Garðr Víða III

This will likely be my last post on Citadel proliferation for awhile.  We will have to wait and see exactly how Upwell 2.0 effects the proliferation of Upwell structures. I’m sure that we’ll see more destroyed but I’m not sure the changes will be enough to stifle the propagation.

At the moment docking, tethering, the use of fitting services and access to hangar storage requires no fuel. With that and the fact that there are no limits to where or how many structures you can anchor what we’re seeing is chokepoints being opened up (which is allowing the almost completely safe movement of capital ships) and all over New Eden we’re seeing systems being locked down by Citadel tanking.

Obviously there are different areas of space and Upwell structure anchoring limits would need to be addressed separately for each.

With the Upwell 2.0 release I see New Eden having 7 distinct areas of space.

  • High-sec (0.6 to 1.0)
  • Refinery High-sec (0.5)
  • Low-sec
  • FW Low-sec
  • NPC Null
  • SOV Null
  • Wormholes

High-sec (0.6 to 1.0)

  • There could be an argument made to allow unrestricted anchoring in High-sec so that everyone and anyone can toss up there own ‘house’.

Refinery High-sec (0.5)

  • You could also argue to allow unrestricted anchoring in this space as well, although I’d argue to see a generous limit set. Setting some level of limitation might create some good confilct, it would be cool to see High-sec industrial groups fighting over good industrial systems.

Once you leave High-sec though I believe having limitations on the number of anchorable Upwell structures is essential. Yes this will create blocking, yes you’ll have to shoot a citadel to place your own but that is the point of setting limits, it will create conflict which in return creates content in New Eden and in the end isn’t that what EVE is all about… Content?

Low-sec

  • I’m not familiar enough with the meta play and politics of Low-sec to make any recommendations for what sort of limitation should be set for Upwell structures for this type of space but many of the chokepoints for capital ship movement are through Low-sec systems.

FW Low-sec

  • Also not super familiar with Faction Warfare Low-sec but I do know that the controlling Faction has access to stations and the attacking Faction does not. Upwell structures in FW have rendered that game mechanic meaningless.

NPC Null

  • This space is frequently used by harassment or nomadic roaming groups and is also often used as a stepping stone location for groups looking to get into SOV Null. Setting a limit in NPC Null would be a good stimulus to create conflict between those groups and the SOV Null entities that have Upwell structures anchored in NPC Null for their logistics routes and capital ship movements. Just like in Low-sec many of the NPC Null systems are also chokepoints for capital ship movement, unrestricted Citadel anchoring has made this activity too safe.

SOV Null

  • In SOV null the idea is to fight for and take space, which will become nigh impossible when the defending force has decided to Citadel tank and has dropped 30+ Citadels in every one of their systems. Even with Upwell 2.0 Citadels will still be hard to clear and having to destroy 15, 20 or 30 of them in one system would be a lot more than a little tedious.

Wormholes

  • Wormholes are somewhat similar to SOV null in regards to fighting for and defending your space. It will become nearly impossible to fight over a Wormhole when the local residents have Citadel tanked their hole.

 

For all those folks still asking “Why is it really a problem?” ~ I don’t mean for this to be rude but… if you still aren’t cognizant enough to realize the inevitable problems that will come with allowing an unlimited number of Upwell structures to be anchored everywhere in New Eden I’m not sure there is anything that anyone can say about setting limitations that will make sense to you.

 

– – –

Fjúka Hœttr!

Virðing,
Kalam

Advertisements

Framast Njósn Garðr

While pondering on Citadel proliferation and working through the idea that every system should have a set number of Upwell structure points and set location beacons an idea came to me for a small sized Upwell structure. CCP is yet to introduce or even speak of any small sized Upwell structures but the citizens of New Eden have already started speculation on what they may be and what they may do. Most of the conjecture is folks thinking the small structures will be replacements for jump bridges which is something that needs to be addressed but my thought was for something a little different.

But first, just to keep it fresh, below is what my Upwell structure point system would look like:

“Again this is very basically thought out but maybe a system gets so many Upwell structure points for each moon, planet and asteroid belt it has and each size of Upwell structure costs a specific number of points as well?

Just for an example lets give 1 point for each celestial, so Perimeter would have 23 Upwell structure points, and then XLG structures cost 10 points, LRG structures cost 5 points and MED structures cost 3 points – this leaves some room for the SML Upwell structure that would cost 1 point.

Using that point structure would limit Perimeter to having a maximum of 7 medium Upwell structures or 2 extra-large and 1 medium or 4 large and 1 medium, etc…”

Putting some extra thought into it I’d change that so that the SML Upwell structures cost no points to anchor which would allow folks to anchor as many of them as they wish in any system. IIRC small structures already include deployables like Mobile Tractor Units, Mobile Depots, etc… so the zero point anchor cost would hold in line with how things are currently working.

My idea for a small structure is the Upwell Forward Operating Base. The idea would be that the Upwell FOB would be used by anyone looking to put a foothold into a system or for someone looking for a small base to operate out of.

Here are some basic thoughts on the Upwell FOB:

  • Can be anchored anywhere, does not need to be placed near celestial beacons, but does follow the current Upwell anchoring mechanics
  • The Upwell FOB is not a ‘station’ and does not have a docking bay but will have fitting slots and modules that allow it to provide services like tethering & repairing, a mobile depot style of cargo capacity & refitting service, maybe even modules that works like scan or cynosural inhibitors
  • The Upwell FOB will have a dedicated fuel bay and the service modules will require fuel, I’d think a fuel bay with a capacity to run it for 30’ish days depending on the modules installed would be sufficient and fair
  • Taking it a little further maybe an Upwell FOB could be the necessary structure to anchor with whatever thing replaces jump bridges, it could be one of the service module options

I am of the thought that there should be a fueling requirement for all Upwell structures and with that a dedicated fuel bay that would require one of the Structure Management skills to load so that not just any Alpha toon can load it up.

The fuel bay capacity and how long that fuel will power the structure could be dependent on the size of the structure and which modules it has installed but some primary numbers could look like this:

  • SML – approx 30 days worth of fuel capacity
  • MED – approx 60 days worth of fuel capacity
  • LRG –  approx 90 days worth of fuel capacity
  • XLG – approx 120 days worth of fuel capacity

I’m not super familiar with POS fuel requirements or usage but I’m sure CCP could mirror something similar for the Upwell structures?

 

Just some off the cuff stuff, what do you think?

– – –

Fjúka Hœttr!

Virðing,
Kala

Garðr Víða II

I wanted to get a solid idea of how many Upwell structures we’ve currently got and see if I could get some base on the number being anchored per day, etc… so I pulled some data off the Adam4EVE site. It was pretty burly so I ended up grabbing just the statistics for all the Upwell structures in HighSec, 0.5 and above, that are being reported by CCPs ESI interface. This covers all structures that allow public access and thus are visible in-game in the structure browser. Any private structures are not listed on the Adam4EVE site, since they are not included in the provided data.

Here is what I came up with.

HighSec (0.5 and above) – Upwell structures anchored per year
Year Anchored Astrahus Athanor Azbel Fortizar Raitaru Sotiyo Tatara Grand Total # of Days Avg/Day
2016 621 35 72 305 2 1035 45 23
2017 516 273 280 59 1485 12 14 2639 363 7.269972452
2018 36 45 18 2 86 1 185 16 11.5625
Grand Total 1166 318 333 133 1876 14 15 3859 424 9.101415094
HighSec (0.5 and above) – Upwell structures anchored per Region
Region Astrahus Athanor Azbel Fortizar Raitaru Sotiyo Tatara Grand Total Avg/Day
Aridia 2 3 1 6 0.0141509
Black Rise 17 4 4 1 21 47 0.1108491
Derelik 39 15 13 4 74 1 146 0.3443396
Devoid 33 9 10 54 106 0.25
Domain 130 38 35 11 232 2 2 450 1.0613208
Essence 48 9 12 6 55 1 131 0.3089623
Everyshore 52 16 11 11 56 146 0.3443396
Genesis 51 13 20 7 72 2 165 0.3891509
Heimatar 42 12 7 5 62 128 0.3018868
Kador 60 15 16 3 79 173 0.4080189
Khanid 54 8 11 4 46 2 125 0.2948113
Kor-Azor 27 7 8 2 47 91 0.2146226
Lonetrek 100 19 23 9 192 2 2 347 0.8183962
Metropolis 77 37 20 12 105 2 2 255 0.6014151
Molden Heath 11 2 1 1 13 1 29 0.0683962
Placid 11 2 6 4 23 46 0.1084906
Sinq Laison 92 30 23 14 141 1 1 302 0.7122642
Solitude 9 2 2 2 7 22 0.0518868
Tash-Murkon 66 30 29 8 127 1 2 263 0.620283
The Bleak Lands 14 3 1 1 15 34 0.0801887
The Citadel 74 16 32 12 171 1 306 0.7216981
The Forge 131 24 36 10 247 3 1 452 1.0660377
Verge Vendor 30 4 13 6 36 89 0.2099057
Grand Total 1170 318 333 133 1876 14 15 3859 9.1014151
HighSec (0.5 and above) – Upwell structure anchored
Upwell structure Grand Total Avg/Day
Astrahus 1170 2.759433962
Athanor 318 0.75
Azbel 333 0.785377358
Fortizar 133 0.313679245
Raitaru 1876 4.424528302
Sotiyo 14 0.033018868
Tatara 15 0.035377358
Grand Total 3859 9.101415094

So what is all this data telling us?

In Highsec, since the introduction of Upwell structures, we’re seeing an average of 9 being anchored daily with the majority of those being the Raitaru and Astrahus types. Both Domain and The Forge are seeing an average of 1 anchored every day within their regional borders.

Would you consider this proliferation? Maybe not yet but if it continues unchecked then I can see a day where it will be ridiculous.

There has been an argument being tossed around that “compared to the number of POSes that are in each system, the number of citadels is still tiny” and I’ll agree that, yes, there are way more POSes anchored than Upwell structures but there is a limit to the number of POSes you can anchor in a system and in comparison Upwell structures are very young. POSes were introduced in 2004, that’s 14 years of POS anchoring, if EVE is still around in 14 years and there are no limits placed on the anchoring of Upwell structures how many do you think Perimeter will have in it?

– – –

Fjúka Hœttr!

Virðing,
Kalam

Garðr Víða

It has been a long while since I’ve posted… it’s not due to lack of time in New Eden or lack of time to write, it has purely been a lack of motivation to write about ‘everyday’ life in New Ede, ie; a lack of something  exciting/new to write about, but with the CSM Winter Summit kicking off today it felt like a good day to discuss citadel proliferation.

I truly believe that there has got to be some sort of limit placed on the number of Upwell structures allowed in any given system.

We’ve got three types of Upwell structures; Citadels, Engineering complexes and Refineries that are further broken down into:

Citadels
Astrahus (medium)
Fortizar (large)
Keepstar (extra-large)

Engineering complexes
Raitaru (medium)
Azbel (large)
Sotiyo (extra-large)

Refineries
Athanor (medium)
Tatara (large)

There are currently no limitations to where or how many Upwell structures can be anchored in a system and if you find yourself asking “What problems is this causing?” then you’ve been hiding under a rock somewhere.

One very basically thought out solution is to bind the number of Upwell structures that can be anchored in any given system to the number of Celestials in that system, specifically planets, moons and asteroid Belts.

My suggestion would be to put beacons on planets and asteroids belts just like the moon mining beacons and further allow only Refineries to be anchored near the moon beacons and then Citadels and Engineering complexes can be anchored near the planet and asteroid beacons. And again like the moon beacons only one Upwell structure can be placed within range of any beacon.

Lets use Perimeter as an example – http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/Perimeter/celestials

According to that list Perimeter has the following Celestials:
• 1 Sun
• 5 Stargates
• 5 NPC Stations
• 10 Planets
• 10 Moons
• 3 Asteroid Belts

Using those numbers Perimeter would be limited to a maximum of 23 Upwell structures where as currently, according to Adam4EVE, Perimeter has 44 Upwell structures anchored within it’s borders.

Using this celestial beacon anchoring solution would cut the number of Upwell structures in Perimeter by almost half but in my opinion 23 structures still seems pretty excessive so maybe there has to be some sort of point system placed on top of the beacon system.

Again this is very basically thought out but maybe a system gets so many Upwell structure points for each moon, planet and asteroid belt it has and each size of Upwell structure costs a specific number of points as well?

Just for an example lets give 1 point for each celestial, so Perimeter would have 23 Upwell structure points, and then XLG structures cost 10 points, LRG structures cost 5 points and MED structures cost 3 points – this leaves some room for the SML Upwell structure that would cost 1 point.

Using that point structure would limit Perimeter to having a maximum of 7 medium Upwell structures or 2 extra-large and 1 medium or 4 large and 1 medium, etc…

Those numbers seem much more reasonable to me and would make the anchoring of any Upwell structure something that needs to be thought out and planned. I believe that putting some limitations like these would also be a good content generator for folks all across New Eden, there would be more battles over moons, battles to have your Market Citadel next to Jita and so on.

Putting some more thought into it I’d probably like to see some sort of incentive for SOV holders where they get a boost in Upwell points based on the ADMs of their systems.

 

What are your thoughts on citadel proliferation?

– – –

Fjúka Hœttr!

Virðing,
Kalam

Mikill Kjóll Hugr III

I’ve finally finished up JDC V and have had my Chimera built and waiting in my ship hangar for this occasion but now the issue is that there isn’t really too much point in fully fitting it out until EVE: Citadel is released and all the Capital Ship changes hit New Eden.

So be it… patience is golden – for now she’ll sit unrigged, get a few modules to help with some tank and be used primarily as a suitcase for move operations.

 

– – –

Fjúka Hœttr!

Virðing,
Kalam

Byggja Yfir Heimisgarðar

Well… it’s been awhile since I’ve last posted – no good excuses to give – thing are rolling along, pretty settled in the new home, been logging in and playing pretty much daily (there is always lots of content to take part in with the FEIGN crew), my skills are progressing nicely and truthfully that’s about it.

Maybe that’s not all, as a new Carrier pilot – I’m eagerly awaiting the April 27th release of EVE: Citadel and I’m definitely finding that some patience is necessary as we wait for the details of how the Capitals are being reformed. I’ve worked out all my basic skills to fly a Carrier but really need to see what direction they are going before committing to much further training.

Hopefully Fanfest will bring some news!

 

– – –

Fjúka Hœttr!

Virðing,
Kalam