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) |
Suzuka A1
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
19
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 19:03:00 -
[721] - Quote
Araneatrox wrote:To me this does not seem to fix any problems with power projection.
What i would like to see is
"Fuel can no longer be stored in Fleet/Corp Hangars"
There we are, Power projection fixed without hurting Jump Frieghter and Black ops pilots.
But then JFs and/or Rorquels would tag along with (sh*t tons of) extra fuel.
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Any word on this? You still planning on going through with this awful idea?
Yeah, an update would be nice. (Either from CCP or the CSM.) Never forget the battle of Z9PP-H-á What actually happened: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgcUwTmHY74 Battle Report: http://www.kugutsumen.com/showthread.php?42836-They-Might-Be-Giants-The-Southwest&p=497626&viewfull=1#post497626 |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
796
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 19:50:00 -
[722] - Quote
at this rate, theyre will be higher supply of fuel-grade tears to use on my jump drive |
Joraa Starkmanir
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
12
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 21:21:00 -
[723] - Quote
sabastyian wrote:Well ccp, announcing these changes early on has already crashed the fuel market ( isotopes went up by like 300-400 isk p/u ) and you still want to make caps take 50% more? Haven't you screwed up the market enough with something that hasn't even happened yet? I mean let's consider a fuel bay for a carrier beforehand was around 12m isk, it is now 18-22m, add 50% consumption with your -33% mass and a fuel bay will go up another 5-10m. So for what used to cost 12m, it will cost 23-32m, thats an extra 11-20m. Usually changing things by 5-10% is frowned upon but accepted, changing things ( in cost, consumption, etc ) by 50-100% is downright unsettling to the market and the player-base. Reconsider these changes as you already crashed the isotope market once recently.
I wont say that the price will go back down to what it was, but market speculation should NEVER have anything to do with balance changes. Since the neither the industry change or isotope consumption change have hit the live server yet its all speculations.
IF the industry changes means that there is less need for isotopes to run towers, there is a chance that the extra jump consumption takes the total consumption back to where it was. Some people over at CCP clearly belive this, and they are the ones with access to hard data regarding what is used where... |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
1347
|
Posted - 2014.06.21 12:58:00 -
[724] - Quote
Can't wait for this change, great job CCP. The Tears Must Flow |
Lugia3
Intentionally Dense Easily Excited
987
|
Posted - 2014.06.23 20:10:00 -
[725] - Quote
Bad. This is only going to hurt smaller corps and alliances. "CCP Dolan is full of ****." - CCP Bettik |
iskflakes
918
|
Posted - 2014.06.25 15:55:00 -
[726] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:We will be giving doomsday isotope consumption some thought and bringing it up with the CSM, thanks.
I noticed this was changed on SISI - doomsdays now use more isotopes.
At current prices it's going to cost me 75 million to shoot a single shot with my titan now. A much needed nerf to those titan fleets you see everywhere. - |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
3175
|
Posted - 2014.06.26 05:42:00 -
[727] - Quote
iskflakes wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:We will be giving doomsday isotope consumption some thought and bringing it up with the CSM, thanks. I noticed this was changed on SISI - doomsdays now use more isotopes. At current prices it's going to cost me 75 million to shoot a single shot with my titan now. A much needed nerf to those titan fleets you see everywhere.
All supercap fleets should see a 100 fold increase in jump costs, just for a start. (Lower JF and carrier requirements to counter this) Wiping out the concept of PL dropping 12 supercaps on a ratting Drake would be reasonable. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Carniflex
StarHunt Mordus Angels
241
|
Posted - 2014.06.26 10:06:00 -
[728] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:iskflakes wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:We will be giving doomsday isotope consumption some thought and bringing it up with the CSM, thanks. I noticed this was changed on SISI - doomsdays now use more isotopes. At current prices it's going to cost me 75 million to shoot a single shot with my titan now. A much needed nerf to those titan fleets you see everywhere. All supercap fleets should see a 100 fold increase in jump costs, just for a start. (Lower JF and carrier requirements to counter this) Wiping out the concept of PL dropping 12 supercaps on a ratting Drake would be reasonable.
For space-rich and properly organized entities the fact that it would cost more in fuel to drop on a lone drake than the ship they are ganking is irrelevant. They are bored and this is their entertainment. Fishing with dynamite, if you will.
Sure you can ramp up the fuel costs to the point where even space-rich entities start taking note. All you would acghieve with such a change would be crippling smaller entities. Because if the fuel cost gets so prohibitive that larger entity starts considering it in a serious enough manner then what happens is that they will just buy a second/third carrier / dread for different regions of operation and just pod-express between locations. The tipping point is probably somewhere between 50-100 mil in fuel for crossing EVE in a carrier.
What this in turn would mean would be even more increased mobility/power projection for well organized entities. Because instead of going 5 to 8 jumps in a carrier when "stuff happens" they would dock up, change clone location and be in the area within 2 minutes taking the last jump or two to the action. Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... *THWONK!* GOT the bastard. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
3175
|
Posted - 2014.06.26 13:05:00 -
[729] - Quote
Carniflex wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:iskflakes wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:We will be giving doomsday isotope consumption some thought and bringing it up with the CSM, thanks. I noticed this was changed on SISI - doomsdays now use more isotopes. At current prices it's going to cost me 75 million to shoot a single shot with my titan now. A much needed nerf to those titan fleets you see everywhere. All supercap fleets should see a 100 fold increase in jump costs, just for a start. (Lower JF and carrier requirements to counter this) Wiping out the concept of PL dropping 12 supercaps on a ratting Drake would be reasonable. For space-rich and properly organized entities the fact that it would cost more in fuel to drop on a lone drake than the ship they are ganking is irrelevant. They are bored and this is their entertainment. Fishing with dynamite, if you will. Sure you can ramp up the fuel costs to the point where even space-rich entities start taking note. All you would acghieve with such a change would be crippling smaller entities. Because if the fuel cost gets so prohibitive that larger entity starts considering it in a serious enough manner then what happens is that they will just buy a second/third carrier / dread for different regions of operation and just pod-express between locations. The tipping point is probably somewhere between 50-100 mil in fuel for crossing EVE in a carrier. What this in turn would mean would be even more increased mobility/power projection for well organized entities. Because instead of going 5 to 8 jumps in a carrier when "stuff happens" they would dock up, change clone location and be in the area within 2 minutes taking the last jump or two to the action.
Your point is a valid one. But something has to be done to get rid of the vice lock the cartels have on null. I personally like the idea of a small chance of ships not jumping, jumping to the wrong system, or flat out blowing up when jumps are done, with the percentage chance increasing as the mass and quantity of the ships involved increases, or if the target system is more congested.
But frankly, the only way to fix this mess is to remove supercaps from the game completely. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
BoBoZoBo
Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team
431
|
Posted - 2014.06.26 16:52:00 -
[730] - Quote
Just watched CCP answer this question directly in the FanFest video, I am even less convinced this is not a good pre-emptive move. Primary Test Subject GÇó SmackTalker Elite |
|
Carniflex
StarHunt Mordus Angels
241
|
Posted - 2014.06.27 08:16:00 -
[731] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote: Your point is a valid one. But something has to be done to get rid of the vice lock the cartels have on null. I personally like the idea of a small chance of ships not jumping, jumping to the wrong system, or flat out blowing up when jumps are done, with the percentage chance increasing as the mass and quantity of the ships involved increases, or if the target system is more congested.
But frankly, the only way to fix this mess is to remove supercaps from the game completely.
Hehe. I think it is a bit naive to presume that removing supercaps does anything to power projection. You would just get to complain about some power-block dropping 600 dreads or 800 carriers on you. Or if you remove capitals altogether then about 500 navy apocalypses or whatever happens to be the FOTM.
What might have some effect would be getting rid of alts (as practically all cynos and super-capitals are alts) - but lets be realistic. At this point it would be easier to write a new game without alts than get rid of alts in EVE. EVE has been a game where full game experience starts with 2 accounts for more than a decade by now. Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... *THWONK!* GOT the bastard. |
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
87
|
Posted - 2014.06.27 13:37:00 -
[732] - Quote
I wonder how power projection would be if supercaps required a cyno be opened from some other big ship like a battleship. That could certainly have the potential to slow down power projection. Most of the time you would probably need a considerable escort to even get that cyno battleship into place...
edit: thinking about this more, you'd have to also make it so that you can't bridge battleships to a normal cyno as well, only to the same type of cyno supers can jump to (otherwise you'd just normally bridge your battleship first then immediately open the super-cyno) |
Carniflex
StarHunt Mordus Angels
244
|
Posted - 2014.06.27 16:13:00 -
[733] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:I wonder how power projection would be if supercaps required a cyno be opened from some other big ship like a battleship. That could certainly have the potential to slow down power projection. Most of the time you would probably need a considerable escort to even get that cyno battleship into place...
edit: thinking about this more, you'd have to also make it so that you can't bridge battleships to a normal cyno as well, only to the same type of cyno supers can jump to (otherwise you'd just normally bridge your battleship first then immediately open the super-cyno)
Like most "power projection nerf's" it would mostly cripple smaller entities. Larger powerblocks would do their supercap cynos either from black ops or from carriers - depends on how, exactly, the proposal would be implemented. And inability to bridge battleships would be somewhat heavy handed - don't you think? I mean why stop there? For next thing we would have a problem that coalitions bridge battlecruisers, or T3's etc etc. And then you would have to nerf the carriers so that they cant carry a battleship. As otherwise (if carriers cant make supercap cynos which would be silly) they just give out the cyno BS from their hold to the waiting cyno alt.
Where there is a will there is a way and as long as supercaps themselves remain as they are you end up just chasing them around with all the special casings, cans and cant's. I mean why beat around the bush in such a indirect way? If super-capitals are a problem just do something about these ships.
Jump drives and bridge networks and titan bridges are just the tip of the iceberg as far as power projection goes. You can hammer at them all away until they are all gone and unused and you would still have power projection. Even today I can be anywhere in EVE in 2 minutes or a bit less if I find a friendly triggerhappy local nearby only limit is where my corporation has offices. With a little planning any major coalition can have suitable stashes of doctrine ships in predefined locations with unlimited mobility, for all practical purposes, without lighting a single cyno. Nerf medical clones enough if that becomes a problem and you sort of kill off high SP PvP viability and delegate fleet PvP to specific tailor made alts. Again putting smaller more disorganized entities at severe disadvantage against older, alt heavier, better funded entities.
Only way I see how you can sort of "nerf" to some degree major coalitions / rental empires is something akin to NPC null/ low sec. You have to push back every day to keep your spot in the wrold. The second you stop the reds flood in into the local. I.e., you have to actually live in the space you hold to hold it. But I have no glue how one would go around achieving it in a fair and balanced way that leads into menaingful and fun sov system which does not get your local "small entity" violated whenever the adjacent larger entity wills is to be so.
That aside - the fuel consumption changes are not aimed at power projection directly. Their aim was to re-balance perceived drop in ice consumption as a result of new industry system causing unanchoring of huge amounts of towers in empire (presumably). Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... *THWONK!* GOT the bastard. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
10551
|
Posted - 2014.06.28 23:46:00 -
[734] - Quote
So, what, are these changes set in stone? No more discussion from CCP on the matter? No, this isn't it at all. Make it more... psssshhhh. |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
1353
|
Posted - 2014.06.29 00:17:00 -
[735] - Quote
Can't wait for this change. The Tears Must Flow |
Luxotor
Imploding Turtles Rising in Outerspace Gravity
59
|
Posted - 2014.06.29 09:34:00 -
[736] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:So, what, are these changes set in stone? No more discussion from CCP on the matter?
Also interested in additional commentary from CCP developers on this. THE NIGHT IS DARK AND FULL OF TERRORS! |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1591
|
Posted - 2014.06.30 11:01:00 -
[737] - Quote
Isn't this going to be unreasonably tough on the individual pilots? I live in a wormhole and sometimes i move my dread between wormhole systems via low/null sec... It sounds like i'm going to have do a lot of messing around hauling fuel to my jump points.
If fuel usage is being doubled, them why is the fuel bay capacity only being increased by a third? +1 |
Joraa Starkmanir
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2014.06.30 21:50:00 -
[738] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Isn't this going to be unreasonably tough on the individual pilots? I live in a wormhole and sometimes i move my dread between wormhole systems via low/null sec... It sounds like i'm going to have do a lot of messing around hauling fuel to my jump points.
If fuel usage is being doubled, them why is the fuel bay capacity only being increased by a third?
That is since +50% is not double, it ends using same m3 fuel as now just higher quantity |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1593
|
Posted - 2014.06.30 23:37:00 -
[739] - Quote
my mistake, i thought it was 100% for some reason... +1 |
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
486
|
Posted - 2014.07.03 16:25:00 -
[740] - Quote
PL makes a trillion isk a month this doesn't even effect us other than make the beancounters scream about ZOMG were using so many topes. We will just have a few more jumpfreighters at the ready with fuel. But I feel sorry for the little guy who doesn't make much isk. Also this is a nerf to people who live on the edges of nullsec. This change is a hamhanded change to attempt to curtail power projection and ultimately accomplishes nothing. Instead of dealing with a issue you choose to medicate/bandaid. @EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny |
|
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3649
|
Posted - 2014.07.04 07:09:00 -
[741] - Quote
Would you care to explain how what you're proposing off in your other thread helps people living at the edge of nullsec, exactly? Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1409
|
Posted - 2014.07.07 16:00:00 -
[742] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:PL makes a trillion isk a month this doesn't even effect us other than make the beancounters scream about ZOMG were using so many topes. We will just have a few more jumpfreighters at the ready with fuel. But I feel sorry for the little guy who doesn't make much isk. Also this is a nerf to people who live on the edges of nullsec. This change is a hamhanded change to attempt to curtail power projection and ultimately accomplishes nothing. Instead of dealing with a issue you choose to medicate/bandaid.
Agreed. Little money fees will do nothing but hurt more the weaker groups than the power blocs. And increase a bit the revenue of the peopel that mine ice :P "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Ioci
Bad Girl Posse Somethin Awfull Forums
499
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 19:34:00 -
[743] - Quote
Make Jump Fuel Conservation 4 required to fly a carrier, then nullify Jump Fuel conservation 5 by increasing fuel costs 50%.
The more things change the more they stay the same? R.I.P. Vile Rat |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
947
|
Posted - 2014.07.10 06:10:00 -
[744] - Quote
I recall something mentioned about lowslot mods for JFs in the freighter change thread. Is this still going on and will it make it time for crius if so? |
MHayes
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 00:54:00 -
[745] - Quote
More Solar systems is a better solution to this problem. |
Smugest Sniper
Salient Logistics Inc. Northern Associates.
20
|
Posted - 2014.07.13 07:40:00 -
[746] - Quote
Already poor people with carriers(read people who buy shiny **** they can't reasonably afford) have trouble with escaping bad situations and even with Jump Fuel Con 5 it's difficult to operate for long operations when moving your **** out of deep null or even around to a different part of low sec.
Help the Poor, don't take away their only way to live and survive in EVE. |
Anthar Thebess
585
|
Posted - 2014.07.14 08:09:00 -
[747] - Quote
1.Make Capitals unable to jump between regions. 2.Make Titan bridges unable to jump between regions. 3.Make Jumpbriges limited to one region. 4.Increase size of regional gates - so capital ships can use them.
You are increasing fuel usage while not demoting local (regional) capital ship movement. Additional benefit : significant nerf to power projection. Support Needed : Jump Fuel Consumption |
sabastyian
Absolute Massive Destruction Circle-Of-Two
23
|
Posted - 2014.07.15 17:45:00 -
[748] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:1.Make Capitals unable to jump between regions. 2.Make Titan bridges unable to jump between regions. 3.Make Jumpbriges limited to one region. 4.Increase size of regional gates - so capital ships can use them.
You are increasing fuel usage while not demoting local (regional) capital ship movement. Additional benefit : significant nerf to power projection. Jump bridges are limited to one region, you jump to the next via gate and go on your way iirc. Regional gates would have to increase 50x fold to fit a titan. Titan bridges Limited to on region can also have a huge effect on alliances that live in regions that are a total of maybe 25 systems. like 10 of which are in low-sec. |
Draconus Lofwyr
UK Corp RAZOR Alliance
103
|
Posted - 2014.07.15 21:07:00 -
[749] - Quote
is there any update or input on the jump fuel reduction modules promised with the jump freighter nerf? |
Lilla Kharn
Militant Mermen Questionable Intentions.
2
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 04:45:00 -
[750] - Quote
Can we at least see if there is a problem before we fix it? Like others have said before me, there are many variables that this fix does not take into consideration and appears to straight jump the gun on fixing...what exactly?
Nerfing the smaller people does nothing except help the power blocs and the.... oh right. Got it. |
|
|
|
|
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 |