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 - 56 post(s) |
Alyxportur
From Our Cold Dead Hands The Kadeshi
83
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:23:00 -
[241] - Quote
You didn't explain how the price scaling will or will not be implemented for sovereignty nullsec. Does this mean that outposts will be forced into this pricing scheme? or will they remain a manually specified cost? or will we have the ability to choose between one or the other since, as it is nullsec, we own the outpost. |
Myxx
698
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:23:00 -
[242] - Quote
Greyscale should never be allowed near EVE design, this has been commonly known for some time now. I am beginning to think very similarly of Yitterbum and friends. All in all, for me, all you're doing is adding a few more annoyances to what I already do.
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
570
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:24:00 -
[243] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Maximus Andendare wrote:This may be in the cost scaling blog, but will the 0-14% cost increase be reflected in the UI in some way, or will we have to learn this from our spreadsheets? The new UI will show you the accurate price before you actually install the job. And can I get an answer in that regard to my question? How are we supposed to compare stations in regard to the different cost levels without ferrying the stuff around? Or have you also not thought this through?
You will be able to get a quote from a station you are not at, with a blueprint you don't even own. More details to follow in the UI blog. CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS |
|
Andre Vauban
Quantum Cats Syndicate Repeat 0ffenders
252
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:25:00 -
[244] - Quote
Makoto Priano wrote:Actually, QUESTION!
So. If you're removing the standing requirement for anchoring POSes because it doesn't add gameplay value, will you also be removing the standing requirement for installing jumpclones?
That said, if you're removing standings requirements and standings now only really matter for taxes/agent access, will you be adding new standing-gated rewards to LP stores or something like that? Pretty please?
They should probably just remove standings all together. There really is no value for having high standings anymore except for access to high level missions. QCATS is recruiting:-á https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3896299 |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20762
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:25:00 -
[245] - Quote
Alyxportur wrote:You didn't explain how the price scaling will or will not be implemented for sovereignty nullsec. Does this mean that outposts will be forced into this pricing scheme? or will they remain a manually specified cost? or will we have the ability to choose between one or the other since, as it is nullsec, we own the outpost. It applies everywhere, per a previous comment GÇö the congestion fees become a new universal ISK sink. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6898
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:25:00 -
[246] - Quote
Alyxportur wrote:You didn't explain how the price scaling will or will not be implemented for sovereignty nullsec. Does this mean that outposts will be forced into this pricing scheme? or will they remain a manually specified cost? or will we have the ability to choose between one or the other since, as it is nullsec, we own the outpost. They did: outposts have the same cost scaling mechanic and that part goes into a sink, the station owner can also manually specify a cost.
What was not specified is how fast they scale up - if, say, an amarr station with 100 simultaneous jobs has the same cost as a highsec station with 100 or if its lower, and I assume that will be mentioned when they also mention what they're doing with the slot bonus upgrades. Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Disadvantaged Persons Outreach Division:
"We hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half." |
Edward Olmops
Sirius Fleet
153
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:26:00 -
[247] - Quote
The mentioning of Teams makes me want to have CREWS. |
Imiarr Timshae
Funny Men In Funny Hats
181
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:27:00 -
[248] - Quote
Tippia wrote: Well, for one, salvagers don't care about loot reprocessing GÇö they care about salvage.
Alright then "looters/salvagers" I thought that was clear.
Looting and salvaging level 4's for example about 80% of the ISK comes from loot. A 30-40% drop in value is significant. TSCA - Free 3rd Party & Collateral Holding Service - POS Deployment Corp Sale/Boosting |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
289
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:27:00 -
[249] - Quote
Edward Olmops wrote:The mentioning of Teams makes me want to have CREWS. We already have them, in missile form.
Get it? CREWS MISSILES
Excuse me, I need to pay penance for this. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
145
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:28:00 -
[250] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Kadl wrote: So an industrialist needs a spare corporation in reserve? I am not sure your suggestion addresses the claimed problem.
tying up an alt makes it at least require a mediocum of planning to trivially avoid wardecs i would still be irritated at the ease but it would be a vast improvement you must admit
No. It just looks like an impediment to newer industrialists while older industrialists with more accounts get a pass. Designing a feature whose main focus is to hinder newer players seems foolish. The problem I see is related to the War Dec, corporation, and POS systems. All of those need real iterations to make them functional. So, yes you should be able to claim a POS or POCO location using a War Dec. Making high sec industry more convoluted does not seem like the proper solution. |
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20763
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:28:00 -
[251] - Quote
Edward Olmops wrote:The mentioning of Teams makes me want to have CREWS. Crews? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
gifter Penken
State War Academy Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:29:00 -
[252] - Quote
Grendell wrote:I really hope you address the blueprint voting/lockdown system before making the slot changes. Allow a sort of emergency quick vote or something when the starbase gets attacked or reinforced.
You can't lockdown blueprints at the POS.
Therefore, they won't be there, because the risk of corp theft is way too high! |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
382
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:29:00 -
[253] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Maximus Andendare wrote:This may be in the cost scaling blog, but will the 0-14% cost increase be reflected in the UI in some way, or will we have to learn this from our spreadsheets? The new UI will show you the accurate price before you actually install the job. And can I get an answer in that regard to my question? How are we supposed to compare stations in regard to the different cost levels without ferrying the stuff around? Or have you also not thought this through? You will be able to get a quote from a station you are not at, with a blueprint you don't even own. More details to follow in the UI blog.
Nice, that is finally good news.
|
Valterra Craven
171
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:29:00 -
[254] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Querns wrote:On a related note:
The removal of standings for anchoring POS makes it trivial to evade destruction of your POS. Right now, if you want to move your POS to a new corporation upon wardec, it takes seven (7) days for standings to promulgate to the corporation's standings. This had the effect of severely limiting the amount of "POS cycling" that could occur. With the removal of standings from the equation, it is now a reasonable response, upon being wardecced, to create a new corporation, unanchor the POS under wardec, and sit on the moon in question in a cloaked industrial sitting in the new, unwardecced corporation, ready to anchor a new pos when the old one comes up.
I suggest that a new corporation be required to wait seven (7) days before being eligible to anchor a new pos. This brings the new era in line with the convoluted, yet functional system that exists today. This is a good idea and should get implemented.
Its a stupid idea, all you need is several alts in different corps as backups. You're goons, the second a new feature is added you *always* look for ways to circumvent it and laugh in CCPs face (see mobile bounty system in useless anoms) |
Entity
X-Factor Industries Synthetic Existence
646
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:30:00 -
[255] - Quote
So you're saying 8 years of operating a hisec POS with 2.5 trillion ISK worth (that's 2500 billion) of BPOs, you're suddenly expecting me to put said 2.5 trillion ISK into a paper space container and not locked down in my hangar?
I like the changes but that part is just flabbergastingly stupid GòªGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGòæGûæGûæGûæGòöGòùGûæGòæGûæGòæGûæGòöGòùGûæGòªGòæGûæGòöGòùGòöGòªGòùGòöGòù GòæGûæGòöGòùGòöGòùGòöGòúGûæGòöGòùGòáGûæGûæGòáGûæGòáGòùGòáGò¥GûæGòæGòáGûæGòáGò¥GòæGòæGòæGòÜGòù Gò¬GòÉGòÜGò¥GòæGûæGòÜGò¥GûæGòÜGò¥GòæGûæGûæGòÜGò¥GòæGòæGòÜGò¥GûæGò¬GòÜGò¥GòÜGò¥GòæGûæGòæGòÜGò¥ Got Item? |
Boltorano
Devious Chemicals
71
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:30:00 -
[256] - Quote
Imiarr Timshae wrote:Tippia wrote: Well, for one, salvagers don't care about loot reprocessing GÇö they care about salvage.
Alright then "looters/salvagers" I thought that was clear. Looting and salvaging level 4's for example about 80% of the ISK comes from loot. A 30-40% drop in value is significant.
That lost income to mission runners will most likely result in more income for miners, which is something I'm completely fine with. "Mining with guns." should never have been a thing, and CCP has slowly been correcting that error. |
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
572
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:30:00 -
[257] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Canenald wrote:Sounds to me like manufacturing and research is about to be dumbed down. Yeah, just like the creation of a GUI dumbed down computer use. Hell, now EVERONE will be able to do it... sheesh.
We talk a lot about good and bad complexity within the team. A fair portion of the industry changes are pretty clear examples of removing bad complexity, while still keeping the interesting problems for players to solve.
Some of the changes are also centered around cleaning up years of legacy code, freeing us up to better iterate on the feature and do more sexy looking UI CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS |
|
Thead Enco
47th Ronin
153
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:31:00 -
[258] - Quote
Seriousrly who in their right mind puts billons worth of BPO's at a ******* POS? and with the standings change to anchoring people have been crying for a change since forever, Now CCP makes is easier so you dont have to rescue "The Damsel" 1,000,000th time and people stll *****?
-á"A Lannister always pays his debts."
-áTyrion Lannister |
Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries Solar Assault Fleet
1057
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:31:00 -
[259] - Quote
Kaius Fero wrote:I have not much to comment except this: Quote:Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements (minus some protected solar systems, like Jita or new player starting systems of course). Now.. tell me this was a typo! Are you guys serious about this?! I mean.. there are thousand of players whom spent like months grinding those stupid cosmos missions just to be able to drop a POS in hi sec and now your like.. "lol suckers!" Erh, yes.
It's happened before, and it'll happen again.
Luckily standings are useful for more stuff than hanging towers.
And yes, I've spent quite sometime grinding standings, and even doing Cosmos, to be able to hang towers ;)
Vote for Fuzzy Steve! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4236322
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6898
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:32:00 -
[260] - Quote
Kadl wrote:No. It just looks like an impediment to newer industrialists while older industrialists with more accounts get a pass. Designing a feature whose main focus is to hinder newer players seems foolish. The problem I see is related to the War Dec, corporation, and POS systems. All of those need real iterations to make them functional. So, yes you should be able to claim a POS or POCO location using a War Dec. Making high sec industry more convoluted does not seem like the proper solution. your proposal that we ought not improve things until there is a complete fix is dumb and wrong
by effectively charging 1/3rd a plex for a (weak) wardec immunity, and charging 2 1/3rds plex per month for complete wardec immunity, we significantly penalize the cowardly through an easy-to-implement system that dramatically improves wardecs without requiring massive change Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division. |
|
Myxx
699
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:33:00 -
[261] - Quote
Btw, as far as defending a pos goes in highsec: Ever heard of a dickstar? In highsec, those can be especially annoying to deal with. your goal with risking stuff in a starbase might not work the way you think it will. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6898
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:33:00 -
[262] - Quote
Entity wrote:So you're saying 8 years of operating a hisec POS with 2.5 trillion ISK worth (that's 2500 billion) of BPOs, you're suddenly expecting me to put said 2.5 trillion ISK into a paper space container and not locked down in my hangar?
I like the changes but that part is just flabbergastingly stupid the real issue here is your apparent belief you should be entitled to get the most advantages possible from your 2.5 trillion in bpos absolutely risk free and how long that was tolerated
eight years was 7.9 too long Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6898
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:35:00 -
[263] - Quote
protip research poshavers: it is expected and anticipated your expensive bpos will be moved to station slots, you should stop appearing flabbergasted that you will have to move them Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division. |
Knug LiDi
Quafe Commandos The Obsidian Front
71
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:36:00 -
[264] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Maximus Andendare wrote:This may be in the cost scaling blog, but will the 0-14% cost increase be reflected in the UI in some way, or will we have to learn this from our spreadsheets? The new UI will show you the accurate price before you actually install the job.
That's nice - BUT - I want to know this cost BEFORE I transport materials to a particular station. I.e. the cost amount need to be reflected in the information about that station. And, of course, it is dynamic.
This is necessary. Trial and error trying to find cheap manufacturing while carrying materials is stupid. If the rate is dynamic, it needs to be on the equivalent of a market, so players have the intel to decide how far/how much. Doing this while carrying good is idiotic. Flying to 50 stations to determine a value that may change before I get back is wrong. Let me view the local 'market' for manufacturing just like a can examine the market for ore. Then I will make market decisions
If only we could fall into a woman's arms
without falling into her hands |
Imiarr Timshae
Funny Men In Funny Hats
181
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:36:00 -
[265] - Quote
Boltorano wrote: That lost income to mission runners will most likely result in more income for miners, which is something I'm completely fine with. "Mining with guns." should never have been a thing, and CCP has slowly been correcting that error.
Yeah. Seems reasonable to me. Create a "Sandbox", let people create their own professions and then remove them.
Sure it's corrective. But "sandbox" it is not.
Edit : Not that it really matters in trying to argue that Eve isn't much of a sandbox these days; it was always a fucxing stupid marketing campaign. TSCA - Free 3rd Party & Collateral Holding Service - POS Deployment Corp Sale/Boosting |
JITAALT808
Boom. Boom. Boom.
4
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:36:00 -
[266] - Quote
Boltorano wrote:JITAALT808 wrote:I'm not happy that my faction standings that I worked so hard for are now useless. Did you guys give any thought to the effects on mission runners who were making a business out of POS standings? Or to mission runners in general? Basically, standings are worthless at this point. In effect, they are nothing more than a penalty on those with bad standings, as there is only one remaining benefit -- access to L4s for faction standings of 5+. All other standings above that number are quite literally useless save for the bonus bpc's (big whoop) and a reduction in taxes for trading (also big whoop for everyone but serious traders). I appreciate that you've taken advantage of emergent gameplay and found yourself a niche way to make ISK. That said, sometimes changes should be made for the greater good of all. It doesn't have to be a zero sum solution. Those standings were hard to get. Especially for those of us who worked to get multiple faction standings up (riding the seesaw ain't no fun). That work should count for something and there should be rewards for having done it. The most common refrain I'm seeing so far is, "well you got to use it in the past." To which I can only reply, "let's see if you say that after capitals are removed from the game and no one gets the skillpoints back. I mean, you got to use it in the past, right?"
Those standings should be worth something and they should affect something. If they don't, then the concept needs to be entirely removed from the game, and the people who put the work in should get something for it. You can bet you sweet ass that station owners are not going to get screwed over with the changes to slot mechanics (Devs have already said that another dev blog will address those changes). Why should mission runners get screwed? |
Nathan Natinde
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:36:00 -
[267] - Quote
I have a large POS, only one other guy has access, (and then only because I know him in RL because 'EVE') I already have billions in assembly arrays and labs at risk
The only thing that makes my industry experience bearable is that I can keep HUNDREDS of (Non stackable) T2 BPC's, Ship / Module / Component BPO's in ONE corp hanger in a station and set the jobs going on multiple characters from there. (Maxed out builder gets a whole 11 slots of each and you do not get EVE rich making T2 on one character))
So now I have to split all the blueprints up as well, have all my characters log in out at the POS and memorize which pesky array or lab I left each in. Or swallow hefty fees that apparently will make losses.
All this would be fine if I made one or 2 items, but to make ISK in EVE without a T2 BPO you should to be flexible and ready to make practically any item. I don't mind the risks, or particularly having to make more things at the POS (as long as the awful drawbacks on T2 ship arrays go away) but honestly I don't need industry to be more complicated for Blueprints. |
Entity
X-Factor Industries Synthetic Existence
646
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:37:00 -
[268] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Entity wrote:So you're saying 8 years of operating a hisec POS with 2.5 trillion ISK worth (that's 2500 billion) of BPOs, you're suddenly expecting me to put said 2.5 trillion ISK into a paper space container and not locked down in my hangar?
I like the changes but that part is just flabbergastingly stupid the real issue here is your apparent belief you should be entitled to get the most advantages possible from your 2.5 trillion in bpos absolutely risk free and how long that was tolerated eight years was 7.9 too long
Risk free? What? Is your brain turned off or something?
- The pos alone is worth 8 billion+ (all faction stuff) - I stand to lose a month worth of product to the tune of 20 billion if someone decides to blow it up.
I'm fine with -that- risk, but having to literally put ALL my eggs in that one easy to pop basket is completely unacceptable. GòªGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGòæGûæGûæGûæGòöGòùGûæGòæGûæGòæGûæGòöGòùGûæGòªGòæGûæGòöGòùGòöGòªGòùGòöGòù GòæGûæGòöGòùGòöGòùGòöGòúGûæGòöGòùGòáGûæGûæGòáGûæGòáGòùGòáGò¥GûæGòæGòáGûæGòáGò¥GòæGòæGòæGòÜGòù Gò¬GòÉGòÜGò¥GòæGûæGòÜGò¥GûæGòÜGò¥GòæGûæGûæGòÜGò¥GòæGòæGòÜGò¥GûæGò¬GòÜGò¥GòÜGò¥GòæGûæGòæGòÜGò¥ Got Item? |
Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries Solar Assault Fleet
1057
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:37:00 -
[269] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:Canenald wrote:Sounds to me like manufacturing and research is about to be dumbed down. Yeah, just like the creation of a GUI dumbed down computer use. Hell, now EVERONE will be able to do it... sheesh. We talk a lot about good and bad complexity within the team. A fair portion of the industry changes are pretty clear examples of removing bad complexity, while still keeping the interesting problems for players to solve. Some of the changes are also centered around cleaning up years of legacy code, freeing us up to better iterate on the feature and do more sexy looking UI Success in industry should be about knowing what to build, how, where, when, sourced from where and sold at the right place and at the right time.
Edit: and for the right price.
It should never be about to be able to stand or navigate a stupid UI. Vote for Fuzzy Steve! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4236322
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6899
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:38:00 -
[270] - Quote
Imiarr Timshae wrote:Boltorano wrote: That lost income to mission runners will most likely result in more income for miners, which is something I'm completely fine with. "Mining with guns." should never have been a thing, and CCP has slowly been correcting that error.
Yeah. Seems reasonable to me. Create a "Sandbox", let people create their own professions and then remove them. Sure it's corrective. But "sandbox" it is not. sandbox means you can never change anything ever, said nobody with an ounce of sense ever
seriously is there a single time that anyone has ever used sandbox in a post in one of these threads where their post didn't amount to whining that anything could possibly change Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division. |
|
|
|
|
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 |