Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Psychotic Monk
Paper Snowstorm Petition Blizzard
903
|
Posted - 2013.03.12 21:09:00 -
[91] - Quote
Dersen Lowery wrote:If the issue is an impedance mismatch between POSes in high sec and POSes in WH space (and, having access to both, I agree that there is), then how about some ideas that depend on space:
1) High sec towers require starbase charters. Instead of lasting for a fixed amount of time, have them last four times longer for small towers and twice as long for medium towers, modified additionally by the corp's current faction standing. This would incidentally help close one of the more obnoxious loopholes involved in setting up a high sec tower.
2) Buff small and medium towers so that they're easier to work from in high sec and easier to live in in WH space.
3) Use faction standings to make smaller towers more attractive (again) along the lines that most high sec people care about so that there's more of an incentive to use them. Maybe along the lines of 1., there would be a refining and manufacturing [edit: durrrr, and BP research] efficiency bonus related to faction standing that was best for small towers and worst for large ones. (This, incidentally, would dovetail neatly with a nullsec implementation where refining and manufacturing efficiency would increase with whatever measures are used to determine system usage in a farms & fields system. The problem is, what to do with WHs?)
4) Accept that, in a game where loss has real consequences, there are always going to be people willing to pay a steep price to put up a sufficiently daunting fortification to convince 99.9% of would-be attackers to leave them alone, and this is fine, as long as there's a price to pay for enjoying it. This, in particular, is what what makes wormholes and high sec both friendly to small corps.
What I'm seeing in your proposal is an advantage to highsec industry when it's already much better than nullsec industry. You mention that these bonuses would carry over based on the metrics of a new Farms & Fields sov system, but as we have absolutely no indication what that would entail, specifically, we seem to be putting the cart before the horse. Further, that doesn't actually help the problem of taking down large towers in these situations. I don't feel this is the solution we're looking for at all.
Yes, we could accept that people are willing to pay a steep price for highly decreased risk, but the cost of a large tower and hardeners/ECM is not significant. When put in the light of the profit obtained from a well-run large POS, the cost of the POS and mods are really quite cheap. Additionally, it's very strongly my feeling that safety should be something you do, rather than something you buy or something you have.
C 3 PO:
Limiting hardeners in highsec seems like a decent response. A limit on taking down towers during wars limits the ability to mess with people taking down POS towers (by killing/bumping the dude taking the stuff down and stealing it, for instance). Besides that, if your goal is to free up a moon, then having your opponent take down the POS is exactly what you want. Psychotic Monk for CSM. Belligerent Undesirables Blog. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8111
|
Posted - 2013.03.12 21:30:00 -
[92] - Quote
June Ting wrote:Malcanis wrote:Well speaking for myself, I don't want to make it easier to hit towers in W-space at all. Dreads are already a thing in W-space, and they're more than efficient enough to clear out any towers. So if I'm understanding you correctly, you have no objection to me setting up a risk-free moongoo reaction farm on dickstarred towers in C1 W-space where there is ~0 risk of someone bothering to set up a large tower of their own, put up (and risk during build process) multiple billions of isk into building a dread in that hole, and then blapping my towers? (and then SDing the dread because it is not reusable for any other purpose)? The point of reactions only being usable on towers in lowsec/nullsec/w-space is to make it feasible for people to disrupt them. In practice, it seems like it's impossible to disrupt a C1 reaction farm and that therefore there is zero risk involved.
Are people using C1s for reaction farms in practice? The logistics seem like they would be annoying. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
June Ting
Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.12 21:38:00 -
[93] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Are people using C1s for reaction farms in practice? The logistics seem like they would be annoying. I've never personally set one up, but the logistics would be super easy with a C1 with a high static, and far easier than any logistics involving lowsec or nullsec -- you wouldn't even need a cloaky hauler or a jump freighter, just a itty V, a prober, and a pair of eyes to watch your static. Proud independent player. I support Ali Aras and Psychotic Monk for CSM 8! Ali's thread: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=213048 Monk's thread: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=212105 |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
8111
|
Posted - 2013.03.12 21:41:00 -
[94] - Quote
You'll excuse me being the tiniest bit sceptical about people who say things are "super easy" when they've never actually attempted them Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
June Ting
Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind
15
|
Posted - 2013.03.12 21:50:00 -
[95] - Quote
I can tell you that my C2 with highsec static is stupidly easy to manage. At least twice a week, we get a static within 4 jumps of a trade hub, and I leave my prober cloaked off the hole, load up a Badger Mark II with the supplies we need, and bring it straight in and warp to 0 at my tower. There is no challenge involved in it whatsoever, and no need to invest in expensive hulls or high-skilled characters to get that bit of logistics done.
I choose to do my reactions in sov null because of the fuel bonus and suck up having to pay jump freight or paying alliancemates to make cloaky hauler runs, but if I didn't have sov null I assure you that a C1 or C2 with a highsec static would be my very next choice of place to put reactions because of the fact that no caps can be moved into the hull and because it opens directly into highsec; therefore, there is zero risk involved whatsoever of having dreads dropped on my towers or of having my haulers ganked.
Just because I don't personally do a cheesy thing doesn't mean it's not cheesy or that other people don't do it. Proud independent player. I support Ali Aras and Psychotic Monk for CSM 8! Ali's thread: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=213048 Monk's thread: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=212105 |
Karl Hobb
Stellar Ore Refinery and Crematorium
1326
|
Posted - 2013.03.12 22:18:00 -
[96] - Quote
June Ting wrote:I can tell you that my C2 with highsec static is stupidly easy to manage. Confirming this. About the only thing you have to worry about is the random roaming gang or occasional cloaky bastard. A C1 makes things even easier. I support Malcanis and Psychotic Monk for CSM8. |
None ofthe Above
458
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 00:54:00 -
[97] - Quote
Mr. Monk,
Nice entry into the race. Actually quite surprised. You represent your play-style quite well.
If you had asked me even a few months ago about you on CSM I would have been quite appalled.
"That a-hole? Never."
But it seems you may just be the a-hole we need on CSM 8. EVE is a sandbox; The only "end-game" content in EVE is the crap that makes you rage-quit.
|
Psychotic Monk
Paper Snowstorm Petition Blizzard
903
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 01:11:00 -
[98] - Quote
Thanks. I hope I win. Our play style hasn't had an effective CSM representative... possibly ever. Psychotic Monk for CSM. Belligerent Undesirables Blog. |
anthie
Biggest Dickest
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 04:52:00 -
[99] - Quote
I'm considering throwing my 5 votes on you since no Noir is running this time from talking with Alexander ingame
But just briefly and short to the point, why should i vote for you, what benefits would i get
are we talking sexual favors in a deep corner og low sec somewhere or ? |
Psychotic Monk
Paper Snowstorm Petition Blizzard
907
|
Posted - 2013.03.13 16:05:00 -
[100] - Quote
Besides a handie behind the bleachers, there are two thing I offer that no other candidate seems to be doing at the moment.
Firstly, I am the only candidate that seems to be advocating that players in highsec be able to get further involved in each others business. As a merc, this means more business and more interesting gameplay for you.
Secondly, I am the only candidate that has extensive and recent experience in the interactive parts of highsec. This means wardecs, mission invasion, awoxing, suspect baiting and so on. James has experience suicide ganking, but that's about it. And not only do none of the other CSM candidates have that experience, but CCP thinks so little of us that they don't allow their employees to play in our part of space. That means that all the knowledge they possess that's relevant is somewhere between second-hand and a distant memory. They need someone on hand that can actually speak from experience about these things.
But yeah, beyond that, my exchange of sexual favours scales depending on number of votes. Email me about that. Psychotic Monk for CSM. Belligerent Undesirables Blog. |
|
anthie
Biggest Dickest
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 09:15:00 -
[101] - Quote
Well considering i am a low sec dweller and want no part of the land of carebears other than i don't want them getting anymore love than they have gotten the last few years, up to and including the latest stunt, warp drives getting disabled the moment you try to suicide gank someone, that part is just so game breaking for me, and besides high sec has always been more about docking games war , not an actual war dec, so if you can see to it that once you engage something, up that docking timer even more.
I would have thought you would have atleast looked up my name and from that you could have seen i was negative ten, but when it comes to votes, well me and my fellow low sec dwellers do count for a substantial amount, so if you truely believe you have something to offer us, please do let us know. |
Tora Bushido
EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective
263
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 12:13:00 -
[102] - Quote
If you can go from this :
Old Monk
to :
New Monk - CSM8
You must be damn good
Psychotic Monk for CSM |
Psychotic Monk
Paper Snowstorm Petition Blizzard
912
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 14:28:00 -
[103] - Quote
Believe me, having any bit of cleverness nerfed out from under us is a very large concern for me.
Seeing your friends and peers adapt to the situation here in highsec and seeing them have anything clever they come up with nerfed into the ground can be extremely discouraging, and watching your entire playstyle get pushed aside in favour of a bug like dec scraping when anything that inconveniences those unwilling to adapt to their situation catered to can be absolutly heart-wrenching.
So, yes, when you see a nerf like getting insta-scrammed upon suicide gank looks painful to you, our lowsec cousins, know that it feels worse. It feels like CCP doesn't even want you in this game at all. I've lost many of my most talented friends and peers that way.
As for what I can do for lowsec, I'm not entirely sure. Lowsec is the only bit of space that I haven't lived in at one point or another. It's my understanding that it's in a fairly decent place these days, especially compared to how it was before the FW revamp. What would you like attention called to? Psychotic Monk for CSM. Belligerent Undesirables Blog. |
anthie
Biggest Dickest
0
|
Posted - 2013.03.14 20:45:00 -
[104] - Quote
Thing that is most annoying is the FW cunts in low sec, they sit there in their small t1 frigs with a cloak on and 3 stabs in order to farm the sites for LP , what i'd like see done is , nerf the ability to sit cloaked inside a FW, make it so they just can't sit in their an amarr site being an amarr de plexing the system with just a t1 frig with a cloak and 3 stabs on if someone from the opposing faction or like me a pirate enters the site using a proper ship for that site.
The carebearness of FW is plain right disgusting that they can be allowed to do that
I propose a buff for FW sites , let there both be a FW rat for both sides "duking" it out, that means that someone with said cloak and 3 stabs on would not just be able to sit there for the 10 to 20 minutes with a random no good alt deplexing or plexing up the system, since they never bother to fit any kind of combat on their useless alts.
Carebears have gotten way to much love the last couple of years, where is the Open PVP , where is the Sandbox game Eve started out to be in 2003
Its just heart breaking having to cater to WoW kids and other MMO Themepark kids comming to Eve. |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
525
|
Posted - 2013.03.16 14:34:00 -
[105] - Quote
anthie wrote:Thing that is most annoying is the FW cunts in low sec, they sit there in their small t1 frigs with a cloak on and 3 stabs in order to farm the sites for LP , what i'd like see done is , nerf the ability to sit cloaked inside a FW, make it so they just can't sit in their an amarr site being an amarr de plexing the system with just a t1 frig with a cloak and 3 stabs on if someone from the opposing faction or like me a pirate enters the site using a proper ship for that site.
The carebearness of FW is plain right disgusting that they can be allowed to do that
I propose a buff for FW sites , let there both be a FW rat for both sides "duking" it out, that means that someone with said cloak and 3 stabs on would not just be able to sit there for the 10 to 20 minutes with a random no good alt deplexing or plexing up the system, since they never bother to fit any kind of combat on their useless alts.
Carebears have gotten way to much love the last couple of years, where is the Open PVP , where is the Sandbox game Eve started out to be in 2003
Its just heart breaking having to cater to WoW kids and other MMO Themepark kids comming to Eve.
It's a complete disgrace. The FW Medals should have the shap of a Warp Core Stabilizer. |
Psychotic Monk
Paper Snowstorm Petition Blizzard
932
|
Posted - 2013.03.18 22:25:00 -
[106] - Quote
Hey dudes. In about an hour I'm going to be on the Declarations of War podcast having a debate against Trebor. Aleks Karrde will be moderating and there's a thread up taking suggestions for questions in this very subforum. You should go tell him what you'd like to hear me drone on about. Psychotic Monk for CSM. Belligerent Undesirables Blog. |
Sabriz Adoudel
Resurgent Threat
132
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 01:32:00 -
[107] - Quote
Added some friendly questions to your battle with Trebor (in that thread). '... you cannot reason with the mining bots, you cannot negotiate with them, you can only bring them judgement in the form of Navy Antimatter, turn their Mackinaws to salvage and dust, smartbomb their pods, and burn their Mining Link implants with sweet incense...'- The Gospel according to St James 315 |
Theron Vetrus
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
25
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 02:23:00 -
[108] - Quote
I am a Belligerent Undesirable, and I approve this message. Endorsed.
Take what you can, give nothing back. I'm looking for a pirate corp Psychotic Monk for CSM8 |
Dersen Lowery
Laurentson INC StructureDamage
463
|
Posted - 2013.03.19 17:21:00 -
[109] - Quote
Psychotic Monk wrote:What I'm seeing in your proposal is an advantage to highsec industry when it's already much better than nullsec industry. You mention that these bonuses would carry over based on the metrics of a new Farms & Fields sov system, but as we have absolutely no indication what that would entail, specifically, we seem to be putting the cart before the horse. Further, that doesn't actually help the problem of taking down large towers in these situations. I don't feel this is the solution we're looking for at all.
May I ask how? That certainly was not my intention. The goal was to encourage the use of small and medium towers in high sec, and large towers where they can be reasonably threatened, and/or people in high sec are willing to pay a significant penalty for an assurance of safety.
I am assuming that nearly-free NPC station manufacturing is going the way of the do-do, at least in high sec, because that only makes sense.
Malcanis, Ripard Teg, and Trebor Daehdoow for CSM 8
(I have three accounts, so why not?) |
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks Petition Blizzard
2948
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 00:56:00 -
[110] - Quote
Returning to the POS-in-highsec discussion, I think there's an easy target that everyone has overlooked in this thread. In fact, I've overlooked it until today. I'm talking about the one thing that only affects highsec POS management: starbase charters.
The current system requires 720 charters to maintain a POS for 30 days in highsec, regardless of size. At Jita price of 3599 per charter, that's a paltry 2.59 million isk.
What if we raised the charter consumption for medium and large POS? And I don't mean double or triple it. Let's add a zero for each step in size. Suddenly mediums cost 25.9 million a month and larges cost 259 million a month. And that's not even accounting for the tremendous impact this change would have on the price of charters.
What's more, towers that have exhausted their charters should be unanchored, not simply put offline. This way the first person to find the tower could scoop it and the system would become self-cleaning. Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement. |
|
Sabriz Adoudel
Resurgent Threat
137
|
Posted - 2013.03.20 23:57:00 -
[111] - Quote
Given James 315 has withdrawn from the race, you'll get my vote and I'll try to get the rest of the minerbumping community voting for you too. '... you cannot reason with the mining bots, you cannot negotiate with them, you can only bring them judgement in the form of Navy Antimatter, turn their Mackinaws to salvage and dust, smartbomb their pods, and burn their Mining Link implants with sweet incense...'- The Gospel according to St James 315 |
Psychotic Monk
Paper Snowstorm Petition Blizzard
940
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 00:11:00 -
[112] - Quote
Thanks very much. I'll need those votes and I appreciate it. You should know there are some things that James has been arguing for that I won't be, such as the removal of level 4 missions from highsec.
However, I do think that I'm the best candidate to represent the people that would otherwise be voting for James in his absence and I hope I don't let you guys down. I'll likely be stopping by your forums or a chat channel near you to talk about it in the near future. Psychotic Monk for CSM. Belligerent Undesirables Blog. |
Wescro2
New Order Logistics CODE.
96
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 01:19:00 -
[113] - Quote
Monk, what do you think of James 315 criticism of the CSM that he presented when withdrawing from the race, specifically as it applies to your campaign. For example, you may be constrained by the NDA such that you would no longer be able to write your immensely popular and influential guides on running safaris. You are known among the belligerents undesirable community as an innovator and a mentor, both roles which stand to be "nerfed" by an NDA.
Also, we know that CCP employees are not allowed to suicide gank. It is not hard to imagine there being bans on CCP employees committing generally villainous activity, perhaps for reasons of propriety. Since CCP picks the "Iceland 5," do you think perhaps this misplaced notion of propriety could see you kept out of the process? |
Sabriz Adoudel
Resurgent Threat
137
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 01:39:00 -
[114] - Quote
Psychotic Monk wrote:Thanks very much. I'll need those votes and I appreciate it. You should know there are some things that James has been arguing for that I won't be, such as the removal of level 4 missions from highsec.
However, I do think that I'm the best candidate to represent the people that would otherwise be voting for James in his absence and I hope I don't let you guys down. I'll likely be stopping by your forums or a chat channel near you to talk about it in the near future.
My position on missions in highsec is different to that of James.
I'm for having level 4 and 5 missions in highsec, but reducing their rewards considerably. L4s at ~80% of present HS rewards, L5s (as a totally optional 'training ground' for fleet ops) at ~50% of present LS rewards. This includes rat bounty payouts, meta loot drops, salvage loot tables, agent rewards, chances at faction loot, etc. (Similar changes needed in incursions).
I feel the main issue with missions is that lowsec ones do not pay enough. IMO lowsec level 3 security missions (the highest that can be completed in good time in a PVP fit ship that isn't stupidly expensive) should be paying out more than highsec level 4s.
Highsec bears running L5s in blinged ships would then be perfect targets for anti-bear operations, and players risking blinged battleships and strategic cruisers running lowsec L4s would also be an important part of the game's ecosystem, serving their place at the bottom of the food chain and being rewarded for it.
That said, even if you have a quite different position on this issue, you'll still be my first choice. '... you cannot reason with the mining bots, you cannot negotiate with them, you can only bring them judgement in the form of Navy Antimatter, turn their Mackinaws to salvage and dust, smartbomb their pods, and burn their Mining Link implants with sweet incense...'- The Gospel according to St James 315 |
NinjaTurtle
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
26
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 03:53:00 -
[115] - Quote
Monk are you on Twitter? Co-host and editor of Declarations of War Podcast http://declarationsofwar.com [Noir.] Director http://noirmercs.com Twitter- @schertt |
Psychotic Monk
Paper Snowstorm Petition Blizzard
942
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 04:25:00 -
[116] - Quote
I'm not, but I guess I should be. I'll work on that tomorrow, which is also when I'll awnser Wescro's questions. Psychotic Monk for CSM. Belligerent Undesirables Blog. |
Psychotic Monk
Paper Snowstorm Petition Blizzard
947
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 19:28:00 -
[117] - Quote
Wescro2 wrote:Monk, what do you think of James 315 criticism of the CSM that he presented when withdrawing from the race, specifically as it applies to your campaign. For example, you may be constrained by the NDA such that you would no longer be able to write your immensely popular and influential guides on running safaris. You are known among the belligerents undesirable community as an innovator and a mentor, both roles which stand to be "nerfed" by an NDA.
Also, we know that CCP employees are not allowed to suicide gank. It is not hard to imagine there being bans on CCP employees committing generally villainous activity, perhaps for reasons of propriety. Since CCP picks the "Iceland 5," do you think perhaps this misplaced notion of propriety could see you kept out of the process?
Being under NDA may prevent me from talking about some of my thoughts regarding the game design of eve, but as my blog is primarily entertainment in the form of killmails and chat logs and education in the form of guides, I don't think that'll grind it to a stand-still.
I especially don't believe that I'll be restricted from mentoring and innovating in game.
It's entirely possible that bias within CCP might see me cut out of actually attending the summit when I otherwise should, but even if that happens, it would still be better for us to have someone on the CSM than not. We have been so underrepresented that even if they limited me to smoke signals I would fill the sky with our message. I will invent new forms of communication if that's what it takes.
I'm fairly confident there's no malice in CCPs mistake about leaving us out in the cold, and any amount of representation we have is better than the amount we've traditionally had. Psychotic Monk for CSM. Belligerent Undesirables Blog. |
Psychotic Monk
Paper Snowstorm Petition Blizzard
947
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 19:39:00 -
[118] - Quote
And by request I now have a twitter account. You can bother me over at @SKNK_Monk Psychotic Monk for CSM. Belligerent Undesirables Blog. |
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
1083
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 20:38:00 -
[119] - Quote
Psychotic Monk wrote:And by request I now have a twitter account. You can bother me over at @SKNK_Monk proud to be your first follower. Welcome to #tweetfleet "Alekseyev Karrde: mercenary of my heart."-á -Arydanika, Voices from the Void
Hero of the CSM Noir./Noir. Academy Recruiting: www.noirmercs.com |
Sabriz Adoudel
Resurgent Threat
138
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 22:10:00 -
[120] - Quote
Psychotic Monk wrote:Wescro2 wrote:Monk, what do you think of James 315 criticism of the CSM that he presented when withdrawing from the race, specifically as it applies to your campaign. For example, you may be constrained by the NDA such that you would no longer be able to write your immensely popular and influential guides on running safaris. You are known among the belligerents undesirable community as an innovator and a mentor, both roles which stand to be "nerfed" by an NDA.
Also, we know that CCP employees are not allowed to suicide gank. It is not hard to imagine there being bans on CCP employees committing generally villainous activity, perhaps for reasons of propriety. Since CCP picks the "Iceland 5," do you think perhaps this misplaced notion of propriety could see you kept out of the process? Being under NDA may prevent me from talking about some of my thoughts regarding the game design of eve, but as my blog is primarily entertainment in the form of killmails and chat logs and education in the form of guides, I don't think that'll grind it to a stand-still. I especially don't believe that I'll be restricted from mentoring and innovating in game. It's entirely possible that bias within CCP might see me cut out of actually attending the summit when I otherwise should, but even if that happens, it would still be better for us to have someone on the CSM than not. We have been so underrepresented that even if they limited me to smoke signals I would fill the sky with our message. I will invent new forms of communication if that's what it takes. I'm fairly confident there's no malice in CCPs mistake about leaving us out in the cold, and any amount of representation we have is better than the amount we've traditionally had.
You could always organise a riot in a trade hub if they do ignore you. Burn Jita caused quite the storm. '... you cannot reason with the mining bots, you cannot negotiate with them, you can only bring them judgement in the form of Navy Antimatter, turn their Mackinaws to salvage and dust, smartbomb their pods, and burn their Mining Link implants with sweet incense...'- The Gospel according to St James 315 |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |