Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
masternerdguy
Inner Shadow C.L.O.N.E.
1042
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 00:54:00 -
[271] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Peter Raptor wrote:Theres a lot of risk moving stuff around in null sec in freighters, its just not possible that null sec hubs will ever be on par with hisec hubs. Gee, I never thought of that. If only we had a ship that was like a freighter but had a jump drive in exchange for somewhat less cargo space...
If only we could fit a module to vastly improve hulk tank at a reduced mining yield.
That was too complex, CCP rebalanced an entire line of ships because of that. I expect they'll "rebalance" regular freighters to have 2x the HP, 99% resists, etc. For the children. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1243
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 00:56:00 -
[272] - Quote
masternerdguy wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Peter Raptor wrote:Theres a lot of risk moving stuff around in null sec in freighters, its just not possible that null sec hubs will ever be on par with hisec hubs. Gee, I never thought of that. If only we had a ship that was like a freighter but had a jump drive in exchange for somewhat less cargo space... If only we could fit a module to vastly improve hulk tank at a reduced mining yield. That was too complex, CCP rebalanced an entire line of ships because of that. I expect they'll "rebalance" regular freighters to have 2x the HP, 99% resists, etc. For the children. The mining barge re-balance was one of the best things ever done.
I love my 127K ehp skiff :) Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
495
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 01:06:00 -
[273] - Quote
masternerdguy wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Peter Raptor wrote:Theres a lot of risk moving stuff around in null sec in freighters, its just not possible that null sec hubs will ever be on par with hisec hubs. Gee, I never thought of that. If only we had a ship that was like a freighter but had a jump drive in exchange for somewhat less cargo space... If only we could fit a module to vastly improve hulk tank at a reduced mining yield. That was too complex, CCP rebalanced an entire line of ships because of that. I expect they'll "rebalance" regular freighters to have 2x the HP, 99% resists, etc. For the children. Why is having a special case tank mod for hulks a better solution than the rebalance? Or were you hoping that they best case tank was still 30k EHP after the balance? |
masternerdguy
Inner Shadow C.L.O.N.E.
1042
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 01:09:00 -
[274] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:masternerdguy wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Peter Raptor wrote:Theres a lot of risk moving stuff around in null sec in freighters, its just not possible that null sec hubs will ever be on par with hisec hubs. Gee, I never thought of that. If only we had a ship that was like a freighter but had a jump drive in exchange for somewhat less cargo space... If only we could fit a module to vastly improve hulk tank at a reduced mining yield. That was too complex, CCP rebalanced an entire line of ships because of that. I expect they'll "rebalance" regular freighters to have 2x the HP, 99% resists, etc. For the children. Why is having a special case tank mod for hulks a better solution than the rebalance? Or were you hoping that they best case tank was still 30k EHP after the balance?
Lol special case mod.
I was talking about DAMAGE CONTROL 2 Things are only impossible until they are not. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
495
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 01:10:00 -
[275] - Quote
masternerdguy wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:masternerdguy wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Peter Raptor wrote:Theres a lot of risk moving stuff around in null sec in freighters, its just not possible that null sec hubs will ever be on par with hisec hubs. Gee, I never thought of that. If only we had a ship that was like a freighter but had a jump drive in exchange for somewhat less cargo space... If only we could fit a module to vastly improve hulk tank at a reduced mining yield. That was too complex, CCP rebalanced an entire line of ships because of that. I expect they'll "rebalance" regular freighters to have 2x the HP, 99% resists, etc. For the children. Why is having a special case tank mod for hulks a better solution than the rebalance? Or were you hoping that they best case tank was still 30k EHP after the balance? Lol special case mod. I was talking about DAMAGE CONTROL 2 So yes to the 30k EHP max then? |
masternerdguy
Inner Shadow C.L.O.N.E.
1042
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 01:11:00 -
[276] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
I was talking about DAMAGE CONTROL 2 So yes to the 30k EHP max then?
Yep. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
James Amril-Kesh
RAZOR Alliance
2959
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 01:13:00 -
[277] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote: So yes to the 30k EHP max then?
It doesn't take much to make ganking unprofitable, before OR after the exhumer buff. Phrases like "you can't nerf / buff X EVE is a Sandbox" have the same amount of meaning as "If this is a sack of potatoes then you can not carrot." - Alara IonStorm |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
495
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 01:13:00 -
[278] - Quote
masternerdguy wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:masternerdguy wrote:
I was talking about DAMAGE CONTROL 2
So yes to the 30k EHP max then? Yep. Glad they didn't share your opinion. Procurer is quite nice @ 90K EHP. |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1244
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 01:14:00 -
[279] - Quote
masternerdguy wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:masternerdguy wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Peter Raptor wrote:Theres a lot of risk moving stuff around in null sec in freighters, its just not possible that null sec hubs will ever be on par with hisec hubs. Gee, I never thought of that. If only we had a ship that was like a freighter but had a jump drive in exchange for somewhat less cargo space... If only we could fit a module to vastly improve hulk tank at a reduced mining yield. That was too complex, CCP rebalanced an entire line of ships because of that. I expect they'll "rebalance" regular freighters to have 2x the HP, 99% resists, etc. For the children. Why is having a special case tank mod for hulks a better solution than the rebalance? Or were you hoping that they best case tank was still 30k EHP after the balance? Lol special case mod. I was talking about DAMAGE CONTROL 2 To be honest the thing that was actually best about the rebalance was the rebalance its self.
After so many years of watching PvP ships get rebalanced time and again it was nice to see something done for mining or manufacturing.
After all that has been promised, one click manufacturing, ring mining ect.. it was good to see something. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
497
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 01:17:00 -
[280] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote: So yes to the 30k EHP max then?
It doesn't take much to make ganking unprofitable, before OR after the exhumer buff. In a .5 it pretty much took every slot the ship had, a non-compromise most other ships didn't have to make. It's like a combat ship without a single damage mod, no ewar and no tackle. Doesn't seem "balanced" to me. Maybe I'm overestimating the ganking potential but especially during permageddon this became true to a real extent. |
|
James Amril-Kesh
RAZOR Alliance
2959
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 01:21:00 -
[281] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote: So yes to the 30k EHP max then?
It doesn't take much to make ganking unprofitable, before OR after the exhumer buff. In a .5 it pretty much took every slot the ship had, a non-compromise most other ships didn't have to make. It's like a combat ship without a single damage mod, no ewar and no tackle. Doesn't seem "balanced" to me. Maybe I'm overestimating the ganking potential but especially during permageddon this became true to a real extent. So don't go to 0.5 ohnoeschoices Phrases like "you can't nerf / buff X EVE is a Sandbox" have the same amount of meaning as "If this is a sack of potatoes then you can not carrot." - Alara IonStorm |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
497
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 01:24:00 -
[282] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote: So yes to the 30k EHP max then?
It doesn't take much to make ganking unprofitable, before OR after the exhumer buff. In a .5 it pretty much took every slot the ship had, a non-compromise most other ships didn't have to make. It's like a combat ship without a single damage mod, no ewar and no tackle. Doesn't seem "balanced" to me. Maybe I'm overestimating the ganking potential but especially during permageddon this became true to a real extent. So don't go to 0.5 ohnoeschoices I prefer having options like lower yield but more tank. |
Peter Raptor
Galactic Hawks
382
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 02:25:00 -
[283] - Quote
To tell you the truth, if they "slightly" nerf hisec, it wont make any difference to player distribution, hisec has been mini-nerfed for years (lvl 4 nerfs, datacore nerfs etc etc) people are still not going to nullsec, nullsec needs a MASSIVE overhaul to attract players, nullsec is the problem. Evelopedia;-á
The Amarr Empire, is known for its omnipresent religion -áGÇá-á-á |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1245
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 02:43:00 -
[284] - Quote
Peter Raptor wrote:To tell you the truth, if they "slightly" nerf hisec, it wont make any difference to player distribution, hisec has been mini-nerfed for years (lvl 4 nerfs, datacore nerfs etc etc) people are still not going to nullsec, nullsec needs a MASSIVE overhaul to attract players, nullsec is the problem. To be honest the whole thing is do do with player distribution but the need has to be to make players want to go rather than forcing them too.
Take wormholes
They are now getting kind of full, it is becoming rarer to find an uninhabited system. Why because they work, this risk vs reward while more dangerous than Null and only slightly more rewarding is acceptable as we have no blobs and no need to join super alliances to live.
If the same could be done for Null and lo-sec made better it would be great. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Torakenat
Space Cowboys United The Irukandji
25
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 02:44:00 -
[285] - Quote
Peter Raptor wrote:To tell you the truth, if they "slightly" nerf hisec, it wont make any difference to player distribution, hisec has been mini-nerfed for years (lvl 4 nerfs, datacore nerfs etc etc) people are still not going to nullsec, nullsec needs a MASSIVE overhaul to attract players, nullsec is the problem.
Give me my ferris wheel in null and we'll have an insurgency of new blood. |
ashley Eoner
157
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 02:51:00 -
[286] - Quote
Peter Raptor wrote:To tell you the truth, if they "slightly" nerf hisec, it wont make any difference to player distribution, hisec has been mini-nerfed for years (lvl 4 nerfs, datacore nerfs etc etc) people are still not going to nullsec, nullsec needs a MASSIVE overhaul to attract players, nullsec is the problem. It's not the content that's the problem it's the people. The people in nullsec have decided they love a field of blues so they can kick over the sand castles of the small up and coming groups..
Then the nullsec players turn around and complain about the lack of targets.
Nullsec miners crunch ABC ores in massive numbers behind a huge blue shield. The nullsecer then complains that they don't get enough for the massive amount of ABC ore they mined almost risk free.
Seems to me a lot of the complains come from the ability to easily and quickly project a lot of power far from home bases. You wouldn't quite have the same sea of blue if your ability to project power was massively limited. With more risk and fewer miners your ABC ores would suddenly skyrocket in value. Without a sea of blue you'll suddenly find far more targets to shoot. |
Peter Raptor
Galactic Hawks
383
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 03:03:00 -
[287] - Quote
True enough too, and also some nullseccers seem to want to nerf hisec, cos theyre are running out of cannon fodder, and they just don't realise being cannon fodder is not everybodys idea of a fun time. Evelopedia;-á
The Amarr Empire, is known for its omnipresent religion -áGÇá-á-á |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2596
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 03:32:00 -
[288] - Quote
Peter Raptor wrote:True enough too, and also some nullseccers seem to want to nerf hisec, cos theyre are running out of cannon fodder, and they just don't realise being cannon fodder is not everybodys idea of a fun time. Hahaha, the only problem is the newbies grow up and eventually they're all using drakes and we need more frigates for frigate roams... Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Zaraz Zaraz
Imperial Planetology Academy
60
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 06:55:00 -
[289] - Quote
Peter Raptor wrote:True enough too, and also some nullseccers seem to want to nerf hisec, cos theyre are running out of cannon fodder, and they just don't realise being cannon fodder is not everybodys idea of a fun time.
Game needs more masochists.
CCP need to give more incentive for masochists to join the game. How about giving clinically diagnosed masochists a discount on their game time? That would improve nullsec and lowsec A LOT!
|
Murk Paradox
Dvice Shipyards No Value
132
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 14:54:00 -
[290] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:masternerdguy wrote:Murk Paradox wrote:masternerdguy wrote:So you want an alliance to go through the expense and work of maintaining a functioning infrastructure, keeping it safe from enemy invaders, and freeporting all the bases? And they have to let you act like an antisocial animal just because you are there? Does that make sense? I don't "want" anything. When I get destroyed going through TEST space getting stuck in a bubble, I move on and try to not get stuck in it again. It's TEST's space, they wanted the bubble there, they put it there. I move on. I don't act like an antisocial animal, that's the point. When I see people in local, I wave as I'm passing through. When I went through in a venture, someone at a gate camp mentioned not being able to catch me, I replied I wasn't worth much and was passing through, then said bye as I left. The point is, when I am in someone else's space, I take a chance. I accept it, I move on. If an alliance wants to be NBSI and blows away everything that moves not blue, that's their fault, not mine. Doesn't matter if I'm in my little corner of NPC Null, or in highsec near Dodixie, or if I'm roaming in lowsec around Schoorasana. It all applies the same; you choose how you want your environment to be. The rest is just whining. Your venture could be an enemy spy, scout, or have a cyno. Or could be me playing in a frig and moving it deep into npc null (which it was) Who knows, you might be a PL alt, and there's titans in them there hills
Paranoia proves my point. "I say tomato, you say tomaCCP BAN ALL TOMATOES THEY ARE HARASSING ME I WANT TOMATO FREE HIGHSEC."-á -TheGunslinger42 Proud enforcer of the Code, see [url]http://www.minerbumping.com[/url] for details. |
|
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
924
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 16:48:00 -
[291] - Quote
Peter Raptor wrote:Some Rando wrote:Peter Raptor wrote:If CCP nerfs hisec, what have the hisec dwellers/industrialists got left A lot of other space to do business in. High-sec should be left to new players and the little coddled children who can't handle conflict in a PvP game. As I said elsewhere , many people play EVE to relax, manufacture stuff, hang out with friends, not to have an FC yelling at them for allegedly making the team lose a PVP match. If forced to PVP, many would rather leave.
Too bad you (like every other high sec genius who says that) have no proof of that. History has shown that people invested in a game will ADAPT rather than leave, and this history is why the CCP brass (rightly) said "watch what they do, not what they say".
People like you need to believe legions of other people agree with them (oh look the post I replied to got 12 likes in a game of 400,000 accounts). Sorry, it's just not true. And if high sec people are too narrowminded to see their is a problem, wel, that's just sad.
You see most people are NOT saying "buff null/low/wormholes" (another common mistake of the high sec paranoid, it's not just about null), because we aren't greedy entitled welfare queens. We simply would like some internal consistancy in the game we play, high sec as currently constituted doesn't fit. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2654
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 17:20:00 -
[292] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Peter Raptor wrote:Some Rando wrote:Peter Raptor wrote:If CCP nerfs hisec, what have the hisec dwellers/industrialists got left A lot of other space to do business in. High-sec should be left to new players and the little coddled children who can't handle conflict in a PvP game. As I said elsewhere , many people play EVE to relax, manufacture stuff, hang out with friends, not to have an FC yelling at them for allegedly making the team lose a PVP match. If forced to PVP, many would rather leave. Too bad you (like every other high sec genius who says that) have no proof of that. History has shown that people invested in a game will ADAPT rather than leave, and this history is why the CCP brass (rightly) said "watch what they do, not what they say". People like you need to believe legions of other people agree with them (oh look the post I replied to got 12 likes in a game of 400,000 accounts). Sorry, it's just not true. And if high sec people are too narrowminded to see their is a problem, wel, that's just sad. You see most people are NOT saying "buff null/low/wormholes" (another common mistake of the high sec paranoid, it's not just about null), because we aren't greedy entitled welfare queens. We simply would like some internal consistancy in the game we play, high sec as currently constituted doesn't fit. Highsec, exceptional and the exception. Come to highsec today~
CONCORDprotectionfreeofchargenotaxesleviesifyoumakeanaltcorporareaminerortrader Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
6680
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 18:14:00 -
[293] - Quote
Look at these guys with their cosy little subsidised monopoly squealing like little piggies at the idea of some actual competition from nullsec industry.
Look at them.
Well at least we can be honest and up front about the real motivations behind opposing a nullsec industry rebalance. No need to pretend any more... MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
masternerdguy
Inner Shadow C.L.O.N.E.
1096
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 18:15:00 -
[294] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Look at these guys with their cosy little subsidised monopoly squealing like little piggies at the idea of some actual competition from nullsec industry.
Look at them.
Well at least we can be honest and up front about the real motivations behind opposing a nullsec industry rebalance. No need to pretend any more...
But but but subsidized monopolies are good for the economy and help encourage low barriers to entry and healthy competition. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2661
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 18:26:00 -
[295] - Quote
masternerdguy wrote:Malcanis wrote:Look at these guys with their cosy little subsidised monopoly squealing like little piggies at the idea of some actual competition from nullsec industry.
Look at them.
Well at least we can be honest and up front about the real motivations behind opposing a nullsec industry rebalance. No need to pretend any more... But but but subsidized monopolies are good for the economy and help encourage low barriers to entry and healthy competition. Yep, EVE Online, Highsec is magic (so are the police) Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Hestia Mar
Calmaretto
61
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 18:57:00 -
[296] - Quote
Rain6635 wrote:it should be that high sec missions are run just for the standings, so pilots can travel through unmolested on their way back to jita. no LP or ISK rewards and bonus.
AND standings degrade over time... so you have to return to repair standings with missions periodically.
like going to the DMV or filing taxes, something that everyone has to do.
Don't be too parochial with your examples - no-one here in the UK ever goes to the DVLA (which is where we get our driving licences from).
There's no need since our licences last until we're 70...and more to the point the DVLA office is in Wales (and no-one goes there voluntarily)
In addition, the great majority of people in the UK don't file taxes, it's ripped out of our pay-packets at source. |
Mistah Ewedynao
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
305
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 19:08:00 -
[297] - Quote
I am all for a completely balanced industrial universe.
So let's have cap ship building and the ability to move them to where needed, moon goo and moon mining in...HIGH SEC!
Jump freighters too, to avoid those pesky bottlenecks.
Then we would be equal.
Well give you Concord too if you would like. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
6683
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 19:10:00 -
[298] - Quote
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:I am all for a completely balanced industrial universe.
So let's have cap ship building and the ability to move them to where needed, moon goo and moon mining in...HIGH SEC!
Jump freighters too, to avoid those pesky bottlenecks.
Then we would be equal.
Well give you Concord too if you would like.
CSAAs in hi-sec would be glorious. Let's do this. MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
6683
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 19:11:00 -
[299] - Quote
I'm completely serious. Lets get the CSM on this or whatever it takes.
Because oh god, can you imagine the reaction of the same guys who go nuts about losing a Hulk or something trivial when their loaded up CSAA gets coathangered?
MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
James Amril-Kesh
RAZOR Alliance
2984
|
Posted - 2012.12.29 19:15:00 -
[300] - Quote
ashley Eoner wrote:Peter Raptor wrote:To tell you the truth, if they "slightly" nerf hisec, it wont make any difference to player distribution, hisec has been mini-nerfed for years (lvl 4 nerfs, datacore nerfs etc etc) people are still not going to nullsec, nullsec needs a MASSIVE overhaul to attract players, nullsec is the problem. It's not the content that's the problem it's the people. The people in nullsec have decided they love a field of blues so they can kick over the sand castles of the small up and coming groups.. Then the nullsec players turn around and complain about the lack of targets. Nullsec miners crunch ABC ores in massive numbers behind a huge blue shield. The nullsecer then complains that they don't get enough for the massive amount of ABC ore they mined almost risk free. Seems to me a lot of the complains come from the ability to easily and quickly project a lot of power far from home bases. You wouldn't quite have the same sea of blue if your ability to project power was massively limited. With more risk and fewer miners your ABC ores would suddenly skyrocket in value. Without a sea of blue you'll suddenly find far more targets to shoot. And yet we have no shortage of risk or people to shoot at. Your entire premise is flawed. Phrases like "you can't nerf / buff X EVE is a Sandbox" have the same amount of meaning as "If this is a sack of potatoes then you can not carrot." - Alara IonStorm |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |