[Lifeblood] New Repair Cycle at Initial Structure Deployment


(White 0rchid) #21

I have to be honest, this feels like a very unusual change to me.

I have yet to speak with someone who has ever noticed a hostile citadel in its first hour of anchoring, let alone first 15 minutes.

I’m not sure what this will accomplish.

(CCP Lebowski) #22

Thanks for all the responses so far, I just wanted to highlight a section of the OP as many seem to be missing it:

This change is primarily to combat potential abuse of the structure mechanics with the new Refineries, not something that really causes too many problems right now. With the fact that there is only one location where a refinery can be placed (to mine a moon), someone could conceivably block the location by simply being the fastest to launch a structure, even if the location is crawling with enemy pilots. With this change, you need to have control of the grid for at least the initial 15 minutes.

I hope this helps clear things up!


No, only refineries will be able to be deployed within a significant radius of these locations.

(Moac Tor) #23

It is actually very common in high sec that the structures are detected and wardecced within the first 15 minutes of anchoring. This change would mean that this vulnerability period is extended to 30 minutes.

Defending the structures is an option for some of the bigger entities, although the defender currently has his hands tied due to not being able to fit any modules during the initial 15 minute vulnerability window.

(Blade Darth) #24

It’s useful in pretty much one single case- when attackers anchor a fort to take down another fort, and defending fleet is already in system. Prolly should be 30 min.

Regarding invul timers and TZ’s- POS’es had passive defenses, an unmanned citadel can’t fight off a wet tissue.

(theRaptor) #25

Exactly. EvE is a PVP game and you should have to actually defend your structures, not just rely on archaic war dec mechanics to ensure they live for at least a week. Two weeks if you don’t screw up the vuln reset trick.

(Akira Kashada) #26

Defending (by either force or diplomacy) a structure should be the only option if you want to keep it.

(Moac Tor) #27

Agreed, defending and attacking is definitely a big part of the fun when using the structures.

If they are meant to be defended though, then they should be allowed to be fit with modules to assist with defending, as currently for the first timer you can’t fit any defensive modules.

At the moment you have to hope they are not detected during the first timer so you can then fit them up and try to defend on the subsequent timers.

(theRaptor) #28

No, just like POS they need a vulnerable period before weapons can be onlined.

No, you need to bring a fleet which can take the attacking fleet without needing a battlestation to support you.

(Moac Tor) #29

A POS could not be attacked in high sec whilst it was onlining unless the corp is already wardecced, so you are already incorrect based on that fact.

A medium POS also costs 200mil, whereas a medium Upwell structure costs 4b-10b. So a POS costs a lot less, and could be fit up to defend before the first vulnerability period.

Comparing a POS to an Upwell Structure is a poor comparison to make in the first place though as they are both very different types of structure.

(Sindri Oksaras) #30

A medium upwell structure is 600m-900m. (A medium Upwell structure is Astrahaus / Raitaru).
So you are comparing a medium POS to a large Upwell structure.

Comparing a POS to an Upwell structure is not a poor comparison to make at all. Its been clearly stated that Upwell structures are there to replace Player Owned Starbases and Outposts. Outposts are null sec player built stations and POSes are sticks on moons.

A POS can’t be attacked in high sec whilst onlining unless the corp is wardecced.
An Upwell structure can’t be attacked in high sec during its first 15 minute window unless the corp is wardecced.
Therefore the comparison is valid, you are just salty that this means you have to actually try and defend your structures instead of relying on archaic wardec mechanics to do it for you.
See you in Perimeter o7

(Akira Kashada) #31

Also a Medium POS can’t be invulnerable for 2 weeks after onlining.

(Moac Tor) #32

Clearly I want the mechanics stacked as much in the favour of the smaller entities, much like Gobbins himself has also made multiple posts complaining to get the mechanics changed on reddit.

I know you are lobbying to make things easier for yourself so that you can dominate high sec with your market hubs.

The fact is that with a POS in high sec you can fit it up before it becomes vulnerable, but with an Upwell structure you cannot.

(Akira Kashada) #34

Well, unless they make upwell structures always vulnerable like posses I wouldn’t see that feature needing a change. You need to be able to defend a structure to be able to anchor it normally.

(theRaptor) #35

No we are just against mechanics that avoid fighting. If you want to have a share of the market you should actually have to fight for it instead of just spamming citadels with alt corps to dodge wardecs.

(Sindri Oksaras) #36

But you are relying on mechanics alone. If you can’t defend your structures, why should you be allowed to keep them?
Also, its not like this is that big of a change… It only gives PH slightly longer to find anchoring citadels than it did before and we were finding them fine before.

Honestly though, real talk, its stupid that the only counter play to high sec citadels is having to sit and watch a system and wait for it to be anchored, miss just one and it is invulnerable for two weeks and then takes a further week to remove it. Regardless of how large or small an entity you are that is ridiculous, I can see why you would disagree with this with the Planet V stuff going on but it is kinda broken.

(Moac Tor) #37

I actually enjoy the fights, it has been good content for both our sides. Your people on here are complaining that we are trying to avoid fights, but we actually try to defend as many as we can, and have won quite a few of them I might add. Fitting the structure simply means we will get more good fights, and so anything that increases that is a good thing in my book. Of course we’ll try and keep the structure invulnerable when possible like everyone else would.

I do agree that the structure mechanics could be better. Even though we currently benefit from it, I think they could just remove the hull timer completely and replace it with reduced hours of vulnerability for the shield. That would make attacking more fun as your more likely to get a fight on both the shield and the armour timer. Keep hull timers just for the Keepstar and Sotiyo.

Either way, dropping a 4b+ structure and not being able to use it is not much fun for anyone. Let us have a proper fight to anchor it rather than the current system which isn’t much fun for either party.

(Moac Tor) #39

Your talking about low and null sec my friend. High sec mechanics have always been more in favour of smaller groups. A POS could never be attacked whilst onlining in high sec unless the corp tried anchoring it whilst they were already wardecced.

If I were CCP I’d make it the same for Upwell Structures, but then make the first vulnerability period during a window when the modules come online. That way you remove all the tedious and broken parts of the current gameplay.

(Tipa Riot) #40

@CCP_Lebowski @CCP_Fozzie Can you comment on the negative effects this change has to survivability of newly anchored Upwell structures in highsec?

(Kaivarian Coste) #41

I warped into Perimeter the other day and my game literally crashed because of too many citadels.

#SaveEve #DeathToPerimeterCitadels

(Corraidhin Farsaidh) #42

Perhaps the self-repair function of citadels should require fuel to operate. No fuel means no repair and no dps cap.

Rename vulnerabilty window to maintenance window so it makes more sense.

Reduce the fuel required by other services to balance this so that there is no negative logistics impact on those actively using their structures.