CCP_Dopamine-
Has this feature been bug tested? Crashing Stations is a bad idea. Is this feature on SIsi now or will be?
Yeah⊠niceâŠ
Cannot defend yourself against 20+ raiders swarm = havenât right to own even single citadel.
Logic⊠
Itâs been for a while if youâve cared to look.
What do you mean by âcrashingâ stations?
Ah, so you are one of those entitled little high sec scrub lords.
I couldnt care less if you didnt.
Just because you dont like what it says and pretend you dont understand english all of a sudden either is no skin off my nose.
In my opinion, the only thing Quantum Cores do is eliminate the possibility for players to mitigate risks when placing citadels.
For example, right now, if you place an Athanor on an R64 moon, itâs basically painting a huge target on itself, because there is a high possibility someone will want that moon too, therefore you are increasing your risk of a possible loss.
On the other hand, if you place an Athanor on an R16 moon in some backwater system almost no one ever goes to, you are lowering the possible risk of a loss by lowering the payout the structure provides.
Quantum Cores blow all of this into oblivion. It basically removes any possibility of mitigating risks, because right now, any citadel is a highly lucrative target, even if it is sitting in the middle of nowhere, in a system of zero importance to the attacker.
You know how hauler pilots mitigate risks by sacrificing cargo hold in exchange for tank and by hauling cheaper cargo, in order to not be a profitable gank target?
Imagine that tomorrow, all Industrials and Freighters would be forced to fit a module that costs 1B, has a hardcoded price and will always drop. Suddenly, all haulers would be a profitable gank targets even if they carried an empty cargo and had a bricktank fit.
Feel free to apply this any other ship out there, capitals, missiong running shipsâŠhell even regular PvP boats.
Because this is exactly what Quantum Cores are. They are artificially adding risks to an area where it is not needed while removing any potential for players to mitigate such risks.
11 Likes
Imagine that in order to put their safety to red, each suicide ganker had to fit a 200M module, that uses 100mÂł, and that drops 100% of the time.
And that they had to be yellow all the time and could not warp in less than 15s (you need 1 week to unanchor a citadel). And that once undocking from anything with security red, they could not warp off for 1H.
Then, realize that this could still be EASIER for them to deal with than this patch.
2 Likes
Alright CCP, do you want these cores to actually mean something significant?
Easy solution:
Quantum Cores allow the switching of structure rigs without destruction of currently fitted rigs. Any structure under attack or in any timer can not switch without destroying fitted rigs.
One of the reasons for structure spam in high sec is the fact to do industry at a high level you need 3, 4 even 5 Raitaruâs. Five Raitaruâs in different systems can hide quite nicely without attracting attention. An Azbel, which is a major bullseye in high sec gets war decâd in a matter of weeks.
1 Like
Yes. And this is CCPâs clear intention:
By placing an ante in the core of every structure in space, the amount of structure spam will be reduced. The incentive and reward for attacking structures will be increased and the chance of both sides showing up to fight is also increased.
Apparently CCP has decided this risk is needed. That it is too easy to deploy structures with no intention of showing up to defend it. This will change that.
I agree with you, that this makes it less easy to mitigate the risk of attack by remaining a unprofitable target, but itâs not really the same as the CONCORD mechanic protecting haulers. There are still three 20+ minutes timers the attacker has to chew through giving you plenty of time to respond. This is quite different the the 20s or less it takes to gank a hauler where there is no time to take action.
I donât know if this mechanic will work or is the best way to do this, but I can see the point that something should not be safe just because it is too tedious and unrewarding to shoot. You should actually have to do something to protect your space assets. This does mean those that have no intention of doing something are at more risk, and likely the number of structures will decrease as people take them down as the next best way to mitigate the risk of losing them, but it should be also make structure ownership more valuable.
It will be unpopular for sure, but that is the price CCP has to pay now for releasing them in such an overly safe and overly powerful state 4 years ago. They choose to make them super OP so players would happily move from their POSes to Upwell structures, but of course now the chickens have come home to roost, and Upwell Structures need to be put back into line.
1 Like
I wonder when CCP realizes that this q_core thing in current state is undefendable. I pity devs and csm members forced to stand behind this idea.
For this you need to be able to do it.
The truth is that in the current state, almost NOBODY can ensure a defense of their structure. The only that can do it by diplomacy, so not by defending.
THAT is why the structures are not defended : you CANT. Claiming that people âshouldâ defend is a lie.
People will just make corporations to hunt structures, targeting the people they know CANT defend and leaving the other ones to bigger corps.
2 Likes
It pretty much pushes the âN+1â issue into overdrive.
On one hand, people complain about blue donut happening, groups piling into even larger groups and EVE going stale and stagnant.
On the other hand they are happily applauding to a new feature, that basically makes a blue donut near-mandatory.
Iâd like to know, what EVE players actually want. Small groups to be viable and to stand a chance when larger blocs dogpile onto them, or everyone joining on the nearest megablob bandwagon? Because there is nothing in between.
3 Likes
I was in I.T. for over 11 years, before moving into software (embedded systems).
Youâve not seen it all until you consider a pressure-washer as standard equipment for repairing computers. Iâm not kidding. Oh the horror stories I have 
Observations:
stage 0: indestructable npc stations, player built stations are conquerable
stage 1: starbases are added, destructable and with two timers
stage 2: player built stations to be replaced by Upwell, with three timers (higher investment, lower the risks?), become destructable, asset safety provided, starbases phasing out
stage 3: âthe reflexion stageâ - structure bashing, is considered a boring and unrewarding activity and there may be too many structures soâŠ
stage 4: ⊠(âthe tippytoe stageâ) partial removal of asset safety, by introduction of the âabandonedâ state
stage 5: after seeing an orgy of abandoned structure bashing by crazed piñata whackers the âthe lazy idea stageâ of âwouldnât it be great ifâŠâ
stage 6: âŠall structures become potential piñatas by enforcing the addition of âlootâ in the shape and cost of one QC, asset safety rules apply
Extrapolation:
stage 7: bashing structures still considered boring and, when confronted with half decent defense, not really worth the risk, although it can fund multiple wardecs when successfulâŠ
Results:
- bashing (Upwell) structures is, always was, and will be boring;
- QCâs are the spoonful of sugar to make the placebo go down;
- hulkageddon still doesnât get an overdue replacement
although the Niarja situation comes close
Conclusion: canât fix whatâs bad to the core, only make it even more painful. Oh, and we need more red dots 
2 Likes
I know of at least one CSM member who is not behind this idea. Also, given the maturity of CSM members, not to mention the community they represent, they will not be railroaded.
You make my day⊠now starts the piñata area. Or this is the piñata update.
As someone who has ninja salvaged at least 3 dead citadels near Amarr⊠yes please! ;D
No.
There is the 0200 shield attack, then the armour timer is a Tuesday⊠The only timer most groups can meaningfully attend is the hull timer. Given most groups are not capable of dropping full combat fleets 24/7. Sure the null giants are fine, but they arenât who we are talking about getting hit hard.
1 Like
Ok, you are being a bit pedantic, but sure, the first two timers may be in an unfortunate time zone for the station owners. However, the attacking fleet still has to grind through those timers, and that still gives many days notice to the defenders they need to show up. The main point is that there are reinforcement timers that give advanced notice to the decisive fight and a chance for the defender to react, which is not the case for a ship being ganked, suicide-like or otherwise.
I guess making a freighter carry a similar token might increase the chance people bring escorts, but realistically it canât really do much to promote conflict as a freighter gank is over so quickly. But in the case of structures, itâs CCP thought that having something more of value on the line will increase the chances both sides show up for the timers.
Weâll have to wait and see if it works.