These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

EVE Information Portal

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.

Dev blog: More Deployables from Super Friends

First post First post First post
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#341 - 2014-01-14 20:19:36 UTC
ESS looks absolutely fecking stupid. Syphon yeah cool get that but why the ESS? Vein attempt at reducing income of null sec dwellers?

Snowflake Tem
The Order of Symbolic Measures
#342 - 2014-01-14 20:21:17 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
I really dislike this new ESS thing.


1) It's too complicated for what it does. Moving around a structure, anchoring it, interacting with it, etc, all for a bit more income from rats. I view ratting as a fluent activity.

2) It feels forced, not emergent. The big obvious "take all" button vs the "share all" button. I mean, come on. I like conflict drivers just like the next player, but this is laying it on a little bit thick.

3) It barely even makes sense. Look at the story in the blog and how convoluted it seems. It's so ridiculously arbitrary. Just reading it makes me cringe:

An ESS allows an empire to monitor bounty-generating activities in the solar system it is deployed in. Why this is a thing is due to an on-going and ever-growing feud between the empires and Concord.

It's like, what? Sure, it makes sense...I guess..., but I really wouldn't call this EVE quality.

Siphons are a lot more direct, usable, understandable, and I think actually great for the game. This ESS thing though, it's bad...

Scrap it, back to the drawing board please. Ugh

1) It's complex because it's has got handles for jigsaw pieces we've not seen yet.
2) It does feel forced, I agree. It could be integrated with hacking skills as mentioned elsewhere. Pressing buttons for rewards has the taste of a rat trap (heh, see what I did there?)
3) I assume the lore puzzles me slightly because I've been out to the game for a while. But if I'm not alone in looking at that snippet slantwise then there is a problem.

It does NOT need scrapping, it needs placing in context.
Dave Stark
#343 - 2014-01-14 20:21:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
DarkestHeart wrote:
Vein attempt at reducing income of null sec dwellers?

apparently pushing people from null sec, to high sec, in order to make isk is a great conflict driver. or, something.

edit: having said that, an influx of null players in incursions would increase the number of contests in high sec incursions so i guess it's creating conflict....
Lady Carington
Live Bait and Tackle
#344 - 2014-01-14 20:22:11 UTC
Having played this game for 4 and half years the ESS is the worst idea since Incarna. Most people who live in 0.0 will burn these things down just as soon they are found. The risk for having a ESS up far exceeds the rewards due to ease that they can be robbed. The idea that you can put a ess up and not have someone come rob it every 6 hours is laughable. Alliance mates would send there neutral alts around doing this long before any outside player could do so. An Ess requires honor to function and there is no honer left in EVE.

I am not sure who's idea this was but the fact that development time was spent on this is sad. Instead of investing time to improve/overhaul things likes POS system, Corp right management, low sec, Incursions or developing the game code to run on multicore servers, CCP invest it on crap ideas likes the ESS. When stuff like this is created it is no wonder last 2 Expansions have done so poorly and then ccp wonders why more and more players leave the game.
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#345 - 2014-01-14 20:26:55 UTC
+1 for hacking game woven into the take all button

+1 for larger % payouts

+10 for p*ssing a lot of nullbears off.

your doing something right +1
Powers Sa
#346 - 2014-01-14 20:32:23 UTC
If interceptors are immune to bubble, then this whole thing is completely broken.

Do you like winning t2 frigs and dictors for Dirt Cheap?

Remeber: Gambling addiction is no laughing matter unless you've lost a vast space fortune on the internet.

1Robert McNamara1
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#347 - 2014-01-14 20:33:52 UTC
Best Renter Nerf Ever.

People who own their space, and can defend it, probably will sort out the use of this tool. They gain a boon for having it and defending it (extra 5.5% income over their current income). If an alliance mate of mine steals all the ratting isk, there's a paper trail and they get purged. If I'm ratting in a system alone, I just check the thing before leaving and go about my business. Also, as a ratter with lots of space, I can just move to another system to rat if I feel that things are being camped in.

If I'm a pirate, I have a great place of value to jump to instantly and try and gank some isk, ratters need to respond quickly and in force to prevent my actions.

It's bubbled, ffs, that's awesome. with a delay in how quickly I can get isk. So interceptor and nullified T3 advantage is reduced. Means ratters would be covering each other when a pilot was hitting the big share button (or killing him for stealing all their isks).

This does not work for Renters. Renters get to suck it. Renting without an ESS is vulnerable to a cloaky scab who drops an ESS to steal your ratting income. They camp with a cov-cyno and the renter is literally powerless no matter who dropped the ESS. Renters cannot move to another system without renting a whole new system, which I can just spend another 30m to ruin his new investment.

Now the 'space lord' must go through and clean up all these camped ESS' which are pretty cheap and easy to put back in place.

Thank you CCP.

Transparency: The coalition of which I am a member, CFC, rents out space. But i'm still glad to see something like this in game
The Syndicate.
#348 - 2014-01-14 20:34:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Alcorak
These are going to work pretty much exactly as stated in post #52, which is too damn big to repost. I wouldn't want one of these in my ratting system - seriously a pot of gold for any neut that pops in. In fact, if I see one in any of my systems - I am blowing it up and eating the 5% reduction. If people actually use these things, I'm going ratting in a Crow from now on.

As they stand right now the 'time to rob' is about 75 seconds from when an interceptor appears in local. 30 sec to land on the unit, 40 to rob it, and 5 (on the outside) for human error. I'd estimate a defender's time to get to POS/station in ratting ship, swich to pvp ship, warp to bubbled ESS, lock interceptor and point at around 90 seconds *minimum*.

Now, if these things didnt appear on overview like a cyno that screams 'come blow me up' or 'come rob me', we might have a better syphon. A neut/hostile would actually have to scan it down to rob you (or could be a sneaky bastard and drop one of their own in system without anybody knowing it and grab it later).

If this is to promote 'small gang' warfare, the loot timer needs to be extended to around 90 seconds, looting ships should need to stay within the bubble, and lose ability to cloak (ESS targets looter until timer runs out?). These changes would maintain a moderate chance of theft with risk involved on both sides. Defender is scared of cyno, looter is scared of getting popped. A small roaming gang gets a higher chance of finding a fight, and a bunch of isk if it doesn't find one.
Taram Caldar
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
#349 - 2014-01-14 20:35:57 UTC
Mirthander Kane wrote:
i think it might have to do with the fact that people buy plex with ratting isk, thus taking away from CCP's monthly income - now they introduce this to lower the isk gains, meaning less plex and (hopefully) more subs.

So by making this deployable's mechanics as complex as it currently seems, they try to make it look 'justified'.
Thus the concept of 'shaking things up' with this device, is just a ruse to hide/justify an isk nerf, thus forcing more subs than plex use.
Could be, could be not... still a dumb-a$$ idea to release this.

You do realize they make FAR more money off plex than subs, right? Subs are between $9.95/mo and $14.95 a month. Plex are 19.95 for a month or $34.95 for a 2 month GTC. Either way it's far more money for CCP than subs are..

Your logic fails.


Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#350 - 2014-01-14 20:36:08 UTC
Drone Regions buff?

If it's racial ESS'ssss then what race ESS gets dropped in the Drones'?
Smoking Blunts
ZC Omega
Goonswarm Federation
#351 - 2014-01-14 20:38:34 UTC
are you really this low in the idea barrel ccp?

can you do pos's now rather than all this half arsed **** you seam to think is a good idea

OMG when can i get a pic here

Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#352 - 2014-01-14 20:38:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Hops
Snowflake Tem wrote:

It doesn't matter the reason that it is overly complex, I'm just pointing out that it is bad for these types of things to become complex.

Contrast it to an MTU or a Mobile Depot or even a siphon. This ESS thing is just *facepalm*.

Snowflake Tem wrote:
It does NOT need scrapping, it needs placing in context.

It does need scrapping.

This concept of a "booster" anchorable is horrific slippery slope, as you could invent endless different varieties of them, giving players the incentive to run around and anchor random crap if they want their "full reward."

Hauling around a black box, placing it where you rat, anchoring it, interacting with it, all so that it can give you a bit extra income...but store it in the middle of the system for some bizarre reason. Just awful.

Anchorables should be generic sandbox tools (theft/storage/utility), not passive boosters with some artificial risk mechanic built-in.
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#353 - 2014-01-14 20:40:27 UTC
CCP Phantom wrote:
Please be constructive in your replies and follow the forum rules. If you think you do not like an idea, then please point out why you don't like it and why it is from your point of view not a good idea. Thank you!
Can we start by an explanation of how the ESS is a good idea?

Ok, so, NullSec is too overcrowded, let's nerf line members* living there with 5% base.
Let's give them the perceived opportunity to get that 5% back, but at the risk of 20%.

Let's then give Interceptors the option of stealing those 20%.
Let's then give everyone, not just sov holders or people with roles, the option of deploying them.

I'm honestly not sure how you made up this idea, but I guess it involved LSD or Winter Depressions.
So please, explain first how it's a good idea. What is it meant to achieve, and how is it doing that?

After that, when you have justified it, we'll give you some criticism according to your desired goals. Until then I'm going to say "thanks but no thanks" to this idea.

*Excluding industri.... yeah, all line members.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#354 - 2014-01-14 20:42:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Il Feytid
I'm going to expand a bit on why the ESS should be deployable in ALL space.

For one, it most certainly will drive conflict. Sure it will vary depending on where and who is involved, but there will be shots fired. Let's face it, while players in null can choose to kill all MSS if they don't want to deal with the hassle of protecting one and monitoring it so all the ratters get a fair share; this will not be the case in high sec. All high sec mission hubs (hi SoE systems o/) will always have one of these out in space. It will be fought over constantly. Tons of content will spew forth around them. The other thing to consider is it would be incentive to move to other systems to run missions. Thus making use of otherwise empty systems .

As mentioned on FHC, this would work there as well. If all those faction warfare players who only want to farm LP with their dual stabbed frigates want the full payout, they need to actually fight for it. Did I mention the ESS should take LP as well?

And for those still thinking it is a nerf to null, if you are making 95% making sure the ESS is destroyed, high sec mission runners are making 80% due to PvP players battling over the other 25%. Thus, it becomes an actual buff to line member null income. Blink
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#355 - 2014-01-14 20:42:06 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Where's the highsec version of this? Oh right I forgot, daddy CCP is caving to the carebears once again and declaring the MTU drones thing to be a bug. Poor highsec doesn't need anybody interrupting their isk faucets.

You know my opinions on null sec.
But this ESS is a terrible, terrible concept, and it is a direct nerf to line member null sec income.
While I am no fan of the cartels, and the industrialization of null sec income, this method of applying a nerf is beyond stupid.

The cartels will either make it mandatory in every system, and mandate that anyone destroying, and equally importantly, accessing a unit will be tossed from null sec, which makes this effectively a 20% tax that goes to cartel leadership.
Or as predicted, inty gangs will steal everything. Either way the line member loses big.

Further, a blind man can see the next step.
CCP introduces the same module into high sec, but like the PI gift to the cartels, to destroy the module in high sec you will have to war dec the owner. I imagine that next step into high sec is the only way to mollify the null sec cartel leadership.

In any case, the entire premise of this module is beyond stupid.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#356 - 2014-01-14 20:42:18 UTC
Querns wrote:
A thing a lot of you naysayers are missing is that anyone can deploy these ESSes in a system. Say I've got an inkling for messing with folks. I duckwalk into a system owned by hostiles and deploy my own ESS. Suddenly, I am sapping 20% of the bounties of the system. If you are a sovhaver, you have to deploy these items defensively to prevent this from happening to your systems, unless you want your space to be worth four-fifths of its current value.

I find your lack of perception disturbing. Anyone can take from these. So there is no such thing as a defense ESS. You've only saved me the trouble of bringing one in.

Whats the volume on these?

Vincent Athena
#357 - 2014-01-14 20:45:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Vincent Athena
Alot of the discussion of the ESS seems to assume they will be deployed and left up for days, virtually unattended. I do not see them being used that way.

I think they will get deployed as soon as the ratter wants to start and scooped when they stop. Possibly even in the anomaly being cleared. Hostiles reported as incoming, you hit "share", hit align, wait 20 seconds for the ISK to be delivered, hit scoop, hit warp.

These are not intended to be long term structures. Think of using it tactically, like you would MTUs or mobile depots.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

State War Academy
Caldari State
#358 - 2014-01-14 20:47:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Evelgrivion
I have to agree with the general sentiment expressed in here; this deployable suggests either a deep lack of understanding of null security space, a poorly disguised nerf to ratting, or the deliberate conception of a new hot-dropping magnet.

If one were to use them, this change would enforce the old rule of one ratter per solar system. If they were used, players would be exposed to effectively invincible traveling interceptor roams and tech 3s on a constant basis. All the while, the income available in nullsec is trying to compete with the near-zero-risk income in highsec. Why should players choose to expose themselves to compensate for a 5% income nerf when they can make comparable, or more, ISK per hour by running level 4 missions in high security space?

Consider that:

  • Level 4 mission runners do not have to compete for their resources.

  • Level 4 mission runners do not have to expose their ship to enemy fire unless wardecced or suicide ganked.

  • Level 4 mission runners are not distanced from the market hubs.

There's a fine line where theoretical income potential becomes irrelevant to the convenience of hassle-free resupply, and that line probably lies half way between the income of level 3 and level 4 missions as it is.
Otto Kring
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#359 - 2014-01-14 20:48:52 UTC
Well ok great, but when I am stuck in station all day and paying to play EVE can I get a game to play with all of my newbros so we can have some fun. Recreate some stations to have an EVEVegas fun!
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#360 - 2014-01-14 20:49:56 UTC
Has anybody pointed out that if ratting bounties were too high (from CCP's perception -- and they have all the numbers) that it would have been simpler to just straight nerf ratting bounties?

Instead it's like they packaged it with an anchorable design straight out of the Worst Ideas Ever thread.

I think most EVE players would just prefer the truth straight up.

"We are nerfing ratting bounties and here is why." (explanation follows)