|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3121
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 16:25:04 -
[1] - Quote
EASILY FIRST PAGE |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3121
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 19:33:44 -
[2] - Quote
If you haven't already figured out a way to allow ships to access hangars from outside the structures, please allow an exception for the rorqual on the Large EC until that comes into place.
It would be very odd for the rorqual to have a position of ore transport that can't even use the Large. Otherwise you'll end up with a scenario where people have to keep a freighter and a fort nearby to utilize them both together. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3122
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 19:57:07 -
[3] - Quote
Also, one other thing: there are absolutely WAY too many medium rigs. 16 different application categories, times 2 for ME/TE versions = 32 different rigs. This is absolutely more than current POS setups, including faction/specialized versions. It would be so bad if the rig slots weren't so limited, but with only three slots? You're going to find the TE bonuses rigs falling to the wayside. Not to mention an excessive amount of complexity for very little in terms of reward or gameplay.
What is the reason for splitting these up like this? |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3122
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 20:06:49 -
[4] - Quote
Althalus Stenory wrote:Instead of giving a 25% boost to rigs, it'll be better to have a base bonus to every industry jobs, so at least, any industrial job have a real interest to be done on EC even without rigs instead of citadel without rigs... I like this better |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3126
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 23:41:25 -
[5] - Quote
Arronicus wrote:Rowells wrote:If you haven't already figured out a way to allow ships to access hangars from outside the structures, please allow an exception for the rorqual on the Large EC until that comes into place.
It would be very odd for the rorqual to have a position of ore transport that can't even use the Large. Otherwise you'll end up with a scenario where people have to keep a freighter and a fort nearby to utilize them both together. Sit the rorq on the undock, with a DST/freighter/hauler. One drops a can, rorq dumps compressed ore in can, hauler scoops, docks up. problem solved. Mild hassle, but nothing really problematic. I'm aware of the work around, but it's still a terrible design if that is the only/easiest way to do it. It also devalues the rorq as an ore hauler over other options.
On top of the fact that it's a new hassle that seems to have no justification or acknowledgement. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3126
|
Posted - 2016.10.11 02:53:31 -
[6] - Quote
Professor Humbert wrote:Can an engineering complex fit a market service module? from the looks of it, yes. Not sure if any size restriction or not. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3128
|
Posted - 2016.10.11 17:45:36 -
[7] - Quote
Manssell wrote:I may hav missed it, but are these just going to appear in space the way citadels do or will you have to scan them down the way POS's are now? Appear in space like citadels. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3128
|
Posted - 2016.10.11 21:49:41 -
[8] - Quote
Soleil Fournier wrote:The devs should increase job install costs with this expansion, like they increased broker fees/tax with citadels. Disappointing that they haven't mentioned it.
I installed a 430m isk vindicator last night but only paid about 1.5 million to start the job. Installed a 600 million isk job a while ago, paid around 3 million to start it.
Those numbers are paltry and the monthly economic report agrees by showing manufacturing costs way down the list of sinks. Install costs should get a significant bump across the board.
Money is cheap and easy to come by at the moment, devs need to be adding bigger sinks to the game to compensate. This is a good opportunity to do that. They already did that in crius by adding install fees (or something along that line) to begin with.
And considering almost all of these items are bought and sold at numerous points in the process, I think the extra brokers fee has covered up on it already. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3128
|
Posted - 2016.10.11 22:14:19 -
[9] - Quote
Soleil Fournier wrote:Rowells wrote: They already did that in crius by adding install fees (or something along that line) to begin with.
And considering almost all of these items are bought and sold at numerous points in the process, I think the extra brokers fee has covered up on it already.
Again, manufacturing costs are only about 2 trillion isk sink. The LP store brings 6 trillion isk out of the economy. That's silly. Increase install costs 3 times so that vindi costs 4.5m to install. That's not going to put anyone in the poor house but it would definitely help pull a bunch more isk out of the economy. What do you mean it's silly? Was it supposed to be somewhere else?
Not every sink in the game needs to be equal to all others. And like I said before, the vast majority of those manufactured materials and products are bought and sold on open markets. This means those increased brokers fees apply there.
So why would an increase be needed? A reason other than "I think it's weird" if you don't mind. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Mercenary Coalition
3129
|
Posted - 2016.10.15 17:27:23 -
[10] - Quote
Bad Bobby wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Now Life wrote:So the most valuable items(BPO's) of a corp / alliance we place them in the weakest and least self-defensive complexes. Unless you're in WH space, they still have asset safety, so this isn't quite a valid argument. That said, they could absolutely be less vulnerable without stepping on citadels' toes, IMO. As jobs in progress are not protected by asset safety, he does have a valid point. BPOs were excluded from the list materials |
|
|
|
|