| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sinari Galdrin
   |
Posted - 2006.01.15 16:47:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Filan
500-1000 of each bpo would be perfect imo, when you figure how many subscribers there are now 1k or more even of each T2 wouldnt drasticly effect anything. considering even 1000 of them would only be 1/20 of the avg nighttime population.
Eh?
So, you want the possibility for 1000 HACs to be made EVERY DAY? That would flood the HAC market & make it crash, so that everyone would be flying them.
I really don't see the problem with the HAC market (except for the BPO lottery system) - T2 ships should be 'elite' ships, not the standard. So, they should be expensive.
|
Agent Kenshin
|
Posted - 2006.01.15 17:13:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Filan
500-1000 of each bpo would be perfect imo, when you figure how many subscribers there are now 1k or more even of each T2 wouldnt drasticly effect anything. considering even 1000 of them would only be 1/20 of the avg nighttime population.
Righto!  Not there wouldnt be enough materials to produce 4000 HACs every 1.5 days. Assuming that you mean 500 of each type... And not 500 total in which case 62 or 63 of each is still a little high. Ive said it before and ill say it again a mass increase of bpos does not help the economy it will just destroy it... There are already a lot of ship bpos that all use the same components. Increasing the ship bpos would mean boosting moon mining and POS stuff as well.
Originally by: MAXSuicide
only carebears call pvpers 'greifers'
ehehehh....
|
Bubba Love
|
Posted - 2006.01.15 20:54:00 -
[33]
It seems that disproportionately wealthy players appreciate HACs being expensive and exclusive. After all this is their edge in the game and offers the closest thing to a solo-pwn-mobile. I wonder whether many of the people on this forum who approve of the current HAC prices fit into this category!
civire chicks are the best... |
Dao 2
|
Posted - 2006.01.15 21:03:00 -
[34]
the great secret to always reducing prices is STOP BUYING IT
|
Katya Detia
|
Posted - 2006.01.15 21:16:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Bubba Love
It seems that disproportionately wealthy players appreciate HACs being expensive and exclusive. After all this is their edge in the game and offers the closest thing to a solo-pwn-mobile. I wonder whether many of the people on this forum who approve of the current HAC prices fit into this category!
hmm i wouldnt say thats true tbh
Join Black Sea Industries today!!! |
Moghydin
|
Posted - 2006.01.15 23:00:00 -
[36]
The main reason for HACs going up, is I think - the increase of subscribers. I remember HACs were sold at 70 mill and there was like 8-9k users online every day. Now it's twice that number. So, I think that we should have twice, or at least 1.5 times number of tech II BPO's, especially those which are subject to price fixing and cartelization. Research agents should also give 1 run tech II BPO's for certain number of missions completed. That way mission w***res will get some reward for their dedication, but the main prizes will still be distributed via lottery.
Another suggestion, quite radical though, would be to restrict the number of similar BPO's at the hands of 1 player to 1 or two. So that no single player could posess more than 1-2 BPOs of the same kind (better yet, make it apply to accounts, so that BPO-holding alts would be put out of the equasion).
|
Jeffor
|
Posted - 2006.01.15 23:36:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Jeffor on 15/01/2006 23:37:58
It's really quite simple the only thing hurting the economy is how the current distribution of tech 2 bpos encourage monopolies and cartelisation. Ensuring that we will see an ever increasing unfair and uneven distribution of resources (ISK). Theres a reason for why modern economies have made such activities illegal. The sooner CCP realises that, the better off we will all be.
Saying that the HAC should be rare is not a valid excuse when the responsibility for producing them has been put in our hands. If they want to keep it rare with the ever increasing amount of skill points we as players amass, then they should have made 1 run HAC bpcs drop off rats like faction ships do today. Tech 2 isnt about rarity its about better equipment, seriously people even though CCP is draging its feet we havent seen the tip of the iceberg here. Theres suposed to be 3 more tech lvls for us to play with. Are we going to see 1 bpo of each tech 5 item where theese are distributed with the current R&D system?
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.01.15 23:54:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Maya Rkell on 15/01/2006 23:54:42
Originally by: Zaldiri
Why did the demand for HACs go up after RMR is a mystery
? Demand hasn't really risen, the production difficulty has.
Firstly the RAM issue, secondly the shift from modern JIT to a clunky, bug-ridden and laggy 1890's parallel production system.
Warning: above post may contain traces of sarcasm.
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
shivan
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 00:40:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Originally by: Fester Addams
Actually the best solution for the issue would be to revamp the R&D so that you can only get BPO's from dedicated R&D work (ie doing the daily mission for the R&D agent) and that the free daily RP bonus you get for simply having the agent researching giving you a chance to get a BPC of a T2 print.
This would allow the dedicated players to compete over the BPO's but their effort will have to be payed for in action.
So only agent runners can get BPOs?
Quick, everyone get back to empire and lets lag Jita out even more.
|
Fester Addams
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 02:53:00 -
[40]
Originally by: shivan
Originally by: Dark Shikari
So only agent runners can get BPOs?
Quick, everyone get back to empire and lets lag Jita out even more.
Dark, yes, only R&D mission runners would get BPO's.
But then again its not really fair that only people who actually puts effort into getting BPO's should get them, its alot better that people get them for doing nothing.
shivan, Odd I have 10 research agents running over 2 characters and not a single one of those R&D agents is in Jita, In reality I dont think many of the ones I do have are located in hub systems... must be a fluke on my part... I meen I simply have used the best ones I can use and they are not there.
But then ofcource its alot better to get somthing as valuable as a BPO in a lottery in exchange for doing... well absolutely nothing :)
|
XR Havoc
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 03:36:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Bubba Love
It seems that disproportionately wealthy players appreciate HACs being expensive and exclusive. After all this is their edge in the game and offers the closest thing to a solo-pwn-mobile. I wonder whether many of the people on this forum who approve of the current HAC prices fit into this category!
I can't afford a HAC and I don't feel a sense of "entitlement" to beable to. If everyone flew HACs then we would be back a the beginning. I personally think the T2 situation is fine, let T2 stuff be uber exclusive. If somoene wants to have equipment worth 3x as much as their ship to be 15% better, more power to them.
|
Alazais
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 03:40:00 -
[42]
I honestly dont know why people fly HACs... to be honest you can achieve the same result in a much cheaper ship and they're so easy to kill with heavy nos... but i dont' complain, other people flying HAC's makes our killboard look shiny.
|
Kerosene
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 03:41:00 -
[43]
tbh I stopped buying HAC's at the 90m isk mark. A bs with half decent fittings costs 50m to replace including insurance.
HACs vs BS pro's
HAC's are faster
HAC's can do similar damage
HAC's can outtank most bs setups if the bs is using the preferred racial damage
HAC's have lower sig radius
HAC's vs BS con's
BS's have more slots so more versatile
BS's have more firepower period
BS's have more range
BS's are cheaper
BS's can be insured for the full amount
BS's can easily reach over 20k hit points
BS's have more cap to run more modules such as EW/repairers/guns
BS's have more cargo space (useful for ratting)
BS's can use heavy nos's
tbh I'll stick with bs's til the HAC prices become sane again. They are sooooo much more versatile and resilient than a HAC.
__
Originally by: Galaxian
I'd like to add that as a penalty for warping out, Chowdown recieved a /heal0 from the devs, and his ship promptly exploded.
|
Partisan Ograe
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 05:03:00 -
[44]
Originally by: dantes inferno
HAC prices will not go down until
1) demand goes down
2) supply goes up
the ram shortage gave the producers an excuse to raise the prices..and as people were paying the high prices...they will stay up.
 Gas anyone?
** So, I like mining, whats the big deal? ** |
nukem ts
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 07:24:00 -
[45]
160 milloin for a cerb is to much. i will buy first new hacs if the price is gonig down.
hope ccp will seed more bpos
|
Kinsy
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 08:08:00 -
[46]
Man i love HACs, they make such pretty explosions :)
|
Sochin
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 08:24:00 -
[47]
Originally by: fl0pski
Originally by: ErrorS
BOB won the championships with an Eagle. Last part of the fight was an eagle against a Diemos and an Ishkur if i recall correctly and the eagle took them both.
not everybody here has devs and gm's as friends.
lollercoaster
Nemo me impune lacessit
|
Skuld OdinsDottir
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 08:38:00 -
[48]
Originally by: SghnDubh
HACs...over-rated, over priced. Just like a hot new sportscar in RL, the HAC is an uber-pwnage-boat on paper. As I discuss combat results with corpmates, it seems that the king of the battlefield remains the Battleship. HACs can rule in 1:1 and small mixed fleet engagements, no question. But my unofficial and completely unscientific musings as a result of experience in 0.0 suggest you're still better off bringing something tougher to the field overall. Good fleets appear to be using HACs exactly as intended: As a large compliment to a combined-arms force. "HAC=Packs" for raiding, camping, or general pwnage are effective until faced off against the equal number of battleships...even though a HAC 1:1 to a BS can stand up with a skilled pilot in the pod. Comes down to sheer firepower, really. Sigh--this from a guy whose both paying characters specialise in HACs. Hmm...how far off am I from Dreadnought 5? :)
HACs arent ment to kill BS, they are ment to kill Cruisers. Sure they can hold their own in a 1:1 but its still a cruiser. So comparing A HAC to a BS is still bit off.
Liquid dreams filled her mind as she found herself sinking into an eternal ocean of blood. An ocean she had created over the severed flesh of her assigned targets. |
bumcheekcity
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 09:44:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Kerosene
tbh I stopped buying HAC's at the 90m isk mark. A bs with half decent fittings costs 50m to replace including insurance.
HACs vs BS pro's
HAC's are faster
HAC's can do similar damage
HAC's can outtank most bs setups if the bs is using the preferred racial damage
HAC's have lower sig radius
HAC's vs BS con's
BS's have more slots so more versatile
BS's have more firepower period
BS's have more range
BS's are cheaper
BS's can be insured for the full amount
BS's can easily reach over 20k hit points
BS's have more cap to run more modules such as EW/repairers/guns
BS's have more cargo space (useful for ratting)
BS's can use heavy nos's
tbh I'll stick with bs's til the HAC prices become sane again. They are sooooo much more versatile and resilient than a HAC.
BSs dont have more firepower. A Raven vs. Cerby firing Cruise and Heavies at BSs, and/or Cruisers, the Caracal wins EVERY TIME. In my COSMOS missions, there were dome guys with insane tanks. I had to call on local for someone to help. He turned up in a Caracal, and spammed the guy from 100KM away with ehavies (Scourge, I was using Wrath Cruise). He did MORE damage than me, and would have broken my tank completely. A HAC can easily get a 100KM range with just skills.
Aye, the insurance, and the price, are factors, but the HACs better... It's GOING to be more expensive.
Also, the hitpoints issue is nothing. If you fit your Raven with shield extenders, you'll die, because you arent fitting hardeners or a booster. Also, the Cap is no issue, because the modules that HACs use are Cruiser models, and so use less cap.
So basically, you dont know what you're talking about. Doing a bit of basic maths, my Raven woudl be DESTROYED by a caracal with my skills. Yeah, I'm only using Caldari, so this might not be the same for other races, but for us at least, HAC > BS.
--
bumcheekcity |
Arngorf
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 10:00:00 -
[50]
Originally by: adam f
thnks uther can u see if rustok or hyllex is online and get them on this thread
dont worry.. ill get them on this thread when i get online in bout 5-6 hours (if im not too late) :p
________________________________________________
|
Grimwalius d'Antan
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 13:11:00 -
[51]
Im still gonna pay over 100 mil for my Deimos. It is not the manufacturers fault, but rather the resellers that takes advantage of people like me who is willing to sacrifice 90% of the wallet just to get a ship today. The thing is that there is no competition on who is the cheapest. Very few HACs are on the market because most HACS are ordered factory per request. T2 ship manufacturers are swamped with orders, there simply is no time to produce a HAC and put it on the market because there is always a bunch of people who has pre-ordered already. The HACs on the market are being sold by pilots who can set whatever price they want. It is very rare to find more than 5 competing resellers in one region, and most likely they are "overcharging" just as much as the others. As long as you're the cheapest, you have a MUCH larger chance of selling, even if it is only 0.1 ISK in the same station. No need to undercut an averagely expected cost of around 100 mil when the only competitor is selling for 150. Also, there is no reason to try and sell for 100 mil when you're the only one selling in that region. If someone is desperate to have the ship he has to pay whatever price you offer if he wants the ship.
|
Buck Socket
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 13:44:00 -
[52]
i agree with bumcheekcity :)
in my opinion, HACs are much more versatile than BSs. the only thing a BS is really good for is killing another BS or holding a ship down whilst someone else takes it out. the smaller targets become increasingly difficult to hit, and even if you fit appropriately sized weapons you're completely wasting the BSs potential and are, in effect, a gigantic sitting duck should anything bigger come along.
conversely, the amount of damage that a single HAC setup puts out across a whole range of ship types is staggering compared to a BS. it's faster, more agile, harder to hit, has insane resistances and will bring the pain to almost every ship in the game without needing a complete refit.
i've seen 2 HACS take out a well fitted BS in 15 seconds. i've never seen that the other way around.
|
Jizzy B
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 13:49:00 -
[53]
I'm fairly happy with the hac stuff, i'm probably paying a lot less for my HAC of choice than most of you. i used a cerb until after RMR, bought it for around 60mill.. sold it for 150 bought 2x hacs instead. just waiting for you guys to find out how awesome it is.
|
Iberi
|
Posted - 2006.01.16 15:03:00 -
[54]
"HAC is BS killer!"(c)
Are you guys really understand what are you writing here?
|
Reix
|
Posted - 2006.01.17 18:16:00 -
[55]
Originally by: dantes inferno
HAC prices will not go down until
1) demand goes down
2) supply goes up
the ram shortage gave the producers an excuse to raise the prices..and as people were paying the high prices...they will stay up.
THANK YOU CAPTAIN OBVIOUS!
|
M00dy
|
Posted - 2006.01.17 18:52:00 -
[56]
Oh please, HACs are weak. I pwn one every day in my Cyclone. Everyone should stop buying them. They're only good for anti-frig work. 
|
HUGO DRAX
|
Posted - 2006.01.17 19:01:00 -
[57]
Which alliances have these prints? I heard that only 5 or 6 prints (deimos) are in the hands of producer for the general public and the rest of the prints are in alliance hands for internal members use only.
Dont just complain, do something. Channel macrointel meet with likeminded folks, spottings,intel |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |