Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 72 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 37 post(s) |
Otto Kring
Imperial Guardians Spaceship Samurai
3
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 20:48:00 -
[361] - Quote
Well ok great, but when I am stuck in station all day and paying to play EVE can I get a game to play with all of my newbros so we can have some fun. Recreate some stations to have an EVEVegas fun! |
Pinky Hops
Spartan's DNA
221
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 20:49:00 -
[362] - Quote
Has anybody pointed out that if ratting bounties were too high (from CCP's perception -- and they have all the numbers) that it would have been simpler to just straight nerf ratting bounties?
Instead it's like they packaged it with an anchorable design straight out of the Worst Ideas Ever thread.
I think most EVE players would just prefer the truth straight up.
"We are nerfing ratting bounties and here is why." (explanation follows) |
Shun Makoto
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve The Fourth District
39
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 20:51:00 -
[363] - Quote
Make it so permissions can be set on the ESS or this is one of the crappiest things introduced in the game. Putting these down will become a KOS-able offense, just watch.
Edit: Putting the Hacking minigame into the Take All button is a good idea
Do it Caldari Independant Navy Reserve Fourth District Patriot Faction Former 22nd BRDU - Retired Milita Wing Commander
|
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
65
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 20:51:00 -
[364] - Quote
Alcorak wrote:As they stand right now the 'time to rob' is about 75 seconds from when an interceptor appears in local. 30 sec to land on the unit, 40 to rob it, and 5 (on the outside) for human error. I'd estimate a defender's time to get to POS/station in ratting ship, swich to pvp ship, warp to bubbled ESS, lock interceptor and point at around 90 seconds *minimum*.
I think you are missing the 20 seconds needed to access the ESS. So your estimate is 75 seconds, and adding 20 seconds gives 95 seconds, which is apparently CCP's guess at response times. I am not as confident about the 90 second response time being enough for defenders. I think the response time is a huge variable that CCP needs feedback on. |
Berluth Luthian
Meltdown.
172
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 20:51:00 -
[365] - Quote
So nobody has talked about how the isk tags are racial.
So say I drop minmatar tags in Amarr space then the closest navy location to redeem them is a bit of a ways away. I feel like this will be an underestimated effect... |
Shun Makoto
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve The Fourth District
39
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 20:53:00 -
[366] - Quote
Berluth Luthian wrote:Are the isk tags racial? Or are they universal? IOW, does the ESS's race determine what kind of tags are printed?
Tags are racial, read the Dev Blog Caldari Independant Navy Reserve Fourth District Patriot Faction Former 22nd BRDU - Retired Milita Wing Commander
|
Alcorak
Stealth Tactics and Reconnaissance Service Rebel Alliance of New Eden
11
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 20:55:00 -
[367] - Quote
A nice thought Vincent but that won't work in practice. They light up on overview like cynos - meaning a 0 warp for an I-nulled cynoalt that enters the system - hope you're not too attached to whatever ratter you fly if you're going to try to warp back and loot it before you warp off. You can't 'just scoop it' it has a bubble and takes 40sec to loot. You also wont be right next to it as you'll be trying to clear multiple sites. Anyone being able to deploy and loot these will get *hilarious* in a bad way. Its a mobile troll module. |
handige harrie
Hedion University Amarr Empire
174
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 20:55:00 -
[368] - Quote
so CCP made up their mind what they want with Nullsec.
Instead of encouraging people living there doing industry and killing stuff, building empires etcc, they want it even more empty, with the occasional roaming gang wondering why no people are living in nullsec.
Guess CCP really like high sec Incursion alts. Baddest poster ever |
NinjaStyle
hirr RAZOR Alliance
39
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 20:55:00 -
[369] - Quote
the ESS is the dumbest idea you've had yet CCP well ******* done.
it will put a bubble up? wow thats smart intys are immune even t3's can be immune well done! so smart!
your not ******* thinking at all nobody will USE THEM AT ALL the only thing your doing is nerfing bounties 5% because a 5% increase is NOT WORTH THE RISK OF IT BEING STOLEN.
OMFG this will NOT generate PVP or ANYTHING because I WILL REPEAT NOBODY WILL USE THEM.
siphons are annoying and kinda fun because of it but this is just PLAIN STUPID.
find something that ACTUALLY will generate PVP because siphons dont they are too cheap / too **** atm and this ESS thing is even dumber!
allso this from Evelgrivions post since he's being a little more polite:
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. |
Foo Chan
Sparks Inc Zero Hour Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 20:57:00 -
[370] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:Has anybody pointed out that if ratting bounties were too high (from CCP's perception -- and they have all the numbers) that it would have been simpler to just straight nerf ratting bounties?
Instead it's like they packaged it with an anchorable design straight out of the Worst Ideas Ever thread.
I think most EVE players would just prefer the truth straight up.
"We are nerfing ratting bounties and here is why." (explanation follows)
Would save everyone time too.
How about remaking older stuff like corp hangars and pos gui?
I mean.. much needed stuff to motivate more people to keep p(L)aying
Yes, I can build that. |
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5977
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 20:57:00 -
[371] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote: The cartels will either make it mandatory in every system, and mandate that anyone destroying, and equally importantly, accessing a unit will be tossed from null sec, which makes this effectively a 20% tax that goes to cartel leadership. Or as predicted, inty gangs will steal everything. Either way the line member loses big.
we can just set corp ratting taxes, less effort and no chance those inty gangs steal our rightful cartel loot "I can hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half." |
Berluth Luthian
Meltdown.
173
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 20:57:00 -
[372] - Quote
Shun Makoto wrote:Berluth Luthian wrote:Are the isk tags racial? Or are they universal? IOW, does the ESS's race determine what kind of tags are printed? Tags are racial, read the Dev Blog
Yeah i just reread it and corrected my post. Thanks for the help. Anyway, that's an underestimated thing. I imagine that collecting and then redeeming these tags itself will be a contentious thing.
Camping the caldari navy station that is the closest to Goon space for example could be rather lucrative. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2606
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 20:57:00 -
[373] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote: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. If one were to use them, this change would enforce the old rule of one ratter per solar system. If they were used, players would be exposed to effectively invincible traveling interceptor roams and tech 3s on a constant basis. All the while, the income available in nullsec is trying to compete with the near-zero-risk income in highsec. Why should players choose to expose themselves to compensate for a 5% income nerf when they can make comparable, or more, ISK per hour by running level 4 missions in high security space? Consider that: - Level 4 mission runners do not have to compete for their resources.
- Level 4 mission runners do not have to expose their ship to enemy fire unless wardecced or suicide ganked.
- Level 4 mission runners are not distanced from the market hubs.
There's a fine line where theoretical income potential becomes irrelevant to the convenience of hassle-free resupply, and that line probably lies half way between the income of level 3 and level 4 missions as it is. This was talked about to the CSM. are not a majority of them from Null? Do they have a poor understanding of Null?
As for why not do L4 missions: Because that means being in high sec with all the self entitled whiners. The reason to be in Null is because you like Null. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
4301
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 20:59:00 -
[374] - Quote
scimichar wrote:Let's nerf null sec ratting even more and make it even harder to find stuff to kill.
Yea, it's not as if CCP hasn't chased enough pve player into high sec to do incursions and sister's missions (or to low sec to farm tags in the belts and FW lp with stabed frigs). All of which I'm already doing lol.
ESS is a very dumb idea. CCP should not develop in a vacuum like that, but rather should consider all pve isk sources and iterate accordingly. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5977
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:02:00 -
[375] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote: This was talked about to the CSM. are not a majority of them from Null? Do they have a poor understanding of Null?
As for why not do L4 missions: Because that means being in high sec with all the self entitled whiners. The reason to be in Null is because you like Null.
I assume that this means the initial draft was that much worse. There was, after all, that thing that the minutes showed the CSM shouted down. "I can hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half." |
Mirthander Kane
The Warp Core Stabilizers Tactical Narcotics Team
10
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:02:00 -
[376] - Quote
Taram Caldar wrote:Mirthander Kane wrote:i think it might have to do with the fact that people buy plex with ratting isk, thus taking away from CCP's monthly income - now they introduce this to lower the isk gains, meaning less plex and (hopefully) more subs.
So by making this deployable's mechanics as complex as it currently seems, they try to make it look 'justified'. Thus the concept of 'shaking things up' with this device, is just a ruse to hide/justify an isk nerf, thus forcing more subs than plex use. Could be, could be not... still a dumb-a$$ idea to release this. You do realize they make FAR more money off plex than subs, right? Subs are between $9.95/mo and $14.95 a month. Plex are 19.95 for a month or $34.95 for a 2 month GTC. Either way it's far more money for CCP than subs are.. Your logic fails.
I understand plex needs to be bought with RL currency and that is why it is ingame. I forgot that plex actually costs more than subs, so yes, in that regard my logic was wrong. Thanks for pointing it out.
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8365
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:03:00 -
[377] - Quote
Evelgrivion wrote: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. I don't even rat anymore and I'm absolutely disgusted with CCP over this change. Instead of allocating developer resources to things that matter and need to be fixed or improved (POS mechanics, corp mechanics, nullsec income, nullsec industry, sovereignty warfare, devaluation of exploration) instead we have the most idiotic ideas being put forth by the brains at CCP.
Nerfing nullsec bounties by 5% and introducing an absolutely imbalanced and pointless module to further discourage people from trying to make an income. Income which fuels PVP. Why the hell are you trying so hard to distract and obfuscate those things that are actually important? My EVE Videos |
justatrial Minayin
Light of the moon Fraternity.
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:07:00 -
[378] - Quote
15km? That's nothing for frigate. Why don't we add a constrain, if you decide to take it, whatever the amount you take, you will be hold around the depot unit for 30 seconds. So the other people in the system can come and tackle you. You can use interceptors, bombers just because they are cheap, you can also use battleship or even carrier, mothership because they can tank more damage. |
Myriad Blaze
nul-li-fy Nulli Secunda
139
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:08:00 -
[379] - Quote
I think the ESS is a great idea ... totally in line with other great ideas like New Coke, the Sony rootkit or putting your unsinkable ship to the test against an iceberg.
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2606
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:08:00 -
[380] - Quote
Alcorak wrote:A nice thought Vincent but that won't work in practice. They light up on overview like cynos - meaning a 0 warp for an I-nulled cynoalt that enters the system - hope you're not too attached to whatever ratter you fly if you're going to try to warp back and loot it before you warp off. You can't 'just scoop it' it has a bubble and takes 40sec to loot. You also wont be right next to it as you'll be trying to clear multiple sites. Anyone being able to deploy and loot these will get *hilarious* in a bad way. Its a mobile troll module.
Its 20 seconds if you hit the share button, and that way there are no tags, there is no looting. You just get the ISK. Many ratting ships take 20 seconds to align, so you hit share, hit align, wait 20 seconds, scoop (bubble drops) warp.
Remember the 40 seconds and tags option only applies to the "give me all button"; that is to a thief. The share button is faster and there are no tags. If you are willing to abandon the structure, just hit share and get out as fast as possible. For example have an alt in a frig sitting by it. Alt hits share, burns out and warps. Or have the alt in a shuttle and let him take the pod express home. All you need to do get your isk, and keep the invader from getting it, is hit the Share button. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
|
Batolemaeus
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
16
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:09:00 -
[381] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Vincent Athena wrote: This was talked about to the CSM. are not a majority of them from Null? Do they have a poor understanding of Null?
As for why not do L4 missions: Because that means being in high sec with all the self entitled whiners. The reason to be in Null is because you like Null.
I assume that this means the initial draft was that much worse. There was, after all, that thing that the minutes showed the CSM shouted down.
That is a terrifying thought. |
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
880
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:09:00 -
[382] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote: Instead of allocating developer resources to things that matter and need to be fixed or improved (POS mechanics....
Playing devils advocate for CCP....maybe they are doing just that. Consider 2 things, if you will.
1) The main hurdle to improving POS is the legacy code which CCP apparently can't touch, particularly as it applies to the Pos bubble.
2) We get a new bubble (the MSI) which projects a new effect (dscan jamming) over a bubble. This is linked to some new capabilities they've been developing.
Seems to me that these "new capabilities" could be used for removing OGB and a new POS system. Just saying... |
Alphea Abbra
Grim Determination Nulli Secunda
541
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:11:00 -
[383] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Evelgrivion wrote: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. I don't even rat anymore and I'm absolutely disgusted with CCP over this change. Instead of allocating developer resources to things that matter and need to be fixed or improved (POS mechanics, corp mechanics, nullsec income, nullsec industry, sovereignty warfare, devaluation of exploration) instead we have the most idiotic ideas being put forth by the brains at CCP. Nerfing nullsec bounties by 5% and introducing an absolutely imbalanced and pointless module to further discourage people from trying to make an income. Income which fuels PVP. Why the hell are you trying so hard to distract and obfuscate those things that are actually important? +1. "I don't always agree with Goons, but when I do... !!!"
Weaselior wrote:Vincent Athena wrote: This was talked about to the CSM. are not a majority of them from Null? Do they have a poor understanding of Null?
As for why not do L4 missions: Because that means being in high sec with all the self entitled whiners. The reason to be in Null is because you like Null.
I assume that this means the initial draft was that much worse. There was, after all, that thing that the minutes showed the CSM shouted down. Where? Did CCP really present this to the CSM? I read the Deployables through, no mention?
Seriously CCP, when CFC, N3, Provi and NPC 0.0 people tell you it's bad, rethink it. When Dinsdale agrees with Goons, the freaking end is nigh.
Seriously CCP, don't do drugs. |
Fix Lag
603
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:15:00 -
[384] - Quote
THIS IDEA SUCKS ASS
(That's constructive criticism. I am encouraging you, CCP, to completely get rid of this fucking stupid idea.) |
Jessica Danikov
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
225
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:16:00 -
[385] - Quote
Oh, come on, I don't understand what the fuss is about. The roots of the ESS are fairly obvious:
What if being aligned and warping out the first sign of danger was inhibited in some way? Maybe some of the worth you're generating is stored separately.
Well, what's the incentive in doing that optionally? Make it worth a little less without, worth more with- classic risk/reward mechanic.
What's to stop you parking an alt on it and cashing out when danger comes along? Have a timeout on the payout.
Honestly, the only people who'll be hit hard by this are solo ratters- those who work in groups can fight off a solo roaming player, while groups vs. groups is where it's interesting.
How could you make it better? Maybe go full-hog with the CONCORD features. Disable cynos on grid (regular and covert, just like hisec), make it impossible to hotdrop- might get more interesting ships (faction fitted faction BS, perhaps) risking the ESS vicinity and a fight for the loot if a solo hunter can't tackle & cyno in help all by themselves.
Also, maybe trickle the payouts- should be an incentive not only to get on the ESS as early as possible but to also stick around. Some kind of trickle mechanic would encourage that.
Making the payout take up m3 is also important, otherwise interceptors will be mercilessly abused.
Apart from that, a little balancing can ensure that most nullsec dwellers are inclined to use it (and expose themselves to the risk that incurs), while there's also room for hostile ESS deployment to try and force the issue. |
Angry Mustache
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
90
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:18:00 -
[386] - Quote
There's a lot of potential in a thing like this, what about an alteration.
Price : 500 million, decent EHP (500k to 1M)
Can be anchored anywhere, takes LP as well as Isk
Projects a 300km sphere where concord jurisdiction is disabled. inner 50km warp disruption field. Access is limited to the anchoring party, and can by standing, by corp, etc.
Bam, instant conflict driver.
Who gets to control the one in Osmon? who gets to control the ones in an incursion system? An official Member of the Goonswarm Federation Complaints Department. Were you wronged by a member of our fine space guild? We can get you the compensation you deserve. |
Snowflake Tem
The Order of Symbolic Measures
101
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:20:00 -
[387] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:Snowflake Tem wrote:1) It's complex because it's has got handles for jigsaw pieces we've not seen yet. It doesn't matter the reason that it is overly complex, I'm just pointing out that it is bad for these types of things to become complex. Contrast it to an MTU or a Mobile Depot or even a siphon. This ESS thing is just *facepalm*. Snowflake Tem wrote:It does NOT need scrapping, it needs placing in context. It does need scrapping. This concept of a "booster" anchorable is horrific slippery slope, as you could invent endless different varieties of them, giving players the incentive to run around and anchor random crap if they want their "full reward." Hauling around a black box, placing it where you rat, anchoring it, interacting with it, all so that it can give you a bit extra income...but store it in the middle of the system for some bizarre reason. Just awful. Anchorables should be generic sandbox tools (theft/storage/utility), not passive boosters with some artificial risk mechanic built-in.
Do we agree that infrastructure hubs do not deliver all that was hoped for? Could this not be an alternate structure on a similar theme that interfaces with real players, and not weekend administrators? Isn't understanding the complexity of any system in EVE part of it's allure?
I think you are mistaking the slippery slope for more star systems slipping through the fingers of a certain alliances' grip.
Having said that, from a entirely abstract perspective. I don't understand the gathered data being kept on record for everybody benefit if the blighter is destroyed. If the thing is a telecommunications tower to Empire data centres I want to see new structures going up in empire to receive the data if they don't already exist. The ownership of the data is obscure. Were the isk is coming is not entirely clear. The margins seem arbitrary. The triggers for ramping up of rewards is downright baffling, I assume deliberately so. I like that CCP will be able to track what happens to the isk chits, but don't feel that the dev teams hard work has been successfully set in the game world context.
Don't abort this baby yet, I want to see what it grows into. |
Turelus
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve The Fourth District
769
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:21:00 -
[388] - Quote
Alphea Abbra wrote:Seriously CCP, when CFC, N3, Provi and NPC 0.0 people tell you it's bad, rethink it. This.
Lieutenant Turelus
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
The Fourth District |
Dolph Carebear
Adohivatal
57
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:22:00 -
[389] - Quote
Why, oh why are you spending time designing and implementing useless junk like this Rubicon 1.1 deployable line?
I don't care about the 5% bounty nerf, I don't care about moon income implications... What I do care about is the fact that the team behind the game has apparently lost it.
These things are gimmicks that nobody will use. |
Nassus Ryn
Dystopian Industries
3
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:22:00 -
[390] - Quote
How dare you nerf Nullsec ratting income by 5% while implementing a mechanism in which they can actively regain the lost ISK and then some in exchange for a higher percentage risked and the necessity to defend their own space, CCP! And to compound the insult, to even DARE add new mechanics that can be used by both carebears and pvpers for their respective playstyles, whether it be making as much ISK as possible, or baiting Sov holders into a confrontation to protect their profit margins.
And last but not least, how DARE you add broadcasted, high profile locations desirable to both defenders and attackers to be used as flashpoints for spontaneous pvp in nullsec!?
I don't know you anymore, CCP. This is the last straw.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 72 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |