EVE Search - Sticky:New dev blog: Tech is fine l2p

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

Sticky:New dev blog: Tech is fine l2p

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 15 post(s)
Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 34	Posted - 2012.07.20 20:59:00 - [1] - Quote Alchemy was a BAD fix, so why not remove it instead of expand on it? And this expanded feature depends on another broken thing...posses. To me it seems like CCP learned nothing at all from past mistakes!
Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 34	Posted - 2012.07.21 14:03:00 - [2] - Quote Who says fuel prices will remain the same if more towers are put on cobalt moons? The cost is sure to go up and we will see price rises as will be the demand for new towers. And given the likelihood that current towers will not be taken down, multiple classes of items will go up in price without solving ANYTHING of the original problem! This CCP is what you get for playing communist! FAIL in the power of two! Time to abort this change right here and now and also kill of the past alchemy introduction, just axe it already!
Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 34	Posted - 2012.07.21 15:06:00 - [3] - Quote Lord Zim wrote: That word, "communist", I don't think you know what it means. Well not exactly the same, its the tendency is there and thats what counts. This not balancing, this is an attempt to set prices top-down. And that my friend, happens in communist systems as there is no method of valuing anything correctly as there is no free choice that evaluates what a price for an item should be. Now, if they were to redistribute moon minerals for example, that would be another matter at all!
Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 34	Posted - 2012.07.22 16:18:00 - [4] - Quote Richard Desturned wrote: Inspiration wrote: Now, if they were to redistribute moon minerals for example, that would be another matter at all! redistributing moon minerals is dumb when there's 180k moons in the game that can potentially be mined if your idea of a balanced game is "the game rolls 1d20 for me every x months and i might get a personal tech moon in the process!" well it's not How does that differ from changing the materials needed in T2 production, like they did before? Which costed me around 25b in reaction input stock i had at the time? If that was is legitimate change, then redistributing moon minerals once so that not all stuff sits in one particular place, certainly is too!
Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 34	Posted - 2012.07.22 16:22:00 - [5] - Quote Abdiel Kavash wrote: Inspiration wrote: Lord Zim wrote: That word, "communist", I don't think you know what it means. Well it is not exactly the same, but the the tendency is there and that is what counts. This is not balancing, this is an attempt to set prices top-down. And that my friend, happens in communist systems as there is no method of valuing anything correctly as there is no free choice that evaluates what the price for an item should be. No, that would be if CCP decided to set a fixed NPC buy/sell price on moongoo to put hard limits on it. Even with alchemy you are still free to try to buy/sell tech at any price you want. Alchemy is more comparable to R&D in the real world - expensive materials are being replaced by cheaper and more efficient ones, in order to be able to produce the same stuff cheaper and thus stay competitive. Which is one of the foundations of capitalism. Like magic is in fantasy! Transmuting materials is not the thing your analogy will hold up well to. Using various other materials in new proportions to produce the same stuff would be an appropriate match. And that is NOT what CCP is dong here, the T2 stuff requiring technetium still requires the same input! Besides real progress wouldn't require more POS spam!
Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 34	Posted - 2012.07.22 16:34:00 - [6] - Quote Lord Zim wrote: I think what needs to happen is that Inspiration needs to be forced to scan down two regions, in one sitting. I guess we can allow one bathroom break, but no more. LOL! In a real environment new resources are found and others deplete, requiring "scanning" all the time. THis mechanic is totally absent in moon mining, so you trolling me by proposing I have to scan as if that is an unrealistic amount of work...is well...laughable! You got a pretty poor defense there and the self interest oozes out !
Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 34	Posted - 2012.07.22 16:35:00 - [7] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Inspiration wrote: Richard Desturned wrote: Inspiration wrote: Now, if they were to redistribute moon minerals for example, that would be another matter at all! redistributing moon minerals is dumb when there's 180k moons in the game that can potentially be mined if your idea of a balanced game is "the game rolls 1d20 for me every x months and i might get a personal tech moon in the process!" well it's not How does that differ from changing the materials needed in T2 production, like they did before? Which costed me around 25b in reaction input stock i had at the time? If that was is legitimate change, then redistributing moon minerals once so that not all stuff sits in one particular place, certainly is too! How do you not understand how much moon scanning sucks? What language does that need to be put in for you? You are just plain lazy and want a static environment, meaning you should not even play a game like EVE that undergoes so many changes over its lifetime!
Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 34	Posted - 2012.07.22 16:49:00 - [8] - Quote Lord Zim wrote: Inspiration wrote: Lord Zim wrote: I think what needs to happen is that Inspiration needs to be forced to scan down two regions, in one sitting. I guess we can allow one bathroom break, but no more. LOL! In a real environment new resources are found and others deplete, requiring "scanning" all the time. THis mechanic is totally absent in moon mining, so you trolling me by proposing I have to scan as if that is an unrealistic amount of work...is well...laughable! You got a pretty poor defense there and the self interest oozes out ! 5 regions, then. You don't have to move far in a good system at all!
Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 34	Posted - 2012.07.22 16:53:00 - [9] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Inspiration wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Inspiration wrote: Now, if they were to redistribute moon minerals for example, that would be another matter at all! redistributing moon minerals is dumb when there's 180k moons in the game that can potentially be mined if your idea of a balanced game is "the game rolls 1d20 for me every x months and i might get a personal tech moon in the process!" well it's not How does that differ from changing the materials needed in T2 production, like they did before? Which costed me around 25b in reaction input stock i had at the time? If that was is legitimate change, then redistributing moon minerals once so that not all stuff sits in one particular place, certainly is too! How do you not understand how much moon scanning sucks? What language does that need to be put in for you? You are just plain lazy and want a static environment, meaning you should not even play a game like EVE that undergoes so many changes over its lifetime![/quote] If I'm lazy you're an idiot, hows that fit for you ? EVE has been around for SOO many years and guess what, Moon mining is so damn tedious that there is not one single complete record of every moon in the game. 8 years, in a relatively unchanging environment and no one has scanned all the moons. So am I lazy or are you ignorant of what moon scanning entails? [/quote]
Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 34	Posted - 2012.07.22 17:00:00 - [10] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: EVE has been around for SOO many years and guess what, Moon mining is so damn tedious that there is not one single complete record of every moon in the game. 8 years, in a relatively unchanging environment and no one has scanned all the moons. So am I lazy or are you ignorant of what moon scanning entails? You are wrong on all accounts because: * Every moon (bar high sec, as that cannot be mined) is scanned, often multiple times. * Every relevant moon can be found in public databases. * Of course alliances will try to keep moon information as secret as possible, but that will never change. * Even so, statistics for null sec are available and public and have been for years!

Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 34	Posted - 2012.07.22 17:18:00 - [11] - Quote Lord Zim wrote: Inspiration wrote: * Very moon (bar high sec, as that cannot be mined) is scanned, often multiple times. One moon being scanned by one guy/alliance doesn't mean the rest of the eve universe knows what's going on there. Inspiration wrote: * Every relevant moon can be found in public databases. Wrong. Inspiration wrote: * Of course alliances will try to keep moon information as secret as possible, but that will never change. Which means that everyone has to scan every moon in the entire eve universe. And if you're going to make this a depletable bullshit mechanic, you have to do that every month or 3 months or whatever the **. Inspiration wrote:** * Even so, statistics for null sec are available and public and have been for years! Wrong. I can only laugh at your reply really, first i ain't proposing to change all month mineral locations every x months. Second, All valuable moons are known by the big alliances simply because of the fact that other put a pos on it at one time or another. For null sec goes that when the big alliances know , it is effectively public knowledge. You might not know, but that is your own little problem. Insisting you should know it form public records, is a madness in and of itself. Bus since your lazy and/or just ignorant, here is a long for you to start wising up! http://evemaps.dotlan.net/region/Fountain/moons After seeing stuff like this in a public database, you you really expect that the moons in those system you do not see listed are all valuable? I wouldn't think so!
Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 34	Posted - 2012.07.22 17:23:00 - [12] - Quote Lord Zim wrote: Look at you, assuming that information is actually 100% correct. You even too lazy to verify a single moon, go **** yourself dude...keep asking in Jita for handouts! Pathetic!
Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 36	Posted - 2012.07.23 08:41:00 - [13] - Quote Lord Zim wrote: Ahh, the sounds of a defeated forum combatant. No it is a victory cry as you proven to everyone here you just can't deliver factual point in a discussion and are just here for trolling and free handouts. Does that come with frustration on my side as I wasted so many posts to get here...yes. I had rather has a meaningful discussion instead of a blip like you trying to ruin a game for everyone else. But if that was your goal and it probably is...then cry victory yourself too, but know your just a pathetic troll no1 really cares about!
Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 36	Posted - 2012.07.23 08:50:00 - [14] - Quote Abdiel Kavash wrote: Random shuffling and/or depletion is a very stupid idea. It will not encourage more warfare. Why spend potentially billions in ships to take a moon which might (and very likely will if you don't want to screw with the rarity tables as well) become worthless in a few weeks? All it encourages is holding huge areas of unused space, just to give yourself a better chance of getting the rare spawns. Every moon you hold will be a lottery ticket, the more tickets you have the bigger chance of winning the jackpot. Which is completely opposite to what we (people who have a clue about how 0.0 works, as well as CCP) are trying to accomplish. It will not benefit smaller alliances or corps. That moon in the arse end of Derelik you hold that nobody bothers to take away from you because lol tungsten? Yeah, next week it turns into something moderately valuable and you'll get to see what a fleet of titans looks like from up close. The bigger you are, the more people and alts can you throw at scanning moons, and the faster can you project force across EVE to put up a tower before anybody else does, the more moons you'll be able to grab. Victory or defeat in actual battle will be more or less irrelevant. In order for the 0.0 ecosystem to work there need to be strategic targets to fight over. Whether that's moons or systems or planets or whatever it doesn't really matter, but no alliance will commit fleets of hundreds of ships just to watch the fireworks. Wealth should be determined by winning or losing battles, not by who gets the luck of the draw this month. Think a little of the box instead of just axing it right off the bat. Your concern of space having a random value is not implied by the idea of depletion. Just as some regions are rich in one type of moon material, other are rich in others and change will be slow. Area control over where the good stuff "spawns" will take the space control issue out of the randomness you fear. And please let us not use POS to moon mine, make it an activity involving people ships and a quick setup/abortion instead of static income involving towers only big alliances can defend! There you go, everything addressed you took issue with.
Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 36	Posted - 2012.07.23 08:55:00 - [15] - Quote Richard Desturned wrote: Inspiration wrote: After seeing stuff like this in a public database, you you really expect that the moons in those system you do not see listed are all valuable? I wouldn't think so! If you honestly believe that dotlan's moon data is accurate, I don't know what to tell you. Every moon i double checked years ago was correct, its a good start. As for hostile alliance space, just scan the mining towers they have, ignore all else and you get the good picture rather quick, all hard effort will be done for you by your enemy. So it is not an issue at all that not every single noob can publicly see where the best moons are in all of EVE. Simply because they can;t do anything with it anyway!
Inspiration Focused Radical Energy Engineering 36	Posted - 2012.07.23 09:05:00 - [16] - Quote Scatim Helicon wrote: Dr 0wnage wrote: I see the logic behind this, but its still a reaction to the symptoms and not the problem itself. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt however as you say the real solution in coming. Personally, i would like to see depleting moons with random spawns of new materials. Give all moons a finite amount of resources, and when depleted, they would respawn somewhere else in new eden. This should be quite simple to implement and would solve nearly all of our current moongoo problems. -Rare goo being confined to one part of space would be solved by random seeding. -Rare goo being controlled by only the largest alliances would be largely solved by the unknown locations of new goo deposits. This system could allow WH systems to produce goo as well making moon surveying in unknown space a profession. Adjusting respawn consistency and amounts would allow ccp to somewhat adjust the supply of goo for when asteroid belt mining is implemented. I simply don't see any downsides to this idea... Random moonshifts just discourage spaceholding and territorial conquest and generally make 0.0 irritating for everyone out there. Use your imagination! Random moonshifts and depletion and that sort of stuff can be implemented without influence on territorial warfare. It will change however the passive nature of moon mining into an active one (no longer with towers) And the scanning mechanism can work just like with exploration, and you could enhance systems you control. It wouldn't be totally random either, an area rich in X will keep rich in X, just need to find the details. Other regions will have smaller amount of X too now and then, but with less chance to find it. Everyone happy! Most scanning is done already anyways, in search of combat anomalies. So is it all nothing new, but much better then static moon mining with towers!