A thing a lot of you naysayers are missing is that anyone can deploy these ESSes in a system. Say I've got an inkling for messing with folks. I duckwalk into a system owned by hostiles and deploy my own ESS. Suddenly, I am sapping 20% of the bounties of the system. If you are a sovhaver, you have to deploy these items defensively to prevent this from happening to your systems, unless you want your space to be worth four-fifths of its current value.

Please be constructive in your replies and follow the forum rules. If you think you do not like an idea, then please point out why you don't like it and why it is from your point of view not a good idea. Thank you!

Reading these comments gives me the impression that the CFC has hoovered up a lot of risk adverse carebears over the years and become the thing they used to despise.

I really want to be constructive here, CCP, but what in the unholy **** were you smoking when you devised this rube goldberg crap?

There are tons of issues in nullsec right now. Capital issues you're putting off for possibly years, a tedious sovereignty system, a POS system that needs a serious overhaul, utterly broken interceptors (that turn your stupid ESS into a loot pinata for any inty gang that knows where to find it), taking away income from ratters, who from my few years of playing this game are SORT OF KINDA AT THE BOTTOM of the economic food chain in nullsec. Nodbody, no renter, nobody from deklein to delve to Kevla to cobalt edge should want your glorified undefended tip jar.

Don't push this thing into tranquility. Please, don't. I've generally been on board with CCP changes over the last year or two, but this takes the cake as the dumbest damned thing I've ever seen you do, and I've read about tracking titans and remote AOE doomsdays.

What happened to farms and fields and handling top-down income? Why don't you deal with the fact that alliances need to finance themselves with renter empires? I guess you're too busy thinking, damn, the average nullsec line member needs to have his income reduced and/or put at further risk, as if uncatchable interceptor gangs weren't enough.

If I had a plane ticket and passport I think I'd travel to iceland just to take a dump on your front porch if this goes live, CCP.

Literally 95% of the naysayers in this thread so far are Goonswarm Federation.

Fix POSes? Nope.
Fix Sov? Nope.
Fix TiDi? Nope.
Fix Corp roles? Nope.
Iterate on FW? Nope.
Rework PvE? Nope.

Nerfing nullsec income to make it even more empty and less desirable? YES, now THAT'S the important thing CCP needs to be spending its time and resources on.

1: It's taking a hit if you are incredibly bad, yes.

2: Another objective for small gang combat, which is exactly what this is, is hardly "no reason". In fact, that's exactly what we have been asking for.

Actually, if you don't completely suck, it's a bonus to your income.

What is it that goons think Inties are the new evil untouchable overlords that can warp to the thing (notifying everyone) and then stay there for 60 secs until they can actually loot the stuff?

If you're going to defend that assertion James you need to start looking more than one layer deep into the onion.

Sure, as long as CCP can click a button and receive that extra bonus money from you. Surely you won't mind.

My point was, it will still be far, far easier to make money in EVE than it was in the past. In fact pretty much everyone can agree that there is far too much ISK in the game, they just don't want to be one of the ones that "might" end up with their income reduced.

Null sec ratters (if they can't be bothered to deal with the mechanic) can easily afford the minute loss to their income. However if they wish to use the mechanic they will actually get a boost to their income.

It's totally up to them whether they want to profit, or be a victim.

James, I've listed a half a dozen ways you can use this thing to your advantage.

You've listed one draw back and ignored various ways that can be dealt with.

I like you, but seriously....

I wasn't aware that mission rats and incursion rats don't have bounties....

Dear CCP - please do not ban me for the post I am about to make

disclaimer - I HATE REAL MONEY TRADE OF ISK - there i make this pos RMT#

Have you guys even considered the misuse of this feature.

RMT'ers could simply leave a container full of tags somewhere and the buyer "happens" to find them and now you have a "clean" transfer of aburd amounts of isk that people could sell off for real money and you would have a REALLY hard time proving that was what was going

Did you even consider that - becuase this is eve and when you make something you need to start thinking like the most sick and depraved of us, if you dont then you end up making the tools to break your own game.

If CSM 8 let an idea as terrible as this and the Dscan inhibitor get to the point of Devblogs, then they obviously aren't doing their jobs.

Alternatively, they either objected, and CCP didn't listen, or CCP went right over them. In either case, why keep them around?

This is definatelly going to give some goals for small gangs. For one I am happy how this feature turned out. Thank you CCP for listening in to CSM feedback.

I don't typically post on these forums, but the amount of not-actually-playing-the-game evident in the devblog is just too high not to...

I'm honestly just amazed. Let's go back in time a bit.

When Dominion was released to make sov warfare worse than before, there was a vague promise of more ihub modules being released. As people who actually play this ****** game may know, many of the ihub upgrades have been completely broken since release, but at least there was the pretense of ~~iterations~~ happening at some point in the future. One upgrade that was suspiciously absent was a way to tax income generated in the system and transfer it to a holding corp.

When CCP was queried as to why this obvious feature was missing, the stated reason was that Eve didn't support something like this.

So now CCP reveals that this capability exists, but wastes it on a 0.0 ratting nerf instead. Have there been no lessons learned from siphons? To remind you: siphons did one thing, and one thing only: They made POS worse and more of a pain to run than they already were without generating fights at all. I, for one, thought such a thing wouldn't be possible, but apparently someone at CCP took that as a challenge.

So now the same people decided to devalue 0.0 a little more. It does, after all, offer sub-par money making possibilities if you are doing PvE. So, to make a bad feature worse, ratting siphons are implemented.

The amount of derp that lead to these deployables is hard to grasp. The tractor unit, depot and jump inhibitor were pretty good. The mjd and scanning deployables raised eyebrows and are a little weird. But these? No way this is not a troll. Nobody can be so clueless about the realities of 0.0. I pity whoever is still doing PvE in 0.0.

I have to agree with the general sentiment expressed in here; this deployable suggests either a deep lack of understanding of null security space, a poorly disguised nerf to ratting, or the deliberate conception of a new hot-dropping magnet.

Also, if this nerf to nullsec income happens I'm moving to hisec to gank day old noobs till they quit the game. Nerf my income I'll nerf yours.

TL:DR = Super Friends have created a mobile deployable bubble with comparable range to a medium T2, smaller cargo volume requirements, around triple the raw EHP, half the onlining time without the need to stick around to anchor it, a vast skill requirement reduction to Anchoring II, a beacon that will allow your friends to warp in on the target even if you were to be explodified, and a shiny notification to let you know when there is someone inbound to it (mother of drag bubbles).

Let's assume that a nullsec nerf is coming. Especially with carrier ratting, you'd be foolish to think that it wouldn't happen. Just like incursions were broken back in the day, so too is carrier ratting.

At one point, I might've agreed with you. But these days, the sheer amount of people ratting in carriers tells a weeee bit of a different story, I think.

To get the most out of your lp you need to put in a fair amount of isk.

That's not true at all.

The vast majority of value from high end wormholes is in blue loot, which generates isk from npc buy orders.

Sean Decker, former EA Executive, now with CPP, enter CCP headquarter:
Emplyee: "Is that you or it is getting dumber in here?"
Decker: ""

Conclusion: since Decker/EA works with CCP, the total number of stupid ideas shoots through the clouds.

Prediction: there will be no more rage quits, we will see more reason quits.

Because the ISK coming into the game from Null Sec bounties every day is insane and we want to minimize inflation.



That is mostly for lore reasons - the empires are coughing up money themselves because they-¦re hoping to draw null sec pilots back into the fold.




This is subjective. Some will feel the risk is not worth the gain, some will feel the gain is worth the risk.

lmfao you actually have no idea do you

Where exactly did you point out any source that said I was wrong? CCP said their is too much isk coming out of nullsec, which is entirely possible. Where exaclty is your up to date source that contradicts this, oh goonsire?

This is the "farms and Fields" we've all mostly been screaming for isn't it?

Yes, and most of that boils down to "ratters are cowards and will vehemently oppose anything which negatively impacts their ability to be cowards".

I do not see them making a fuzz.

Any CSM discussion not mentioned in the CSM Meeting minutes would have been NDA-ed (like this discussion over this module if it existed), so they wouldn't be able to talk about it even if they wanted to. I accept that the proposition I made is entirely speculative and is not to be treated with any seriousness. However, it has not gone unnoticed by me that the only posts in this thread are Ali Aras, who specifically mentioned that portions of this module and its operation are under an NDA; Mangala Solaris, who answered a clarification question; and Mynnna who posted an alternative option to the deployable. Usually CSM members are very active in a thread as controversial as this one.

Marlona Sky rather than Mynnna.

Also, I still say this thing is going to only be mostly used by the 'big boys' who can hold systems secure from outside interference to successfully use it (like goons, and etc).

Question, if what you stood to gain was more than the potential loss, would that encourage you to try it?

I'm agreeing it's not worth it currently yes, However you said (possibly not what you meant to say?) that the rewards exceed what is at risk. Where as the reverse is true.

My heart bleeds for you tippia

Seriously though, i think you guys are wasting your time here. CCP are going to do this so the best things you can do is start demanding that they add more PVE content to make it worth living in null.

Most people who reject the ESS seem to reject it out of one or several of the following reasons:

a) they donGÇÿt want their income to be nerfed

b) they argue that they want to rat with their PvE alts mostly or completely undisturbed

c) they say that the mechanic is too complex to be good for the game

Sorry to say so, but this argument is plainly ridiculous. YouGÇÿre living in NULL SECURITY SPACE. So by definition you do only have security as far as you yourself or your corporation or your alliance are able to provide. Did you ever hear wormhole people complain about the fact that they can be slaughtered anytime in their sleeper anomalies? I bet there have been a lot of complaints, but I am also quite sure that very few nullsec people would agree with such complaints.

If you defend your farm EFFICIENTLY and SUCCESSFUL, then there will be less incentive for brigands to come back.

Your like a broken record:

We understand there is a game imbalance between nullsec income and highsec income when viewed in relation to Risk: Reward and Effort: Reward paradigms.

So what? Do you suddenly think you shouldn't have to defend your ratting space because of this? Do you suddenly think you deserve some concord level of safety because you placed an IHUB in system? Of course you don't!! You are responsible for defending your own space, and the whole POINT of farms and fields is to have infrastructure susceptible to attack by small roaming gangs.

so? if you dont deploy this EES thingy you loose bounties. IF you deploy it, you MIGHT loose some bounties to raiders but whatever \o/
In any case you profit from them and not deploying one will get you loosing ISK.

Curious: Can you provide a quantitative ISK value and time-to-return that would be "decent"?

So no ROI is acceptable. Got it.

I <3 irrational people