Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
7656
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 14:59:16 -
[1] - Quote
We are working on improving existing Upwell Structures (Citadels, Engineering Complexes) and also on new Upwell Structures.
We would like to give you a high level overview of where we currently are with those structures and where we want to go. We also would like to get your feedback and encourage you to fill out this survey.
But first, check the latest dev blog and learn more about The Advancing World of Upwell Structures.
CCP Phantom - Senior Community Developer
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14795
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:07:09 -
[2] - Quote
We hope that many of you will find the time to complete this survey and help give us your feedback on what you want to see next from Upwell Structures. And big thanks to the CSM for their participation in this process as well.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
|
|
Andre Vauban
Aideron Robotics Federation Uprising
481
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:26:47 -
[3] - Quote
This isn't directly related to Upwell structures, but all stations.
1. Decouple the ability to recover a secure container's PW from the "Security Officer" role. This is a game breaking ability and defeats the use of containers in stations/upwells. 2. Allow secure containers to be used for the output of manufacturing jobs (where the item is locked upon being deposited into the container. There is currently no way to secure the output of a manufacturing job except dedicating a hangar per person which doesn't scale. 3. Ensure that all types of containers, station warehouse, vault, container can be used for #2. 4. Allow for fully fit ships to be placed in station containers/vaults/warehouse. 5. Please fix the BPO lock down mechanic. Locking down a blueprint collection or unlocking it can literally kill somebody with the amount of time and clicks required. A person should be able to highlight all the BPOs in a hangar and create a single vote to lock/unlock all of them with a single action.
.
|
Drabbin Mishi
Excognative Ignorance Short Bus Syndicate
24
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:38:42 -
[4] - Quote
When will we be able to destroy our clone from the clone-bay window in an Upwell structure, just like we have always been able to do in a Station/Outpost? |
Black Pedro
Yammerschooner
3269
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 15:39:18 -
[5] - Quote
Interesting devblog. I think the approach to take a breather and finish implementing the basic features (and squashing the worst bugs/problems) is a good one and I thank you for the insight into their usage. But I still have two questions:
1) Any thoughts of doing a balance pass on their offensive/defensive capabilities of the Upwell structures yet? You gave us numbers on how they are being used, but not so much on how they are being destroyed. There are some concerns that the current vulnerability windows and reinforcement timers make them too tedious to attack while others are concerned their defensive systems aren't sufficient in some situations. I was wondering if you had enough stats yet to revisit these or if it is even on the agenda to do so yet?
2) More long term, do you still intend to implement additional Upwell structures? The original devblog proposed about 8 different structures, and while a couple seem to have been combined, we still have only heard about 3. Are additional structures like the Observatory Arrays, Advertisement Centers or Star Gates still on the road map?
Keep up the good work and I look forward to hearing more at Fanfest.
The 8 Golden Rules of Eve
Why Do They Gank?
|
Grookshank
Jump Drive Appreciation Society Jump Drive Appreciation Alliance
134
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:17:39 -
[6] - Quote
You introduced a very powerful function to upwell structures with Clone Swapping in citadels.
I am perfectly fine that we can't build structures in Thera as it is a shattered WH system.
Is there any chance we can get clone swapping to the NPC stations we have? We are the only region of space that is left out on this feature. |
Cristl
578
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:49:30 -
[7] - Quote
Andre Vauban wrote:This isn't directly related to Upwell structures, but all stations.
1. Decouple the ability to recover a secure container's PW from the "Security Officer" role. This is a game breaking ability and defeats the use of containers in stations/upwells. 2. Allow secure containers to be used for the output of manufacturing jobs (where the item is locked upon being deposited into the container. There is currently no way to secure the output of a manufacturing job except dedicating a hangar per person which doesn't scale. 3. Ensure that all types of containers, station warehouse, vault, container can be used for #2. 4. Allow for fully fit ships to be placed in station containers/vaults/warehouse. 5. Please fix the BPO lock down mechanic. Locking down a blueprint collection or unlocking it can literally kill somebody with the amount of time and clicks required. A person should be able to highlight all the BPOs in a hangar and create a single vote to lock/unlock all of them with a single action.
Private, are you suggesting that the corp interface / roles / hangars situation is sub-optimal? That's grounds for court martial!
But yeah, +1
|
Naye Nathaniel
Cobra INC
80
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:50:35 -
[8] - Quote
Why you touch another thing to screw someones gameplay? This changes are stupid - especially the one with "chunking" a moon and bring miners to collect whatever to collect from That belt;
What is the reason for that changes except "we want to everything around takes longer - and wamt you to easier lose your stuff so u wont be able to buy a plex via isk" |
Sekeris
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
21
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:53:40 -
[9] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote: 1) Any thoughts of doing a balance pass on their offensive/defensive capabilities of the Upwell structures yet? You gave us numbers on how they are being used, but not so much on how they are being destroyed. There are some concerns that the current vulnerability windows and reinforcement timers make them too tedious to attack while others are concerned their defensive systems aren't sufficient in some situations. I was wondering if you had enough stats yet to revisit these or if it is even on the agenda to do so yet?
This mostly, from fighting citadels the following points stick out, they are probably a little too powerfull against capitals (allthough i am not sure how they are against supers), a little too weak against sub capitals, but the bomb launcher is probably too strong, especially the neuting bombs. |
Obidiah Kane
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
42
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:32:41 -
[10] - Quote
Liking a lot of this, top work again - the moon mining looks interesting...that said...
We really need some action in losec (I know its being seen to as it's own project, but in relation to structures) as FW has been totally broken by citadels - the chance to dock and hide has removed a great deal of the tension associated with FW, and that has had a knock on effect on folks like me (not FW but denizens of that part of space) .
In general, the hassle it takes to have any effect whatsoever on a citadel is completely out of balance with how powerful they are for their owners - they are fundamentally risk free stepping stones at the moment. Once anchored they are more of an insidious influence on New Eden then the pre-nerf jump ranges - they not only allow the larger entities to project force (fort full of caps and jump clones), but also establish it.; its like we took a step forward for two steps back.
The ability to deliver without docking would only make this worse...where is the risk going?!! Please do not implement this!
Finally, from a nerd perspective - the ability to decorate, to skin, to personalise our structures should also be pretty high on the list too - the dull generic interior is tired already and is completely immersion breaking, not to mention it murders gfx cards (seriously, can that be fixed asap? My 980 is making alarming fan noises when I'm docked...if you are happy being invoiced for my new hardware, please continue, but it is a bit rubbish).
All in all, after a year, with all the hype for release - they have turned out to be pretty 'meh'...they have so much potential though, looking forward to seeing where they go :)
|
|
Garphos Trectes
Vision Inc Hole Control
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:35:16 -
[11] - Quote
Quote:enabling remote trashing of items in structures
WHY? So even less looting in wormhole space. Can u please unable trashing in WH Space?
BTW what happens with assets of a deleted character? Are they still existing and can drop by destroying a structure in wspace? |
AFK Hauler
State War Academy
1207
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:39:42 -
[12] - Quote
For the love of God and all the is holy -
PLEASE
Stop introducing more structures that require rigs using raw materials that are already too scares on the market to support!
Reduce the number of raw materials on rigs for these structures, there is no balance.
ALSO-
It's obvious that CCP - you - designed the Upwell structures to need rigs for max efficiency. In thinking that you wanted to provide "profitable" content to salvage players, you made the rigs require a "stupid" amount of raw materials. This thinking would lead to more salvage content to balance the market because of demand - profit follows the player. However, that has not happened and your flawed thinking has resulted in a severe deficit in raw materials. This proposed change follows the exact same flawed thinking - people who do not mine for content will not change their play style just because it becomes more profitable.
This one change can/may/might collapse the game market and lose players from being priced out of play style. It's not like there is an army of salvagers all of a sudden? Why would there be an army of miners to mine rocks and not tears? |
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
2683
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 18:47:08 -
[13] - Quote
AFK Hauler wrote:For the love of God and all the is holy -
PLEASE
Stop introducing more structures that require rigs using raw materials that are already too scares on the market to support!
Reduce the number of raw materials on rigs for these structures, there is no balance.
ALSO-
It's obvious that CCP - you - designed the Upwell structures to need rigs for max efficiency. In thinking that you wanted to provide "profitable" content to salvage players, you made the rigs require a "stupid" amount of raw materials. This thinking would lead to more salvage content to balance the market because of demand - profit follows the player. However, that has not happened and your flawed thinking has resulted in a severe deficit in raw materials. This proposed change follows the exact same flawed thinking - people who do not mine for content will not change their play style just because it becomes more profitable.
This one change (moon mining) can/may/might collapse the game market and lose players from being priced out of play style. It's not like there is an army of salvagers all of a sudden? Why would there be an army of miners to mine rocks and not tears? what? salvage prices are in the dumpster.
and players absolutely change their play styles to the more profitable activity. seems like there has been an explosion in rorqual pilots recently.
selling officer BCUs! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6872141
@ChainsawPlankto on twitter
|
Myxx
Black Eclipse Corp
778
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:10:09 -
[14] - Quote
Andre Vauban wrote:This isn't directly related to Upwell structures, but all stations.
5. Please fix the BPO lock down mechanic. Locking down a blueprint collection or unlocking it can literally kill somebody with the amount of time and clicks required. A person should be able to highlight all the BPOs in a hangar and create a single vote to lock/unlock all of them with a single action.
an alt of mine recently had to lock down 230+ bpos. Never again until it gets fixed. |
Fredrick Arwood
Hawk Wood Industrial Technology
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:16:30 -
[15] - Quote
A suggesting for a service of the new refineries is as a Planetary Interaction (PI) processing facility. With the limited power available in PI performing P3 and P4 processing on a planet that is doing extraction is near impossible. Refineries could do all or just the higher two types, and charge a fee. I would suggest that Command Center V be the required skill to use them, or a new skill similar to Industry. Of course, it would be nice if those with Command Center V could be "grandfathered" into the new skill. This would create more revenue for the structure owner, increase manufacturing and make the higher end products available.
Keep up the good work, I will keep up the subscriptions.
Trade Fair, Mine Well, Fly Sale. |
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
157
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 19:17:54 -
[16] - Quote
> The results of this shift are already visible in the YC119.2 release released a few weeks ago, and in the YC119.3 patch just released.
So those failpatches are indeed CSM fault?
> "go vote in the CSM electionGÇ¥
Is there a way to vote against CSM itself? If boycott is my only option to voice this opinion, boycott it will be. |
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
233
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:00:08 -
[17] - Quote
I feel like the survey was just a 'lets find a way to make sure we can pat ourselves on the back with the results' type of survey. It asked almost NONE of the questions i was expecting, and lots of questions that didn't really seem to matter since apparently you already know what you are doing with those parts.
Upwell structures in HS are near impossible for a small corp to defend against anyone bigger than they are. As the defenses suck for HS since the missiles do diddly squat to anything sub-cap, and the only weapons that can do any decent dmg are the ones you can only use in low/null.
I still can't seem to find the profit in doing industry in them either, or at all since all the industry nerfs over the past few years, that were justified under the guise that the added costs would just get shifted to the 'customers'...lol
New Icon SiSi feedback thread that got wholly ignored!
An example of that a good ship icon set looks like.
|
Sha'Uri Dark
Suspicious Activity Stranger Danger.
21
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 21:41:45 -
[18] - Quote
Took the survey and didn't see a place for general comments a few things I would love to have:
The ability to rent offices at the character level and grant access/usage rights through an ACL So I can consolidate assets across characters in 1 place instead of across 12 different inventories
My Captains Quarters I like to stretch my legs every now and again, but I have a feeling these assets/tech were sold off with WoD IP
Alliance level book marks Not a part of Upwell Structures none the less can we get an eta on them; they've been soonGäó since Novemberish if not longer |
zluq zabaa
Inhumanum Legionis LowSechnaya Sholupen
32
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:11:25 -
[19] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote: 2) More long term, do you still intend to implement additional Upwell structures? The original devblog proposed about 8 different structures, and while a couple seem to have been combined, we still have only heard about 3. Are additional structures like the Observatory Arrays, Advertisement Centers or Star Gates still on the road map?
+1 for Player Owned Star Gates in Null, Low and High Security.
I really liked this idea very much, when it was first announced as it would free up time we use to transport things while it could be taxed to make sure it doesn't ruin hauling as a profession (also should probably be crazy expensive both in build cost and in maintenance). On the other hand I see some serious trouble in PVP if the locals are not only used to the area, have backup, intel and ressources everywhere, but on top of that are able to play the rabbit and hedgehog game, basically outrunning everyone. (Just a vague idea, but maybe introduce some exhaustion timer, which won't allow you to use agressive modules after jumping a player owned stargate) |
Nelly Uanos
True Xenon Inc. White Legion.
33
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 23:22:39 -
[20] - Quote
No comment section in the survey so here it is...
Market function are still not up to station level.
- Can't setup buy order remotly in a Citadel when you are in space, the drop down menu only list Station.
- Can't sell item from your asset windows in they are in a Citadel / Can't sell item in a Citadel if you are not IN that specific Citadel. |
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2894
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 01:54:12 -
[21] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:We are working on improving existing Upwell Structures (Citadels, Engineering Complexes) and also on new Upwell Structures. We would like to give you a high level overview of where we currently are with those structures and where we want to go. We also would like to get your feedback and encourage you to fill out this survey. But first, check the latest dev blog and learn more about The Advancing World of Upwell Structures.
Chant with me:
No Fuel No Tether.
Fix that and you'll see the spam subside, right now they offer a 100% safe space for little investment, and zero maintenance.
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Pro Versius
Ceptacemia DARKNESS.
4
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 03:23:28 -
[22] - Quote
I would love to see a few things that we have with other structures, that we don't have with the Upwell Structures.
1. Set standings for auto attack when a neutral or negative standings person comes within docking radius of the structure. Just like a POS. The target gets scrammed, webbed, and fired upon if they get near a pos with those mods installed. Structures they can't do that.
2. When will I be able to search my assets in Citadel? I virtually live out of nothing but citadels in 0.0, but I have to search manually for anything I keep there. I can't just type it in the search box and it only bring up the structure that item type is in. I can do it for stations, but I can't do it on Upwell structures.
3. I would like to see turrets of different sizes and types for Upwell Structures. We could put 3 different sizes of guns, or missle launchers on POS's but we can only put missiles on structures. Guns are an instant hit, but missiles have flight time.
4. Increase the amount of armaments allowed to be installed in the high slots of Upwell Structures. For example, the keepstar bash in M-0EE8.. Other that time dilation and the DD killing some dreads. It was pretty boring.. I would like the structure to be more defensive. They are pretty toothless right now. |
Indahmawar Fazmarai
5678
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 07:48:47 -
[23] - Quote
Another survey about structures, and I am missing the same option as with the first one:
I don't like structures and would like that other areas were developed as well.
As a former customer of CCP, the whole point of giving money to a company is what can you do for me.
Structures don't cut it. I wish I coud had said it back in 2014 and I wish I could say it now.
In the meanwhile, at least I'm not paying CCP any longer. |
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
5955
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 08:02:33 -
[24] - Quote
The key problem with Upwell structures, IMO, is the lack of incentive for players to attack them.
Attack someone's POS and you usually get nothing or nearly nothing, but you can get the occasional lucky 10 billion ISK loot haul (or, in one case I know of, a 35b+ haul). This creates a strong incentive to engage POSes, and for the defender to actively defend them.
Attack someone's Raitaru and you are guaranteed nearly nothing. Plus it takes a good deal more effort to kill it. The defender doesn't lose all that much either, and so will often ignore the attack.
The only reason to attack a structure is to **** in someone else's bucket. This is sometimes fun, but isn't in line with most of EVE where content drivers exist.
My suggestions:
- Change the safety tax from 10% to 25%. - Give the attacking entity 80% of this tax. (How you determine which attackers get this may be a difficult call).
That simple change will result in citadels (other than a handful in Perimeter) becoming conflict drivers.
_________________________________________
Second point.
Market citadels have accelerated trade centralization in New Eden.
14 months ago we had 5 trade hubs with >1T in sell orders.
Of those Hek and Rens are totally gone, Dodixie is dying, and Amarr is sick.
Present mechanics centralize trade in Perimeter/Jita to an extent that, IMO, has gone too far. This has in turn centralized highsec activity in the Forge region (and I have a good sense of this from doing medium scale production and noting system indicies, which gives me a sense of gamewide industrial activity - I represent about 0.06% of gamewide production activity, which peaked at about 0.20% when I took on major production contracts for Burn Jita).
I don't have the solution here but I think sales tax should scale with a system trade index.
I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
Sabriz's Rule: "Any time someone argues for a game change claiming it is a quality of life change, the change is actually a game balance change".
|
MaxOwaR Thunderfist
Vision Inc Hole Control
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 12:40:14 -
[25] - Quote
Garphos Trectes wrote:Quote:enabling remote trashing of items in structures WHY? So even less looting in wormhole space. Can u please unable trashing in WH Space? [...]
This!
|
Nomistrav
Intaki Liberation Front Intaki Prosperity Initiative
482
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:00:16 -
[26] - Quote
Player made insurance policies would be cool. Would address the issue of underpaid insurance policies for T2/T3 and open up for a whole new world of scamming. Like, my insurance policies would have lots of confusing fine print that basically made it so that I only cover acts of CCP. Or Bob.
"As long as space endures,
as long as sentient beings exist,
until then, may I too remain
and dispel the miseries of the world."
~ Vremaja Idama
|
Skia Aumer
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
434
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:37:24 -
[27] - Quote
This survey lacks at least one crucial point. Abandoned citadels are way too difficult to destroy. In case you dont have ideas how to solve this, I'll give you some. Make "S" size structure that we can anchor near citadels. Those would automatically attack citadels once they go vulnerable. If defenders show up - they can destroy it very easily. But if they dont, attackers would not have to spend their game time grinding the bloody thing 3 times, potentially far off their prime timezone.
Furthermore, I have a lot of concerns regarding the citadels vulnerability mechanics, especially timezone warfare. But this one is just ridiculous. And it was raised numerous times, so I have no idea why CCP forgot to ask about it in the survey. I know some people think Fozzie-sov is bad. I also remember people complained about Dominion sov grind and how awful it was. I've read about pre-Dominion POS sov and that it was so much worse. You know what? We'll soon end up in Citadel sov, so let's make sure the grind would not surpass our wildest nightmares. |
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
467
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 14:20:58 -
[28] - Quote
Your question about corps and upwell structures lacks the answer; "we already own one" ;)
And the one I missed; My friends already own one.
"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X
"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron
-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-
|
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
467
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 14:24:33 -
[29] - Quote
Garphos Trectes wrote:Quote:enabling remote trashing of items in structures WHY? So even less looting in wormhole space. Can u please unable trashing in WH Space? BTW what happens with assets of a deleted character? Are they still existing and can drop by destroying a structure in wspace?
What if trashed items in a citadel would spawn the items in a non-pass-worded secure container in orbit of the citadel that is there for, say 24h?
"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X
"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron
-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-
|
h4kun4
Gang Bang Pandas Snuffed Out
73
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:02:10 -
[30] - Quote
Simple idea to deal with abandoned citadels.
No fuel = no tether, no RF timer, always vulnerable, no damage cap, no asset safety. |
|
Skia Aumer
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
434
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:07:23 -
[31] - Quote
h4kun4 wrote:Simple idea to deal with abandoned citadels.
No fuel = no tether, no RF timer, always vulnerable, no damage cap, no asset safety. Yeah, but they dont even acknowledge there is a problem! The survey asks a lot of questions of minor importance, while the most outstanding problems are left for ~internal discussion~ Which means they may or may not be solved within the next decade. |
Orakkus
Imperium Technologies DARKNESS.
338
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 15:40:49 -
[32] - Quote
h4kun4 wrote:Simple idea to deal with abandoned citadels.
No fuel = no tether, no RF timer, always vulnerable, no damage cap, no asset safety.
Yeah, I agree with this as well, especially since something like an Astrahaus has such a small window of vulnerability, a window completely set by the owner.
He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
|
Korvin
Shadow Kingdom Best Alliance
603
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 19:47:00 -
[33] - Quote
Why don't you use PI mechanics instead?
We could build a mining base on the moon, the one you could attack from space like a structure, and use the citadel to protect it and/or as an orbital lift.
Plus you could use this in future for Project Legion interaction, as an alternative to destroy it from space you could capture or loot it from the surface. And this could split the moon for a limited amount of zones to mine, so people can share the mining if they like.
Member of CSM 4&5 ... &8
|
Echo Mande
88
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 23:24:38 -
[34] - Quote
What I would really really like to have on all Upwell structures is a biography page editable by the structure administrator.
The hideous titles a lot of structures have ought to be on a bio page and could be done a lot better there. Likewise a lot of things currently on a structure owner's corp description page don't really belong there.
Wallet remarks everywhere
|
Fish Hunter
Blacksteel Mining and Manufacturing Renaissance Federation
22
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 23:48:58 -
[35] - Quote
h4kun4 wrote:Simple idea to deal with abandoned citadels.
No fuel = no tether, no RF timer, always vulnerable, no damage cap, no asset safety.
Agree ! These things need to be fueled to provide perks
|
Fish Hunter
Blacksteel Mining and Manufacturing Renaissance Federation
22
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 23:51:38 -
[36] - Quote
Notifications of Structure services offlining and unanchoring & reinforced would be nice. I can undock and see these things but notifications would be nice. |
Saco Bissett
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 00:07:54 -
[37] - Quote
Current system is totally botched there's Moon goo for the top end alliances the cheaper planets are not worth the cost of keeping the structure fueled shift the cost away from some super rare moons that are worth most of the money and to more planets that are worth less money or give a scale that makes it worth it for all alliances that want to make money to look at moon goo if your not PL/Goons etc.
Current system is an utter failure in this department.
EDIT:
I also forgot to mention that even people in highsec should be able to mine moons but should be at a lower profit amount.
Reactions should be permitted in highsec, you can have any type of dangerous thing in Highsec but were not permitted to make the equivalent of an energy drink in EVE in highsec. While drugs were illegal it made sense but they are not any more let alone why other reactions had to be done in lowsec your permitted to play with plutonium (literally the most dangerous substance to exist) as a regular ok material but reactions in a station that have NEVER gone wrong never. |
Sylvia Kildare
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
54
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 16:02:03 -
[38] - Quote
AFK Hauler wrote:It's obvious that CCP - you - designed the Upwell structures to need rigs for max efficiency. In thinking that you wanted to provide "profitable" content to salvage players, you made the rigs require a "stupid" amount of raw materials. This thinking would lead to more salvage content to balance the market because of demand - profit follows the player. However, that has not happened and your flawed thinking has resulted in a severe deficit in raw materials. This proposed change follows the exact same flawed thinking - people who do not mine for content will not change their play style just because it becomes more profitable.
This one change (moon mining) can/may/might collapse the game market and lose players from being priced out of play style. It's not like there is an army of salvagers all of a sudden? Why would there be an army of miners to mine rocks and not tears?
"However, that has not happened"... meaning you don't think salvage prices have increased and more people are salvaging? I dunno. Not ALL salvage has increased a lot in value, but some t1/orange salvage that used to be near worthless (Contaminated Lorentz, IIRC?) have certainly risen a good deal.
I know someone who builds citadel rigs and is constantly trying to get more and more salvagers to sell their salvage to him directly rather than keep selling it as usual in trade hubs.
As a person who loves to salvage, I'm doing my part to fulfill the demand for more salvage. Buyers need to raise the price they're willing to pay to encourage even more to jump on board and start salvaging more.
Oh, and plz, more t2 ships dying in Amarr/Ashab/Mad/Niarja, I would love to whip up some more blue salvage in between generating orange salvage! |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
6580
|
Posted - 2017.03.24 18:47:18 -
[39] - Quote
Saco Bissett wrote:Current system is totally botched there's Moon goo for the top end alliances the cheaper planets are not worth the cost of keeping the structure fueled shift the cost away from some super rare moons that are worth most of the money and to more planets that are worth less money or give a scale that makes it worth it for all alliances that want to make money to look at moon goo if your not PL/Goons etc.
Current system is an utter failure in this department.
EDIT:
I also forgot to mention that even people in highsec should be able to mine moons but should be at a lower profit amount.
Reactions should be permitted in highsec, you can have any type of dangerous thing in Highsec but were not permitted to make the equivalent of an energy drink in EVE in highsec. While drugs were illegal it made sense but they are not any more let alone why other reactions had to be done in lowsec your permitted to play with plutonium (literally the most dangerous substance to exist) as a regular ok material but reactions in a station that have NEVER gone wrong never.
...
Plutonium is the most dangerous substance to exist?
hah. hah hah. hahahahahahahahahahahahahahah.
Antimatter begs to differ.
From a human perspective, so do a number of diseases and materials. Sure, you can make a bomb with plutonium, but if you don't, it's not going to kill a _lot_ of people if mishandled. Disease, on the other, well, those multiply and spread. You want to wipe out humanity, go with disease.
Woo! CSM XI!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
mkint
1675
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 02:02:53 -
[40] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Saco Bissett wrote:Current system is totally botched there's Moon goo for the top end alliances the cheaper planets are not worth the cost of keeping the structure fueled shift the cost away from some super rare moons that are worth most of the money and to more planets that are worth less money or give a scale that makes it worth it for all alliances that want to make money to look at moon goo if your not PL/Goons etc.
Current system is an utter failure in this department.
EDIT:
I also forgot to mention that even people in highsec should be able to mine moons but should be at a lower profit amount.
Reactions should be permitted in highsec, you can have any type of dangerous thing in Highsec but were not permitted to make the equivalent of an energy drink in EVE in highsec. While drugs were illegal it made sense but they are not any more let alone why other reactions had to be done in lowsec your permitted to play with plutonium (literally the most dangerous substance to exist) as a regular ok material but reactions in a station that have NEVER gone wrong never. ... Plutonium is the most dangerous substance to exist? hah. hah hah. hahahahahahahahahahahahahahah. Antimatter begs to differ. From a human perspective, so do a number of diseases and materials. Sure, you can make a bomb with plutonium, but if you don't, it's not going to kill a _lot_ of people if mishandled. Disease, on the other, well, those multiply and spread. You want to wipe out humanity, go with disease. Way to contribute to the discussion. Really valid. Really on topic. Good job.
If the benchmark is antimatter rather than plutonium... um... I've got millions of rounds of ammo that are fueled by antimatter. It's so cheap and so unregulated in-game a toddler could get hold of it. So, I guess we'll take this as official confirmation that reactions are going to be allowed in highsec now. You heard it here folks, thanks Steve!
Maxim 6. If violence wasnGÇÖt your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
|
|
Echo Mande
91
|
Posted - 2017.03.25 23:29:15 -
[41] - Quote
Fish Hunter wrote:Notifications of Structure services offlining and unanchoring & reinforced would be nice. I can undock and see these things but notifications would be nice. And to make this nicer it would be great if there was an entry on the structure profile, just like docking and other rights, where the administrator can put who (persons, corps, alliances) gets sent (annoyed with) these messages. Preferably by type (anchor, unanchor, out of fuel, attacked/reinforced) but one entry will do in a pinch. A 'corp' default wouldn't be good for corps with multiple structures admin'd by different people.
Wallet remarks everywhere
|
twoflower Secret
Federation Star Invention
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.28 08:04:43 -
[42] - Quote
Hi
Can you please look into fuel costs of the Citadels, a alarmingly growing number of Citadels in hi-sec (no experiences in low/null-sec) is not fueled and thus necessary services are not available. In the region I travel more than 50% of the citadels seems not fuelled at all.
Giving the fuel costs Citadels seems like a big money pit for most smaller corporations (<10 member). Low or no tax to attract customers for a refinery does not make it any better for the competition.
Please do a count of how much of the cited 7800 corps have one or more Citadels with only the free services running (repair/insurance/storage/offices).
Posted this concern in the Refinery thread as well. |
Serenta Mystra
N'tech DevilBear
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 18:56:45 -
[43] - Quote
Changes Needed:
I) Assets need to be more visible in Structures. This includes marketable actions, BP runs (remotely).. Oh and search.
II) Buoy Structures: Can't be renamed, no 'life time' anchoring, aka permanent, or can be tethered to a near structure (if same corp). - Little wish here, nav buoys for a market structure: undock buoy for when the structure's undock sucks for a gate's direction.
III) Fatigue system; I'm sick of structures anchoring, being public for 2 weeks, then can't pay fuel, so services go offline, finally structure goes private. MAKE THESE STRUCTURES DECAY IF ABANDONED! plz? - 7 day decommissioning is a little excessive, is there no way to to speed this up if the structure is private? - More incentive to clean up your Ass-house trash. Clean-up Hisec plz.
IV) FOR **** SAKE! Give us control on WHAT'S ON TELLY! - Srsly ****'d up. . . Sitting in your structure and see your enemies' ad, dafuq!
V) The materials needed for the rigs are insane, they need a reduction, Fortizar t2 rigs for example are currently the HULL ITSELF again, isk wise. - Salvaging was suppose to be a 'side-project' anyway! With these numbers, we need a rorqual equivalent salvager! - Even TVP don't consider salvaging worthwhile. . . rather grind TPPH's lol. . .
VI) Some automated defences is advised, single gun maybe? hero fighter 'hovers' around regardless of control.
VII) Now, I know I'll get some flak from this but: DON'T REMOVE P.O.S. EVER! KEEP'EM! k? - Dickstar-POS ~1b, can hold off 30-40 ppl - ASS-house ~1b, can't handle 5 logi ships.. ?!?!?
|
h4kun4
Gang Bang Pandas Snuffed Out
79
|
Posted - 2017.03.31 00:35:39 -
[44] - Quote
[quote=Serenta Mystra]Changes Needed:
I) Assets need to be more visible in Structures. This includes marketable actions, BP runs (remotely).. Oh and search.
agreed
V) The materials needed for the rigs are insane, they need a reduction, Fortizar t2 rigs for example are currently the HULL ITSELF again, isk wise. - Salvaging was suppose to be a 'side-project' anyway! With these numbers, we need a rorqual equivalent salvager! - Even TVP don't consider salvaging worthwhile. . . rather grind TPPH's lol. . .
T2 rigs are always that expensive, surely when it goes in the 20 bil ranges it its insaen, but try to fit a regular BS or cruiser with t2 rigs under hull price, HF and GL |
Sylvia Kildare
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
54
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 01:28:33 -
[45] - Quote
twoflower Secret wrote:Hi
Can you please look into fuel costs of the Citadels, a alarmingly growing number of Citadels in hi-sec (no experiences in low/null-sec) is not fueled and thus necessary services are not available. In the region I travel more than 50% of the citadels seems not fuelled at all.
Giving the fuel costs Citadels seems like a big money pit for most smaller corporations (<10 member). Low or no tax to attract customers for a refinery does not make it any better for the competition.
Please do a count of how much of the cited 7800 corps have one or more Citadels with only the free services running (repair/insurance/storage/offices).
Posted this concern in the Refinery thread as well.
I mean, in a stationless system, a public astrahus with only the free services is still very handy. tether/rep, dock/rep, refit without needing to have brought a mobile depot along, etc.
But yes, the amount of structures that don't have a reproc or clone bay onlined is quite striking as of late. We're nearing 1 year of astrahus spam in highsec and some corps that put one or more up seem to have grown bored with their toys. |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. Mercenary Coalition
325
|
Posted - 2017.04.01 12:39:11 -
[46] - Quote
wait for it..... wait.....
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
Kueyen
Mei-ha's Light Fleet Coordination Coalition
183
|
Posted - 2017.04.07 21:16:46 -
[47] - Quote
Echo Mande wrote:What I would really really like to have on all Upwell structures is a biography page editable by the structure administrator.
The hideous titles a lot of structures have ought to be on a bio page and could be done a lot better there. Likewise a lot of things currently on a structure owner's corp description page don't really belong there. Congratz on finally getting this feature request noticed, and on camera @ Fanfest no less!
Until all are free...
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |