Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rek Seven
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
2168
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 08:22:56 -
[1] - Quote
Both the mobile cynosural inhibitor and the scan inhibitors have seen very little use since they were released. A look at the market show that there are less than 200 units of each device available for sale. To me it's clear that these devices need to be changed, and i'm unsure why CCP have ignored them for so long.
Both modules are a single use item, yet they have a price tag in excess of 20 million isk. I think CCP should make both these items re-usable (i.e. you can scoop it when you are finished), just like the mobile depot or drastically reduce their price.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Iain Cariaba
2866
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 08:33:20 -
[2] - Quote
They're actually quite good where they're at, and fulfill their intended purpose. The fact that meta has drifted away from what they were intended to do doesn't mean they need fixed. They just need to wait til the meta shifts back again.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
|
Rek Seven
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
2168
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 09:00:44 -
[3] - Quote
Can you explain how you came to the conclusion of them being "good where they are at"?
I'm not saying they can't do their job, I'm saying that their disposable nature and high price make them a relatively unused time. I hope that ccp don't consider used features to be working as intended and i doubt the meta has anything to do with this particular issue, as this is a cost and game mechanics issue.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Pleasure Hub Node-514
Pleasure Hub Hotline
52
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 09:11:27 -
[4] - Quote
I'd opt for being able to scoop them.
'One night hauler' The tell all story of a pleasure bot in Jita 4-4
|
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
959
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 09:36:05 -
[5] - Quote
Pleasure Hub Node-514 wrote:I'd opt for being able to scoop them. If that was possible there wouldn't be any gatecamps that wouldn't use them.
EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
|
Pleasure Hub Node-514
Pleasure Hub Hotline
52
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 10:16:57 -
[6] - Quote
Arya Regnar wrote:Pleasure Hub Node-514 wrote:I'd opt for being able to scoop them. If that was possible there wouldn't be any gatecamps that wouldn't use them. So check the d-scan. If there's an inhibitor popping up on the direction of the gate, warp to a perch for a visual check of the gate.
'One night hauler' The tell all story of a pleasure bot in Jita 4-4
|
Rek Seven
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
2169
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 10:54:11 -
[7] - Quote
Plus, the cyno inhibitors can't be anchored within 75km of a gate, so it's not a big deal.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
1749
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 13:41:22 -
[8] - Quote
scan inhibitors are far to expencive but we use the cyno jamers a lot
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
780
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 13:56:08 -
[9] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Both modules are a single use item, yet they have a price tag in excess of 20 million isk. Cost is a relative thing, when you have billions of ISK worth of ships at risk that you are wanting to help protect 20 million is chump pocket change.
I would dispute your claim that these are in a bad place because you used market data and not actual use data. Why?
Perhaps they are rare on the market because most groups that use them have a BPO, or access to BPC's. Every group I know that uses them has a BPO.
Since these are essentially worthless in high sec why would you make and sell tools like this that will end up in the hands of your enemy?
There are many modules in EvE that see very little use does that mean that CCP should "fix" all of them?
Because they see little use does that really mean they are broken and in need of being fixed? or does it simply mean that players have found better ways of dealing with the same problem? |
Shalmon Aliatus
Bluestar Enterprises The Craftsmen
11
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 13:59:38 -
[10] - Quote
Also market data doesn't say much. If I was an entity that uses a lot of inhibitors I would just produce them and store them at a corp office or make them avaible via alliance/corp contracts. Since there aren't that many buy orders either, I guess there is not a huge amount of people that need/use them and the onces that do just build them. |
|
Rek Seven
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
2170
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 14:56:49 -
[11] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Both modules are a single use item, yet they have a price tag in excess of 20 million isk. Cost is a relative thing, when you have billions of ISK worth of ships at risk that you are wanting to help protect 20 million is chump pocket change. I would dispute your claim that these are in a bad place because you used market data and not actual use data. Why? Perhaps they are rare on the market because most groups that use them have a BPO, or access to BPC's. Every group I know that uses them has a BPO. Since these are essentially worthless in high sec why would you make and sell tools like this that will end up in the hands of your enemy? There are many modules in EvE that see very little use does that mean that CCP should "fix" all of them? Because they see little use does that really mean they are broken and in need of being fixed? or does it simply mean that players have found better ways of dealing with the same problem?
Fair points... But where am i supposed to get use data from?
Obviously things like cost are relative and if the cost of a cyno jammer is chump change when trying to protect an expensive fleet, then i don't see what gating them behind a pay wall and placing heavy mechanic restrictions brings to the game.
If they were re usable, their stats (e.g. ehp) and cost could be amended to make sure their use doesn't become too wide spread, if that is the fear.
I agree that people who use them are just building their own, so keeping them expensive/single use is doing nothing but providing a minuscule isk sink.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Iain Cariaba
2868
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 15:32:15 -
[12] - Quote
Pleasure Hub Node-514 wrote:Arya Regnar wrote:Pleasure Hub Node-514 wrote:I'd opt for being able to scoop them. If that was possible there wouldn't be any gatecamps that wouldn't use them. So check the d-scan. If there's an inhibitor popping up on the direction of the gate, warp to a perch for a visual check of the gate. If you could scoop scan inhibitors, I'd have no problem dropping half a billion isk on them and seeding the system I'm camping with quite a few of them. The "see if there's one towards the gate" would be pointless because there'd be dozens of them. It'd be a pretty safe investment, too. Bring alt in blockade runner, seed system, and scoop them when done or people start shooting at them.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
|
Iain Cariaba
2868
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 15:36:07 -
[13] - Quote
First off, cost should never be used as a criteria for balancing something. That simply leads to the "he who spends the most, wins" scenario that plague most other MMOs.
Secondly,Rek Seven wrote:I agree that people who use them are just building their own, so keeping them expensive/single use is doing nothing but providing a minuscule isk sink. EvE needs more isk sinks, not fewer. Yes, the sink provided by these inexpensive, single use items isn't the largets, but every little bit helps.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
|
Rek Seven
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
2170
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 15:43:02 -
[14] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:First off, cost should never be used as a criteria for balancing something. That simply leads to the "he who spends the most, wins" scenario that plague most other MMOs. Secondly, Rek Seven wrote:I agree that people who use them are just building their own, so keeping them expensive/single use is doing nothing but providing a minuscule isk sink. EvE needs more isk sinks, not fewer. Yes, the sink provided by these inexpensive, single use items isn't the largets, but every little bit helps.
First off, cost is already a balancing factor in eve so tell ccp if you have an issue with that, not me.
Secondly, my point was that it is such a small isk sink that it really isn't one at all. Furthermore, if they were reusable, they would see wider use, particularly by small roaming gangs and thus become a larger isk sink.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
Scotsman Howard
S0utherN Comfort Circle-Of-Two
85
|
Posted - 2016.03.30 18:18:48 -
[15] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:First off, cost should never be used as a criteria for balancing something. That simply leads to the "he who spends the most, wins" scenario that plague most other MMOs. Secondly, Rek Seven wrote:I agree that people who use them are just building their own, so keeping them expensive/single use is doing nothing but providing a minuscule isk sink. EvE needs more isk sinks, not fewer. Yes, the sink provided by these inexpensive, single use items isn't the largets, but every little bit helps.
You guys do realize that these are not isk sinks right? The only part of these items that is an Isk sink is the blueprints. When you buy something from another player, that is not an isk sink. |
Doomsayer Gianna
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2016.03.31 10:02:19 -
[16] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:They're actually quite good where they're at, and fulfill their intended purpose. The fact that meta has drifted away from what they were intended to do doesn't mean they need fixed. They just need to wait til the meta shifts back again.
Mobile Cyno Inhibitors are still quite good. They are still used to prevent effective hotdrops and to prevent tackled capitals from easily getting support.
Mobile Scan Inhibitors on the other are however trivially countered in almost all their use cases and the cost is too high for such little effect. Meta variations with different properties could improve this,
Some possible ideas:
- A short-duration version (15 minutes) which is extremely difficult to scan down. - A short duration version (15 minutes) which is just as easy to scan down as the current one, but which prevents warping directly to a cynosural field within its area of effect (still shows on systemwide overview, can't warp to it) - A long duration version (24 hours) with 2x increased cost, suitable for masking formups. - A decoy version, which appears as a single, valuable ship but is actually a scan inhibitor. |
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
782
|
Posted - 2016.03.31 12:33:24 -
[17] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Fair points... But where am i supposed to get use data from? There is no easy way that I am aware of, and even the ones you could use would collect virtually meaningless data, and in that lies the trouble with using market data to support any call for changes to the game or to a specific item.
Rek Seven wrote:Obviously things like cost are relative and if the cost of a cyno jammer is chump change when trying to protect an expensive fleet, then i don't see what gating them behind a pay wall and placing heavy mechanic restrictions brings to the game. If they were multiple use items then people like me would buy and use them to make our farming in nul sec virtually 100% risk free and all buy itself that would be a really bad thing. Another aspect to multi-use would be how it would affect what little market there is for these. If they were buy once and forget would they even be available on the market at all? and if they were what would the cost be then?
Rek Seven wrote:If they were re usable, their stats (e.g. ehp) and cost could be amended to make sure their use doesn't become too wide spread, if that is the fear. Problem here is CCP does not set prices for player produced items so even adjusting the stats is no guarantee that they cost would change. For many situations these are useless now, and yet in others they could be borderline OP so how would you propose to change the stats to balance this new multi-use capability? |
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
782
|
Posted - 2016.03.31 12:36:50 -
[18] - Quote
Doomsayer Gianna wrote: - A long duration version (24 hours) with 2x increased cost, suitable for masking formups. Curious here how you are going to make them 2x the cost? Especially when they are a player produced item and cost are controlled by the players who sell them and those who buy them. |
Iain Cariaba
2871
|
Posted - 2016.03.31 13:18:54 -
[19] - Quote
Scotsman Howard wrote:Iain Cariaba wrote:First off, cost should never be used as a criteria for balancing something. That simply leads to the "he who spends the most, wins" scenario that plague most other MMOs. Secondly, Rek Seven wrote:I agree that people who use them are just building their own, so keeping them expensive/single use is doing nothing but providing a minuscule isk sink. EvE needs more isk sinks, not fewer. Yes, the sink provided by these inexpensive, single use items isn't the largets, but every little bit helps. You guys do realize that these are not isk sinks right? The only part of these items that is an Isk sink is the blueprints. When you buy something from another player, that is not an isk sink. When you use the item you bought from another player and are unable to recover the item, that is where the sink is.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
|
Rek Seven
Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found
2173
|
Posted - 2016.03.31 15:16:40 -
[20] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote:Rek Seven wrote:If they were re usable, their stats (e.g. ehp) and cost could be amended to make sure their use doesn't become too wide spread, if that is the fear. Problem here is CCP does not set prices for player produced items so even adjusting the stats is no guarantee that they cost would change. For many situations these are useless now, and yet in others they could be borderline OP so how would you propose to change the stats to balance this new multi-use capability?
Increasing manufacturing costs (i.e amount) would increase the module cost. The ehp could be reduced so that they can be destroyed reasonably quickly.
I would also lift the harsh placement restrictions but at the same time, decrease their area of effect, this would bring them closer to the fight and thus, make them more likely to be destroyed.
The wishlist is pretty much complete...
|
|
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
2530
|
Posted - 2016.03.31 16:13:09 -
[21] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:When you use the item you bought from another player and are unable to recover the item, that is where the sink is.
Umm. Sort of. But only the transaction fees.
Remember kids: only removing isk from the economy as a whole is a sink. Only adding isk to the economy as a whole is a faucet. Individual wallets don't matter. |
Mr Twinkie
Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture
41
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 08:32:01 -
[22] - Quote
Mobile cyno jammers are fine, and shouldn't be touched.
Scan inhibs on the other hand, these things are useless. I'd love to use one when I'm doing a mining op out in null trying to get some space rocks to build ships to kill stuff with but I don't want to spend 40m for a non reusable item every time. The simple fix is make them scoopable and perhaps up the mineral requirements.
MAMBA Head of IT
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
2514
|
Posted - 2016.04.15 21:37:57 -
[23] - Quote
Mr Twinkie wrote:Mobile cyno jammers are fine, and shouldn't be touched.
Scan inhibs on the other hand, these things are useless. I'd love to use one when I'm doing a mining op out in null trying to get some space rocks to build ships to kill stuff with but I don't want to spend 40m for a non reusable item every time. The simple fix is make them scoopable and perhaps up the mineral requirements.
If it completely removed the mining anomaly from the scanner, it wouldn't be useless.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Mr Twinkie
Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture
41
|
Posted - 2016.04.16 05:33:42 -
[24] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Mr Twinkie wrote:Mobile cyno jammers are fine, and shouldn't be touched.
Scan inhibs on the other hand, these things are useless. I'd love to use one when I'm doing a mining op out in null trying to get some space rocks to build ships to kill stuff with but I don't want to spend 40m for a non reusable item every time. The simple fix is make them scoopable and perhaps up the mineral requirements. If it completely removed the mining anomaly from the scanner, it wouldn't be useless.
Or just bring back mining anoms that needed to be scanned down.. those were the good old days
MAMBA Head of IT
|
Cyrus Tybalt
Blap n Pew
4
|
Posted - 2016.04.16 10:54:59 -
[25] - Quote
What turns me off from the mobile scan inhibitor (aside form being a one use item) is the description that says that the mobile scan inhibitor will basically light up like a christmas tree for everyone using probes and d-scan.
It's basic psychology here: if you're with a roaming gang and a mobile scan inhibitor shows up in your scanner, do you go: "Oh! We absolutely shouldn't check this out!" or do you go "Hmm! Someone is trying to hide something under a MSI, better go there and check it out what it is they're hiding!" ?
My guess would be that most PvP:ers out there go for the latter rather than the former.
If the MSI's had been reusable, then you could've adopted the tactic of placing several of them in random locations in a system as "false flags", forcing other players to warp to every single one to check them out. But since they're one-use only, this strategy would be very expensive and basically necessitate that the system you use it in will net you enough profit to cover the expenses of setting up a bunch of MSi's. |
Mr Twinkie
Black Serpent Technologies The-Culture
41
|
Posted - 2016.04.19 01:37:49 -
[26] - Quote
Cyrus Tybalt wrote:What turns me off from the mobile scan inhibitor (aside form being a one use item) is the description that says that the mobile scan inhibitor will basically light up like a christmas tree for everyone using probes and d-scan.
It's basic psychology here: if you're with a roaming gang and a mobile scan inhibitor shows up in your scanner, do you go: "Oh! We absolutely shouldn't check this out!" or do you go "Hmm! Someone is trying to hide something under a MSI, better go there and check it out what it is they're hiding!" ?
My guess would be that most PvP:ers out there go for the latter rather than the former.
If the MSI's had been reusable, then you could've adopted the tactic of placing several of them in random locations in a system as "false flags", forcing other players to warp to every single one to check them out. But since they're one-use only, this strategy would be very expensive and basically necessitate that the system you use it in will net you enough profit to cover the expenses of setting up a bunch of MSi's.
This
They're up there as the most useless items in the game.
MAMBA Head of IT
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |