Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 27 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 12 post(s) |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
568
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 23:30:00 -
[391] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:CCP starts poking the "elephant in the room", entitled people start to cry.
Power projection is huge problem in this game and this is the first step to fix it. Props to CCP.
Because making the alliances that can afford to replace 50 titans are going to care about bridging costs going up some?
This isn't goign to hurt the power blocs, and it isn't a power porjection nerf, it just makes moving capitals more expensive, something that doesn't hurt established alliances as much as smaller alliances.
Paul Tsukaya wrote:Still waiting on someone from the likes of Mordus Angels, Dirt Nap Squad, IRED, Triumvirate, Sev3rance etc to weigh in on how this change will effect their small alliance.
I think we've heard enough from the CFC how much the small alliances they care about so very very much will suffer.
'Small' lowsec alliance checking in, this change is stupid, they are fixing an anticipated effect that isn't going to happen (less isotopes used on POSs? Not with POSs becoming more useful) by messing up capital and BLOPs usage. How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
Miner Hottie
Polaris Rising Gentlemen's Agreement
51
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 23:38:00 -
[392] - Quote
Firstly I would like to personally thank ISD for locking the thread whilst I replied causing me to lose my reply.
Secondly, I fail to see why this change is necessary, anticipation of a market moving is an important thing and I appreciate CCP doing this, however, I am quite certain a lot more isotopes disappears into null sec POS's (especially reaction chain POS's) than in to jump drives and without that being considered the eve market is one that will adjust and adapt without you guys doing anything. Taken in isolation the stated desire to ensure you "cushion" the isotope market is simply giving a free kick to hi sec AFK ice harvesters.
Thirdly you stated you wanted to encourage local resource gathering. This statement is diametrically opposed to everything you have done in the last few months for local null sec carebears, between the ******** ESS, a straight out nerf to ratters and gift to gank loving, real fight avoiding roamers and the retardely overpowered (since slightly nerfed) interceptors ignoring bubbles, align times and anything except another 10*remote sebo'ed interceptor to catch them.
If you are serious about improving the idea of local resource gathering, i.e. ice mining, then a couple of points, 1) all the nitrogen isotopes I gather in Vale of the Silent are never going to do anything but take up space in any jump capable ship unless that ship happens to be a Rhea, Chimera, Wyvern, Phoneix (lol) or Leviathan. This makes your "local resource gathering" with respect to isotopes plain silly, bordering on mindless, ultimately it is a through away line. 2) Those ice belts in Vale of the Silent are little better than the those in hi sec, but risk is much higher. You know, risk/reward? The thing is you added unstoppable interceptors to the game and now there is too much risk undocking my mining fleet. 3) Incentives to have corp/alliance mates cover mining ops are practically non-existent. This ties in with reward, the yields from ice mining aren't sufficient to me to provide a cut to someone flying PVP or PVE combat ships as cover for me.
So, in summary, how about you go away and do a proper job of thinking about this, maybe have that lovely economist CCP Dr Eoyj (apologies for not being able to spell that) do some modelling of the isotope markets to see if this change is needed, then see if you need to financially ruin anyone jump drive owning pilot not in a large and wealthy alliance.
Also, why tinker with the isotope market, how about fixing POS's and force projection instead? It's all about how hot my mining lasers get. |
ROXGenghis
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
188
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 23:51:00 -
[393] - Quote
This change screws over people like me:
- non-industrialists
- who only play Eve to PVP, solo and in small gangs
- who live in NPC 0.0 or lowsec
- and are independent or in a small corp
Was this your intended target?
It's now going to cost a lot more ISK for me to bring ships out to where I live so I can get them blown up. And to move all my stuff to a different region, because who spends their entire Eve career in one location? Inflation has been pretty bad these past few years in Eve; why ramp up everyone's costs even more? You are continuing to price casual players out of the game. |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
6294
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 23:59:00 -
[394] - Quote
Seems tome thatfarto many people have gotten used to cheap and easy gameplay. This thread reminds me greatly of the way people panic when plex prices rise.
CCP never promises that that tings won't change. |
Albert Madullier
Macabre Votum Northern Coalition.
1
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 00:03:00 -
[395] - Quote
^ you mean it seems that ppl aren't willing to give up their real life jobs and have making isk as their full time job |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1299
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 00:08:00 -
[396] - Quote
Well, if JF's don't work any more I guess it's a return to the good old normal freighter convoy days. Should be fun. |
TheButcherPete
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
418
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 00:18:00 -
[397] - Quote
Why the hell do we need this change?
we don't WANT it, that's for sure. THE KING OF EVE RADIO
ElQuirko is my son |
Red Teufel
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
377
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 00:18:00 -
[398] - Quote
I don't really see it affecting anyone except putting more cash into the industrialist and traders wallets. will increase more blop fleets. so some more activity for sure to come from this. time to start buying up isos |
Black Canary Jnr
Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch. Sev3rance
104
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 00:23:00 -
[399] - Quote
TheButcherPete wrote:Why the hell do we need this change?
we don't WANT it, that's for sure.
Have a 33% reduction in jump range on all JDs then ... |
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
240
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 00:30:00 -
[400] - Quote
Albert Madullier wrote:^ you mean it seems that ppl aren't willing to give up their real life jobs and have making isk as their full time job
So pay with cash, you allegedly fully employed dignab |
|
Bob Billyson
Tayto Truck
2
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 00:32:00 -
[401] - Quote
So...
Prices for High end minerals will increase. Prices for Moon goo Will go up. Prices for PI will go up.
Ship prices go up. Module prices go up Implant prices go up (low/null imports) Supercapital prices will go up. Fuel prices have just gone up 200-300 isk.
Are you forgetting you were hoping for compressed ore to be exported to null for production there? Is some magical Fairy going to move it at no cost now?
Are you forgetting that after the changes MORE people will be able to put up towers in Highsec as you removed the standing requirements, thus even without adding the amount of poses that will be set up for ore compression, you're still looking at an increase in poses?
IF the fuel prices don't go down, then people won't build Poses for compression as they'll be far too expensive to maintain. Compressed ore will not become a viable method to transport minerals to Null. Not only is the compression ratio worse, and you have to go through the work of buying it straight from miners to compress yourself, as the only people who really need compressed minerals are the nullsec/lowsec bunch.
Indirectly, you're shooting capital ship production in the knee, chest and head with a single bullet, and demanding that nullsec mine all the low ends it needs for production locally.
Let's not forget that you haven't seemed to think about what might happen if for instance fuel usage increases despite your estimates, and the prices spiral out of control due to the limited amount of fuel one can obtain because of that lovely gravimetric system you implemented. |
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
240
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 00:38:00 -
[402] - Quote
Suzuka A1 wrote:Dear CCP, If you want to rebalance capital ships then why don't you rebalance them instead of beating around the bush? CCP Fozzie wrote:The goals of this change are: - Stimulate the isotope (and therefore ice) market to help cushion any drop in demand from players using smaller starbases after the science and industry slot changes.
- Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec.
- Although we don't expect this change to significantly impact behavior around jump drive power projection, it should at least provide a small incentive change through higher costs for moving huge capital fleets often.
Judging by what you have said it seems the main reason for this change is solely to influence the market (something I thought CCP has stated it would never do unless PLEX prices become an issue) based on speculation that the demand for fuel may drop.... If you really wanted to implement this to increase the usage cost of owning a capital then you should have stated that as the only goal and then listed under residual outcomes/side effects the possibility it may "Stimulate the isotope market to help...." I am still continuing to lose faith in you CCP.
CCP doesn't INTERVENE in the market.
They have, for the longest, longest time, sought to achieve market balance though. Just last month they introduced chips that can be redeemed for SoE BPCs to help take the demand pressure off. One of many, many examples of balance changes to stimulate markets....
Of course as a non-new player you would know this if you stopped to think about it for even a moment.
|
Migui X'hyrrn
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
93
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 00:43:00 -
[403] - Quote
It is not a matter of range anyways. Titans have a ****** range and they can be moved, just by adding several more mids.
I fail to see what is the problem that Fozzie wants to address here with this change. You don't like that you can move a whole supercapital fleet 100 ly appart in a matter of minutes? You don't like that suitcase carrier fleets are a must have for deployments? You don't like scout titans?
I can't find it.
I smell a hidden nerf to supercaps again, but a ****** one, because supercaps can afford this, the little guy will find a little more annoying the extra markup in the market in 0.0 just because of it.
The post opens with 3 premises:
"Stimulate the isotope (and therefore ice) market to help cushion any drop in demand from players using smaller starbases after the science and industry slot changes."
So here you want to artificially duplicate the demand, keeping the offer constant, so that the price increases.
This is the same as if the government says they are going to put higher taxes to stimulate the sales. If you have to face a higher markup, you can't be competitive at the same level as the richer ones, that can afford having less margin but overall better profit.
If this change pretends to help the localization of the industry in 0.0 and low, then you have just pissed off jump freighter pilots and making everything more expensive to manufacture, increasing the retail price and the final consumer as well.
Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec.
I can't find the relation between this and topes. Using the same example as before, this is like if your government forbids the import/export market to rely exclusively in local market. What happens? Shortages of many things, weird prices, poverty, etc. Guess what? Economy needs movement of cash. Money leaving nullsec wallet to enter highsec wallet is good for a healthy eve economy. Don't put artificial walls here.
If you want to improve something, instead of nerfing everything else, just do it. The biggest problem for 0.0 production is that low-ends sucks since always. Tritanium alloys aren't going to work, but better think something. Why don't you put a lot of tritanium, mexallon, isogen... in ABCM ores? Why don't you make mining in 0.0 something profitable and not ridiculous? If you want to have minerals in 0.0 and industry in 0.0 provide 0.0 a way to produce stuff without having to rely on importing goodies from highsec.
You guys nerfed ice mining in highsec so that it couldn't provide enough quantity to supply the demand so that low and 0.0 mining would be mandatory. Is that happening in reality? I seriously doubt it. Things are more expensive, period.
Although we don't expect this change to significantly impact behavior around jump drive power projection, it should at least provide a small incentive change through higher costs for moving huge capital fleets often.
When you are moving "huge" capital fleets often fuel cost is the last of your concerns. Please, stop shitting on our newbros. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
465
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 00:48:00 -
[404] - Quote
It's pretty amusing how many people are kneejerk posting on this thread and betraying their sheer incompetence at understanding basic economics. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Ravcharas
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
308
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 00:50:00 -
[405] - Quote
Migui X'hyrrn wrote:When you are moving "huge" capital fleets often fuel cost is the last of your concerns. It's not as if we go 'let's take the archons for a spin tonight, to see what we can see' or prank-jump supers back and forth in some kind of display of general mischief. |
Migui X'hyrrn
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
93
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 01:00:00 -
[406] - Quote
Ravcharas wrote:Migui X'hyrrn wrote:When you are moving "huge" capital fleets often fuel cost is the last of your concerns. It's not as if we go 'let's take the archons for a spin tonight, to see what we can see' or prank-jump supers back and forth in some kind of display of general mischief.
lol |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
5052
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 01:12:00 -
[407] - Quote
I'm prepared for the thread now. . |
Tyrrax Thorrk
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
314
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 01:15:00 -
[408] - Quote
I think this change is ********, going to make my fuel blocks much much more expensive :( If you think this change won't have that effect you're an idiot. |
Lilliana Stelles
1234
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 01:30:00 -
[409] - Quote
With the removal of standings and sec status requirements for starbases, everyone and their mom will want one. Ice will be consumed enough already. Fuel prices have been consistently rising thanks to miner ganking anyways. This is just over the top.
Not a forum alt.-á |
Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
371
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 01:32:00 -
[410] - Quote
I think we should wait and see what the other changes do before adding something like this in on top. |
|
Thunrac Crendraven
Maraque Enterprises Brothers of Tangra
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 01:52:00 -
[411] - Quote
I don't think this change will be good for the game. This is going to up the prices of all the T2 ships in the game because all the materials for them come from null sec (hence they need to be jumped out). When these prices increase it's just going to keep driving the inflation that we already see. |
Habris
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
26
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 02:16:00 -
[412] - Quote
CCP Fozzie,
Please stop breaking our game. Your so called "balancing" is terrible. Firstly the black ops battleships have REALLY crappy holds as is, and you are suggesting this? Secondly of all the things that need addressing you pick this? Just please stop.
disgruntlely, Me
p.s. remember those interceptor changes? yeah this is about a good idea as that. Reminder: it wasn't. |
Dark Macros
Algorab Technology Brothers of Tangra
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 02:21:00 -
[413] - Quote
Querns wrote:It's pretty amusing how many people are kneejerk posting on this thread and betraying their sheer incompetence at understanding basic economics.
Funny you have so much faith is something that is total crap. Feel free to quote that |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
467
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 02:25:00 -
[414] - Quote
Dark Macros wrote:Querns wrote:It's pretty amusing how many people are kneejerk posting on this thread and betraying their sheer incompetence at understanding basic economics. Funny you have so much faith is something that is total crap. Feel free to quote that You're gonna have to be more specific here. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Pinkpie Divers
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 02:30:00 -
[415] - Quote
Nice lets get rid of all those new bros is this a Goon engineered plan to increase membership? CCP stomping on the little guys again. |
June Ting
Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind
75
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 02:39:00 -
[416] - Quote
Reverse Malcanis's Law: any change that attempts to hurt the operations of large, well-organized, cap-heavy entities will hurt the operations of small, less-organized, cap-light entities much worse.
PL and GSF can handily afford their isotope budget increasing by 50%. My 250-person alliance with a handful of jump freighters and carriers cannot afford it. I fight for the freedom of my people. |
Katanagari
Council of Grumpy Old Farts Brothers of Tangra
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 02:57:00 -
[417] - Quote
This change is a simple increase in transportation costs. It's bad for null sec, it's bad for highsec and in practice there isn't a single group of players who'll benefit from it.
What industry that does occur in null relies on some imports from Empire. If you make importation costs equal (or exceed) the cost of local production more goods may be produced in null - however isotope usage will actually drop, so it fails to help the ice miners as planned. In addition almost everything will cost more in null than empire - this impact will be felt least by large alliances with efficient logistic chains.
For the high sec population imports of moon products - that must be imported - will rise in price. This has an inflationary effect on the whole T2 economy. The speculation on this change is already raising isotope prices, coupled with an increase in usage the actual cost to move moon products to empire could double or more.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
467
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 03:24:00 -
[418] - Quote
Katanagari wrote:This change is a simple increase in transportation costs. It's bad for null sec, it's bad for highsec and in practice there isn't a single group of players who'll benefit from it.
People who mine topes benefit quite a bit! You can find those people across all bands of security space, except wormholers I guess. Poor wormholers. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Demotress
The Circus Corp Intrepid Crossing
19
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 03:35:00 -
[419] - Quote
if they keep making bad changes like this im just gonna unsub. it wont make costs in their example go from 50 to 75. the fact that fuel will get burnt quicker and create a higher demand will make it at the very least go from 50 to 100+ mill because the demand will go up so sharply. and with more demand a larger price will follow. i dont feel like paying 1500+ isk a tope. |
Zomgnomnom
Royal Black Watch Highlanders Mordus Angels
29
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 03:49:00 -
[420] - Quote
Fozzie,
You and Rise were doing sooooo much better with the pirate re balance..... and now this ****.
This is an entirely unnecessary change at this time.
There's so many problems with the stated goals I dont know where to begin.
If your true goal here is to get things done locally in null sec you need to re distribute all the resources to all the different regions.
For starters capitals all use differing fuel types that cant be found everywhere. By default we will be needing to import fuel from other regions for the various capital jump drives needing fed.
T2 production requires resources from moons, which by the way, are concentrated based on regions. Yet again we will need to import these things.
IF the goal of this was some bastardized attempt at nerfing power projection, it wont work. How many times have you guys seen that price is NOT a balancing factor. The blocs will pay the fuel bill without a second thought. The guys like me who have to pay for their own fuel on the other hand are now consuming 50% more fuel for an already minuscule profit and thankless job of logistics.
You want to de centralize Jita and make nullsec industry worth while. I get it and I like it. This change however has numerous secondary and tertiary side effects.
You've said before you guys wont interfere with the market unless its PLEX prices.
FUNNY, Plex prices are through the roof and here you are making a change to shore up a market, that may, or may not be affected by a change that you have no idea how the player base will react too.
On second thought, it's good to have "put drones on everything and make interceptors unstoppable, what could go wrong?" Fozzie back. We're used to dealing with his insanity. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 27 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |