Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
4300
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 12:56:00 -
[901] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:
Individual player income is more important than alliance level income & currently that player level income is less than what is available in highsec.
Also no, under the proposed change there will be more people roaming around nullsec looking for kills than ever.
http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/Verite/influence.pngTell me you guys can't continue easily defend your rental areas down at the bottom left side of the map. With a straight face please. I'm 100% sure that we give zero fucks about people looking to kill ratters in renter space. So the answer is "yes, you will maintain rental empire". I'm not the person to ask. Why don't you shoot a mail off the mynnna & ask? He's pretty friendly & likes meeting new people. I imagine whatever change is made, the options for moving into nullsec will always be: 1. Pay someone to live there 2. Blue someone to live there 3. Get roflstomped by the existing coalitions
For those going "but provi but provi!", that's number 2, they just extend blue to cover grey so you are "blue" until you get added to the absolutely enormous list of reds..
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
2557
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 13:39:00 -
[902] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:I'm not the person to ask. Why don't you shoot a mail off the mynnna & ask? He's pretty friendly & likes meeting new people. rgr, thanks for responding. |
Celly S
Concord Attraction Services The Ditanian Alliance
286
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 01:34:00 -
[903] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Celly S wrote:Lucas Kell wrote: I don't know who's dumber, Gobbo or his fans. I'm not sure that fanaticism has anything to do with it, While I personally don't know who he is outside of his post here, his comment is entirely plausible, if there's something that he's said elsewhere that leads folks to believe he's just making a statement based on what everyone already knew was coming?, then doesn't that still validate his statement?. He may be "stating the obvious" if that's the case, but that doesn't mean he's wrong and demeaning his comment only reflects badly on the person doing it more-so than the target of the beratement. *shrugs.. So his "you knew about it from your CSMs" is validated? It's all tinfoil hattery. And while the force projection changes will make it harder to move about (but not much, interceptors can get you across the map in 15-20 minutes and we have ships stashed everywhere) it will also mean the chances of us being attacked in out deepest sov is slim, since nobody is likely to slowboat through hostile space, and multiple jumping into hostile space will leave you trapped there for a significant time.
I said his statement was plausible... the rest of it was an example of why berating someone isn't the best thing to do. as to the force projection thing, it is true that these changes are going to force people to approach things in a different manner than is currently done. Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13512
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 06:20:00 -
[904] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:So the answer is "yes, you will maintain rental empire".
With a change to occupancy sov no we wont. We replace rental empire income with taxing our own members running missions in our own space. Thats the whole point of having a bottom up income stream for allainces, it is much better for the line members and gives them a reason to want to live in the empire the fight to build and protect. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
2559
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 06:30:00 -
[905] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:X Gallentius wrote:So the answer is "yes, you will maintain rental empire". With a change to occupancy sov no we wont. We replace rental empire income with taxing our own members running missions in our own space. Thats the whole point of having a bottom up income stream for allainces, it is much better for the line members and gives them a reason to want to live in the empire the fight to build and protect. We'll see. Nothing has been revealed by CCP suggests that defending your rental empire will be difficult at all. |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2230
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 10:59:00 -
[906] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote: I don't know who's dumber, Gobbo or his fans. We all knew power projection nerfs were coming, genius. The pretty much stated it outright at fanfest. Gevlon is acting smug because he "predicted" common knowledge, connected the dots wrong so he could accuse goons of whatever tinfoil hat theory he has this time, then failed to read the part of the dev blog that states that sov will likely be changed in the exact way called for by null leadership.
It's pretty hilarious that you expect people to think the Goon elected CSM representatives don't leak inside information to their boss. Pure comedy. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13524
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 13:51:00 -
[907] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Lucas Kell wrote: I don't know who's dumber, Gobbo or his fans. We all knew power projection nerfs were coming, genius. The pretty much stated it outright at fanfest. Gevlon is acting smug because he "predicted" common knowledge, connected the dots wrong so he could accuse goons of whatever tinfoil hat theory he has this time, then failed to read the part of the dev blog that states that sov will likely be changed in the exact way called for by null leadership. It's pretty hilarious that you expect people to think the Goon elected CSM representatives don't leak inside information to their boss. Pure comedy.
Given that it would be very easy for CCP to figure this out and dump them out of the CSM staining their RL name forever with an NDA violation, yes, its rather easy to see why they don't tell alliances anything. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Plukovnik
Everyone vs Everything THE R0NIN
8
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 17:35:00 -
[908] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote: Individual player income is more important than alliance level income & currently that player level income is less than what is available in highsec.
Also no, under the proposed change there will be more people roaming around nullsec looking for kills than ever.
WRONG: High concentration of players in systems is bad for roaming. I killed hundreds of Ishtars in Deklein in past five months. Even Orcas, Tengus, Vidnicators... and believe me, the more people in system, the lower chance for a good kill, because defence is so easy when you have 30+ buddies on local. Some of worst syst+¬m to kill a ratter is JU-UWQ, where is permanently 40+ guys, often 20 or more farming at the same time. There are people in Deklein who live in one system for months and never feel the need to go to another systwm because anomalies would be occupied. If enemy comes, all they need to do is dock and reship. No effort, no coordination. Just dock,reship, warp to gate - piece of cake.
CCP should change the anomaly spawning so that no more than 6 good anoms are in system at the same time. Also, Forsaken Hubs should be bad anoms again, Havens and Sanctums should be the most sought anoms. The yield per anomaly could even be higher - just not for 20 dudes in one syst+¬m at the same time, just for the 6 who were lucky to be there first. Others would have to go looking elsewhere.
Decreasing number of anoms per system would force people spread across universe looking for unoccupied anomalies, there would be less empty system and roaming would be funnier. Also people who would want to join home defence fleet would have to travel to staging system. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
4021
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 17:58:00 -
[909] - Quote
Andski wrote:there are actual consequences for violating it and even if CCP doesn't pursue legal action, you really wouldn't want a potential employer to google your name and see "NDA breach" in the top results fry cooks aren't told what's in the big mac sauce so some people could be excused for thinking the above isn't a big deal |
Arronicus
Bitter Lemons Brothers of Tangra
1146
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 18:31:00 -
[910] - Quote
NPC space in every region? No thanks. I like the idea of different regions with different advantages and disadvantages. We don't need to make all of nullsec rapidly accessible to non-sov null just like we don't need all of null to have tons of truesec systems. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13525
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 18:41:00 -
[911] - Quote
Plukovnik wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote: Individual player income is more important than alliance level income & currently that player level income is less than what is available in highsec.
Also no, under the proposed change there will be more people roaming around nullsec looking for kills than ever.
WRONG: High concentration of players in systems is bad for roaming. I killed hundreds of Ishtars in Deklein in past five months. Even Orcas, Tengus, Vidnicators... and believe me, the more people in system, the lower chance for a good kill, because defence is so easy when you have 30+ buddies on local. Some of worst syst+¬m to kill a ratter is JU-UWQ, where is permanently 40+ guys, often 20 or more farming at the same time. There are people in Deklein who live in one system for months and never feel the need to go to another systwm because anomalies would be occupied. If enemy comes, all they need to do is dock and reship. No effort, no coordination. Just dock,reship, warp to gate - piece of cake. CCP should change the anomaly spawning so that no more than 6 good anoms are in system at the same time. Also, Forsaken Hubs should be bad anoms again, Havens and Sanctums should be the most sought anoms. The yield per anomaly could even be higher - just not for 20 dudes in one syst+¬m at the same time, just for the 6 who were lucky to be there first. Others would have to go looking elsewhere. Decreasing number of anoms per system would force people spread across universe looking for unoccupied anomalies, there would be less empty system and roaming would be funnier. Also people who would want to join home defence fleet would have to travel to staging system.
And would force empire to require hundreds to thousands of systems. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
2562
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 20:44:00 -
[912] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:And would force empire to require hundreds to thousands of systems. Is that a bad thing? Lower density of farmers over larger area leads to more targets, err, "fights". Again, there seems to be a "Pay us or we'll hold 0.0 hostage" type of vibe going on here.
The reality is that null sec entities are going to hold as much turf as they can - whether or not the specific income of each system is ridiculously high or low. The specific income only sets the rental rate on the areas they choose not to farm for themselves. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
4301
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 21:03:00 -
[913] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Lucas Kell wrote: I don't know who's dumber, Gobbo or his fans. We all knew power projection nerfs were coming, genius. The pretty much stated it outright at fanfest. Gevlon is acting smug because he "predicted" common knowledge, connected the dots wrong so he could accuse goons of whatever tinfoil hat theory he has this time, then failed to read the part of the dev blog that states that sov will likely be changed in the exact way called for by null leadership. It's pretty hilarious that you expect people to think the Goon elected CSM representatives don't leak inside information to their boss. Pure comedy. No, it's pretty hilarious that you didn't see power projection nerfs coming yourself, since during fanfest it was made pretty clear and since then it's been a pretty big topic. You want to think that because goons choice for CSM got though the vote, that a bunch of people - who are not all goons - would be willing to breach a real life legally binding document to tell us something that we already know and that will be outright explained prior to deployment for feedback.
The fact that you believe tinfoil hat theories doesn't lend them any more credibility. The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog. Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list. Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13535
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 21:31:00 -
[914] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Is that a bad thing?
That's exactly what we have now. So yea, its a very bad thing because that is what everyone wants to not happen.
X Gallentius wrote: The reality is that null sec entities are going to hold as much turf as they can - whether or not the specific income of each system is ridiculously high or low. The specific income only sets the rental rate on the areas they choose not to farm for themselves.
We have something like 30k pilots in the CFC, with only 10% ratting at a time we would need 3000 systems under your plan to house them all. That leaves just 524 systems in null for everyone else out here. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Nariya Kentaya
The Pulsar Innovation Surely You're Joking
1562
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 21:49:00 -
[915] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Is that a bad thing? That's exactly what we have now. So yea, its a very bad thing because that is what everyone wants to not happen. X Gallentius wrote: The reality is that null sec entities are going to hold as much turf as they can - whether or not the specific income of each system is ridiculously high or low. The specific income only sets the rental rate on the areas they choose not to farm for themselves.
We have something like 30k pilots in the CFC, with only 10% ratting at a time we would need 3000 systems under your plan to house them all. That leaves just 524 systems in null for everyone else out here. Not to mention, with proposed changes, renter empires will be difficult to defend, might have to start havign small regional fleets bolstered with renter "militias" at a mandatory or kicked the **** out level for quick reaction fleets.
Also, unrelated note, I hope CCP doesnt do anythign to alleviate the goon's concern with "getting new members out to our space on day 1", memebers shoudl bo considered assets/resources, and should eb forced to sit on their ass until the enxt weekly freighter convoy back into null to get out there. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13536
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 21:54:00 -
[916] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote: Also, unrelated note, I hope CCP doesnt do anythign to alleviate the goon's concern with "getting new members out to our space on day 1", memebers shoudl bo considered assets/resources, and should eb forced to sit on their ass until the enxt weekly freighter convoy back into null to get out there.
They alted their plan to get new corp members out to where the corp is. Under 30 days old you can suicide pod jump to your new corp. Over 30 days old you get to do that once a year. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
2569
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 21:57:00 -
[917] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Is that a bad thing? That's exactly what we have now. So yea, its a very bad thing because that is what everyone wants to not happen. X Gallentius wrote: The reality is that null sec entities are going to hold as much turf as they can - whether or not the specific income of each system is ridiculously high or low. The specific income only sets the rental rate on the areas they choose not to farm for themselves.
We have something like 30k pilots in the CFC, with only 10% ratting at a time we would need 3000 systems under your plan to house them all. That leaves just 524 systems in null for everyone else out here. You guys are going to hold all of the systems anyways. We both agree on that.
The only question is how much isk you're going to generate from renters while doing so, and at what threshold you're going to have to undock to defend your space (get pew).
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13536
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 21:59:00 -
[918] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:baltec1 wrote:X Gallentius wrote:Is that a bad thing? That's exactly what we have now. So yea, its a very bad thing because that is what everyone wants to not happen. X Gallentius wrote: The reality is that null sec entities are going to hold as much turf as they can - whether or not the specific income of each system is ridiculously high or low. The specific income only sets the rental rate on the areas they choose not to farm for themselves.
We have something like 30k pilots in the CFC, with only 10% ratting at a time we would need 3000 systems under your plan to house them all. That leaves just 524 systems in null for everyone else out here. You guys are going to hold all of the systems anyways. We both agree on that. The only question is how much isk you're going to generate from renters while doing so, and at what threshold you're going to have to undock to defend your space (get pew).
Under your plan it would be zero. All of that space would be needed for us alone and it most likely would not be enough. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Barton Breau
University of Caille Gallente Federation
77
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 22:18:00 -
[919] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
Given that it would be very easy for CCP to figure this out and dump them out of the CSM staining their RL name forever with an NDA violation, yes, its rather easy to see why they don't tell alliances anything.
... because moving from "possible but unlikely" to "absurd" helps your argument :) |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
2569
|
Posted - 2014.10.03 22:40:00 -
[920] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Under your plan it would be zero. All of that space would be needed for us alone and it most likely would not be enough. Again, you are posting some sort of extortion threat to CCP. "Give us rich farms in null sec or we won't let anybody else use get in."
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13547
|
Posted - 2014.10.04 06:37:00 -
[921] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:baltec1 wrote:Under your plan it would be zero. All of that space would be needed for us alone and it most likely would not be enough. Again, you are posting some sort of extortion threat to CCP. "Give us rich farms in null sec or we won't let anybody else use get in."
No I am telling you what would have to happen. You cannot shrink our empire and not deal with over population and the fact that the space simply cannot support even a fraction of our members. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
1430
|
Posted - 2014.10.04 07:01:00 -
[922] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Andski wrote:there are actual consequences for violating it and even if CCP doesn't pursue legal action, you really wouldn't want a potential employer to google your name and see "NDA breach" in the top results fry cooks aren't told what's in the big mac sauce so some people could be excused for thinking the above isn't a big deal I hear McDonalds in iceland is adding tears to theirs. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
2574
|
Posted - 2014.10.04 07:40:00 -
[923] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:X Gallentius wrote:baltec1 wrote:Under your plan it would be zero. All of that space would be needed for us alone and it most likely would not be enough. Again, you are posting some sort of extortion threat to CCP. "Give us rich farms in null sec or we won't let anybody else use get in." No I am telling you what would have to happen. You cannot shrink our empire and not deal with over population and the fact that the space simply cannot support even a fraction of our members. And yet you have so much space.... hmmm... Maybe there isn't a link between being able to support your base and the number of systems you'll own. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13547
|
Posted - 2014.10.04 08:04:00 -
[924] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: And yet you have so much space.... hmmm... Maybe there isn't a link between being able to support your base and the number of systems you'll own.
If you had paid any attention over the last week you would know that the vast bulk of systems in sov null are so crappy that you can earn more isk running level 3 missions in high sec. It still doesn't change the fact that even if the systems were worth ratting in they could still only host at the very most 10 people. If you want to shrink the CFC down to just being able to hold Deklein then you are going to have to deal with the fact that you are going to have 30,000 trying to live in just 80-90 systems. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Jandice Ymladris
Aurora Arcology
892
|
Posted - 2014.10.04 08:34:00 -
[925] - Quote
I believe someone's missing a view here: CFC has a huge memberlist, so no matter what system you implement, the space they'll occupy will always be large, simply due to the amount of manpower they can call on at any time.
The jumprange change will undoubtedly have effects on CFC, perhaps they'll relinquish some bad fringe systems to bold adventurous sov entities, in order to establish a better border that they can defend much better (which might also include taking systems to get a nice, defendable border going) But as long as CFC commands such a huge pool of members, they're not in any danger of falling apart or loosing large parts of space, no matter the system you introduce.
What does matter tho, is making a system where it's viable for smaller entities to exist in null, to offer a more constant pressure to the large entites, keeping them on their toes. NPC nullsec offers this. The changes to the jumpranges can also help, as the big coalitions can't just blindly jump hundreds of capitals on a small threat. They now got to run a cost/effective analysis before doing so, no more dumping 100 caps when 10 would do. The Yulai Incident, when Zombies defied Concord -áNew Eden Capsuleer writing contest! Deadline 15 october! |
Deck Cadelanne
Exigent Circumstances CAStabouts
48
|
Posted - 2014.10.04 10:34:00 -
[926] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:X Gallentius wrote:baltec1 wrote:Under your plan it would be zero. All of that space would be needed for us alone and it most likely would not be enough. Again, you are posting some sort of extortion threat to CCP. "Give us rich farms in null sec or we won't let anybody else use get in." No I am telling you what would have to happen. You cannot shrink our empire and not deal with over population and the fact that the space simply cannot support even a fraction of our members.
Maybe a simplistic question, but given the history of CFC itself, why would anyone assume that it is somehow immune to change?
I would note that I fly down through Goon space a lot, even right through the heart of Fountain from time to time, and 90% of those systems are empty, as in not a single pilot in local, 90% of the time. Your claim seems to have little factual basis based on simple observation. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13548
|
Posted - 2014.10.04 10:41:00 -
[927] - Quote
Deck Cadelanne wrote:
Maybe a simplistic question, but given the history of CFC itself, why would anyone assume that it is somehow immune to change?
I would note that I fly down through Goon space a lot, even right through the heart of Fountain from time to time, and 90% of those systems are empty, as in not a single pilot in local, 90% of the time. Your claim seems to have little factual basis based on simple observation.
The power projection nerf wont have much impact due to the way we operate. We have a vast subcap fleet which will not be badly impacted by this and it is deployed in sigs across our space so we can deploy a fleet or three to any attempt upon our sov/assets rather quickly. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Deck Cadelanne
Exigent Circumstances CAStabouts
48
|
Posted - 2014.10.04 12:26:00 -
[928] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Deck Cadelanne wrote:
Maybe a simplistic question, but given the history of CFC itself, why would anyone assume that it is somehow immune to change?
I would note that I fly down through Goon space a lot, even right through the heart of Fountain from time to time, and 90% of those systems are empty, as in not a single pilot in local, 90% of the time. Your claim seems to have little factual basis based on simple observation.
The power projection nerf wont have much impact due to the way we operate. We have a vast subcap fleet which will not be badly impacted by this and it is deployed in sigs across our space so we can deploy a fleet or three to any attempt upon our sov/assets rather quickly.
OK, but doesn't this suggest that the nature of warfare and conflict is likely to become more dynamic because of the changes? If an attacker doesn't have to worry about being instantly hot-dropped by a massive capital fleet when they decide to attack some remote system and in fact could even plan blockades/ambushes on the approaches to counter said "vast subcap fleet" trying to get there, that will change the strategic balance. Perhaps in a major way.
Surely, that's a good thing?
In fact, if these changes will have no impact on your space tyranny at all, as you suggest, why then is there any problem with them? |
Hemmo Paskiainen
463
|
Posted - 2014.10.04 13:35:00 -
[929] - Quote
My proposed idea of adding more npc space in certain regions, got trilled away back in 2011, just say'ng. Just like faster warps, tech effect warnings, and a gazillion other **** like that. How's your 'life' now in mommies basement CCP FIX BLACK OPS FFS
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13559
|
Posted - 2014.10.05 06:30:00 -
[930] - Quote
Deck Cadelanne wrote:
OK, but doesn't this suggest that the nature of warfare and conflict is likely to become more dynamic because of the changes? If an attacker doesn't have to worry about being instantly hot-dropped by a massive capital fleet when they decide to attack some remote system and in fact could even plan blockades/ambushes on the approaches to counter said "vast subcap fleet" trying to get there, that will change the strategic balance. Perhaps in a major way.
Surely, that's a good thing?
In fact, if these changes will have no impact on your space tyranny at all, as you suggest, why then is there any problem with them?
Oh things will change. Expect new and interesting uses for capitals. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |