EVE Search - Sticky:Dev Blog: No Honor Among Thieves

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

Sticky:Dev Blog: No Honor Among Thieves - Siphon Units in Rubicon

» 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 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 52 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 15 post(s)
Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 908	Posted - 2013.10.18 09:51:00 - [631] - Quote Speedkermit Damo wrote: Good times, I see no reason why I need to spend a single ISK on a Siphon, when I could just fly around stealing from everyone else's siphons. Easy life. I doubt there'll be anything worth stealing. Siphons around worthwhile moons will get killed, siphons at bad moons will just give you 1000 m3 of atmospheric gases or something even less useful. Wooo. The more I think about this, the more it seems to be that the real problem is the automatic moon mining itself. While a mining POS does has a role as something worth fighting over and as a location for large battles, the AFK nature is bad, along with the API tools that promote it. So, maybe something like moving moon minerals to mining anomalies and creating a proper nullsec POS-based industry to replace mining POS as strategic targets would be better? Of course, you'd also have to remove all jump mechanics to stop an entity simply jumping supplies from Jita to bypass an industrial interdiction campaign... so yeah, back to the siphon then!
Kranky Hakaari Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 0	Posted - 2013.10.18 09:54:00 - [632] - Quote i can see alot of angry goons shitting bricks. Any thing that gives me the opportunity to stick it to Big boys is welcomed...yeah you goonie
Rek Seven Probe Patrol Polarized. 1009	Posted - 2013.10.18 09:58:00 - [633] - Quote Although i like the idea of this siphon unit, this firs iteration is a little underwhelming and i don't like the fact that it is yet another passive activity being added to eve. That said, i'm sure some people will have fun with it. minuscule output won't be worth the time for me personally. There should be a second version (tech 2 maybe) where the yield it massively increased by players on grid. For example, transferring energy to the t2 siphon could allow you to fill it up in one hour. However, when you deploy the tech 2 version, the POS owner receives a notification. This would reward players for active participation, increase activity in space and draw fights away from gates. +1
Zappity Kurved Space 554	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:04:00 - [634] - Quote The real question is, where's Harry? Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
nXus Infinite Point Nulli Secunda 3	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:07:00 - [635] - Quote Concerned that the false API tracking thing is going to completely break existing API tools that people rely on. So we'll see how the false reporting works in reality when people are emptying/shuffling silos etc. Expecting T2 prices to go crazy. If these are spammed that's already 20% supply lost from the game and if it turns people off running the reaction chains then that's additional supply gone from the system. Add market manipulation and it's going to be a pretty crazy ride. Time will tell I guess.. I don't see this affecting large entities that don't base their ship doctrines on t2 ships. Expect T1 and T3 ships to become the norm.
Corvald Tyrska Dha'Vargar 15	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:08:00 - [636] - Quote Is there anything preventing the POS owner deploying these inside their own POS shield? If you are willing to take a 20% loss on income then you can effectively make your POS completely immune to other people's siphons since they siphon in order of deployment. Login to empty them to the silo once a day and you're all good. Admittedly you take a 20% reduction in capacity but for the more valuable materials that could be well worth the price for not having to deal with these
Abdiel Kavash Paladin Order Fidelas Constans 1349	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:12:00 - [637] - Quote Corvald Tyrska wrote: Is there anything preventing the POS owner deploying these inside their own POS shield? Dev Blog wrote: Siphon units must be deployed close to a POS, outside of shields to a maximum distance of 50 kilometers from the control tower. Reading is hard right?
Arrendis Northstar Cabal Tactical Narcotics Team 61	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:19:00 - [638] - Quote Turfrider wrote: This is awesome. Good job CCP. About time. All the people crying about this calling it "horribly unbalanced" lol @ you. Moons are inheriently horribly unbalanced, worried about your SRP? I'm just happy more of you will be forced into the belts to earn a crust so I can kill you :) Ill be putting 100's of these things up as soon as physically possible, good game. So you'll be spending billions on things that will just get blown up? If that's how PL wants to waste their money, man, go for it. I think we all know whose moons you'll be looking at. Who knows, maybe we'll get bounties for blowing them up.
Arrendis Northstar Cabal Tactical Narcotics Team 61	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:20:00 - [639] - Quote Dracvlad wrote: Let me put this bluntly, in terms of Sov war the CFC is the elite of Eve. Aww... Don't say that, you'll upset N3 and PL.
Atlantis Fuanan Uncharted Skies Cerberus Unleashed 34	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:21:00 - [640] - Quote Good job on the siphon unit, i just love the way it will harm the "big guys". But I don't see why the owner should be abel to see WHO placed it. I'd rather leave it anonymous. Why? For the first, a thief won't let a note back with his name on it. For the second, if done by a small corp, "bug guys" could go mad and throw blobs at them, while it encourages PVP, this can't be called PVP in the end (small vs big :(). AND for the third, it could also be done by some own corp buddies and cause some conspiracy. A big part of EVE is trust right? Things that would make EVE better: NRDS - Remove Local - Balance Cloak - Sov-Mechanic Changes - Less QQ
M1k3y Koontz Thorn Project Surely You're Joking 352	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:33:00 - [641] - Quote To the people complaining this won't create conflict, the siphons will never generate conflict as long as the POS owner can use the guns to destroy them. APIs and notifications wouldn't increase conflict, only make it easier for people who don't monitor their space to maximize their profit. How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Arrendis Northstar Cabal Tactical Narcotics Team 61	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:36:00 - [642] - Quote M1k3y Koontz wrote: To the people complaining this won't create conflict, the siphons will never generate conflict as long as the POS owner can use the guns to destroy them. APIs and notifications wouldn't increase conflict, only make it easier for people who don't monitor their space to maximize their profit. I don't think the issue is 'they are bad because they won't create conflict', so much as it is 'hey, CCP, you're claiming these will create conflict, and they blatantly won't.' Which is a subtle thing, but it's not the lack of content being the source of irritation, but the blatant failure of CCP to see the blindingly obvious way this plays out.
Lallante Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 398	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:42:00 - [643] - Quote Dear goons Please never, ever, ever change. New update on the siphon stats: Harvest 30 pages of goon tears per day .
Lallante Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 398	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:43:00 - [644] - Quote Arrendis wrote: M1k3y Koontz wrote: To the people complaining this won't create conflict, the siphons will never generate conflict as long as the POS owner can use the guns to destroy them. APIs and notifications wouldn't increase conflict, only make it easier for people who don't monitor their space to maximize their profit. I don't think the issue is 'they are bad because they won't create conflict', so much as it is 'hey, CCP, you're claiming these will create conflict, and they blatantly won't.' Which is a subtle thing, but it's not the lack of content being the source of irritation, but the blatant failure of CCP to see the blindingly obvious way this plays out. I think you both misunderstand the meaning of "conflict".
Miner Hottie Polaris Rising Gentlemen's Agreement 19	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:46:00 - [645] - Quote Dracvlad wrote: Miner Hottie wrote: Arrendis wrote: Neave LaFontaine wrote: Anyone else notice the high level of goon tears in this thread? You know, it never ceases to amaze me that with GSF up over 10,000 people, to say nothing of the rest of the CFC, people see a half-dozen goons pointing out blatantly obvious flaws in mechanics (and/or trolling the people who inevitably crop up to defend anything purely because the goons say it's not a good idea) and decide that's a 'high level of goon tears'. Really? One of the largest, most active groups in the game, with a history of delving into the mechanics of the game looking for the loopholes and problems CCP refuses to see until GSF goes ahead and rubs someone's nose in it, has multiple people posting in a thread about mechanics - the very same people who post on all of these mechanics threads, no less - and you think that's somehow significant? Never underestimate the power of confirmation bias from the "elite PVP players who hate goons (which is most of them)" of eve. Let me put this bluntly, in terms of Sov war the CFC is the elite of Eve. Probably true. It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
Lallante Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 398	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:50:00 - [646] - Quote Conflict driver 1 This should be blindingly obvious: very few people will destroy a siphon without checking/taking its contents first. Anchor a siphon, anchor a bubble, cloak just outside. Kill the POS gunner in an iteron who comes out to grab back his moon mins. Conflict driver 2 Anchor a siphon, they destroy it with POS guns. When they go offline anchor another, they destroy it. Repeat. Sooner or later they will have to take proper precautions to stop you doing this, or give up and let you steal goo. Conflict driver 3 Small gang X sets up siphons all over alliance Y's space. Prior to this mechanic, small gang X is essentially irrelevant to alliance Y, but now they are at least an annoyance and at best a many-hundred million isk a day sink that MUST be addressed by force Conflict driver 4 Alliance X attacks alliance Y in a sov invasion. Alliance Y pays corp Z to go siphon EVERY R32/64 moon of Alliance X repeatedly. Alliance X loses income, or it's POS managers burn out. Alliance Y counterattacks. Conflict driver 5 Alliance X RENTS moons in its space to Renter Y. Those moons get constantly siphoned. Either Renter Y gets pissed at Alliance X for not keeping the roaming siphon gangs out, or else it cant afford it's rent. Theres an infinite number of other scenarios. This will be interesting!
Lallante Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 398	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:50:00 - [647] - Quote Miner Hottie wrote: Dracvlad wrote: Miner Hottie wrote: Arrendis wrote: Neave LaFontaine wrote: Anyone else notice the high level of goon tears in this thread? You know, it never ceases to amaze me that with GSF up over 10,000 people, to say nothing of the rest of the CFC, people see a half-dozen goons pointing out blatantly obvious flaws in mechanics (and/or trolling the people who inevitably crop up to defend anything purely because the goons say it's not a good idea) and decide that's a 'high level of goon tears'. Really? One of the largest, most active groups in the game, with a history of delving into the mechanics of the game looking for the loopholes and problems CCP refuses to see until GSF goes ahead and rubs someone's nose in it, has multiple people posting in a thread about mechanics - the very same people who post on all of these mechanics threads, no less - and you think that's somehow significant? Never underestimate the power of confirmation bias from the "elite PVP players who hate goons (which is most of them)" of eve. Let me put this bluntly, in terms of Sov war the CFC is the elite of Eve. Probably true. Only because in Eve sov war numbers and timezone coverage >>>>>> all
M1k3y Koontz Thorn Project Surely You're Joking 352	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:53:00 - [648] - Quote Gilbaron wrote: Quote: Yeah I totally wish smugglers and thieves would send me an ETA. "Ohhey by the way we are going to start digging a tunnel in this section of the border. We'll both be there at noon." You want a space empire, you have to actually patrol it. Sorry. playing whack-a-mole with moles that only show up for seconds on a HUGE playing field is not exactly fun. a well designed feature would have introduced meaningful interaction for both parties. the currently planned implementation avoids every possible interaction between players. that's just plain stupid Time to scrap moon mining then! How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Helicity Boson Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel 599	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:56:00 - [649] - Quote M1k3y Koontz wrote: Time to scrap moon mining then! Moon mining is not, and has never been, a good kind of gameplay mechanic.
M1k3y Koontz Thorn Project Surely You're Joking 352	Posted - 2013.10.18 10:57:00 - [650] - Quote Royaldo wrote: How will this generate any sort of pvp when you have no idea **** is actually happening? It wouldn't generate PVP if you did know it was happening, you'd blap them with POS guns and go back to doing whatever you were before. If you're occupying the space where your towers are this be a problem. How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Johnny Marzetti GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 746	Posted - 2013.10.18 11:01:00 - [651] - Quote Lallante wrote: Dear goons Please never, ever, ever change. New update on the siphon stats: Harvest 30 pages of goon tears per day . I never get tired of reading "lol goon tears!!!1" posts. You know, I don't pay a lot of attention to this dumb game, but I've seen this play out numerous times over the years exactly this way: CCP: Presenting new feature X! Goons: X is horribly unbalanced. Pubbies: Hahaha goonie tears goonie tears!!!!1 Goons: vv Well okay then, we're going to exploit the hell out of X. Pubbies: Goons are exploiting X! CCP: We're nerfing X. Pubbies: Hahaha goonie tears goonie tears!!!!1 I mean, y'all literally have the long term memory of that guy from Momento. Is it really any wonder why we have so little regard for the vast majority of you?
Speedkermit Damo Demonic Retribution 115	Posted - 2013.10.18 11:02:00 - [652] - Quote Helicity Boson wrote: M1k3y Koontz wrote: Time to scrap moon mining then! Moon mining is not, and has never been, a good kind of gameplay mechanic. At least not whiles it's AFK passive income. Moon mining should be something a player has to get into a ship and undock for. Don't Panic.
Abdiel Kavash Paladin Order Fidelas Constans 1349	Posted - 2013.10.18 11:05:00 - [653] - Quote Speedkermit Damo wrote: Helicity Boson wrote: M1k3y Koontz wrote: Time to scrap moon mining then! Moon mining is not, and has never been, a good kind of gameplay mechanic. At least not whiles it's AFK passive income. Moon mining should be something a player has to get into a ship and undock for. Please explain to me how you take a moon from someone without undocking? POSes are not passive income. POSes are PvP income.
Gilbaron Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda 1121	Posted - 2013.10.18 11:05:00 - [654] - Quote Quote: Conflict driver 1 This should be blindingly obvious: very few people will destroy a siphon without checking/taking its contents first. Anchor a siphon, anchor a bubble, cloak just outside. Kill the POS gunner in an iteron who comes out to grab back his moon mins. i actually see this as a pvp opportunity. you may kill a T1 Hauler. Awesome and exciting PVP content. especially the "wait for X hours for someone to log in" part Quote: Conflict driver 2 Anchor a siphon, they destroy it with POS guns. When they go offline anchor another, they destroy it. Repeat. Sooner or later they will have to take proper precautions to stop you doing this, or give up and let you steal goo. both, the anchoring and the destruction are incredibly boring activities. Can you please tell me about those "proper precautions you plan to take ? an ocean of bubble around your pos ? Sounds exciting. Hint: there is no practical way to stop someone in a cloakie ship. Quote: Conflict driver 3 Small gang X sets up siphons all over alliance Y's space. Prior to this mechanic, small gang X is essentially irrelevant to alliance Y, but now they are at least an annoyance and at best a many-hundred million isk a day sink that MUST be addressed by force please elaborate how you want to adress this ? by rapecaging the station this small gang stages from ? Sounds really exciting and fun. Quote: Conflict driver 4 Alliance X attacks alliance Y in a sov invasion. Alliance Y pays corp Z to go siphon EVERY R32/64 moon of Alliance X repeatedly. Alliance X loses income, or it's POS managers burn out. Alliance Y counterattacks. Yes please, let's all ** of people in leadership positions even more. their life is way to easy nowadays. Quote: Conflict driver 5 Alliance X RENTS moons in its space to Renter Y. Those moons get constantly siphoned. Either Renter Y gets pissed at Alliance X for not keeping the roaming siphon gangs out, or else it cant afford it's rent. there won't be roaming gangs. there will be roaming cloakie haulers. We as landlords can do absolutely nothing against this. just like it is with AFK-Cloakies or roaming BLOPs gangs today. Theres an infinite number of other scenarios. This will be interesting no, it won't We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :) Banner was used for this Post**
Johnny Marzetti GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 748	Posted - 2013.10.18 11:05:00 - [655] - Quote Speedkermit Damo wrote: Helicity Boson wrote: M1k3y Koontz wrote: Time to scrap moon mining then! Moon mining is not, and has never been, a good kind of gameplay mechanic. At least not whiles it's AFK passive income. Moon mining should be something a player has to get into a ship and undock for. Because belt mining is totally not an AFK mechanic.
SMT008 SnaiLs aNd FroGs Verge of Collapse 692	Posted - 2013.10.18 11:09:00 - [656] - Quote MeBiatch wrote: SMT008 wrote: I guess I'll just spam the hell out of them and see what happens/how much money I'll get/how much tears I'll get. Happy times for everyone but the one who gets his stuff stolen. so i heard TRI is reforming... you upset some of your brosefs are leaving? My brosefs will be brosefs until death do us apart. Being in another internet space alliance is outside of my giving-a-damn zone. Anyway. What I actually want to see is the other sorts of deployable. Especially the depot thing.
M1k3y Koontz Thorn Project Surely You're Joking 352	Posted - 2013.10.18 11:11:00 - [657] - Quote Lallante wrote: Arrendis wrote: M1k3y Koontz wrote: To the people complaining this won't create conflict, the siphons will never generate conflict as long as the POS owner can use the guns to destroy them. APIs and notifications wouldn't increase conflict, only make it easier for people who don't monitor their space to maximize their profit. I don't think the issue is 'they are bad because they won't create conflict', so much as it is 'hey, CCP, you're claiming these will create conflict, and they blatantly won't.' Which is a subtle thing, but it's not the lack of content being the source of irritation, but the blatant failure of CCP to see the blindingly obvious way this plays out. I think you both misunderstand the meaning of "conflict". People in EVE usually associate conflict with PVP, not with two opposing forces/interests. How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Helicity Boson Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel 599	Posted - 2013.10.18 11:18:00 - [658] - Quote The reality is few people will bother with siphons outside of null conflicts, once they realize you are unlikely to profit from them. Why? Because smart players will just fly around and loot Siphons placed by someone else and save themselves the 10m investment.
KAT3 Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance 0	Posted - 2013.10.18 11:22:00 - [659] - Quote I can remember when player owned stations where introduced. We had to fuel them with small industrial ships, and heavily guarded freighter fleets were used to go to empire to bring back the fuel necessary to keep them running. Then Poses became the tool by which an entity would challenge a corporation's sov holdings. Pos work was unbearably time consuming and 0.0 players wanted to pvp instead of putting up, taking down (which was painfully slow work) and tending to poses. CCP started to give some help - and then more help ! Challenging sov no longer required having the most poses in a given system. Jump freighters, fuel blocks, poses that only need to be fueled once every 30 days, and poses that can be set up and taken down relatively quickly compared to days of old. Now CCP feels a need to balance all the buffs they have given to Pos maintenance and upkeep. This seems to be a cyclical pattern not with just poses but with all aspects of the game. First we buff, then we nerf, then we buff, then we nerf, or we introduce some new content that is suppose to re-balance the unbalance we created in the past.. I guess it does keep a lot of programmers working in Iceland, and hey -- we all get free program upgrades full of buffs and nerfs.
Zappity Kurved Space 557	Posted - 2013.10.18 11:22:00 - [660] - Quote Johnny Marzetti wrote: Lallante wrote: Dear goons Please never, ever, ever change. New update on the siphon stats: Harvest 30 pages of goon tears per day . I never get tired of reading "lol goon tears!!!1" posts. You know, I don't pay a lot of attention to this dumb game, but I've seen this play out numerous times over the years exactly this way: CCP: Presenting new feature X! Goons: X is horribly unbalanced. Pubbies: Hahaha goonie tears goonie tears!!!!1 Goons: vv Well okay then, we're going to exploit the hell out of X. Pubbies: Goons are exploiting X! CCP: We're nerfing X. Pubbies: Hahaha goonie tears goonie tears!!!!1 I mean, y'all literally have the long term memory of that guy from Momento. Is it really any wonder that we have so little regard for the vast majority of you? That is quite a naive comment when you actively cultivate your collective persona as griefers and scammers. Tell me, what would the public goon response be to a change that was good for smaller groups but bad for CFC be? Because whatever the truth, I guarantee that the vast majority of pubbies would say 'exactly the same'. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 52 :: 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.