Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Beofryn Sedorak
Sedorak Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 15:22:00 -
[121] - Quote
Kelmurdoch wrote:I think the Itty IV/Miasmos will see alot less use than the other variants. With the exception of gas it simply doesn't hold enough isk/m in value to be useful for something like ice mining while being role restricted and otherwise unable to hold the refined ice products.
Increase the base to 60k or so and things are better.
Jetcan mining.
Your assumption is incredible shortsighted.
|
Beofryn Sedorak
Sedorak Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 15:31:00 -
[122] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:Why not just make the "extra" Iterons into ORE industrials, and require them to use the ORE Industrial skill?
I can see reading is very challenging for you. Your thought is about as far away form original as it gets, and it has been brought up, debated, put to bed, many times over.
TL;DR Stop wasting peoples time with your unoriginal ideas because you're too lazy to read. |
Beofryn Sedorak
Sedorak Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 15:42:00 -
[123] - Quote
Photon Ceray wrote:Rebalancing haulers is a good and welcome change.
The renaming is interesting, rather un-intuitive but I guess people will get used to it.
Just one thing though, please make the specialized haulers have a significant advantage in hauling the specific content!
Otherwise, why anyone use a specialized hauler that can only carry 30k when they could carry 50k with a general hauler that only requires industrial IV. "just coz it's cool" is not enough :)
so IMO, specialized haulers should be able to hold at least 25% more than the biggest general bay to be worth it.
First off, none of the specialized bays are under 40km3, secondly, You get an additional 10% per level. Please do your research before ranting. kthx.
|
Beofryn Sedorak
Sedorak Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 15:47:00 -
[124] - Quote
Gogela wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:Lady Zarrina wrote:I realize these changes need to be done for various reasons. But will tech 1 industrial ever be more than just a floating loot pinata? I certainly hope so. Being a super stealthy or hard to kill loot pinata is the role of T2. Then what would be the motivation to get a blockade runner or DST? I think these changes are fine and make sense. I still think you need a mini-freighter class... something like a 100k m3 cargo hold retailing for about 100 mil to bridge the gap between standard indys and freighters for hauler types.
It's a pretty decent pirce gapo between 100mil and an Orca, but the Orca fills that role quite well. Perfect skills with rigs and expanders brings the general cargo bay to 90km3, + the fleet hangar 40km3 |
Beofryn Sedorak
Sedorak Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 15:53:00 -
[125] - Quote
Radgette wrote:god damn those names ><
you do realise noone is gonna call them that right. well maybe some noobs
I'm kind of confused though:
you go through the modules removing the different names saying it's hard for noobs to remember all the new names then you add a bunch of new names to the indy ships :P
Surely the normal "Iteron" should keep it's name as it is the progenitor of the class, a mark 5 with no mark one or reference to it seems strange also I understand changing the names of the ships getting dedicated bays to differenciate but the Itty 1 is just a standard hauler so ye no idea why your renaming it.
Believing that no one will use the new names is an incredibly ignorant claim born obviously out of your general unhappiness with no ragard for logic or reason.
Despite having read the OP (Which I have to assume you did because you're aware of the name changes) and still having "No idea why *you're renaming it [them]." Is just more evidence supporting the conclusion that you're just being whiney and immature. |
Beofryn Sedorak
Sedorak Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 15:57:00 -
[126] - Quote
Vyktor Abyss wrote:I'm sorry for not following the discussion etc
The only question I've got is:
Like with T2 cruisers being made slightly redundant by T1 cruiser changes, doesn't this set of changes make the T2 Industrials kind of redundant and overpriced for their 'roles'?
Perhaps if you could list the maximum cargo capacities (with full sets of expanders) for all the haulage types, and contrast that with the T2 haulers I'd comprehend better...
But right now, I'm feeling my rather pricey T2 rigged Occator and Viator just became rather obsolete... Or am I wrong?
Cheers.
T2's are designed for hostile space, not maximum cargo. Fitting them for maximum cargo ruins their advantage in tank. So my oppinion would be that you are wrong. |
Beofryn Sedorak
Sedorak Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 15:59:00 -
[127] - Quote
Sable Moran wrote:Valterra Craven wrote:If you don't have the resources to do something correctly the first time, then don't waste time on it till you do. If the human race had followed that rule we would still live in caves.
While incredibly short sided and quite definately incorrect, I can appreciate the sentiment of your statement. |
Tsabrock
Circle of Friends
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 16:00:00 -
[128] - Quote
Having just returned to the game, I'm afraid I wasn't able to debate these changes. I wasn't even aware they were in the works until this Dev post.
That said, I'm a bit on the fence with these changes. I've always felt that the different Empire ships were a little too homogenous - when a new mechanic hit, all races got the new mechanic at the same time. From a game play standpoint, this makes sense, since you don't favor one race over the other, but from a lore/continuity standpoint, it didn't make much sense at all.
Now, just to make sure I'm following all of this right - it seems Gallente got the most benefit out of this change by far. Minmatar got a new Ammo-hauling ship (an interesting idea, but not sure how useful it'll be. Can it haul drones too?). Caldari don't really get any new ships, but their Mark II gets renamed, and the Mark I gets Missile slots. I didn't see Amarr getting anything at all? Did they get left in the cold?
At first glance, it seems that those people with high Gallente Industrial skills will benefit from this the most. This seems like an odd design choice, considering balance has been so important in the past. Am I missing something?
Also, how will this impact the balance of Transports. Blockade Runners still have their role as the ultimate sneaky transport, but DST's need to compete with the revamped T1's sturdier hulls. |
Beofryn Sedorak
Sedorak Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 16:03:00 -
[129] - Quote
Photon Ceray wrote:To be honest, t1 inudstrials aren't worthy of being named after greek gods and stuff, these names should be reserved for PVP ships.
Also, the names will create some confusion, especially for newer player.
It's fine giving them special names, but make the names more intuitive and related to what the ships do, because not all people read the dev blog and even those who did still don't know latin and will forget what the names stand for 10 mins after reading.
I hope you at CCP won't get stuck over the names of ships, that didn't take from the development budget - I hope, if it did then you need to hire me instantly and i'll be naming everything for you!.
Your arogance on top of your ignorance is getting irritating. Please accept that CCP is doing what they're doing. They've been doing it for 10+years on 3 AAA titles. They likely have a better sense of how to/not to do things than yourself.
As for people remembering the names, People will learn the new names in the exact same manner they've learned the other names of ships. When it matters to them.
|
Valkyrs
Deep Vein Trading
67
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 16:32:00 -
[130] - Quote
Good move, the training time difference was a small consideration back when I started but ultimately trivial down the road.
I have 83 mammoths. And each one is uglier then the next.
I'm glad I will be able to use more variety, for specific tasks.
Thanks CCP, keep up the good work! |
|
Sorcerror
SteelFactory Inc. Legion of xXDEATHXx
2
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 17:29:00 -
[131] - Quote
There still more need for more specific cargo industrials on Caldari/amarr side (I have like 9 chars with mostly caldari spec): Pos Fuel Capital Components Moon Materials Pos Modules/Poses/Constructions/Sov
|
Contik Ardman
xell network seven V.e.G.A.
5
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 18:52:00 -
[132] - Quote
Will the Special Edition Industrials be renamed, too?
- Iteron Mark IV Amastris Edition -> Miasmos Amastris Edition
- Iteron Mark IV Quafe Ultra Edition -> ...
- Iteron Mark IV Quafe Ultramarine Edition -> ...
|
Silivar Karkun
Imperium Aeternam Phantom Armada
87
|
Posted - 2013.07.17 19:51:00 -
[133] - Quote
Contik Ardman wrote:Will the Special Edition Industrials be renamed, too? - Iteron Mark IV Amastris Edition -> Miasmos Amastris Edition
- Iteron Mark IV Quafe Ultra Edition -> ...
- Iteron Mark IV Quafe Ultramarine Edition -> ...
special edition ships will remain as they are.... |
Sabriz Adoudel
Paragon Blitz
537
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 01:43:00 -
[134] - Quote
CCP Eterne wrote:Industrials serve a very important role in EVE Online, serving to transport goods and materials across the cluster. As part of the continuing Tiericide initiative, all Industrials will soon be rebalanced to give them specific roles. As part of this rebalancing, some of the ships will be renamed to reflect the new order. In his first ever dev blog, CCP Rise lays out all the changes.
Named to reflect the New Order? I can get behind this.
'The James 315' - a transport ship with a bay specifically designed to hold Catalyst hulls. (5500k m^3, can only hold unpackaged ships)
An enemy is just a friend that you stab in the front. |
Sabriz Adoudel
Paragon Blitz
537
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 01:44:00 -
[135] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Makoto Priano wrote:AWESOME.
Now-- AHACs? Pretty please? And let's get those numbers released for medium rail rebalance? :D Unless CSM raises something major in the next day or two you should have some new stuff to look at before the end of the week =)
Now as someone that loves flying an Ishtar, and that is sitting on plenty of HAC BPCs, this makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
An enemy is just a friend that you stab in the front. |
Octoven
Phoenix Productions Headshot Gaming
169
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 09:17:00 -
[136] - Quote
Fade Toblack wrote:Natasha Maraska wrote:So are any other of the other races getting any love on this? That's nice for Galls and ok for Cald, but everyone else only having 2 haulers and no specializations? Seems like forcing purists to have to buy and train more skills just to be equal... No, you've got a general hauler with a large cargo bay for every race. If you want a ship with a specialized bonus you cross-train, it works the same way that if you want a bonus to ECM you need to train Caldari etc. If you want to be able to switch between different bonuses, you need to be able to fly multiple races. I'm sure that CCP will spread any future bonused hulls around the other races, but there's no requirements for new bonuses at the moment, and no art department time to do new hull designs.
True that; however, each race has equal numbers of ships in their combat classes. 7 frigates, 2 destroyers, 4 cruisers, 3 battlecruisers, 3 battleships. The scorpion is the only BS to give ECM bonus making you cross train; however, the same could be said about the geddon and neuts...the point being that each race has equal quantities of ship regardless of specialization.
The same should be true for industrials as well. It would be one thing to give the gall a specialized ship and nothing to the rest but in this example the gall are getting 3 while minmatar get one, the caldari and amarr sit back with their hands out still. From what ive seen on the bays, there are 4 types of specialized bays, i think its more then adequate to split them equally among the four races. Let the minmatar keep the Hoarder's ammo bay, let one of the old itties keep a bay perhaps PI, give the caldari the mineral one maybe and the amarr the ore bay.
Thus you would need to eliminate 2 ships out of the gall lineup and craete models and 2 new assets for amarr and caldari respectively. Each race would have equal ships that way. PLUS if you fly caldari and want the PI indy you STILL need to cross train as you pointed to the ecm example; however, if you fly mostly gallenete and want a mineral bay you would cross train to fill that role. Either way I'd prefer that setup then the one proposed. |
Lag Ellecon
Gemini Mining and Manufacturing
13
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 09:22:00 -
[137] - Quote
The changes seem interesting not shure about the ammo bay . But the bays do seem like a good idea How about allowing your fleet members to open the bays similar to the Orca |
Waldemar Caldari
Havana Club International
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 09:33:00 -
[138] - Quote
Please, stops with the nonsense!
Read the ships at place and puts!
Nevertheless, please, makes simply new ex-tenders, for the different loading kinds! This would be the most sensible(meaningful), and we would have ours needing(requiring) navigates(has a slash) we for different purposes(targets)!!!
Quote:I am German of languages players, I use a translator there I no English is able |
Waldemar Caldari
Havana Club International
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 10:05:00 -
[139] - Quote
English whom you would have, however, now the choice between 5 different ships (specifically) or you have a ship and the respective ex-tenders / Rigs what you would prefer?
Deutsch wen du aber jetzt die Wahl zwischen 5 verschiedenen Schiffen(spezifisch) h+ñttest oder du hast ein Schiff und die jeweiligen Extender/Rigs was w++rdest du vorziehen? |
Kusum Fawn
State War Academy Caldari State
339
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 14:27:00 -
[140] - Quote
I just want to put this out there From the dev Blog
Dev Blog wrote: You can expect to see all of this on Tranquility for our Odyssey 1.1 release coming up later this summer. Hope you enjoy the changes!
See you in space o/
CCP Rise
why is this not going to sisi for feedback? Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
|
|
Infinite Force
Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance
639
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 15:18:00 -
[141] - Quote
Kusum Fawn wrote:I just want to put this out there From the dev Blog Dev Blog wrote: You can expect to see all of this on Tranquility for our Odyssey 1.1 release coming up later this summer. Hope you enjoy the changes!
See you in space o/
CCP Rise
why is this not going to sisi for feedback?
Because our feedback is consistantly ignored when it makes sense. HROLT CEO Live Free; Die Proud
Hammer Mineral Compression - The only way to go! |
Siresa Talesi
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
53
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 23:45:00 -
[142] - Quote
Beofryn Sedorak wrote:Radgette wrote:god damn those names ><
you do realise noone is gonna call them that right. well maybe some noobs
I'm kind of confused though:
you go through the modules removing the different names saying it's hard for noobs to remember all the new names then you add a bunch of new names to the indy ships :P
Surely the normal "Iteron" should keep it's name as it is the progenitor of the class, a mark 5 with no mark one or reference to it seems strange also I understand changing the names of the ships getting dedicated bays to differenciate but the Itty 1 is just a standard hauler so ye no idea why your renaming it. Believing that no one will use the new names is an incredibly ignorant claim born obviously out of your general unhappiness with no regard for logic or reason. Despite having read the OP (Which I have to assume you did because you're aware of the name changes) and still having "No idea why *you're renaming it [them]." Is just more evidence supporting the conclusion that you're just being whiney and immature.
That's pretty severe; I wouldn't call the idea of people not using the new names "ignorant" at all; quite the opposite really. It's human nature to resist change, and history has shown that when we try giving a new name to something old, it takes a long time before it's use is common (if it ever catches on).
For example, back in 2000, in order to try to overcome negative connotations for marketing purposes, the California Prune Board announced that they were officially changing the name "prunes" to "dried plums." The new name was supposed to be more appealing. They spent over $10 million on a campaign to promote this change.
To this day, I don't know anyone who calls them "dried plums." In fact, I have a hard time finding anyone who even remembers that this change took place. This is regardless of the fact that many growers still label their products as "dried plums;" people still just call them prunes, even if the label says differently.
So you can change the name, you can rewrite the labels, but when people see something familiar, they will continue to call it what they have always called it, despite any efforts to enforce a change. |
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative Trans-Stellar Industries
489
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 02:31:00 -
[143] - Quote
First and foremost, I like these changes far more than the previous options.
I love that it's not completely 'balanced', and gives a bit more racial flavor.
I don't care much for the name change, but their names aren't much to me one way or another.
Only thing I'd really like to see added to this, is possibly combining some of the ideas from your playerbase into a new class of industrial hauler for ORE which is more unique than your standard parts-movers. Taking some of those ship fitting and jump fuel ideas we keep harping on for smaller-than-orca ships.
Really let the Industrial class begin to flourish. If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality. That "griefer/thief" is probably more sane than you are. How screwed up is that? |
Beofryn Sedorak
Sedorak Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 04:51:00 -
[144] - Quote
Siresa Talesi wrote:Beofryn Sedorak wrote:Radgette wrote:god damn those names ><
you do realise noone is gonna call them that right. well maybe some noobs
I'm kind of confused though:
you go through the modules removing the different names saying it's hard for noobs to remember all the new names then you add a bunch of new names to the indy ships :P
Surely the normal "Iteron" should keep it's name as it is the progenitor of the class, a mark 5 with no mark one or reference to it seems strange also I understand changing the names of the ships getting dedicated bays to differenciate but the Itty 1 is just a standard hauler so ye no idea why your renaming it. Believing that no one will use the new names is an incredibly ignorant claim born obviously out of your general unhappiness with no regard for logic or reason. Despite having read the OP (Which I have to assume you did because you're aware of the name changes) and still having "No idea why *you're renaming it [them]." Is just more evidence supporting the conclusion that you're just being whiney and immature. That's pretty severe; I wouldn't call the idea of people not using the new names "ignorant" at all; quite the opposite really. It's human nature to resist change, and history has shown that when we try giving a new name to something old, it takes a long time before it's use is common (if it ever catches on). For example, back in 2000, in order to try to overcome negative connotations for marketing purposes, the California Prune Board announced that they were officially changing the name "prunes" to "dried plums." The new name was supposed to be more appealing. They spent over $10 million on a campaign to promote this change. To this day, I don't know anyone who calls them "dried plums." In fact, I have a hard time finding anyone who even remembers that this change took place. This is regardless of the fact that many growers still label their products as "dried plums;" people still just call them prunes, even if the label says differently. So you can change the name, you can rewrite the labels, but when people see something familiar, they will continue to call it what they have always called it, despite any efforts to enforce a change.
Your rant hinges on the premise of wide usage, where as the discussion is about "no one". Your entire rant is invalid. |
Kaillon Huren
Malleus Astorum
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 15:45:00 -
[145] - Quote
I have 3 main uses for Industrial haulers;
1) Missions; according to eve survival the largest story line mission for Level 4 is 40k, never seen a T1 hauler carry that in one go.
2) Mining assist; the fact that I see one ship carrying Ore and another carrying minerals, is cruel and laughable, so every new high sec miner has to have 2 hauling ships for one operation, not nice.
3) My most important need, a hauler that can move ships from a high sec trade hub to areas of danger, packaged ships and ammo, modules, no T2 hauler seems capable of that. The cloaked Prowler, 3 frigs at best, the Mastodon, higher capacity but still not safe enough to get through low sec safely.
My corp. and alliance use a collection of Freighters, Jump freighters and carriers to get ships and modules to low sec, an absurd level of skills for a simple task, but they have no alternative.
I would like to be able to carry a reasonable amount of small ships in the cloaked T2 version if possible, short distances from hi-sec to low-sec, otherwise Industrial hauling has no value to me. Although this hope is more in the area of T2 Industrials, I don't believe this will happen.
Also to a previous poster, who implores us to trust CCP as they have a great record in updates and patches. I personally have never been privileged to fly a single ship that has been improved by CCP, only nerfed and made less useful or valueable ever. Rifter nerf, Rupture nerf, Tracking Enhancer nerf (for minmatar ships that shoot in falloff 99% of time) Drake nerf, Hurricane nerf, Typhoon changes, Medium missiles nerfed. The best result as a Minmatar pilot I have EVER experienced in a patch or update, has been "mostly unchanged". EVER. So how about a reduced subscription for Minmatar races as an apology. |
Erik Finnegan
Polytechnique Gallenteenne
93
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 16:16:00 -
[146] - Quote
The renaming is a win and I like how the new roles are set up. Best possible solution at this point for industrials. |
Siresa Talesi
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
54
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 17:27:00 -
[147] - Quote
Beofryn Sedorak wrote:Siresa Talesi wrote:Beofryn Sedorak wrote:Radgette wrote:god damn those names ><
you do realise noone is gonna call them that right. well maybe some noobs
I'm kind of confused though:
you go through the modules removing the different names saying it's hard for noobs to remember all the new names then you add a bunch of new names to the indy ships :P
Surely the normal "Iteron" should keep it's name as it is the progenitor of the class, a mark 5 with no mark one or reference to it seems strange also I understand changing the names of the ships getting dedicated bays to differenciate but the Itty 1 is just a standard hauler so ye no idea why your renaming it. Believing that no one will use the new names is an incredibly ignorant claim born obviously out of your general unhappiness with no regard for logic or reason. Despite having read the OP (Which I have to assume you did because you're aware of the name changes) and still having "No idea why *you're renaming it [them]." Is just more evidence supporting the conclusion that you're just being whiney and immature. That's pretty severe; I wouldn't call the idea of people not using the new names "ignorant" at all; quite the opposite really. It's human nature to resist change, and history has shown that when we try giving a new name to something old, it takes a long time before it's use is common (if it ever catches on). For example, back in 2000, in order to try to overcome negative connotations for marketing purposes, the California Prune Board announced that they were officially changing the name "prunes" to "dried plums." The new name was supposed to be more appealing. They spent over $10 million on a campaign to promote this change. To this day, I don't know anyone who calls them "dried plums." In fact, I have a hard time finding anyone who even remembers that this change took place. This is regardless of the fact that many growers still label their products as "dried plums;" people still just call them prunes, even if the label says differently. So you can change the name, you can rewrite the labels, but when people see something familiar, they will continue to call it what they have always called it, despite any efforts to enforce a change. Your rant hinges on the premise of wide usage, where as the discussion is about "no one". Your entire rant is invalid.
Um, ok, not really sure where I was "ranting;" I was just pointing out an example illustrating that changing the names of well-known items doesn't always take right away. I wasn't even commenting on whether I thought the new names are good or not, I just made an observation about human nature, and demonstrated that there is valid reason to assume that at least at first, these new names might not be widely used.
Frankly, I think you need to just calm down a little; in calling people "incredibly ignorant," devoid of "logic or reason," and identifying simple statements as "ranting," you seem to be taking this whole name issue a little too personal than is healthy, and are demonstrating some of the characteristics of which you have accused others. |
Antei Thantonne
EVE University Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 18:26:00 -
[148] - Quote
I'm so very impressed by the process that led to this re-balance. It's amazing to look back at the original Round 1 and Round 2 proposals, and see how much they changed in response to CCP staff and players communicating, thinking, and working together. I look forward to seeing more of these expansion/re-balancing monsterthreads in the future! |
Estella Osoka
Deep Void Merc Syndicate Villore Accords
124
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 19:03:00 -
[149] - Quote
Beofryn Sedorak wrote:Gogela wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:Lady Zarrina wrote:I realize these changes need to be done for various reasons. But will tech 1 industrial ever be more than just a floating loot pinata? I certainly hope so. Being a super stealthy or hard to kill loot pinata is the role of T2. Then what would be the motivation to get a blockade runner or DST? I think these changes are fine and make sense. I still think you need a mini-freighter class... something like a 100k m3 cargo hold retailing for about 100 mil to bridge the gap between standard indys and freighters for hauler types. It's a pretty decent price gap between 100mil and an Orca, but the Orca fills that role quite well. Perfect skills with rigs and expanders brings the general cargo bay to 90km3, + the fleet hangar 40km3
Orca has a 400k m3 Ship Maintenance Bay. |
Beofryn Sedorak
Sedorak Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.21 03:28:00 -
[150] - Quote
Kaillon Huren wrote:I have 3 main uses for Industrial haulers;
1) Missions; according to eve survival the largest story line mission for Level 4 is 40k, never seen a T1 hauler carry that in one go.
2) Mining assist; the fact that I see one ship carrying Ore and another carrying minerals, is cruel and laughable, so every new high sec miner has to have 2 hauling ships for one operation, not nice.
3) My most important need, a hauler that can move ships from a high sec trade hub to areas of danger, packaged ships and ammo, modules, no T2 hauler seems capable of that. The cloaked Prowler, 3 frigs at best, the Mastodon, higher capacity but still not safe enough to get through low sec safely.
My corp. and alliance use a collection of Freighters, Jump freighters and carriers to get ships and modules to low sec, an absurd level of skills for a simple task, but they have no alternative.
I would like to be able to carry a reasonable amount of small ships in the cloaked T2 version if possible, short distances from hi-sec to low-sec, otherwise Industrial hauling has no value to me. Although this hope is more in the area of T2 Industrials, I don't believe this will happen.
Also to a previous poster, who implores us to trust CCP as they have a great record in updates and patches. I personally have never been privileged to fly a single ship that has been improved by CCP, only nerfed and made less useful or valueable ever. Rifter nerf, Rupture nerf, Tracking Enhancer nerf (for minmatar ships that shoot in falloff 99% of time) Drake nerf, Hurricane nerf, Typhoon changes, Medium missiles nerfed. The best result as a Minmatar pilot I have EVER experienced in a patch or update, has been "mostly unchanged". EVER. So how about a reduced subscription for Minmatar races as an apology.
1) Currently itty 5 with gallente indy 4 and 2 t2 rigs and 1 t1 rig exceeds 40km3
2) You don't "need" to use the specialized ships to haul ore and minerals, so low level pilots will just use a general purpose hauler like thay've always done.
3) That's part of the balance of EVE, every economy needs "Money sinks" to help alleviate all the currency that gets generated out of thin air to help manage inflation.
4) The fact that you're always on the wrong side of the imbalance when it comes to ships and weapons is your own fault, not CCP's. Please stop whining because you can't have your unfair gameplay anymore.
In conclusion: Your rant is very poorly thought out and has a lot of holes. Please spend more time thinking through your comments to help avoid embarrassing situations that reflect poorly on you. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |