Quantum Cores - Updates begin 8 September

It is to remove the structures that dont offend anyone, only function as sort of player “housing” and dont have much reason to exist beside having a personal place to dock and keep stuff in a stationless systems.

These groups that will destroy structures already have enough money, for example FOBs. It is kind of stuffing the stuffed.

1 Like

The structure will remain in the onlining state without these?

January 12, 2021 https://imperium.news/eve-online-the-core-has-appeared/

“all structures that were anchored before the October deadline will need to have Cores installed or all structure services, including tethering, will be disabled until a Core is installed.”

That will be huge.

1 Like

Yup.

Well, it means station ownership is no longer for the poors, which I am.

I always had the impression you werent, Ice?

Has something gone wrong?

Yes totally you can do PvE, PvP but you’ll always be subject to CCPvP where you don’t even have to undock to take part!

1 Like

The thing about market volatility is such that it is always temporary :slight_smile:

For an MMO it is still worth logging into.

For now.

100% But hey it’s “content” so who cares right?

Truer words were never spoken. It seems that CCP won’t be happy until this game is one big PvP zone. With this current chapter of the Trig invasion, HS can become LS, but i don’t recall anything about LS becoming HS

I really have no idea about percentages, you could be right, or not.
It just feels like a lazy, inefficient (and we’ll have to see, probably ineffective) fix. However, the questions I have now are:

  • why is it called structure spam, why are many structures any kind of an issue ? Did they cause the node in the KVN keepstar fight to simply give up, don’t think so.
  • why is it that Upwell structures are more common than the old POS towers ever were ? (benefits like flexibility of services probably, and freedom to pick an anchoring location anywhere on a system map)
  • does this generous deployment throughout New Eden point at a design error in Upwell structure properties as such, a design error not present in the old POS tower design ? (one that will not be fixed by a quantum core requirement either, imo)
  • alternatives for hisec ? maybe a reduction of hisec Upwell benefits (slots, services, possible (number of) anchoring positions such as requirement of a nearby celestial, etc), aka you’d better have a very solid reason to put one up and be ready to knock another one down first if need be.

Any decent, balanced corp should be sufficiently ballsy to put one up in lowsec instead, again only my personal opinion for what it’s worth.

Then I guess you’ll have to figure out how to defend them yourself.

Well that’s the crux, isn’t it? The part no one is really talking about is, will this change accomplish the only goal CCP is trying to accomplish? Will it prevent structure spam as a combat tactic? You think yes, I think I have no idea, but what I really want to see are answers/discussions from alliance FCs/indy/logistics pepole who actually have to deal with this ■■■■.

Because the thing is, if this mechanic WILL accomplish CCP’s singular goal, then there are some easy ways to avoid the collateral damage people are complaining about.

One simple fix is to have the single structure core immediately turn into (sticking with the quantum theme) a red core, a blue core, and a green core. These would have 100% drop rates and high NPC buy-back values. Every 7 (or whatever) days, one of these cores should “decohere”. A decohered core has 0% drop rate and no NPC value. After 21 (tuning required) days, a structure placed with “good intention” has no more chance at dropping loot than one does now. This pretty much solves the long-term problem many people are talking about here without invalidating the short-term mechanic that CCP wants to use to prevent structure spam.

In fact, even better, because this change forces you to acquire a new, single, pristine quantum core from an NPC for every new structure. You cannot reuse existing cores you’ve stockpiled from previous bashes, etc., since immediately upon installation they’d turn into the red/blue/green variants that cannot be used to bootstrap a new structure. It also separates the sell and buy NPC orders into separate items which makes market tuning a bit simpler (also adds some fun scam opportunities).

But again this all hinges on whether the affected alliance-level folk believe the original mechanic as proposed will accomplish the goal of reducing tactical structure-spam. If it doesn’t, then NONE of the collateral damage discussed in this thread matters because that is CCP’s singular goal with this change proposal anyway.

OK, crunched through 600 replies. Thanks for the feedback everyone.

Key takeaways and clarifications

  • Player made Quantum Cores do not have the desired effect as they will be industrialized and built on site with no added logistics risk. Nullsec alliances will now have to distribute Quantum Cores across space from the NPC station where they bought them. A new risk for them.

  • More destruction of Citadels will mean more demand for industrialists

  • The Quantum Cores are bought and sold at the “same” price, so as to not create an arbitrage. If you find a Quantum Core floting in space, its guaranteed ISK, not subject to market prices. Like blue loot.

  • We made changes to Wardecs fairly recently, and if Highsec wardeccing becomes oppressive, based on data, not anecdotes, we would certainly want to act

  • That said, any corporation that owns a structure today can be wardeced because we don’t want structure owners to be safe. You can’t be safe in New Eden. Don’t forget, there are losses on the Attackers side as well, and they also need an HQ to maintain their wardecs so that becomes a new risk for them as well.

  • We are giving players choices, do you fortify with structures that will fall into enemy hands at a cost to you and a benefit to them, or do you forego tethering/ship repairs&fitting because that was not your intent and purpose of the structure

  • Forgetting Keepstars in <C5s was an oversight by CCP, and sadly missed through all the validation efforts, including extensive reviews with the CSM. We will adjust the masses and update when ready.

  • Existing structures that are not injected with Quantum Cores do not become hyper vulnerable trash. They lose 3 of the “basic services”, i.e. tethering, ship&module repairs and ship fitting. All Service Module and Reinforcement timer behaviour remains as before.

4 Likes

Realistically, any structure that has been in a full power state for a period of time (say 6 month or longer) should get one automatically installed for free. Having a forced bounty on your station is still not fair, but it is less of a slap in the face.

1 Like

Hurrrayy ! Let’s make rich more rich… and poor ones more poor ! Make it as much difficult as possible for them to get on their feet’s… and smash small snakes head Because it’s easier when they were well small… what do you expect from a CSM full of null sec respresantatives… goood job !

It’s part of capitalism… small markets must die so big chains feed on better… … also personally I find some small corps pathetic who trying to drop some citadels like bunnies everywhere… it’s environmental disaster trash … also they SHOULDNT have identity or belongings so much… they have to be part of alliance and get into hive mind… small Indy is baaaad tooo baaaad … they have no right to be independent in EvE if they can’t defend their structures against big alliances.
. oh also CCP needs money… so please cotton hands into pockets… sink moar!

Far edit : WE WANT EVE ONLINE CLASSIC
2012 please … with improved graphics

2 Likes

Then remove the damage cap. It’s an annoyance at best and at worst, it puts people off sitting around for no reason other then CCP thought it was a good idea.

2 Likes

One corp destroyed our Raitarus simply because they had T2 rigs to salvage.

We know this, since we talked to them (well, our ‘diplomat’), and they found us to be agreeable, so they left one standing (the one without T2 rigs) and cancelled the war.

Now there will be even more incentive to bash structures than just salvage.

What losses for attackers in a highly assymetric war of 40 vs 10? Or 160 vs 90?

You realize that large alliances are just going to form citadel cleanup gangs and systematically reinforce nearly every single structure pinata.

And a large portion of those structures are going to die - and die without getting rebuilt - because they are owned by small corps and they are not going to keep getting replaced (read: fed) and “lead to increased industrial production.” LOL

Just as nobody EVEN TRIES to anchor a market hub in NPC null or lowsec these days bc it has a life expectancy of a month. Most small sized alliances who have poor means of defending are simply not going to be permitted to have any structures.

6 Likes

Healthy amount of ships and modules in circulation is achieved by its constant destruction. Structures are too difficult to destroy to the point of “tanking by irrelevance”: they could be destroyed potentially but it was extremely unlikely to lose one. So the structures just kept piling up.

Therefore it stands to reason to put something valuable in each structure so it now worth taking the effort to try and blow it up. Though it cannot be simply a bounty payout like rat anoms because it will result in greater amount of ISK inflation.

Direct result of lack of destruction stated above combined with too much security, convenience, affordability, and flexibility.

POSes were much less secure and more easily destroyed with limited functionality, cargo space, etc. They worked as a lightly fortified base of operations not impenetrable bulwark for the cost of a few hundred million isk.
Though as I see it Upwell structures are better when designed as a large vanity project for corporations to work on (and as a nice bonus to extract some profit if clever or lucky)