only requires Anchoring 4 instead of 5 now.


Wanna change some more numbers and do a balancing pass on POS guns and buff their stats a bit, since they haven't been touched since an era when a dreadnaught had less EHP than a cruiser can get today?


e: This goes especially for scan res. In context of such a change I'd propose massive increases to scan res, on the order of tenfold, but perhaps a corresponding increase in the automatic lock delay as well. That way an unmanned POS still takes its sweet time doing anything, but a manned POS is able to swiftly react to a changing combat landscape. You've got that huge tower there, why are its targeting arrays so bad?


That's going to take quite some time indeed, but that's why we keep CCP Fozzie chained in the basement. I'll promise him some raw meat if he looks at it at some point, that should cheer him up.

We'll discuss that point for sure, but we are not certain this will make it at the same time than the main bulk of Industry changes though.
Forum Jump