Walter

Strongly disagree. Building within the confines of the PvP environment, making designs that both push the limits and still look good, balancing compromises across the board, is far more interesting for me as a ship builder than making yet another hauler or warp shuttle.

You work with cross sections, keeping an eye on mass the whole time so you can keep your max speed as high as possible, as a fast ship has many advantages over a slow one. You keep an eye on thrust, because the more Gs of thrust you can manage, the faster your ship will accelerate and reach the top speed. But more engines for most thrust means more weight and thus lower top speed. Using more military engines or higher-tier military engines means more fuel consumption. Your decision on which weapon-loadout you equip your ship with also impacts the ship's mass and thus its overall performance. If you pick cannons, you pick close-range weapons that require being able to catch up to targets and get in close to them quick, but cannon ammo is relatively heavy compared to other weapon types. So now you fight the compromises of best-as-can-be top speed, thrust and also your ship's dps.

In contrast you can go big tanky battleship, where top speed falls out of the equation and it's all up to the rest of the stats, with focus less on quickness but how tanky you can make the ship. Also, for the most part, ignores cross sections.

THIS requires you to find creative solutions. It provides challenge. You build a million LEGO things that all do the same, how dull would that be.
 

What an uninformed statement of someone who does not know what they are talking about. Always so quick to judge when you lack the insight to know better.

All I see here is someone who is willingly not involving themselves with PvP pinning all the blame and all their issues with the game onto this aspect of the game, because that's the easy thing to do. Addition of PvP and their future plans to add more mechanics to it is not something bad, just because you feel whatever you enjoy in this game feels neglected for it. NQ is incredibly slow developing this game, most of what they do nowadays is rosey talk of a dream-like future while at the same time shooting down community feedback to what the community wants to see, saying it's not planned, not happening, not possible, or whatever else excuses they can find. That is on NQ though, not on the fact that PvP exists in this game.
 

Player numbers and specifically PvP player numbers are very low, we're in a sub-to-play early access beta stage game.

The whole fight around Gamma Alien Core had around 150 constructs involved. You compare it to fully launched, decade-long running game that doesn't come with the uncertainty of the terrain DU is right now.
Not sure how the lack of players and a lack of unified opposition of the players towards a big adversary like Legion is "bad game design". Lack of marketing engagement to create hype or whatnot to bring in players might be NQ's fault, but it's not a question of game design in that aspect.

Where I do blame NQ here is that they didn't do anything with the Gamma fight. They could have made a video of sorts to promote it, show how PvP actually plays out in their game compared to the false advertising they do with their youtube videos on PvP. Get some info from the parties involved, backed by the data of the server and pull it off documentary style, generating some hype and maybe moving people to involve themselves with it, to at least check it out.

So wipe most everything from the vast majority of players... But let us leave the creative folks alone. The economy is in need of correction but allowing for ship builders to retain there source of income while others start from zero is fair how?

.

IF there is a reset there are at minimum two main things that have to be retained upon a wipe. The first you already mentioned which is the core BPs. These are what we have spent hours designing and building within the game. The second one is that talent points need to be retained as it is a representation of the TIME that we have already invested in the game. No I do not mean partial I mean all as this is something that differentiates those in the BETA and the release.

Additionally a HIGHLY recommended one is to have our Organizations carried over as there can easily be people who will use the opportunity to take the names of popular existing organizations within the community. Not doing so would cause a lot of issues withing the community.

NQ consider please to increase rewards for missions because you nerfed income strongly for Organisations and Single players to hinder alt abuse.
 
Suggestions:
 
 1. Increase reward for single mission considerably 
 
 2. Or a player could carry now 3 or 4 mission packages 
 
 3. Or player can carry as many mission packages ship can fit
   (but mission packages are to be seen for other players in pvp space this would force to work in groups and have escorts bringing back team gameplay)
 
There are almost no mission runs right now because most players will not risk a ship that cost between 50 Mil and 100 Mil to fly over 5 hours to gain just 7 Mil. 
 

NQ consider please to increase rewards for missions because you nerfed income strongly for Organisations and Single players to hinder alt abuse.
 
Suggestions:
 
 1. Increase reward for single mission considerably 
 
 2. Or a player could carry now 3 or 4 mission packages 
 
 3. Or player can carry as many mission packages ship can fit
   (but mission packages are to be seen for other players in pvp space this would force to work in groups and have escorts bringing back team gameplay)
 
There are almost no mission runs right now because most players will not risk a ship that cost between 50 Mil and 100 Mil to fly over 5 hours to gain just 7 Mil. 
 

NQ consider please to increase rewards for missions because you nerfed income strongly for Organisations and Single players to hinder alt abuse.
 
Suggestions:
 
 1. Increase reward for single mission considerably 
 
 2. Or a player could carry now 3 or 4 mission packages 
 
 3. Or player can carry as many mission packages ship can fit
   (but mission packages are to be seen for other players in pvp space this would force to work in groups and have escorts bringing back team gameplay)
 
There are almost no mission runs right now because most players will not risk a ship that cost between 50 Mil and 100 Mil to fly over 5 hours to gain just 7 Mil. 
 

NQ consider please to increase rewards for missions because you nerfed income strongly for Organisations and Single players to hinder alt abuse.
 
Suggestions:
 
 1. Increase reward for single mission considerably 
 
 2. Or a player could carry now 3 or 4 mission packages 
 
 3. Or player can carry as many mission packages ship can fit
   (but mission packages are to be seen for other players in pvp space this would force to work in groups and have escorts bringing back team gameplay)
 
There are almost no mission runs right now because most players will not risk a ship that cost between 50 Mil and 100 Mil to fly over 5 hours to gain just 7 Mil. 
 

NQ consider please to increase rewards for missions because you nerfed income strongly for Organisations and Single players to hinder alt abuse.
 
Suggestions:
 
 1. Increase reward for single mission considerably 
 
 2. Or a player could carry now 3 or 4 mission packages 
 
 3. Or player can carry as many mission packages ship can fit
   (but mission packages are to be seen for other players in pvp space this would force to work in groups and have escorts bringing back team gameplay)
 
There are almost no mission runs right now because most players will not risk a ship that cost between 50 Mil and 100 Mil to fly over 5 hours to gain just 7 Mil. 
 

NQ consider please to increase rewards for missions because you nerfed income strongly for Organisations and Single players to hinder alt abuse.
 
Suggestions:
 
 1. Increase reward for single mission considerably 
 
 2. Or a player could carry now 3 or 4 mission packages 
 
 3. Or player can carry as many mission packages ship can fit
   (but mission packages are to be seen for other players in pvp space this would force to work in groups and have escorts bringing back team gameplay)
 
There are almost no mission runs right now because most players will not risk a ship that cost between 50 Mil and 100 Mil to fly over 5 hours to gain just 7 Mil. 
 

I must admit that a post like this was what I would have liked to see before, being able to speak with devs and understand your vision is important but also being aware that you are reading and analyzing our feedback. Thx for that.
 
From my point of view; the speed limitation equation by the mass of the ships need to be less rude, to allow to have competitive ships with some voxel and a skin/identity, not just a stack of elements, your orientation pushes too much to lose all what is best designed in DU: the construction and the voxel.
 
Shields should be limited by core size; Shield L for core L only, M for core L and M etc..
 
I sent a TTK video test to Deckard regarding tanking a ship with voxel and taking the whole box of an L core, it dies in 20 seconds with a good focus, during a fleet fight with 100% hitrate from anywhere, having ships with so many weaknesses (large cross section, slow, expensive in HC and elements ...) which become throwable and it's clearly not a solution. You need a real balance, the small ships are very powerful due to the misses, weapon damage are really too high for allowing another meta if you change anything.

Hello there,
 
First off, thanks for the feedback. 
 
So there's a couple of different things to touch on here:
 
The internal balance of shields sizes CCS/honeycomb health vs Shield Health per mass Venting
I’ll try to address in that order but they will mesh a little since they have some obvious links.
 
First of all smaller shield sizes are at an advantage in regards to HP/mass. So something to keep in mind is that as you go up in size, as it pertains only to shields, you are losing out on the HP/mass ratio (in simpler terms, each HP weighs more on larger shields). This is an inbuilt advantage smaller sizes simply have.
However, the main and primary reason we have different shield sizes at all, is to support constructs of varying sizes and mass. This is the key center-point around which everything else mostly revolves.
 
If you are intending to make a larger, heavier construct, that is going to trend towards or go past the max mass, then the large shield becomes the obvious choice. However, should you want to make something smaller, more agile, and quicker, you may start to use shields of smaller sizes. We already see people experimenting with constructs of smaller sizes using S and M shields to take advantage of the speed, this is a great direction, as long as the pendulum does not swing too far in the favor of smaller constructs.
Now, if the weight penalties do not sufficiently affect the design of the ship, and large shields are still too mass effective even on smaller designs. That's a subject we will continue to address. We do not want to see S designs using exclusively L shields because the additional mass from larger shields doesn't matter in regards to acceleration, max speed, and rotation speed.
 
To answer your question clearly, there is no direct goal for an M shield and an equivalent 95t of voxel to be worse, equal, or better than an L shield and I’ll try to explain why as we go. You should take the shield of the size that makes sense for the design of your ship. If you have the mass available, or are willing to “spend” the mass to have a larger shield, then go for it.
 
Don't want to get into the venting subject too quickly, but using an M with a bunch of honeycomb could allow you to vent once or twice during a battle, especially on a lighter design that can also evade some damage. Maybe the balancing on that isn't perfect, but it should be an option.
At the end of the day the inbuilt advantage of an M shield over an L shield is that it's significantly lighter. You say it's always worth going to an L shield because M+HC is worse in HP, maybe this is the case (more on that later) but the point is that for that 95t you could probably build out a good part of a fully equipped construct, allowing you to have a quicker, more agile construct with a superior max speed, that's the upside.
 
Talking concretely in regards to the mass, if I made a competitive light-ish design with an M shield around 250t ( I don't have one on hand, this is probably on the lighter side after the changes). I'm going about 38-39k km/h max speed, just switching from an M shield to an L shield, I drop down to about 35k km/h. Now adding an extra 95t to a 250t design is probably going to seriously hurt my acceleration as well, so now I'm probably at least looking at redoing my engine setup, which likely adds some more mass as well.
So now the question is more along the lines of, do I prefer an extra 5mill HP from the L shield, or about 5000-6000km/h extra max speed and some extra rotation speed. Well that's a question I’d love feedback on, maybe the max speed and rotation speed isn't enough, I could see that.
 
Secondly there could be an advantage to being able to “modulate” your weight while still gaining some tankiness from honeycomb. An M shield with some honeycomb unlocks some venting on that design, while retaining some/most of the mobility.
 
In regards to your reasoning about M vs L shields. Roughly you're going from “it only makes sense to use the largest shield mass wise, so I can never vent on xs-m because I'm not going to be using voxels on anything smaller than the L”.
 
Well honestly, I don't particularly agree with that, at least not in theory. The interest of voxels is that it's scalable, and you can choose how much voxel you think you need. If you're going to use an M shield because that makes sense for your design mass wise, you don't “have” to use 95t of honeycomb. You can use 30t of a good hc over your ship. That's already going to give you a chunk of armor to help you get some venting going, and probably not endanger your cross-section too much. If that honeycomb buys you enough time for 2 vents (probably optimistic), then you’ve essentially caught up on an L shield in raw shield HP and you’re operating at more than half the mass. 
Now maybe that's not viable, maybe the honeycomb itself is too weak and even reasonable quantities of honeycomb get blown apart too quickly, that's possible and that's something we can look at. Perhaps at that point the subject is more that voxels are generally weak.
 
It's also important to note that in regards to your “real HP”, some amount of the incoming hits are also going to be hitting elements, elements that can be repaired which can give you more tankiness down the road. That means that when comparing raw HP to CCS, you have to take into account that CCS is counting every hit no matter where it's going, as opposed to your raw voxel HP which will, in effect, have additional health from elements.
 

For point 2, there's a couple things to say here. Shields are not inherently in competition with honeycomb, as mentioned we don't want them to be magnitudes apart in terms of HP because it wouldn't make sense, but fundamentally they are supposed to be complimentary.
 
Now in regards to your chart and conclusions. You didn't quite explain what “mean raw HP” is but I can guess it's the actual HP value of the deployed m3 HC multiplied by the average resistance, or at least I get close enough to your numbers using that.

Internally, in our tests using real ships CCS almost always goes first as opposed to the direct destruction of the core, I’d say in general this is situational depending on the design of the ship. In my experience, when constructs actually have a good amount of voxels, it's very difficult to dig your way to the core, and between the HC and the elements and the (occasional, hopefully fewer and fewer) lost shot, I believe that most of the time, you can count on your CCS HP being your “real” HP bar.  If that's not the case, especially on ships that have a good amount of HC, I’d love to see/hear more about it, since that would be contrary to what we’ve tested. Perhaps certain voxels are outliers.
 
My gut feeling is that in the “nano-age” during which CCS was introduced and voxels were rebalanced, people haven't been using voxels a ton in pvp. The goal is for that to change and honestly, if people start using voxels in some quantity, that's already good progress. If it does come out that cheaper voxels, or certain cheap voxels are always way better than more expensive voxels, I'll be more than happy to take a look at that (and to be honest, I’ve started already since I had to look at a bunch of stuff for this).
Lastly on this, you’ve defined that plastic is the best material on the basis of it having the most “mean HP” for the mass. That may be the case, but seeing how much effort players have put into reducing cross-section at almost any cost, I don't think 6700 m3 of plastic is always going to be the best solution.
 

For the last point in regards to venting, I feel like I’ve partly answered the question already but I’ll answer more broadly. Venting isn't something that will or needs to be used. It's a tool at your disposal and it's up to you to figure out how and when you're going to use it depending on the situation and the design of your ship. In contrast it's our job to make sure that those avenues can exist in the game.
 
In view of that, lighter ships now can try to disengage using their speed and try to get away and disengage to vent and come back, some ships may have honeycomb to tank on the CCS, some ships may not be able to reliably vent. If you design your ship in such a way that it cannot vent, then that's on you. However, if it is the case that there are NO competitive designs that allow you to vent at all, I agree that's a problem we need to change.
 
It will come down to the design of your ship, and it's possible that venting will be more usable in certain situations, and certain circumstances than others. For example, I don't expect smaller and lighter ships to have enough CCS/voxels to tank more than a couple hits (let alone all the elements that will die on a compact design) so if they can't escape the firepower using their speed/agility, they are likely dead. But who knows, it might be worth it now to dedicate some amount of HC on ships, specifically to be able to tank a handful of shots to get some shield HP back, even if you don't manage a full cycle off.
 
Essentially from my perspective, if you go no honeycomb, you are accepting that venting is going to be a tougher proposal than if you had dedicated some mass to HC protection, there's a tradeoff there. Now maybe that tradeoff isn't balanced, and there's one obvious better choice than the other, in that case we will take a look (that was sort of what was happening up to 0.29, there wasn't much point to using HC, but I think between the shield mass and health changes,  and the speed changes, HC could have merit again in at least some designs, but maybe it's not enough).
 
For an example on a relatively light design, even just 100m3 of that grade 5 titanium is going to give you around 1.2milll CCS health for 4-5~ extra tonnes. Is that enough to tank serious damage for a while? No, probably not. Is it enough to absorb a couple hits as you try to pull out of range, get your transversal speed up and start venting some HP back, probably yes. The downside is your cross-section may suffer and you'll lose some speed (honestly the speed loss won't be much, even at the most severe parts of the speed curve). Is it worth it? I’d say so yeah, in some designs and some situations, especially now that heavy L ships can’t easily rotate to keep up with smaller constructs, having a slightly larger cross-section probably isn't such a big deal in certain scenarios now.
 
To be fair in regards to that point, I agree that on lighter and more compact constructs, the damage dealt to elements will sometimes be what ends up killing you rather than CCS, or even the core being killed. If you take a nasty hit that blows up half your elements, you are essentially dead. My question is are you able to use some HC, to reduce the chances of a good hit taking you out of the fight entirely.
 
I did a quick test, put up 50m3 of grade 5 titanium and blasted it with a fully talented laser L. It took 3 shots to get through and kill the core I had placed  just behind the material. To be honest though, based on my hit chance on a totally immobile target with zero cone or range issue, I would actually expect an actual S design to take almost 0 damage from L weapons. The shield and the CCS at that point is more of an insurance policy for the occasional hit, or to fight off other smaller constructs.
 
There's also something to be said about balancing cross-section vs compactness. Not having all your elements in the same spot, even on smaller designs, means a single shot has less chance to obliterate half your elements.
 

Anyway, I'm just spitballing on a lot of things, I certainly don't have all the answers, and likely there's some things I’ve missed, or some things I've overestimated the importance of or underestimated the importance of.
 
 
Now to address your “problems to be solved” directly as a conclusion of sorts.
 
   Point 1: In regards to this point, if people start using any honeycomb at all it’ll be a good direction. Once we get to the point where we’re saying “we’re using HC and these honeycombs are all clearly better than these honeycomb”, we will be in a good place to start addressing HC internal balancing. The second thing is I do currently believe that especially on larger ships, CCS is a better representation of health than raw HP, and this is likely the opposite on smaller ships.
 
   Point 2: I‘m not totally set on this. Unplayable seems like a strong word here. I think lighter, smaller constructs have more opportunities now to disengage from fights in order to vent, or potentially exploit larger ships' slow rotation to stay out of the cone of the guns. Additionally, in my mind, some honeycomb can be a valuable addition to smaller designs, to give yourself some room to vent. However, If this isn't enough, we could explore more powerful and quicker vents for smaller shields, that's certainly a possibility.
 
   Point 3: Maybe, I’ve gotten some info by looking into it again today, and it's possible some changes can come down the line on this. In the past we’ve had the opposite issues, so it's possible we went too far.
 

I know this is a big blob, I hope my numbers were right, my brain is a little hazy, and hopefully I’ve answered most of your questions and made this a little clearer for you guys.
 
 
Thanks.
 

Change in an MMO is normal and in most cases welcomed if it is for a positive outcome. These radar changes were unasked for and force us to redesign our ships. For me it's not much that now ships will be ugly with these radars sticking out but how battles will be from now on. Let's say we get a fight between a few Nanos and some Capitals defending an Alien core Shields are to go down very fast and the Capitals will start to Hull-tank until Venting is over, forcing radars on the outside will destroy these really quick because Weapon RNG goes straight to radars first as tested on PTS. With the destroyed radars Capitals can't shoot back and this was really the final nail in the coffin for big ships. NQ you really don't want us to fly big ships do you? 

That's exactly the point of the transponders though, basicly giving your real-time feedback on who is friend and who is foe. If we didn't use third-party programs (namely communication tools like teamspeak and discord) we wouldn't really have had a way to identify friend or foe at all as defenders. It was a major issue, specifically as the defending party, because enemy ships slipped through multiple times and shot the alien core again, resetting the combat timer back to 10mins and preventing the shields to regenerate. Might have been somewhat fun for this specific encounter, maybe. Or provide an interesting challenge.

But this should NOT become the norm or even intended gameplay. Having your alien core be prone to attacks, having to be available for defense all the time, having to basicly have a multitude of enemies in DU simply by holding alien core(s), having to field the finances and production time of base shields and warp beacons, aswell as extractors and everything around that, is enough cost already. Burdening the defenders with bullshit such as (potential) intentional transponder scrambling goes a bit far imho

As a non PvP player let me say that this was pretty amazing. Interestingly it seems, there is a lot of strategy, planning, logistics, subterfuge, all the elements that make combat quite compelling. Two things stood out, one was we all had a great time, lots of laughs interspersed with OMG nooooo.... Secondly the servers didn't seem to miss a beat with 150 ships on grid engaging each other. Sure there are bugs but pretty smooth gameplay. Still thinking about it two days later and cant wait to get back out there. 

I hope they will adjust the Base Shield Generator behaviour, that not again the Combat timer of the Alien core will unnecassery get extended for multiple hours.

Yep, major problems during this encounter was: Transponder didn’t works, radar sometimes shutdown, desync in close/mid range and that’s all, from my side
 
I still hope they add colored icons and make the icons/range of our target more visible when there are 20+ grouped in the same place in 3rd person

This was really Fun , Even with the broken parts that we had to deal with. But I think Its also to say a Thank you to NQ as the server really held up well during the battle with minimal lag problems.

Some of the most fun I have ever had in DU. Been waiting for something like that for years. GF to everybody involved hope we get a lot more like that 

well, despite what people outside of the PvP crowd think, this was actually hella fun!
The bugged radars and transponders frustratingly made this incredibly difficult and challenging to see who the enemy is, and who might just one of your allies.

We had ships from S to M to L sizes all represented, from the small cross section fast strike crafts to the larger L core battleships. We saw smaller ships trying to utilize their higher max speeds and we saw the bigger ships using their voxel to tank. It was a slug-fest the kind we haven't seen before and that brought excitement with it among us PvPers.

Personally I chalked up 8 kills (2x S, 5x M, 1x L) that I either partook in or even decidedly have gotten myself, but among the stress and hectic of the battle I couldn't save the positions on several of the wrecks from those that tried to flee the engagement zone but did not make it. I am sure there are still lots of wrecks like this, spread round the Alien Core.
 
We had up to 150 constructs, cored or not, directly around the Alien Core battle zone. With all the fighting slightly around it, it might be yet more that were directly engaged in the fight.

Really awesome to see some more fleet vs fleet pvp. Thanks for sharing and best of luck to both groups in your next engagement.

With the Athena update we decided to hold 3-4 alien cores, the goal being to test our ability to defend multiple cores.

The harsh reality of alien cores
In response, our enemies have put our cores in lockdown ~fifteen times, sometimes 4 on the same day, forcing us to organize ourselves well to allow everyone to come home from work, eat, take care of their family or simply rest. For having a minimum number of people at the end of each lockdown, just in case.
The ends of lockdown follow one another and still nothing on radars, the regularity required by this feature prevents us from pirating on asteroids or pipes as we did before, but the various changes have not reinforced either the interest of them, the motivation is therefore less and less perceptible and it becomes a chore to come and defend...
So we come to this evening of May 21, 4 cores are in lockdown;
Gamma, Theta, Iota and Zeta
Theta and Gamma are respectively under siege at 18:24 UTC and 18:56 UTC, knowing that it takes 20 minutes to secure a core without enemies, the timing is tight but nothing can tell at this moment that our enemies will take advantage of it...

A well thought out plan
18:36 UTC, Theta in siege but without contacts, when suddenly the announcement falls: "CONTACT ON THETA"
10 to 15 ships on radars, the fight is easily managed but a large part of our fleet is therefore in combat lock for the next 10 minutes, preventing warp, and an attack on Gamma begins to grow in our heads. Taking advantage of the combat lock to loot some of the enemy ships, meanwhile another group forms, alerted by the first attack and start moving in direction of Gamma.
18:58 UTC, Gamma in siege and the dreaded announcement drops: "24 CONTACTS ON GAMMA"
We are all surprised and at the same time excited, @here and @everyone appears on the various discords to call Legion for mobilization, we've been waiting for this moment for a long time, impossible to miss it!
We get together in voice, we regroup in the same place in game and we jump into the fray. Focus announcements follow one another, but more surprisingly, there are not 24 contacts but 50... 70... 100... (we reached 150 contacts on the radar at one point, allies and enemies). Several ships are dummys, but the enemy is really numerous, we will have to be disciplined and use our experience in PVP but also as a group.
The confrontation was complex, the previous patch broke the radars and transponders, impossible to sort the contacts on the radar and even less those who change their name like ours (our entire fleet bore the name "WONDU" on its ships), but LUA scripts save us and maintain some semblance of order in this nameless mess.
The station sees its shield descend little by little, an alt left on it allows us to follow it live, protecting the core is impossible without killing all our enemies, it must get out of the 10 minutes of combat lock to recharge its shield. It ends up being core, we manage to regain control, the core itself is not enough, we have to hold these 10 minutes. Unfortunately the timer is constantly reset, even after taking advantage of the fight; the dead ships then repaired by our enemies, the incessant comings and goings of small fast ships and those bearing our tag, it's almost mission impossible to prevent them from approaching, the fight drags on so long as we almost destroyed the entire enemy fleet.

The Liberation
"30 seconds left" (combat timer on alien core)
Announced in voicecom, still no hostile contact... When suddenly a M core appear, rushing to the alien core.
"15"
Some of our remaining forces are concentrated on him, the burst is violent but it's not enough.
"10"
He is at 80km from the core, almost dead but he still represents the last threat of these long hours of confrontation.
"OHNO OHNO OHNO HE IS SHOOTING [filtered] MY LIFE"
...
"IT'S REPAIRED"
Nerd screams, phew of relief, Legion held on but not without difficulty.

A big GG to everyone, even if the game is clearly not the most pleasant for PVP currently, it's events like this that make the game live. Bravo for the organization, the execution and the destruction of the core. We had a lot of trouble keeping our precious plasmas

Some stats about those fight
The opposing forces: Legion vs "Empire, BOO, CVA, Penrose, CYT, IC, CRN, MSI, SB Nation, UA and I think another 1 or 2, just a handful from each, think IC had the most, but mostly new to PvP"
+/- 150 ships involved
~40 Legion members at the end
More than 3 hours of fight
45+ wrecks still close to Gamma this morning
Very very little amount of stasis
Too much ammo fired
Too much kills
Not enough transponder xD
 
 

Radar not working like before the radar patch.
 
-Yesterday destroyed a ship at an asteroid, when I went back to check it out it disappeared from the radar.
  Seems that below 50 km from an asteroid's surface radar stops working.
 
-Also when warping and getting closer to our Space Station radar shows many constructs but the icons in third-person view of Space Station and ships parked there are not displayed.
 
So approaching the base one can hit own ships. Please give us a checkbox that all constructs in the range are displayed with its icon. It is also needed for PvP to be able to evaluate ships number present on a large fight.