Devblog: Navigation Structures Inbound!

official
devblog

(Tribal Trogdor) #122

Compared to the others, it was way out of line anyways. Really just seems to put i closer to where it should be.


(CCP Lebowski) #123

Sorry to be clear, when I say dev team I’m talking about my one team (Team Five 0) out of many teams spanning gameplay, art, audio etc, not EVE development at large.

I’m a QA Analyst working directly on this feature, so I don’t make a habit of speaking on any subject that I don’t have a direct relationship to, especially when it comes to confirming or denying long term roadmap plans, or grand statements of past years. I hope that makes sense.


(stephan Rin) #124

and that is fine if you feel that way, while i agree its out of line with the others i personally find it too big a jump for an initial increase.


(Molly Shears) #125

can we change rules ?

if you dont have upgrade in system ( now its call cyno jammer ) then you cant jump into system.

if system dosnt have upgrade you can drop cyno inhib to be able light cyno :slight_smile:

This would be nice winter :stuck_out_tongue:


(Erytnicmcire) #126

Retrieving PI from a POCO seems to be a similar function – there’s no tethering there either.


(Phase Hunter) #127

@CCP_Falcon

Now that these structures are replacing POS modules, are these any plans to re-work the TCU fuel savings into the beacon, jammer, and jump bridge structures? We are looking at an increase in fuel block consumption from 30/hr for a large POS to 45 for a bridge and beacon structure.


(CCP Lebowski) #128

There are no plans to move this over to the new structures, this bonus will be retired along with POSs when the time comes


(Nana Skalski) #129

Interdimensional gate to mushroom kingdom for example?


(Aralis) #130

Same mistakes over and over. Screwed it up again CCP.


(Tzar Sinak) #132

@CCP_Lebowski Many thank to Team 5-O for creating these structures and thanks to you for the time taken to respond on the forums. Cheers


(Solecist Project) #133

oh nono, i wouldn’t. the amount of leechers out there is flabbergasting. they think they deserve stuff just for existing and no one ever taught them that existing isn’t something you just deserve.


(Litsea Reticulata) #134

Whatever happened to ‘like for like’ ?


(Litsea Reticulata) #135

At least, not until planetary drills progress beyond their current state as some overlooked entries in the SDE that CCP provides.


(Cypherous) #136

Industrials can be moved around fairly quickly, you just don’t want to use fully expanded T1 haulers, get a couple of people to help and just shuttle stuff to it in smaller faster things like blockade runners or some DST’s


(Sethyrh Nakrar) #137

GL fueling that with a BR…


(Cypherous) #138

I think you missed the part about multiple people, like i said if you’re super paranoid about having slow T1 haulers doing it then don’t use them, risk vs reward, in this case you risk dying for the reward of getting the job done faster :stuck_out_tongue:


(Kithran) #139

But when fueling a POS atm (which is closest in volume to how much you need to fuel say a jammer) you are safe inside the POS bubble, precisely the thing that tethering is meant to replace.


(Kithran) #140

As I’ve pointed out I’m simply asking for equivalence of functionality - at the moment if you have a jammer pos you are safe inside the bubble when refueling. Tethering is meant to replace the protection of the bubble thus it is not unreasonable to ask for it for the ships that will be used for refueling.


(Tipa Riot) #141

Where is the issue? Just warp up from the Keepstar to fuel the structure if no enemy is in system. Warp down, get safe.


(Cypherous) #142

I never said there was an issue, someone else did :stuck_out_tongue: