Are there any plans to address how Structures in Highsec do not act as a force multiplier, effectively meaning that it’s a pure N+1 fleet fight in high sec.
The combination of weaker bonuses & weaker defences means that they don’t serve as a focal point for a corp to rally & build around, since the bonuses are not worth fighting over if you are outmatched, and the structures can’t make up for being outmatched. So either they need equal bonuses or to become significantly stronger defences in Highsec.
3 Likes
Improvements to subcapital missiles are a step towards this. However, I’m not expecting these changes to do a whole lot in this regard, sadly.
1 Like
So let me understand this clearly.
CCP wants to take literally, one of the most valuable defense tools we have in citadels, nerf it to a point that it will not provide even 50% of its initial benefit to fit onto the structure, and somehow or another this is ok because we get a 25% bonus to another type of bomb (that will still suffer from literally a twice as slow rate of fire which will basically make the damage bonus null/void) and damage bonuses to missiles.
I say this to bring up the absurd notion that a nerf of this level does anything other than eliminate the usefulness of structure bombs almost entirely. What if, instead of 40 seconds, it was 30, and instead of cutting the AOE in half, we cut it to 30 like the other structure bomb? Why do we have to nerf the usefulness completely away instead of maintaining usefulness but providing a level of fairness to the people who siege citadels?
2 Likes
I almost see the increase in damage as a step away from effective force multipliers for highsec, since it makes them look better on paper, meaning they won’t put as much importance onto implementing actual multiplier mechanics which are usable in highsec.
Though yes as a stop gap measure they are some improvement.
In 10 years of eve online “Re-balancing” always means “Nerf” in Iceland terminology. Any time they change an existing game feature its for the worse 99% of the time. The Plex changes are great example 35% increase in prices due to the mechanic changes CCP knew what would happen greed motivates them.
1 Like
So we are not getting the improved faction standing UI in August?
Good start - the void bombs were in serious need of edits, although, as others have mentioned, why a space station can’t change its defensive profile whilst defending is a big issue here, that nerfing said bombs only worsens. Right direction otherwise.
Unfortunately you still avoid the real issues; the spam of these damn, grid wrecking things everywhere, and how hard they are to remove. For something that costs less than a Black Ops battleship the timers, the numbers required and the damage caps are quite frankly insane. Please can you tell me when this balance issue will be addressed?
It’s killing your game…but lets focus on corp insurance :face_palm:
Additionally, Cits and Faction Warfare space - even before you released them you must have realised this would break the game meta? Sitting in Caldari held systems and watching GalMil tether or dock in Cits, makes no sense, none whatsoever…and is going a long way to stagnating an important stage in most new players journeys into the deeper game. You have removed all strategy and depth to the gameplay, is this issue being considered?
We also have the ‘beachhead’ issue, as raised on reddit, where large entities spam cits into desirable staging systems, knowing that the incumbent defenders can’t pop them all before one anchors and they have their base. As above, this destroys all strategy and gameplay, and people go and play something else - is this issue on the table for consideration, too?
Finally, a suggestion - abandoned cits: After a week of resources running out, the owning corp gets a mail from the npc ‘station manager’ saying that due to lack of investment (or whatever lore-reason one desires) all inhabitants will be moving on. This disables the cit, the lights go out, no more timers or tethering etc…and an alpha could show up in an Atron and destroy the structure, and salvage etc, if so desired (and they have lots of time).
Please fix these damn things, please.
1 Like
those void bomb were practically useless to cap fleets,
harmfull to the defending fleets and pointless at all.
Why ?
PL parks it’s dread fleets at around 280km with long range fit.
the only thing that can reach them are the anti-cap missiles
guess what: They tank them with EASE even if you throw
void bombs on them.
why at 280km ? Because ANY OTHER upwell module does not have the range to do any harm at all. Neuts ? !!!4!!! GJ on that range … year, what a help that is… target painters ? they are already bricks, does not help either…
Web Scram ? doesn’t have the range.
You can’t defend a citadel against those dreads purly with struture guns,
you need a cap hot drop fleet ready. And that means, PL gets what they wanted: your caps, because they have anything on standby for sure.
BTW: Why do have roquals be able to tank a citadel ??
Heres your solution to the problem: Make it worse to defend it 
A suggestion:
make a module hangar : anything inside can be exchanged to the active fit, anytime, but can’t removed from it when the structure is under siege.
Advantage: Setups can be switched / it coasts more if the structure dies because 2 setups ( anti-cap anti-subcap ) are inside / More fun for the defender.
So, the entire game wins : Producers / The Economy / The Defenders and PL can keep killing structures, as nothing of it helps against the I WIN BUTTON.
— Remove the I WIN BUTTON –
All involved parties ( sub Caps / caps and structures ) have to have the same range, if you can place 10 dreads outside of the counterrange, they always win. Citadells must hit caps on the range any cap can have with 100% full effectiveness. If you bring a cap on field, it must be on the risk of loosing it. If you bring 10 and loose 1, because the structure scrammed one and killed it, thats a fair tradeoff. As long as the I WIN BUTTONS are possible, it’s not a plain battle field. if you have to bring 200 caps and logis, to not loose one cap, than thats the way it has to be, and it always was…
It’s totally because the citadel can’t deploy a mobile depot close enough to refit. 
1 Like
Way to go CCP!
We get to pay a lot more for the replacement for the venerable POS and it has the defensive capabilities of a pussycat.
Another great step forward in your never ending quest to eliminate players who try to build things from your game while squeezing every penny possible from them in the process.
Fighting from a POS in low sec/ null sec as a gunner was a great way I served my corp in low/null sec. Got my first capital kill doing so.
Of course CCP you never gave POS gunners kill mail credit so you never tracked our effectiveness in making things go boom. Your excuse was old code right?
Instead of giving us credit you have taken away our chance to participate effectively in battles. That sucks.
When you completely shut down the POS we will not replace them with the toothless expensive overpriced and under capable Citadels that are just shiny puffy targets.
Thank you for finally giving me an exit strategy from EVE Online, a game I have been a paying subscriber of for a lot of years.
Unlikely you’ll miss my cash because you have found so many new clever micro transaction ways to squeeze players into paying more for even less then they use to get with the basic monthly subscription.
This game use to be fun when you had a chance to win or lose a fight based on how many of your corp would rally to a fight even for a smaller corp. Now it is slanted only in favor of huge fights between the big alliances. CCP you are missing the forest by focusing only on the biggest trees, very sad indeed.
Quote! Temba Mapindazi
“Way to go CCP! We get to pay a lot more for the replacement for the venerable POS and it has the defensive capabilities of a pussycat”.
Quote! Obidiah Kane
“Unfortunately, you still avoid the real issues; the spam of these damn, grid wrecking things everywhere, and how hard they are to remove” ------for smaller corps and alliances (without dread and cap fleets), and how easy to remove for the likes of PL & GSF.
Additionally,
- Cits and Faction Warfare Space It makes no sense to be able to site Cits in these contested systems
- The ‘beachhead’ issue, where large entities spam Cits into desirable staging systems.
My Input !! - Empire Null sec which was fairly neutral to all corps has now become virtually the same as “Non-Empire Space” Before this area was advantageous to small corps to try their first footsteps into null!
- Worm holes! what is the use of putting a Cit or a Ragi in a wormhole? You need several different units. It costs a fortune to install everything you need, and in a C1 or C2 is not viable
To repeat the point made by Obidiah Kane. You have removed all strategy and depth to the game play, is this issue being considered? Is this just another great step forward in your never-ending quest to eliminate players who try to build things from your game. (Note Just 15k players Friday evening GMT+8 including Alpha players where as it used to be 39-40k Fully subscribed members).
Please reconsider excluding Cits from some systems and leaving the old POS rules and structures for these areas.
Please read the comments above carefully and note the underlying trend. From the comments, it is clear PL ect gain. They have the Cash, logistics resources and Power. Smaller corps lose. CCP you should be worried with the low numbers this now means the balance is shifting towards large fleet members or short time new alphas. Without the care bears, small corps and lone wolf’s who will the big fleets have to
a. prey upon
b. scam
c. exploit.
d. replenish their ranks as the disillusioned migrate to other games.
Anyone tried playing on the Chinese server, Manufacturing nearly non-existent, T2 and T3 ships & parts hard to come by, Bott mining is the only mining but has to be ignored or the game would come to a halt. Is this what the rebalancing efforts are trying to achieve???
I look forward to the next MER. I want to see how little an impact the capital nerfs had on the null sec bounty ISK presses.
While the Eve economy burns, you guys fiddle with changes like these that NOBODY, outside of the null sec cartels, wants, instead of focusing on the important balance issues.
You and me both, brother. My alliance leadership was considerate enough to not deploy until the first of the month, guaranteeing that the MER data would be untainted for July.
2 Likes
It was a silly way to proceed anyway. The data showed a cyclical fluctuation in previous months, and CCP timed the nerf to coincide with that cycle’s downturn, so of course they had their immediate ‘drop’ in ratting.
I’ll be by later to remind you of this if the drop-off on the end of the last MER holds up…
I always tought that improving something means ■■■■ gets better. Please do not call totally useless nerfs “improvement” you are not improving anything. Large fleets wont stop using already working strategies just because you nerf some neutralising power.they will just sit even more comfortable in passive armor fleets while gettingl ess neuted and thats it. There are already other methods to cap out fleet esp in nullsec. Stealth Bombers do the same just as effective.
What you should look into is still the cancer called fozzie sov and the horrible timers/reinf citadels have.
I dont know why is it possible now to place unlimited amounts of citadels into the same system.For pocket money and set all their timers to different timezones. But thats what totally killed this game and not the void bombs…
@CCP_Phantom (the OP)
Just curious if you’ve seen this and there are plans to get rid of station containers and fix personal hangars.
-station vaults and warehouses cant be moved conventionally or pragmatically, they have to be made on site and if there’s no industry available in a station you’re basically Sol on any organization for assets and they can’t be shipped or sold.
-you have to wait three weeks to destroy or repackage them. (WHY)
-needing an item in an item hangar to hold items in an item hangar is inefficient, might as well let me out station containers in my station containers so I can have items within items within items within the hangar.
-The item hangar window is too small and the station services tab is largely empty space.
Corp hangar can just add new tabs, get rid of “ships” merge ships into items hangar under a ships tab. Merge coro hangar into the station services tab.
[Alliance] [Corp] [Personal]
Replacing the current ships items toggle.
You need permissions and roles for taking things and doing stuff in the first two, third belongs to you, once in a hangar there will be a +\ that lets you create a subsection within your hangar that you can name and password lock etc.
If you want to help fix structures start there.