EVE Search - New Blog: Upgrading and Upkeep of Sovereign Solar Systems in Dominion

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

New Blog: Upgrading and Upkeep of Sovereign Solar Systems in Dominion

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 119 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 36 post(s)
Dano Ei tr0pa de elite Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.11.07 14:54:00 - [781] Originally by: Vivian Azure Originally by: Dano Ei So you put all these investments in a system, then you grind the ** out of it in a potentially very hostile environment and after all that you get what you could get in Motsu? After all that effort you should expect low sec lvl5 mission rewards attleast and not **ty hi sec lvl4 type rewards. Why would you go through all that trouble if you could get the same in hi sec for 1% of the effort....risk vs. reward remember. High sec lvl 4 type rewards shouldnt be the top you can reach in 0.0. You can call this area of 0.0 your home, and the sov-map will show it. You are talking to the e-peen crowd. I am not one of them.
Hrodgar Ortal Minmatar Ma'adim Logistics	Posted - 2009.11.07 14:54:00 - [782] So 10-15 people doing anomalies with personal income similar to lvl4s, could be a bit more but should be easy enough to tweek (could always boost the amount from 2 extra to 4 extra for example). Hopefully that means we can have at least 5-10 people mining with a decent upgraded mining upgrade and get similar income? Meaning that the grav sites actually need to be worth squat, most 0.0 systems have crap asteroids as well as crap rats so will the extra grav sites actually be worth it? If, and thats a rather big if, that is so a system should be able to support around 30 people which seems rather ok imo. Sure the super mega alliances (goons etc) will still need lots of systems but I don't think anyone said they were to be able to only be in one. Also given that there has been hints on planetary interaction and ways to profit from that I assume alliance income streams might change as that comes which might fix part of the extra costs.
RedClaws Amarr Dragon's Rage Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.11.07 14:54:00 - [783] Personally I don't really like the "lvl 4 agents in 0.0" idea. It's just too ...fake. Imo, the devs should not make 0.0 income "on par with lvl 4". Add the risk of hostile players, the cost of the system + upgrades + losses over wars + expanding the alliance and THAT should be your isk/hr. Disapointed atm but I believe CCP will adjust the values enough before release to make it an alternative to lvl 4's.
iP0D	Posted - 2009.11.07 14:54:00 - [784] Originally by: CCP Soundwave Originally by: Hertford I see you haven't addressed a point I made earlier, so I'll dedicate this post to it alone. In an upgraded system, anomalies will be "on par" with "Motsu", as in (I assume) Level 4 missions there. However, what does the week-old newbie in a caracal do? Should the newbie be locked out of 0.0? Is 0.0 meant to be the Elitists Backyard? From the point of view of the week-old-caracal-newbie, is upgrading anomalies in a system a bad thing? Should the same newbie have to accept to living in a ghetto (un-upgraded 0.0 system)? (A follow-on point is why an upgraded system has only one tier of anomalies. Surely it would be even better if newbies were ratting 'alongside' veterans in the same system.) Ideally we have a set of upgrades that are tailored for frigate and cruiser users. They would function like the pirate magnet, but intead of distributing standard 0.0 anomalies that increase in payout, they distributes sites specifically for people in frigates and cruisers. "Training Sites" like that would help lifting the financial limits EVE currently has for new players that wish to live in 0.0 from the get-go. I'd much prefer to have that than to squeeze vets and newer players into the same sites. Don't do too much of those tbh. Most functioning 0.0 alliances kick out newbies who can't fly minimum requirements to be functional in a team, not to mention those who are not already self sufficient. It's all fine and dandy to want to recreate places like D2 and Xetic and similar victim alliances, but people have kinda grown a bit, and even a newbie these days is quickly up to date on how things work for best practices. Spare yourself that development time imo.
L'Artest	Posted - 2009.11.07 14:56:00 - [785] Edited by: L''Artest on 07/11/2009 14:56:52 Originally by: Rainus Max words Unfortunatly giving a discount for holding more space is the opposite of what CCP seems to want. A constellation bonus would be great, but I'm still curious as to what "Sov 5" will do exactly. Originally by: RedClaws Personally I don't really like the "lvl 4 agents in 0.0" idea. It's just too ...fake. Imo, the devs should not make 0.0 income "on par with lvl 4". Add the risk of hostile players, the cost of the system + upgrades + losses over wars + expanding the alliance and THAT should be your isk/hr. Disapointed atm but I believe CCP will adjust the values enough before release to make it an alternative to lvl 4's. Why not? More risk, more reward. You should know this.
Super Whopper I can Has Cheeseburger	Posted - 2009.11.07 14:56:00 - [786] Originally by: CCP Soundwave We cannot currently put level four agents into 0.0 stations owned by players. I completely agree that it would be a very good solution, as they are one of the few non-finite resources, but it's simply not possible at present. I can promie you that it is high on the list of stuff many of us would love to see, though. You are joking, right? Is this EVE Online or is this Missions Online? I certainly don't pay to continuously run missions, I am a miner and I refuse to run missions. Is this a case of adapt or leave? If so I would like to remind you that EVE is not the only game and I would rather leave than run missions, I can't stomach missions and they make me want to jump out the window. And even then, what's the point in putting LVL 4 agents in 0.0 when people can run those same stupid missions in empire, in safer area's, without the risk of roaming gangs? Ill thought out idea's being put forward, once again. I, as an industrialist, would like to see something done about me having to share my system with all the other miners in my corp. Am I going to have to mine 500 unit Arkonor, Mercoxit and Bistot rocks? This is totally ridiculous and it's not funny. I don't care about the ratters, I don't care about the hordes of mission runners, I care about mining and it's the basis of all that exists in EVE. Anyone who dares say that miners are stupid has the right not to buy anything made by miners and manufacturers... enjoy flying your noob ship in Missions Online. I don't want to be nasty but this expansion is looking ever more of a joke and I now dread its deployment, especially as all care is being taken to accomodate the ratters and mission runners. I'm willing to bet those hubs get taken over by macroers, while I sit there staring at empty belts, waiting for rocks to respawn.
Zahorite	Posted - 2009.11.07 14:56:00 - [787] Originally by: CCP Soundwave Originally by: Hertford I see you haven't addressed a point I made earlier, so I'll dedicate this post to it alone. In an upgraded system, anomalies will be "on par" with "Motsu", as in (I assume) Level 4 missions there. However, what does the week-old newbie in a caracal do? Should the newbie be locked out of 0.0? Is 0.0 meant to be the Elitists Backyard? From the point of view of the week-old-caracal-newbie, is upgrading anomalies in a system a bad thing? Should the same newbie have to accept to living in a ghetto (un-upgraded 0.0 system)? (A follow-on point is why an upgraded system has only one tier of anomalies. Surely it would be even better if newbies were ratting 'alongside' veterans in the same system.) Ideally we have a set of upgrades that are tailored for frigate and cruiser users. They would function like the pirate magnet, but intead of distributing standard 0.0 anomalies that increase in payout, they distributes sites specifically for people in frigates and cruisers. "Training Sites" like that would help lifting the financial limits EVE currently has for new players that wish to live in 0.0 from the get-go. I'd much prefer to have that than to squeeze vets and newer players into the same sites. So based on this you guys aren't finished with the upgrade system. That is fine, just make sure that they are going to balance these costs, because if they don't you are going to lose a lot of subscribers very quickly. And once you lose them your going to have to work to get them back. I like Eve and a great deal of my frustration with this is that it could very easily go very badly.
Pattern Clarc Blue Republic	Posted - 2009.11.07 14:56:00 - [788] CPP Greyscale, what happened ? People get attracted to 0.0 for a whole bunch of reasons, but eventually they will still have to make isk. There's little currently in your proposal that provides more intensive for the average grunt to stay in 0.0 and make the isk, as opposed to returning to there level 4 agent. 1) There isn't more isk to be made in 0.0 for the average grunt. 2) It's less convenient to make isk for the average grunt in 0.0. 3) It's more risky to make isk for the average grunt in 0.0. Fix 2 out of 3 of those issues and you'll probably solve the problem and make a bunch of people happier... Anyway /o\ ____ Domination Balance (Or how we fix the Tempest)
Sally Bestonge	Posted - 2009.11.07 14:56:00 - [789] Stoffer, please reply to my previous post. Do you want me to keep paying for the subscription to my two accounts?
Cefte GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.11.07 14:57:00 - [790] Originally by: Nahia Senne Once upon a time, there was no moon goo and alliances got by just fine. Nothing has changed, people just love to whine about anything and everything. That must be why you've been frantically trying to capture lowsec moon goo for the past two months.

Miraqu Caldari	Posted - 2009.11.07 14:57:00 - [791] Somehow I fail to understand the concerns here. Most seem to ignore that the upgrades consist of more than just ratting. It's about having different players in your corp/alliance. A system will make profit if you have players which use all 3 sides of the upgrades. One could quite easily pay the full fee of around 3b for a full upgraded system if one has players that use all the upgrades. So we will need miners in our corp or a mining corp in our alliance, you will need to change current structures. Just using one of the three possible upgrades will either result in being unable to pay or at least putting a heavy fine/strain on the players utilizing the system. Furthermore, a good part of the corpmates are always away on roaming gangs, defenses or other ops. I never saw any corp having all online members trying to make isk at the same time.
Miklos Kowacs Amarr Royal Amarr Institute	Posted - 2009.11.07 14:57:00 - [792] Yes I am an alt. I live in 0.0 in a 250 man corp in a SOV 4 system. I already have a lot of members asking if they should move back to empire because of the changes. With the posting of this dev blog, I'm sure that people will already start leaving 0.0. I agree with Bobby Atlas and others that this is an ill-conceived upgrade. No 1. Eve is an closed economy. The people who play Eve produce probably 80% of the items that people buy vs the items that CCP sells from empire. What I see is CCP trying to skim off a sizable chunk of isk out of the market to encourage people to generate more. We're basically talking about removing 500 Billion to one Trillion isk a month out of the game. Once you pay your tax, it doesn't give you anything for it except sov and the ability to do certain things. The loss of operating capital from the game will only do one of 2 things. First is force some people to buy and sell GTCs to make rent, thereby putting more money in CCP's pocket. Second is loss of player base due to having to grind out isk to pay rent. After three to six months of grinding, 0.0 will be empty. 2. Is sov no longer constellation based? I am in a sov 4 system. If I only have to hold one station, does that mean anyone can come in the other two systems and claim sov because I can't afford 6 billion a month to keep sov in all 3 station systems? For my corp to remain as we are, it would cost us 16 billion isk a month to maintain sov for the stations and jumpbridges to empire. 3 Your point about POS's doesn't wash with reality. We hold sov in 3 constellations and our fuel costs are 5- 6 billion a month. We have 30 full faction deathstars that will basically be unneeded on this happens. Within 30 days faction towers will glut the market and small corps will have lost billions in assets. 4. I predict that every system within 2 jumps of empire will be contested for sov and that any area that needs more then 2 sets of Jumpbridges will slowly empty.

CCP Soundwave C C P Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.07 14:57:00 - [793] Originally by: Hertford Originally by: CCP Soundwave Ideally we have a set of upgrades that are tailored for frigate and cruiser users. They would function like the pirate magnet, but intead of distributing standard 0.0 anomalies that increase in payout, they distributes sites specifically for people in frigates and cruisers. "Training Sites" like that would help lifting the financial limits EVE currently has for new players that wish to live in 0.0 from the get-go. I'd much prefer to have that than to squeeze vets and newer players into the same sites. I'm not saying newbies and bitter bitter veterans should be squeezed into the same sites. I am saying that a newbie and a bitter bitter veteran should find opportunity in the same system. "Training Sites" is a terrible name, fyi. It goes to show that my awesomepost on page 23 is in fact not what you are implementing at all. If you re-read it, I specifically mention ten tiers of difficulty, with the bottom aimed at newbie in a frigate, and the mid-level aimed at a T2 fitted battleship. That allows a nice spread from frigate, through cruiser and battlecruier, onto battleship, and then beyond for high SP players and groups. So we pretty much agree, but are arguing names and semantics?


CCP Soundwave C C P Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.07 14:59:00 - [794] Originally by: Zahorite Originally by: CCP Soundwave Originally by: Hertford I see you haven't addressed a point I made earlier, so I'll dedicate this post to it alone. In an upgraded system, anomalies will be "on par" with "Motsu", as in (I assume) Level 4 missions there. However, what does the week-old newbie in a caracal do? Should the newbie be locked out of 0.0? Is 0.0 meant to be the Elitists Backyard? From the point of view of the week-old-caracal-newbie, is upgrading anomalies in a system a bad thing? Should the same newbie have to accept to living in a ghetto (un-upgraded 0.0 system)? (A follow-on point is why an upgraded system has only one tier of anomalies. Surely it would be even better if newbies were ratting 'alongside' veterans in the same system.) Ideally we have a set of upgrades that are tailored for frigate and cruiser users. They would function like the pirate magnet, but intead of distributing standard 0.0 anomalies that increase in payout, they distributes sites specifically for people in frigates and cruisers. "Training Sites" like that would help lifting the financial limits EVE currently has for new players that wish to live in 0.0 from the get-go. I'd much prefer to have that than to squeeze vets and newer players into the same sites. So based on this you guys aren't finished with the upgrade system. That is fine, just make sure that they are going to balance these costs, because if they don't you are going to lose a lot of subscribers very quickly. And once you lose them your going to have to work to get them back. I like Eve and a great deal of my frustration with this is that it could very easily go very badly. We certainly have ideas on how to expand the upgrade system, and everything like number of sites, upkeep cost etc can easily be adjusted, based on feedback (like this thread \o/)

Bobby Atlas Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:00:00 - [795] Originally by: Kerfira Edited by: Kerfira on 07/11/2009 14:55:31 Originally by: Bobby Atlas You clearly are a member that has to deal with any of the management tasks of an alliance or deal with cost issues. When the corporation you are part of shoots it taxes up, the alliance imposes membership fee's, station services/refining tax/repair costs go up and reimbursement programs dry up - clearly you are not just going to run to empire and farm on your L4 alt who is outside of the alliance. Actually, we already DO pay quite a high (compared to this) corp tax per month... Enough to keep sov in 10+ systems from our corp alone.... The rest of the alliance pays their share too... The mission runner money is used to: 1. Pay corp tax 2. Pay ships + fittings What the hell else is there to spend money on????? I don't hoard ISK for the sake of hoarding ISK (which is a pretty stupid thing)... But, then again, we're one of the corp/alliances that DOESN'T have a lot of freeloaders, meaning we'll probably come off quite well from this! You have clearly made a compelling argument with an NPC alt, you are clearly so infallible that you can be transparent and tell us all who you are and what alliance you belong too. If you are already pay quite high taxes, wait till dominion when those taxes go out the ass cause the costs just went up exorbitantly. I am sorry but the case you make loses all ground when you are hiding behind an NPC alt. As for what to spend isk on, lets see - combat, reimbursements, infrastructure and capitals to name a few.
Niding Polaris Project Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:00:00 - [796] If ive missed it im sorry, but ive yet to see how CCP quantifies how we are supposed to justify the upgrades. Yes, we can SUBSIDIZE them from high sec income, but tbh that surely cant be CCPs intention? Have CCP run the math on the actual LONGTERM yield of anomalies? As mentioned earlier it has to be expected to see a decrease in the isk per unit value as more and more people run these anomilies, and this will (as I can see it) nullify the very shortterm value. Also, regardless of the longterm yield, SOV holding alliances are not likely to see much of the wealth that supposedly will be generated from these changes. There has been mentioned "treaties", but unless "treaties" are installed with the first patch, there are nothing to encourage neutrals to actually pay SOV holders any isk to offset the upkeep. So where is the incentive to actually upgrade? Why should we go past just controlling the outposts and patrolling our "turf", ensuring that noone else will be given a chance to claim sov?
Vivian Azure	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:01:00 - [797] Originally by: Sethur Blackcoat Originally by: Vivian Azure You can call this area of 0.0 your home, and the sov-map will show it. Yeah, most people in 0.0 alliances aren't actually that narcissistic to pay 1+ bil/month just to see their alliance name in the upper left corner with no other tangible benefit, hth~ So why did Goonswarm or any other alliance moved into 0.0 in the first place? 0.0 was never attractive when talking about ISK. The only interesting thing was moon-mining and some higher tier complexes. The problem with you people is, that you want CCP to make the game into a Hello-kitty-Wonderland, where you don't have to incvest anything but can milk the cow. there's tons of games where you can do so. EvE is a MMO and CCP emphatizes on the Massive Multiplayer part in 0.0. Now your members need to contribute to the whole thing, instead of just milking the cow with a few industrial players... I couldn't care less about you lazy bums actually. Like I said. If my alliance keeps their valuable systems, outpost-systems and the systems needed for logistic, then we can cut down to somewhere around 20 systems that need to be claimed. The money to pay the bills for these 20 systems is allready made in empire by our producers and the moon-mining-towers in low-sec and 0.0. If you wanna claim more sace then that, well... be my guest and start working for it.
Zeturi Caldari 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:01:00 - [798] If you actually want some costs to be reduced (read : tower fuel), why not make it so that if you have sov in a system towers of that alliance take no fuel or a small amount. To keep it from getting out of hand you could of limit the number of "free" towers to say 3-5 or something similar as that's what this upkeep price is supposed to be like.
Sally Bestonge	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:02:00 - [799] Originally by: Miraqu Somehow I fail to understand the concerns here. Most seem to ignore that the upgrades consist of more than just ratting. It's about having different players in your corp/alliance. A system will make profit if you have players which use all 3 sides of the upgrades. One could quite easily pay the full fee of around 3b for a full upgraded system if one has players that use all the upgrades. So we will need miners in our corp or a mining corp in our alliance, you will need to change current structures. Just using one of the three possible upgrades will either result in being unable to pay or at least putting a heavy fine/strain on the players utilizing the system. Furthermore, a good part of the corpmates are always away on roaming gangs, defenses or other ops. I never saw any corp having all online members trying to make isk at the same time. There is no need to grind ISK to pay for upgrades while running missions/mining in highsec. Why should people who want to live in 0.0 grind ISK to pay for sov/upgrades when the overall pay is comparable to highsec? Why not live in NPC 0.0, rat and run missions there, without worrying about the biweekly sov bill?
Tia Tzu Caldari G.E.A.R.	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:03:00 - [800] Face it all you big alliances, CCP are changing things because you are making the game so boring.. If you won't be able to hold all the space you do now, then thats a good thing and really the whole point. Things need shaking up in 0.0, atm its just the same old vested interests that have been there for years hoarding all the isk from moon mining. And lol at all you ppl (mostly from goons) who say mining is pointless and ratting is the only worthwhile method of making isk, you are just so self centered you cant see past the end of your own noses. It's tragic all you rank and file have no clue about the bigger picture cos it's your alliance leaders that have been coining it in behind your backs for years. While making even simple ship reimbursements for mandatory ops like getting blood from a stone. CCP are trying to do you a favour

Super Whopper I can Has Cheeseburger	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:03:00 - [801] Originally by: CCP Soundwave We certainly have ideas on how to expand the upgrade system, and everything like number of sites, upkeep cost etc can easily be adjusted, based on feedback (like this thread \o/) I don't mind more sites, as long as there's something to mine there. Nobody in their right mind is going to sit in a site and mine rocks that will deplete in one and a half cycle. It's a waste of time and will just encourage people to rat and run missions. I might be overreacting but this thread has repeatedly put forward the masses of (macro) ratters and mission runners. Please, do not ignore the industrialists.
Hertford Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:03:00 - [802] Originally by: CCP Soundwave So we pretty much agree, but are arguing names and semantics? Everything you have posted indicates that a system will have only one level of difficulty for the anomalies within it. Upgrading changes that level of difficulty. At no point have you mentioned having a smooth progression of difficulty. The only mention of catering to newbies was "training sites", which is a new one. The give-away statement was "I'd much prefer to have that than to squeeze vets and newer players into the same sites.". iPOD: Minimum requirements for alliance warfare: Minmatar Frigate III Propulsion Jamming I High Speed Maneuvering I But that doesn't belong here. My only statement is CCP wishes to encourage more people into 0.0. Newbies are people too.
WarDecEvading NPCCorpAlt	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:05:00 - [803] How 'bout a pretty straight-forward question: With these changes, what incentive is there to live in conquerable space instead of NPC space, lowsec, or Motsu?

CCP Soundwave C C P Alliance	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:05:00 - [804] Originally by: Super Whopper Originally by: CCP Soundwave We certainly have ideas on how to expand the upgrade system, and everything like number of sites, upkeep cost etc can easily be adjusted, based on feedback (like this thread \o/) I don't mind more sites, as long as there's something to mine there. Nobody in their right mind is going to sit in a site and mine rocks that will deplete in one and a half cycle. It's a waste of time and will just encourage people to rat and run missions. I might be overreacting but this thread has repeatedly put forward the masses of (macro) ratters and mission runners. Please, do not ignore the industrialists. The anomalies won't have rocks, but there are mining upgrades as well, providing more rocks for you to mine :)

Orthaen	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:06:00 - [805] Where is everyone getting the 2 billion a month standard from? The dev blog clearly states 900 million/month for a system with an infrastructure hub. Unless of course you're planning to have a cyno jammer and jump bridge in every single system, in which case you're a ****tard, and you deserve to lose money. Military/Industry upgrades don't add to upkeep, they're a one time fee. Even putting a cyno jammer and infrastructure hub in every system is 1.65 billion per month, which isn't exactly game breaking especially considering it isn't required. I personally make about 250 million/month for my corp. In hi-sec. By copying 3 blueprints. You poor 0.0 warriors must have it so hard, with out the option to copy blueprints, or react moon minerals, or run production lines. I feel for you guys, because your alliances only have 1 person in them who can only generate 1 isk per day, and this new system is COMMUNIST AND HORRIBLE EVEN THOUGH IT ISNT IN THE GAME YET WAAAAH. PS. I realize 250/month doesn't pay for sovereignty. I suggest your alliances run more then 3 copy jobs, and gets more then 1 member. You could also try cutting back on jump bridge routes, and have some manufacturing lines in 0.0, lessening the requirement for 0.0-empire logistics.
Dastycakes Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:06:00 - [806] Simple question. How many people does this new sov system you guys introduced allow to operate at the same time in system and what is the estimated isk gained compared to the cost? There are some goons -dastommy79
Sally Bestonge	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:08:00 - [807] Originally by: Tia Tzu And lol at all you ppl (mostly from goons) who say mining is pointless and ratting is the only worthwhile method of making isk, you are just so self centered you cant see past the end of your own noses. So, you're saying everyone should be able to pilot a Hulk and mine ISK? Maxed Hulks mining bistot (no arkonor in our space) earn maybe 30m an hour, and that is not considering roid popping/relocation/disruption from hostile activity. Many people in 0.0 alliances have 1 trained pilot, that being a PVP pilot. Few have two with one being able to fly a Hulk. Mining in anything less than a Hulk is painful because ISK earned per hour drops well below 0.0 ratting. There's a difference between holding space and holding sovereignty. For example, many NPC 0.0 alliances hold parts of their regions, but do not hold sovereignty. 0.0 alliances will simply drop sov everywhere and quash anyone who chooses to come near. Now, does that sound boring to you? It does to me.
Hrodgar Ortal Minmatar Ma'adim Logistics	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:08:00 - [808] Originally by: CCP Soundwave Originally by: Super Whopper Originally by: CCP Soundwave We certainly have ideas on how to expand the upgrade system, and everything like number of sites, upkeep cost etc can easily be adjusted, based on feedback (like this thread \o/) I don't mind more sites, as long as there's something to mine there. Nobody in their right mind is going to sit in a site and mine rocks that will deplete in one and a half cycle. It's a waste of time and will just encourage people to rat and run missions. I might be overreacting but this thread has repeatedly put forward the masses of (macro) ratters and mission runners. Please, do not ignore the industrialists. The anomalies won't have rocks, but there are mining upgrades as well, providing more rocks for you to mine :) More doesn't mean worthwhile. For example mining in most 0.0 now is (imo) worthless, I won't touch anything but the high ends since the isk/h is so bad. There needs to be good rocks not just many.
ElvenLord 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:09:00 - [809] Originally by: Vivian Azure EvE is a MMO and CCP emphatizes on the Massive Multiplayer part in 0.0. Now your members need to contribute to the whole thing, instead of just milking the cow with a few industrial players... I couldn't care less about you lazy bums actually. Multiplayer in 0.0 is turning into multi player vs NPCs in 0.0. Instead of having wars and player vs player fun, eve is slowly turning into player vs NPC. End game my ass.
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.11.07 15:10:00 - [810] Edited by: Rastigan on 07/11/2009 15:10:43 Edited by: Rastigan on 07/11/2009 15:09:45 Originally by: Vivian Azure The problem with you people is, that you want CCP to make the game into a Hello-kitty-Wonderland, where you don't have to incvest anything but can milk the cow. there's tons of games where you can do so. Because hundreds of towers fuel themselves for free every month, and there arent people who disrupt logistics and once you have sov3 all friendly ships are suddenly immune from pvp harm.. Dont forget towers totally defend themseves from hostile fleets, we can rat the entire time. Most friendlies believe this.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 119 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.