70 replies to this topic

[Sakco]

CCP is going to delete ultra deep safe spots on May 18th:

Tl;dr After Tyrannis, for any point more than 10AU outside the furthest celestial in the system, you will not be able to open cynos, create bookmarks, or warp to that location. Also, all "stuff" outside this range will be deleted during Tyrannis deployment.

*clicky*

[Sever Aldaria]

Wow. Goodbye deepsafes. fake edit: or unaligned offscan tacs for that matter.

[Ged Hawkins]

As a side-effect, it also makes having Deep Space Scanner Probes even more utterly useless. Yay. It'd be nice if CCP made those probes useful in _some_ way.

[Carenthor Loon]

Note that the maximum distance a safe can be from the sun is the distance of the furthest planet + 10au, so in reasonably large systems you'll be fine (i.e. it's not quite as bad a nerf as the tl;dr might suggest).

[Sever Aldaria]

Cath is not happy

This, quite frankly, ****es me off.

I have done a ****load of missions in 0.0. I have saved every one of those bookmarks, taking a lot of time to mark the distance to the nearest warpable object - and some are over 22AU from any object. Quite a lot of them are over 10AU.

Now you are telling me that if I am in a ****ing MISSION when the server dies before patch, my ship will be dead and I will be podded???

CCP dudes, what are you smoking? Please stop, it is hazardous to your health and my sanity.

[Sever Aldaria]

Note that the maximum distance a safe can be from the sun is the distance of the furthest planet + 10au, so in reasonably large systems you'll be fine (i.e. it's not quite as bad a nerf as the tl;dr might suggest).

I get it now. So like in D-6 since the furthest celestial is say 9 AU from the star, you have a bookmark that's 18 AU above or below the star out of scan range.

Ofcourse the logoff / on trick won't work so better make your unaligned off scan bookmarks above/below-ish the star before May 18

[Granger]

Note that the maximum distance a safe can be from the sun is the distance of the furthest planet + 10au, so in reasonably large systems you'll be fine (i.e. it's not quite as bad a nerf as the tl;dr might suggest).

Yeah I think some safes will be OK - and in fact we should maybe make some more. Consider the case looking at a system laid out as below (elevation looking along the orbital plane):





10______________8_____7_______5_____3___2 __SUN_1__4_____6 _____9___________SAFE




Planet 10 above is (say) 30 AU from the sun, so you are allowed to have a safe 30+10 = 40AU from the sun. If planet 9 is 25 AU from the sun, then you can use Poisedon to make a safe-spot 14.8AU beyond planet 9, which will be 39.8AU from the sun (so OK in theory) but still off scan from all celestials.

[Sever Aldaria]

The biggest reasonable argument against this move is that with large wars like the SC vs. the NC up north, alliances bridge/cyno in their fleets at deepsafes because the lag makes it take a long time for people to load after jumping. Under the changes, a bridged / cyno'd force could be quickly scanned down and ambushed before they've finished loading whereas now it takes too long and drains too much cap (i.e. multiple warps) to warp to the deepspace cyno.

[AlarDarkwind]

Wow. Only a few hours after the dev blog is posted and the forums be raging. To be fair though there is a good bit to rage about here. While I can agree with the idea of eliminating the extremely long range safes from the game 10 AU is, well, hardly any distance at all. I think there is some confusion here and it does help that a safe spot is only considered "bad" in this case if it is 10 AU further from the sun than the furthest celestial preventing (most) of the abuses against the new probing system. So you can still have your in system safes, you just can't use all the old tricks of crazy safes such as the disconnect tricks or Black Ops shenanigans. You could still REALLY confuse an enemy prober by using a deep safe still within that 10 AU + longest distance marker but putting it above/below the system or opposite from the celestial furthest out from the sun. Especially after this patch when most players will think deep safes are dead and won't think about those that are really creatively placed. And then the destroying of ships/objects at deeps, especially ships that log into these deeps after the patch...just wow. There is no need for this at all. If you cannot warp to these bookmarks or create Cynos then the only way a player could be at those safes in the future would be to keep a character dedicated to that spot without any ability to do anything but things such as system wide effects (like command modules/leadership bonuses) or assign Fighters. And without the ability for players to get to these spots things like bubble farms or large can deposits would disappear in 60 days due to the inactivity rules. But ya, someone didn't think this one through enough...

[Kerzack]

The reason why is probably becuase there is lots of space junk floating about at deep safes. Also my first spot was woW can't warp to it? Lets put our TCU's way the F out there - people could see it but not warp to it - permanent un-takable system. But then I read further about the wanton destruction - fucking hell I just anchored all those bubbles and cans. Craptastic - yay more logistics work. yay!

[Sever Aldaria]

The reason why is probably becuase there is lots of space junk floating about at deep safes.

Also my first spot was woW can't warp to it? Lets put our TCU's way the F out there - people could see it but not warp to it - permanent un-takable system.

But then I read further about the wanton destruction - fucking hell I just anchored all those bubbles and cans.

Craptastic - yay more logistics work. yay!

Haha, if someone put a TCU at a deepsafe would they lose sov I wonder? !lol

[AlarDarkwind]

Also my first spot was woW can't warp to it? Lets put our TCU's way the F out there - people could see it but not warp to it - permanent un-takable system.

Ah that is why they are doing the ship destruction thing. Otherwise you could sit an Industrial at a soon to be unwarpable deep safe the day before the change then log him in afterwards with a TCU in the hold, drop Sov in the system, deploy the TCU, then win Eve.

[AlarDarkwind]

Also, for those who want a quick glance over about what is happening, here is a picture of the changes:

http://www.mashie.or...e/supersafe.png

[Kerzack]

So basicly they are destroying the 'overshoots' from the outside ring of celestials and gates. Best bet would be then to make an overshoot as vertical as possible on the sun - from the outter celestial so as to get one at least the radius of the system below the sun ~ radius 45au or so? Thus you could still get a decent deep safe of say 35au or so... I wonder if you could start a poseidon safe by powering a tac several thousand above the sun, change ships and start warping towards the sun...overshooting. Tacs ~ 40au below the sun in all our systems should work and be a nice advantage. Then warp back and make one above the sun.... just using the 'sun' because it would give you the furthest part away from the sphere and most systems are pancake like.

[Aether]

ah well, more people fitting cloaks I suppose ...

[Lord Gabriell (Acobar)]

ah well, more people fitting cloaks I suppose ...

Agony and their fucking cloaks and stabs, I tell ya.

[Ecatherina W]

Cath is not happy

This, quite frankly, ****es me off.

I have done a ****load of missions in 0.0. I have saved every one of those bookmarks, taking a lot of time to mark the distance to the nearest warpable object - and some are over 22AU from any object. Quite a lot of them are over 10AU.

Now you are telling me that if I am in a ****ing MISSION when the server dies before patch, my ship will be dead and I will be podded???

CCP dudes, what are you smoking? Please stop, it is hazardous to your health and my sanity.

You are right, Sever, I am not a happy camper

[Sever Aldaria]

Cath is not happy

This, quite frankly, ****es me off.

I have done a ****load of missions in 0.0. I have saved every one of those bookmarks, taking a lot of time to mark the distance to the nearest warpable object - and some are over 22AU from any object. Quite a lot of them are over 10AU.

Now you are telling me that if I am in a ****ing MISSION when the server dies before patch, my ship will be dead and I will be podded???

CCP dudes, what are you smoking? Please stop, it is hazardous to your health and my sanity.

You are right, Sever, I am not a happy camper

I promise it had nothing to do with TeaDaze though

Sometimes CCP does something to "fix" a problem for some people while creating a new problem for most people x)

[Rocinantae]

Woot! Covops buff.

[Baka Lakadaka]

So to get this straight, you take a point in space (the sun) and draw a line to the furthest celestial, then you extend that line by 10 AU. You then use that line from the sun to 10AU past the furthest celestial and create a sphere around the sun. Everything outside that is effectively out-of-bounds and out of the game after patch day. It seems to me that it leaves quite a bit of scope for safes that are well out of range of the ship's onboard scanners from any celestial. Particularly in the areas above and below the usual plane of the celestials. Having a scan point above and below the plane seems a good idea for the hunter. The hunted still have a fairly good chance of evading. It's still pretty bad, but maybe not as bad as the first read suggests. Is that the sound of every super-capital pilot in the world rushing to move their ships from their deep-safes? And Alliance Executors filing petitions to move deep-safe TCUs?

[AlarDarkwind]

Is that the sound of every super-capital pilot in the world rushing to move their ships from their deep-safes? And Alliance Executors filing petitions to move deep-safe TCUs?

I think they are abandoning that approach to post on the forums first.

I have a feeling CCP will need to take this one back due to the overwhelming negative feedback as we get the full picture of what this all means. The thread is probably greater than 90% negative with over 180 posts in the first 6 hours of existence. That means it is already close in size to the average dev blog response and, at this rate, will hit as many posts as the Walking in Stations blog around 01:00 tomorrow and as many as the Dominion Issues thread (aka complain about fleet lag here) in 3 days. %-6

At first you take a look at the idea, maybe misread it, and go crazy. Then you sit down and see that there is still the possibility for deep safes (In most systems) just a bit differently than before and you start to relax.

Then you start thinking about everything else it means: hinders fleet fights due to deep safes being a workaround to lag, erodes the sandbox ideals of the game depending on your views, and in 98% of the systems in Eve makes Deep Space Probes completely worthless. Then you freak out again but for completely valid reasons this time...

[Kerzack]

...
Then you freak out again but for completely valid reasons this time...

LOL

[Draelor]

It's like they're intentionally making the lag worse, further crippling their already shoddy servers and general shit-ass upkeep.

[Ecatherina W]

Let's clear up a few misconceptions. It does not make sense in the current game mechanisms to have a TCU on a deepsafe, since all sov structures are scannable. Old sov systems have TCUs that are not at a POS due to being placed at random by CCP during the patch that introduced the sov structures. New sov systems have MUCH better defended TCUs due to smart owners placing a Deathstar (or Dickstar) POS prior to anchoring the TCU. That explanation should have made the "deep safe TCU" debate null and void. There ARE systems in existance with just 1 planet and 1-3 gates, no belts, and a few moons. Such systems will not be that big from sun to furtherest warpable celestrial. In such systems, if you are a missionrunner and if there are agents in the area, you can achieve missions placed outside of the scannable area from any of the celestrial objects - including the sun - if you are lucky. Now those missionspots are going to be illegal... Do you trust CCP to stop making missions that are outside their own legal boundary? Do you, like me, wonder what will happen when you get a new mission in one of the small solar systems? What if the mission spot is outside the boundary? Will your ship then implode in warp? Don't tell me you trust CCP to implement this in a good way? Sure, the main use of deepsafes - and I too have some of 300+ AU - is to have a spot to drop off a supercapital when logged off. And to make a cyno to bridge or jump a fleet into a hostile system to avoid the jumplag issues that CCP does not seem to be capable of sorting out. When we are talking supercapitals, then we are talking ships that cost 14+ billion ISK. I have been in a lot of lagfest fights with capitals being probable far longer than the 15 minutes we normally consider the max period with aggression. Ships killed 45+ minutes after the owner logged off. Is it fair that a titan or supercarrier has to be logged off in a safe POS at all times to not be able to be killed? It will most likely mean that a lot of supercapital pilots will be hesitant to use their ships. Especially since CCP also wants to nerf the supercapital insurance. Just think about the amount of ISK for a moment. If you think getting 14+ billion together is an instant move for anyone, then you are sadly mistaken or a scamartist. Yeah..... still pissed off.

[Tea]

I put together a simple/crappy diagram



Anything outside this boundary will be removed during patch deployment.

CSM were not consulted about this change thus there has been no player input until now...