|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 36 post(s) |
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 08:11:00 -
[1]
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 07/11/2009 08:13:46 These changes are some of the most **** changes I have seen. You're going to make 0.0 cost MORE to live in and give us marginally more in return through avenues that are a very finite resource to begin with. Unless you massively up the amount of plexes they can all be run within a few hours of downtime.
Why not upgrade **** that isn't finite? Like rats, agents, the long forgotten planetary spawns etc? Let us improve truesec, let us HIRE AGENTS TO SIT IN SPACE OR AT OUR STATIONS OF THE FACTION WE CHOOSE.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 08:17:00 -
[2]
A quick review of this thread shows that the vast majority of people in 0.0 alliances and not alt posting do *not* support these changes as they stand.
Yes sov should be changed, I think this system has some good ideas but I think it needs more work.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 08:27:00 -
[3]
They need to rename this expansion to Eve Online:New Game Enhancement
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 08:39:00 -
[4]
Originally by: ian666
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 07/11/2009 08:13:46 These changes are some of the most **** changes I have seen.
We have 250 titans in game, those ships needed tons of minerals to build, each of them have worth around 80b isk. This is more than enought to upgrade entire constelations at max and mantain it for years.
This patch will reduce amount of new Titans in future since alliances will need more money to mantain their systems not to create more spares for each titan pilot, and that is one of best changes since Red Moon Rising.
And since MS are most cost effective titans wont be the big fear, a MS blob will be. Me? I already own a new wyvern(My 3rd) and I have the isk for EIGHT MORE. So yes, this will definitely stop players from getting insanely rich(It won't) You really have no idea what you're talking about Ian. 80b upgrades ONE SYSTEM not an entire constellation. This completely destroys any non wealthy/large entities from owning 0.0 space.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 10:35:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Winters Chill @angry players. Reading over some of the comments it appears that some of you either can't to comprehend the meaning of the changes or simply knee jerk rage react at any change, because every year it seems to be the same. I wonder if its the same people too...
@CCP Cho', looks interesting. I'd change the pirate mag's name to reflect the fact it's a lure, what do pirates like? civilian traffic of-course:- "holographic civilian communication transmitter"? or something like this, the idea being the installation produces fake civilian chatter in system for the NPC pirates to come looking. I'm sure you thought of this already. My 2 pence anyway.
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/corp/Shadow_Legion. Shadow LegionPERIOD No Sov? Check No Station? Check No Vested Interest in anything 0.0 Except "L33t PvP"? Check
Hard to figure out why you're not opposed to this eh?
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 10:41:00 -
[6]
To be fair the one thing this does encourage is mass rentals out to macro ratting alliances and corporations to ensure you can afford any amount of space.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 10:56:00 -
[7]
Originally by: CCP Soundwave Hi
About the anomalies:
Anomalies are a good way of injecting single player content into a certain system. The way it's currently set up is that the site instantly re-spawns when run, meaning it's not three sites per day; it's three sites constantly. Financially, having guaranteed access to NPCs should provide a much more solid stream of income than jumping from belt to belt, hoping that rats have re-spawned. We could have added more belts to systems, but why would we want you to jump around in a growing list of belts when we can just have you jump into a single anomaly and make money?
They were not put in as "OH GOD I STRUCK GOLD" sites. You don't make 0.0 financially inhabitable for thousands by adding extra officer spawns, you do it by providing a constant flow of content that makes a good amount of money, which is what the anomalies do. The distribution of sites is made so that the higher the upgrade, the higher quality anomaly. Financially, the top tier anomalies that will be spawning are much more profitable than mining and ratting currently is, and pretty much on par with level 4s. Added to that, they have a chance of escalation.
Sorry stoffer but **** this. 3 sites that RESPAWN INSTANTLY that you have to PROBE DOWN which TAKES TIME so its NOT INSTANT. It is still subpar to mission running even assuming you are lucky enough to chain them without some ass probing it down before you.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 11:02:00 -
[8]
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Originally by: CCP Soundwave Hi
About the anomalies:
Anomalies are a good way of injecting single player content into a certain system. The way it's currently set up is that the site instantly re-spawns when run, meaning it's not three sites per day; it's three sites constantly. Financially, having guaranteed access to NPCs should provide a much more solid stream of income than jumping from belt to belt, hoping that rats have re-spawned. We could have added more belts to systems, but why would we want you to jump around in a growing list of belts when we can just have you jump into a single anomaly and make money?
They were not put in as "OH GOD I STRUCK GOLD" sites. You don't make 0.0 financially inhabitable for thousands by adding extra officer spawns, you do it by providing a constant flow of content that makes a good amount of money, which is what the anomalies do. The distribution of sites is made so that the higher the upgrade, the higher quality anomaly. Financially, the top tier anomalies that will be spawning are much more profitable than mining and ratting currently is, and pretty much on par with level 4s. Added to that, they have a chance of escalation.
Sorry stoffer but **** this. 3 sites that RESPAWN INSTANTLY that you have to PROBE DOWN which TAKES TIME so its NOT INSTANT. It is still subpar to mission running even assuming you are lucky enough to chain them without some ass probing it down before you.
They are anomalies, not signatures. You can scan them down in about four seconds with the onboard scanner, or a single probe. It is pretty much as instant as it gets dude. Also remember that you can get quite a few more sites than 3 :)
How about that "Why is level 4's the cap for income?" We can either run level 4's in empire in COMPLETE SAFETY without paying 2b a month to own the system or ya, get anally ****d financially for what amounts to "almost meeting empire isk making"
No Stoffer, just no. 2b a month to support 15 people doesn't even sound remotely ****ing acceptable.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 11:12:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Natourist In my opinion CCP is just making it harder to control huge areas of space. If you want to control it - you must work for it. At present it seems that its too easy. CCP increases the effort to control by increasing the costs.
In other hand I understand that T2 ships and modules will be cheaper in future.
When we sum these two things up: + less static actions like moonfarming to activate players. + cheaper ships so players can more easily engage in the o'mighty pvp action. + if you want your name to the map - you work for it.
Even so at present Sove system, if you are small, you will get squished. This is the same thing now and will be at dominion. This is why we have Alliances.
And from the NRDS (CVA) point of view, alliance/corps will control only limited number of systems because of the high upceep costs. The neutral players can still rat/plex/whatever in the region in systems without control! Change to present is only that neutrals are not allowed to do isk in controlled systems.
Sup dude who has never done logistics in current day Eve. They aren't making it hard, they are making it impossible. "hard" will be controlling small swathes of space. Financially backbreaking. Think your corp has a hard time affording any sort of reimbursement or corp funded ANYTHING now?! Imagine an extra 6-8b per month income just for controlling ONE CONSTELLATION. On top of the pos network *that they are still going to need*
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 11:18:00 -
[10]
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Batolemaeus Edited by: Batolemaeus on 07/11/2009 11:01:47
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
You don't make 0.0 financially inhabitable for thousands by adding extra officer spawns, you do it by providing a constant flow of content that makes a good amount of money,
This is correct.
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
which is what the anomalies do
This is completely wrong.
Wanna know what a steady, reliable and good income stream is? Lvl4 missions in empire. They give me much more isk/h than constantly respawning anomalies of dozens of jamming gurista hacs..
No, financially the higher tier anomalies pretty much match level 4s.
So anything but the higher tier anomalies won't? **** yeah. We can make LESS ISK THAN LEVEL FOURS IN EMPIRE AT HUGE PERSONAL COST. While risking being ganked and fighting our wars and dealing with building projects and logistics empire *never* has to deal with.
This really is the NGE
|
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 11:28:00 -
[11]
You're ****ing trolling. There's no other explanation for this. None.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 11:29:00 -
[12]
If you're not trolling you're seriously bringing the NGE to one of the most amazing MMO's ever made.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 11:30:00 -
[13]
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Furb Killer
Quote: Hopefully you have supplementary ways of making money, you know, like moon mining?
CCP seeding R64 moons in providence?
I personally dont even have that much issues with the anomalies, considering belt ratting here in provi is crap. However lets start by dividing the sov costs by 5, and then repost the blog.
As I said, if the costs become an issue, they can always be looked at.
The costs are an issue, look at them.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 11:52:00 -
[14]
A bunch of alliances that can't agree what color coal is all agree this is utter ****.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 11:57:00 -
[15]
Why not just increase the rats per belt to upwards of 50+ bs per belt respawning as normal rats do.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 12:24:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Amy Wang Cost seem fine in general, maybe a bit steep, but thats what the expansion is about isnt it?
however I would switch them around a bit like so:
- claim sov in system w/o station: 5m/d
- extra cost for infrastructure hub: 25m/d
- claim sov in system with an outpost: 30-40m/d
always bugged me that outposts have no running costs attached to them, now is the chance to indirectly introduce such a cost
rest seems fine, although I would be in favor of doubling the JB cost to 25m/d as well provided you remove the need to fuel them completely
Now that's an obvious troll.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 13:00:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Dan Grobag well, with constant stream of anomalies, rating in a carrier might be an option.
Oh god I hope you do this.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:56:00 -
[18]
I really hope CCP isn't half as married to this idea as they seem to be. Why do you willfully accept that the system only supports 10-15 people in it's current state but YOU CAN UPGRADE IT. Why not increase the cost until it can support more than 30+ people with your "planned add ons". CCP has regularly promised us these sort of things that let them "just add on content". They add one one or two things then completely forget about it in favor of a new toy.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 22:22:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Mcon99 I cannot believe how many of these so called existing 0.0 alliances are absolute FAILURES.
Although these proposed system costs are probably 50% - 20% too high (and what happened to the sliding scale?), the path they lead space towards is exactly what EVE needs.
That need is for DENSE player concentrations in 0.0 space, not spread out AFK empires. No wonder why people like CVA and GOONS are complaining. They don't have control of their members. They don't know how to work together as TEAMS. They all run to empire to make isk instead of actually flying and defending their space.
Oh and yes, your spledid PVP skills also work great for NPCs. Shoot some.
15 people per station system is dense?
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 22:33:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Mcon99
15 people per station system is dense?
Lol. So, so misguided. I think i can see your tears from here.
Think about it, you might actually have to have a mining division (gasp) active in your system, and a wormhole gang, and PVPers defending the borders. It's going to be so much fun placing stops all over goon space and watching your sov melt because you can't organize. Damn, with the wormhole generator alone a fully loaded C5 can be worth 4+billion to clear out. So get it through your heads everyone. Organized corps and alliance working all facets of 0.0 space simotaneously, living densly together, each working to benifit the greater whole while sitll making tons of personal isk. No spread out, AFK empires who don't talk to each other until it's time to drop a cap fleet somewhere. Instead, people living side by side within a 5 jump radius of each other harvesting the plentiful resources while killing intruders.
You realize we have all these now right?
|
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 22:39:00 -
[21]
Hell my main BobFromMarketing is a nearly maxed out industrial character that regularly flies hulks IN DELVE
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 23:19:00 -
[22]
This won't hurt us nearly as bad as people may think. Sure it'll reduce our footprint a bit but it will completely destroy any small alliances in 0.0 financially. They will struggle jsut to keep sov in one or two systems. God forbid they get in a war and cant rat 24/7
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 23:25:00 -
[23]
Sup Atlas we've told you a billion times our old space was complete ****. We were not kidding and it looks to only be getting worse. :)
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 23:39:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Dualshock YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 23:58:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Korodan
Originally by: Aeryn Carter
Originally by: Alexis Avalon
Quote: YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 00:13:00 -
[26]
Sorry dude most of us have Jobs and obligations outside internet spaceships. Must be nice to live with mom.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 00:21:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Verlai YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
never stop posting
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 00:30:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Mcon99
Actually don't know why it took me so long to think of this.
CCP - Level 1 and 2 missions in high sec. Level 3's in low only. Level 4's in 0.0 only.
Game play leveled.
There is literally no way this will ever happen.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 01:20:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Future Mutant
Originally by: Sworn Absent
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
excellent clarity of vision I must say!
It is true and something we said from outset that unbalanced alliances who are 95% PvP/Fleet and 5% industry will be most affected by this as we are reducing their dependency on passive point sources and introducing greater active resource density to allow for passive income to take over.
The alliances who will benefit most are those who have or aim to have balanced compositions of people with different playstyles or even act as enforcers or protectors of the space with multiple rental agreements if they wish and we will add tools as we call the treaty system to help facilitate that.
So you basically want to take the sand out of the sandbox and force alliances to operate in a particular way. Cool.
Funny but i dont remember you being too concerned about the sandbox when they proposed npc corp taxes
Because we have little experience with it. Just as you probably have little experience with this so we appreciate you not being concerned or acting as if you have a legit opinion.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 01:27:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Future Mutant Do i know what npc means? It means your a moron you hypocrite.
Originally by: cok cola YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
THIS NEEDS ANSWERING CCP, WERE ALL ASKING, WERE ALL WAITING FOR A RESPONSE.
Also- everyone thats asked this question is a moron- every activity that makes isk can be done in nullsec for more isk per hour compared to highsec.
Haha do you really believe this?
|
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 01:33:00 -
[31]
Thread is about 100 pages short in the same time limit to be considered a threadnaught
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 01:39:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Qlanth
Originally by: Future Mutant Do i know what npc means? It means your a moron you hypocrite.
Originally by: cok cola YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
THIS NEEDS ANSWERING CCP, WERE ALL ASKING, WERE ALL WAITING FOR A RESPONSE.
Also- everyone thats asked this question is a moron- every activity that makes isk can be done in nullsec for more isk per hour compared to highsec.
You are completely wrong.
He forgot to mention how anytime anyone enters 0.0 they are mystically blown up even though no one is in local. That's why he has never come out here.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 01:45:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Vivian Azure
Originally by: ep1k Is there any alliance or corp that has seen this change and is now super excited to leave for 0.0? And what exactly makes any space worth fighting over now that's different before. With moons gone i see even less reason to fight over territory.
This is a problem with most players in EvE. Why should you do something, if you don't gain any rewards by doing so.
Why do we fly around roaming at all you might ask yourself...
This isnt a philosophy discussion. It's a game mechanic discussion. GAME.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 02:37:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Prognosys
Originally by: Masempa
Originally by: Jethro Hawkins YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
Would still love an answer to this by CCP
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 02:45:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Lucas Pantelis YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
Here's to twelve more!
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 02:58:00 -
[36]
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 08/11/2009 02:59:15
Originally by: Aralis Edited by: Aralis on 08/11/2009 02:56:25 Supporters of this patch are coming out with bizarre dribble.
"You should cooperate more.." "You shouldn't hog so much space and let others in.." "You'll have to stop living off all that R64 moon goo.."
If these are the problems - why are we (the CVA) to whom none of these statements apply - the alliance getting shafted the worst by this patch?
Because the people who like this chat are empire dwellers L33t WOLFPAXX players like Tri or Star Fraction and people who don't comprehend how the current sov system works or any of the costs and efforts involved so they damn sure won't "get" the new one.
And
Quote: YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 03:25:00 -
[37]
Quote: YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
So beyond this point can we perhaps get the rest of "non finalized" details to see if maybe they make up for this ******ed flat pay scheme that royally bones p much everyone?
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 03:49:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Sentinel Eeex Welcome to Farmville Online.
I play Farmville and I only have to touch it like once every 4 days and briefly every day to milk the cows.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 04:34:00 -
[39]
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 08/11/2009 04:34:23 I like it because it jsut became insanely easy to grief players out of space by being AFK.
Locate anomaly, AFK in anomaly while cloaked. Get 10 people to do this. Game over :)
Quote: YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 05:26:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Bobby Atlas Edited by: Bobby Atlas on 08/11/2009 05:22:58
Originally by: Pointfive YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
As CCP Chronitus pointed out, the amount of reward to offset a small amount of risk is allot but I also think that is a matter of perception, in either case it is not in of itself the argument being made. The actual argument being made by allot of people is the fact that 0.0 is less profitable than running LVL4 missions in empire and these upgrades in dominion do little if anything to change that situation.
I personally have been playing eve for some 6 years now and I remember when I first came to 0.0 it was a niche idea that you came out here to make money, however that is something that quickly evaporated and has been the consensus for a long time that you do not come out to 0.0 to make money. This should not be the case, 0.0 should not be unprofitable or certainly not less profitable than empire - please do not counter about pvp risks etc.. as we all accept those risks and costs but that is not what we are talking about.
The simple point is that 0.0 life is less profitable than LVL4 missions when in reality it should at very least be equal to or greater than.
Allot of this boils down to lazy development work, I remember 2-3 years ago when the concept of touching the POS code was a nightmare to CCP, you said it wouldn't happen and were admit that it was a monumental challenge. This is the very same situation we see at the moment regarding making true sec values dynamic, belt numbers, the npc spawn density/value within and astroid types/density, all dynamic. This is something CCP needs to tackle head on, the proposed system we have in front of us now is the most indirect method possible of actually fixing the economic inadequacies of 0.0 and it is frankly very lazy way.
I personally have never run a wormhole, never run an anomaly and I know for a fact I am not the only person, there is a large player base that is just not interested in it - we rather fight NPC's in belts in a far more straight forward fashion. So please, get off your collective behindes and rethink the implementation of dominion and actually addressing the economic issues and more importantly the short comings of the code base.
Holy **** I am quoting and completely agreeing with a Bobby Atlas post. God help us all.
|
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 05:41:00 -
[41]
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 08/11/2009 05:41:55
Originally by: Lockefox Late to the thread as usual, but going to throw my two isk into the pile.
Though the system looks very good (and a welcome change to the way things are) looking at it from my alliance's perspective, the cost of entry is much higher than I expected. We were anticipating a significant forward investment, but this seems a little absurd.
30-50m (basically) per system? On top of the other costs already associated with the move (base towers, defenses, etc) to then slap on another "5 towers of fuel" cost seems a little high.
If it were my call, I'd make the system 10% or 20% of the originally stated costs (maybe boost upgrade costs) and instead make holding more systems multiply that cost (similar to war mechanics). Or some sort of exponential curve along those lines.
In sum, please don't lock us smaller guys out of 0.0. We want to rat and pvp and get blown up as much as anyone else! ~Locke
Heh, CCP Locked, Locke out of 0.0.
oh and
Originally by: Bobby Atlas Edited by: Bobby Atlas on 08/11/2009 05:22:58
Originally by: Pointfive YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
As CCP Chronitus pointed out, the amount of reward to offset a small amount of risk is allot but I also think that is a matter of perception, in either case it is not in of itself the argument being made. The actual argument being made by allot of people is the fact that 0.0 is less profitable than running LVL4 missions in empire and these upgrades in dominion do little if anything to change that situation.
I personally have been playing eve for some 6 years now and I remember when I first came to 0.0 it was a niche idea that you came out here to make money, however that is something that quickly evaporated and has been the consensus for a long time that you do not come out to 0.0 to make money. This should not be the case, 0.0 should not be unprofitable or certainly not less profitable than empire - please do not counter about pvp risks etc.. as we all accept those risks and costs but that is not what we are talking about.
The simple point is that 0.0 life is less profitable than LVL4 missions when in reality it should at very least be equal to or greater than.
Allot of this boils down to lazy development work, I remember 2-3 years ago when the concept of touching the POS code was a nightmare to CCP, you said it wouldn't happen and were admit that it was a monumental challenge. This is the very same situation we see at the moment regarding making true sec values dynamic, belt numbers, the npc spawn density/value within and astroid types/density, all dynamic. This is something CCP needs to tackle head on, the proposed system we have in front of us now is the most indirect method possible of actually fixing the economic inadequacies of 0.0 and it is frankly very lazy way.
I personally have never run a wormhole, never run an anomaly and I know for a fact I am not the only person, there is a large player base that is just not interested in it - we rather fight NPC's in belts in a far more straight forward fashion. So please, get off your collective behindes and rethink the implementation of dominion and actually addressing the economic issues and more importantly the short comings of the code base.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 05:47:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Destrim
Originally by: WhiteSavage My worry is where tf is CCP even coming from? The initial costs were SO horrible... did CCP even think about it? DId they run the numbers? Did they not realize that now players would have had to pay extra to be in 0.0? Lowering the costs is helpfull but now onto the other changes... wtf 2 anomolies... wtf those mining things that nobody does because its not worth the time mining out the veld... IS ccp playing the same EVE we're playing?
And WHERE are these "a single system will support 100-150 players at one time." WHAT happened between that statement and the horrible implementation we're being offered today?!
Which feature does CCP expect will improve 0.0 at all in any way? The higher costs of living or the xtra anomolies?
And of all the upgrade possibilities you give us... nothing to do with belt ratting? The #1 income for the average pilot in 0.0 like me?! wtf dudes. wtf
I feel you, believe me, but enough with the complaints. A certain amount of venting is healthy, but I believe we've done enough to fan the flames, lol!
That being said, and I agree with you that their proposed infrastructure upgrades suck, please put forth what you think should be done instead.
What infrastructure upgrades would you rather have?
NPC agents in space or in stations. Bonus to rat bounties Bonus to truesec Bonus to rock composition Bonus to rat respawn speed Bonus to warp speed while in a system you control. (Minor but I can see use for it) Bonus to production in a system you control. Ability to tax any income whatsoever earned inside that system. Ability to send a beacon that decloaks anything in system with less than 0 standings towards owned alliance. Usable once every few hours. (Maybe 4 or 5 so that it cant be spammed on defense ops)
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 06:07:00 -
[43]
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 08/11/2009 06:07:27 6 AM is not the middle of the night. Nor is the 4pm GMT when we STARTED asking it.
Quote: YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 06:14:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Pointfive Honestly i was hoping to see upgrades more along these lines. i always though of 0.0 as being like the wild west. Where you venture out to dangerous lands to get shot at, control some territory make money, and occasionaly find gold.
Concord Bounty Hunter Angent Relay - Allows LP gain for killing pirates in nullsec, create a pvp geared concord lp store
Bounty increase - High activity in your system has driven away all but the most dangerous pirates. 15% bonus to pirate bounty per level
Respawn Speed - High activity in this region has increased pirate activity in the system. 10% bonus to pirate respawn speed per level.
Pirate hideout Locator - Each level increases the chance of locating rare hidden pirate hideout anomalies. These danger pirates do not drop faction items but have significantly increased bounty.
Ship quality increase - Having Faced larger ships constantly, pirates begin to only appear in more difficult ships. Each level reduces the chance of a non battleship spawn by 20%
oh and
YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
They can't implement these because they make too much sense and WE ACTUALLY WANT THESE CHANGES
aaand
Quote: YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 06:20:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Bobby Atlas Edited by: Bobby Atlas on 08/11/2009 05:22:58
Originally by: Pointfive YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
As CCP Chronitus pointed out, the amount of reward to offset a small amount of risk is allot but I also think that is a matter of perception, in either case it is not in of itself the argument being made. The actual argument being made by allot of people is the fact that 0.0 is less profitable than running LVL4 missions in empire and these upgrades in dominion do little if anything to change that situation.
I personally have been playing eve for some 6 years now and I remember when I first came to 0.0 it was a niche idea that you came out here to make money, however that is something that quickly evaporated and has been the consensus for a long time that you do not come out to 0.0 to make money. This should not be the case, 0.0 should not be unprofitable or certainly not less profitable than empire - please do not counter about pvp risks etc.. as we all accept those risks and costs but that is not what we are talking about.
The simple point is that 0.0 life is less profitable than LVL4 missions when in reality it should at very least be equal to or greater than.
Allot of this boils down to lazy development work, I remember 2-3 years ago when the concept of touching the POS code was a nightmare to CCP, you said it wouldn't happen and were admit that it was a monumental challenge. This is the very same situation we see at the moment regarding making true sec values dynamic, belt numbers, the npc spawn density/value within and astroid types/density, all dynamic. This is something CCP needs to tackle head on, the proposed system we have in front of us now is the most indirect method possible of actually fixing the economic inadequacies of 0.0 and it is frankly very lazy way.
I personally have never run a wormhole, never run an anomaly and I know for a fact I am not the only person, there is a large player base that is just not interested in it - we rather fight NPC's in belts in a far more straight forward fashion. So please, get off your collective behindes and rethink the implementation of dominion and actually addressing the economic issues and more importantly the short comings of the code base.
I scrolled up and down like 3 times to make sure we didn't get lotka'ed to ****.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 06:43:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Lucas Pantelis Why would you take space from your enemies when the financial burden of it hurts them more than a loss of sov?
This is why you don't take it, you just render it unusuable by sitting cloakers in the system so they get the bill AND no benefit.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.08 07:31:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Irongut [ ] YES OR [ ] NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/time/effort) than highsec L4 mission running.
Every powerbloc in the game is now spoken for.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:42:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Quesa
Originally by: Future Mutant
Originally by: Hratli Smirks YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
This is a really good question, and I bet CCP really doesn't want to answer it
This question is ******ed and heres why- How much can a miner in god mode make in highsec? maybe 10 mill- how much can the same miner make in null? 60 mill+
Now can any of you goons tell me which number is higher- 10 mill or 60 mill?
Do the math for other activities and null always wins- ratting- null makes more, plex sites- null makes more, missions- null makes more
Is there any activity done in null that makes less then hisec?
No because pretending to be a pirate makes the same amount no matter where you do it.
You just proved you don't know what you are talking about.
And yes, missioning is actually very profitable compared to just about anything in 0.0 and it's not limited in any way unlike missions available to anyone who spends a week grinding standings.
He proved that like 40 pages ago actually.
I see that Jade woke up as I went to bed and spent his day ****ting up the thread with his HIGH SEC HAS MORE RISK nonsense.
I am glad to see CCP is looking into this and will be releasing a statement monday or tuesday. Let's hope it's more effective than stoffer's kicking of the anthill. We still <3 you stoffer but holy **** dont **** on our 0.0 :(
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 05:00:00 -
[49]
Originally by: cok cola
Originally by: Kuar Z'thain Military experts are calling this a Threadnaught.
YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.
THIS NEEDS ANSWERING CCP, WERE ALL ASKING, WERE ALL WAITING FOR A RESPONSE.
I think the fact they haven't answer is pretty telling. For some reason they view Level 4's as some sort of hardcap for non moon goo player isk earned per hour and woe is he who suggests some aspects of the game should be reliably more income without counting on a random drop system.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 05:16:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Mkiaki Boy you "endgame" players really know how to spit the proverbial dummy don't you.
What the hell do you think we do all day? Run missions?
|
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 20:54:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Encalderante Bah, at worst, small alliances crumble. Yay!
Fixed it for you.
To afford these upgrades and properly defend them small alliances will have to band together with other alliances.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 03:01:00 -
[52]
**** I have to post more than 30 times to be the top poster in this thread?
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 11:17:00 -
[53]
Wanna see whining? Cut bounties in missions by 80% and remove all non salvage loot from them as well.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 11:47:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources Wanna see whining? Cut bounties in missions by 80% and remove all non salvage loot from them as well.
Remove jump bridges/jump portals/jump freighters and kill cargo bays/corporate hangars/ship maintenance bays on carriers, moms and titans and we have a deal. In exchange i could even pass with ship bays on freighters.
And this here is a prime example of what I am talking about.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 11:53:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources Wanna see whining? Cut bounties in missions by 80% and remove all non salvage loot from them as well.
Remove jump bridges/jump portals/jump freighters and kill cargo bays/corporate hangars/ship maintenance bays on carriers, moms and titans and we have a deal. In exchange i could even pass with ship bays on freighters.
And this here is a prime example of what I am talking about.
This is prime example of bull**** you and other members of 0.0 are spewing around. "life in 0.0 is risky" "life in 0.0 is hard" "logistics in 0.0 are hard".
No, they are not. They WERE hard few years ago, before freighters were introduced. Freighters helped a lot but they still needed to be escorted (risk part). Nowadays 0.0 is almost risk free, easy to get rich area of the game with **** easy logistics. Jump carrier to random system, npc/plex/whatever around, jump back to empire. Basically - no chance someone will nab you on the way. When you use POSes as landing point or jump bridges to travel it gets even easier faster.
So your "example of what I am talking about" is just another typical rhetorics of most 0.0 allies that has almost no coverage in reality.
You sound pretty mad about the idea of having your missions nerfed. You should take a break, go have lunch or dinner or whatever timezone you live in. Take a few deep breaths.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 12:17:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
You sound pretty mad about the idea of having your missions nerfed. You should take a break, go have lunch or dinner or whatever timezone you live in. Take a few deep breaths.
Another example why you have no clue and are biased towards empire corps is just above. I dont run missions in empire, the rewards are too low. Plexing = isk. But what would you know when you didnt try all isk-making ways
Yes obviously the *real* flaw here is my lack of psychic powers. It's all so clear now. Hahaha
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 02:15:00 -
[57]
MS just went from 3 drones per level of carrier to 1 on SISI. **** 0.0 players amirite right?
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.11 02:17:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Alexander Knott Adapt or die Ed.
That's a pretty easy adaption.
WTS 1 wyvern
|
|
|
|