Dev blog: Upwell 2.0 - Structures Changes Coming On February 13th!

EVE Information Portal Dev Blogs
,
589

I’m presuming based on current evidence that all other timers work by giving an exact time display, even POS which can be variable, so most likely option is that we see the exact timer., I flagged CCP in an earlier post asking to clarify exactly The RNG timer can totally make a difference, I agree. But you are forgetting that you no longer have the vulnerability window. You now pick an exact time of day & week. There is no 6 hour window on your Fortizar.
Shield is always vulnerable, armour timer is 1-2 days after someone hits your shield at your exact time +/- 2 hours. Hull timer is your exact day & time +/- 2 hours. So the window for the timer you are talking about isn’t as big as you think.

Actually someone can shut you down for nearly 2 weeks in highsec. If you have say a Saturday timer, if they do the armour timer on Tuesday, then +5 days takes you to Sunday, which means the next allowed hull timer is 12 days away. Then even if they don’t turn up you get Sunday/Monday, they shield reinforce you Monday and then armour reinforce you Tuesday again. And expecting high sec groups or even small lowsec or wh groups to be able to form a fleet 7 days a week isn’t likely.

1 Like
590

Yeah, the longer hull reinforcement acts more as a penalty as a benefit here. Highsec and partly lowsec become more and more a mess, with balance decisions and tool development made solely from the nullsec perspective.

EDIT: don’t want to be that negative.

2 Likes
591

We have already walked this path. It was when jetcans were changed, which led to can-flipping. Not surprised to see CCP side-step that. Nor I am surprised at the number of “well meaning” people unable to foresee this.

And why wouldn’t the war-dec be effective against the citadel owner? They ain’t dropping corp. Plus is always a 0.5 sec system. You are over-thinking this. I expect the same sort of mixed bag mining ships that would normally populate a mining belt. Plenty of un-tanked retrievers, macks and hulks. Ice belts are the only place that there has been procession in the thinking of the miner. (Skiffs, Skiffs Everywhere - Buzz)

Or maybe as Black Pedro posited, pirates could show up and “steal” the ore from the refinery owners. arrr.

592

Ok lets pick days for a small group to defend a final timer.
Fridays and Saturday’s are out because you just don’t want to risk the larger blobs that come with fighting on the weekend.
Sunday is out because many will want to have an early/quiet night in preparation for Monday’s return to work. It is also Saturday for much of the rest world so opposing fleets are likely to be larger.
That leaves us with 4 potential days 3 of which need 2 hours of vulnerability set for that single structure.
(I have considered 2 X 3 hour vulnerability timers but that could mean having to form a fleet when half our alliance is still at work or it comes out in the early hours of the following day - As much as we all love Eve, being forced to take time off work to be online should never be a prerequisite.)

So in your opinion what days would be less problematic. Taking into consideration that with RNG a 2 hour vulnerability timer could come out at midnight (2 hours after the chosen vulnerability period has ended) and need to be contested for a minimum of 30 minutes.
I’m sure any small group from any part of the world will face much the same issues - If they don’t become part of a larger coalition that has 24 hour TZ coverage, they could be faced with having to be online outside their regular TZ to defend structures.

NB; Many smaller groups set vulnerability timers to suit the time they believe they can best cover membership wise (their prime time). CCP is about to add 2 hours to all timers, so what is now a 2 hour timer (set in a groups prime time) becomes a possible 4 hour timer + 30 minutes repair cycle.
Large groups don’t have to worry as most have full TZ coverage, so if a timer that ends in one TZ goes into the next due to RNG, it can usually be covered by the next TZ coming online. Most smaller groups don’t have this luxury - It will be down to members being forced to be online for longer hours, or just lose the timer.

2 Likes
593

You keep missing the point. There is no six hour window anymore. It’s literally an exact day and time you set now. And the window is 2 hours either way.
I suppose you could think of this as a 1 day 4 hours window of possibility. But you don’t have to be online the whole time since you know when it actually comes out.

1 Like
594

Nevyn Auscent
I’m presuming based on current evidence that all other timers work by giving an exact time display

Pretty sure “at a random time within a 4 hour window” = It isn’t a fixed time. The only exact thing is the time the owner has chosen for the timer, the fight can be up to 2 hours before or 2 hours after that exact time.

This means that the structure owners will always have about one day’s notice that they need to form for a fight, and that the fight will take place at a random time within a four hour window centered on the time chosen by the defender

But you are forgetting that you no longer have the vulnerability window.

So what you’re saying is - A Keepstar or Sotiyo have the exact same vulnerability/reinforcement times as an Astrahus and Raitaru ?

See I thought, seems incorrectly if you’re right. The next reinforcement time would be based off a structures vulnerability timers.

When a structure enters this first reinforced mode it determines when to become vulnerable again by looking forward to the next reinforcement time that takes place at least 24 hours after it entered reinforced mode and randomly adding or subtracting some amount time up to two hours in either direction.

Not too sure either where your “no vulnerability window” leaves;

This also means that an attacker with proper investigation can plan for approximately when the structure will leave its first reinforcement period and control what day that reinforcement exit takes place to generate conflicts on dates of their choosing.

If there is only 1 reinforcement time/day - How would the attacker get to pick what date they want the fight to be on?
Basically your definition means every structure is only really vulnerable 1 day per week chosen by the defender - You can take the shields any time you like and have to wait until the reinforcement timer is due to take the armour, then you’ll be waiting at least a week between attacking the armour and the final timer.

1 Like
595

Structure reinforcement flow.
Owner picks Time//Day. Lets say Midday Friday as our example.
Someone reinforces shields 11:00 Monday.
Since we are talking about a defended structure, lets assume it’s fueled so has an armour timer.

The server looks ahead 24 hours, then finds the next reinforcement time of day, it ignores the defenders preferred day for the armour timer, but respects the defenders time… In this case they scouted and timed it perfectly so the armour timer will be 1200 Tuesday +/- 2 hours. This is true for all structure sizes and all areas of space.
If they had reinforced it at 1300 Monday, 24 hours would have just missed the Tuesday timer so instead would be a Wednesday armour timer.

If they then win the armour timer, it looks ahead a time period dependant on the area of space, then finds the next time the defenders time & day comes up.
If it was in Null it has to be at least 24h away, in which case it would be that weeks Friday Midday +/- 2 hours.
If it was Highsec it has to be at least 5.5 days away, in which case it would be the next weeks Friday Midday +/- 2 hours.
Regardless of the area of space, or the size of the structure the hull timer is always going to happen at that specific time of week, somewhere in that 4 hour space. However the structure will not be vulnerable for the whole 4 hours, just for a 30 minute period.

Now here we do have one assumption that CCP have not made 100% clear, but what they’ve posted combined with what current structures do makes me believe that you will know the exact time that 30 minute period will happen.
So you will know if you need to turn up at 11:30 or 1400 for 30 minutes. It might be a little outside a small groups play time, but you have warning the timer is coming up, you know what day it will be, and you probably won’t have to form for the whole time, just a small window.

So to restate the flow.
Shields anytime.
Armour at the time the defender chose, but 1-2 days after shields are reinforced.
Hull at both the time & day defender chose, with time after the armour is reinforced depending on the area of space.

Size of structure is irrelevant, the potential timer times are always in a specific time frame and the hull timer is always on a specific day.

TLDR. Actually read the Dev diaries before complaining to make sure you have the mechanics right.

1 Like
596

Have you seen this interview with CCP Fozzie …

In the last paragraph Rhivre addresses the problems of highsec, thanks for that @Rhivre!

@CCP_Fozzie asks for input, how to tackle the problems. He suggests a benefit for true freeports, but in reality this will only further benefit the big groups because their’s must be freeports to make the desired money.

This issue IMO is the overwhelming advantage of big organized 24/7 groups against the small, amateur highsec groups, so they easily can create and hold monopolies.

A bunch of ideas floating my brain for a while:

  • Structures being a force multiplier bringing a fleet of 10 on par with a 100 man fleet, curve the bonus like Incursion payout … EDIT: a wild idea, make NPC logis, ewar for rent a thing in wars if you have high standing.

  • The GTFO would have been a very nice addition to highsec, as it can work well against large lazy groups of attackers, plus add more non-offensive AoE weapons to highsec.

  • Redesign wars, a) let defenders join individual adhoc independent of current corp - “recruit from local”, or b) exempt structures from war mechanics, instead make attackers suspect.

  • Lift the structure shutdown on armor timer for Highsec (only for public services maybe?), or make the long stint between shield and armor and not armor and hull.

Would like to add in general I think there are two directions worth going, strengthen the defense of small, imperfect groups and strengthen guerilla warfare options against large blocs.

What else do you think?

1 Like
597

I’ve always felt that adding the concept of ‘weapon racks’ where you can’t fire them all at a single target because of interference would help especially in highsec.
CCP don’t want Citadels to be able to one shot stuff, but what if they could engage say… 5 targets at once with missiles if they fit missiles. F1-F5 except instead of individual weapons each is automatically a ‘group’ based on how many missiles are fitted. And you can’t fire two at the same target.
Multiple targets being engaged puts a lot more pressure on logistics as it makes it far harder to tell the true primary DPS target simply from red boxing or watch list. And would avoid the single ship being volleyed off the grid while still giving Citadels impressive total DPS, if there are enough targets.

1 Like
598

Just to confirm: Once a structure enters a reinforced state (armor or hull) and the RNG roll has happened, the exact time that it will exit reinforced and become vulnerable is visible to anyone who looks at the structure (It will also be shown in the defender’s Structure Browser window). So both parties will know in advance when the next fight can happen.

1 Like
599

This, IMO, is far more worrisome – timed properly, 32 minutes of attacking can shut down a station’s services for 12 days in every 14. Repeatedly.

I’m not sure that an 85% reduction in Hi Sec industrial capacity is an intended consequence of this patch, but you might like to start stocking up, just in case.

Perhaps the solution would be to move the current sec-based delay from between amour and hull timers to between shield and armour? Or maybe apply it to both – using 0.5 days for J-space, 1.5 for Low and Null, 3.5 for High? (Will confess, I haven’t flowcharted those to see the full implication.)

600

While I understand that some rebalancing was necessary, all changes are one sided now; the result does not look reasonable

Fitting invulnerability clearly could have added some fun to both sides, I assume people prefer killing in a fight rather than shooting down a dummy; gone now.

Vulnerability window is 24x7 now that will severely impact medium refineries and industrial platforms with low EHP, no fighters and limited firepower; with the propulsion/EW mod changes random attackers do not even risk of losing a ship if they are not completely mindless. Note, unlike POS an upwell structure is no threat when unmanned.

4 hour window for follow up attack will be a nightmare for everyone but large x-time zone alliances to defend.

Burst projectors can be interesting, but unlikely that make any difference in Raitaru/Athanor vs small gang fight.

Fighter changes are to the good direction, again medium refinery/industrial platform will not benefit at all. Locking distance change is not really relevant for defence either.

The low/full power change makes sense (still cannot interpret what it actually means that in low power mode the armour resistance will be lowered but also full armour cycle is skipped). No sign of additional modules (e.g. resistance) that can help to survive; but given the refinery/industrial platform slot, CPU and power limits we are not losing much on those either.

I understand that some people get excited that whenever and wherever they roam in a small gang or even alone they will be able to successfully attack structures without the fear of losing ships, but I don’t only dislike it but I think it will push the game to unintended direction.

Acknowledgement: Yes, I am biased - industrialist in small corp/alliance (nullsec)

6 Likes
601

From reading all these post of the past days, I see one thing

CCP really needs to review and upgrade corp/alliance mechanics. All these changes to structures and ships won’t do anything long term when most of the complaints are “bolb” vs small group.
I have nothing against blob, but the mechanic seems to have worse effects over all then good. It cuses blue donuts, TIDI etc.

Perhaps CCP could look at number of things: some ideas
1: When a corp is established (for a fee later) it picks a focus - Industry, Combat, Exploration and recieves bonuses based on what it picks.
2: Corps would have their own skill system/tree - this would be what allows/controls corp population size, alliance size, claimed sov limits, structure limits, standing limits, taxes etc.
3: look at better ways for players to share/lock down assets. One of the reasons we have so many small groups is that people don’t trust others. I would go as far as saying BPOs become a digital asset owned by a player, maybe something like a skill book, once injected it can’t be take out and sold again. There would have to be major increases in BPO market prices, probably even increases in their ME/TE research cost.

3 Likes
602

So the RNG roll is used as the visible time for the structure to be vulnerable.
Where as now it is based on a specific time set by the owners it is now some random time selected by an RNG roll.

What exactly is the purpose of the RNG roll?
I can see its value if it were hidden so as to add some random element to structure fights but the way in which it is being implemented really doesn’t seem to serve any purpose other than to change the time from what the owners chose as their optimal time for defending.
Sure it may only be up to 2 hours but 2 hours can make a big difference as to whether some groups can form-up for a defence or not.

Funny thing is, you are making it so that it is not worth while defending a second timer, especially if it is on a weekend.

This new system also enables clever attackers to ensure that the first reinforcement period for a full power structures will exit during a weekend to generate potential fights by launching initial attacks against structures on Thursday evening, Friday, or Saturday in preparation for the next day’s reinforcement hour.

And doesn’t it also mean that if a structure has its timer set for Friday, gets shield reinforced on a Friday or Saturday ( to try and force a fight on a weekend), the defenders get 5 or 6 days to ready themselves for the final timer (the only one that really needs to be contested under the new system)?

1 Like
603

Services get shut down once it’s onto the hull timer. So the armour timer needs contesting if you care about your services.

And yes, the RNG roll exists to move the time slightly away from the owners perfect time, and it might make a big difference sometimes. It creates the same sort of window as before, but without the structure being vulnerable for the whole four hours like the current/old system. So you might have to stay up late for example to get a RNG later timer, but you don’t have to spend 4 hours camping the structure. Just the 15/30 minutes it’s actually going to need to repair + obviously any fight if it happens.

1 Like
604

Well, I for one hate these new changes that just make it easier for griefers to annoy people who just want to have a casual game of eve with a few mates without being constantly wardecced, and now having their home away from home light up like a christmas tree in low power mode, and forced to feed it fuel. Sold the Fortizer, citadels just died for me. Perhaps it’s time for Star Citizen or some other game. -Subscription- Canceled.

5 Likes
605

I can somewhat sympathize with this. You make some valid points. CCP sold citadels and the idea that small players/casual gamers who perhaps could stop the war decs, griefers with a citadel. Fact is, I doubt they even care about the pve’rs out there who just want the pve content without being constantly harrassed and wardecced. People being forced into non-consentual pvp ruins it, as does a small corp who spent a lot of time getting a citadel now are forced to mine or have it go to low power mode and a big sign saying “Grief Me!”.

CCP just killed the notion a citadel would help small corps, but fact is, griefers just bring a lot of players, so even if they don’t shoot the citadel, they just volley the small corp off the field or out-rep or out cap drain the station with a few guardians or the like.

Good luck with your new game(s). I for one won’t be playing with citadels anytime soon.

5 Likes
606

See this is the sort of thing I was afraid of… @CCP_Fozzie please reconsider these changes, we need to have some help for the small guy… please stop listening to these attackers… we just want a citadel for our own and yes attack but give us something to work with here… not this crap system we are gonna be introduced with on upwell 2.0

7 Likes
607

Looks like he is just slave of big blobing aljances nothing more :confused:

2 Likes
608

Yeah and you think they would care that most of the posts in this thread are against the changes ?

CCPs clear message is clear, they want only cannon fodder. They consider only the posts that they like. They dont even bother to reply to others.