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) |
nercomonger
Interstellar buyers of unwanted stuff Shadows Of Redemption
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 02:32:00 -
[601] - Quote
This is a TERRIBLE idea.
As it is its a royal pain shipping moon goo to high sec.
At your current suggested levels, it will be CHEAPER to titan bridge a full freighter, than to use my JF.
This is a BAD PLAN......
Now, if you give the JF and Rorq. a bonus to fuel consumption, and jack up the prices to move all other capitals... I would be ok with the change. |
Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team
19
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 02:39:00 -
[602] - Quote
nercomonger wrote:This is a TERRIBLE idea.
As it is its a royal pain shipping moon goo to high sec.
At your current suggested levels, it will be CHEAPER to titan bridge a full freighter, than to use my JF.
This is a BAD PLAN......
Then you have the titan bridging freighter option. EVE players always find a way.
By the way, if becomes uneconomical to ship your moon goo to hisec, then that doesn't mean they broke the game or the market. Not for you or for the game as a whole. It just means the market doesn't currently support a price that is economical for you to be competitive in. Thus you would (normally) choose to stop producing that item, find a more economical market if one exists, or hoard supply until the price adjusts. This then results in a loss of your potential supply and prices will adjust to reflect that supply reduction. Perhaps at some point in the future, it will become economically advantageous for you to starting shipping goo to empire once again.
For the record, I'm against the change too, but for reasons associated with the logic behind the proposed change. Not because it may or may not hurt me personally, be bad for the "little guy" or any such non-relevant issue. The reason why they are making the change is not adequately based on reality or necessity. |
nercomonger
Interstellar buyers of unwanted stuff Shadows Of Redemption
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 02:42:00 -
[603] - Quote
While yes, changes could be made.
Making this kind of a change, prior to seeing the need for it, is a terrible idea.
They are speculating on the market.
This really is uncharted territory, no one knows what will happen post change. |
nercomonger
Interstellar buyers of unwanted stuff Shadows Of Redemption
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 02:44:00 -
[604] - Quote
Dirk MacGirk wrote:nercomonger wrote:This is a TERRIBLE idea.
As it is its a royal pain shipping moon goo to high sec.
At your current suggested levels, it will be CHEAPER to titan bridge a full freighter, than to use my JF.
This is a BAD PLAN...... Then you have the titan bridging freighter option. EVE players always find a way. By the way, if becomes uneconomical to ship your moon goo to hisec, then that doesn't mean they broke the game or the market. Not for you or for the game as a whole. It just means the market doesn't currently support a price that is economical for you to be competitive in. Thus you would (normally) choose to stop producing that item, find a more economical market if one exists, or hoard supply until the price adjusts. This then results in a loss of your potential supply and prices will adjust to reflect that supply reduction. Perhaps at some point in the future, it will become economically advantageous for you to starting shipping goo to empire once again.
A simpler way would be to make POS's anchored in high-sec burn more fuel per hour. |
Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team
19
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 02:47:00 -
[605] - Quote
nercomonger wrote:Dirk MacGirk wrote:nercomonger wrote:This is a TERRIBLE idea.
As it is its a royal pain shipping moon goo to high sec.
At your current suggested levels, it will be CHEAPER to titan bridge a full freighter, than to use my JF.
This is a BAD PLAN...... Then you have the titan bridging freighter option. EVE players always find a way. By the way, if becomes uneconomical to ship your moon goo to hisec, then that doesn't mean they broke the game or the market. Not for you or for the game as a whole. It just means the market doesn't currently support a price that is economical for you to be competitive in. Thus you would (normally) choose to stop producing that item, find a more economical market if one exists, or hoard supply until the price adjusts. This then results in a loss of your potential supply and prices will adjust to reflect that supply reduction. Perhaps at some point in the future, it will become economically advantageous for you to starting shipping goo to empire once again. A simpler way would be to make POS's anchored in high-sec burn more fuel per hour.
There are several "other" ways of subsidizing the ice farmer market, but at this point, no evidence yet exists that the changes they are making will have the outcome they suspect might happen. Thus there is no need to rush into any change. 2-4 weeks after June 3 they will have clear evidence and can then make a change, either this one or something else. |
zentary
Wrath of Angels Vanguard.
3
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 03:01:00 -
[606] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:zentary wrote:well ccp you've failed again. Thank you and good night.
Because we do something to break something lets just jack **** up by 50%. Yeah that makes perfect sense.
How about decrease amount of isk made in high sec and low sec first. Then you wouldn't have such a huge surplus of isk. Seriously what's the point of allowing someone to make more isk in high and low sec than 00? The whole point to 00 was making the big bucks back when i first started playing eve. Sorry but that has all changed for the betterment of eve as a whole - Balancing CCP Rise and CCP Fozzie style; Devs - Devs - Players - Players - Devs - Players - Devs - Players - Devs - Players > I'll tell you a secret, the Ibis will soon be the go to ship for everything Eve. Don't tell anyone else though, don't want to spoil CCP Rises & CCP Fozzies big announcement.
Sorry no. that was just to help the people who just complained all day, not for the betterment of eve. all we have no is a massive surplus of isk and what not because of it |
ButtFungus
SOONWAFFE
39
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 04:23:00 -
[607] - Quote
Dirk MacGirk wrote:ButtFungus wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. For now I just wanted to drop by and make sure you know that we're not ignoring this thread, I'm reading everything... Please pay careful attention to the corps/alliances represented in this thread. I have seen posts from Major Power Blocks and posts from the smallest indy corps all agreeing on something. This is nearly unheard of in Eve, and it happened in response to your idea, Fozzie. It appears to be the opinion of all that your plan is a bad idea... Well, let's not go crazy. The Universal Brotherhood of Frozen Liquid Local 632 is quite happy with this proposed change. Nothing like government handouts to get the union vote to rally up :ObamaIce: That's only the hisec local. The locals in null and low oppose the idea as the teamsters plan to increase transport fees to compensate. They recommend: 1) Change Cyno behavior so that as soon as the cyno ship is destroyed, the explosion disrupts the cyno signal causing portals to drop and jump drives to lose their locks. This would require progressively stronger cyno ships as fleet size increases, or the cyno could go down with only part of the fleet moved. Deploying a large fleet now becomes riskier than jumping a small gang. Risk vs reward. 2) Prevent portals from being opened within 15km of a POS shield. That is the distance needed for the Jump Bridge to be anchored from a POS shield, apply the same mechanic to a ship based jump portal. This would require ships be deployed to guard the bridging ship lest a gank fleet jump in as soon as the fleet has jumped out. When combined with #1 above, it would allow a fleet to trap a freighter bridging from a Titan by destroying the cyno as soon as it is lit, trapping the Titan and Freighter 15km from a pos shield. This would make JF a viable alternative to losing a freighter and titan, and stimulate the isotope market. 3) Re-examine the distribution of racial ice anomalies. If increasing local resource gathering is the goal, then all resources should be available to harvest locally. If you have 4 racial carriers, freighters, or towers, you need 4 racial isotopes to power them. Without all 4 racial anomalies available locally, there is no incentive to do anything but gather the most profitable resource, sell it, and buy what you need at the markets in hisec. Break up distribution into 1-3 constellation blocks with different racial anoms. It could also serve to encourage trade between local friendly corps/alliances who now live in bordering areas with different resources... and conflicts between unfriendly bordering entities who desire the other's resources.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
5408
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 07:08:00 -
[608] - Quote
Tubrug1 wrote:So you're not tackling the real issue involving jump drives which is power projection?
That would be TOO obvious! Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Sgt Ocker
Last Bastion of Freedom
197
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 07:49:00 -
[609] - Quote
zentary wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:zentary wrote:well ccp you've failed again. Thank you and good night.
Because we do something to break something lets just jack **** up by 50%. Yeah that makes perfect sense.
How about decrease amount of isk made in high sec and low sec first. Then you wouldn't have such a huge surplus of isk. Seriously what's the point of allowing someone to make more isk in high and low sec than 00? The whole point to 00 was making the big bucks back when i first started playing eve. Sorry but that has all changed for the betterment of eve as a whole - Balancing CCP Rise and CCP Fozzie style; Devs - Devs - Players - Players - Devs - Players - Devs - Players - Devs - Players > I'll tell you a secret, the Ibis will soon be the go to ship for everything Eve. Don't tell anyone else though, don't want to spoil CCP Rises & CCP Fozzies big announcement. Sorry no. that was just to help the people who just complained all day, not for the betterment of eve. all we have no is a massive surplus of isk and what not because of it I agree with you completely. It is difficult to put sarcasm into words on paper. The delivery is what makes a lot of sarcastic remarks work.
|
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
2667
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 16:00:00 -
[610] - Quote
Dear CCP
Make sub caps use isotopes to warp around systems. Demand problem solved forever. Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk! |
|
Ravcharas
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
319
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 19:14:00 -
[611] - Quote
With rigs for freighters and jumpfreighters, it means you will be able to jump more m3 per trip - that alleviates some of the added cost from jumpfuel requirement- and compression/reprocessing changes. |
Arthur Aihaken
Erebus Solia
3444
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 19:15:00 -
[612] - Quote
Ravcharas wrote:With rigs for freighters and jumpfreighters, it means you will be able to jump more m3 per trip - that alleviates some of the added cost from jumpfuel requirement- and compression/reprocessing changes. Maybe... cargo space may get nerfed to accommodate the rigs and customization. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
TheMercenaryKing
StarFleet Enterprises
180
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 21:14:00 -
[613] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. For now I just wanted to drop by and make sure you know that we're not ignoring this thread, I'm reading everything.
I'll be collecting together and answering/discussing some of the points raised soon. Part of the reason I posted this before Fanfest is so that we could take advantage of all the feedback possible, but that also means that we'll be a bit slower replying to threads for the next couple days. Rest assured that we'll make it up to you next week, and we're not forgetting about this thread.
Fozzie I want an update from you or someone on your team by/on Monday or I will write a letter explaining how upset i am at CCPs lack of communication after receiving feed back that nearly unanimously say "dont do this." |
Tam Althor
lll tempered sea bass Brothers of Tangra
29
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 22:47:00 -
[614] - Quote
TheMercenaryKing wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. For now I just wanted to drop by and make sure you know that we're not ignoring this thread, I'm reading everything.
I'll be collecting together and answering/discussing some of the points raised soon. Part of the reason I posted this before Fanfest is so that we could take advantage of all the feedback possible, but that also means that we'll be a bit slower replying to threads for the next couple days. Rest assured that we'll make it up to you next week, and we're not forgetting about this thread. Fozzie I want an update from you or someone on your team by/on Monday or I will write a letter explaining how upset i am at CCPs lack of communication after receiving feed back that nearly unanimously say "dont do this."
Don't hold your breath... most of the devs will still be in recovery on Monday, expect responses to start rolling out Tuesday and Wednesday. |
Silvetica Dian
Manson Family Advent of Fate
1009
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 23:44:00 -
[615] - Quote
speaking as one of the little guys. (npc null pvp alliance). apart from jump freighter runs we barely use ice products. titan bridges are almost non existant, blops something we do for fun 1-2 times /month and carrier /dread ops are just as rare and VERY limited in numbers. I don't see us noticing much. But a big thankyou to all the people in huge coalitions going into bat for us to preserve us from this hideous cost increase. Money at its root is a form of rationing. When the richest 85 people have as much wealth as the poorest 3.5 billion (50% of humanity) it is clear where the source of poverty is. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/20/trickle-down-economics-broken-promise-richest-85 |
JohnnyRingo
Somali Sailors
45
|
Posted - 2014.05.04 19:31:00 -
[616] - Quote
I love jumping my archon/moros around, DONT YOU DARE CCP TO JACK UP THE PRICE OF THAT! |
Sladislov
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
39
|
Posted - 2014.05.04 19:45:00 -
[617] - Quote
WTB Mackinaw -á-á-á-á-á-á Sladislov Director of Silly semantics -á-á-á-á-á-áBroksi Kurth -á-á xXxBlack LegionxXx |
Narjack
CragCO
5
|
Posted - 2014.05.04 21:57:00 -
[618] - Quote
So I run PI in null sec. PI is supposed to be better in more dangerous space as part of the whole risk/reward factor right? But now the profit margin due to transporting these goods to market just took a big hit. So what's the point? I need to do the math but it seems like its starting to look like I might as well move this into safer space so I don't need to bother with fuel costs. I would like to say I could just transfer my extra transport costs to the buyers but the reality is that people will just do this in high sec and will probably find the "free" transport cost about equal to the less productive planets found in high sec.
I really don't get this change. Move to null sec? Why? Its a pain the ass and become less and less profitable unless you with a big alliance. This just makes it more and more unfriendly to small corps. |
Sgt Ocker
Last Bastion of Freedom
198
|
Posted - 2014.05.04 23:18:00 -
[619] - Quote
Narjack wrote:I really don't get this change. Move to null sec? Why? Its a pain the ass and become less and less profitable unless your with a big alliance. This just makes it more and more unfriendly to small corps. Sad but true. Nulsec has been pretty evenly divided up between the power blocks and this is another change by Devs that will help them maintain the status quo. That's not to say there isn't a place for smaller alliances in Nul, as long as they don't try to move into 1 of the power blocks space they will be for the most part left alone. Don't make the mistake of trying to get more sov though, you may find 1 of the big guys gets offended and decides to push you back to lowsec. Or worse, invite you to join them (an offer you accept, or go back to lowsec).
Anything larger than a small gang roaming is no longer alliance or corp warfare / Pvp. it is purely coalition level fighting. 1 alliance attacking another is declaring war on a coalition and as the coalitions have all the isk they need, this change will have no affect on them. It will possibly make it easier for them to maintain things just as they are. |
Kern Walzky
Extraordinary Danish Gents Brothers of Tangra
11
|
Posted - 2014.05.05 07:06:00 -
[620] - Quote
its a dam shame that all Capitals now get a nerf... increase in fuel consumtion is ok, but you really need to be able to carry the amount required to jump as before.
i vote for bigger Fuel bays !!! |
|
Elzon1
Shadow Boys Corp
177
|
Posted - 2014.05.05 09:37:00 -
[621] - Quote
Funny, I was expecting this to be a general rebalance of Titan jump portals. I'm a bit confused by this.
If you want to limit power projection you should probably bring the Titan's jump portal in line with other capital ship jump drives.
First the jump portal needs to be brought in line in terms of it's capability to jump ships with great mass more efficiently than using their own jump drives.
Rhea (Jump Calibration 4 + Jump Fuel Conservation 4+ Jump Freighter 4)
808,148.8 kg per 1 isotope per light year
Jump Portal Generator (Jump Fuel Conservation 4)
1,666,666.6 kg per 1 isotope per light year
See that ^^^ not cool!
Don't even get me started on effective volume transported per light year. Okay I will. Let's take the case of using a regular freighter with a jump portal generator versus a jump freighter's own hauling capacity using it's own jump drive.
Charon:
785000 m3 cago hold
Rhea (Jump Freighter 4):
282600 m3 cargo hold
Charon through Jump Portal(Jump Fuel Conservation 4):
1362.8 m3 per 1 isotope per light year
Rhea (Jump Calibration 4 + Jump Fuel Conservation 4+ Jump Freighter 4):
237.9 m3 per 1 isotope per light year
As you can see it's more efficient to use a Titan's jump portal with freighters than it is to just use Jump Freighters.
Sure, you could increase the need for all Jump Drives and Jump Portals by 50%, but why don't you tackle this first?
You could at least bring it down to the level of all the Capital ship jump drives. And of course if you wanted a real nerf you could bring it down to Black Ops levels of fuel consumption. Hell, make it lower so that Black Ops are more efficient than Titan's at using jump portals. |
Pyrasanth
Boa Innovations Brothers of Tangra
5
|
Posted - 2014.05.05 15:27:00 -
[622] - Quote
I have just spent many weeks training my Jump freighter characters to minimise the transportation costs of moving goods between home & high sec. This has been a great strain on training resources to get JF5, CAL5 & Cons5 & now potentiially its all been relatively undone. Many of my corp mates offer this service for free. I don't think they could afford to do this with a 50% fuel increase.
This change will hurt a lot of the null sec corporations who offer a service to its members to restock from highsec.
I'm not very happy about the way that CCP keep kicking the player base in the balls.
We had the recent change to ratting & the useless ESS which does nothing other than fill the pockets of roaming nuets or bring trouble to every sector they have ever been deployed & now this.
I simply cannot see a logical reason for this change & CCP's logic is dubious to say the least. If it ain't broken don't mess with it or try & fix it.
This change cannot be for the better & the best adjustment CCP can make is not to implement this expensive high impacting change.
If CCP wants to bring an effective "value" back to ice then remove all the macro miners who devalue the product. |
Cardano Firesnake
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
135
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 07:59:00 -
[623] - Quote
Increase fuel bay too please.
Finding Fuel to go back home will be more difficult. |
Cardano Firesnake
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
135
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 08:31:00 -
[624] - Quote
Elzon1 wrote:Funny, I was expecting this to be a general rebalance of Titan jump portals. I'm a bit confused by this. If you want to limit power projection you should probably bring the Titan's jump portal in line with other capital ship jump drives. First the jump portal needs to be brought in line in terms of it's capability to jump ships with great mass more efficiently than using their own jump drives. Rhea (Jump Calibration 4 + Jump Fuel Conservation 4+ Jump Freighter 4) 808,148.8 kg per 1 isotope per light year Jump Portal Generator (Jump Fuel Conservation 4) 1,666,666.6 kg per 1 isotope per light year See that ^^^ not cool! Don't even get me started on effective volume transported per light year. Okay I will. Let's take the case of using a regular freighter with a jump portal generator versus a jump freighter's own hauling capacity using it's own jump drive. Charon: 785000 m3 cago hold Rhea (Jump Freighter 4): 282600 m3 cargo hold Charon through Jump Portal(Jump Fuel Conservation 4): 1362.8 m3 per 1 isotope per light year Rhea (Jump Calibration 4 + Jump Fuel Conservation 4+ Jump Freighter 4): 237.9 m3 per 1 isotope per light year As you can see it's more efficient to use a Titan's jump portal with freighters than it is to just use Jump Freighters. Sure, you could increase the need for all Jump Drives and Jump Portals by 50%, but why don't you tackle this first? You could at least bring it down to the level of all the Capital ship jump drives. And of course if you wanted a real nerf you could bring it down to Black Ops levels of fuel consumption. Hell, make it lower so that Black Ops are more efficient than Titan's at using jump portals. Whoops, forgot a useful source I was using: Useful Source
I love the idea of a fleet of freighters warping to a pos where a Titan is waiting and get bubbled @ 350km of the pos by a sabre who uncloaked. Or perharps a Titan who is lighting a bridge near a station surronded by a fleet of Freighters could see a frigate un cloacking next to him and open a cyno... Heavy dictors everywhere and a Titan who cannot go anywhere.
If it is true it is cheaper to use a Titan Bridge the risk is quite bigger though for the Freighters or for the Titan...
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
478
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 09:01:00 -
[625] - Quote
Why would you do that on station? |
Elzon1
Shadow Boys Corp
178
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 17:58:00 -
[626] - Quote
Cardano Firesnake wrote:
I love the idea of a fleet of freighters warping to a pos where a Titan is waiting and get bubbled @ 350km of the pos by a sabre who uncloaked. Or perharps a Titan who is lighting a bridge near a station surronded by a fleet of Freighters could see a frigate un cloacking next to him and open a cyno... Heavy dictors everywhere and a Titan who cannot go anywhere.
If it is true it is cheaper to use a Titan Bridge the risk is quite bigger though for the Freighters or for the Titan...
You put the Titan in a low sec system next to high sec. You bring the freighters into system (with scouts and maybe a small gang for protection). Then you bring the freighters to the Titan in a POS and jump bridge the freighters out to a secure nullsec system destination.
In low sec you can't use bubbles you see and the Titan will be safe within the shield of a POS.
If your destination is secured it's a fairly low risk operation so long as you're being careful and smart about it. |
Pyrasanth
Boa Innovations Brothers of Tangra
5
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 19:18:00 -
[627] - Quote
I started to research the effect of rising fuel prices on an economy & the effects can be staggering & quite far reaching.
This is one of the many topics on the internet that I found Rising fuel price effects on an economy
My concern is that 50% is such a massive fuel price hike that it has a serious risk of destabilizing the Eve economy. Manufacturing is one of the core hinge pins in the stability of any economy and frankly this change, as echoed by many, is ill thought out and potentially very damaging.
Any price increases should be very carefully applied and monitored- 50% increase is as much thought out as playing sticking the tail on a donkey blind folded and hoping you got it in the right place. |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
1328
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 19:39:00 -
[628] - Quote
Cardano Firesnake wrote:Increase fuel bay too please.
Finding Fuel to go back home will be more difficult.
Edit: And find and Ban BOTs
It's should be other way around, they should reduce it, alot. The Tears Must Flow |
Cage Man
425
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 19:58:00 -
[629] - Quote
Seems CCP wants everyone back in HS as jumping is going to become too expensive for the smaller groups. For me to light a cover cyno and jump a sin in to a quite upgraded system to ninja their anoms is no longer going to be worth the effort. Also people running lvl5's in carriers are going to take a knock in income. It also doesn't encourage production in LS as you eating in to already thin profits for jumping your resources to the LS system to take advantage of the free slots. The thick plottens... CCP, When can my crane get its black paint job back?? |
Ranamar
Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind
55
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 20:02:00 -
[630] - Quote
Pyrasanth wrote:I started to research the effect of rising fuel prices on an economy & the effects can be staggering & quite far reaching. This is one of the many topics on the internet that I found Rising fuel price effects on an economyMy concern is that 50% is such a massive fuel price hike that it has a serious risk of destabilizing the Eve economy. Manufacturing is one of the core hinge pins in the stability of any economy and frankly this change, as echoed by many, is ill thought out and potentially very damaging. Any price increases should be very carefully applied and monitored- 50% increase is as much thought out as playing sticking the tail on a donkey blind folded and hoping you got it in the right place.
They're definitely going to be watching this change. However, I expect that the future response if fuel prices go in a direction they don't want will be to monkey with ice supply, rather than reducing fuel usage. (AIUI, currently, most of the ice product usage in the game goes to POS fuel blocks, although PL throwing around fleets of Archons might possibly be driving the high Helium Isotopes price.)
That said, I don't think the devs consider making it more expensive to move stuff around the EVE universe to be a bad thing. As it is, it will probably hit large-scale importers hardest, and I expect them to go out of business if they can't sufficiently pass that price along to customers because local producers can make a better profit. Such is the way of the world. |
|
|
|
|
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 |